Three Seas Forum

the archives

dusted off in read-only

  •  

Music..not generally... posted 08 March 2007 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by Sokar, Auditor

For the past 4 years I have come to know many new musicians..I guess you grow away from your music you listen to as a kid and those of your friends..also stop going to a pub that often to realise that some music has its moment of joy..yet loses that joy directly after.... Anyway, also around 4 years ago I met the fabulous world of Rock, I am not going to state all the names, but Jimmy Page should sum it up <!-- s:D --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_biggrin.gif" alt=":D" title="Very Happy" /><!-- s:D --> But as much I as I like that guy..and I mean the music..as much as I can enjoy it at any given moment..there is still Roger Waters and David Gilmour... I can start giving a list of my favourites of Pink Floyd..but I can as well as state the albums and even then the list will include all of them... Does anybody have any clue what I am talking about at this point..?
Ok..there are classics..and by this I mean the classical music..Beethoven..Mozart..Strauss..Vivladi..Chopin and Bach (no particular order, and neither exclusive..except perhaps for Beethoven's piano sonata's). But how can that surpass the depth and the hollowness Pink Floyd..the absoluteness as unmeasurable even in (to my opinion) sonata's of Beethoven..the symphonies of Mozart and Strauss..etc...etc... I know the tragedy (comedy) of Pink Floyd... If, as we have learnt from Bakker, &quot;meassure is unceasing&quot;..than Pink Floyd is paradoxically beyond any measure...
Ok..so here is my question... Can someone state any greater music or musician (not technically) than Pink Floyd's Waters and Gilmour..? Somehow, I see many names coming..but none can compare... view post


Music..not generally... posted 08 March 2007 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by Warrior-Poet, Moderator

Funny I was never fond of Pink Floyd not to say their music isnt brilliant but it was never my thing. I enjoy a wide range of music from classics to rock as well as others but I think what makes a band or song truly great is when it &quot;moves your soul&quot;, so to speak that is, you can feel it inside you, moving you to wonder. Music greats I can think of off the top of my head(besides those mentioned) are Jimi Hendrix, Peter Frampton, The Who, Billy Joel, Colplay, the Eagles, Jack Johnson, Johnny Cash, The Killers, The Offspring. Red Hot Chili Peppers, Santana, and others I cant think of but its all relative to who you are. So whether or not anything matches Pink Floyd is all upon what moves you. My personal song that I enjoy more than anyother is Mozart's Requiem which can do nothing more than move my very being. view post


Music..not generally... posted 08 March 2007 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by Holsety, Candidate

Ya, I have to agree with Warrior-Poet; very generally...people are not all the same, so different people like different music.

My favorite song is probably Gambler's Blue's by Josh White (it's an older version of the better known St James Infirmary Blues. The song itself has a number of different possible interpretations; I've always thought of White's version as a sort of lonely, bitter, grudging farewell (as though his dead lover is leaving him for another man; the coldness of her body is more of an emotional distance).

Another great version of the St. James Infirmary Blues is by Louis Armstrong. It's a little less raw and painful than White's version to my ears, which is only White with vocals and guitar, but it's still great...but the singing always seems less powerful than the sax in his version. His interpretation is more straightforwardly mournful.

Generally I like Jazz more than Blues, though. A (very) small collection of my favorite artists are Ahmad Jamal, Herbie Hancock, Thelonious Monk, Coltrane, Cannonball Adderley, Mose Allison. Of those, Allison and Jamal are probably my favorites.

I also like country, though I don't have as diverse a knowledge of the musicians. Ray Wylie Hubbard, John Prine, Johnny Cash, Hot Club of Cowtown, Marty Stuart, Jesse Winchester (classified as rock but I think of him as country), Townes Van Zandt are some of the ones who come to mind. view post


Music..not generally... posted 08 March 2007 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by Harrol, Moderator

I love Pink Floyd I think their music is briliant. view post


Music..not generally... posted 08 March 2007 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by TheDarkness, Peralogue

Pink is a great band, no doubt!! Not only is the music glorious, but it is composed briliantly as well. Have you seen The Wall?!! The album is a classic along with a number of their other works. Not many bands in history compare. If you are a big fan i would reccomend TOOL, to me they are the modern day Pink Floyd.

to go along with my &quot;first time&quot; thread, I was introduced to rock in high school by a class mate who gave me an AC/DC album. I have been hooked ever since. AC/DC definately one of my favorite bands of all time. So many good songs by them, Stiff Upper Lip, Highway to Hell, and Live Wire just to name a precious few. view post


Music..not generally... posted 08 March 2007 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by Harrol, Moderator

Tool is great I love their sound and i find them to be very provoking i.e. Vicarious. view post


Music..not generally... posted 08 March 2007 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by Warrior-Poet, Moderator

Any of you like Def Leppard? Pour Some Sugar On Me, and others cannnot be denied. view post


Music..not generally... posted 09 March 2007 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by Harrol, Moderator

Well I do like Pour Some Sugar On Me, but I am not a big fan of theirs. I like Blue October, 3 Days Grace, Ten Years and Chevelle. view post


Music..not generally... posted 11 March 2007 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by Buckethead, Peralogue

I think this topic is a little awkward. I really enjoy pink floyd as well but i don't think you can ask that question.... what makes music greater?

that's like asking who's the greatest artist of all time? if you have an answer for that, you're simply shortsighted. I can guarrentee there are one hundred more artists you'd relate to or enjoy more that you've simply never heard of (whether it's because they never showed their art or it's just not popular). A favorite i can see, but not simply GREATEST. At work I consistently hear different radio stations calling U2 the greatest band ever for god's sake... U2!!! could there be a more redundant, repetative recipe card band.

for their time Pink floyd was a very explorative and experimental rock band and are still relative, but in terms of explorative and experimental music? hardly anything to get excited about. They still function under western pattern based song writing techniques (like most rock bands, not to say i don't enjoy western writing techniques). Although they have influenced entire generations of musicians to become 1/10th of a step different.

so to answer your question, i could name ten bands i think are poetically and acoustically &quot;greater&quot;, &quot;better at making music&quot; or &quot;more interesting&quot;, however i am sure you probably wouldn't agree (no offense to anyone meant, but especially after reading the &quot;listening to...&quot; entries on this site). And I wouldn't expect or want you to. You can't always grade art... but if you did, pink floyd would get an A in my book... but they sure wouldn't be the only ones.

PS and as for tool being a modern day pink floyd? in my opinion, NO WAY. Tool (and i've listened to them A LOT more than i would like) needs to write a song about a new topic, find some different effects and change ANYTHING once in a while. Floyd (for a rock band) was quite a bit more creative. being dark and mysterious doesn't mean you automatically have depth. view post


Music..not generally... posted 11 March 2007 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by Nauticus, Auditor

I also like Pink Floyd, but I believe some of the best music ever created is the lesser-known bands.

Riverside, from Poland, for example. They play a Pink Floyd-y style, but it's completely original and complex, without becoming too much.

Porcupine Tree, as well. The compositions they create, in my opinion, are beyond what anyone's ever done. view post


Music..not generally... posted 13 March 2007 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by Buckethead, Peralogue

Just listened to floyd's &quot;animals&quot; at work today.... damn, i forgot how good it is.... view post


Music..not generally... posted 14 March 2007 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by Sokar, Auditor

The point I tried to make is not Pink Floyd's 'ultimity'..hence the topic &quot;not generally&quot;... What I am trying to show, or perhaps to find, is a combination of what WP is saying &quot;moving of the soul&quot; with the aesthetic understanding of music. I recently looked into Adorno's notes on Beethoven..a great composer no doubt..and of course very close to the heart of many thinkers for many reasons... Similarly of course with all music..at least that enhancing, encouraging, lifting up (more synonyms) the being...
About a year and a half ago, together with a friend of mine, we've been looking into how aestheticism plays a prime role in 'evolution', or perhaps even creation, of civilizations... We came to conclude that it is even the basis of every society (after economics).. Now the reasons for this will take a long time (we were discussing for two days in a row..continuesly!)..
So to the point (again).. What makes Pink Floyd brilliant, great, &quot;beyond measure&quot;, is of course personal..yet this personal is felt by so many that it makes me wonder how greatness is achieved, except for the moving of the soul (I usualy refrain from describing things as such..but the lack of undrestanding makes me do so). Is there an understanding of music..is it pure marketing..? (Please no discussion on how marketing influences music etc..)
As to the artists you mentioned..I didn't like Tool..probably not going to if I listen to them again..and they are not comparable to Pink Floyd even a bit..though it was some years ago that I listened to them.. Def Leppard is in my collection as well..though it is not something I listen to often.. The Polish band I will check out when I can get my hands on it
I conclude with my last sentence..is there a greater music than Pink Floyd..any reason to see Beethoven beyond the measure as Bakunin did, perhaps also Adorno..or as someone mentioned Mozart..? Now again..not generally!

PS I understand the narrow-mindedness I have right now..perhaps it is the revival of the self..the exploration to the past beauty..yet with an affirmation of undestanding of it... Perhaps it is simply melancholy that I have these weeks... view post


Music..not generally... posted 14 March 2007 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by Harrol, Moderator

Well I believe music moves the mood and emotion. If you consider your soul to be the core of your deepest feelings then yes music moves the soul. view post


Music..not generally... posted 15 March 2007 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by Buckethead, Peralogue

In terms of moving the soul? I find that some of my favorite musicians, artists and poets have work that is not aesthetically speaking &quot;technical&quot; or &quot;skillful&quot;. However like picasso (who could paint realism incredibly well) they were not always doing so because of a lack of technical skill. Daniel Johnston is a musician who blows me away because his music is so visceral. He's one of the most pure hearted, open and totally messed up musicians i've ever heard. If you haven't seen it i suggest the film &quot;the Devil and Daniel Johnston&quot;. Modest Mouse, Tom Waits (especially the album &quot;alice&quot;) and Elliott Smith all have a tendancy to hit me in the gut the heart and the brain all at the same time. Almost like reading Ginsberg or looking at a Basquiat painting.

I don't think you're being narrowminded, i think i was just confused with the terminology.

and melancholy? as frustrated as i get with it i don't could there be a more receptive state to listen to music in...

waiting to be moved by somebody... view post


Music..not generally... posted 19 March 2007 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by gierra, Sorcerer-of-Rank

Quote: &quot;Nauticus&quot;:3idznl5x
Porcupine Tree, as well. The compositions they create, in my opinion, are beyond what anyone's ever done.[/quote:3idznl5x]

definitely. i don;t listen to them much anymore, but ya, they're great. view post


Music..not generally... posted 22 June 2008 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by Orion_metalhead, Auditor

Funny thing is for me, Pink Floyd's lesser known albums have much more impact on me than say, The Wall or Dark Side of the Moon. I'd rather listen to Meddle than any of the Pink Floyd albums.

But this topic is interesting. The question &quot;what makes one music 'greater' than another&quot; is a loaded question that involves diving into listening to music objectively as well as subjectively. For instance, While Pink Floyd might be thought of as being &quot;complex&quot; I don't find their music anywhere near as complex as say, Watchtower or Fates Warning (Awaken the Guardian specifically comes to mind) though their lyrics are more complex. At the same time, I would say that Pink Floyd's music is more complex than some bands with more complex lyrical themes. With that said however, what makes lyrics inherently complex? With music, you can measure the complexity - the amount of notes, the structure of the compositions, the arrangements. With lyrics though, who is to say that Manowar's lyrics are inferior to those of Pink Floyd? I know that I can get emotional when I hear the lyrics to Battle Hymn or Metal Daze (or any song off their debut album) however there has never been a Pink Floyd song that has had an emotional effect on me. Its the same for me with Classical music as well. Igor Stravinky's Rite of Spring always touches my heart and calms me yet Mozart doesn't do anything for me.

Music is so personal and individual that the only music that matters is the music that matters to you. view post


Music..not generally... posted 23 June 2008 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by carlsefni, Peralogue

Quote: &quot;Orion_metalhead&quot;:2nkz0vso
Funny thing is for me, Pink Floyd's lesser known albums have much more impact on me than say, The Wall or Dark Side of the Moon. I'd rather listen to Meddle than any of the Pink Floyd albums. [/quote:2nkz0vso]

Sign me up for Piper at the Gates of Dawn! <!-- s8) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_cool.gif" alt="8)" title="Cool" /><!-- s8) --> While I respect the achievements of the later Floyd albums, they never really did that much for me at a gut level. And I kept thinking people who were that successful while still sounding that miserable were clearly taking the wrong drugs. <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_lol.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing" /><!-- s:lol: -->

Quote: &quot;Orion_metalhead&quot;:2nkz0vso
But this topic is interesting. The question &quot;what makes one music 'greater' than another&quot; is a loaded question that involves diving into listening to music objectively as well as subjectively. For instance, While Pink Floyd might be thought of as being &quot;complex&quot; I don't find their music anywhere near as complex as say, Watchtower or Fates Warning (Awaken the Guardian specifically comes to mind) though their lyrics are more complex. At the same time, I would say that Pink Floyd's music is more complex than some bands with more complex lyrical themes.[/quote:2nkz0vso]

I think it would be hard to objectively measure &quot;greatness&quot; unless we transformed that into a measure of &quot;influence&quot; or &quot;(commercial) success&quot; (though, IMO, preferably not just the latter!). In any case, we would clearly have to separate &quot;greatness&quot; and &quot;complexity&quot; as very different things. It would be hard to describe the Ramones' music as &quot;complex&quot; <!-- s:) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile" /><!-- s:) --> but it might well be judged objectively &quot;great&quot; in terms of influence or something. (And perhaps subjectively great, depending on the taste of the individual listener -- but that's another thing.)

Quote: &quot;Orion_metalhead&quot;:2nkz0vso
With that said however, what makes lyrics inherently complex? With music, you can measure the complexity - the amount of notes, the structure of the compositions, the arrangements. With lyrics though, who is to say that Manowar's lyrics are inferior to those of Pink Floyd? [/quote:2nkz0vso]

Ah, but we must not confuse objective complexity with subjective superiority. That said, I think we can set up measures for lyrical complexity just as we could for music. In all cases, we would have to define our standard for complexity, but just we might judge &quot;complex&quot; music as that which contains more notes, more chords, more harmonic structures, etc. we could judge those lyrics to be complex that include a wider range of vocabulary, or a wider range of grammatical structures or rhetorical devices, etc. (and we might rate certain grammatical structures or rhetorical devices as more complex than others).

We could do similar things to rate the &quot;complexity&quot; of prose ....

Of course, this isn't to say that a given subjective listener would necessarily judge the objectively more complex lyrics (or prose, or music) to be &quot;superior&quot;, in their opinion, but with an agreed set of definitions for &quot;complexity&quot;, they could objectively determine the complexity of the piece.

Quote: &quot;Orion_metalhead&quot;:2nkz0vso
I know that I can get emotional when I hear the lyrics to Battle Hymn or Metal Daze (or any song off their debut album) however there has never been a Pink Floyd song that has had an emotional effect on me. Its the same for me with Classical music as well. Igor Stravinky's Rite of Spring always touches my heart and calms me yet Mozart doesn't do anything for me.[/quote:2nkz0vso]

I often find Mozart strangely irritating -- though possibly I was traumatized by seeing Amadeus at an early age. <!-- s;) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_wink.gif" alt=";)" title="Wink" /><!-- s;) --> On the other hand, I can listen to piles of 19th-century Romanticism all day: Sibelius (OK, early 20th-century, too!), Rimsky-Korsakov, Borodin, Grieg .... some good ol' thumping Wagner. <!-- s:) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile" /><!-- s:) -->

Quote: &quot;Orion_metalhead&quot;:2nkz0vso
Music is so personal and individual that the only music that matters is the music that matters to you.[/quote:2nkz0vso]

As I'm sure I once read as a quote from someone knowledgeable about such things (though I forget who!), there is no good or bad music -- only music you like more or less. view post


Music..not generally... posted 24 June 2008 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by Orion_metalhead, Auditor

Quote: &quot;carlsefni&quot;:2j7cdgfn
Quote: &quot;Orion_metalhead&quot;:2j7cdgfn
Funny thing is for me, Pink Floyd's lesser known albums have much more impact on me than say, The Wall or Dark Side of the Moon. I'd rather listen to Meddle than any of the Pink Floyd albums. [/quote:2j7cdgfn]

Sign me up for Piper at the Gates of Dawn! <!-- s8) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_cool.gif" alt="8)" title="Cool" /><!-- s8) --> While I respect the achievements of the later Floyd albums, they never really did that much for me at a gut level. And I kept thinking people who were that successful while still sounding that miserable were clearly taking the wrong drugs. <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_lol.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing" /><!-- s:lol: --> [/quote:2j7cdgfn]

I think that the later P.F albums soak into my interior better than the earlier stuff because I view them more as &quot;musician's&quot; albums. There is more focus on the music. The latter era of Floyd albums have a distinctive jazz/fusion flare to them that the early ones don't. The fact that I enjoy my Camel, Mahavishnu Orchestra, and Return to Forever may affect my preference for which era of Floyd I enjoy. Don't get me wrong or take my opinion on their repertoire as looking down on their early albums because I think that The Wall has some incredibly brilliant tracks on it. Overall I lean towards the latter.

Quote: &quot;carlsefni&quot;:2j7cdgfn
Quote: &quot;Orion_metalhead&quot;:2j7cdgfn
But this topic is interesting. The question &quot;what makes one music 'greater' than another&quot; is a loaded question that involves diving into listening to music objectively as well as subjectively. For instance, While Pink Floyd might be thought of as being &quot;complex&quot; I don't find their music anywhere near as complex as say, Watchtower or Fates Warning (Awaken the Guardian specifically comes to mind) though their lyrics are more complex. At the same time, I would say that Pink Floyd's music is more complex than some bands with more complex lyrical themes.[/quote:2j7cdgfn]

I think it would be hard to objectively measure &quot;greatness&quot; unless we transformed that into a measure of &quot;influence&quot; or &quot;(commercial) success&quot; (though, IMO, preferably not just the latter!). In any case, we would clearly have to separate &quot;greatness&quot; and &quot;complexity&quot; as very different things. It would be hard to describe the Ramones' music as &quot;complex&quot; <!-- s:) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile" /><!-- s:) --> but it might well be judged objectively &quot;great&quot; in terms of influence or something. (And perhaps subjectively great, depending on the taste of the individual listener -- but that's another thing.) [/quote:2j7cdgfn]

Well, I use the term &quot;greatness&quot; loosely. I think that a more apt attempt at ranking would be credibility as artists but that too poses infinite amounts of &quot;cracked-cup-filling.&quot; I don't think that it really is necessary to attempt and give music or art a particular score, I was more or less just running with the topic.

Influence is a possible way to base whether a band is &quot;great&quot; or not I suppose but it poses many problems. I think that people throw the word &quot;influence&quot; around these days as a marketing ploy so as to link a band's generic and entirely watered down sound with a more credible scene or group of artists to gain the favor of real music fans. I think that happens a lot and it seeps through the cracks like worms through an ancient rotting coffin. Case and point would be a band (which I happen to like) called The Absence. They were listed by critics and the band in interviews as an old-school Gothenburg band (Ala At The Gates, Dark Tranquility, In Flames) however they sound almost entirely like any other melodic death metal band to my ears. Hints of some of the Swedish melodies here and there and songs like Dead and Gone slay 95% of all the other melodic death metal floating around the used bins of FYE and Coconuts however they have no connection to the scene - they are from fucking Florida. These days, everyone and their mother's best friend's dog is influenced by At The Gates and In Flames. I would say that In Flames is an influential band but less because of them in particular and more because of the scene that they were involved in. At The Gates on the other hand was downright excellent and somehow get less credit than In Flames. They had more atmosphere than the stratosphere and a morbid sense of melody and musical cynicism. As artists they were top notch experimentalists and progenitors. A band like Nirvana - who I would love to argue and bash all day for being the worst thing to happen to music until American Idol decided to claim the throne to that position - who were incredibly influential would also, in my ears, be listed as less than great. They were influential but that was all they were. They too were part of a scene that spewed forth more enduring and talented bands. The only good musician was Dave Grohl and I would go so far as to say that the Foo Fighters are a &quot;greater&quot; band than Nirvana.

I won't even touch upon commercial success. To claim that N'Sync is a greater... musical outfit than say, Darkthrone is ridiculous.

Quote: &quot;carlsefni&quot;:2j7cdgfn
Quote: &quot;Orion_metalhead&quot;:2j7cdgfn
With that said however, what makes lyrics inherently complex? With music, you can measure the complexity - the amount of notes, the structure of the compositions, the arrangements. With lyrics though, who is to say that Manowar's lyrics are inferior to those of Pink Floyd? [/quote:2j7cdgfn]

Ah, but we must not confuse objective complexity with subjective superiority. That said, I think we can set up measures for lyrical complexity just as we could for music. In all cases, we would have to define our standard for complexity, but just we might judge &quot;complex&quot; music as that which contains more notes, more chords, more harmonic structures, etc. we could judge those lyrics to be complex that include a wider range of vocabulary, or a wider range of grammatical structures or rhetorical devices, etc. (and we might rate certain grammatical structures or rhetorical devices as more complex than others).

We could do similar things to rate the &quot;complexity&quot; of prose ....

Of course, this isn't to say that a given subjective listener would necessarily judge the objectively more complex lyrics (or prose, or music) to be &quot;superior&quot;, in their opinion, but with an agreed set of definitions for &quot;complexity&quot;, they could objectively determine the complexity of the piece. [/quote:2j7cdgfn]

Lyrical &quot;superiority&quot; would be easier to judge than musical &quot;superiority / greatness.&quot;

I do however frown upon any attempt to create a set of rules or definitions for judging complexity and the like. Setting a manual of guidelines creates a prison for the creative potential of the artist. It would drive them to create music that fits the definitions given and write lyrics that would fall into the missing places that the rules cut out of the sod.

Quote: &quot;carlsefni&quot;:2j7cdgfn
Quote: &quot;Orion_metalhead&quot;:2j7cdgfn
I know that I can get emotional when I hear the lyrics to Battle Hymn or Metal Daze (or any song off their debut album) however there has never been a Pink Floyd song that has had an emotional effect on me. Its the same for me with Classical music as well. Igor Stravinky's Rite of Spring always touches my heart and calms me yet Mozart doesn't do anything for me.[/quote:2j7cdgfn]

I often find Mozart strangely irritating -- though possibly I was traumatized by seeing Amadeus at an early age. <!-- s;) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_wink.gif" alt=";)" title="Wink" /><!-- s;) --> On the other hand, I can listen to piles of 19th-century Romanticism all day: Sibelius (OK, early 20th-century, too!), Rimsky-Korsakov, Borodin, Grieg .... some good ol' thumping Wagner. <!-- s:) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile" /><!-- s:) --> [/quote:2j7cdgfn]

I'm not a HUGE fan of classical but I don't care for the big bombastic symphonies so much. I do like Tchaikovsky's pieces however so, I guess its a matter of individual composers in the case of classical for me. I would like to get more involved in the classical genre and delve deeper into that rabbit hole but I just get caught up in the other genres.

Quote: &quot;carlsefni&quot;:2j7cdgfn
Quote: &quot;Orion_metalhead&quot;:2j7cdgfn
Music is so personal and individual that the only music that matters is the music that matters to you.[/quote:2j7cdgfn]

As I'm sure I once read as a quote from someone knowledgeable about such things (though I forget who!), there is no good or bad music -- only music you like more or less.[/quote:2j7cdgfn]

Yeah, thats a great quote. I've heard it as well. It too raises some interesting questions. Is there any such thing as truly BAD music? view post


Music..not generally... posted 24 June 2008 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by carlsefni, Peralogue

Quote: &quot;Orion_metalhead&quot;:s32zqp8w
Well, I use the term &quot;greatness&quot; loosely. I think that a more apt attempt at ranking would be credibility as artists but that too poses infinite amounts of &quot;cracked-cup-filling.&quot; I don't think that it really is necessary to attempt and give music or art a particular score, I was more or less just running with the topic. [/quote:s32zqp8w]

Well, me too -- it's what topics are for. Really, I would see the exercise of trying to judge music objectively as requiring a necessary reduction to fairly rigidly define sets of criteria, making the whole thing a fairly academic exercise of limited applicability to ... anything most anyone would be interested in. <!-- s:) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile" /><!-- s:) -->

Quote: &quot;Orion_metalhead&quot;:s32zqp8w
Influence is a possible way to base whether a band is &quot;great&quot; or not I suppose but it poses many problems. I think that people throw the word &quot;influence&quot; around these days as a marketing ploy so as to link a band's generic and entirely watered down sound with a more credible scene or group of artists to gain the favor of real music fans.[/quote:s32zqp8w]

True. I'm really just using &quot;influence&quot; as a kind of short-hand for &quot;the condition of having created music that refuses to go away even after the social conditions that might have initially made it popular even if it had had no other particular value have dissipated&quot; .... or something like that!

Quote: &quot;Orion_metalhead&quot;:s32zqp8w
A band like Nirvana - who I would love to argue and bash all day for being the worst thing to happen to music until American Idol decided to claim the throne to that position - who were incredibly influential would also, in my ears, be listed as less than great. They were influential but that was all they were. They too were part of a scene that spewed forth more enduring and talented bands. The only good musician was Dave Grohl and I would go so far as to say that the Foo Fighters are a &quot;greater&quot; band than Nirvana. I won't even touch upon commercial success. To claim that N'Sync is a greater... musical outfit than say, Darkthrone is ridiculous. [/quote:s32zqp8w]

Well, I'm not going to leap up to defend Nirvana's subjective greatness -- I'll own Cobain an able writer of pop songs (no doubt to his chagrin, and that of many of his fans) but they never did much for me. (Cobain, haplessly miserable beggar that he was, was clearly taking the wrong drugs! <!-- s;) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_wink.gif" alt=";)" title="Wink" /><!-- s;) -->) Nor will I lift so much as the cuticle of a particularly small finger to defend anything about N'Sync! But it does go to show that we need a definition of &quot;greatness&quot; in order to judge whether it exists in a particular case.

Quote: &quot;Orion_metalhead&quot;:s32zqp8w
Lyrical &quot;superiority&quot; would be easier to judge than musical &quot;superiority / greatness.&quot;
I do however frown upon any attempt to create a set of rules or definitions for judging complexity and the like. Setting a manual of guidelines creates a prison for the creative potential of the artist. It would drive them to create music that fits the definitions given and write lyrics that would fall into the missing places that the rules cut out of the sod.[/quote:s32zqp8w]

Well, we wouldn't be setting a manual of guidelines for the artist, only for the judge -- if we want objective measures. But as I noted, that reduces our judgments to the purely academic; only as good as the criteria we define. And this is not particularly useful or interesting. <!-- s:) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile" /><!-- s:) --> We could define &quot;complexity&quot; as &quot;the number of different notes per unit of time&quot;, and define &quot;greatness as complexity&quot;, but then we would know little more than our notionally great music had an awful lot of notes in it. <!-- s:) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile" /><!-- s:) --> We may as well stick with purely subjective mesaures like, &quot;N'Sync suck!&quot;, which are at leat more satisfying if not more informative.

Quote: &quot;Orion_metalhead&quot;:s32zqp8w
I'm not a HUGE fan of classical but I don't care for the big bombastic symphonies so much. I do like Tchaikovsky's pieces however so, I guess its a matter of individual composers in the case of classical for me. I would like to get more involved in the classical genre and delve deeper into that rabbit hole but I just get caught up in the other genres. [/quote:s32zqp8w]

Well, I was raised on classical music (with some folk and jazz thrown in ) as a child, only to be caught up in the heady glories of rock-and/or-roll later on. I retain many early likings of classical music, but there are practical difficulties in getting into the genre. IMO, it's like every record is by a cover band -- and you might like someone's &quot;cover&quot; of a piece more or less. Any given symphony, say, probably has been recorded at least half-a-dozen times (if not many, many more) by different combinations of conductors and orchestras over the past 50 years. You might like some interpretations but not others, and finding the ones you like can be something of a chore. (I'm still looking for a version of Rimsky-Korsakov's Russian Easter Overture that is more like the one I dug as a kid, about which I remember no helpful identifying details, not having been concerned with (or even aware of) such things then. Well ... not looking very hard, day to day, but you know what I mean ....) I increasingly think one needs to get some of those catalogs of classical reviews and then learn which reviewers tastes you trust. (Heh, well, not that different from reading reviews in Kerrang! or any of a number of metal web sites, then! <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_lol.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing" /><!-- s:lol: --> )

Quote: &quot;Orion_metalhead&quot;:s32zqp8w
Quote: &quot;carlsefni&quot;:s32zqp8w
Quote: &quot;Orion_metalhead&quot;:s32zqp8w
Music is so personal and individual that the only music that matters is the music that matters to you.[/quote:s32zqp8w]
As I'm sure I once read as a quote from someone knowledgeable about such things (though I forget who!), there is no good or bad music -- only music you like more or less.[/quote:s32zqp8w]
Yeah, thats a great quote. I've heard it as well. It too raises some interesting questions. Is there any such thing as truly BAD music?[/quote:s32zqp8w]

I'd like to say &quot;yes&quot;, but my philosophy prevents me from doing so. <!-- s:wink: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_wink.gif" alt=":wink:" title="Wink" /><!-- s:wink: -->
(Still .... N'Sync suck!) view post


Music..not generally... posted 25 June 2008 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by Orion_metalhead, Auditor

Yes... Yes they do. view post


Music..not generally... posted 25 June 2008 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by carlsefni, Peralogue

Quote: &quot;Orion_metalhead&quot;:3brz869i
I'm not a HUGE fan of classical but I don't care for the big bombastic symphonies so much. I do like Tchaikovsky's pieces however so, I guess its a matter of individual composers in the case of classical for me. [/quote:3brz869i]
(Just to add to this:) Surely this is the case for most fans in most genres. I mean, I like &quot;metal&quot;, but just because someone is a musician working with that genre doesn't mean I'm going to like their output. Likewise, there are classical composers I like, and others I don't. (Hey, there's bluegrass I like and bluegrass I don't.) And, of course, just because I generally like a musician's output, doesn't mean that I'm going to like all of it. I can think of plenty of bands that I love to death but are nevertheless capable of producing things that make me think, &quot;Well, that was rubbish!&quot;. <!-- s:P --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_razz.gif" alt=":P" title="Razz" /><!-- s:P -->

Of course, that goes for books and authors, too. People will tell me things like &quot;Hey, you like that science fiction stuff, you must like this thing.&quot; Which IMO is not terribly sensible .... <!-- s:roll: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_rolleyes.gif" alt=":roll:" title="Rolling Eyes" /><!-- s:roll: --> And of course, sometimes authors that I generally like deliver me a turkey (maybe a very successful turkey that clearly lots of other people think flies like an eagle, but not me!). Still ... I've liked all of &quot;Prince of Nothing&quot; so far! <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_lol.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing" /><!-- s:lol: --> view post


Music..not generally... posted 29 June 2008 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by ThePrinceofNothing, Candidate

Pink Floyd is my favorite band of all time. Meddle is actually my favorite album by them.

That said, regarding the original discussion, the only musicians I can see coming close to the Waters/Gilmour combination of Pink Floyd would be:

Gabriel/Hackett (Genesis)
Anderson/Barre (Jethro Tull) view post


Music..not generally... posted 30 June 2008 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by carlsefni, Peralogue

Quote: &quot;ThePrinceofNothing&quot;:20gnclnq
Pink Floyd is my favorite band of all time. Meddle is actually my favorite album by them.
That said, regarding the original discussion, the only musicians I can see coming close to the Waters/Gilmour combination of Pink Floyd would be:
Gabriel/Hackett (Genesis)
Anderson/Barre (Jethro Tull)[/quote:20gnclnq]
Well, I won't argue in the latter case, as Tull is perhaps my most &quot;consistently favourite&quot; band. Martin Barre rules! <!-- s:) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile" /><!-- s:) -->
Strangely, though I have many a prog-head friend who raves about ye olde Genesis, I always warmed to the rather eclectic post-Genesis career of Peter Gabriel than the Genesis stuff. view post


Music..not generally... posted 22 August 2008 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by Cnaiür, Peralogue

Quote: &quot;Warrior-Poet&quot;:3dfuf34g
Any of you like Def Leppard? Pour Some Sugar On Me, and others cannnot be denied.[/quote:3dfuf34g]

ROFL! <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_lol.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing" /><!-- s:lol: --> That, and &quot;Paul Revere&quot; by Beastie Boys is what got me into listening to music. Heck, just because of those 2 songs I have several vinyl LPs, over 100 tapes, about 50 CDs, and over 30 concert tickets to prove I was there (a couple even signed by band members). <!-- s:) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile" /><!-- s:) -->

Nowadays, I don't listen to music. Its become unwanted, undesired noise to me. Its like it all sounds the same to me, like I've heard it all before. Blah!!!

If I do listen to music, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, GNR, RATM, and Jane's Addiction (especially!) still get my blood flowing and me going.

&quot;I wish I knew everyone's nicknames
all their slang and all their sayings,
and every way to show affection
and how to dress to fit the occasion.

I wish we all waved!&quot;

Yeah!

&quot;One come a day the water will run
and no man will stand for the things that he has done... &quot;

Hurrah!!!!!


Yeah! view post


Music..not generally... posted 25 August 2008 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by carlsefni, Peralogue

Quote: &quot;Cnaiür&quot;:1586a7iv
Quote: &quot;Warrior-Poet&quot;:1586a7iv
Any of you like Def Leppard? Pour Some Sugar On Me, and others cannnot be denied.[/quote:1586a7iv]
ROFL! <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_lol.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing" /><!-- s:lol: --> That, and &quot;Paul Revere&quot; by Beastie Boys is what got me into listening to music.[/quote:1586a7iv]
Actually, I was huge Def Leppard fan in high school. <!-- s8) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_cool.gif" alt="8)" title="Cool" /><!-- s8) --> Hysteria was the big new album at that time (which, for good or for ill, pretty much reveals my age!), and I think I had, like, all the singles on vinyl (some good b-side tracks on those, actually -- I remember quite digging the &quot;Ride into the Sun&quot; remake at the time, though I'll be durned if I can remember how it goes now!)). But I always actually liked the High 'n' Dry album best! I freely confess that that I found Adrenalize rather disappointing and kinda stopped following the band after that!


(I would expect a band with Vivian Campbell (e.g. Dio's Holy Diver) on board to kick out some more memorable riff-meistery ... but I think I'm still waiting to hear it.) view post


Music..not generally... posted 26 August 2008 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by Cnaiür, Peralogue

Hysteria is a legendary album in my collection. My very first tape. My very first rock band t-shirt was the Hysteria cover album with concert dates on the back. Amazingly, my young brother and one of his friends, for several years now - up to this very day - rock that t-shirt like its some priceless holy relic, and walk around downtown Toronto like they're kings and all eyes should be on them and all women should be on their knees in their presence. My brother's friend takes it to the extreme limit of sometimes wanting to fight anyone and everyone while we wears it. Its a crazy matter, with crazy tales to tell <!-- s:shock: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_eek.gif" alt=":shock:" title="Shocked" /><!-- s:shock: --> . What a $10 investment can do over the course of 20 years is truly amazing. <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_lol.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing" /><!-- s:lol: -->

Anyhow... I'm with you carlsefni, I lost all interest in the band when I heard Adrenalize (Let's Get Rocked?! Puh-leeeeease!). But I was also listening to Jane's Addiction during those times (when don't I listen to them! <!-- s:D --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_biggrin.gif" alt=":D" title="Very Happy" /><!-- s:D -->). Hysteria and Pyromania were the ones I enjoyed. I almost don't even remember High N Dry. The last song they made that I enjoyed was a b-side &quot;Two Steps Behind&quot;. Ever since, I haven't heard a thing by them, cept the news of the guitarist passing on, which just goes to show what alcohol can do. <!-- s:| --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_neutral.gif" alt=":|" title="Neutral" /><!-- s:| --> view post


Music..not generally... posted 26 August 2008 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by carlsefni, Peralogue

Quote: &quot;Cnaiür&quot;:1ac4qnnu
Hysteria is a legendary album in my collection. My very first tape. My very first rock band t-shirt was the Hysteria cover album with concert dates on the back. Amazingly, my young brother and one of his friends, for several years now - up to this very day - rock that t-shirt like its some priceless holy relic, and walk around downtown Toronto like they're kings and all eyes should be on them and all women should be on their knees in their presence.[/quote:1ac4qnnu]

Heh, in high school, I used to have an awesomely chauvinistic Def Lep T-shirt promoting the &quot;Women&quot; single from Hysteria. Thinking back, I'm kinda surprised no gang of irate feminists whupped my @rse for it! Bizarrely, I think my younger sister eventually stole it and wore it as some kind of advanced ironic display. <!-- s:roll: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_rolleyes.gif" alt=":roll:" title="Rolling Eyes" /><!-- s:roll: -->

Quote: &quot;Cnaiür&quot;:1ac4qnnu
Anyhow... I'm with you carlsefni, I lost all interest in the band when I heard Adrenalize (Let's Get Rocked?! Puh-leeeeease!). But I was also listening to Jane's Addiction during those times (when don't I listen to them! <!-- s:D --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_biggrin.gif" alt=":D" title="Very Happy" /><!-- s:D -->). [/quote:1ac4qnnu]

Yeah, Def Lep are kind of on that list of '80s rock bands who got steamrolled by grunge and whatever else. In 1992 (or whenever Adrenalize came out) I was soaking up the likes of Kyuss, Monster Magnet, and Trouble .... And, on the lighter, jammier side, Phish. <!-- s8) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_cool.gif" alt="8)" title="Cool" /><!-- s8) -->

Quote: &quot;Cnaiür&quot;:1ac4qnnu
Hysteria and Pyromania were the ones I enjoyed. I almost don't even remember High N Dry. [/quote:1ac4qnnu]

Admittedly, I must have been pretty young when High N Dry came out! I never actually heard the band until high school (by which time the family and MTV, which was sufficiently non-sucky back then that they actually played a wide variety of music!) and I bought Hysteria first, then worked back to Pyromania and finally High N Dry, which I ended up liking best! Well, worth revisiting: slightly more aggressive production and some great riff-driven songs. However, I never really warmed to their first album, On through the Night.

Quote: &quot;Cnaiür&quot;:1ac4qnnu
The last song they made that I enjoyed was a b-side &quot;Two Steps Behind&quot;. Ever since, I haven't heard a thing by them, cept the news of the guitarist passing on, which just goes to show what alcohol can do. <!-- s:| --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_neutral.gif" alt=":|" title="Neutral" /><!-- s:| -->[/quote:1ac4qnnu]

Yeah, they are certainly a band who've had their alcohol-related problems. <!-- s:? --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_confused.gif" alt=":?" title="Confused" /><!-- s:? --> view post


Music..not generally... posted 17 January 2009 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by Isûphiryas, Candidate

Quote: &quot;Nauticus&quot;:212xp0ni
I also like Pink Floyd, but I believe some of the best music ever created is the lesser-known bands.

Riverside, from Poland, for example. They play a Pink Floyd-y style, but it's completely original and complex, without becoming too much.

Porcupine Tree, as well. The compositions they create, in my opinion, are beyond what anyone's ever done.[/quote:212xp0ni]

I could not argue against the inherent lyrical and musical genius of either Riverside and Porcupine...I have been listening to Riverside for approximately three years now and never tire of them in the least....I would list them in my Top 5 musical artists that I have ever laid ears on! I have recently just began to listen to Porcupine Tree whom I love more and more every day. That being said, musical taste is exactly what it is.....though I have music that I love, but will not listen to unless a certain mood is breached at a particular moment in time.

Actually my favourite music of all time is as follows....Cocteau Twins, The Cure, Lake of Tears(has a forum that feels like family to me), Dead Can Dance and Riverside. Though at the moment I recommend a Riverside self-titled side project called Lunatic Soul....I cannot find the words to decribe this album accurately enough....*sighs*

finally to PF...

&quot;Just listened to floyd's &quot;animals&quot; at work today.... damn, i forgot how good it is....&quot; - Buckethead

honestly I am a Pink Floyd fan, but there is no album that I enjoy more than Animals....in my humble opinion... <!-- s8) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_cool.gif" alt="8)" title="Cool" /><!-- s8) --> view post


Music..not generally... posted 09 February 2009 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by AJD, Candidate

Quote: &quot;Cnaiür&quot;:1qytrlei


Nowadays, I don't listen to music. Its become unwanted, undesired noise to me. Its like it all sounds the same to me, like I've heard it all before. Blah!!!
[/quote:1qytrlei]
This physically pains me to read. I have no clue and cannot re;late or even get along with people that do not like music. Mostly because music is my life really, but music really touches the soul and people that don't care about that really throw me off. I will just have to say you are listening to the wrong music and turn off your radio. :p view post


Music..not generally... posted 22 February 2009 in Off-Topic DiscussionMusic..not generally... by Isûphiryas, Candidate

I agree that mainstream radio music can be a bit skewed and is highly overrated <!-- s:( --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_sad.gif" alt=":(" title="Sad" /><!-- s:( --> .....the one thing that the internet has solved for us is the ability to listen to music (unskewed for the most part) and choose exactly the music that you really want to listen to <!-- s:D --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_biggrin.gif" alt=":D" title="Very Happy" /><!-- s:D -->

....that being said....on my limited budget, I still like to support musical artists that I love as best as humanly possible! view post


  •  

The Three Seas Forum archives are hosted and maintained courtesy of Jack Brown