DocMcCoy"Go and laugh in your own country!" 5,913 Posts
HarveyCanal said:
There's just something not right with the tone of her voice. She no longer sounds artistic as if she actually wants someone to pay attention to her. It's just dry ranting with no pot of gold at the end of her rainbow of isms.
DocMcCoy"Go and laugh in your own country!" 5,913 Posts
bassie said:
It's boring and a waste of a Slits sample.
For real? I thought I recognised it, but it didn't register that it was the Slits. What's the original? (Please tell me it's off Return Of The Giant Slits, because I never had that album)
I hear it now, and I'm ashamed of myself for not catching it. I used to stan hard for the Slits back in the day. I was thinking the sped-up guitar was a sample too - maybe Mike Oldfield or something like that.
It's grown on me a little, although not to the extent that I'm eagerly anticipating the album or anything.
I think I prefer this to the previous track she put out. That shouldn't necessarily be read as an endorsement.
As soon as she's got something more substantial to offer than just rappity-rap word-salad circus tricks and a loooooooonnnngggg list of -isms, I'm ready to listen.
Take all the time you need, Lauryn.
Straight garbage. Sounds like a Talib Kweli song that did not make his new album. I don't even like any of his songs that make it on his albums! LOL. Sony is on the phone right now with Pharrell Williams asking for his help.
I'm a fan of Lauryn, miseducation/ the score was a big influence on me and all I listen to for about a year in highschool. I like some of the live album stuff too but not nearly as much..
I'm happy she's making new music but I'm not digging it. Neurotic society is better than the latest, trying to listen to the lyrics is frustrating doesn't sound like sentences, big words and short phrases. Hard to follow... Some singing would be nice or something with a melody
I figure she just wants to make some money now to get out of her legal problems and is venting anger. Not sure if she wants to be doing it, she hates the industry.
Venting anger can be a great path to artistic inspiration, relevance.
But if what you are mad at is the IRS/Music Industry/Only being rich instead of super rich, it gets boring fast.
Neil Young, Prince and others have made those type of angry records to poor effect.
I think I prefer this to the previous track she put out. That shouldn't necessarily be read as an endorsement.
As soon as she's got something more substantial to offer than just rappity-rap word-salad circus tricks and a loooooooonnnngggg list of -isms, I'm ready to listen.
I don't make music or any art for that matter, so I can only theorize and talk as a fan/consumer/audience member about artistic purity, art vs commerce, the creative process and artistic integrity. All to say, I can see how all the BS with the record company, the fraud charges and imprisonment can be exhausting and draining and knock the wind out of one's sails. And how one would not even want to give an iota of one's soul and creativity over to a label or the government against this backdrop.
But then, they don't own souls or creativity, so why not just, as said above, leave good music behind? Giving in to shitty lazy music and letting them compromise her art seems like she is telling them they own her and have a say as to how she does.
I am not even a fan of hers to be honest, but I can still recognize she had/has talent.
Not the same but kind of the same - look at what Marvin did with his circumstances. Grace and genius under pressure and all that.
I don't make music or any art for that matter, so I can only theorize and talk as a fan/consumer/audience member about artistic purity, art vs commerce, the creative process and artistic integrity. All to say, I can see how all the BS with the record company, the fraud charges and imprisonment can be exhausting and draining and knock the wind out of one's sails. And how one would not even want to give an iota of one's soul and creativity over to a label or the government against this backdrop.
But then, they don't own souls or creativity, so why not just, as said above, leave good music behind? Giving in to shitty lazy music and letting them compromise her art seems like she is telling them they own her and have a say as to how she does.
I am not even a fan of hers to be honest, but I can still recognize she had/has talent.
Not the same but kind of the same - look at what Marvin did with his circumstances. Grace and genius under pressure and all that.
No doubt.
marvin was slick enuff to marry gwen and be given a lot of pampering before grapevine hit.
i think lauryn could of had a different arc if she had a gordy type mentor/label or wasnt accelerated after two group albums.
Marvin's arc was a good 20 years. He had three or four reinventions.....Grapevine after trying to ape Sinatra, What's Goin' On, Here My Dear(that didnt get critical acclaim yet "purged his demons temporarily), and Sexual Healing(without Motown's muscle).
Lauryn is maybe haff of that. 2 group albums and two solo joints.
She has the fan base to pull off a Sexual Healing......but......
Trying to ape Sinatra was not really a reinvention. Marvin had a huge hit in '62 with Stubborn Kind of Fellow, after having worked as a Moonglow with Harvey Fuqua for a while. He also worked as a drummer at Motown.
The Sinatra thing was part Marvin (all singers admire Sinatra), and part Motown (they were always going for that adult white crossover thing).
Lauren has been at it for almost as long. Blunted hit 19 years ago.
Trying to ape Sinatra was not really a reinvention. Marvin had a huge hit in '62 with Stubborn Kind of Fellow, after having worked as a Moonglow with Harvey Fuqua for a while. He also worked as a drummer at Motown.
The Sinatra thing was part Marvin (all singers admire Sinatra), and part Motown (they were always going for that adult white crossover thing).
Lauren has been at it for almost as long. Blunted hit 19 years ago.
The Sinatra stage was before Grapevine - '61 to '68.
Grapevine wasnt a Sinatra crooning image/vocals.
It not a reinvention but more of an abandonment of a idea that didnt work. He was on some suit n tie shit until MPG/WGO.
Can I Get A Witness
1964
Wonderful One
What's The Matter
1965
How Sweet It Is
I'll Be Doggone
Ain't That Pecular
1967
It Takes Two
And lots lots more that are R&B church long before Grapevine.
The Sinatra crooner thing was an album thing for the adult crowd, he was churning out huge crossover R&B hits on singles for the teens at the same time.
This was common in the early 60s. Compare Sam Cooke's 45s to his lps.
And common at Motown, pick up a Live at the Copa by any Motown artist.
No oops.
10 songs in the R&B top ten including 2 at #1.
20 songs in the R&B top 40.
4 songs in the pop top 10 and 19 songs in the pop top 40.
All before Grapevine.
Every single one of them is R&B.
None of them is a different Sinatraesque Marvin.
2 Months before Grapevine hit he had a hit with Chained, a year before that It Takes Two.
There was no reinvention of Marvin Gaye for Grapevine.
No oops.
10 songs in the R&B top ten including 2 at #1.
20 songs in the R&B top 40.
4 songs in the pop top 10 and 19 songs in the pop top 40.
All before Grapevine.
Every single one of them is R&B.
None of them is a different Sinatraesque Marvin.
2 Months before Grapevine hit he had a hit with Chained, a year before that It Takes Two.
There was no reinvention of Marvin Gaye for Grapevine.
Ill have to disagree.
Whitfield brought out a raspy tone not used in the examples you've posted.
While he had hits before, this vocal change was stylistically new.
Comments
This is dead-on.
For real? I thought I recognised it, but it didn't register that it was the Slits. What's the original? (Please tell me it's off Return Of The Giant Slits, because I never had that album)
http://grooveshark.com/#!/s/Instant+Hit/2441kX?src=5
(First track off Cut)
I hear it now, and I'm ashamed of myself for not catching it. I used to stan hard for the Slits back in the day. I was thinking the sped-up guitar was a sample too - maybe Mike Oldfield or something like that.
It's grown on me a little, although not to the extent that I'm eagerly anticipating the album or anything.
Looks like Lauren just got a rhyming dictionary!
http://rhymebrain.com/en/What_rhymes_with_ism.html
"IM GONNA GO IN THE BOOTH AND READ THIS LIST OK GUYS JUST HOLD TIGHT AND DONT EAT MY THAI FOOD WHILE IM IN THERE"
(OK, maybe not hipster, but definitely nonsense. Nooooope!)
Straight garbage. Sounds like a Talib Kweli song that did not make his new album. I don't even like any of his songs that make it on his albums! LOL. Sony is on the phone right now with Pharrell Williams asking for his help.
I'm happy she's making new music but I'm not digging it. Neurotic society is better than the latest, trying to listen to the lyrics is frustrating doesn't sound like sentences, big words and short phrases. Hard to follow... Some singing would be nice or something with a melody
I figure she just wants to make some money now to get out of her legal problems and is venting anger. Not sure if she wants to be doing it, she hates the industry.
But if what you are mad at is the IRS/Music Industry/Only being rich instead of super rich, it gets boring fast.
Neil Young, Prince and others have made those type of angry records to poor effect.
Unlistenable, horrible, deplorable, terrible....etc etc
Lauryn needs to hook up with Gabe Roth, make a throwback soul album, pay her debts, and return to obscurity having left some good music behind.
This is actually a great idea.
I don't make music or any art for that matter, so I can only theorize and talk as a fan/consumer/audience member about artistic purity, art vs commerce, the creative process and artistic integrity. All to say, I can see how all the BS with the record company, the fraud charges and imprisonment can be exhausting and draining and knock the wind out of one's sails. And how one would not even want to give an iota of one's soul and creativity over to a label or the government against this backdrop.
But then, they don't own souls or creativity, so why not just, as said above, leave good music behind? Giving in to shitty lazy music and letting them compromise her art seems like she is telling them they own her and have a say as to how she does.
I am not even a fan of hers to be honest, but I can still recognize she had/has talent.
Not the same but kind of the same - look at what Marvin did with his circumstances. Grace and genius under pressure and all that.
No doubt.
marvin was slick enuff to marry gwen and be given a lot of pampering before grapevine hit.
i think lauryn could of had a different arc if she had a gordy type mentor/label or wasnt accelerated after two group albums.
and women get really worked over in the industry.
Perhaps you knew that.
Lauryn is maybe haff of that. 2 group albums and two solo joints.
She has the fan base to pull off a Sexual Healing......but......
The Sinatra thing was part Marvin (all singers admire Sinatra), and part Motown (they were always going for that adult white crossover thing).
Lauren has been at it for almost as long. Blunted hit 19 years ago.
The Sinatra stage was before Grapevine - '61 to '68.
Grapevine wasnt a Sinatra crooning image/vocals.
It not a reinvention but more of an abandonment of a idea that didnt work. He was on some suit n tie shit until MPG/WGO.
Grapevines vocals were more R&B and church.
1963
Can I Get A Witness
1964
Wonderful One
What's The Matter
1965
How Sweet It Is
I'll Be Doggone
Ain't That Pecular
1967
It Takes Two
And lots lots more that are R&B church long before Grapevine.
The Sinatra crooner thing was an album thing for the adult crowd, he was churning out huge crossover R&B hits on singles for the teens at the same time.
This was common in the early 60s. Compare Sam Cooke's 45s to his lps.
And common at Motown, pick up a Live at the Copa by any Motown artist.
did marvin chart before grapevine?....oops his first number one was grapevine.
10 songs in the R&B top ten including 2 at #1.
20 songs in the R&B top 40.
4 songs in the pop top 10 and 19 songs in the pop top 40.
All before Grapevine.
Every single one of them is R&B.
None of them is a different Sinatraesque Marvin.
2 Months before Grapevine hit he had a hit with Chained, a year before that It Takes Two.
There was no reinvention of Marvin Gaye for Grapevine.
Ill have to disagree.
Whitfield brought out a raspy tone not used in the examples you've posted.
While he had hits before, this vocal change was stylistically new.