|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
fosterman
Joined: 16 Nov 2011
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 18, 2012 4:08 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| KimchiNinja wrote: |
That's the easiest explanation, you've seen not only the quality of the artists, but also the quality of the record production go to hell over the last 10 years with the "awesomeness" of the internet. Same will happen to film.
|
I don't think the same will happen to film.
Film always has the movie theater experience, great for kids, dates, viewing on the big screen etc. it's a night out.
sure DVD's might decline slightly over the next 50 years as out generation know how to steal content easily. my grand dad can't even turn a pc on, and my parents just can't be bothered with it, they rent dvds or buy from cable.
also, film make their money through advertising, selling their contents to networks, movies made for tv, reruns, international markets
songs can still make this kind of money through radio or having their songs used in commercials or on tv movies etc..
some moral people still pay for music..
DJ's in nightclubs all over the world I am sure steal their music.
probably not the super star djs, but your common bar dj will.
artists still make their money through touring, and this is how it should be
work for your money and make contact with your fans.
selling albums were suppose to be a bonus income, but it ended up being the main income so we saw so many fillers on a cd back in the days.
easy millions ! I am glad those days are over actually, it now makes artists work for their money. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 18, 2012 4:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tideout wrote: |
| KimchiNinja wrote: |
That's the easiest explanation, you've seen not only the quality of the artists, but also the quality of the record production go to hell over the last 10 years with the "awesomeness" of the internet. Same will happen to film.
It's a transfer of money from the entertainment industry to the tech industry, and ART gets screwed in the process. That's my analysis. |
The argument about the effect of the internet & piracy will continue on I guess but I do agree with you about the degrading effects of technology & the internet.
I believe it's had a negative effect on everything from music to news, writing, art, typography, jobs, conversation and more. The so called "democratization" of media is a joke. Now anyone can put up a blog on Korea with the same space that someone who's spent their life really studying the history, language and culture. Everything's reduced to opinion rather than earned merit. Real work is reduced to just another file to be passed around the net.
I'm afraid the music industry is just a facet of the overall picture. |
I disagree.
J.S. Bach's music was ignored for the better part of 100 years after his death. Van Gogh went completely unacknowledged during his lifetime. Who knows how many Picassos, Mozarts and Dickenses have slipped through the cracks? By giving everyone (well, not everyone) a voice, we've significantly cut the chances of these things ever happening again.
Your argument that things were better or more significant before hinges on the people in charge of publishing or publicizing knowing what's best. I'd rather have to wade through 100 different opinions to find one with some merit than to only have access to a few popular ideas. Never have our critical thinking skills been as challenged as they are today. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 18, 2012 4:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| fosterman wrote: |
| it now makes artists work for their money |
The artists have always been working for their money. It's the promoters and publishers who have to work harder now. Or at least they had to briefly during the transition from posters and CDs to Internet ads and iTunes. Now I imagine things are easier than ever without all that messy physical media to be dealt with. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Greekfreak
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 8:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm probably the same age as the original poster, and a former DJ to boot. I can honestly say that new music is dead in the water--not to say that I haven't found the odd album that still impresses me from time to time ("Rival Sons" debut LP being a good example). But all new artists are just photocopies of photocopies of ditto paper, etc. There really is nothing original coming out that's worth listening to. Even the one I just mentioned, good as it is, I've heard it countless times before.
And yes, movies were better in the 70s when studios were willing to take a chance on unknowns. Sucks to be right, but it's simply true.
Now take somebody like my teenage nephew, who digs Deadmau5. I've been Korea since the day he was born, almost, and I left my enviable collection of music back home (and it's almost like a time-capsule--all my new CDs are here). Eventually he'll come to the realization that he's listening to absolute shyte, and discover the artists that came before represent a purer, undiluted form of whatever genre they begat.
At least, that's what I hope for.
For myself, it's strange--I can't say with a straight face that I care too much about finding new music, because there's a whole whack of "new" old music that I never got into or else didn't have the wherewithal to find it for whatever reasons. So I've been filling in the gaps for the last decade.
Someone was going on about Arcade Fire, who's a decent band, but they're a pastiche of so many bands that came before. Nothing wrong with that, but it's not unique or original. Interpol is an example of a band that should be paying royalties to Joy Division every time they release their album.
One band I really dig since their debut is Camera Obscura out of Glascow. Just wicked harmonies and melodies straight out of the 60s. A complete throwback but I love 'em to death. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NilesQ
Joined: 27 Nov 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 9:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Greekfreak wrote: |
| Eventually he'll come to the realization that he's listening to absolute shyte, and discover the artists that came before represent a purer, undiluted form of whatever genre they begat. |
That's what my grandfather said to my father about Elvis and the Beach Boys; what my father said to me about NWA, Public Enemy, and Nirvana; and what you seem to be telling your nephew about his musical heroes!
By that logic, genres shouldn't exist. If everyone after the first to do it is "shyte", then we could only have one offs in each genre that are worth listening to. Everyone has the right to listen to "shyte" music! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Greekfreak
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 12:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What do NWA, Public Enemy, and Nirvana have to do with Elvis or the Beach Boys? I listened to all of them at one point or another; I still do. Way to miss my point. I was also blessed to have parents with good taste in music and who actually liked a lot of what I listened to. No generation gap in my family where that was concerned.
Once again, all genres have been done to death. There is NOTHING NEW UNDER THE SUN. You can add Krautrock to Viennese mandolin music but again, you would be using known quantities. I don't think this matters so much, but the end result is, people who know more about music are surprised and impressed less and less each progressing year.
"Electronica" was the last so-called "new" genre but even that was BS. Techno-based music goes way back. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NilesQ
Joined: 27 Nov 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 12:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Greekfreak wrote: |
What do NWA, Public Enemy, and Nirvana have to do with Elvis or the Beach Boys? I listened to all of them at one point or another; I still do. Way to miss my point. I was also blessed to have parents with good taste in music and who actually liked a lot of what I listened to. No generation gap in my family where that was concerned.
Once again, all genres have been done to death. There is NOTHING NEW UNDER THE SUN. You can add Krautrock to Viennese mandolin music but again, you would be using known quantities. I don't think this matters so much, but the end result is, people who know more about music are surprised and impressed less and less each progressing year.
"Electronica" was the last so-called "new" genre but even that was BS. Techno-based music goes way back. |
I think you missed my point! Each generation tells the next that what they listen to "isn't as good as in my day" or "they don't do it like this artist". You are doing the same to your nephew by saying that what he listenes to is "shyte". It has nothing to do with the artists themselves.
Your statement, "I was also blessed to have parents with good taste in music and who actually liked a lot of what I listened to.", reinforces what I believe to be the underlying theme of your posts; You know what "good" music is and others don't. The fact that because they like what you do means that they have good taste in music is musical snobbery. It's cool for anyone to like or dislike whatever they want. But when people start labeling music as good or bad because they like it or dislike it is arrogant. Anyway, who can know about music?! What about the old entertainment test? It sounds good or it doesn't.
I think the only real way to objectively judge music, is time. If people still like and listen to something 30 or 40 years after it was made, it's probably "good" music. That still doesn't mean I'll like it, but if enough people do, it has some sort of redeeming quality. Maybe not what a musical intellect like yourself is looking for, but it has something. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fosterman
Joined: 16 Nov 2011
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
it's not about this generation not being allowed to listen to their music without the previous generation saying their music is shyte!
it's the fact that this generation are not producing anything ORIGINAL!
you mention elvis presely, the beach boys, or the 60's, the 70's
well those artists in those times were releasing NEW MUSIC, breaking barriers, creating new genres, experimenting, creating, setting threads.
of course there were plenty of bands on the band wagon regurgitating music and just out for a buck, but music fans knew who the originals were.
which bands today can really say they have started a new genre like
NWA did. or which band today can say they started a genre like the sex pistols did.
which band today can say they started a genre like new jack Swing like Jodici did.
there are no bands, because creatively they are not out there.
it's nothing about me slamming artists like
Chris Brown, nicki minaj or drake.
it's the fact that Usher, Craig david, and countless other guys did that already. so the new generation think they are getting original music with original artist. well they are not. there is nothing original about Chris Brown. he is Usher 20 years ago.
and it's not like Saying Elvis was just copying someone else..
NO he wasn't! Elvis took influences from Gospel and other genres at the time and then warped it into hsi own sound of rocknroll which is uniquely his,
Chris Brown is just a clone of Usher.
nothing original what so ever. and that goes for 95% of bands today.
I like new music today, I turn on the Radio and think "yeah this is alright"
but I don't cream my pants and say, OMG this is so awesome, and original and cool like when I listened to Pink floyds the wall, or even Enigma for the first time.and of course I can mention hundred of other albums which did that.
but today... seriously.. name me one album? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Greekfreak
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 8:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| NilesQ wrote: |
| Greekfreak wrote: |
What do NWA, Public Enemy, and Nirvana have to do with Elvis or the Beach Boys? I listened to all of them at one point or another; I still do. Way to miss my point. I was also blessed to have parents with good taste in music and who actually liked a lot of what I listened to. No generation gap in my family where that was concerned.
Once again, all genres have been done to death. There is NOTHING NEW UNDER THE SUN. You can add Krautrock to Viennese mandolin music but again, you would be using known quantities. I don't think this matters so much, but the end result is, people who know more about music are surprised and impressed less and less each progressing year.
"Electronica" was the last so-called "new" genre but even that was BS. Techno-based music goes way back. |
I think you missed my point! Each generation tells the next that what they listen to "isn't as good as in my day" or "they don't do it like this artist". You are doing the same to your nephew by saying that what he listenes to is "shyte". It has nothing to do with the artists themselves.
Your statement, "I was also blessed to have parents with good taste in music and who actually liked a lot of what I listened to.", reinforces what I believe to be the underlying theme of your posts; You know what "good" music is and others don't. The fact that because they like what you do means that they have good taste in music is musical snobbery. It's cool for anyone to like or dislike whatever they want. But when people start labeling music as good or bad because they like it or dislike it is arrogant. Anyway, who can know about music?! What about the old entertainment test? It sounds good or it doesn't.
I think the only real way to objectively judge music, is time. If people still like and listen to something 30 or 40 years after it was made, it's probably "good" music. That still doesn't mean I'll like it, but if enough people do, it has some sort of redeeming quality. Maybe not what a musical intellect like yourself is looking for, but it has something. |
You're right; I do know what good music sounds like. Snobbery? Yeah, I'll take that hit. And yes, really good music has no expiry date. But when I was his age, I did the same thing; experiment by listening to anything NEW until I was old enough to discern the difference between NEW and GOOD. Believe it or not, there is such a thing as crap music, and there is such a thing as having bad taste.
Anything good out there is buried under a morass of "ehh..." and thoroughly mediocre nonsense. There was always fluff in music, only now there's way more of it to sift through.
To the original poster: try "Passive Me, Aggressive You" by The Naked & Famous. You can play "name that influence" til the cows come home, but it still sounds very contemporary at the same time. Strange indeed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fosterman
Joined: 16 Nov 2011
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 9:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Greekfreak wrote: |
To the original poster: try "Passive Me, Aggressive You" by The Naked & Famous. You can play "name that influence" til the cows come home, but it still sounds very contemporary at the same time. Strange indeed. |
it probably sounds contemporary because it's new zealand music, and NZ music has a very unique distinctive sound. I am from NZ so I grew up listening to pure NZ music through the 80's and 90's and it's always been different. so perhaps for you coming from the UK? it might sound contemporary , LOL, yes you are so right about name the influence.
but yes, New Zealand music is very original to peope on the outside, because of the huge ethnic diversity especially from the islands,the music is very different. so for first time listeners it might sound fresh. and actually a lot of it is.
I should state, I am not saying there is not any original music or good bands out there, of course there are. I am just saying there are not as many as our generation ,in the main stream and creating new genres and styles. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KimchiNinja
Joined: 01 May 2012
Location: Gangnam
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 11:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tideout wrote: |
| KimchiNinja wrote: |
That's the easiest explanation, you've seen not only the quality of the artists, but also the quality of the record production go to hell over the last 10 years with the "awesomeness" of the internet. Same will happen to film.
It's a transfer of money from the entertainment industry to the tech industry, and ART gets screwed in the process. That's my analysis. |
The argument about the effect of the internet & piracy will continue on I guess but I do agree with you about the degrading effects of technology & the internet.
I believe it's had a negative effect on everything from music to news, writing, art, typography, jobs, conversation and more. The so called "democratization" of media is a joke. Now anyone can put up a blog on Korea with the same space that someone who's spent their life really studying the history, language and culture. Everything's reduced to opinion rather than earned merit. Real work is reduced to just another file to be passed around the net.
I'm afraid the music industry is just a facet of the overall picture. |
Very well said!
I've produced records, mixed them, played in bands, lots of stuff over the last two decades...and there *used to be* a standard regarding record production. You had some incredible albums made, and having the budget to hire gifted producer/engineers/mixers was a part of what made the records what they were.
Now it's just a race to the bottom, I can't believe the slop production I hear, but heck people press CDs and call it an album! The decline in quality is so wow. But it has to decline, you can't blow $100K in the studio if it's just going to get pirated.
I know the average person doesn't think about any of this, and just says "oh it's great that the labels crashed, now it's all about the freedom of the artist, and bla bla bla" and scoffs at the idea of art+industry being a good thing for the art. But they don't have any idea what they are talking about. 
I'd rather have one great album like Back in Black or OK Computer that I had to pay $20 for on my iphone than 10,000 free ones.
Basically in 2000 people were like, sweet now I don't have to pay for music! "The labels were thieves!" they shouted out while playing the $1M USD Metallica Black album (that they stole off the internet) on their ipod. AAPL profits soared and records commenced to suck...nobody considered that the quality would slowly decline until [quality = price paid].
Peace out hommies |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KimchiNinja
Joined: 01 May 2012
Location: Gangnam
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 11:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| fosterman wrote: |
| I am glad those days are over actually, it now makes artists work for their money. |
Okay but this is kinda absurd.
It used to be that you had to work for your money and maybe (after all the business people took all the profit) you got just enough to sustain, and continue doing music. Few people were rich, but you had financiers that allowed you to do what you do, but not necessarily profit from it. It was an imperfect system, but timeless records came about.
Now it's just next to impossible, everyone has a day job. Cobain today would be a pizza boy and youtuber with 100K plays, and really crappy sounding bedroom recrods available on CD Baby.com, whoopie doo. The art suffers from the lack of concentration, it needs to be the only job. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fosterman
Joined: 16 Nov 2011
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 10:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| KimchiNinja wrote: |
| fosterman wrote: |
| I am glad those days are over actually, it now makes artists work for their money. |
Okay but this is kinda absurd.
|
there is nothing absurd about my statement.
We entered a decade where people (so called Musicians) would put a single together, process the vocals through software , with tweeks and beats etc
and then release it, then make a remix version, and then make another album, and then keep producing the same content over and over, when put in front of a microphone to sing live, they would lip sync!
because they are not musicians! they are not singers. they are engineered artists filtered through a PC software program and dressed up in pretty clothes.
I am sorry, people out there looking for money when they really have no business being in the industry. and it turns my stomach that they know by these multi million dollar mansions, drive ferrairs and win grammys for awards like Best artist of the year! come on!!
this is where the industry has come to.
I am not agaisnt artists cutting cd's but I expect those artists to hit the road and do concerts and promote their music the old fashioned way
and that's what we are seeing now, before to many artists would just be cutting cd after cd and looking to generaton profits by appearing on magazine covers, mtv cribs, or talk shows so the press circuit and make millions that way just by having PR people escalate their celebrity into IDOL status . well I am sorry...
you are not a musician!
and I am not going to pay for your content, you are release content and pricing it at the same price with artists who have mastered their craft! who are out on the road 300 days a year, writing music, playing for fans, singing live, doing the hard yards with a full road crew and band.
and not to mention SING LIVE at their concert..
not these artists who might put on a couple songs a year and lip sync to their music and then pick up awards and these guys are like 20 years old LOL.. NO!!! sorry..
you didn't earn your strips.. so...
I am not buying your music.. frankly I ain't even listening to you music.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rock & roll owes a large part of its existence to the blues and folk music. Pop music to orchestral and jazz. Elvis, the Beatles, Led Zeppelin - they all use the same old chord progressions and scales in all of their songs that Renaissance composers were banging out 600 years ago. Those things are what make popular music popular.
Popular music is stagnating because the things that make it popular aren't changing. It doesn't matter how original your sound, you'd better have that V-I resolution in there, or no one will listen to you. There's only so many rhythms, chord progressions and melodies possible within the limits of what people will listen to.
True musical innovation came in the 20th century in the form of serialism, atonality, microtonality (actually much older, but only recently explored in depth), clusters, minimalism and electronic and procedurally generated sounds. There are aspects of a lot of those things in popular music, but no popular musician invented any of them.
If 20th century popular music will be remembered for anything, it'll be its use and invention of recording and reproduction techniques. Records, tape, CDs, digital storage, multi-channel recordings and reproduction (though technically, a 100 person orchestra has 100 channels) multi-tracking, analog and digital electronic effects, etc. In terms of advancing actual music theory, popular music has done practically nothing for the entire duration of its existence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NilesQ
Joined: 27 Nov 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2012 10:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| KimchiNinja wrote: |
| tideout wrote: |
| KimchiNinja wrote: |
That's the easiest explanation, you've seen not only the quality of the artists, but also the quality of the record production go to hell over the last 10 years with the "awesomeness" of the internet. Same will happen to film.
It's a transfer of money from the entertainment industry to the tech industry, and ART gets screwed in the process. That's my analysis. |
The argument about the effect of the internet & piracy will continue on I guess but I do agree with you about the degrading effects of technology & the internet.
I believe it's had a negative effect on everything from music to news, writing, art, typography, jobs, conversation and more. The so called "democratization" of media is a joke. Now anyone can put up a blog on Korea with the same space that someone who's spent their life really studying the history, language and culture. Everything's reduced to opinion rather than earned merit. Real work is reduced to just another file to be passed around the net.
I'm afraid the music industry is just a facet of the overall picture. |
Very well said!
I've produced records, mixed them, played in bands, lots of stuff over the last two decades...and there *used to be* a standard regarding record production. You had some incredible albums made, and having the budget to hire gifted producer/engineers/mixers was a part of what made the records what they were.
Now it's just a race to the bottom, I can't believe the slop production I hear, but heck people press CDs and call it an album! The decline in quality is so wow. But it has to decline, you can't blow $100K in the studio if it's just going to get pirated.
I know the average person doesn't think about any of this, and just says "oh it's great that the labels crashed, now it's all about the freedom of the artist, and bla bla bla" and scoffs at the idea of art+industry being a good thing for the art. But they don't have any idea what they are talking about.
I'd rather have one great album like Back in Black or OK Computer that I had to pay $20 for on my iphone than 10,000 free ones.
Basically in 2000 people were like, sweet now I don't have to pay for music! "The labels were thieves!" they shouted out while playing the $1M USD Metallica Black album (that they stole off the internet) on their ipod. AAPL profits soared and records commenced to suck...nobody considered that the quality would slowly decline until [quality = price paid].
Peace out hommies |
The art of music production is another matter. The technology is changing and people will change along with it. The producers and sound engineers who learned to record with millions of dollars worth of equipment perhaps don't have the skill set required to make a record with a macbook and some mics. I have seen and heard some really high quality stuff recorded in those conditions. You also hear crap made under both circumstances.
When technology changes, the skill set required changes as well. You had to practically be a chemist to be a photographer at one time. Photographers today are still producing quality images, just using a different set of tools. The transition period is always tough. The melding of the artistry of the old guard with the tech savy of the new generation can produce some cool new stuff in any field. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
