I still be Guenin 99% of the current rock gives me a tremendous boredom. Compare the music of previous decades (I refer mainly to the 60 and 70) with what is done now, I suggest the image of a butcher cortándote a leg of ham and obsequiandote only the crust of the piece and with a bit of bacon stuck this, without ever scrape the inside of the ham.
Much to insist on the other side of the fence, those who say that everything is guest and can only honor the memory of those (groups) "dead", there is something inherently exciting about the discovery. In any area, not only in the musical. The human being is moved by the virgin land (in all senses) and routine kills not only sexual and emotional relationships, but also the creation. To justify this routine (in this case, music) there are all sorts of bad excuses: the eternal chant of "invent other, which is all that" or words that have been devoid of meaning, even embezzled , as an attitude (nose), roots (repeat), regardless of fashion (inability to absorb any influence new or explore other avenues). And of course, the "we" are supposed to do, good-songs, do not do boring and / or experimental sounds pretentious. " If fans with songs that remind hearth of their favorite songs-and past-at least to comfort and to deceive the firstborn, who does not know these previous references. And if school since the last coward.
Influences: Stones, Beatles, Kinks, Who ...
So, lately I'm trying to group them get a bit of jack, queen and king (of pop, rock ... well, the subtrack whatever). What bothers me is not to copy, copy is so bad. The lack of capacity for abstraction. A group of 60 copies a picture of another composition, I had a different context and created something completely different (and I think a completely valid creation). This concern has disappeared.
Well, what was. I'm trying to groups that long line that goes from (we're talking about upgrades) kraut, to trip hop, post rock, through the lounge. Groups such as Portishead, Laika, Moonshake, Tortoise, Stereolab, Broadcast and Pram. I like to play with textures, do not forget what a song and try to move (to cause some concern with the sounds that go beyond using sounds "Molanta" problem electronic music endemic to so-called "smart"). Speaking of emotions, words which I use for want of a better. Fed up with bands who insist on the spontaneous, willful little music, it seems that the exudative. It sounds like most of the time. He very well pass them, no doubt, but not the listener. From here I claim the cold mathematical intelligence of music.
made me reflect, albeit negative, a book that caught me on the technical aspects of the music of Brian Wilson. I bought very excited but I was disappointed. It's incredibly comprehensive at some level. You talk about a song and you compare your melody or chord changes with other parts, whether the same author or in which was probably inspired. But other aspects of Wilson's music does not speak or do not know. For example of their imaginative productions that sound completely natural but unrealistic (in terms of available sound layers) that succeeded. Or the incredible arrangements and infinite texture of your best work. And that made me think that maybe some players (say, learning by ear to learn music or a style only) copy such things (melody, riffs, chord wheel) and others (both ignore these aspects earlier, as have some studies say more regulated) are set out in more subtle aspects of music.
0 comments:
Post a Comment