Music: Death of Soul

[Captain Crunch]

I think the famous lyrics: "Todays music aint got the same soul, I like that old time Rock and Roll" sums up the majority of how tasteful music fans feel. My Question to you all is what is your opinion: Has todays music lost its soul and meaning or is there still hope?Is good music around the corner or do we have 100 years more of the Backstreet boys to look forward to?

[Captain Crunch]

If you feel as though there are good new bands please dont hold back. Let us know who they are and why you feel this way. Peace.
-Capn

[Zeppelin]

i'm affraid we are losing it, and it got nothing to do with people like backstreet boys, in my opinion it because all the so called rock or metal bands of our time. most of the people out there are doing crap, i dont know why but that's the way it is, i mean the only "modern" guitar player who's giving me some hope is steve vai, all the others are just playing pure rhythm like metal bands, or crappy acustic tunes like travis, or even worse : the so called alternative rock like radiohead.
ok what im really trying to say, is that people should stop trying to do new styles, and try to play more like it was in the 70's and then we will see rainbow in the music sky :)

[Captain Crunch]

I think even if upcoming musicians returned to an older style which had meaning at the time it would still suck. What is the root of this problem!?

[Christoph]

Good music is right here, right now, my friend.

I won't disagree with you in that the Backstreet Boys, Radiohead, and NSync are total crap, but have you ever listened to Disturbed?

I really can't even stand listening to that old (70's and 80's) crap anymore. It sounds completely ridiculous compared to bands like Disturbed, Staind, and Godsmack.

[Christoph]

Oh . . . and I forgot to mention SevenDust.

[r_moreno7]

I'm perfectly content with the music of today. I listen to mostly alternative music, and Love bands like coldplay, and matchbox 20 I don't know how you all feel about them but I love them. I still do like all the old stuff, don't get me wrong. I am seeing though, that songs from the 80s and early 90s are coming to mind now. When I think of great songs from the past (my past anyway) I think of metallica, aerosmith, and now even extreme "more than words", RHCP "Under the Bridge". I'm not too experienced I guess with how advanced the guitar parts are or anything, but what I'm trying to say is new music out today will not be known as "good music" or classic until it is dated a little. Get it? Damn I have a hard time explaining myself!! lol -Robyn

[Captain Crunch]

I agree that there are some descent bands today but most of them just recieve the spotlight for copying a played out style. I crave something new! Something with meaning.

[Raskolnikov]

Before I get into my actual post I do have to say that I don't want to hurt anybody's feelings, irritate anybody or get on anybody's case. I think we're all entitled our space on this board and I don't want to ruin the general civility we all enjoy. That said, I'm going to say exactly what's on my mind...
Brace yourselfs.

My first comment is that anybody who thinks that their's a lack of great music now or that their ever was a musical golden age is completely out of their minds. We all have a time, place, and genre in music that we love more than any other, a little peice of musical heaven that we latch onto for one reson or another. We're all entitled that and I'll suspect that 99% of us (myself included) have just such a time, place, and genre we hold dear. But think back, especially those of us who lived through the 60's, 70's, or even before; their was always crap, and ample quantities of it. 400 years ago someone could get exicuted for playing a triad, or even out of a strict major/minor arrangement. Bach had to make his music to please wealthy sponsors, Duke Ellington had to play special shows at the Cotton Club just for white people... Their are always compromises, and we very rarely see pure music flowing from the heart. Any of us who write original music for a band know what it is to give and take so that the band as a whole can live and work with the song. We shouldn't be quite so cynical; just because we don't get the music it doesn't mean it isn't good. Their are also countless underground bands out there doing some amazing things, we just have to get out more and take a closer look at the world around us.

On the other hand, we shouldn't be so naive: One of the above mentioned bands (here I go...) always gets a rise out of me. Godsmack. Lets just say that every time I hear VooDoo I start singing either Angry Chair or Over Now by Alice in Chains because I can pick out parts of both songs from the main riff. Of course, that isn't as bad as Everclear sampling the rythm and horn parts to "Mr Big Stuff" and rapping about the 70's over it. At the other end of the spectrum we see bands like Primus where you can hear a touch of Rush, Pink Floyd, and King Crimson, but mostly a whole lot of originality. That's not to say we all have to be 100% original all the time (AiC did borrow a Maiden riff after all, and Eclectic Electric by Primus is very Floyd-ish, and we all can think of other examples).

What I'm trying to get at here is that we all need to elevate our awareness of that which has come before and that which is around us. If we go and lock ourselfs into "this is my thing, all else sucks" or "man, their ain't nothing out there that's any good any more" or "[insert Metallica Chat come back here]" [insert band here] ROX!" then all that has ever made music great means nothing any more. Lets become accountants.

[Joseph]

Originally posted by Raskolnikov


My first comment is that anybody who thinks that their's a lack of great music now or that their ever was a musical golden age is completely out of their minds.

Well, its like when you're talking to some of your closest friends, and the one thing that really bugs you is their lack of honesty, where they sometimes have a hard time expressing themselves in a reasonable manner. But we would appreciate it much more if our friends would tell us whats on their minds instead of slipping everything under the rug for a rainy day, and ultimately wasting our time. To say that the music today is hopeless is ridiculous. But still, theres no denying that there is a lack of honesty in the music industry today, Just like Wrestling, musicians are admiting that its fake, they are merely interested in instant success instead of thinking in terms of longevity. And the reason that people around the world don't mind, is because thats what they're looking for too.



Originally posted by Raskolnikov
We all have a time, place, and genre in music that we love more than any other, a little peice of musical heaven that we latch onto for one reson or another. We're all entitled that and I'll suspect that 99% of us (myself included) have just such a time, place, and genre we hold dear.

You know, Ive heard it all before, on how there are so many musicians today who should be able to enjoy their success without the overal critical judgementr of others. But if it really bothers them to the point where they can't get anything done, well then that just proves that they are doing something wrong. Of course history tells us that a lot of crappy bands have come our way, through the mistakes of others came something special. But it seems as if integrity isn't exactly a priority for a lot of musicians today. I just wish that more musicians would take the time to ask themnselves how they want to represent their overall creativity, instead of whats deemed acceptable by others.



Originally posted by Raskolnikov
There are always compromises, and we very rarely see pure music flowing from the heart. Any of us who write original music for a band know what it is to give and take so that the band as a whole can live and work with the song. We shouldn't be quite so cynical; just because we don't get the music it doesn't mean it isn't good.

Of course compromise isn't always an option, its something thats necessary if you want to release a record in this day and age. Its not like how it used to be where most record producers were uneducated as to what rock and roll was all about, where they put all of their faith in the musicians. Today, excutive producers are more educated as to what the latest trend is, and to what would make their pockets heavier. I just wish that money wasn't the primary driving fporce in music today. I wish that more record producers put their faith in the musicians for what they are instead of trying to mold them into something that the majority of people would inevitably eat up with a spoon.


Originally posted by Raskolnikov

What I'm trying to get at here is that we all need to elevate our awareness of that which has come before and that which is around us.then all that has ever made music great means nothing any more. Lets become accountants. [/B]


No no no, it will be a while before I take iver my fathers business. But still, we should feel free to express our opiunions as to whats good and bad in the music industry, instead of just accepting whats available for the sake of wanting to stay hip and cool. I havent acquired the attide that everything today in music sucks, because that would be a lie. Just most of the music in the mainstream is predictable, and watered down. But music is my passion, and there ar still many hard working musicians today who do their best to make representation of their personality through their music. With a lot of the bands in the mainstream today, its safe to say that their personallity is a representation of someone else. An idea of whay people might want to see or hear. Overall, everyone is looking for something different, but I'm looking for honesty...


Its safe to say that the MTV generation speaks volumes when it comes to the billboard charts. For years, Ive been waiting for this station to play a little biit more variety, something Ive missed for years. At this point, I think that a lot of people are getting sick of MTV's programing, where the channel is forced to hide behind their late night soap operas. http://www.msnbc.com/news/600331.asp?pne=msn Heres a pretty interesting article for you guys...\


-Joseph

[Raskolnikov]

Their is always compromise: From changing a part because your drummer can't quite get the transition no matter how hard he works or the key being just out of your singer's range, to realizing that a song will alenate a paticular audience and not playing it live, to the compromises you have to make while recording an album, to 200 years ago when you had to keep a rich patron happy with whatever you wrote, to 500 years ago when a dimished chord could get you excommunicated.

I think what separates today from the past is that the business is far more commercialized than before. But it's still operating on the same basic rules it was 40 years ago.

[Captain Crunch]

I think the best music is made by those who arent out to gain a quick buck. I dont wanna sound like Mr. Obvious here but its true that music reflects its creater. If the creater is in it for the money, It will show. People out there for the music, are given unbelievably loyal followings like Steve Vai and Joe Sach. Music is not what's losing soul its people.

[Bardsley]

Right, so, someone complains that new music has lost its soul, and then the post turns into a bagging of bands like Radiohead. Now, you may not like Radiohead, but soulless it is not. I don't like Country and Western at all, in fact, I hate it, but it has soul. Music will never lose its soul, everytime someone picks up a guitar at a campfire and sings a tune, eveytime someone gets a tune in their head that lifts them, everytime a band strives to play what they feel, not what they are told to, soul will continue. That sounded fairly corny, but it had to be said. And to suggest that bands should "stop trying to do new styles, and try to play more like it was in the 70's" is possibly the most brainless way to do anyhting other than ruin music forever I have ever seen on this board. I'm sorry if I sound harsh Zeppelin, but really, you didn't actually mean that did you? So, soul will exist in consciously trying to copy others, rather than find anything new, maybe humans in general should ascribe to this philosophy, don't do anything new, jsut go back to the good old days, aaargh, I am about to scream in frustration. Raskolnikov, every time these sorts of discussions come up you are the one ray of hope that I can see, someone who is not so sentimental about the past, and actually seems to have a clue about what he is talking about. Sorry to get so worked up, I think I am going to have to bow out of discussions about the state of music, it's all too frustrating.

[Zeppelin]

hey bardsley it's only my opinion, you dont have to agree with it, and i know that most people wont. anyway yes its kinda stupid to say that people should stop doing new music but instead i can say that people should stop ruining the 70's music and the blues, because everytime a new rock band or a metal band apears, it seems to me that they took like 10% of what was already done in the 70's 90% of their original stuff, and the result: we've got another crappy band ... i mean i didnt hear a single band yet, that didnt remind me something of the 70's and that didnt sound worse than the original 70's stuff, and about radiohead and all those bands of their style, and bands like rem:
maybe they dont worse than any 70's band , but there's one thing i really like about the oldies and hate in those bands:
when you look at band like Ac/dc they are really average players, there are thousands of players around there who can solo 10 times better than angus BUT the band posses a great ammount of life and stage energy, it something hard to explain but people will understand me, if they like 70's
while when you hear most of today bands, especialy the alternative bands, it seems like the players will fall asleep in a second, and there's a great lack of energy in today music... so that's why i liked the oldies

offcorse it's only opinion...

[Raskolnikov]

Soul I think is in the imperfections. Part of what people are feeling I think is the incredible production we see in music today. Everybody in isolation booths playing to a click track, perfect compression, and all the other essentials of modern production. 30 Years ago guys still played the music live with dividers to keep the mics isolated.

If you think their's no soul to modern music, then go see some live shows. I reccomend Jim's Big Ego www.bigego.com, Incubus, Milligram, The Urge www.urge.net, and a slew of bands that nobody out of their home towns have heard mentioned. If you can't find soul in music today it's from a lack of searching, not a lack of soul or creativity. Rest assured, awesome music is out there.

[Bardsley]

OK, Zeppelin, I see your point, sorry about going a little bit crazy. But I still agree with Raskolnikov, if you aren't finding energy in bands, go to some gigs. I guess U2 began in the 80s but their shows have so much energy you pend the next week coming down off the high. Pearl Jam and Chili Peppers do good shows, I haven't seen Radiohead perform, but - though their music has an ambient, sleepy quality to it- I don't thikn they are boring. Yes, AC/DC have energy, but part of it is because that's what their music is right for, and Hendrix never used to prance around much, he would often stand completely still for the whole peformance, occaisionally playing the guitar with his teeth. I agree that energy is very important though, but I have been to very few gigs in my local area that I haven't felt a buzz from seeing.

[Zeppelin]

the bottom line is:
it's only a matter of taste
i like it in the 70's style : 3 chords, 2 fingers and that's all
i dont think music has to be complicated to be good, thats all. i think that maybe bands like radiohead can do complicated things and all, but their miss part of this magic, and touch that some of those "3 chords bands" had.

[Joseph]

Of course its not that music has to come from an intricate formula to be considered worthwhile, but its very important for musicians to give their all, in what they feel is acceptable in getting their message across, taking themselves to the next level of creativity.


Its alright for a band to have a sense of humor in this business, but sometimes they tend to let that get in the way their better judgement. I think the question they should be asking themselves is why they got into the business to begin with. And if they can hold onto the core of who they are. throughout financial deals etc, than for the most part they're doing alright. Not just for others, but for themselves.

An example: U2, after the well intentioned but schizophrenic feel of their previous work, their newest album is a record the band needed to make, something they probably should have made a long time ago. But in some ways, I think they were testing not only their audience, and their abilities for the latter part of the 90's. But this band has aged rather well, they know exactly what they want, and their overall message is still very clear.

After listening to U2 at the beginning of a new decade and century, one wonders why all big name rock groups can't age this gracefully. Now for various types of music, and for most bands, its mportant to search for whats important. But I think throughout the process of trying to evolve as not only musicians, but as people, we tend to lose our stepping ground. Not because their record sales aren't as high, but because they lose satisfaction very easily in their accomplishments.

So, for this reason, and many others, I truly think that because there are a lot of musicians today who can't find satisfaction in their music, they're merely trying to find other ways to keep their hopes high. By letting the media, and the growing fickle public to dictate whats right and wrong for them musically. And when its very noticable, thats when they've got a problem.

I just think its all about knowing how to handle success, and not losing your integrity along the way. Ive seen some great local bands up north in Massachusettes, as well as Florida, and these guys and girls have a lot of passion as if theres no tomorrow. When it comes to good music of today,its all about knowing where to look, and to never lose hope that there are still those people who let their hearts guid them. Yes, of course we all have different tastes , but if theres one thing that we can agree on, thats that we all appreciate honesty in the music business. Throoughout the mainstream of rock, a lot of the music is kind of boring. Hopefully, once Chris Cornell's new project comes out this December, it will give us a much needed wake up call, as well as a kick in the arse...

-Joseph

[Led Zeppelin]

Why is everyone always picking on Travis and Oasis and other such bands. I mean just cause Fran Healy cant wank a guitar as hard as Steve Vai doesnt mean hes any less of a musician. Id have alot more patience for a Travis or a Radiohead song than for a Steve vai song and if you took the time to find out Jonny Greenwood is actually a very good guitarist, he may not be a wanker like Steve Vai but Id still rate him higher.

[Bardsley]

Though I am not a hge fan of either Travis or Oasis, I agree with you in principle. I wonder, if the Beatles came along today, how long would it take for people to recognise them, or would they just be fobbed off as another boy band with instruments. Oasis may be a little unoriginal, but they have written some good songs, and at least Travis have integrity, and actually care aobut music.

[Zeppelin]

hmm i actually dont have any problem with oasis, but when talking about people like travis:
i think that there should be some line that will seperate between pro musicians, and those who take music as hobby only, i mean i think that people should be able to play in certain level to be pro's. you know i've got guitar players in my area in my age (17-18) who can play like ten times better than travis, and all the bands of this kind, so i just can't understand how all those bands become popular when there are thousands of players around the world, even teen aged who can play 10 times better, and i'm not talking about all those sherd masters, i'm talking about people who play music that is quite similar to travis, and all the bands of this type, but doing this 10 times better than the pro's on the tv do. this problem exsisted in the 70 and the 60 as well, and i never could understand why do people like those bands, when they (the people ) can play much better...

[Raskolnikov]

sometimes it's not that the song is hard to play, but that nobody else could have written it.

[Bardsley]

Exactly, and who cares how good someone is at playing the guitar, if they have no originality, and cannot write songs. Heaps of the best rock acts aren't particularly great at their instruments, but they are original, and write great songs, and work well as a band. For rock and pop, that is so much more important than chops, as long as you are reasonably good. It's different if you want to play jazz or classical or metal of course...

[Zeppelin]

Originally posted by Raskolnikov
sometimes it's not that the song is hard to play, but that nobody else could have written it.

well the problem is that people can write those songs, and it's not like he's doing some interesing harmonies, or he's got good voice, he (travis or whatever the guy's name is)
just plays some simple chord progression and sings.... why do you people think that no one else can do it???
and maybe for pop you dont need any technique, but in rock you probably should be better than travis to do something original
with all the respect to this guy, i can't even consider him as a guitar player, probably he's worse player than 90% of the people on this forum, so i just cant understan how can it be that he is pro, while thousands of people who play and write better than him, can get a contract with a record company..

[Zeppelin]

i know that my posts turns to really mad and angry ones, but that's only because i'm really upset that now when most of the people talk about rock they talk about rem and travis
because whatever they are rock they are not

[Raskolnikov]

I have never heard Travis, so I can't say anything to (his/there?) music specifically. But the fact is you can do simple things very creatively. Look at Jim's Big Ego, their song She's Dead is two chords, it's entirely B and E, yet NOBODY can deny that it's a very creative tune. Anybody can play it, most people can sing it, but ONLY Jim Infintino could have written it.

Simple does not equal uncreative, nor does it equal soul. Everything should be judged in it's individual context.

[Led Zeppelin]

1. Music isnt just about guitars, just because it band isnt a great guitar band doesnt mean theyre not good

2. Fran Healy(Travises singer) isnt the lead guitar player

[Alan Moorhouse]

I gotta go with Rask and Bardsley on this one - if the song is good, the technique is a side-issue.

[Captain Crunch]

soul in music will never die. Its found through the ears of that whos listening.

[Lordathestrings]

A point I keep making, that doesn't seem to register, is the simple fact that as musicians we hear things differently from most people!

As I've often said "The Biz is based on the fact that most of the people who buy their product will give a track 9 out of 10 if its got a good beat and its easy to dance to."

Don't get hung up on the dreck that The Biz tries to shovel into your ears. The commercial side of the industry will never represent 'state of the Art' because artistry is so low on its list of priorities.

Non-musicians cherish fond memories of particular songs because they happened to be popular at the time something special happened in their lives. This explains why most people get stuck into the genre that coincided with the onset of their puberty. Artistic merit isn't even a consideration.

Realistic considerations like eating more than once a week become important if you make the decision to be a professional musician. If you crave pure originalty, check out the smaller venues that host local 'hobby bands'. These guys have day jobs to support themselves, so they don't have to 'go commercial' in order to survive.

There's some amazing stuff 'out there', if you look for it. It won't be in the big stadium shows. The kind of stuff you're looking for tends to grow a little closer to the ground, but it is there.

[Raskolnikov]

oh, I got your point.
The thing is if you pay attention you do find a couple awesome bands playing the large venues. Check out Clutch, or anything involving Les Claypool.

[educatedfilm]

I'll have to disagree with Raskolnikov a little, there are great eras in music, granted it's nowhere near a decade but you some times get 6 months where 3 or 4 truely definitive albums are released very close to each other, from some great bands, and then there'll be a lag, where these bands go on tour/take a brake, where you get anything from 6 month to 1 year lull, where none of the major bands are producing anything.

i do disagree about the seventies simplisty in guitar, cos you'll end up with stuff that sounds similar when the most popular chord progression get used up.

The only thing in music now which wasn't there in the 70's which has really made a large impact, is fx/production. You feel the music is a lot more emotive when you hear the crystal clear strings part, and guitar solos than you would listening to a scratch hissy old 12 inch (nothing wrong with old 12 inches).

Oh yeah i recomend "sigor ros", for those intrested in something a litte more intresting..

[Joseph]

Originally posted by educatedfilm


The only thing in music now which wasn't there in the 70's which has really made a large impact, is...



Back in the seventies, it's safe to say the that music told us something about the artists' personally. Today, with most bands you can't tell whether they are coming or going. Honesty isn't respected today like it was years ago, and there just isn't enough creative freedom. There's no easy way to way it.

Years ago, "musicians" put their hearts on the line, and their less than perfect point of view for the better of their compositions. Today, a lot the music is too safe, and "rockstars" feelk the need to follow a certain poattern to achieve success. Too many "rock stars today" they don't think in terms of longevity, which is sad, because they aren't liuving up to their true potential as "musicians." I'm not disgruntled fan who's constantly waiting for the past to repeat itself, I just wish that intergity went along with success today as it did years ago..

-Joseph

[Lordathestrings]

Put a little more thought into separating the commercial necessities from artistic ideals.

No band gets a recording contract (and big-time promotion and distribution) with a major label unless someone at the executive level is convinced there's profit to be made.

The Biz is run by business-oriented managerial types who would rather impose product on maleable consumers than allow unpredictable artistic cosiderations put their invested millions at risk. Give your head a shake, man, would you be willing to risk everything you own on the possible success of a band you just met? I've known a lot of people who couldn't take that chance on their own band, let alone someone they don't know.

If artistic purity is paramount, you finance the production and distribution of your own material. The web may provide the means to get your stuff out there, but the big sales numbers come from the kind of push that only the big companies can afford. Like it or not, they feel entitled to have some input on what kind of product they put their dollars behind.

In the much-lamented 70's, there weren't nearly so many people trying to break into the market. What we deal with these days, is a 'mature' industry where a large number of suppliers (bands) are vying for a share of a relatively saturated market. Every other industry in similar circumstances is experiencing similar domination by conglomerates, and homogenization of available product.

The good news is that there is a resurgence of craftsmen in these industries. In music, this is represented by bands formed of people who can afford to make music their way, without having to compromise for the sake of making a living. The word "amateur" means "for the love of doing".

'Sorry to sound so discouraging to anyone who hopes to make their way as a professional musician, but my advice is, if you intend to follow your muse as only you can hear her, you better hang onto your day job.

[educatedfilm]

"The Biz is run by business-oriented managerial types who would rather impose product on maleable consumers than allow unpredictable artistic cosiderations put their invested millions at risk."
That applies to everything at the minute really, especailly here in the uk. This is getting worse now the financail heavy weights are merging, i'm being serious, this is really unhealthy for buisness to have such massive companies, who can afford mass advertising, and distrubution, and because of these factors musicains flock to them. All this means they're either crushing little independant record lables or buying them up.

"No band gets a recording contract (and big-time promotion and distribution) with a major label unless someone at the executive level is convinced there's profit to be made."

That is true, but there are alot of musicians managing to earn a living with out that big time recording contract.
THere's a fair amount of money to be made just by laying live, and occasionaly releasing stuff on independant record labels. in the Uk, really poeple have split, you've got those who like the charty stuff (there are plenty of these poeple...alot of them are kids, which is worrying cos that suggests they're being taken advantage of, cos some of these groups get slots on kids tv), and the other poeple, who like anything that really just tickles their fancies. There a lot of specialist shops around now, and i do feel distribution of some of the more underground stuff is getting better.

I dont think that music as a whole is becoming less geniune. Admitidly the chart stuff is pretty fake (i know some one will point out it is these poeple who are sucseeding and not the little bands), but there is some really good stuff out there, you Just have to look for it.

One more thing, musicains are beign a lot more experimental, someone said you can be experimental but at the end of the day you still suck, that maybe true, but your paving the way. New sounds are being made, although you might not be able to really utilise them, some else probably can. This should mean more diversity in music (it's hard to explain... listen to song "KID A" by radio head, i'm pretty sure they didn't come up with effects,it's just a vodex i think with some keyboard, but they've managed to use it pretty well).

[ibanezdude]

music of 2day has changed a great deal from the past!
i mean... u get all the pop crap like backstreet boys nsync etc... that NOBODY can stand except for crazy chiks with a crush on the members in the groiup...

a lot of music that i consider good from 2day lacks a lot of talent (guitar solo worK) like sevendust, papa roach and disturbed but i still really enjoy listening to them coz the guitar work might not b great but it duznt suk! and the lyrics r really meaningful... (not that i really find a meaning in most songs)
music that i like from 2day r sevendust - waffle, home, licking cream.... papa roach - last resort, broken home... disturbed - voices, stupified

howeva... when im lookin for a band with talent i see METALLICA! they arent really as big as they used 2 b but their songs just simply rok! :)

l8r...

[Raskolnikov]

Their's always clusters of good records coming out- they just don't always relate to what you listen to.

As for no good uncomporomising music in the bigger scene... Download the song Pork Soda by Primus and tell me that their was a record exec anywhere near that studio when it was recorded.