Recomendar
Surveying the sonic landscape
Set 23 2006, 16h49
Yes, the "sonic landscape in jazz/pop" is pretty barren, and part of the appeal of the Internet and fancy social sites like this one is that they offer a priori a refashioned landscape for one's own sonic wanderings. Instead of listening to "WBGO Jazz 88" the same as 100,000 other people, and monthly perusing the basement racks at the 66th Street branch of Tower Records, each individual is now the master of his or her own sonic empire, which can encompass far more territory than one radio station (or one record store, even) can govern. Pyeng Threadgill and Jackie McLean are on 'BGO, but Susanna and the Magical Orchestra, Dick Annegarn, and Queen Esther aren't.
Since artists are listeners too, and are just as aware of these new freedoms of listening and taste-making as their audiences are, I think it's natural that folks find cover tunes more attractive: they offer fixed reference points in that vast sonic wasteland. "Love Will Tear Us Apart" can exist in the Nouvelle Vague version or the Susanna and the Magical Orchestra version, as well as the original 80s recording,
Love Will Tear Us Apart. Each of those versions, naturally, offers some of the comforts of familiarity. You may not know who is singing, but you know the song, and the fact that she's chosen that song to sing is the first step to getting to know the singer.
But on the flip side, it's not all about the listener; the artist is making music as a form of self-expression. I wonder if it isn't harder and harder these days to present your own material frankly and honestly as your own creation. I'm thinking of all the fuss attached to the delayed 2005 release of Extraordinary Machine, or the fact that the 2006 Nellie McKay record, "Pretty Little Head," got shelved indefinitely by the record label. Even Beyonce doesn't get the credit she deserves as a composer; apparently if your songs and arrangements are good enough to be superstar-pop, you're assumed to be a puppet of secretive production geniuses (this is the same homunculus theory that was discredited so long ago as a rational explanation of brain function: that within us all is a "little man" sitting at a control desk inside our heads pulling levers to lift our limbs as if we were giant mechanical robots).
The sad thing is that listeners are thirsty for original compositions as well. I stopped listening wholesale to "classic rock" several years back because I felt as if there was nothing else I could learn from listening to those songs; they had become liturgical music for a church whose doctrine I no longer believed in. I wanted to hear new music, or music from other viewpoints that was new to me.
So how do you, fellow listeners and adventurers in the vast sonic wilderness that last.fm only hopes to describe, find music that speaks to you in new words?
Since artists are listeners too, and are just as aware of these new freedoms of listening and taste-making as their audiences are, I think it's natural that folks find cover tunes more attractive: they offer fixed reference points in that vast sonic wasteland. "Love Will Tear Us Apart" can exist in the Nouvelle Vague version or the Susanna and the Magical Orchestra version, as well as the original 80s recording,
Love Will Tear Us Apart. Each of those versions, naturally, offers some of the comforts of familiarity. You may not know who is singing, but you know the song, and the fact that she's chosen that song to sing is the first step to getting to know the singer.But on the flip side, it's not all about the listener; the artist is making music as a form of self-expression. I wonder if it isn't harder and harder these days to present your own material frankly and honestly as your own creation. I'm thinking of all the fuss attached to the delayed 2005 release of Extraordinary Machine, or the fact that the 2006 Nellie McKay record, "Pretty Little Head," got shelved indefinitely by the record label. Even Beyonce doesn't get the credit she deserves as a composer; apparently if your songs and arrangements are good enough to be superstar-pop, you're assumed to be a puppet of secretive production geniuses (this is the same homunculus theory that was discredited so long ago as a rational explanation of brain function: that within us all is a "little man" sitting at a control desk inside our heads pulling levers to lift our limbs as if we were giant mechanical robots).
The sad thing is that listeners are thirsty for original compositions as well. I stopped listening wholesale to "classic rock" several years back because I felt as if there was nothing else I could learn from listening to those songs; they had become liturgical music for a church whose doctrine I no longer believed in. I wanted to hear new music, or music from other viewpoints that was new to me.
So how do you, fellow listeners and adventurers in the vast sonic wilderness that last.fm only hopes to describe, find music that speaks to you in new words?
Envios aceitos
Real Journal Entries, Lesser Associated Yet Streamable Artists, bakmuziek, This Goop Only Consists To Halve The Blessed Dialectic, Maybe - Oh Myriad!, Social Music Sites, This Group Only Exists To Have The Best Eclectic Radio Ever - Period, Evil Baking Club, Hanne Hukkelberg, Village VanguardComentários
-
mechatigers escreveu:
...within us all is a little man sitting at a control desk inside our heads pulling levers to lift our limbs as if we were giant mechanical robots.
ahem...tigers, some of us are giant mechanical tigers. -
IanAR escreveu:
... andLove Will Tear Us Apart is pants! IMHO. Check-out Love Will Tear Us Apart for a decent version.
As you know, I did write a little about discovery -> over here, but that'd benefit from decoding (for the general reader) and expanding. *scribbles on to-do list* - Ian -
NHA escreveu:
hmmm .. last Fm has definately changed the way I listen to music and so has file sharing. I will listen to African, Belgian, French, jazz, post punk, classical, pop, twee and death metal thrash and hip hop without any qualms. The notion as the artist as GOD or as the ultimate creator has moved focus. Instead of being at the beginning of the creative process and the listener passively consumes, the artist seems more in the middle with the art receiving, interpreting (?) and casting out again. In a sense the internet and the way in which music is listened to (in my own experience) has in essence killed the artist. A Barthian 'Death of the Author', the work exists in and of itself the artist not as important as the listener. The artist's projected meaning just another meaning amongst thousands. Neither more valid. Is this a good or bad thing or just a piece of postmodernism that will eventually coalesce when big money takes back control. Don't know but I am enjoying the fecund chaos! -
IanAR escreveu:
Well put, though I don't condone the file-sharing of copyright material. I'll check-out Death of the Author. Like I keep saying - We like music, not necessarily musicians!. - Ian
-
NHA escreveu:
The ethics or morality of p2p and filesharing is questionable. The morality and ethics of the music industry are all so questionable, at the moment I still think Sony etc are winning! The artists of course are another matter. It is like 'hometaping is killing music'again.
-
IanAR escreveu:
Yes, I used to make mix-tapes. Now I no longer have a cassette records :/ The difference, to my mind, is in terms of the fidelity of what's provided and subsequent copies ad infin item. I'd like to get back to mix-distributions and'm thinking of doing it by intentionally degrading sound quality (I'm quite atracted by the Weed approach).
Note: I wasn't admonishing you, nearly placing a limit on my approval.
Thanx for the Barthes tip. I've heard of the work a number of times, but never made time to look into it. His point-o-view reminds me of Flaubert's realism, 100-ish years earlier (Flaubert was mentor to my favourite C19 novelist Guy de Maupassant). - Best, Ian -
talking_animal escreveu:
No matter what Roland Barthes says, artists still feel the need to express themselves in music, but I agree with NHA here; there's a definite shift in emphasis that I see from artists distributing music to listeners assembling music.
It used to be that musicians would complain that they could never get their work out to the world, but now it seems so easy to post a couple demos and a list of influences. When the world is ready for you they'll find you (or your mice pace page), I imagine.
I wonder also if some artists are already taking cues from aggregated instruments of listener power such as last.fm. Can one say with any certainty: We should make a new record that sounds more like these geezers? -
NHA escreveu:
that 'weed' look interesting. it's OK Ian I didn't think you were having a dig.
I know of a few artists who use Last Fm to distribute or promote their music. Artists using last Fm the otherway around? the 'lets make music more like these guys'. I don't see why not. There is always that kind of element in art - nothing new under the sun etc. would also the little men pulling levers use the information also? more likely.I find the idea of Last Fm being used as a marketing tool to try and sell me something upsetting. or try to sell me something based on my listening habits as wrong. I am fortunate that a lot of the areas I travel in on Last Fm the people listen to varied and provoking music. That is the key i think - varied and provoking. ahhh ... i feel another google alert! -
talking_animal escreveu:
I think it's a terrific marketing opportunity. As a temporary freeloader, I'd love for more Charlie Parker-related merch to be offered in that advertising rectangle, but all I ever get are leads to the latest emo releases.
-
NHA escreveu:
As a subscriber I'd forgotten about the ads!DUH DUH DUH! as Cher would say ... *if I could turn back time!*
more in the greater context of the greater web. rather than Last FM. for marketing ... I'll shut up.
