FYI: Truth Attack - All Genres Of Music That Have Ever Existed Contain Awesome Music In Them, And If You Write Off A Whole Genre Of Music You Are Being Closeminded And Dumb

Twelve-tone music? I pick "Rivers of Babylon" by Harry Partch.

OK, next genre?

This is all very reasonable, but I reserve the right to give some genres short shrift in order to concentrate on the ones that interest me more.

Absolutely.

As for the other threads, there is good metal (well, good heavy rock at least) and there is good country.

this is a big no duh, guys

here has never been any good 12 tone music.

oh shut up

See, the thing is, Louis is funny.

This is all very reasonable, but I reserve the right to give some genres short shrift in order to concentrate on the ones that interest me more.

― chap, Monday, October 20, 2008 3:48 PM (4 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

yeah i mean there's personal taste.

this is a big no duh, guys

― metametadata (n/a), Monday, October 20, 2008 3:51 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink,

yes, one would think....but last week made me think a "stating the obvious" thread was, in fact, necessary.

Ah, I remember it well (page goes swirly)

Piers Morgan: You all laughed when Eddie Izzard said it last week!
Ian Hislop: See, Eddie Izzard is funny.

it can be hard to hear what is good in a genre you don't have many good experiences with. sometimes it's hard to even hear what is happening.

I just don't accept the idea of judging a genre from its own criteria. Some criteria I just cannot accept. A genre that sort of rejects melody and harmony I can never see any value in, and it is not likely to produce any good music.

Completely wrong. There are good genres and there are bad genres.
This thread is indeed a "no-duh" for smart people with ears, so your response does not surprise me. Oh, and "McCartney-esque melodic pop" is not a genre.

xpost

Geir can't figure the
format for hustler criteria
Not chrome, grown rims with stallion insignia

Why are people dealing with Geir as if he is anything other than a didactic gibbering racist lunatic moron psychopath idiot robot troll fuck?

After all these years, I still don't think he's racist. (We're talking 12 years of this exact same conversation.)

I don't think he's racist either.

Arnold Schönberg was black?

he's just a man with a worried mind

uh xp

Actually, yeah, I think I agree with you re; Geir not being racist. I think he walks very close to saying outrageously racist (or what could be perceived as outrageously racist) things with shocking regularity, but I think he doens't give a shit what people look like or where they're from as long as they make melodic McCartney-esque pop with it.

hi geir

you're very sure that you're objectively right about this. not many other people who listen to music have come to the same conclusion, though. regarding many people who have the same opinion about "good" and "bad" genres, i'm sure you would agree are generally uninformed. why do you think this is? do you consider it just a matter of personal opinion, and would equally accept someone who only thinks 1995 georgia rap and booty bass are good genres and melodic pop is 100% bullshit?

That's very brave. Or stupid.

obv i'm not saying that unpopular opinions are necessarily wrong but basically, why do you think your opinions on music are pretty far out of the mainstream of music appreciation? why do you think most fans & critics disagree with you?

Because he's the single most solipsistic man to have ever lived?

Actually, yeah, I think I agree with you re; Geir not being racist. I think he walks very close to saying outrageously racist (or what could be perceived as outrageously racist) things with shocking regularity, but I think he doens't give a shit what people look like or where they're from as long as they make melodic McCartney-esque pop with it.

Staple that to every Geir post from now on...

obv i'm not saying that unpopular opinions are necessarily wrong but basically, why do you think your opinions on music are pretty far out of the mainstream of music appreciation? why do you think most fans & critics disagree with you?

Most fans agreed with me in 1967. And even in 1975, to some extent. They were right then, while they are increasingly wrong now. The baby boomers still understand the essence though. As they did back then.

Goodnight, this thread.

So is anyone other than Geir gonna disagree with the premise or can we just close up shop here?

geir, i'm not saying that there wasn't a time where lots of people were into melodic pop, i was asking you why they don't know - do you think it's a liberal media conspiracy? are people pretending to enjoy avant garde classical and soulja boy while secretly returning to beatles LPs when nobody's looking? you've said james brown was the worst thing to ever happen to music, but his stuff is pretty unanimously loved, even by other corny beatles dudes like you - what do you think those people are getting out of it? why do they bother?

"why they don't know" = "why they don't now"

Geir is, as ever, conflating "music Geir does not like" with "music that is not melodic". The two things aren't the same, at least judging by Geir's assertions on this board.

i think it would take a lot of time and effort for me to get into contemporary country -- i get that it's supposed to be emotional and witty but the sounds in general don't appeal.

i think it takes a lot of time to get "inside" a genre so that the stylistic and personal differences between artists start to appear more prominent to you than the basic stuff of the genre itself, like a photograph developing in front of you.

gff i recommend going to karaoke somewhere rural and watch drunk people singing contemporary country joints, you get to hear it without all the slickness + lyrics are in front of you and you can focus on the storytelling and personal meaning - that's how i got over hating that stuff

geir, i'm not saying that there wasn't a time where lots of people were into melodic pop, i was asking you why they don't know - do you think it's a liberal media conspiracy? are people pretending to enjoy avant garde classical and soulja boy while secretly returning to beatles LPs when nobody's looking?

The answer is punk. Even though I do like some punk, punk did a lot of damage to music. Punk and disco together. They may have seemed like cat and dog at the time, but together they ruined music.

reading comprehension isn't your strongest suit, huh

Which question is that the answer to?

music is a market -- if tons of people were not interested in hearing disco and punk, and buying the records, it would have had no effect at all. why would people be interested in hearing punk or disco, do you think?

a/w it's funny you mentiont that. i went to a vfw this weekend -- it's in the city and they get a young crowd doing drunk karaoke. every now and again a girl would get up and do a country tune (who does "redneck woman?") and they were always much better as singers. those people are pretty serious.

WARNING WARNING CHALLOP AHEAD

There are some ways that punk ruined music but it wasn't because it killed McCartney-esque pop; it's because it gave people the idea that you could make consistently good music without knowing anything, either via study or osmosis, about music theory. It also gave the impression you didn't need to know how to sing or play an instrument to be in a decent band. The suckiness doesn't come as much from the acts who got famous as it does from the acts they inspired who didn't actually know what they were doing.

So do you actually think that?

I think it's pretty disingenuous to say that the icons of the 60s and 70s were/are only loved for their melodies - I mean the Beatles wouldn't be so revered without their playfulness and textural experimentation, nor the Stones without their huge grooves, nor Bowie without his self-awareness and contextual games. I'm not denying that all three artists' confidence with a tune isn't/wasn't a huge part of their appeal, part there are a number of factors at play.

There are some ways that punk ruined music but it wasn't because it killed McCartney-esque pop; it's because it gave people the idea that you could make consistently good music without knowing anything, either via study or osmosis, about music theory. It also gave the impression you didn't need to know how to sing or play an instrument to be in a decent band.

People got over those ideas. But The Beatles were never the one and only dominant influence on most music like they were until the mid 70s. Maybe except for a brief Britpop boom in the mid 90s.

hi again geir - i'm going to link you to a video, one of my favorite songs ever recorded. i hope you'll listen to it - i'll be happy to listen to a song you recommend to me afterwards

that's big daddy kane performing "raw". i really love this cut, and it's just a dude rapping (not singing) over a straight james brown drum loop (from "hot pants"). i'm not the only person who loves this, its part of the rap canon, for good or bad, and it's revered by lots & lots of people. people aren't enjoying it as a rebellion against 60s pop, and there's not really any extramusical factors at play here - it's not like we're distracting by a flashy video or the clout of listening to a 20 yr old song. i can explain what the appeal is to me, but i feel like there's not much you'd enjoy about it. i don't think you're objectively wrong for that, you just aren't into rap music. so, why am i big deal capital-w wrong for listening to this? what do you think is the error with me & other heads that we enjoy this track?

Piers Morgan: You all laughed when Eddie Izzard said it last week!
Ian Hislop: See, Eddie Izzard is funny.

wasn't it actually "people like him tho"?

that's big daddy kane performing "raw". i really love this cut, and it's just a dude rapping (not singing) over a straight james brown drum loop (from "hot pants"). i'm not the only person who loves this, its part of the rap canon, for good or bad, and it's revered by lots & lots of people. people aren't enjoying it as a rebellion against 60s pop, and there's not really any extramusical factors at play here - it's not like we're distracting by a flashy video or the clout of listening to a 20 yr old song. i can explain what the appeal is to me, but i feel like there's not much you'd enjoy about it. i don't think you're objectively wrong for that, you just aren't into rap music. so, why am i big deal capital-w wrong for listening to this? what do you think is the error with me & other heads that we enjoy this track?

That's where disco comes in. Some people have gotten way too fixated about dancing and rhythm. And disco started it.

http://speakingoffaith.publicradio.org/programs/britishradical/images/qutb.jpg

did you listen to the song, geir? what would you recommend to someone like me who has been brainwashed into music like "raw"?

Some people have gotten way too fixated about dancing and rhythm. And disco started it.
I thought James Brown started it.

it's because it gave people the idea that you could make consistently good music without knowing anything, either via study or osmosis, about music theory. It also gave the impression you didn't need to know how to sing or play an instrument to be in a decent band.

except these things are true

Trying to put together a list of my all time Top 20 soul/R&B albums, it would probably look something like this (not including reggae by Bob Marley or jazz by Herbie Hancock):

1. Fulfillingness First Finale - Stevie Wonder
2. Bad Girls - Donna Summer
3. Songs In The Key Of Life - Stevie Wonder
4. Talking Book - Stevie Wonder
5. Purple Rain - Prince
6. Can't Slow Down - Lionel Richie
7. Thriller - Michael Jackson
8. Sign "O" The Times - Prince
9. I Am - Earth Wind & Fire
10.Parade - Prince
11.The Dude - Quincy Jones
12.Once Upon a Time - Donna Summer
13.Tropical Gangsters - Kid Creole & The Coconuts
14.Control - Janet Jackson
15.Lionel Richie - Lionel Richie
16.Around The World In a Day - Prince
17.1999 - Prince
18.Rhythm Nation 1814 - Janet Jackson
19.Innervisions - Stevie Wonder
20.Hearsay - Alexander O'Neal

These are all really marvellous albums that I really love. And in addition there are great albums by the likes of Bob Marley, Herbie Hancock and 2 Pac which would have gotten into the list if I had not chosen to define them as non soul/R&B in this case.

geir talking melodies here have you ever heard cardiacs

Not sure. If they are big on melodies, I will probably like them if they are not extremely low-fi or extremely "left of middle" in other ways of approaching music. Like, for instance, I hear great melodies in Pixies and The Replacements, but I do have a serious problem with the way they are approaching them.

Regarding my soul/R&B list, the lack of anything pre-1970 or post-1990 is not a coincidence!

Geir, they're as big on melodies as it actually gets. No jokes.

DON'T listen to "Eat It Up Worms Hero", you will hate. Otherwise, go wild: http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewProfile&friendID=2600990

A bit post punk-ish, maybe. It's OK, but a bit too weird it seems.

Hmm. There isn't anything from "On Land And In The Sea" or "Guns", which might be their most Geir-friendly records. But all I can advise you do is listen to some of their stuff on Youtube or something. I think they'll win you round. Well, I like to think.

They seem pretty experimental to say the least. A bit too "out there" for my taste, really.

Ah well. I tried. Maybe think of them as a souped-up XTC with even better melodies but a lot more weirdness? Nah. Ok, fair enough.

Early XTC is too weird already.

Ya but I prefer the later stuff too, by and large. IIRC you're one of about 3 other ppl on ILM who really bats for Nonsuch.

Cardiacs, to me, sounded way weirder than the strangest stuff on "English Settlement" tho. And I don't like "English Settlement" much with the exception of a few tracks.

And "Spirit Of Eden" is OK. I think it would have worked better with an electronic sound though. Plus they were sophisticated enough by "It's My Life" and didn't benefit from getting more "out there". But it's not that I hate any of their stuff. Not even "Laughing Stock" which I am struggling to get much out of at all.

Geir, I hear what you're saying. But those records weren't about "getting more 'out there'" for weird's sake or trying to make more perfect pop music. They were about exploring pop structures by breaking them down temporally. And by doing so with guitars, drums and the odd arrangement touch, you could also really zoom in on rock dynamics.

I just don't think the goal of these records was to make great pop songs -- but rather to explore what made pop songs great.

Even Nick would agree with that -- or might've many years ago. ;-)

that cardiacs myspace is a perfect reminder of how bands using Mr. Bungle or Sleepytime Gorilla Museum or Henry Cow as touchstones to state "look at us we're quirky" pisses me off.

they're fine and all, but fuck those comparisons. "dear weird music listeners look at us we are weird too lol, just a much more easygoing version of weird" is just such a fucking copout for actually describing what you sound like.

anyway, carry on

XP: What sticks with me is the arrangements, which are at times really beautiful. But I don't feel like they are growing on me. The first time I listened properly to it I thought that "OK, there is some interesting stuff that goes on here that I may really like once I get to know it better and gets it more into my head". But then, the next times I listened to it, nothing happened. I didn't comprehend any more, and I found it boring after a while because nothing stuck. Thus, I decided that it wasn't quite as interesting, because there was never anything to hang anything on.

Fair enough.

that cardiacs myspace is a perfect reminder of how bands using Mr. Bungle or Sleepytime Gorilla Museum or Henry Cow as touchstones to state "look at us we're quirky" pisses me off.

they're fine and all, but fuck those comparisons. "dear weird music listeners look at us we are weird too lol, just a much more easygoing version of weird" is just such a fucking copout for actually describing what you sound like.

anyway, carry on

oh DEAR.

a) they have been around since early 80's.
b) those are some of their easiest songs, ever. put up there doubtless because much else wd fry newcomers' minds. honestly. gentle intro then explore if you like what u hear.
c) mike patton is a huge fan of theirs, as i'd imagine are SGM.
d) that blurb wasn't written by them. it was written by some enthusiastic fans, at 'the organ' magazine.
e) you have just mortally offended my favourite band ever.

If you want to know what sorts of thing bandleader Tim Smith actually says, he has in fact some words highly relevant to the thread-title, words which mark him out as one of the true heroes of popular music: http://www.cardiacs.com/interviews/harmonie-magazine-france-may-2000/

A bit post punk-ish, maybe. It's OK, but a bit too weird it seems.

― Geir Hongro, Thursday, October 23, 2008 12:35 AM (7 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

Early XTC is too weird already.

― Geir Hongro, Thursday, October 23, 2008 12:48 AM (7 hours ago) Bookmark

what does 'too weird' mean, exactly? seems to just mean 'new and unfamiliar'. cardiacs seemed 'weird' to me at first, but now they just sound like a really great, clever, raging prog-pop band.

point being, the use of 'too weird' as a note of criticism signifies little more than an unwillingness to embrace the new on the part of the critic.

Not so. In terms of most broadsheets and magazines it's shorthand for "don't bother with this new music that is so difficult to listen to; stick with what you know and buy/download it again and again in all new formats forever." It's about placating and flattering the ignorance of their solvent readers and advertisers so that they can stay in business.

Geir what are your top 20 gabba tapes off UK market stalls?

i'm shocked control made geir's r&b list! i mean it's a classic obv but it does seem to particularly prioritise rhythm and club atmosphere over melody and harmony.

Maybe he enjoys Janet on other levels.

Wow, Geir actually came through with some genuine human interaction towards the end of this thread. Prog Rock - Bringing People Together Since 1969!

Next we will be having The Lex's Top 20 Indie albums!

1. The Ting Tings - We Started Nothing

2. Mansun - Six

3. Girls Aloud - Out Of Control

4. New Fast Automatic Daffodils - The Peel Sessions

5. Blonde Redhead - 23

Hooray! I finally read this thread, after its having sat atop my browser as an unread bookmark for 11 months. It looked like a good start! And then it devolved into Geir. By the way, is this the closest Marcello has gotten to admitting he's Geir? I've suspected that since I started reading ILM. Their writing styles are very similar. I think Geir is just an experiment of his to try out a particular theory of pop works, and since Geir gets such a "good" response here means the Geir character has stuck around. It's good fun, anyway.

Geir was, is and will always be his own person. Those of us who first encountered him online back in 1994 or so know this.

I want to believe.

But have Marcello and Geir ever been in the same room at the same time? ;)

Marcello had a Geir-imitating sockpuppet a few years ago, I can't remember what it was called though. If he was Geir right from the beginning, why create a sockpuppet to ape Geir?

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1238/1268566093_3612244f45.jpg?v=1188415465

Ah yeah, Marcello's sockpuppet was called "Comstock Carabinieri". Maybe it was a self-parody though, with Geir being the "serious" sockpuppet?

Truth is always stranger than fiction.