PFunkjazz said:

Obviously, y'all don't listen to The Roots, Outkast, The Coup, Madlib, and Gnarls Barkley. Otherwise you would know that Hip-Hop isn't completely dead.
[Edited 1/27/08 18:32pm]

I can see why it might seem that way to some, but why do you say there are more musicians?
[Edited 1/27/08 20:17pm]

NWF said:

Looks like you totally missed the point here. We're not talking about the viability of hip-hop.

midnightmover said:

i've been a fan of nick cave since i was a freshman in college - i have all but maybe one or two of his albums and i've seen him several times - all that said, i think it's a little extreme to call him the only genius working in music today. i think he's extremely talented and i think his work has evolved by leaps and bounds over the years, but i can't think of ol' nick as the end-all/be-all of modern music.

PFunkjazz said:

Co-sign.

Anxiety said:

I enjoy Nick's work, but I'd be more inclined to call Tom Waits a genius (which I won't, but still) than him.

That said, there are fewer innovative artists these days largely because of the system. Those that are truly successful in the music industry these days are rarely innovative because by and large, artists have to deal with an unimaginative public that is internet/video game/sports/cell phone obsessed. Music doesn't drive culture the way it used to and part of the reason is because record companies found that you could make a lot of money marketing the "right" music.

Think of all the innovative artists out there from times past that didn't get their due. Usually the innovator plays a little too raw or is a little out there to be palatable for an audience weaned on sugary pop shit.

I think the idea is to balance newer ideas with semblances of older forms so you give people a shot of the familiar with a spoonful of innovation.

I think things will get better now that record labels are dying, but it will be a lot harder to find these innovators given the current landscape.

Graycap23 said:

The Pop Music Formerly Known As Hip-Hop is a more corrosive form of disco. And I've said this many times in the five years I've been here. Hip-hop is our disco. And it cannot be viable for much longer because it's run its course, and it's going to be harder to move units for any artists, much less those who have run out of things to say.

As for the viability of (small cap) hip-hop, it will go the way of jazz and blues, and its vitality will depend on the core of fans who truly love it for what it was, what it is, and what it can be.

namepeace said:

While I still listen 2 a handful of hip-hop artist, I can't wait 4 this shit 2 DISAPPEAR from the musical landscape.

namepeace said:

I know what you mean, but still you compared jazz to shit hop.

Dance:



Both hip-hop and jazz emerged from the grass roots of black culture, and set off revolutions in music. But not every revolution is a good revolution. Hip-hop has had just as much an impact on the culture of the day as jazz did in its ascendance. But not every impact is positive.

hip-hop (small caps) is cultivated by gradually winnowing audience, and just as with jazz, its base of support will boil down to the more dedicated listeners, i.e., the ones who are digging on the best of the old schools and new schools. They'll be the ones keeping hip-hop alive as it moves further underground and further away from its "jiggy"/"bling"/"gangsta" phases.

That's no commentary on the virtues of jazz v. hip-hop.

Those are comparable market trends as opposed to comparable genres.


[Edited 1/29/08 14:29pm]

namepeace said:

I've always seen freestyling in hip hop as comparable to soloing in jazz. Like you say, not a "just as valuable" likening, but a similarity nonetheless.

Graycap23 said:

The death of Hit-Pop as we know it can't come soon enough. It has corrupted the genre, and it has, at the least, not been a positive influence on our culture.

Great now we're totally off-tangent.

PFunkjazz said:

The question is, can we think of a thread where we stay ON tangent?

namepeace said:

Is yesterday 2 soon? Let's get it over with.

Getting back on tangent....

Todd Rundgren - John Mayer
Frank Zappa - Mars Volta

John Mayer has the talent, but what is he doing with it?

He's churning out tofu.

Years ago someone like John would dunk himself in a scene and develop into something pretty good, but now...

but he'll never be hungry

Anxiety said:

Then who else would you nominate? I'd love to find someone else as good, but as of yet I've found no-one that I could call anything more than promising.

guitarslinger44 said:

I love Tom Waits but he belongs with Prince, Bob Dylan, and Stevie Wonder in the category of one-time geniuses who's best days are behind them. Most of his albums nowadays are unlistenable. I've tried to like them, because I love his older stuff so much, but for the most part they are more interesting than enjoyable. As with Prince, I love his back catalogue (although it's far more patchy than Prince's), but I have no interest in what he's doing now.

With Nick Cave it's totally different because he is still "in the zone" in terms of the quality and quantity of his work. Unfortunately, none of my favourite songs of his are on Youtube, but I can't imagine anyone with any soul not responding to a track like "Gates To The Garden". Unfortunately, most people will never even have the chance to hear it, so instead they have to settle for the drivel fed to them by the mass media.

And let's not forget the clear fact that Cave is the greatest lyricist working today. He is the only lyricist of his generation who can go toe-to-toe with the best of the '60s generation. That alone should garner him far more recognition than he currently enjoys.
[Edited 2/1/08 7:02am]

midnightmover said:

david byrne? (his recent article about the music industry in wired magazine was genius in and of itself)
bowie? (though it's hard to call him a "current" genius since he's hardly done anything since 2003)
sufjan stevens? (he's on the early curve of his career still, but in just a few years he's made some pretty amazing music and put together some very ambitious projects)

Anxiety said:

David Byrne - Past it
David Bowie - Past it
Sufjan Stevens - I'll check him out and get back to you

midnightmover said:

what does "past it" mean?

Anxiety said:

You know what "past it" means.

midnightmover said:

i know what both of those words mean individually, and i know how they can be used together; i'm having a bit of a problem with your usage of those two words, or else i wouldn't have asked, now would i?

Anxiety said:

I think he means they're past their days of creating at the genius level.

I don't agree, I say "once a genius always a genius," but it's true that neither of them are breaking ground in music like the did at one time.

NDRU said:

i'd agree with bowie being "past it" - i think he's pretty much done (and he has every right to call it a day!) - but david byrne is still very much involved in music - creating it, being active in the industry, working with younger artists, collaborating - just because he doesn't get a lot of hype anymore doesn't mean he's not still creating good music.

Anxiety said:

Oh no, not that they don't make good music or even great music, just that they're not creating revolutions.

I think most artists (and other geniuses like Einstein & Newton) kind of only contribute one thing to the world, and it's a reflection of their personality. They tend to give it at an early age, and everything they do afterwards is a form of that initial creation, and therefore, seems slightly less inspired.

NDRU said:

i think i'm starting to forget what i'm arguing.

i agree with what you're saying though. i've always thought that anyone who creates one work of genius should know better than to expect to create a second work of genius. i mean, sure...it HAS happened, but with most folks, they create one GREAT thing and spend their lives after that trying to recapture that initial glory.

Anxiety said:

Right, and they might create more than one work of genius, but I believe it's just a different facet of their one larger creation, and their character is the creation.

Right, what were we saying? Oh, yeah, Bowie's still cool. That performance he did on Extras was nothing if not genius.