One thing that impresses me about the sound is that it's simultaneously a good four-on-the-floor dance stomp and a rock bawler; as the latter, it makes its rolling sea of guitars vastly more effective and voluptuously rocking than are the similar roiling guitar choruses of more officially "rock as such" songs by, for instance, Daughtry and My Chemical Romance (which aren't so bad themselves). And yet it also has the same hazy feel as the more-dance-than-hard-rock "Not Leaving Without You." So you have rock pressure and dance sway going together. (Which is good, 'cause it helps the rock stop being so damned depressed.)
― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Saturday, 10 February 2007 22:40 (nineteen years ago)
I'm not being confrontational, I'm wondering how so much can be read into this--trying to import engineering cpncepts into everyday use here--how such a 'degraded signal' can be parsed for depth-y meaning. How Paris herself can import much into the finished product considering how complicating the process is.
(None of this is really about doting on the idea of authroship although, just for my own organizational purposes, it's helpful to keep trackof producers in some cases to understand, say, asthetic continuity/developement.)
I shouldn't have said "the machinery of te studio", as that's an analog usage, as is the idea of Spears' being interesting in a 'robo-chick' way. Perhaps that's what's new and for me, really unsettling about Paris' vocals--that it's a new sort of detachment, a hyper-digitalized thing.
As we talk, I'm realizing the main thing here is how her vocals really do unsettle me. The sound, the out-of-phase-y high end, the inhumanly smoothed out vocal wash backgrounds.
I was listening to a remix of Roxette's "Dangerous" and there's AMS reverb on, like, everything. But there's a very live, 'warm' studio sound effect on the vocals (which you can, of course, recreate digitally.)
Whatever--the effect is that of two very live-sounding human voices almost sparring with the digital environs. With Paris, it's like she's been consumed.
Maybe that's what wiggining me.
― Grey, Ian (IanBrooklyn), Saturday, 10 February 2007 23:00 (nineteen years ago)
Questions that I just sent to Xhuxk and that I'm now sharing with the masses: (1) Is there ever going to be a Paris Hilton album? and (2) are Kara DioGuardi and Scott Storch still involved? This may surprise you, but I've been negligent on keeping track of this story. -- Frank Kogan (edcasua...), April 5th, 2006. (Frank Kogan)
The phrase "this may surprise you" is a direct rip from Chris Cook (about his cartoon band Yo Soy): "The drummer was Squiddo Octopie, and this may surprise you but he was an octopus." The interesting thing about my irony, which I assumed most people would get, was that on April 5th 2006 (and I'd said something very similar to Chuck a year earlier when I was first hearing about the Platinum Weird and the Hilton LPs) I was basically indifferent to there being a possible Paris Hilton album, since I didn't expect it to be all that good, though Kara's and Scott's association with it gave it the chance of having (in Simon Reynolds' words) merit. So, not only was I being ironic, but it's ironic that I'd said what I'd said and had the attitude I had.
― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Saturday, 10 February 2007 23:04 (nineteen years ago)
Isn't your main point that there's a limit to how much the electronic tinkering can create something that wasn't there in the first place (in this case, a fully realized, characterful voice)? Whereas I'd say that there's no principle or limit that says that the tinkering can't create it, but also I don't know how much tinkering there really was, and anyway I do hear a fully realized characterful voice, and how they achieved it isn't a big issue.
It's more of an issue for me how Ashlee was achieved, since I need to determine whether I should fall in love with Ashlee, with Kara, or with whom? Falling in love with a multiplicity may be too confusing to me.
(I realize I'm giving John short shrift here, esp. since he's one of the most talented producers/instrumentalists/melodists of the '00s.)
― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Saturday, 10 February 2007 23:15 (nineteen years ago)
― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Saturday, 10 February 2007 23:18 (nineteen years ago)
But Frank is OTM about irony. In fact, Paris's irony (or lack thereof) and her coldness (or warmth) has nothing to do with her means of production. THAT SAID. Benjamin would definitely encourage a reading of aura that requires knowledge of her means of production. And I think he'd call her inauthentic because of her means of production - though I'd need to dig out my copy of Illuminations to prove that. And I'm on the road, so that isn't going to happen tonight.
Here's an interesting question: Following Paris Hilton until last year, the most important aspect of her name was Hilton. At least, that was the consensus - because she hadn't created anything that would distinguish her first name from her last (though she distinguished herself in other ways - but artistically, I don't think anyone thought about her as something other than a Hilton). But following the release of the album, with it's one word title, we now refer to her as merely Paris. Did she in fact transform in the terms of her art? If we talked about her cursing out Lohan, would we return to Hilton? Etc.
― Mordechai Shinefield (Mordy), Saturday, 10 February 2007 23:38 (nineteen years ago)
― nameom (nameom), Sunday, 11 February 2007 01:22 (nineteen years ago)
Newest single Heavy Starry Chain (there IS an apple in her hands!), harder rock + Teletubbie-lookin' baby dolls in "I'm Gonna Scream," Elfman Halloween theatrics in "Lollipop Candy Bad Girl." Good Matrix-balladish Xmas track "I Love Xmas." They remind me a little of Betty Curse.
― nameom (nameom), Sunday, 11 February 2007 01:36 (nineteen years ago)
― nameom (nameom), Sunday, 11 February 2007 01:43 (nineteen years ago)
Didn't read the piece, but Us Weekly's cover (and cover story) showed photos of various celebrities who'd recently gone through breakups and dropped a size or two in their dress sizes as a consequence and - said the subhead - were looking far sexier for it.
― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Sunday, 11 February 2007 02:13 (nineteen years ago)
Disagree. We haven't gone into it deeply, but the rock star issue is where it genuinely comes up. E.g., this from Nia:
I think Paris and, to a lesser extent, Lindsay are iconic for sure--but I don't think that alone qualifies them as rock stars. The thing about rock icons, Mick Jagger or Debbie Harry or whoever, is that they either present an image of not wanting to present an image ("They're genuine!"), or if they do want to present an image, it's as negative an image as possible.
Paris and Lindsay are too apologetic. Rock stars don't play dumb and then insist they're smart, or confess to eating disorders and then take it all back. Britney comes closest to the kind of iconic, defiant rock stardom you're talking about, Dave, in that she seems to really not give a shit.
These days, to the extent that "authenticity" is an issue in popular culture and isn't just a buzz word floating in the breeze, it's about class relations and Relationship To Authority, with the premise being that Authority is irremediably illegitimate. Any other issue brought up in relation to "authenticity" is a stand-in for this one. (Not that what is meant by "Authority" and what is meant by "class relations" are at all clear. The advantage of discussing stand-in issues is that one doesn't get clear about one's actual issues.)
― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Sunday, 11 February 2007 02:29 (nineteen years ago)
― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Sunday, 11 February 2007 02:33 (nineteen years ago)
― Mordechai Shinefield (Mordy), Sunday, 11 February 2007 02:49 (nineteen years ago)
There is a mystery of Kara. For me to say "Oh, she wants someone else to work through" seems too... I don't know... clichéd?
Wants? Needs? Is afraid to be without? Her words: "I've loved [being in] the shadows. The shadows are great because you can hide there and do what you do, and if you're failing, no one knows." I can't tell whether she loves her place in pop ("I want to write the quintessential pop song...one of those moments in pop time that defines an era.") or loathes it ("Sometimes, when I enter a room [to write] with a girl who has had no pain, no sorrow, and no experience, I almost want to put a gun to my head."). Not that the things she says are mutually exclusive, really, but they have a way of undercutting themselves. (Now is this a discussion for this thread, or a tangent for elsewhere?)
By the way, I think she's learning how to live in the herd in "Avalanche."
― Nia (girlboymusic), Sunday, 11 February 2007 07:52 (nineteen years ago)
Hilary Duff news, album is due in April, all songs co-written with Kara DioGuardi and dancey as previously reported.
Co-written with DioGuardi and whom else?
Looks like "Dignity," "Never Stop," and "Between You and Me" are Hilary, Kara, Richard Vission, and Chico Bennett; "Play with Fire" is Hilary, Kara, will.i.am, and James Everette Lawrence (is this Rhett Lawrence?); "Danger" is Hilary, Kara, Mateo Carmago, Julius Diaz, and Vada Nobles; and "Dreamer" is Hilary, Kara, and Frederick Nassar.
― Nia (girlboymusic), Sunday, 11 February 2007 07:54 (nineteen years ago)
― nameom (nameom), Sunday, 11 February 2007 16:26 (nineteen years ago)
― nameom (nameom), Sunday, 11 February 2007 16:59 (nineteen years ago)
― Frank Kogan, Wednesday, 21 February 2007 21:34 (nineteen years ago)
― Frank Kogan, Wednesday, 21 February 2007 21:37 (nineteen years ago)
― Frank Kogan, Wednesday, 21 February 2007 21:42 (nineteen years ago)
― Frank Kogan, Wednesday, 21 February 2007 22:19 (nineteen years ago)
― dabug, Wednesday, 21 February 2007 22:51 (nineteen years ago)
― dabug, Wednesday, 21 February 2007 22:53 (nineteen years ago)
― dabug, Wednesday, 21 February 2007 22:56 (nineteen years ago)
― curmudgeon, Wednesday, 21 February 2007 23:02 (nineteen years ago)
― Nia, Wednesday, 21 February 2007 23:25 (nineteen years ago)
― Greg Fanoe, Wednesday, 21 February 2007 23:37 (nineteen years ago)
― Greg Fanoe, Thursday, 22 February 2007 00:07 (nineteen years ago)
― Greg Fanoe, Thursday, 22 February 2007 00:08 (nineteen years ago)
― dabug, Thursday, 22 February 2007 00:15 (nineteen years ago)
― Greg Fanoe, Thursday, 22 February 2007 00:58 (nineteen years ago)
― Mordechai Shinefield, Thursday, 22 February 2007 07:22 (nineteen years ago)
― Nia, Thursday, 22 February 2007 07:50 (nineteen years ago)
― Greg Fanoe, Thursday, 22 February 2007 13:25 (nineteen years ago)
― Mordechai Shinefield, Thursday, 22 February 2007 20:17 (nineteen years ago)
― Greg Fanoe, Friday, 23 February 2007 02:43 (nineteen years ago)
― Greg Fanoe, Friday, 23 February 2007 03:02 (nineteen years ago)
― Mordechai Shinefield, Friday, 23 February 2007 07:29 (nineteen years ago)
― Greg Fanoe, Friday, 23 February 2007 14:06 (nineteen years ago)
― Jeff W, Friday, 23 February 2007 14:16 (nineteen years ago)
― Greg Fanoe, Friday, 23 February 2007 14:29 (nineteen years ago)
― Frank Kogan, Friday, 23 February 2007 17:44 (nineteen years ago)
― Frank Kogan, Friday, 23 February 2007 17:47 (nineteen years ago)
― Frank Kogan, Friday, 23 February 2007 17:53 (nineteen years ago)
― Frank Kogan, Friday, 23 February 2007 18:12 (nineteen years ago)
― Matt Armstrong, Friday, 23 February 2007 19:35 (nineteen years ago)
― Greg Fanoe, Friday, 23 February 2007 19:53 (nineteen years ago)
― lex pretend, Friday, 23 February 2007 19:59 (nineteen years ago)
― Nia, Saturday, 24 February 2007 07:22 (nineteen years ago)
― dabug, Sunday, 25 February 2007 02:53 (nineteen years ago)