Melody Maker's review of Kula Shaker's "K"

"Because the world needs new songs. Not the same old songs, but new ones. In the same style, but with new melodies. After a while, you get sick of humming the old songs, and you need new songs to hum."

But why not new styles as well? What's the difference?

Nothing wrong with new styles as long as the contain hummable songs. The new styles of the past 20 have been too much about rhythm and repetition though, not enough about melody and harmony.

Plus entirely new styles are not needed. One should rather mix the styles already existing, creating new conglomerations of already known stylistic elements.

Eh? Don't you think your criteria for what makes a song enjoyable or worthwhile is bit limited, Mr Grongo?

It's the only criteria that mattered until 1920 in classical music, and until the late 80s in popular music.

That's nonsense. Classical composers were always experimenting with different orchestral arrangements, new instruments, etc...
And there's been experimentation with production techniques in pop since at least the late 60s.

I was going to send this thread around to some friends b/c of the interesting review but then the thread got derailed. still derailed i see.

That's nonsense. Classical composers were always experimenting with different orchestral arrangements, new instruments, etc...
And there's been experimentation with production techniques in pop since at least the late 60s.

But melodies were always an important part of 60s pop and 19 century classical music, even if there were other elements too the melody was always there at the bottom.

geir do you like harry warren?

i regret reviving this thread.

fucking geir.

-- That one guy that hit it and quit it, Monday, September 24, 2007 2:48 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark Link

Votes for imagebombing?

there should be a 'killfile last 100 posts' function

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/04/DeadKennedys-NaziPunksFuckOff.jpg

ilm has been silent for 17 minutes, as the LBZC plots its next move

http://www.scaredmonkeys.com/fun-images/PotKettle_small.jpg

I couldn't find a .jpg of three pots and one kettle, sorry.

http://www.encircling.us/photoplog/file.php?s=81e3599dee7c9ece39484a1c18e56897&n=296&w=o

TS mr idée fixe vs the holy trinity of lazy, adolescent snark.

(ha, xposts)

That looks like a Yello video that never was.

Personally I think their comeback album is indeed better than any of their two 90s albums. They have stripped away all of the "indie" elements and gone fully fledged hippie-pop with quite a hint of 70s softrock/pomp pop. Which fits them greatly.

I like "Tattva."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqncFetwku0

Yeah, they sucked

I'm happy to say that KulaShaker never graced my stereo - I thought they were bollocks.

this DG guy OTM

Mr Snrub OTM 2 posts ago

I've just been informed by that porridge-faced wanker, Simon Mayo,

lol

still basically feel that -- from this distance in time, and his value as a naysayer* notwithstanding -- kulkarni said NO to britpop in a very britpop way: the same one-note grab-you-by-the-lapels bellow

*his deep value was always as a yaysayer, to all kinds of things not britpop

best melody maker cheerleader for hip hop, metal and R&B. But I did love his angry polemics to Britpop

i know you do -- i'm just saying with a bit of distance the angry polemics are less distinguishable from what's being polemicised against than they were at the time

that is quite astute

you should write about music!!!

perhaps the 90s were a good time in general to grab lapels and bellow, utterly confident in the righteousness of whatever it is you were bellowing. they strike me as a time of plenty, where one didn't have to second-guess oneself because Everything Was Turning Out OK, especially in The West

this is only a vague notion I have, though, and I'm willing to be disabused

i am slightly astute sometimes but actually it's someone else's insight

you should write about music!!!

:)

this wasn't a bad album really. cute in a way

Seems appropriate. RIP.