Mr. Food wrote:B. Clark wrote:
no matter how "experimental" you want your music to be, you need to retain some inspiration from the ROOT.
This is some bullshit, ass-backwards, pseudo 'right-on' hyperbole of the highest order sir.
(Special mention has to go to the sarcastic quotation marks around the word 'experimental', as though it were a ridiculous term, which is then followed by the capitalisation on the word 'root' presumably because that really means something).
I have to admit that I dislike complete noise a great deal, though sometimes I think my definition of noise might differ from others. For instance, Hella doesn't sound like noise to me, but the Dead C do. Also, when Sonic Youth try to get artsy and mostly just get boring (SYR3 and SYR4, though I really like SYR1 and 2), I think that is just noise.
Anyway, to comment on the above statements, I really think it is fair to say that completely breaking from the past usually results in something quite interesting, but not necessarily good. As a music composition student for the past four years, experimental composition in modern classical music has been a source of intense frustration for me. I can understand why some composers broke away from tonal music or began to experiment with composition techniques that implented improvisation and intense interpretation, but this music doesn't fulfill me the way that...Tchaikovsky or Mahler or Beethoven or Wagner do.
Using Sonic Youth as an example, their earliest records, which had some good moments, are not as good as EVOL and the records that followed. They were always interesting because they were trying new things, but on EVOL they finally learned to really craft great songs and apply their experimental tendencies to that songcraft.
A less popular example (on this forum, that is), I'll assume, is Nine Inch Nails. I can't really dig bands like Throbbing Gristle too much, and though I consider Trent Reznor to be a bit maudlin at times (ha, this is probably an understatement), I think he did a pretty fantastic job of synthesizing "industrial music," pop music, and heavy rock and metal. I think he also owed a great debt to David Bowie's Berlin Period and Peter Gabriel's third solo record. He definitely had some experimental tendencies, but once again, he married those ideas to excellent songcraft (at least on the Downward Spiral) and really showed himself to have a truly original voice.
I think that it is fair to say that something is missing in music right now. In the sixties and seventies, bands were far more productive and prolific, often putting out one record every year, and sometimes more than that (in the Beatles' case, they put out three records in 1965 alone). From 1970 to 1980, David Bowie released twelve records, and many of them are considered classic releases. From 1963 to 1970, the Beatles recorded eleven records. Bob Dylan released eleven records from 1962 to 1970. Costello released ten or eleven from 1977 to 1987, and Prince recorded ten from 1980 to 1989 (not to mention a bunch of b-sides and unreleased material). Husker Du, the Minutemen, and the Replacements (among others) had some amazingly productive years in the 80s, as well. Also, I find that these artists evolved a great deal during these periods of recording music.
Yet, most artists take up to two or three years to follow up their records in this day and age. And you know who has put out records every year for the past five or six years? Deerhoof. It's true that some of you might dislike them, but they've only gotten more interesting as they've progressed, and I can't wait to see what they do next.
Unwound also put out a record a year from 1993 to 1998, and they also changed dramatically and wonderfully from album to album.
It's also fantastic to see how often the Fiery Furnaces put out records, even though I don't like everything they do. I thought Blueberry Boat was great, though.
The Microphones' Phil Elvrum put out records every year from 1999 to 2001, and then put out another record very early in 2003 and a live one with all new songs in 2004. This was in addition to other smaller releases that he released in the same years.
The Joan of Arc guys have been very creative for the past couple years, and I think they've also improved immensely. Joan of Arc, Mark Twain, Dick Cheney or whatever it's called was a really great record. And I really think Shock of Being is one of the best rock records I've ever heard. I took a long break after about a month and a half of listening to it way too much, and it still is just as powerful a listen as it was when I first got it.
I really think that there is a link to being productive and being innovative. If you're only recording every two years, you're taking long breaks and forgetting how to be creative and how to write songs. Perhaps, some artists even end up ripping themselves off, forgetting how close a new song is to an old one. When bands and songwriters are working constantly, they have to find new ways to be excited and to express themselves, because the music that they most recently made is still very close to them. Perhaps I'm oversimplifying to a degree, but I think there's some truth in that statement.
All I know is that right now, I can't imagine there being a time like 1967, when the Beatles put out Sgt. Pepper (and the magical mystery tour), the Who released The Who Sell Out, The Rolling Stones released Their Satanic Majesties Request, the Pink Floyd released Piper at the Gates of Dawn, the Velvet Underground released... and Nico, the Doors released two records, and the Beach Boys released Smiley Smile. Hell, this is the year Jimi Hendrix released Are You Experienced and Axis: Bold as Love.
Perhaps I have more of a fascination with the sixties than most of the guys who read this forum, but I think that a lot of great music came out and a lot of great artists were extraordinarily productive in this period and the early seventies. Anyway, Sorry for the long post, go ahead and criticize away.