And while she's most certainly not a woman that I would describe as classically "attractive" in any real sense of that description, I do find myself perversely attracted to her drunk, skinny self.
And I would not even have my panties in such a twist over this if it weren't for this insistence on labeling her a real soul artist (that, and I'm less than 20 posts away from 5K!!!!!!!). A production team that knows and understands soul music does not a real soul singer make.
Yeah, that must be it... (how do we not have a "roll eyes" gramelin?)
I lost count of the times a cute or a pretty girls picture has been posted in a thread and dozens of dudes will call the woman ugly or throw up the "ehhh" graemlin. Things that make you go hmmmmm...
and oh yea, the singer from Air, whose name escapes me right now.
Googie Coppolla.
You know, my problem with Winehouse is that her singing sounds like she's doing an impression of a soul singer. I love how her British accent mysteriously transforms into a Southern accent when the mic is on. And as far as cuteness - she is NOT cute.
I have the same sentiment. Like why can't people just sing how they would naturally sing, without having to try to sound like _____ or _______. That's one of the first things that I listen in to, when I hear vocals.
I think considering music for only the sound it makes is a sad way to listen.
That's gotta be the quote of the year. I'm in awe that a music fan would say that judging music by whether it sounds good to you or not is sad. Elitism Rules!!!
What her songs sound like is of minor consequence to my opinion of her. I've brought this up before on this board, and been the subject of a hundred quoted posts with a 'disconnected' graemlin aimed at me, but I'll say it again. I think considering music for only the sound it makes is a sad way to listen. [/b]
you're right. liking music for how it sounds is pretty much boring. I like my music to have explosions and car chases in it. Otherwise its crap.
does this mean deaf people have a hand up in enjoying music cause they can afford to be Bam style purists and aren't stuck in the same "sad" trap the rest of us are forced to deal with
Your weird reactionary self-centeredness aside, I am referring to taking an artist as a whole, considering what they do (their music, words, who they associate with, how they present themselves, their business practices, their behavior, how they treat their life's work, etc.) as integral to them. It is pretty standard to form an opinion about someone based on their conduct. (e.g., Based on your conduct, several people here have a similar opinion about you.) Making a disctinction between the audible parts and every other part is narrow. To put it simply for you, I treat musicians the same way I treat people.
Your childish oversimplification is retarded. I'm not interested in trying to explain anything beyond On/Off to you.
What her songs sound like is of minor consequence to my opinion of her. I've brought this up before on this board, and been the subject of a hundred quoted posts with a 'disconnected' graemlin aimed at me, but I'll say it again. I think considering music for only the sound it makes is a sad way to listen. [/b]
you're right. liking music for how it sounds is pretty much boring. I like my music to have explosions and car chases in it. Otherwise its crap.
does this mean deaf people have a hand up in enjoying music cause they can afford to be Bam style purists and aren't stuck in the same "sad" trap the rest of us are forced to deal with
Your weird reactionary self-centeredness aside, I am referring to taking an artist as a whole, considering what they do (their music, words, who they associate with, how they present themselves, their business practices, their behavior, how they treat their life's work, etc.) as integral to them. It is pretty standard to form an opinion about someone based on their conduct. (e.g., Based on your conduct, several people here have a similar opinion about you.) Making a disctinction between the audible parts and every other part is narrow. To put it simply for you, I treat musicians the same way I treat people.
Your childish oversimplification is retarded. I'm not interested in trying to explain anything beyond On/Off to you.
last post I'm going to dedicate to playing with your elitist, holier-than-thou self.
You don't listen to music as much you care about the image, no matter how many multi-syllable words you use to try to restate this, its the same idiotic answer. Back in the day we would call you a "poser"
get over yourself and respond to questions instead of feeling offended when someone doesn't act all "wowed" by your overly verbose "contributions" to this site.
One day I hope you find the ability to enjoy listening to music
Bam, not to start a fight or anything, but if you have to consider someone's music, words, who they associate with, how they present themselves, their business practices, their behavior, how they treat their life's work, etc. before you can enjoy their music, who are you listening to? I mean, just about every great artist I can think of is seriously deficient in at leas a few of those areas. Unless you just listen to those Bulgarian Nuns and records of whale songs and shit.
I was lucky enough to take two classes w/ Pauline in Deep Listening, which is her meditative, martial-arts-influenced discipline. We did lots of field recording, listening, slow walking, and noise making???In one class she taught, we performed side-by-side with a spherical speaker array in a planetarium - she on accordion, myself on my modified turntable, and my friend mike with a glove fitted w/ motion sensors that tweaked sounds + video.
she's a mighty talented lady, and her contributions to electronic music, among others, is enormous???
I know this won't go over well, but i have a big spot reserved for Feist, especially after seeing her live. I'll take her over Whinehouse any day. ouch.
It's pretty funny that Adam is calling Eric a poseur.
Carry on.
He refuses to be "wowed" by Eric's "contributions".
I'm still trying to figure out what he thinks quotation marks signify--apparently he does not share the generally-held understanding that they denote something that was actually said by somebody previously.
And while she's most certainly not a woman that I would describe as classically "attractive" in any real sense of that description, I do find myself perversely attracted to her drunk, skinny self.
-e
while i must admit my general love for the female lush. i can only see amy's huge ass horsey-hair.
It's pretty funny that Adam is calling Eric a poseur.
Carry on.
He refuses to be "wowed" by Eric's "contributions".
I'm still trying to figure out what he thinks quotation marks signify--apparently he does not share the generally-held understanding that they denote something that was actually said by somebody previously.
Call me Younger Phonics Grammatics
seriously though Asstro said the same thing I did without adding a punchline and no one jumped down his throat about it. What that shows me is that it wasn't my response but rather my "image" that got the usual suspects all defensive.
File under: it's not the content but the perception that matters (the sequel)
last post I'm going to dedicate to playing with your elitist, holier-than-thou self.
You don't listen to music as much you care about the image, no matter how many multi-syllable words you use to try to restate this, its the same idiotic answer. Back in the day we would call you a "poser"
get over yourself and respond to questions instead of feeling offended when someone doesn't act all "wowed" by your overly verbose "contributions" to this site.
One day I hope you find the ability to enjoy listening to music
My shelves are literally bowing with records that I absolutely love listening to. And you can feel free to call me whatever you like. I don't care.
There is no shortage of music that I have found the ability to enjoy listening to, over and over, for years, as I've watched you (if we count 2001 as "since back in the day") struggle through musical definitions, applying catchphrase ideology towards your fascination with artificiality. Putting importance on hair (fros, then jhericurl) or rarity or covers of whether a record is 'moder' or not. As you buy records you love, and then sell them for new records that you love (all the while treating them as things that make sound) I have had the same interest in music that is more than just sound.
It's no mystery. There's nothing elite, holy, or posturing about it. I like music made by people who have a genuine stake in what they're doing. This list includes perverts, creeps, drunkards, miserabilists, Top 40 Acts, Real Schitters, and boring types.
This is where you threaten to hit me with a baseball bat.
Bam, not to start a fight or anything, but if you have to consider someone's music, words, who they associate with, how they present themselves, their business practices, their behavior, how they treat their life's work, etc. before you can enjoy their music, who are you listening to? I mean, just about every great artist I can think of is seriously deficient in at leas a few of those areas. Unless you just listen to those Bulgarian Nuns and records of whale songs and shit.
I could be wrong, but I think Bambouche is being misinterpreted. Several of the aspects he takes into consideration are meaningless to me personally, but I'm sympathetic to the idea that music is more than just sound. If Bambouche is saying, for instance, that listening to music can also be an act of historical imagination (or some other kind of imagination), I'm fully with him. Imagine this: prompted by another thread on SS today, I watch "Apocalypse Now" tonight and "Full Metal Jacket" tomorrow night. Afterward, haunted by the Vietnam War and my own faint memories of early 70s America, I feel like listening to music that reminds me of those years, that gives me the aural atmosphere of the period, that prompts in me feelings and memories I can't otherwise access --what I'm doing is listening for more than just sound. Don't we all do this, to varying degrees? Isn't this one rich way of approaching music? I appreciate early 20th century klezmer recordings more now that I've read about the world that gave rise to them -and the music is especially poignant given how much of that world was later -soon- destroyed . But the poignancy is extra-musical: you can't hear it in a contextual vacuum.
What her songs sound like is of minor consequence to my opinion of her. I've brought this up before on this board, and been the subject of a hundred quoted posts with a 'disconnected' graemlin aimed at me, but I'll say it again. I think considering music for only the sound it makes is a sad way to listen. [/b]
you're right. liking music for how it sounds is pretty much boring. I like my music to have explosions and car chases in it. Otherwise its crap.
does this mean deaf people have a hand up in enjoying music cause they can afford to be Bam style purists and aren't stuck in the same "sad" trap the rest of us are forced to deal with
Your weird reactionary self-centeredness aside, I am referring to taking an artist as a whole, considering what they do (their music, words, who they associate with, how they present themselves, their business practices, their behavior, how they treat their life's work, etc.) as integral to them. It is pretty standard to form an opinion about someone based on their conduct. (e.g., Based on your conduct, several people here have a similar opinion about you.) Making a disctinction between the audible parts and every other part is narrow. To put it simply for you, I treat musicians the same way I treat people.
Your childish oversimplification is retarded. I'm not interested in trying to explain anything beyond On/Off to you.
last post I'm going to dedicate to playing with your elitist, holier-than-thou self.
You don't listen to music as much you care about the image, no matter how many multi-syllable words you use to try to restate this, its the same idiotic answer. Back in the day we would call you a "poser"[/b]
get over yourself and respond to questions instead of feeling offended when someone doesn't act all "wowed" by your overly verbose "contributions" to this site.
One day I hope you find the ability to enjoy listening to music
lord have mercy. i mean really.
there's this gal too, which, to be honest, i have a love / hate thing with.
seriously though Asstro said the same thing I did without adding a punchline and no one jumped down his throat about it. What that shows me is that it wasn't my response but rather my "image" that got the usual suspects all defensive.
File under: it's not the content but the perception that matters (the sequel)
Amazing.
Is that the only difference you see between the two posts?
seriously though Asstro said the same thing I did without adding a punchline and no one jumped down his throat about it. What that shows me is that it wasn't my response but rather my "image" that got the usual suspects all defensive.
File under: it's not the content but the perception that matters (the sequel)
Amazing.
Is that the only difference you see between the two posts?
He "refuses" to be "wowed" by your "fancy rhetorical techniques" or to do a "close read" of any of the preceding posts. Now step off, poseur.
This is where you threaten to hit me with a baseball bat.
actually this is where I restate that I enjoy knowing that I am honest enough about myself to say I can ask questions about music in order to learn more about it without worrying about what image-conscious types like you think about how I come to conclusions about the music I find myself enjoying.
It's also where I say that it's sad that you feel so emotional over who I am and not what I say (read Asstro's similar conclusion to your statement) and tell you to get a grip on whatever reality you feel your coming from.
and this also is where I put you back on ignore
PS now I remember why I stopped finding this place to be fun and worthwhile to contribute to. Dizzybull was right to leave when he did. The idea that opinions are like assholes seems to have devolved to the point where some posters tend to think all their excrement is gold.
Bam, not to start a fight or anything, but if you have to consider someone's music, words, who they associate with, how they present themselves, their business practices, their behavior, how they treat their life's work, etc. before you can enjoy their music, who are you listening to? I mean, just about every great artist I can think of is seriously deficient in at leas a few of those areas. Unless you just listen to those Bulgarian Nuns and records of whale songs and shit.
I could be wrong, but I think Bambouche is being misinterpreted. Several of the aspects he takes into consideration are meaningless to me personally, but I'm sympathetic to the idea that music is more than just sound. If Bambouche is saying, for instance, that listening to music can also be an act of historical imagination (or some other kind of imagination), I'm fully with him. Imagine this: prompted by another thread on SS today, I watch "Apocalypse Now" tonight and "Full Metal Jacket" tomorrow night. Afterward, haunted by the Vietnam War and my own faint memories of early 70s America, I feel like listening to music that reminds me of those years, that gives me the aural atmosphere of the period, that prompts in me feelings and memories I can't otherwise access --what I'm doing is listening for more than just sound. Don't we all do this, to varying degrees? Isn't this one rich way of approaching music? I appreciate early 20th century klezmer recordings more now that I've read about the world that gave rise to them -and the music is especially poignant given how much of that world was later -soon- destroyed . But the poignancy is extra-musical: you can't hear it in a contextual vacuum.
Of course music is more than just sound, and of course knowing the history behind the music you hear can add to the experience. But can't you just appreciate music for the fact that it's pleasant to hear also, without all the other stuff? what Bam seems to be saying is that Winehouse's record is invalid (although it "sounds cool", his words) because she has a corporation that is making money selling her to people who wouldn't otherwise listen to a soul/R&B record. To me this is irrelevant, she has a decent voice, good songs, sympathetic production and for the most part it works. There's so much bad music out there, to me it's cutting off your nose to spite your face to dis her because of her image and all that. Just listen and enjoy it for what it is AND isn't, it still beats the hell out of Avril Lavigne or whatever other truly hacky music is selling far more than Winehouse is.
seriously though Asstro said the same thing I did without adding a punchline and no one jumped down his throat about it. What that shows me is that it wasn't my response but rather my "image" that got the usual suspects all defensive.
File under: it's not the content but the perception that matters (the sequel)
Amazing.
Is that the only difference you see between the two posts?
yes, maybe you can tell me your interpretation of what the difference in what were saying is?
Bam, not to start a fight or anything, but if you have to consider someone's music, words, who they associate with, how they present themselves, their business practices, their behavior, how they treat their life's work, etc. before you can enjoy their music, who are you listening to? I mean, just about every great artist I can think of is seriously deficient in at leas a few of those areas. Unless you just listen to those Bulgarian Nuns and records of whale songs and shit.
I have thousands and thousands of records made by people that I adore, people I look up to. They are easy to find.
And I did not say I look at their lives "before I can enjoy their music." I said I consider their lives when forming my opinion of them.
A few examples:
Gil Scott-Heron: Wrote some of the most beautiful songs I've ever heard. A shame about the drugs and domestic violence.
Last of the Blacksmiths: Wrote some of the most beautiful songs I've ever heard. I would use their lives, individually, as a model on how to live my life, personally.
Ant Banks: I love what he does musically. Safe to say he and I have absolutely nothing in common.
Matt Bauer: Wasn't the biggest fan of his music at first, but his personality and the way he conducted himself was so impressive to me that I have come to appreciate his music as more of a symbol of what he is, in toto, than just the sound it makes being played.
Amy Winehouse: Can't find anything. At all. I'm bored by everything about her.
This is fun. Everyone can do it. I'm not saying my thoughts on Gil Scott-Heron, Last of the Blacksmiths, Ant Banks, Matt Bauer, Amy Winehouse or anyone else should be your opinion. Nor am I trying to say your opinion is wrong. But when someone hands me a bunch of bullshit disguised as content I will reject it. Granted, "bullshit" is subjective. Which is why threads like this are good.
There is a condition that comes with "collecting" music. Much like grading, it puts importance on artificiality or secondariness. Rarity, cover design, genre, hoopla, hype, etc. These things, largely unimportant when considering the life of the artist, become the focal point of the collector. I am not one of those guys who sits around listening to "private" or "rare" or "funny cover" music all day. I listen to music that unsettles me, makes me move, compels me to think about all sorts of shit.
Is that ridiculous? Why else would I be compelled to listen?
seriously though Asstro said the same thing I did without adding a punchline and no one jumped down his throat about it. What that shows me is that it wasn't my response but rather my "image" that got the usual suspects all defensive.
File under: it's not the content but the perception that matters (the sequel)
Amazing.
Is that the only difference you see between the two posts?
He "refuses" to be "wowed" by your "fancy rhetorical techniques" or to do a "close read" of any of the preceding posts. Now step off, poseur.
Well, for the edification of the few hungry minds among us,
this
Bam, not to start a fight or anything, but if you have to consider someone's music, words, who they associate with, how they present themselves, their business practices, their behavior, how they treat their life's work, etc. before you can enjoy their music, who are you listening to? I mean, just about every great artist I can think of is seriously deficient in at leas a few of those areas. Unless you just listen to those Bulgarian Nuns and records of whale songs and shit.
Reads like a reasoned response from a knowledgeable adult who disagrees with the preceding post.
this
You don't listen to music as much you care about the image, no matter how many multi-syllable words you use to try to restate this, its the same idiotic answer. Back in the day we would call you a "poser"
get over yourself and respond to questions instead of feeling offended when someone doesn't act all "wowed" by your overly verbose "contributions" to this site.
One day I hope you find the ability to enjoy listening to music
Reads like a depressed, defensive college student with a bone to pick. The issue is not actually addressed at all - the author just hurls insults and dresses them up to sound smart.
If you stew in anger, you come off sounding pretty lame.
In New York City, owning a car puts you simultaneously back a few steps and forward a few leaps. Depending on who you are and what you do, it can be either very liberating or burdensome. There are city-centric rules to car ownership and operation in NYC that everyone seems to know, but nobody bothers to share. One of these unwritten bylaws is that during street cleaning, you can double park your car opposite the street cleaning zone, for the duration of the time period. It is assumed that if you are on the side where people will double park, you should move your car before this happens.
Long story short, I double parked my car in just such a fashion this morning, and returned to the shop to get some work done. A half hour later I heard some honking, but paid it no mind. The honking continued throughout the street cleaning period. I chuckled that, were it me who was boxed in, I certainly would go grab a coffee and chill out rather than stew behind the wheel on a hot day and honk my horn incessantly. When I returned to move my car, it turned out that I was the culprit responsible for blocking this fella in. Well, he wasn't all too happy about my stroll and was offended by my swagger (I know, it happens).
He asked in an exasperated tone if I had heard him honking. I replied that I had, but that I had no idea my car was the issue. He asked how I might like it if he broke every bone in my body. Now, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that a guy in a Jeep Liberty and a tucked up shirt isn't going to break much of anything, so I just chuckled, and told the guy he shouldn't have parked where he did, or at least moved his car on time. I got in my car, and reclaimed my rightful parking space.
Just as I put my city-scarred, road-weary beater in park, this tunnel jockey comes up on the passenger side and says, "I know where you live, and I know where you park. I'll be back." I laughed heartily, told him I hoped so, and wished him a good day.
DocMcCoy"Go and laugh in your own country!" 5,917 Posts
I've just today finished reading this. It's one of the best books about music that I've read in a long time. Some of the comments in this thread have me thinking that it'd make good food for thought for some of you, and I don't mean that in a disparaging way.
I've spoken on Amy Winehouse in a previous thread, so I'll just reiterate that, while I understand the traditional American scepticism about the latest Hot New Thing from the UK, I do feel that some of you are rushing to judge her, and harshly too. The girl is barely in her twenties and only two albums deep, yet her writing skills and her ability to deliver a song are already in a different league to pretty much all her contemporaries. If she doesn't come off the rails altogether - which would be a shame, I think - she could yet surprise a few people.
Comments
-e
I lost count of the times a cute or a pretty girls picture has been posted in a thread and dozens of dudes will call the woman ugly or throw up the "ehhh" graemlin. Things that make you go hmmmmm...
I have the same sentiment. Like why can't people just sing how they would naturally sing, without having to try to sound like _____ or _______. That's one of the first things that I listen in to, when I hear vocals.
That's gotta be the quote of the year. I'm in awe that a music fan would say that judging music by whether it sounds good to you or not is sad. Elitism Rules!!!
Your weird reactionary self-centeredness aside, I am referring to taking an artist as a whole, considering what they do (their music, words, who they associate with, how they present themselves, their business practices, their behavior, how they treat their life's work, etc.) as integral to them. It is pretty standard to form an opinion about someone based on their conduct. (e.g., Based on your conduct, several people here have a similar opinion about you.) Making a disctinction between the audible parts and every other part is narrow. To put it simply for you, I treat musicians the same way I treat people.
Your childish oversimplification is retarded. I'm not interested in trying to explain anything beyond On/Off to you.
last post I'm going to dedicate to playing with your elitist, holier-than-thou self.
You don't listen to music as much you care about the image, no matter how many multi-syllable words you use to try to restate this, its the same idiotic answer. Back in the day we would call you a "poser"
get over yourself and respond to questions instead of feeling offended when someone doesn't act all "wowed" by your overly verbose "contributions" to this site.
One day I hope you find the ability to enjoy listening to music
Whoa, I wholeheartedly agree.
I was lucky enough to take two classes w/ Pauline in Deep Listening, which is her meditative, martial-arts-influenced discipline. We did lots of field recording, listening, slow walking, and noise making???In one class she taught, we performed side-by-side with a spherical speaker array in a planetarium - she on accordion, myself on my modified turntable, and my friend mike with a glove fitted w/ motion sensors that tweaked sounds + video.
she's a mighty talented lady, and her contributions to electronic music, among others, is enormous???
If you have learned nothing else in your time on this site, you should know that it is spelled "poseur".
E**c--I owe you a PM.
ouch.
Carry on.
He refuses to be "wowed" by Eric's "contributions".
I'm still trying to figure out what he thinks quotation marks signify--apparently he does not share the generally-held understanding that they denote something that was actually said by somebody previously.
Look lil potna, Eric is in no uncertain terms THAT_DUDE. You do not have to be an acquaintance of his to recognize.
Filed under TALKING VERSUS WALKING, Subsection VII, clause 2.8.
while i must admit my general love for the female lush. i can only see amy's huge ass horsey-hair.
that lady really needs a haircut.
Call me Younger
PhonicsGrammaticsseriously though Asstro said the same thing I did without adding a punchline and no one jumped down his throat about it. What that shows me is that it wasn't my response but rather my "image" that got the usual suspects all defensive.
File under: it's not the content but the perception that matters (the sequel)
My shelves are literally bowing with records that I absolutely love listening to. And you can feel free to call me whatever you like. I don't care.
There is no shortage of music that I have found the ability to enjoy listening to, over and over, for years, as I've watched you (if we count 2001 as "since back in the day") struggle through musical definitions, applying catchphrase ideology towards your fascination with artificiality. Putting importance on hair (fros, then jhericurl) or rarity or covers of whether a record is 'moder' or not. As you buy records you love, and then sell them for new records that you love (all the while treating them as things that make sound) I have had the same interest in music that is more than just sound.
It's no mystery. There's nothing elite, holy, or posturing about it. I like music made by people who have a genuine stake in what they're doing. This list includes perverts, creeps, drunkards, miserabilists, Top 40 Acts, Real Schitters, and boring types.
This is where you threaten to hit me with a baseball bat.
I could be wrong, but I think Bambouche is being misinterpreted. Several of the aspects he takes into consideration are meaningless to me personally, but I'm sympathetic to the idea that music is more than just sound. If Bambouche is saying, for instance, that listening to music can also be an act of historical imagination (or some other kind of imagination), I'm fully with him. Imagine this: prompted by another thread on SS today, I watch "Apocalypse Now" tonight and "Full Metal Jacket" tomorrow night. Afterward, haunted by the Vietnam War and my own faint memories of early 70s America, I feel like listening to music that reminds me of those years, that gives me the aural atmosphere of the period, that prompts in me feelings and memories I can't otherwise access --what I'm doing is listening for more than just sound. Don't we all do this, to varying degrees? Isn't this one rich way of approaching music? I appreciate early 20th century klezmer recordings more now that I've read about the world that gave rise to them -and the music is especially poignant given how much of that world was later -soon- destroyed . But the poignancy is extra-musical: you can't hear it in a contextual vacuum.
lord have mercy. i mean really.
there's this gal too, which, to be honest, i have a love / hate thing with.
she's not white
Amazing.
Is that the only difference you see between the two posts?
He "refuses" to be "wowed" by your "fancy rhetorical techniques" or to do a "close read" of any of the preceding posts. Now step off, poseur.
actually this is where I restate that I enjoy knowing that I am honest enough about myself to say I can ask questions about music in order to learn more about it without worrying about what image-conscious types like you think about how I come to conclusions about the music I find myself enjoying.
It's also where I say that it's sad that you feel so emotional over who I am and not what I say (read Asstro's similar conclusion to your statement) and tell you to get a grip on whatever reality you feel your coming from.
and this also is where I put you back on ignore
PS now I remember why I stopped finding this place to be fun and worthwhile to contribute to. Dizzybull was right to leave when he did. The idea that opinions are like assholes seems to have devolved to the point where some posters tend to think all their excrement is gold.
Of course music is more than just sound, and of course knowing the history behind the music you hear can add to the experience. But can't you just appreciate music for the fact that it's pleasant to hear also, without all the other stuff? what Bam seems to be saying is that Winehouse's record is invalid (although it "sounds cool", his words) because she has a corporation that is making money selling her to people who wouldn't otherwise listen to a soul/R&B record. To me this is irrelevant, she has a decent voice, good songs, sympathetic production and for the most part it works. There's so much bad music out there, to me it's cutting off your nose to spite your face to dis her because of her image and all that. Just listen and enjoy it for what it is AND isn't, it still beats the hell out of Avril Lavigne or whatever other truly hacky music is selling far more than Winehouse is.
Hope Sandoval
yes, maybe you can tell me your interpretation of what the difference in what were saying is?
I have thousands and thousands of records made by people that I adore, people I look up to. They are easy to find.
And I did not say I look at their lives "before I can enjoy their music." I said I consider their lives when forming my opinion of them.
A few examples:
Gil Scott-Heron: Wrote some of the most beautiful songs I've ever heard. A shame about the drugs and domestic violence.
Last of the Blacksmiths: Wrote some of the most beautiful songs I've ever heard. I would use their lives, individually, as a model on how to live my life, personally.
Ant Banks: I love what he does musically. Safe to say he and I have absolutely nothing in common.
Matt Bauer: Wasn't the biggest fan of his music at first, but his personality and the way he conducted himself was so impressive to me that I have come to appreciate his music as more of a symbol of what he is, in toto, than just the sound it makes being played.
Amy Winehouse: Can't find anything. At all. I'm bored by everything about her.
This is fun. Everyone can do it. I'm not saying my thoughts on Gil Scott-Heron, Last of the Blacksmiths, Ant Banks, Matt Bauer, Amy Winehouse or anyone else should be your opinion. Nor am I trying to say your opinion is wrong. But when someone hands me a bunch of bullshit disguised as content I will reject it. Granted, "bullshit" is subjective. Which is why threads like this are good.
There is a condition that comes with "collecting" music. Much like grading, it puts importance on artificiality or secondariness. Rarity, cover design, genre, hoopla, hype, etc. These things, largely unimportant when considering the life of the artist, become the focal point of the collector. I am not one of those guys who sits around listening to "private" or "rare" or "funny cover" music all day. I listen to music that unsettles me, makes me move, compels me to think about all sorts of shit.
Is that ridiculous? Why else would I be compelled to listen?
Well, for the edification of the few hungry minds among us,
this
Reads like a reasoned response from a knowledgeable adult who disagrees with the preceding post.
this
Reads like a depressed, defensive college student with a bone to pick. The issue is not actually addressed at all - the author just hurls insults and dresses them up to sound smart.
If you stew in anger, you come off sounding pretty lame.
In New York City, owning a car puts you simultaneously back a few steps and forward a few leaps. Depending on who you are and what you do, it can be either very liberating or burdensome. There are city-centric rules to car ownership and operation in NYC that everyone seems to know, but nobody bothers to share. One of these unwritten bylaws is that during street cleaning, you can double park your car opposite the street cleaning zone, for the duration of the time period. It is assumed that if you are on the side where people will double park, you should move your car before this happens.
Long story short, I double parked my car in just such a fashion this morning, and returned to the shop to get some work done. A half hour later I heard some honking, but paid it no mind. The honking continued throughout the street cleaning period. I chuckled that, were it me who was boxed in, I certainly would go grab a coffee and chill out rather than stew behind the wheel on a hot day and honk my horn incessantly. When I returned to move my car, it turned out that I was the culprit responsible for blocking this fella in. Well, he wasn't all too happy about my stroll and was offended by my swagger (I know, it happens).
He asked in an exasperated tone if I had heard him honking. I replied that I had, but that I had no idea my car was the issue. He asked how I might like it if he broke every bone in my body. Now, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that a guy in a Jeep Liberty and a tucked up shirt isn't going to break much of anything, so I just chuckled, and told the guy he shouldn't have parked where he did, or at least moved his car on time. I got in my car, and reclaimed my rightful parking space.
Just as I put my city-scarred, road-weary beater in park, this tunnel jockey comes up on the passenger side and says, "I know where you live, and I know where you park. I'll be back." I laughed heartily, told him I hoped so, and wished him a good day.
I've spoken on Amy Winehouse in a previous thread, so I'll just reiterate that, while I understand the traditional American scepticism about the latest Hot New Thing from the UK, I do feel that some of you are rushing to judge her, and harshly too. The girl is barely in her twenties and only two albums deep, yet her writing skills and her ability to deliver a song are already in a different league to pretty much all her contemporaries. If she doesn't come off the rails altogether - which would be a shame, I think - she could yet surprise a few people.