|
How Important Is Originality In Music?
|
26-09-2016, 00:54
If you listen to the "experts" Neil and Crazy Horse invented the grunge sound and the lack of dress sense....
"BTO....Bachman,Turner,Overweight
They were big in the 70s....for five minutes,on a Saturday,after lunch..." - Me 2014. 
26-09-2016, 01:02
Probably very true Crazy mate....however Nirvana sounded unlike any band before them!
The ultimate connection is between a performer and its' audience!
26-09-2016, 01:12
(This post was last modified: 26-09-2016, 04:42 by CRAZY-HORSE.)
I don't agree with the experts though...
They were grungy but not grunge IMO, unless you count the "mirror ball" album Neil did with Pearl Jam which was very grungy, but melodic at the same time... the problem I have with "grunge" on the whole is that it sounds messy and un-melodic. back to one of the original posts....Nirvana took an original sound like the NY & CH sounds and made them their own, thus creating a new sound in rock music... was never a big fan of Grunge though, I like Pearl Jam, some of Soundgarden's material but very little of anything else including Nirvana (the exception being their 'unplugged' album)... that said, what Nirvana did was give rock the kick in the ass it needed because it had become sterile and predictable IMO... would you count Grohl's Foo Fighters as grunge or alt-rock?
"BTO....Bachman,Turner,Overweight
They were big in the 70s....for five minutes,on a Saturday,after lunch..." - Me 2014.  SteveO Wrote:Nirvana exploded with a new sound...grunge! Then all the other subsequent bands followed!...lol That happens a lot in Music when a new flavor of sound and style is created, it can become big like Blues/Jazz, Swing, Rock, Disco, Glam/Hair Metal, etc. and spawn artists/bands with it. When Grunge came alive, the public craze surrounded that scene and Glam Metal was pretty much dead by the late 80s and early 90s. Now the craze is Electronica, Hip Hop, and Indie. I also notice that music can go through cycles of rebirth considering I hear 80s vibes like Synthpop becoming popular again, haha. 
26-09-2016, 03:22
I like 70's electronic music (mainly JMJ & Tangerine Dream ) but the 80's synth pop stuff is too simplistic-sounding to me. The 70's stuff had 'layered sounds' which gives it a kind of depth and atmosphere. The synth pop stuff sounds 'thin' to me. The same instruments are used for both genres but it's just how they are being used that makes the difference. I have often tried to figure out why JMJ appeals to me so much and I think it's the fact that he composes in an orchestral way - he thinks in classical terms but utilizes electronic instruments. His pieces also evolve/develop as they go along. The synth pop stuff just stays in the same rut all the time, mostly driven by a pre-determined beat which does not allow the music to breathe in any way. EDM is a case in point. With JMJ there are rhythmic structures as well but they change and sometimes disappear at times so that the music can move to a different plane or movement. Hard to explain but that's about as close as I am ever going to get to describing my perception of electronic music.
'The purpose of life is a life of purpose' - Athena Orchard.
Jerome Wrote:I like 70's electronic music (mainly JMJ & Tangerine Dream ) but the 80's synth pop stuff is too simplistic-sounding to me. The 70's stuff had 'layered sounds' which gives it a kind of depth and atmosphere. The synth pop stuff sounds 'thin' to me. The same instruments are used for both genres but it's just how they are being used that makes the difference. I have often tried to figure out why JMJ appeals to me so much and I think it's the fact that he composes in an orchestral way - he thinks in classical terms but utilizes electronic instruments. His pieces also evolve/develop as they go along. The synth pop stuff just stays in the same rut all the time, mostly driven by a pre-determined beat which does not allow the music to breathe in any way. EDM is a case in point. With JMJ there are rhythmic structures as well but they change and sometimes disappear at times so that the music can move to a different plane or movement. Hard to explain but that's about as close as I am ever going to get to describing my perception of electronic music. Some Synthpop doesn't bother me as long as it is interesting, fresh, and fun. I've only recently gotten into electronic music mainly Trip Hop, downtempo, electropop, ambient, and such. 
26-09-2016, 12:38
Pretty important. Most bands borrow from others tho. Oasis did this amazingly
26-09-2016, 12:40
yes they did...they blatantly and shamelessly copied and plagiarised just about everything that came before them, but in the process they did create their own sound.
"BTO....Bachman,Turner,Overweight
They were big in the 70s....for five minutes,on a Saturday,after lunch..." - Me 2014.
26-09-2016, 16:45
When I listen to Oasis I automatically hear The Beatles! A recent poll of the best Brit bands had The Beatles as number one followed by Oasis!
The ultimate connection is between a performer and its' audience!
29-09-2016, 19:10
I try not to be too harsh on bands who express their musical influences unless it is so close to them that they fail to have an identity of their own. For instance, some Prog Metal bands are influenced by Dream Theater which is fine until you have bands who are not distinguishable from each other.
If I'm listening to bands who are too much alike, every time I listen to them I will keep comparing them and that can mess up my listening experience so yeah very little innovation can show. |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
