New topic
PrintableNor do I...
I think whatever production "style" they would have choosen would still be remembered and thought of as Real Music..its chords..its harmony..its stuff that they put together with musical taste and knowledge..its not some criminal with a bag of weed and some of his moms old 70's hit records..saying.."yo..if i loop this 1 bar of this jam..this shit is gonna be Fire" ! 
Moonbeam said: prettymansson said: Both Kraftwerk & Eurythmics can PLAY !
I even have an old video with Dave stewart on a tv show playing the acoustic guitar and talking about how he doesn't consider a song a SONG unless it can be played on a single instrument like a guitar or piano. Yes, but their most successful music is nearly entirely or entirely (in the case of Kraftwerk) synthesized. And I don't see anything wrong with that. | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
Scorpion said: PFunkjazz said: 
Did you read that definition here or somewhere else? I'm sure the complaint was against the use of samples. No, not here. This board seems to be the most musically cultured and diverse out of the other music/entertainment boards that I've been on. The demographic is younger at other places and the music interest is more contemporary. The general inclination is that songs that are slow and are somber in lyrics usually get classified as "real music" opposed to a record that is up tempo and fun. If you're not singing/writing about Darfur, gov't, depression or something "deep"...yo shit ain't "substance". It's a contradicting way of thinking when you recall music from back in the day that was great but it wasn't ALL boring and complaining about what's in the news or killing themselves. But its still generally considered "classics" today. I just think the varying perception of "real music" is interesting...ppl seem to have diff. ideas. I agree with what you've said. And, that's how it is on the org. Loss or no creativity where lyrics are concerned is if folks aren't talking about pain and what's going on in the news. Music wise, it has to do with more computer stuff as oppose to the use of real instruments. But, really to each his/her own. If what an artist sings about touches some, then it must be real or considered real to whomever their art touches.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
prettymansson said: Nor do I...
I think whatever production "style" they would have choosen would still be remembered and thought of as Real Music..its chords..its harmony..its stuff that they put together with musical taste and knowledge..its not some criminal with a bag of weed and some of his moms old 70's hit records..saying.."yo..if i loop this 1 bar of this jam..this shit is gonna be Fire" !
Moonbeam said: Yes, but their most successful music is nearly entirely or entirely (in the case of Kraftwerk) synthesized. And I don't see anything wrong with that.  We're on the same page, then! I just don't like the notion that music employing synthesizers is somehow less worthy than music that doesn't.Feel free to join in the Prince Album Poll 2018! Let'a celebrate his legacy by counting down the most beloved Prince albums, as decided by you! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Janfriend said: PFunkjazz said: You mean like that stuff that shows upon Janet Jackson tracks?  I don't understand what the point was in bringing her up, but her music is Hybrid as opposed to some other folks out there. She uses real instruments in her music with synthesized drums and keyboards Thank you, Janfriend! Hateration for her is all up in the building. I was told it was a figment of my imagination. But, again music is for allot of folks considered the use of real instruments and dark and depressing lyrics are considered a great song with growth potential of an artist. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |