Jump to content

Your Ad Could Be Here

Rudi

Inspired Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,804

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    51

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Rudi

    Patty Lakamp

    in Musician's Lounge

    Posted

    Right. 

    Fine interview & interesting.

     

    Just read the 1st three of Patty's songs. She seems to have something down that eludes of lot of new lyricists. The verses seem to easily fit into musical bars. It's as if she has some tune in mind already. Is that the case Patty?

     

    There seem to be a self exploratory element as well as emotional expression in the content & tale telling is better than hinted at. Keep going Patty!

    • Like 2

    Quincy Jones

    in Musician's Lounge

    Posted · Edited by Rudi

    I've Just remembered.

     

    George Martin had an interesting point to make about John's lack of formal musical knowledge.

    George used the example of the well known piano riff from Imagine. There is a 'wrong' note in there. George said that trained musicians would not write/play the riff with the bum note in there. It would be instinctive to sharpen & correct it. However if the riff were to conform to the scale, it would be less effective.

     

    Now, let me put this into perspective. I am not suggesting that this would apply to anyone but a tiny minority of 'natural' musicians. Fastrack is right about more knowledge being more enabling. But it is possible, albeit rare, for the above type of example to trump formality. Ok, its also possible, but again rare, to have a trained musician who can choose to step out of the constraints of musical structure and accomplish the same thing. 

     

    When creating/writing music. I sometimes create chords by assembling the notes until I like the way it sounds. For 37 odd years, I would follow this up by figuring out what the chord was. It was useful when writting it down etc.

     

    For about the last 10 years though, I have stopped doing this. I will still create custom chords, but no longer bother to figure out what the upper partials are. They are now just a bunch of harmonising notes. Sure, they are still chords, but I choose to think about them differently. This is made easier with modern recording aids, because I dont have to write everything down. If I forget a chord, I can just learn it back off the recording. Obviously this is only ok when working alone. 

     

     

    • Like 1

    Quincy Jones

    in Musician's Lounge

    Posted

    46 minutes ago, fasstrack said:

    Don't get me wrong---I'm a huge fan. Their growth from street roughs writing puerile songs about young love to the level of sophistication they ended up with is nothing short of astonishing. 

     

    I sometimes wonder, though, if John Lennon---always with his nose in a book---would've applied himself more to music study---could he have gone even farther than he did? I think so... 

     

    I suspect John was perhaps a bit lazy? He was a natural talent and he knew it. He once said "If there is such thing as a genius, I am one. And if there isnt, then I dont care". Some of his songs seemed almost magical to me.

     

    On the Arena doc I mentioned, George Martin said that John didnt recognise the structure of his own work. He then put on John's 'Good Morning' and identified all the running time changes as they were occurring in the song. John was unaware of these changes but he created them naturally nevertheless. 

     

    Ringo describes Mc Cartney as the workaholic. He would rouse them and make them work. Paul was always ambitious.

     

    A friend and musical collaberator of mine considers Paul as the more talented of the two. We disagree on that. To me Paul is a master craftsman, and John was an artist. 

     

    I rarely listen to the Beatles and havnt done for many years, but they were important to me at that vital 'young age' when I was beginning to love music.

     

    I confess I never heard of (or noticed) Quincy Jones until this film was shown to me. He is unquestionably inciteful, intelligent and wise. He doesnt need the shock power of arrogance. I wonder if its an old habit carried forward or ongoing frustration that's responsible. Maybe it isnt really arrogance, but oversized character? He's facinating all the same.

     

     

    • Like 1

    Quincy Jones

    in Musician's Lounge

    Posted

    2 hours ago, fasstrack said:

    It's more a question of being rounded---and prepared. Of course, no one can specialize in everything. But a musician could be CALLED ON to do project X, Y, or Z. If they turn it down b/c it ain't their thing---but have the training and experience to HANDLE it is one thing. Saying no for fear of failing b/c one lacks skills is another. 

     

    The Beatles got by on talent, and spent lots of time in the studio realizing ideas and getting chops. But no way could they have handled the orchestration of, say, A Day in the Life w/o Martin. And after the breakup when McCartney wrote Liverpool Oratorio it had to be transcribed and the parts written by orchestrators. By contrast Stephen Sondheim uses Jonathan Tunick as orchestrator b/c it's hard enough just writing the songs and getting them right for the shows. But if it came to it, he's WAY more literate and ready to work with the written page than McCartney---creative and accomplished as he is. I get SO weary of rockers defending lack of knowledge with weak excuses like 'it's not necessary'. BS. You can always say 'it's not necessary' when you know how to do 'it'---that's informed decision-making. When you lack the know-how you'll forever be reliant on others to finish your ideas or projects for you...

     

    Fair comment. However, I dont think this addresses what I said. The Beatles could not have cut it as session players. Toulouse-Lautrec could not have cut it as a Basketball power forward. Jones was measuring the Beatles according to his own business centric criterea. You dont go winkle picking in the Kalahari. 

     

    As for studio time:

    Until Sgt Pepper, the Beatles didnt spend a lot of time in the Studio. They were writting on the road as best they could for a lot of thier early career. George Martin was a true and valuable collaberator and yes, a realiser of the groups ideas. However the early guide recordings for Sgt Pepper were revealed by Martin during the Arena documentary 50th Anniversary. The songs were essentially complete, lacking mostly only the soundscape constructions of George. 

     

    • Like 1

    Quincy Jones

    in Musician's Lounge

    Posted

    I understand (I think) his POV. But the Beatles were not trained musicians and its unrealistic to compare them to session musicians and the like. So to him they were of little use and therefore deemed 'not much good'. 

     

    Me? I think they did fine doing thier own thing. 

    • Like 2

    (Why) Is Modern Pop Music So Terrible?

    in Musician's Lounge

    Posted

    1 minute ago, Richard Tracey said:

    Thats true Rudi, but some people state that unless a piece of music is technically played and composed it isn’t worth listening to.

     

    I think that is just limiting themselves and they are missing out.

     

    'Those' people have made an assertion. Its up to them to supply some sort of justification, and I think that is impossible. 

    No one can claim ownership of language. 

     

    except theologians :ph34r:

    • Like 1

    (Why) Is Modern Pop Music So Terrible?

    in Musician's Lounge

    Posted

    1 hour ago, Richard Tracey said:

    Musical snobbery annoys me. Music should be for everyone and should be enjoyed by everyone, in whatever form it takes. A life without music - to me - is a boring, horrible place to exist.

     

    I can listen to music from the 60’s and find enjoyment in it. I can listen to music in the 70’s / 80’s and 90’s and find enjoyment in it. Even now in the 2000’s, there are a lot of really good artists out there creating fantastic music.

     

    Its about opening your mind to new possibilities- you won’t know what you are missing till you let it in

     

    Pop is convenience music, like fast food is a convenience meal. It does what you want it to with a minimum of input from yourself. Its purpose is unashamedly commercial. It doesnt have to be any good.

     

    I remember the term 'heavy' before metal hijacked it. It usually described classical music that was harder to appreciate. Scheonberg was heavy, Mozart was light. The point is some music requires active listening. You need to invest time and attention before you 'get it'. 

     

    Modern pop music is more efficient than any pop music that has gone before. The film supports that assertion. 

    • Like 1

    (Why) Is Modern Pop Music So Terrible?

    in Musician's Lounge

    Posted · Edited by Rudi

    3 minutes ago, The S said:

    I haven't even watched it but I can guess the sentiment.

     

    Well, my take is this, isn't it like it always have been and probably always will be?

     

    You think the older generation way back when welcomed The Beatles? Elvis? Dylan? 80's rock? Springsteen? The youngsters sure did but not the generation above, and I don't think they ever have. Just ask us??? (This very topic)

     

    If you change genre from what you yourself are listening to, a common feeling is that everything sounds the same. You need to be in it to hear the subtle differences, otherwise it will sound the same.

     

    I listen to folk. If you don't I'm positive you'll think it all sounds the same.

    Go back to the delta blues era and tell me if it doesn't sound the same to you. I love it but admittedly it took awhile to tell them all apart.

    Do the same with jazz, grunge, synth pop, EDM etc etc...

     

    If you're in it, if it's your genre, you wouldn't agree because then it is of no problem at all for you to separate the various artists you know and love.

     

    So I don't really agree modern pop is so terrible. Can't say I'm a big fan, but that itself is probably more of a sign I'm too old and not that the music is bad itself. 

     

    My 0.2

     

    Cheers,

     

    Peter

     

    There is more to the video than that, so you really need to see it. Hope you'll have better luck than me.

    (Why) Is Modern Pop Music So Terrible?

    in Musician's Lounge

    Posted

    Well there's nothing like stating the obvious

     

    Well there's nothing like stating the obvious

     

    Well there's nothing like stating the obvious

     

    Well there's nothing like stating the obvious

     

    Well there's nothing like stating the obvious

     

    Well there's nothing like stating the obvious

     

    Well there's nothing like stating the obvious

     

    Well there's nothing like stating the obvious

  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 164 Guests (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By continuing to use our site you indicate acceptance of our Terms Of Service: Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy: Privacy Policy, our Community Guidelines: Guidelines and our use of Cookies We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.