Is blood supposed to be gushing from my ears like that? Man that was terrible, if I ever need to torture someone I'll just make them listen to that song.
Has Simon said anything about "Friday" yet? If he hasn't we must track him down and record every insult he has for the song.
I don't know, I think even the great Mr Cowell would be speechless from that pile of dross
Unfortunately I cant find anything about him seeing this, maybe he is writing a long list of insults for it, then throwing it away because none of them can describe this horrible thing labeled "music".
I have to admit when rebecca black mentioned "gotta get up and have a bowl" i was thinking that's a bit strange , a cleancut pop star like that having a bowl and then ..."have my cereal" ....oooooh that kind of bowl. I am no longer shocked and appalled at her drug usage.
Image post changed to link as it contains profanity, and posting images containing profanity is a violation of Dakka rules.
It's a pretty darn funny line-by-line deconstruction of the video, though. So check it out if you're not someplace where a swear or two on the screen is a problem.
SilverMK2 wrote:I would imagine pretty much any rap or hip hop video would have to be a contender for this title.
Oh, wait, you said "music" video... sorry, forgot that isn't actually music
There's some good rap and hip-hop out there. I'm not a big fan of the genres, but there's some decent stuff. I'm a huge fan of Madworld's soundtrack.
There's tonnes of great music being made today, you just got to look for it. Every single generation had a tonne of really crappy music. For every Cure or Talking Heads, there are going to be a hundred Abbas and Poisons. People only remember the good stuff, but there's a tonne of trash. It's not like King Crimson or Pink Floyd were ever chart toppers.
Even in the case of artists with mainstream appeal, it's rarely their best albums with the most mainstream appeal. David Bowie's Berlin Trilogy may be some of the finest music to ever come out of the 70's, it was some of his most commercially unsuccessful of the decade as well.
30 years from now, it'll be the cult artists like Regina Spektor or Elbow who will still have a following, while the majority of the bubblegum pop crap will be largely forgotten, and people will be reminiscing about how our generation's music was so much better than that generation's.
Fafnir wrote:Every single generation had a tonne of really crappy music... Poisons.
Heresy!
People only remember the good stuff
Entirely correct. I love "older" music from the 70's and 80's, but looking at all the crud that was put out then really makes you realise that the "good" stuff was very much a minority.
But Justin Beiber is a plauge that is infesting the world and needs to be stopped. Please tell me i am not the only one whos ears bleed when they hear him.
The kid is talented, but his music is crap (understandably, that's part of what makes it popular), but it's no worse than a lot of the crap from a long time back. Hell, even some of the Beatle's early stuff is on a comparable level (yes, they had good harmonies, we get it, but a lot of their early stuff was on the same level of teeny-bopper crap as Beiber's is today).
Give him a bit of time. His popularity will eventually fade with his youthful image, and he'll either rise to the occasion and produce some legitimately good music or fade away into obscurity. With a little maturity and the removal of corporate interests, he has the potential to be good, assuming all the fame he's been exposed to now doesn't wreck him when his bubble pops.
Fafnir wrote:The kid is talented, but his music is crap (understandably, that's part of what makes it popular), but it's no worse than a lot of the crap from a long time back. Hell, even some of the Beatle's early stuff is on a comparable level (yes, they had good harmonies, we get it, but a lot of their early stuff was on the same level of teeny-bopper crap as Beiber's is today).
WTF dude you are way off comparing the bettles to Justin Beiber bad bad call
Fafnir wrote:The kid is talented, but his music is crap (understandably, that's part of what makes it popular), but it's no worse than a lot of the crap from a long time back. Hell, even some of the Beatle's early stuff is on a comparable level (yes, they had good harmonies, we get it, but a lot of their early stuff was on the same level of teeny-bopper crap as Beiber's is today).
WTF dude you are way off comparing the bettles to Justin Beiber bad bad call
Yes, I am. And I'm completely serious. Despite their venerated status, the Beatles started out as the same teeny-bopper trash as any other pop sensation. It wasn't until they started to move away from that sound (and the drugs... oh man, the drugs) that they started to become something actually worth listening to.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Luco wrote:
Fafnir wrote:
Luco wrote:Its all meaningless if the music isn't... musical. Monotone is a lecture, not a song.
Monotone has its place in music. You're just not looking at the right music.
As a whole that isn't music to me. Its someone talking over background music. Not a fan, sorry.
"Singing is a trick to get people to listen to music for longer than they would ordinarily."
—David Byrne
Here, try this on for size. Not quite so monotone, but I swear, if you don't want to get up and move to this, you have no soul.
@Fafnir - That semiotic analysis of the video you posted is pretty funny, if a bit ham-fisted. It's a magnificent troll. Where did you find it?
On that subject, I've attended lectures by a guy who wrote a book (literally:http://www.tagg.org/mmmsp/fernando.html) on the semiology of 'Fernando' by Abba. Who are awesome, by the way! Such analysis is genuinely very interesting, though one must be careful not to ascribe any intentionality to any of the implicit symbolism - that's a mistake the dude (?) who analysed the video made by claiming that it was a work of 'genius'. I could perform a similar analysis on 'Saturday Night' by Whigfield (godawful dross) and make it sound like era-defining art, if I had the time (and inclination), but it would be a mistake to make a value judgment on the piece based on that. Like, a very basic error.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I also disagree about the Beatles, but I can't be bothered getting into it!
Albatross wrote:@Fafnir - That semiotic analysis of the video you posted is pretty funny, if a bit ham-fisted. It's a magnificent troll. Where did you find it?
All things are given birth and then go to die on 4chan.
I also disagree about the Beatles, but I can't be bothered getting into it!
Yes, I am. And I'm completely serious. Despite their venerated status, the Beatles started out as the same teeny-bopper trash as any other pop sensation. It wasn't until they started to move away from that sound (and the drugs... oh man, the drugs) that they started to become something actually worth listening to.
What a load of i guess when your country can only produce the likes of beiber and nickleback you would slander great musicians like the beetles.
Steu wrote:What a load of i guess when your country can only produce the likes of beiber and nickleback you would slander great musicians like the beetles.
Have you ever listened to any of the early Beatles stuff? It was all quite "poppy", rather mainstream and quite musically un-interesting. It was only when they started getting bigger and more well known that they were able to go out and do anything a bit more interesting.
Nope Fafnir is correct Beatles were a boy band when they first broke into the charts. Unlike most boy bands however they didn't get replaced by the next new thing but creatively evolved into something worth bothering about.
Their early years were no different from much of the other bands of the time. Let's not get partisan about popular music Steu , we have our fair share of pish too and the USA has its fair share of genius.
Hey right i not complaining about the fact of the music when they first came on the scean because lets face it the 60s music variation was not as vast as t is today. It was a different style of life with a smaller music genre to pick from. But nowadays we have a vast genre range to pick from and that is due to the beatles they are one of the bands if not the first to change the whole music scean for the world. They were the first band to write their own songs rather than have stuff shoved in front of them and told to sing.
And im not saying the USA has not produced many great artists becasue they have it was more directed at Canada.
And yes SilverMK2 i have listene to their early stuff i proberbly own every beatles ablum.
Steu wrote:Hey right i not complaining about the fact of the music when they first came on the scean because lets face it the 60s music variation was not as vast as t is today. It was a different style of life with a smaller music genre to pick from. But nowadays we have a vast genre range to pick from and that is due to the beatles they are one of the bands if not the first to change the whole music scean for the world. They were the first band to write their own songs rather than have stuff shoved in front of them and told to sing.
The 60's had a vast range of different music styles, not all resulting from the Beatles. And large numbers of bands (I would say most) wrote their own material. Also, it is "Scene".
And im not saying the USA has not produced many great artists becasue they have it was more directed at Canada.
Yes, I am. And I'm completely serious. Despite their venerated status, the Beatles started out as the same teeny-bopper trash as any other pop sensation. It wasn't until they started to move away from that sound (and the drugs... oh man, the drugs) that they started to become something actually worth listening to
.
What a load of i guess when your country can only produce the likes of beiber and nickleback you would slander great musicians like the beetles.
Holy feth, at least try to spell their name correctly if you're going to defend them.... If you could learn to at least try punctuation, that would also be smashing.
And as other people have pointed out, Canada has produced some of the best artists in popular music history.
They were the first band to write their own songs rather than have stuff shoved in front of them and told to sing.
Untrue. The first couple of Beatles records contain a significant number of covers, the most notable of which is probably 'Twist and Shout' - also, the idea that they were the first band/artist to perform self-penned material is completely ludicrous. Artists have been doing that in popular music since the turn of the last century at the very latest.
No, the Beatles WERE different - the idea that they were just run-of-the-mill teen pop trash like everything else around at the time is, and apologies if this offends anyone, total rubbish. It was the way they played which was pretty much a bolt from the blue - their early stuff is incredibly raw by the standards of mainstream pop at the time. Feverish, almost. And the speed at which they progressed was totally insane - from Please Please Me to Revolver took 3 years. 3 years to completely change pop music forever. Both Lennon and McCartney were bona fide geniuses, of that there can be no doubt. They wrote over 200 songs before getting a record deal - that's incredibly prolific. It's more than many artists ever manage in their entire careers.
By all means, defend the Beatles - their music ranks amongst mankind's finest achievements. But do it for the right reasons, and in the right way.
For the record, I am a Wings fan. I quite like McCartney and Harrison. There are a lot of good Beatles songs, but the overwhelming majority, I find, come from later in their career rather than earlier.
Well that's obvious. I never said they weren't a good band. I just said I'm not fond of their early work.
Just like, despite the fact that I'm an obsessive Bowie fan, I don't care for anything between Let's Dance and Black Tie White Noise (which is underrated). Although to be fair, most of his albums during that period just weren't any good to begin with.
And there's tonnes of great music coming out today. You just gotta look beneath the layer of crap. It's always been like that.
(yes, I know)
Not to mention that there are a tonne of older musicians who are still producing great music today (Bowie's most recent album, Reality, released in 2003 is easily comparable with Scary Monsters in terms of quality, Morrissey's 2009 album, Years of Refusal ranks up with some of his best work, and Iggy Pop's 2009 Les Preliminares is a great, albeit very different sound for the artist).
Haters gonna Hate. Good clean music that makes my little girl dance is a win in my book. And the chick isn't dressed like a super hooker. "Everything sucks but the music I like" gets old.
But Justin Beiber is a plauge that is infesting the world and needs to be stopped. Please tell me i am not the only one whos ears bleed when they hear him.
BIEBER has more money and women than all of us combined, maybe more talent too. His songs may be shallow but his voice is good. Now Ke$ha can't sing, neither can brittney
The only Ke$ha lyric that I know, which always jumps out at me, is the bit about kicking dudes to the curb "unless they look like Mick Jagger". Which is so dumb it's comical.
A) Mick Jagger is gorram old and ugly.
B) Even when he was young and a sex object (many years before she was born), he was still ugly; women wanted to be with the lead singer for the Stones, not with a dude who looked like that.
C) In light of the above two facts, it makes it look like Ke$ha has no idea who Mick Jagger is or what he looks like.
Bieber, at least, is a talented kid. He might turn out to write/perform some good music later.
That could be the worst song Ive ever heard and most of the other music videos posted here are absolutely terrible from the weird techno to the dude bro music. Rock and Roll still exists you don't have to settle with trying to extend your reach into a whole new era of electronics and talking over a 2 chord song. This stuff is not talent it is simply an example of how deaf the world is to music for even thinking of promoting this blasphemous crap. When all else fails go back to what you know; Bob D, Beatles, Pink Floyd, Sabbath, ELO, Bob Marley, listen to the music and study it, they are pieces of art like the Mona Lisa, Starry night etc. You cant just take a quick glance and say "Yep its good, keep on movin." There are true feelings and messages inside of all good art, and to have a good piece of art you need everything to flow together smoothly and with precision. Listen to any Pink Floyd song and try to separate the instruments, then figure out where your mind goes from there.
valhallanguitar wrote:That could be the worst song Ive ever heard and most of the other music videos posted here are absolutely terrible from the weird techno to the dude bro music. Rock and Roll still exists...
So does punctuation. And you're really not telling anyone here anything they don't already know, you just think you are.
Horrendous. However, I would like to point out that today is Friday (at least here in the UK anyway), and that we so excited. Also, Saturday follows Friday.
A rather fiendish marketing strategy, and the reason I haven't viewed the video yet...
Being famous for being excruciatingly awful, she gets zillions of hits and a rather handsome amount of ad revenue. The effects of being famous for being really, really good are comparable, though it seems to be easier to get someone to look at something if you tell them it's hilariously bad, than if you tell them it's good. An interesting quirk of human psychology.
I looked at this thread with the honest intention of Rickrolling people. I just don't have it in me anymore, I'm gonna put on the Offspring and curl into a fetal ball.
Fafnir wrote: It's not like King Crimson or Pink Floyd were ever chart toppers.
Yeah, I'm sure nobody has ever heard of Dark Side of The Moon or The Wall.
One in 4 households in the UK owns Dark Side of the Moon. In fact, so many people throughout the world now own that record that it's practically impossible for it not to be being played at any given moment somewhere in the globe. Which is awesome.
Also, if memory serves, both 'Arnold Layne' and 'See Emily Play' were top 10 hits for Pink Floyd in the 60s, in addition to 'Another Brick in the Wall (part II)' being Christmas number one. So they were singles chart-toppers (which is what Fafnir meant, I think), but not compared to say, The Spice Girls. Floyd hardly released any UK singles, and certainly none off Dark Side..., though they did release 'Money' as a US single. Again, if memory serves.
Wait, was '21st Century Schizoid Man' a single? I wonder where it charted...
I'm going to check.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Hmm.. seems it was released as a double a-side with 'Epitaph' in '76. Could'nt be arsed to find a chart position for it....
It's actually pretty funny, but I remember in David Bowie's biography (the one by Marc Spitz), it mention's how his manager paid 140 pounds to a chart rigger just to get Space Oddity on the charts.
Did you know that Robert Fripp (from King Crimson) played on 'Heroes'? He was told just to start playing, without being told what key or time signature the piece was in allegedly...
Yep. Never knew about how he was told to just start playing, but I knew he did the guitar bits (which sound awesome, by the way), and that they recorded from various points in the room in order to get a really cool, distorted sound.
I love little interesting bits of music trivia - that's why I decided to do my degree!
A particular favourite - on 'Tomorrow Never Knows', to get the vocal sound, Lennon wanted to place a mic in the center of the room and swing around in a circle on a tarzan swing whillst singing extracts from the Tibetan Book of the Dead (which is where the lyrics come from). They eventually settled for a Leslie rotating speaker from a Hammond (iirc) organ.
John Bonham recorded the drum part of 'When The Levee Breaks' at the bottom of a flight of stairs in the hall at Headley Grange, with the mics place at the top of the stairs.
So did everyone that went on Top of the Pops. Everyone lips syncs on shows like that
Rick Wakeman played piano on Clive Dunn's chart topping hit, "Grandad" in an old folks' home while the mic was thirty miles away in the Abbey Road studio. He then played Rolf Harris's Stylophone on Space Oddity.
Fafnir wrote:Did you know that David Bowie did MIME of all things?
No, but I did know that he used to be a grave-digger.
RE: John Bonham - Yeah, I read about that. You can tell, like. It's a fething MONSTROUS drum sound!
RE: Top of the Pops - Actually, the vocals are the only part that aren't lip-synched in a lot of more modern TOTP performances (cf. Nirvana debacle...)
Fafnir wrote:Did you know that David Bowie did MIME of all things?
No, but I did know that he used to be a grave-digger.
Holy crap. That's not in the biography (but then again, I'm only halfway through, havn't gotten enough time to finish the damn thing, just got to where Ziggy Stardust was released)!
There's a particularly funny story in it where he's at a party, and goes to have sex with this one girl in the toilets. A bunch of drag queens chase after them and start banging on the toilet door screaming about how they can do better than a girl ever could.
Oh, and did you know that this is one of the worst songs to listen too when you're suffering from a massive hangover?
I have a class with the most absurdly uninteligent sociology professor and feminazi you could ever imagine in 25 minutes, I need to get rid of this hangover ASAP!
Listening to stupid people talk is painful. Listening to stupid people talk while you're hungover is torture.
Early Beatles music is important, not for the actual music, but for the technologies used in their production. They were one of the first to employ multi-track recording (starting with 2-track, initially developed by Les Paul). Much of the later stuff, like reversing the playback, came from them experimenting with that early technology.
Fafnir wrote: It's not like King Crimson or Pink Floyd were ever chart toppers.
Yeah, I'm sure nobody has ever heard of Dark Side of The Moon or The Wall.
One in 4 households in the UK owns Dark Side of the Moon. In fact, so many people throughout the world now own that record that it's practically impossible for it not to be being played at any given moment somewhere in the globe. Which is awesome.
Also, if memory serves, both 'Arnold Layne' and 'See Emily Play' were top 10 hits for Pink Floyd in the 60s, in addition to 'Another Brick in the Wall (part II)' being Christmas number one. So they were singles chart-toppers (which is what Fafnir meant, I think), but not compared to say, The Spice Girls. Floyd hardly released any UK singles, and certainly none off Dark Side..., though they did release 'Money' as a US single. Again, if memory serves.
Brian Eno is probably the most important individual in modern music history. His influence could even be considered more important than the Beatles in some ways.
I know very few people who actually know who Brian Eno is (sadly). Even plenty of fans of his collaborative works don't even know who he is.
Fafnir wrote: Here, try this on for size. Not quite so monotone, but I swear, if you don't want to get up and move to this, you have no soul.
Better certainly. Still rates at 'meh' for my personal preferences though. Then again I'm in a bit of a down mood so that could be why. The background music is significantly more in-depth and isn't... generic? Not sure if that's the proper word for the background in the 'Friday' video.
Brian Eno is probably the most important individual in modern music history. His influence could even be considered more important than the Beatles in some ways.
I wouldn't say they're so outrageous. His role in the development of music production is huge. Sure, on the level of musical style he may not be as influential, but as far as production and editing aspects are concerned, you'd be hard pressed to find someone who's done as much.
I agree with you to some extent, though I would suggest that his influence is largely on late-period production, and thus doesn't really warrant the title of 'most important of all time', but to modern music, yeah I agree. There's no hip-hop, or electronic dance music without Eno. You could argue that Kraftwerk occupy a similar position of importance.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, this thread?:
I agree with you to some extent, though I would suggest that his influence is largely on late-period production, and thus doesn't really warrant the title of 'most important of all time', but to modern music, yeah I agree. There's no hip-hop, or electronic dance music without Eno. You could argue that Kraftwerk occupy a similar position of importance.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, this thread?:
mmmm i know about a video...
Immortal was always, and still being one of the best black metal band ever.... but they were also known for the "Quality" ...EJEMMM... of their videos... if you don't want to hear just shut down the volume.... but look the video...
Where the hello did you find that pile of crap? UGH! I swear everything about that song was just crap.
Some production company called Ark Music just flooded youtube with tons of crappy teenage artists. My guess is they are probably owned by some giant corp like Disney and trying to find the new Justin Bieber.
So, her parents paid for the track to be cut and mixed?
Yes. She went to one of these so-called 'vanity' studios. Her parents (or rather, her mother) paid $2000 for which she chose a track that the two studio managers had written and then recorded it as well as shooting a video for it.
So, her parents paid for the track to be cut and mixed?
Yes. She went to one of these so-called 'vanity' studios. Her parents (or rather, her mother) paid $2000 for which she chose a track that the two studio managers had written and then recorded it as well as shooting a video for it.
Man I have a lot of friends who are musicians, who have been doing it for many years. Who spend countless hours in the studios, and on tour. I really cannot see any talent in her or the music that was made for her. I see that Ark Productions must be making a killing though since there are so many teen bopper videos on youtube with their name tied to it.
So, her parents paid for the track to be cut and mixed?
Yes. She went to one of these so-called 'vanity' studios. Her parents (or rather, her mother) paid $2000 for which she chose a track that the two studio managers had written and then recorded it as well as shooting a video for it.
Man I have a lot of friends who are musicians, who have been doing it for many years. Who spend countless hours in the studios, and on tour. I really cannot see any talent in her or the music that was made for her. I see that Ark Productions must be making a killing though since there are so many teen bopper videos on youtube with their name tied to it.
Meh. Its a market. There are plenty of kids out there with stars in their eyes and enough of them with parents who have deep pockets. All power to them for spotting the niche I guess. Just a shame they have to inflict it on the world rather than the confines of this girls mp3 player.
And of course, as they say, if you fling enough poo at a wall, eventually some of it sticks. For every 1000 kid who fails miserably, they might be that 1 odd gem that makes them a million.
Yeah, cos I didn't already hate her enough... Seriously, I can't stand it when pop stars sing 'The Star-Spangled Banner'. So fething cringeworthy. Ugh.
Albatross wrote:Yeah, cos I didn't already hate her enough... Seriously, I can't stand it when pop stars sing 'The Star-Spangled Banner'. So fething cringeworthy. Ugh.
Probably because doing it a capella gives them ample opportunity to demonstrate vocal gymnastics to the nth degree (cross ref. Mariah Carey or Christina Aguilera at the Superbowl)
i guess when your country can only produce the likes of beiber and nickleback you would slander great musicians like the beetles.
