Here is a simple test to determine if a song's lyrical content is "good" or "bad". The next time you hear that popular hit being played on the radio, instead of "singing" along with it, try humming the lyrics. Now does your humming make sense? Does it have melody? Now find a dictionary and look up the word "music", you will find the use of terms like;melody, rhythm, harmony, cohesive, unified. Now put today's hits to the test.

jw1914 said:

Fail.

How does removing the lyrics, and humming, determine if the lyrical content is good or bad?

Here's a test to see if your car's engine is good or bad. Remove it and see if you can drive. Look up drive in the encyclopedia.

"Push, Push, in the Bush" still sounds good to me!

otan said:

Perhaps you may relate to this better; What sense does it make to put $5000 wheels on a car, a $10,000 sound system, another $6,000 on ground effects and body work when the engine that moves the car(which by the way is what a car is suppose to do) is lacking in performance? None! The cars performance still sucks! If a song does not a have a good melody or better still lacks melody at all, it is not good music! And in many cases that song may not qualify as music at all! THAT WAS THE POINT!

If I turn on a drum machine and recite a nursery rhyme over it, have I created music?

here's a better test: do you like the song? can you stand to sit through the whole thing?



if so, then it's good.



it's not rocket science.

AaronUniversal said:

But obviously no quality control department.

jw1914 said:

if you like it, what difference does it make?

AaronUniversal said:

I tend to agree. It's not as simple as "good" and "bad". The thread originator must mean good/bad technically. I am not a musician/producer, so I don't recognize things in music sometimes. But in terms of if it makes me FEEL good/bad (which is why i listen to music - to feel), then I go with aaron's point. Example: The song "good love" or anything by rahsaan patterson is my 'happy music' or GOOD. Anything by Jewel makes me want to kill myself, hence BAD.

OK folks, this is what I was really trying to address to no avail. I have been listening to music for many many years and I am also a musician. My father was a blues guitarist and would always tell me that my generations music has no soul. He could not listen to guitar playing that was distorted(Jimi,SRV,Funkadelic) but in time he soon could appreciate their talent once he heard pass the guitar's tone. Artist in the past have spent their lifetimes perfecting their art for our listening pleasure. Imagine if you will a young playground basketball player who has this amazing "cross-over" getting accepted into the NBA along with million dollar endorsements, but this young player has yet learned how to shoot the ball("0" points) and the media was going bananas over him and his "cross-over"? How do you think the rest of the players in the NBA would view his game? No music should not be competitive as sports, but trust me there will be no more "Princes" no more Aretha Franklins, no more Stevie Wonders if the future music artist do not learn the fundamentals of music(melody, harmony, rymthm and composition). A motorist can and will in time ignore that nagging knock from the engine if it is not repaired, soon that motorist does not hear that knock at all, he/she has gotten used to its sound, but in time that motorist will no longer be able to enjoy driving, that once nagging knock has took it's toll. If we start enjoying the works(I won't even call it music) of todays artist, trust me, our roots in black music will die just like that motorist car engine. We all have heard the expression "That's music to my ears" well don't take that literally. At one time there was something in a song called a"bridge", ever hear one in today's music? Folks all I'm saying is let's keep our roots in music alive. White folks used to steal our music and profit from it(Elvis). Do you honestly think anyone would want to steal the songs of 50cent? Can todays black artist even carry a musical scale? I'm sorry if I'm sounding like my old man(God rest his soul)but trust me I have given today's music a listen over and over and I still don't see any talent musically. Who are our black guitarist, today? Better yet where are our bands? Oh datz right dats not needed in todays music! SAD, OH HOW SAD!!!

UptownDeb said:

"Are you ready,are you ready for this? Do you like it,do you like it like this?"

DavidEye said:

What forum do I log on for the serious music lovers?

jw1914 said:

So someone is not a serious music lover if they don't agree with you? And this part of your statement:

"If we start enjoying the works(I won't even call it music) of todays artist, trust me, our roots in black music will die just like that motorist car engine. We all have heard the expression "That's music to my ears" well don't take that literally. At one time there was something in a song called a"bridge", ever hear one in today's music? Folks all I'm saying is let's keep our roots in music alive. White folks used to steal our music and profit from it(Elvis). Do you honestly think anyone would want to steal the songs of 50cent? Can todays black artist even carry a musical scale? I'm sorry if I'm sounding like my old man(God rest his soul)but trust me I have given today's music a listen over and over and I still don't see any talent musically. Who are our black guitarist, today? Better yet where are our bands? Oh datz right dats not needed in todays music! SAD, OH HOW SAD!!!"
This is just really sad to me. You added race into the mix.

jw1914 said:

2 things. Learn to use paragraphs. They're your friend. It makes digesting a statement like this a LOT easier. I promise.

Second. Where are you basing your judgement, asking where you your black guitarists today?

David Ryan Harris is a guitarist singer songwriter of the highest calibre.
Vernon Reid can play a little guitar.
Tony Rich.
Babyface.
Robert Randolph
Me'Chelle Ndegeocello
India Arie

And that list pops into my head without really giving it much thought. There's artists out there that will never make it into mainstream, and there are artists that bend to the will of mainstream and produce mainstream material, FOR THE PURPOSE of gaining mass appeal. If you're looking to mainstream for black guitarists, you won't find many because the mainstream right now is looking for black male rappers and skeezy ho white girl singers.

However, if you think back, when Prince made it big with 1999 and Purple Rain, there WAS a plethora of black guitarists that started to hit mainstream. Living Colour, Fishbone, 247 Spys, Kings X, Xavion, Ready for the World. I'm not saying Prince made them huge, I'm saying Prince's unexpected success forced mainstream music industry to go pimp existing talent a lot harder, sensing that the public was looking for that type of stuff.

So. All this is to say, it's out there. They're playing. They're writing incredible stuff (David Ryan Harris is my favorite singer/songwriter, and an amazing guitar player. He's touring with John Mayer right now). You're not going to hear them on any CLEAR Channel because 16 year old girls and boys ain't hearing any of that right now.

and one last thing

DO NOT hold on to that attitude for long. Folks are inspired from whatever they hear and they bring it to the forefront. Music by NATURE develops and percolates by incorporating underground styles into mainstream styles. Elvis took country and blues and made it into something else. The Beatles, The stones BOTH started out playing blues. How many folks talk about THAT thievery? It ain't thievery. It's hearing a style that speaks to you, and then imitating that style, and adding a little of what you can to it. So, if THAT becomes popular, do you, as the artist, say, "no, I can't possibly accept your accolades. Go back to Howlin Wolf and Big Mama Thornton and play their version please. I'm just repeating what I heard." Hell no. You play it and you tell people what you heard and what you like. And if the people are intelligent, they'll go FIND Big Mama Thornton's Version of HOUND DOG and discover a new world that they didn't know existed.

Like me.

So let that thievery shit go.
[This message was edited Fri Oct 24 8:03:36 PDT 2003 by otan]

jw1914 said:

i'm sorry, you're confused. you're looking for the forum for wannabe music snobs.

okayplayer.com

AaronUniversal said:

I stand corrected "otan", I was asking about black guitarist on mainstream radio(Clear Channel). I do know of quite a few excellent black guitarist performing today, but these musicians will not be heard by the young people today whose only source of new music they feel is BET or MTV. As far as bring race into the picture, the music industry has done that for us already by the catagory labels attached to music. Yes I am black, and I am very concerned about the future of black music (R&B, Rap, Hip Hop).Sorry if my comments about race offended anyone it was not intended to. If it wasn't for my younger years listening to rock & roll {Ozzy Osbourne, Deep Purple, Metalica and the like} I might not be the guitarist that I am today.

Re; David Ryan Harris, I have every single recording that he performed on or has produced. I met David way back when he fronted "Follow For Now", I was the guy who suggested to him not to get married at that time in his career.

I understand what you're saying, but I think you should realize once a person starts to enjoy/get into the music, I think they begin to seek out new artists, or are more open to it, (as opposed to being hand fed mainstream processed cheese). Therefore, those that are open to music will find new and interesting artists. Those that don't really care whats on the radio will dig Clear Channel and buy the top-ten sellers consistently just to stay hip, not knowing or caring why.

I mean, come on, you don't think Prince just poof, hit the mainstream. He started out as a freak with a couple of porno dance tracks. The folks that dug that kind of music started to tell other folks, and THAT is how he grew... that, and his 5-inch heels. He grows a little when he puts those on.

jw1914 said:

I hope u know why this is happening.
Money. Quick buck. Churn 'em out. Spit them out. Repeat. That and the fact that a few huge media companies own all media and would rather sell u 10 million copies of 1 artist than 1 million copies of 10 (because it's far cheaper), and you've got the makings of what we see today. Homogenised, say-nothing crapola targeted at strategic market segments, with alternative views rarely heard simply because they don't cater to the masses.

What amazes me more is that artists think they need a major label representing them to be successful in this internet age.

Thanks otan and cynicalbastard for the interesting dialog. Thank again.

cynicalbastard said:

? It really depends on your idea of success. If you want inner peace & all that then do it yourself.
If you want to be well promoted, get ur music to the masses & sell a million albums plus, sign a record deal with a major label. Just use the system the way the system uses you & a middle ground can be found.

cynicalbastard said:

You just described the 70's era Boston/Journey/Foreigner/Eagles shitstain. So this ain't nothing new man. Pop drives popular music. Cover bands get good at making covers and like the money and start making songs that SOUND like the bands they covered (ANY of the DMB spinoffs, Sister Hazel etc, and ANY of the Soundgarden/PearlJam spinoffs: Greed, sorry, CREED, Stone Temple Pilots, Puddle of Fudge, etc etc.)

It always happens. Will always happen. The Clear Channel is just a really good scapegoat. But before Clear Channel, MTV and Rolling Stone stood as the hip propagandators... hand-feeding you what was cool. Both icons USED to be the pulse of hip, and when the industry realized a hit on MTV was a hit PERIOD, money starts to roll. Etc. etc.

Props to my man Otan. Intelligence without taking the bait, good one.

While I understand what this cat is saying, it's important to understand that while the industry puts things in race oriented categories, the american people do not. I'm generalizing here but color don't drive the music I listen to, the music does the talking.

That PBS blues special gave me a lot more understanding of what music history can teach us.

What do you mean S2G?

I realized while watching my music legends story be told (like Muddy, The Wolf, Sunhouse, Willie Dixon) that because of ignorance, people tuned out a certain kind of music and it wasn't popular.

That would be like saying "I hate Egyptians, so to hell with the pymids and all ofthe art and culture that they brought to human history". "I hate Italians so fuck Michael Angelo his chapel painting bullshit". Even reading this makes me laugh at how ignorant it sounds.

So then, some Englishmen picked-up on a style of music and fell in love with it. So much so that they started covering it and playing it for people. "Race music" had been acknowledged and loved by people because of the music and nothing else. Start the British Invasion of a group of people who idolized the bluesmen ofthe 40's and 50's.

So people's ignorance kept them from realizing great art (right in their own neighborhood) and that is really sad. Now, I know that ignorance is still evident in the world, but enough with the race bullshit. Learn from our past and realize that good music is good music no matter what size, shape or color the person is making it.

Back to the point of the thread. When people demand more than processed, badly written music, then they will get it. If image is what is needed to sell music, then throw your TV in the trash and teach your kids what is what. Take them to a live show and ask them later (when they're still in amazement of what they just witnessed) what kind of shirt the singer had or what brand of shoes was he wearing.

Sorry for the rant, I just couldn't help myself.

Very well put Slave2daGroove, but how do I get my 18 year old to a club playing blues?
I just left the Billboard sites (http://www.billboard.com/bb/charts/randb.jsp)
(http://www.billboard.com/bb/charts/airplay/modern.jsp) Now I encourage you to look at these two different catagories of music and determine which catagory (R&B/HipHop,Modern Rock) would have the higher percentage of artist who can actually play a instrument or has a band? Now maybe go back 20 years ago[Billboard will provide you with the list of that time] now look at the comparsion in the same presentage! At this rate in 5 years not a single artist listed in the R&B/Hip Hop catagory will record playing a real instrument. I kid you not, and that is scary! At least the modern artist that otan mentioned can play a instrument.
[This message was edited Fri Oct 24 12:02:08 PDT 2003 by jw1914]

jolajeph said:

No, see that's where I think things have changed. I think you CAN be well-promoted doing it yourself. And making bucketloads of money in your niche. And I'm eagerly awaiting the artist that does it his way - from scratch, never signing to a multinational and never compromising their music.

What I particularly want to see is a 'popstar' or 'recording star' show, where in the end, the artist starts up his own business entity, represents and markets himself, and doesn't receive a 'prize' from a multi-national in the form of a restrictive one-sided contract that they feel obliged to sign by default, fresh-faced, with stars in their eyes.

Otan, yes, it's been happening forever. Well before the 70s, in fact. However, it seems it's getting worse.

JW,

Billboard, Rollingstone and a few others are run by corporate America. They're marketing, focus-group testing and creating brands/categories of music. This is not where you're going to find the truth to teach your son. The truth is, whatever city you live in, going out and finding live jazz, blues and funk. There's no choice but to feel this. Then, between sets go talk to the musicians and introduce your son. The 18 thing may be a challenge at hot nite spots but you can find it if you try. Shit, give the doorman a $20 and promise your boy won't drink.

Furthermore, if you look at Motown there weren't a lot of those famous people that played an instrument. The Funk brothers were the house band but the singer (with his soul and emotion) is the only person people remember. While I agree with you completely and think more artists should play an instrument, it's not always been necessary.

Cynical, ever heard of Annie DeFranco? For that matter, have you ever heard of the Grateful Dead or Fish? These people have had zero radio airplay and indepently promote.produce music but they sell-out large venues. Not I'm not into Fish or the Dead, it's interesting that someone would think it's not possible.

Everything is cylical when it comes to art, if that's the only thing music has taught us.

Much respect to both of you.
[This message was edited Fri Oct 24 12:36:52 PDT 2003 by Slave2daGroove]

Slave, I feel ya man, while Billboard, MTV, and BET may reflect corporate America, they do control the media and thus ultimately record sales, and let's face it all professionals work to get paid, that includes you and I. I have witness numerous bands breakup because of lack of financial gain to sustain their careers.
Back in the 70's mostly all the artist on "mainstream" radio were bands or groups backed by live bands, ex; Earth, Wind and Fire, Cameo,Funkadelic, Brass Contruction, Kool and the Gang, New Birth, while even Motown artist had live bands backing them in the recording studios. Todays artist have nothing to support their careers when major record companies decide that they are no longer the flavor of the month. They feel "I brought you into this world and I can take you out of this world". I live here in Philly and I can say for a certainty that most of the new artist coming out of Philly have not performed here in Philly before their big break. Only a few people in Philly ever knew about the Black Lily events which showcased artist like Jill Scott, Floatry,and the Roots. Even when I attended those events the musicianship was weak, and I mean weak!
So if you are thinking of becoming the next big hit, are you going to go the long hard road of learning the art, perfecting it, then taking your skills on the road with a band, or will you choose the easy road of hanging out with those already signed, then begging their connections for a shot? It is cheaper for a record company to sign a single artist as opposed to signing a entire band, then bring in a single producer to program the music. Thus no soul, no groove and no heart. NO TALENT!

jw1914 said:

No offense JW, but again, I think you're using selective memory. First: What about all the R&B solo singers that had hits, or bands that were dancing bands - Sylvers, Reddings, etc... I'm guessing they might have performed to a backing track half the time, but it was unpopular BACK THEN to have a turntable on stage with you.

Also, for every band that you listed, and hundreds others, there WERE super-talented bands that were picked up by a label and then discarded, often after just a single was released (go check out www.funk45.com for some amazing stuff that you never heard, or might have heard once or twice).

However, I DO agree that it sucks to watch Eminem on Saturday Night Live rapping over his single, with the original Emenim Vocals STILL on the track... what, he couldn't get the label to hand him a copy WITHOUT his voice on there? There's a level of perceived laziness in hip-hop because yeah, there's the Puff Doody method of just take some hit and mumble over it. But more and more folks might be sick of that crap, and the India's and Donnie's and Floetrys and David Ryan Harris's - there's a building movement to bring live music into dance/funk music.

LIKE MY BAND! YEAH! LIKE MY BAND!:
http://www.soundclick.com...dmusic.htm