What does it mean for a piece of music to "rock"?

you can say 'at least i spent three hours listening to a podcast about chuck eddy'

(the bullet that hits will be from when you shoot yourself in the face immediately after listening to a three hour podcast celebrating chuck eddy)

No one man owns rock because rock music is a universal language, spoken and understood by all.
You see, rock is a feeling that no one can understand really unless you're deep into the vibe of rock.

"Lady, if you have to ask..."

No one man owns rock because rock music is a universal language, spoken and understood by all.
You see, rock is a feeling that no one can understand really unless you're deep into the vibe of rock.

― blapplebees (crüt), Friday, August 5, 2011 11:16 AM (39 seconds ago) Bookmark

are you serious? i mean, this actually seemed to be eddy's position, which seems an untenable one for a guy who (allegedly) makes a living trying to get people to understand and appreciate music. (it's also a sadly anti-intellectual position IMO.)

thomp: haha. yeah, i think i'll pass on the podcast. but it's cool that people like him so much. i've got no problem with that.

also i'm not sure the sentinelese would understand this "universal language" of rock.

I think it basically means you could play air-guitar to it (note that this doesn't require actual guitars in the music).

Without wishing to distract too heavily from amateurist's very real question, how is a piece of music different "rocks" than when it "choogles"?

In my subjective view, a "choogle" is more of a boogie - it insinuates itself. Something that rocks kind of explodes onto the scene.

to rock = it makes you want to move in an overtly expressive way.

well the rock aesthetic is anti-intellectual so that may be why some ppl are wary of approaching it in a non-visceral way

I mean, I think the traditional academic definition of the "rock" sound is pretty dead-on: an emphasis on the rhythm section with a rhythm either based on a strong backbeat or heavy syncopation, with a (mostly) blues-based harmonic structure. rowdy soundin'.

there is a very subtle spectrum between something that rocks and something that choogles/swings/bops/grooves/whateveryouplease

plus a minimum tempo
xp

rock music dropped the swing, then dropped the bop, and later picked up the groove, but it never stopped rockin, with intermittent chooglin

if you believe creedence clearwater revival (and really, there's no reason not to given their impressive academic credentials), chooglin' is also some form of locomotion.

as in, "chooglin' on down to new orleans"

blah blah family resemblances blah blah

You see, rock is a feeling that no one can understand really unless you're deep into the vibe of rock.

HOUSE is a feeling

rock is, you know, whatever

dudes this should put an end to this discussion
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hcMYW6b3Ss

lol geeta

LOVE is a feeling

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRsNtNlXNLs

trying to get people to understand and appreciate music.

don't have any beef w/xhuxk myself but I don't think ^^ is the motivation or net effect of 99% of rock criticism

No one man owns rock because rock music is a universal language, spoken and understood by all.
You see, rock is a feeling that no one can understand really unless you're deep into the vibe of rock.

― blapplebees (crüt), Friday, August 5, 2011 11:16 AM (39 seconds ago) Bookmark

are you serious? i mean, this actually seemed to be eddy's position, which seems an untenable one for a guy who (allegedly) makes a living trying to get people to understand and appreciate music. (it's also a sadly anti-intellectual position IMO.)

It's not his position at all! Eddy has never believed in universal languages or platonic ideals. These sound like Jack Black quotes from School of Rock.

This is a minor point, but an important one for me: Eddy was the first critic I read who emboldened me not to give a damn what an artist's printed lyrics literally said; what mattered was what I thought I heard.

amateurist demands some proof of objectivity from a purely subjective exercise- so not gonna happen

alfred would you read a book that way

LOVE is a feeling

no no, house is a feeling and love is the message!

you guys need to go back to disco school

rock is, you know, whatever

the uncontrollable desire to jack your body?

oh look xhuxk does address "rock" in the comments:

Since I mentioned Carducci, I should maybe add that, if some irritating troll somewhere asked me repeatedly to define what I mean when I say music “rocks,” I’d probably consider some definition like “to propel with forward motion, often though not necessarily at high velocity and volume, using a swinging, blues-derived rhythmic base, generally in a small-unit format.” But I probably wouldn’t tell that to the troll. (And of course somebody might further ask me to define words like “forward motion,” “swinging”, and “velocity,” which I may well not all be using in an absolutely technically and musicologically correct sense, and it could go on forever from there, and I’m a busy guy, so….)

alfred would you read a book that way

not if it sang to me

point taken but...

not to give a damn what an artist's printed lyrics literally said; what mattered was what I thought I heard.

no offense but this aspect of the xhuxk approach seems blindly egotistical; not listening that way but taking the next step and present your perceptions as authoritative criticism

Eddy was the first critic I read who emboldened me not to give a damn what an artist's printed lyrics literally said; what mattered was what I thought I heard.

Hence your pervy interp of Cut Copy's "So Haunted"?

Eddy was the first critic I read who emboldened me not to give a damn what an artist's printed lyrics literally said; what mattered was what I thought I heard.

Not precisely, but Marcus has made more or less the same point: "If the artist made a record intending to convince all right-thinking people to send money to the I.R.A., but the record is in Swedish and nobody can know that, it's sort of pointless to discuss the guy's intentions. What you really have to discuss is what is it like to hear a record in Swedish, and does it have a good beat?"

greil marcus should try writing in swedish

Hence your pervy interp of Cut Copy's "So Haunted"?

you know it! (I wasn't alone though)

no offense but this aspect of the xhuxk approach seems blindly egotistical; not listening that way but taking the next step and present your perceptions as authoritative criticism

Is any criticism authoritative?

I disagree with about 80% of xhuxk's perceptions, by the way, and love his prose and (most of his) arguments, which, I guess, is a variation on the who-cares-what-the-lyrics-really-say argument.

xpost

no, and hence my whole argument crumbles like a day-old doughnut. funny how middle age has made me so literal-minded

Since I mentioned Carducci, I should maybe add that, if some irritating troll somewhere asked me repeatedly to define what I mean when I say music “rocks,” I’d probably consider some definition like “to propel with forward motion, often though not necessarily at high velocity and volume, using a swinging, blues-derived rhythmic base, generally in a small-unit format.” But I probably wouldn’t tell that to the troll. (And of course somebody might further ask me to define words like “forward motion,” “swinging”, and “velocity,” which I may well not all be using in an absolutely technically and musicologically correct sense, and it could go on forever from there, and I’m a busy guy, so….)

well, i'm glad he's put it on the record! he never deigned to explain this when i asked!

fyi it's not "purely subjective" -- one can choose to have a hermetic personal definition but surely for the idea of "rocking" to have any social currency there needs to be some kind of (perhaps unspoken) intersubjective agreement about what it refers to!

although what aspects of musical form seem to replicate the physical concept of "forward motion" is itself an interesting question! obviously music "moves" in the sense that sound waves travel through space, but clearly no music--even styx--actually "moves" in the sense of being propelled forward in any literal sense. i'm sure some music theorists have tackled this topic at length, so maybe i should be looking in the library rather than posting to ILM.

it's telling BTW that chuck considers it "trolling" to ask what he means when he says something "rocks." that seems like the kind of basic, deceptively simple (actually quite complicated) question that rock critics should be asking themselves more often!

i mean rock criticism is so rife with received wisdom, imprecise impressionistic description, etc. that asking what we mean when we use terms like "rock," "dark," "light," "heavy," etc. etc. to refer to music seems like a very productive exercise, even though i understand some people here will always think it's literal-minded or pedantic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordinary_language_philosophy IIRC

clearly no music--even styx--actually "moves" in the sense of being propelled forward in any literal sense

anticipating objections: obviously brass bands/marching bands often "move forward" literally, but that can't really be said to be a (literally speaking, non-metaphoric) inherent quality of the music.

the whole lyrics debate is one big false dichotomy, no? sometimes you care what the person is saying, sometimes you don't. some people care, others don't. what's the big deal?

i still am not sure what this thread's about

i mean i feel like i get a lot more out of e.g. mahler's kindertotenlieder if i know what the singer is singing and how the music interacts with the words. but i wouldn't care if someone else just enjoyed the music. although i'd get annoyed if (like some folks on ILM who will remain nameless) they decided to make it their "project" to tell me that the words don't matter.

i still am not sure what this thread's about
― Neanderthal, Friday, August 5, 2011 5:41 PM (45 seconds ago) Bookmark

it's about what it means when people say something rocks.

These sound like Jack Black quotes from School of Rock.

incidentally I was just quoting the house music monologue and replacing "house" with "rock"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NSn5RfxoXs

imo music that "rocks" tends to a) sound like someone broke a sweat playing it or b) like you'll break a sweat if you move to it in the way that it inspires you to, but not necessarily dancing.

i judge how much music "rocks" by counting how many people I challenged to a fight while the song was playing