Log in

the depreciation of music's Journal [entries|friends|calendar]
the depreciation of music

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ calendar | livejournal calendar ]

Greetings... [10 Jan 2006|04:44pm]

I just came across this community and I must say it's too bad people don't post in here often. There are all sorts of things to bitch about in regards to music today.

Now I'm trying to think of an example and I'm having a hard time haha. One thing that kind of rubbed me the wrong way was something Billy Joe Armstrong said. I recently purchased the "Bullet in a Bible" CD/DVD and found it to be a mediocre concert. Now before I go any further, I'd like everyone to know I'm not your typical flag-waving, "God Bless the USA!" patriot. With that said, toward the end of the concert, Billy tells the audience (it was recorded in England) something along the lines of "England is now the new home of Green Day!" Come on...I'm sure you really feel that way Billy. You know he probably says that everywhere he performs just to get a rise out of the audience. Okay I have no other evidence to base that off of but dammit that's my opinion :D.

Come on people...bitch about something! What does everyone think of the current popularity of all of these great "indie" bands? I think it's great that this good music is being introduced to a wider audience...particularly Modest Mouse and Death Cab.
be honest

[12 Aug 2003|05:06am]

[ mood | bitchy ]

honestly, I am so tired of close-minded people (when concerning music) these days. you know, the type of person that automatically labels another by what they listen to. we all do it, to an extent. people are so quick to judge, to jump to conclusions. to get this album and that t-shirt because your "friends" are doing it.

it's as if there is an invisible barrier dividing music and people. it's rather sickening. just because a person has varied music taste in comparison with another's does not mean you can't give them a chance. everyone's taste has evolved to what it is today--so why judge? it really pisses me off.

I think I have an open mind when it comes to music. I judge by what it is--music and just that. not labels, not record sales, if it's mainstream or not. shouldn't that be all that matters? it should be about the magic created inbetween the rhythm, the lyrics; the lure of that voice that has you craving for more. that's what music is. nothing else.


4 +| be honest

[31 Jul 2003|10:02pm]

[ mood | enraptured ]

sometimes i wish you could just become the music. disappear into soundwaves.

it's almost too beautiful to fall on my ears. it's painful to listen to, but i cannot stop. i want to be as good as the music, as complete, as magical. nothing can fulfill that need.

this is the only thing worth living for these days.
this feeling.

4 +| be honest

[23 Jul 2003|10:29pm]

i was reading the latest issue of rolling stone, appalled that jane's addiction's newest record strays received four stars -- the same rating, mind you, that the magazine gave to a far more revolutionary record, radiohead's ok computer -- and not to mention one star higher than any non-doolittle pixies record. in the review, writer jon pareles writes:

Now, after years of reunion gigs and tours, Jane's Addiction have finally come up with music that can stand alongside their previous albums. The band sounds familiar, with its old gambits intact: the serenely rippling ballads that give way to battering-ram riffs, the odd-meter funk vamps, the sudden swerves from metal stomp to thoughtful melody, the ocean-size crescendos. Aiming for the radio, Jane's Addiction sound beefier now, more Zeppelin than ever in songs such as "Price I Pay." Bob Ezrin (who produced Alice Cooper, Pink Floyd, Kiss and Peter Gabriel in the 1970s) makes every instrument larger than life, magically carving out resonances without losing crispness; every so often, keyboards or a string section slip in. Navarro's guitars are everywhere: snarling, buzzing, chomping, pealing, wriggling or sighing wherever a song needs them, with Stephen Perkins' drums constantly demanding more. They sound thrilled to be collaborating again.

ostensibly, pareles gets to the point of why he thinks jane's addiction's newest set "stand[s] alongside their previous albums." no -- the band doesn't do anything to diversify their past catalogue. any person who listens to the latest single "just because" familiar with the band will instantly realize that the song almost exactly rips off the guitarwork of the 1988 single "jane says." rather, they merely regurgitate the past -- to the extent that they can only sound like someone else, "more zeppelin than ever." what the hell? why is this praise-worthy? jane's addiction was at one point a punk rock band -- and if i'm not mistaken, the last thing any punk band wants is to be radio-friendly. alas, however, even perry farrell has confirmed that the band has looked to nu-metal for influences in order to gain a foothold in today's marketplace. sales overshadows creation once again.

thus, i think jane's represents nothing more than an act that has become sadly commonplace in the music industry: that the nature of the industry itself co-opts artists into abandoning the punk ethic inherent in the act of the composition of such music for viability.
1 +| be honest

welcome [22 Jul 2003|09:24pm]

[ mood | anxious ]

please, begin ranting! i would post something relating to music, but i'm quite tired and think i may take a short nap, instead. and, i am unmoved to write such things at this time.

1 +| be honest

[ viewing | most recent entries ]