kosmo
Joined: September 23, 1999 at 05:01 AM UTC
Posts: 16329
Re: Musicological banter
November 03, 2015 at 01:51 AM UTC
#
hutch wrote:
kosmo wrote:
No new Stone Roses, just a couple more UK live dates..
wake up. they are a dead band
how many bands do you know that can spark sudden interest merely by posting posters of their lemon logo around manchester?
vansmack
Joined: October 04, 2001 at 05:01 AM UTC
Posts: 19725
Re: Musicological banter
November 03, 2015 at 02:16 AM UTC
#
bunnyman
Joined: November 19, 2001 at 06:01 AM UTC
Posts: 5542
Re: Musicological banter
November 03, 2015 at 02:21 PM UTC
#
hutch wrote:
kosmo wrote:
No new Stone Roses, just a couple more UK live dates..
wake up. they are a dead band
The Ramones are a dead band. I'm not sure the Roses qualify. I'm willing to give them a shot. If anything because Reni is a superb natural as a drummer and John Squire is one of the better guitarists. Ian Brown is horrid as a singer though.
walk,on,by
Joined: Unknown
Posts: 0
Re: Musicological banter
November 03, 2015 at 04:00 PM UTC
#
so if a whole new ramones band popped up with like one original band member and the rest, all new ramones, doing all old songs and making new songs as well, you would like them, and go see them live? they dressed the same, the same no break song attack, the same hair.
hutch
Joined: Unknown
Posts: 0
Re: Musicological banter
November 03, 2015 at 04:02 PM UTC
#
everybody knows if the stone roses ever make any new music it will suck….its hard to get excited about an announcement to play huge shows in England. its all about the benjamins for them….
sweetcell
Joined: July 18, 2006 at 05:01 AM UTC
Posts: 22608
Re: Musicological banter
November 03, 2015 at 05:36 PM UTC
#
killsaly wrote:
Holy Fuck dude slows Chipmunks music to sludge
http://www.avclub.com/article/slowed-down-chipmunks-are-both-brilliant-and-terri-227794
this is amazing.
grateful
Joined: October 15, 2008 at 05:01 AM UTC
Posts: 11564
Re: Musicological banter
November 03, 2015 at 07:29 PM UTC
#
sweetcell wrote:
killsaly wrote:
Holy Fuck dude slows Chipmunks music to sludge
http://www.avclub.com/article/slowed-down-chipmunks-are-both-brilliant-and-terri-227794
this is amazing.
this
killsaly
Joined: Unknown
Posts: 0
Re: Musicological banter
November 03, 2015 at 10:53 PM UTC
#
I am trying something similar with a dance album they put out in the 90s… But it just sounds like the female vocal originals…
kosmo
Joined: September 23, 1999 at 05:01 AM UTC
Posts: 16329
Re: Musicological banter
November 09, 2015 at 11:22 PM UTC
#
Don Giovanni records had an everything must go sale in advance of their move from NJ via Kickstarter and for $27 bucks they sent me 5 random CDs + 2 extras.. They sent me a Vacation, Screaming Females, Waxahatchee, Upset, Priests, Peter Stampfel and The Brooklyn & Lower Manhattan Bango Squardron and Castle Talk… Guess I better put up the "Do Not Distrub" sign.
Space Freely
Joined: December 13, 2014 at 07:28 PM UTC
Posts: 11019
Re: Musicological banter
November 10, 2015 at 05:00 PM UTC
#
So we recently watched Love and Mercy, and my wife couldn't stop commenting on how badly punk rock sucks when compared to real musicians like Brian Wilson.
Me, I'm sort of neutral regarding punk. I went to hardcore shows in the late 80's more for the scene than the music. I have the Sex Pistols and Dead Kennedys on my ipod but never listen to them anymore.
Does anybody have a musicological defense of punk based on musical merit alone?
sweetcell
Joined: July 18, 2006 at 05:01 AM UTC
Posts: 22608
Re: Musicological banter
November 10, 2015 at 05:21 PM UTC
#
Space wrote:
I went to hardcore shows in the late 80's more for the scene than the music.
i think the answer is hidden in there, in 2 parts.
"in the 80's", i.e. when you were young. punk is the music of youthful frustration, alienation, etc. you're no longer that person, so the music doesn't speak to you.
"more for the scene than the music" - arguably the most revolutionary aspect of punk is that it was a music scene that wasn't about the music first. it was an attitude, a social group, a protest, an identity… that also came with a soundtrack. to examine it "on musical merit alone" is to miss the point. it was never meant to stand alone, so it doesn't do well when you try.
YMMV, IMHO, i'm old, etc etc etc.
Space Freely
Joined: December 13, 2014 at 07:28 PM UTC
Posts: 11019
Re: Musicological banter
November 10, 2015 at 05:41 PM UTC
#
sweetcell wrote:
Space wrote:
I went to hardcore shows in the late 80's more for the scene than the music.
i think the answer is hidden in there, in 2 parts.
"in the 80's", i.e. when you were young. punk is the music of youthful frustration, alienation, etc. you're no longer that person, so the music doesn't speak to you.
"more for the scene than the music" - arguably the most revolutionary aspect of punk is that it was a music scene that wasn't about the music first. it was an attitude, a social group, a protest, an identity… that also came with a soundtrack. to examine it "on musical merit alone" is to miss the point. it was never meant to stand alone, so it doesn't do well when you try.
YMMV, IMHO, i'm old, etc etc etc.
Ironically, Anarchy in the UK just came on the radio as I was reading your post.
ggw
Joined: December 16, 2001 at 06:01 AM UTC
Posts: 14237
Re: Musicological banter
November 10, 2015 at 05:45 PM UTC
#
Strangely enough, I was rocking the Fugazi catalog this past weekend. It is visceral. Made me bang my head and pump my fist. It hasn't aged incredibly well, but sometimes I like to get in touch with my inner 14-year old.
Sidehatch
Joined: October 04, 2011 at 04:33 AM UTC
Posts: 25687
Re: Musicological banter
November 10, 2015 at 05:48 PM UTC
#
Space wrote:
Ironically, Anarchy in the UK just came on the radio as I was reading your post.
catchy tune…although most would argue, not punk ;)
so I guess that is ironic
Space Freely
Joined: December 13, 2014 at 07:28 PM UTC
Posts: 11019
Re: Musicological banter
November 10, 2015 at 05:54 PM UTC
#
SideBiach wrote:
Space wrote:
Ironically, Anarchy in the UK just came on the radio as I was reading your post.
catchy tune…although most would argue, not punk ;)
so I guess that is ironic
Who are this "most" you speak of. I guess it wouldn't include readers of Rolling Stone.
http://www.rollingstone.com/music/pictures/readers-poll-the-best-punk-rock-bands-of-all-time-20110802/4-the-sex-pistols-0650614or this site:
http://rateyourmusic.com/list/BrainToad/top_100_punk_bands_as_voted_by_musicianforums_com_punk_forum_users/2/or LA Weekly:
http://www.laweekly.com/music/top-20-punk-albums-in-history-the-complete-list-4166542or, well… you get the picture.
Sidehatch
Joined: October 04, 2011 at 04:33 AM UTC
Posts: 25687
Re: Musicological banter
November 10, 2015 at 05:58 PM UTC
#
quoting RS on this board always increases your street cred
anyone else want to chime in here…
Also, let me be clear on this eve that mr lydon is in town for an intimate gig at UStreet (thanks seth)
I love the pistols
that 930 show they did 2003 was one of my favorite rock shows at the club
Space Freely
Joined: December 13, 2014 at 07:28 PM UTC
Posts: 11019
Re: Musicological banter
November 10, 2015 at 06:05 PM UTC
#
SideBiach wrote:
quoting RS on this board always increases your street cred
anyone else want to chime in here…
Also, let me be clear on this eve that mr lydon is in town for an intimate gig at UStreet (thanks seth)
I love the pistols
that 930 show they did 2003 was one of my favorite rock shows at the club
I was quoting Rolling Stone in the context of your "most" argument. I assumed you were using "most" in a quantifiable context, so I simply picked a music publication that has MANY readers.
Just because some little fanzine that you may have subscribed to 25 years ago said the the Sex Pistols weren't punk doesn't mean it's so.
Sidehatch
Joined: October 04, 2011 at 04:33 AM UTC
Posts: 25687
Re: Musicological banter
November 10, 2015 at 06:09 PM UTC
#
?If you have to ask what jazzPunk is, you'll never know.?
― Louis Armstrong just about anyone who listens to "punk music"