theAudience said:

Isn't this a retroactive process that comes out in, say, music journalism, critical reviews or fanmail diatribes? It's a lot easier today to sit up and say "so&so in playing in a Milesian mode", but that's only meaningful to someone who knows the reference point as Miles. In the lay community, this information trickles down at a much slower pace.

You probaly saw this happening with Miles' ON THE CORNER band where he pretty much stopped recording new material and just recorded the same tunes live until the public caught up. Nowadays this would be a dangerous road to take because the evaluation and criticism via the internet is instantaneous and a repetitive program would be ridiculed and avoided.

It seems as though with every other era you could really track all these scenes, movements, and the progression. The industry was a part of watching all that and it was a seemingly bigger part of culture. That's pretty much been blown up.

I haven't bumped into anything really that has the same power as any of those acts or that's truly unique. Many of these so-called decent artists are glorified tribute acts who don't do anything with sounds of the people who inspired them. It's just watered down old stuff with no soul. Factory shit. Today aping the past in a small way is regarded as some great talent where years ago you'd be just another dude. We've lost so much progress to hip hop and synth abuse that many people are treading water(and actually being praised for it). I'd love to ride with some of these acts, but even the ones that show some sort of potential disappoint me. They borrow in the cheapest most unimaginative way possible. Many of them aren't treated the same as fresh talents years ago. No one is developing them and they aren't surrounded by real artists and again many people are spinning their creative wheels anyway.

I'm so glad hip hop is dying.

There's also the industry's habit now of stepping on a spark. If it even smells new and marketable someone swoops down, bastardizes it, and pimps the hell out of it and of course a bunch of clones show up to make their dollar. Then after a year or so people are tired of it and abandon it.

theAudience said:

Just a vernacular confusion on my part....evolution or progression, I would have twigged to.

Thanks!

This is a great thread, by the way....thought provoking in more ways than one! I wish I had more time wax poetic...I have a lot of ideas and opinions, not enough to write them out!

Dance said:

See, your problem is you consider them musicians.

PFunkjazz said:

I suppose that's one way it could be looked at.

My original question was purposely left open-ended for those that chose to try and make direct present day comparisons along with others that took the examples as simply metaphors for more contemporary musical innovation.


tA

Tribal Disorder

http://www.soundclick.com...dID=182431

NWF said:

I believe you've just answered your own question.

Not really trying to prove anything, just asking a question.


tA

Tribal Disorder

http://www.soundclick.com...dID=182431
[Edited 1/26/08 18:25pm]

PFunkjazz said:

I'm talking about the packs of real musicians that were bumped out and don't really have support because of the cancer that is hip hop.

What are YOU talking about?

Dance said:

Taken literally, it seemed your point was about dead rappers who died violent deaths, but in your figurative poetic context, I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

Dance said:

Musicians pushed 2 the side 2 make way 4 shit-hop? Way 2 many.
[Edited 1/27/08 3:31am]

Graycap23 said:

still ain't murder.

PFunkjazz said:

I hope they did not mean in a literal sense.

NDRU said:

I have to disagree with you on that. There are people with guitars in their hands but rather or not tehy're playing is up for debate. You can teach a monkey sign language by association but does he really understand what he's doing above getting what he wants from doing the hand movements. I'm just saying (if that analogy wasn't clear enough) you can over intellectualize things that people like Jimi Hendrix, Thelonious Monk or Robert Johnson was on the forefront on
but there's a difference than just breaking down what they did and accomplished on a intellectual level and regurgitating it or something similar. That's not my definition of someone you can compare to a "legend" my definition is actually creating something new from the heart that rivals the jump from before that they created. Breaking down the notes and scales and putting it in to ways easy to understand so someone who puts enough time studying and with the hand eye coordination that they can recreate something similar isn't my idea of innovation is what I'm trying to say. Create new scales and chords with note combinations no one ever thought of before. Create a new tone of music that feels different than everything that came before. It's a tall order, it's not easy but being considered an innovator isn't a tag that should be applied lightly.

PFunkjazz said:

Not only were existing musicians tossed aside, all those that would have picked up instruments and taken music in a new direction were lost...generations of them

MURDER

Dance said:

You know what's funny?
Music education in the schools is pretty brisk.

Well, at least in my hometown.

PFunkjazz said:

The death of many school programs

another hit to music

Those that have them usually learn the basics so they can scribble that down on college apps. Then they never touch the things again in life. Then you have those handful of folk that want to run around at half-time and nothing else or who go to those performing arts schools that teach people to make canned music.
[Edited 1/27/08 10:24am]

kdj997 said:

Dance said:

As long as the kids can make a good living and don't have to live on the streets or move back into my house, I'm happy to retire early.

PFunkjazz said:

How OLD are you?

kdj997 said:

So you have to be innovative to be good on your instrument?

I never said that they were innovative or comparable to Stevie Wonder, only that they're good on their instruments. In terms of creativity, or "would I buy their records?" I would agree with you, but they can still be fine musicians without being innovators.

Stevie Ray Vaughn is one great example of a guy who didn't really create anything new on electric guitar but was good enough to be respected by the great living blues masters.

Or in classical music, orchestras are playing music from 2-300 years ago, but some play it better than others.

I never considered Wynton Marsalis to be an innovative player, but he's certainly a good player.

I wasn't comparing the random bar players to legends, only in that they have skill as musicians and are capable of playing music with feeling.
[Edited 1/27/08 12:49pm]

Dance said:

Old enough to know the value of things you may one day learn.

PFunkjazz said:

Is that so...didn't know someone could be in such a position and carry themselves as you do

Dance said:

Well, if you spent time improving your writing skills you'd experience more that life has to offer.

PFunkjazz said:

PFunkjazz said:

NDRU said:

Your post helped me sum up the entire point I wanted to make about this thread subject. Because music is more accessible now you have people in bars in every single city capable of playing at a high skill level because they were influenced by "legends" . The down side is you don't have as many originators and innovators because they get lost in the crowd to those very people in the bars who can recreate what has come before good. It's common business sense, go with something safe instead of something different that people may or may not dig. The down side is anyone who is doing something new won't ever be heard on a wide level. The forumla for that is they have to be persistant, they have to be a lil' lucky and if all else fails have to believe in themself so much that they'll willing to market theirself in places like myspace or wherever, The truth is some people with the dexterity to innovate first of all, may never even be exposed to any musical instrument. Second of all if they do, they may not hae the wherewithals to try and "make it". They may not even care about making it or trust that they're doing something worthwhile because they would've been exposed to the same society that we have and may think what they're doing doesn't fit in anywhere. Who knows. All I do know is for whatever reason there's a huge standstill in music after the huge boom of the previous century. Th acts most people named on the first page as being comparable are just really rehashing or doing something similar and not blazing any new trails. SO I stand by my opinion that you can't compare anyone known to them. Atleast I haven't heard anything groundbreaking. Now I did respond to the Mickey Avalon post and mention I thought he was somewhat original as a androgynous, flamboyant, iggy pop-isque rapper but thats as fat as it goes his rhymes nor are the beats anything ground breaking.

First, let me co-sign everything Dance has said. Then let me add that the only truly great contemporary artist is Nick Cave. He is the only genius working in music today that I'm aware of. Lyrically, he sits in company with Dylan, Cohen, and Joni, and like them he's in the grip of a vision. There is nothing derivative about him. For those of you who are unaware of him I recommend exploring his work. There is a titan in our midst, and sophisticated music lovers owe it to themselves to explore his work. Here are two samples.

http://www.youtube.com/wa...re=related

http://www.youtube.com/wa...re=related
[Edited 1/27/08 13:44pm]

Neil Finn deserves a mention, too.

kdj997 said:

Yes, I see your point, and agree with much of that. The creativity really does seem to be lacking today. For example, what is a new movement in music of the last 10 years? Crunk? Maybe there is something happening, but it's not as radical or pervasive & lasting as jazz in the 50's, rock in the 60's and r&b in the 70's.

My point about bar players was more of an aside to the main point. Actually it stems to all aspects of music, too. More rappers can rap, more singers can sing & dance, more players can play, producers can produce, but fewer of them (fewer superstars, at least, since everyone on TA's original list are is a superstar) are truly special at any of those skills.