[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Yes this may be true. But wouldn't you say the state of rock and roll is
> >
> >
> > particularly horrible at the moment? I know I'm pointing out the obvious
> >
> >
> > observation. I was originally trying to make the correllation between
> > this current state of rock and roll and how that relates to the ecomonic
> >
> >
> > boom of the late 90's. And trying to speculate that the recession that
> > Bush will be ushering in will hopefully spawn something more inspiring.
> > I was hoping to discuss the future of rock and roll. I suppose I wasn't
> > clear enough. I'll admit I'm not the greatest communicator via email...
> >
> >
>
>
> The rock charts have sucked for a long time. Period. This ain't
> something new.
> They suck now with Korn, etc....they sucked during grunge.....they
> sucked during
> the hair metal bands...SO WHAT? Ignore them if it gets you so uptight.
> Neither Bush nor Gore nor Nader have ANY effect on the charts.
> >
> > >
>
> > > > Though I've gotta say that from a purely musical perspective
> > > > and my own personal opinion, most obscure music is obscure for good
> > > > reason. A lot of it is utter rubbish. Most of them couldn't write a
> > > > decent song to save their lives.
> > >
> > >
> > > OK, you just gave yourself away there.... dig a little deeper rather
> > > than hide
> > > behind the tried-and-true "it didn't chart for a reason" excuse.
> > >
> > How did I give myself away? I didn't actually say that only stuff that
> > charted was any good. In fact, The Who rarely charted, Creation never
> > charted, and some of the Kinks' best work and Ray Davies' most inspired
> > songs never charted. I meant that a lot of the obscure stuff I've been
> > exposed to had no song quality whatsoever. But I'll take your advice to
> > dig a bit deeper and see where that leads me. Suggestions?
> > > >
>
> Actually ALL of those groups charted (in one country or another) And to
>
> say that
> Ray Davies' song catalog hasn't been given a fair shake (or the Who...)
> is laughable.
>
> What you said was...."Though I've gotta say that from a purely musical
> perspective
> and my own personal opinion, most obscure music is obscure for good
> reason. A lot of it is utter rubbish. Most of them couldn't write a
> decent song to save their lives."
>
> And THAT my friend is a load of malarkey. There are any number of
> reasons why a song could
> be obscure (ie...not charted or played on oldies stations). This is not
>
> to say that "obscurity = good".
> But with the HUGE, HUGE amount of records released in the 60s....how
> many can really
> expect to make airplay? If you work "in the industry" then you must
> know the millions of
> demo tapes floating around, right? I would take ANY half-ass Northern
> Soul throwaway,
> third-rate, Motown rip-off over an overblown Creed song ANYDAY.
>
> I could give you suggestions, but I'm not feeling particularly generous
> at the moment.
> The original question from Mr. Wallace was "is anybody listening to
> anything NEW"
> by that he meant current I suppose. I gave a couple of names
> there...and I could probably
> think up a few more....but I don't LIKE most current music. I find the
> production
> PAINFUL to listen to. I don't close my ears if I hear something I like,
>
> but I don't
> go searching anymore either. There is just too much good stuff from the
>
> past that
> surprises me and gets me going.
>
>
> > Actually it was a serious question that had a cheeky lede. The actual
> > question was not meant to be cheeky or my fallback defensive. If I was
> > that obvious and that boring, why did you take the time to meticulously
> > rip into every point of my post?
>
>
> Because I find it fun to pop balloons. Why did you?
>
>
>
> Do you need to assert your utmost
> > authority at every turn and go for the jugular at the slightest hint of
> > someone's lesser thought out points? Not everyone has had your twenty or
> >
> >
> > so years of exposure to music and involvement in the mod scene. Why not
> > turn people on more to the things you're listening to and have
> > experienced? There must be more that you're listening to than just the
> > two groups you mentioned before.
>
>
> There is plenty more that I listen to. But I don't feel like sharing
> with someone
> so confident that ignorance is bliss. Maybe a month ago, I mentioned
> the first
> Os Mutantes Lp on the Omplatten label. It's just called "Os Mutantes"
> and it's from
> Brazil, '68. It's not "mod" per se, but it is 60s....it is
> obscure....it never charted
> anywhere in North America....it has some great and innovative stuff
> (some of
> which could be played alongside some of your indie faves) and I
> guarantee you've
> never heard anything like it before. Now go find your own treasures.
> It might take more effort than turning on the radio.
>
> Dan
Well we could both go on and on about this but I guess we've
sufficiently beat it into the ground. There are things I could comment
on but wouldn't do anything to further this discussion so I'll let this
thread die a dignified death...
-chris
___________________________________________________________
T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
