Your unpopular music opinions

Winston Payne

karaokeman wrote: »

Thats because all those bands aren't proper Indie bands.

They played within certain conventions of the indie style. They were labelled as indie because that's how they were perceived. Words and meanings change all the time. The DIY endeavour of the past wasn't in evidence but musically they were, or at least tried to be, part of the same pantheon. I think the indie label sticks to them.

karaokeman wrote: »

To be Indie you need to start on an underground (or your own) label and build up your reputation from there.

I don't think that holds true anymore.

karaokeman wrote: »

Most people for example will say Nadine Coyle is pop and The Kooks are Indie, whereas in reality they are both pop, simply because Nadine was signed to her own label (Black Pen Records) so is an Indie pop artist and who were The Kooks signed to? Virgin, EMI, they were signed to major labels.

And they'd be right. I prefer to bracket people by sound, not by some sort of ethical perspective. The Kooks are an indie band, they have an indie sound. They're mainly awful, sure. It'd be disengenous to pretend that they and Coyle have some sort of commonality though.

karaokeman wrote: »

I am unconvinced that this "Indie" landfill period inspired kids to start playing guitars again.

It seems to be a pretty commonly held opinion in the UK at least, in my experience.

SilverScreen

Winston Payne wrote: »

They played within certain conventions of the indie style. They were labelled as indie because that's how they were perceived. Words and meanings change all the time. The DIY endeavour of the past wasn't in evidence but musically they were, or at least tried to be, part of the same pantheon. I think the indie label sticks to them

And they'd be right. I prefer to bracket people by sound, not by some sort of ethical perspective. The Kooks are an indie band, they have an indie sound. They're mainly awful, sure. It'd be disengenous to pretend that they and Coyle have some sort of commonality though.

When I think of 00's indie I certainly don't think of bands like The Kooks. This seems to be more of a mainstream/NME perspective of what indie is more than anything else when really they are nothing more than pop bands with guitars. I don't know about some people but when I think 00's indie I think of bands like Autolux, Asobi Seksu, The National, Broken Social Scene, Deerhunter etc.

karaokeman

Winston Payne wrote: »

They played within certain conventions of the indie style. They were labelled as indie because that's how they were perceived. Words and meanings change all the time. The DIY endeavour of the past wasn't in evidence but musically they were, or at least tried to be, part of the same pantheon. I think the indie label sticks to them.

So what were those specific conventions The Kooks worked with? They were labelled Indie by NME and the mainstream media as Zero pointed out.

Winston Payne wrote: »

The Kooks are an indie band, they have an indie sound. They're mainly awful, sure. It'd be disengenous to pretend that they and Coyle have some sort of commonality though.

How would they not? They are both pop acts.

Jimmy Iovine

_coinin_ wrote: »

I dont like Beyonce, I heard a radio DJ say she has the best singing voice of the century. I think she shouts most of the words

She's an average singer. "Best singing voice of the century" give me a break. There are probably 100 better singers than her out there but they haven't got the publicity that she has.

Also the majority of radio DJs haven't a clue about music.

EchoO

Never really liked The Smiths.

Bobby Baccala

The xx are the best band to come out of the past 10 years.

Kold

I think that Beyoncé's version of empowerment is more akin to misandry and it hurts to think of her as a role model to a generation of young women.

karaokeman

I'm not the biggest fan of Beyonce but there is no doubt in my mind that she is an amazing singer, I agree not the best of the century but one of the best, I'd probably rate her higher than Adele and Bat For Lashes.

She does have some really great pop songs too, and tunes like Crazy In Love are difficult to not like.

I think at a certain age you realise that there's very little point to having role models you have never met in person. When you look at it, the vast majority of "fans" who worship pop stars do seem to be all under 16 years of age.

Da Shins Kelly

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

She's an average singer. "Best singing voice of the century" give me a break. There are probably 100 better singers than her out there but they haven't got the publicity that she has.

Also the majority of radio DJs haven't a clue about music.

Sorry Jimmy, but she's a lot better than "average". There might be singers you prefer, but she is a very, very good singer. She's a very complete performer too.

Da Shins Kelly

Kold wrote: »

I think that Beyoncé's version of empowerment is more akin to misandry

I can't say I've ever found anything about Beyonce to be particularly "man-hating". She's married to Jay-Z ffs.

rcaz

Kold wrote: »

I think that Beyoncé's version of empowerment is more akin to misandry and it hurts to think of her as a role model to a generation of young women.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syCPQH4UQRY

I'd love for someone to come out with a tune along the line of 'Run The World (Boys)' and see how well it's received :pac:

It would seem that feminism != equality. But then that's the kind of discussion we should have in AH, isn't it? :P

Jimmy Iovine

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

Sorry Jimmy, but she's a lot better than "average". There might be singers you prefer, but she is a very, very good singer. She's a very complete performer too.

I was a bit harsh with my 'average' comment. She's slightly better than average.

I don't particularly like any of the singers to be honest. The likes of Adele and Rihanna are pretty poor. The reason they're so highly rated is because of their sales, which is a terrible way to look at it.

There are plenty of classically trained singers that would make a show of every single female singer in the charts today. And they can do it live without the need for lip-syncing. Unfortunately, they will forever be over-looked unless they go down the 'pop' route.

Da Shins Kelly

rcaz wrote: »

I'd love for someone to come out with a tune along the line of 'Run The World (Boys)' and see how well it's received :pac:

It would seem that feminism != equality. But then that's the kind of discussion we should have in AH, isn't it? :P

If any criticism should be levelled at that song it's that it's very, very far from the truth that women run the world, not that it's somehow sexist towards men. If anything, it's a joke that that song even exists given that it's still a man's world in many, many ways.

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

I was a bit harsh with my 'average' comment. She's slightly better than average.

I don't particularly like any of the singers to be honest. The likes of Adele and Rihanna are pretty poor. The reason they're so highly rated is because of their sales, which is a terrible way to look at it.

There are plenty of classically trained singers that would make a show of every single female singer in the charts today. And they can do it live without the need for lip-syncing. Unfortunately, they will forever be over-looked unless they go down the 'pop' route.

Agreed about Rihanna. She can barely hold it together live, terrible performer really, and one of the most contrived public images I've ever encountered from a pop star.

As far as Beyonce and Adele - I'm not a huge fan of their music, but they don't lip sync, they can sing live. As far as classically trained singers - sure, they might be good technically, but it takes more than a technically good voice to be recognized. There are a million great singers in the world, but you need something special, as well as good songs, to make it. You can't just say, 'well they're great singers!'. A lot of people are great singers - what makes them so special?

kunst nugget

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

You can't just say, 'well they're great singers!'. A lot of people are great singers - what makes them so special?

morketing...

Jimmy Iovine

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

As far as Beyonce and Adele - I'm not a huge fan of their music, but they don't lip sync, they can sing live. As far as classically trained singers - sure, they might be good technically, but it takes more than a technically good voice to be recognized. There are a million great singers in the world, but you need something special, as well as good songs, to make it. You can't just say, 'well they're great singers!'. A lot of people are great singers - what makes them so special?

Technically speaking classical singers are in a different class to Beyonce and Adele.

They don't have the same marketing bulldozers behind them though. Adele was rammed down our throat almost every day for the last year and it worked. She sold a ridiculous amount of albums, and fair play to her.

The only difference between them is marketing.

I know you're a rap fan so I'll change artists. What's the difference between Rakim and 50 Cent? I think Rakim has money difficulty, probably brought on by the fact that he sells nothing. Fiddy, on the other hand, has sold 20-30 million albums worldwide. Even the biggest 50 fan in the world would admit that he doesn't hold a candle to Rakim.

The difference between them is marketing, and having a record label that pushes them out into the public arena at every opportunity.

jill_valentine

rcaz wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syCPQH4UQRY

I'd love for someone to come out with a tune along the line of 'Run The World (Boys)' and see how well it's received :pac:

Tyler the Creator would probably laugh in your face for making such a feeble effort. And hey, Chris Brown went a step further and actually tried to kill a woman and everybody, Grammys included, seems just dandy with that.

I got 99 problems, but listing rabidly misogynistic examples of the music industry at work ain't one.

Da Shins Kelly

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

Technically speaking classical singers are in a different class to Beyonce and Adele.

They don't have the same marketing bulldozers behind them though. Adele was rammed down our throat almost every day for the last year and it worked. She sold a ridiculous amount of albums, and fair play to her.

The only difference between them is marketing.

I know you're a rap fan so I'll change artists. What's the difference between Rakim and 50 Cent? I think Rakim has money difficulty, probably brought on by the fact that he sells nothing. Fiddy, on the other hand, has sold 20-30 million albums worldwide. Even the biggest 50 fan in the world would admit that he doesn't hold a candle to Rakim.

The difference between them is marketing, and having a record label that pushes them out into the public arena at every opportunity.

I agree that marketing has a lot to do with it, and Adele is easy to market in the wake of all this love for retro-sounding music recently. Beyonce has the look of course, and songs that are catchy and will get a lot of airplay. But I'm not really talking about album sales. I don't judge how good an artist is on record sales. I'm saying "making it" just in terms of having some fan-base or credibility.

You're saying that all these classically-trained singers are 'overlooked'. I'm saying that some of them are overlooked for a reason - they don't really have any discernible features that distinguishes them from everyone else, be it with songs or a unique-sounding voice. Name me a singer that you think should be getting recognition that they aren't getting.

With regards to rap music, true most of the best rappers don't get much airplay or anything due to the commercialism of rap these days, but anyone who is really interested in rap knows that the likes of Rakim are better than the likes of 50 Cent. It's not like Rakim is particularly overlooked by anyone who likes hip hop. Likewise, in terms of singing, I think Erykah Badu is a better singer than either Beyonce or Adele, but it's not as though she's overlooked either.

All I'm saying is that that Beyonce or Adele are not completely undeserving of their success. Yes, they do have a marketing machine behind them (that's pop music, what ya gonna do?), and there are artists that I do prefer to the majority of what's out there in terms of pop music, but it's not as though they're utterly talentless.

rcaz

I feel I've been misinterpreted. I'm under no illusion that Beyoncé's song is some serious call to arms or anything. It's a gesture, right? Basing the whole tune around a sample from an already-huge song undermines any sense of seriousness anyway.

As for Tyler, The Creator and Chris Brown and the Grammys, Tyler's playing a character, Chris Brown is disgusting violent man, and since when have things as big and money-driven as the Grammys ever been true to a moral compass? I don't think they're embodiments of the music industry being 'rabidly misogynistic'. Chris Brown and the Grammys are ****ed, for sure. As for Tyler, would you say Ed Norton used to be a murdering racist after watching American History X?

latenia

The Great Rock n Roll Swindle is a better album than Never Mind The Bollocks

Da Shins Kelly

rcaz wrote: »

I feel I've been misinterpreted. I'm under no illusion that Beyoncé's song is some serious call to arms or anything. It's a gesture, right? Basing the whole tune around a sample from an already-huge song undermines any sense of seriousness anyway.

As for Tyler, The Creator and Chris Brown and the Grammys, Tyler's playing a character, Chris Brown is disgusting violent man, and since when have things as big and money-driven as the Grammys ever been true to a moral compass? I don't think they're embodiments of the music industry being 'rabidly misogynistic'. Chris Brown and the Grammys are ****ed, for sure. As for Tyler, would you say Ed Norton used to be a murdering racist after watching American History X?

I find it difficult to take Tyler, The Creator seriously as a misogynist given his music is pretty much complete fiction. He talks an awful lot about drugs in his music, but in reality is completely teetotal. I find it difficult to believe that he enjoys murder and rape in real life either.

Sinfonia

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

I find it difficult to take Tyler, The Creator seriously as a misogynist given his music is pretty much complete fiction. He talks an awful lot about drugs in his music, but in reality is completely teetotal. I find it difficult to believe that he enjoys murder and rape in real life either.

Like Eminem/Slim Shady 10 years ago

Da Shins Kelly

Sinfonia wrote: »

Like Eminem/Slim Shady 10 years ago

Exactly!

Bobby Baccala

Sinfonia wrote: »

Like Eminem/Slim Shady 10 years ago

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

Exactly!

No, not exactly, Eminem 10 years ago was far from clean of drugs, he was strung out, whereas Tyler isnt, i have no idea where his influence to rap about that stuff comes from.

Da Shins Kelly

P4DDY2K11 wrote: »

No, not exactly, Eminem 10 years ago was far from clean of drugs, he was strung out, whereas Tyler isnt, i have no idea where his influence to rap about that stuff comes from.

It's still a character though. Eminem's not going to murder his daughter's mother either. It's just fiction.

rcaz

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

Eminem's not going to murder his daughter's mother either.

Eminem won't, but Slim Shady damn well will :pac:

jill_valentine

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

I find it difficult to take Tyler, The Creator seriously as a misogynist given his music is pretty much complete fiction. He talks an awful lot about drugs in his music, but in reality is completely teetotal. I find it difficult to believe that he enjoys murder and rape in real life either.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think Tyler's for real either, and I do actually like Odd Future overall, but how can Beyonce's track be considered seriously misandrist if, on the other side of the fence, Tyler's much more extreme persona gets a pass as a creative mechanism?

I mean, it's clearly neither a call to arms nor a reflection of reality - girls don't run the world. It's an indulgent little step into the idea , but it's not anchored to anything.

kunst nugget

jill_valentine wrote: »

Don't get me wrong, I don't think Tyler's for real either, and I do actually like Odd Future overall, but how can Beyonce's track be considered seriously misandrist if, on the other side of the fence, Tyler's much more extreme persona gets a pass as a creative mechanism?

You're a girl, you wouldn't understands…

snausages

Maybe he's a guy who just really likes Resident Evil.

paddyandy

I can sing .

Da Shins Kelly

jill_valentine wrote: »

Don't get me wrong, I don't think Tyler's for real either, and I do actually like Odd Future overall, but how can Beyonce's track be considered seriously misandrist if, on the other side of the fence, Tyler's much more extreme persona gets a pass as a creative mechanism?

Ask the person who said it.