Fair to compare? - Music - Forums : Best Ever Albums

RFNAPLES
Level 8

Gender: Male
Age: 75
Location: Durham, NC, USA

I hope it won't take 80 years.
_________________
Top 100 Greatest Music Albums by RFNAPLES
Bubbling Under The Top 100 Greatest Mus...y RFNAPLES

telefunker

Gender: Male
Age: 39

i'm hoping the ageing process will be cured within my lifetime
_________________
no fat chicks

Norman Bates

Gender: Male
Age: 51
Location: Paris, France

RFNAPLES wrote:

I remember well the older generations claiming Rock was terrible, just noise that would never last. They said that especially about Elvis Presley and later The Beatles. Most of those older generations have died

Never criticize rock.

purple

Back to Harkan's comment, I ruin "Fight Club" (the movie) for a lot of people by pointing out that its just like "Taxi Driver" and "Raging Bull" made a baby that couldn't live up to its parents expectations. Don't get me wrong, I love "Fight Club," but you can't like that movie and not like "Raging Bull" and "Taxi Driver" and you also can't say that "Fight Club" did anything better than what those movies did.

Here's a perfect example of a comparison being made and the older one winning out; but this is not because the older one did it first, but actually did it better. There are certain older bands that will always be greater than a vast majority of newer bands. I don't think it's because people give them credit for doing it first (I would pick "Fight Club" over the other two if it had nearly as well played out themes, camera angles, and other shit that adds to the filmand its message), I think it's because people just can't be expected to be as incredibly creative as others are, especially within a span of 40 to 50 years for modern film and rock music. That's why directors and musicians draw so much noticeable influence from each other. Anyways, I hope that helped with something (my own rambling); basically, I think its possible to compare art forms to each other, especially ones whose real artistic history is only 50 years old, because they're all drawing from the same creative pool, more or less; their originality (even through time) just depends on what features they focus on.

As for literature and art, its alittle harder to explain...

maxperenchio

Location: Chicago

Good example purple, i think its interesting how with more and more technology, the general public opinion begins to be swayed towards the new. Newer movies look a lot better, are expected to be a more immediate bang for your buck, and usually have way more tits than older movies. I think a lot of people are similarly drawn to more recent music for the same reason. Many younger listeners simply get bored when trying to listen to old music because of the sound quality and the sheer amount it takes to get to choruses or whatever. I think you can draw a similar parallel with CGI and Autotune- at first it was an unbelievable advancement of technology, but eventually it was completely misused and perverted.

Anyone else like the idea of T-Pain Pixar collaboration?

brohio

Location: AZ

maxperenchio wrote:

Good example purple, i think its interesting how with more and more technology, the general public opinion begins to be swayed towards the new. Many younger listeners simply get bored when trying to listen to old music because of the sound quality and the sheer amount it takes to get to choruses or whatever.

Anyone else like the idea of T-Pain Pixar collaboration?

Choruses? Don't even mention the bridges! I don't think it's a sound quality issue as much as it just ain't hip to like the Beatles as much as it is to like Kanye West or Lady Gaga or whatever slut comes down the pike. Kiddies have no patience to compare half the time or no time. What would all their friends think? Also, this society isn't very loyal. What's new, what's supposed to be better? What's easier? A handshake on a deal is now your password typed in a box. I think most of us older guys, keeping in mind Mick and Paul etc are older than me and they're still sharp and reasonably hip, can easily compare society over the last 50 years or so and say it has definately gotten worse. An easy comparison. And I also think music is a reflection of this. But I still buy more music now than I did then. So I can compare the music released today very easily to the music I listened to as a teenager. Some's great, most isn't. I hope that doesn't destroy this thread.
_________________
Oh, my hair is getting good in the back!

Mr. Shankly

Gender: Male
Age: 52
Location: Auburn, Washington

brohio wrote:

maxperenchio wrote:

Good example purple, i think its interesting how with more and more technology, the general public opinion begins to be swayed towards the new. Many younger listeners simply get bored when trying to listen to old music because of the sound quality and the sheer amount it takes to get to choruses or whatever.

Anyone else like the idea of T-Pain Pixar collaboration?

Choruses? Don't even mention the bridges! I don't think it's a sound quality issue as much as it just ain't hip to like the Beatles as much as it is to like Kanye West or Lady Gaga or whatever slut comes down the pike. Kiddies have no patience to compare half the time or no time. What would all their friends think? Also, this society isn't very loyal. What's new, what's supposed to be better? What's easier? A handshake on a deal is now your password typed in a box. I think most of us older guys, keeping in mind Mick and Paul etc are older than me and they're still sharp and reasonably hip, can easily compare society over the last 50 years or so and say it has definately gotten worse. An easy comparison. And I also think music is a reflection of this. But I still buy more music now than I did then. So I can compare the music released today very easily to the music I listened to as a teenager. Some's great, most isn't. I hope that doesn't destroy this thread.

I think you're bringing up another issue that maybe needs its own thread. Is technology necessarily a good thing for music?

purple

Brohio, the "yesterday was better" effect is universal. My father thinks today is shit compared to his heyday, my grandmother thinks my father's heyday is shit compared to her heyday, and I haven't seen enough time pass yet to say that the next generations heyday is shit compared to mine. I remember a quote from a roman, Seneca maybe, who addressed this alot more eloquently than I. It's kinda funny

To technology in music, only within the past year have I taken music with electronics seriously; and even then, only the big stuff like Suicide, Joy Division's Closer, New Order, later Clash, Blondie, etc. Even now though, I still have a problem with it. I don't know why, it just doesn't seem as pure as music that's heavy on strings, brass, or percussion, probably because its relatively still new and because some of its simply programming, requiring technical savvy instead of traditional musical savvy. It's kind of like the difference between 19th century art and 21st century art in that it depends on how much work you put into it; painting several strokes with a purpose or leaving a canvas blank. Both are art, but to most I think electronic music/ 21st century art are less aesthetically satisfying because people feel that "they could have done it" whether or not they are a musician or artist.

brohio

Location: AZ

Either there's too little passion from some of the "heavy on electronics" acts or too much passion from some shrieking punk with loads of angst that he just need to share. That whole range of acts don't get my blood boiling. I'm not saying that, some of them, aren't talented. I can appreciate and understand some of that crap but I don't buy, might listen to it at a party but still not buy it.
The ultimate comparison happens when you decide to buy or not to buy. So, in that regard only music that sells wins the comparison. Excluding the 60's, that usually produces the lamest product out there.
_________________
Oh, my hair is getting good in the back!

Mr. Shankly

Gender: Male
Age: 52
Location: Auburn, Washington

brohio wrote:

The ultimate comparison happens when you decide to buy or not to buy. So, in that regard only music that sells wins the comparison.

OOOh... I'd be careful opening up this can of worms.