Fair to compare?

[videoheadcleaner]

Just looking at the Beatles or Radiohead thread, is this really what music taste and appreciation has come down to? We cannot go any further in music until we compare an album or artist to another. I have done this myself at times but I think it needs a rethink.

I recently tried to think of which bands would be comparable to bands of 90s and earlier. I likened Muse to Queen, Radiohead to Pink Floyd and White Lies (left field!) to Echo And The Bunnymen. Even Maximo Park has a Pulp vibe to their music. But is this fair? Muse has taken the bravado and symphonic nature of Queen and added themselves to it but Queen made their music in a different era. Pink Floyd experimented like Radiohead has done but they cannot really be compared.

The centre of this discussion relates to the relevance of comparison. Is comparisons ruining new music for us? Why can't a contemporary band be good without having the stigma of being too Zeppelin-esque (re Wolfmother)? And at a personal level, does someone else's opinion on comparing one band to another make you look at that band in another light (eg. Radiohead is just like the Beatles).

Sorry if I am rambling. Maybe the lack of sleep and the prejudice towards older is better is getting to me!

[telefunker]

comparisons will always be made, as pretty much all popular artists share so many similarities.. from the mediums they release music on (cd, mp3 etc) to the format (albums, eps, singles) to the structure of the music ('songs'; usually multitextural, focused on a 'chorus' or repetetive segment, lasting an average of 4 mins in length, featuring similar tempos, rhythms and melodies, following the same 12-note scales) to the instruments used (drums, guitars, vocals etc) to the lyrics (rhyming schemes)

that is a bit reductionist, but you get the point.. you can look at popular music as a whole and notice how similar everything is, or focus on the intricate differentiating factors

and one of the reasons i think most new music sucks is because people are scraping the barrell for ideas.. and not only musically.. we've had spiritual, cultural, political, global revolutions on the back of popular music and just about every conceiveable 'fashion statement' has also been made.

as for comparing muse to queen, i can't help but laugh.. i mean, when muse write a song like bohemian rhapsody and learn to sing like freddy mercury we'll have a debate on our hands
_________________
no fat chicks

[videoheadcleaner]

[RFNAPLES]

It's not a matter of old vs. new. There are probably more poor old albums than new ones. It's not a matter of good vs. poor either. The problem with the compare and contrast topics is that they tend to be destructive rather than constructive. Often the most egregious are written by those with little education, training and experience.
_________________
Top 100 Greatest Music Albums by RFNAPLES
Bubbling Under The Top 100 Greatest Mus...y RFNAPLES

[Mr. Shankly]

Comparing and categorizing is a human impulse. It's one way that we make sense out of a chaotic world. It's what poet Wallace Stevens called the "rage for order" (back me up here, JJ). It's not just done with music. People do it all the time with other arts, other mediums, when they decide whether or not to buy a product, when they meet someone new or come across some rare species of animal etc. In the world of education, it's called schema theory, which is activating prior knowledge to make sense of new information or stimuli. It's a natural way of learning.

Now, is it possible to appreciate something as it is without comparing it or making historical connections? Yes, but the more knowledge and experience you acquire, it's natural that your brain is going to make those connections. It's almost unavoidable. I do think one can appreciate a piece of art for what it is while simultaneously making connections / comparisons.

Now is it fair to compare? Well in regards to the Beatles / Radiohead argument, I feel I laid out a pretty coherent explanation for the comparison. It seemed a clear comparison to me. I appreciate both for what they are, but I also appreciate the history of popular music and love to explore connections and influences.

Now here's the problem and contradiction with arguing in favor of merely appreciating something for its aesthetic value: What is the point of this forum? How boring would these discussions be if people were merely discussing if they liked something and couldn't explain why or what connection they were making? Or would we all just be talking about our emotional responses?

[joannajewsom]

Pretty much what Shankly said. Although I would say it's completely impossible to appreciate something "as it is" without making some kind of subconscious comparisons to other music. On a very basic level, Western music will always be the reference point for how we perceive and define all music. Someone from the U.S. hearing Japanese music for the first time is going to form a reaction to it that is based on how it compares to Western music. Within the culture, someone getting into jazz is going to react to it based on how it compares to music they're more familiar with, whether it be rock, rap, etc. It's usually those similarities that serve as a link to making a connection with new forms of music. Not saying that comparing Coltrane to Lennon is valid. They're obviously doing two very different things.

Those comparisons probably get more specific as you dig deeper into the brain. And the closer to types of music are to each other, the more valid a conversation about comparison will be. If you're a Beatles fan and you recognize similarities to Radiohead, you're going to make that connection and compare the two. You may as well attempt to articulate those comparisons you're making.

[purple]

Harkan, I'm almost completely positive you compared musicians in making your chart and ranking which albums deserve to be in front of others and that you rely on comparisons of musicians for finding alot of new music.

[videoheadcleaner]

Ok, reading back on what others have said and what I rambled about at the beginning, it does seem clear that comparisons are made, consciously or sub-consciously (eg Purple's comment). I think the major point for me is that comparisons of contemporary bands or artists seem to be more destructive than positive. And it is a stigma that follows in all mediums of entertainment. In literature, the canonical texts like Austen and Shakespeare are considered untouchable and anything beyond them is unoriginal and not worth a person's time. (Sorry this part is from my teacher education in English at uni).

So, we have established that comparisons are inevitable at whatever level but I want to ask if someone used to like a band or artist but a friend or someone made a comparison which ruined that band for you? For film it happens to me all the time, and recently a friend of mine compared a band I like to the dronings of a robot. That kinda has made me think twice about the band.

[RFNAPLES]

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 or finally realized their errors.

But the new generation of elders seems to be less vocal, perhaps recalling the ignorance of their ancestors. Nevertheless, this new generation of elders (of which I am a reluctant part) often does seem biased against the new. Unfortunately that tendency against change is almost universal--many people hate change.

Still it is only with the passing of time and the availability of more comparative works that society can finally claim various albums great. Until then the recent releases are just neophytic candidates.
_________________
Top 100 Greatest Music Albums by RFNAPLES
Bubbling Under The Top 100 Greatest Mus...y RFNAPLES

[telefunker]

they say it takes a full 80 years for a scientific revolution, as the a younger generation's discoveries are renounced by their predecessors, who have become stuck in their ways.. it's then left for the following generation to make a more objective analysis. i guess the same theory could be applied to music..
_________________
no fat chicks