Page 11 of 13

Group: The Carpenters

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2006 11:09 pm
by Angus Jung
NerblyBear wrote:What I was getting at with my U.S. Maple example is that, in certain extreme types of music, the FORMLESSNESS rather than the FORM of the song is what makes it exciting.

Please stop using U.S. Maple as an example of a band that "doesn't write songs," writes "formless" songs, etc. This is 100% incorrect.

Group: The Carpenters

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2006 11:36 pm
by whiskerando_Archive
I'm using "song" in a pejorative sense here, to refer to verse/chorus/verse bullshit. My tastes are pretty eccentric, though.


gibberish can just as readily be bullshit.

power chords can be life-affirming.

4/4 time can be played mind-bogglingly. also you can't make love to your lady (or your fella i suppose) in 7/13, your back, thrown right out, son.

count me on the performance is more important than song side. i don't discount song at all but i've only heard a bob dylan song improved twice and those are great songs. conversely, Otis Redding's version of "A Change is Gonna Come" is just as fantastic as Sam Cooke's original. they are performed differently and they are great for different reasons. the score had little to do with that.

Group: The Carpenters

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2006 11:48 pm
by NerblyBear_Archive
Angus Jung wrote:Please stop using U.S. Maple as an example of a band that "doesn't write songs," writes "formless" songs, etc. This is 100% incorrect.


Again, I was using "song" in a more restricted sense than the one in which it would be used if one were to refer to the sort of thing that U.S. Maple plays. You could still call the latter a song, but is it a song in the same sense that "Heard it Through the Grapevine" is a song. No.

And I should also qualify "formless" as: "having such a strange or warped form that it can't be transcribed on paper". John Cage's music--now, that's truly formless.

Group: The Carpenters

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2006 11:50 pm
by nihil_Archive
NerblyBear wrote:
But POWER CHORDS?! Come on, hoss. That's just lame.... But power chords are the bane of my existence as a fan of rock 'n' roll.


What about The Jesus Lizard?

NerblyBear wrote:And don't try to name-drop the Ramones, because Johnny played BARRE chords, not POWER CHORDS. Huge difference.


Sorry, but I don't think adding the third is a "huge" difference in this context. Again, you are hung up on the superficial.

I once dated a girl that equated Rapeman with Rage Against the Machine because there was "screaming." You are reminding me of this girl.

Bubbles, is that you?

Group: The Carpenters

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2006 11:54 pm
by NerblyBear_Archive
nihil wrote:What about The Jesus Lizard?


I don't recall ever hearing Duane play power chords. Well, maybe post-DOWN, but that latter material is not too hot.

He was much too inventive for that. He is a superb guitarist.

Group: The Carpenters

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2006 11:56 pm
by whiskerando_Archive
John Cage's music--now, that's truly formless.


it is impossible for sound, particularly recorded sound to be formless. if it begins and it ends it has form. you mentioned unique forms. that's fine, still a form. i like Wire and i like Ramones. i don't like Wire more because fewer people have heard them so why should i like a song because it uses a form fewer people have used?

Group: The Carpenters

Posted: Wed Nov 29, 2006 12:00 am
by NerblyBear_Archive
whiskerando wrote:
it is impossible for sound, particularly recorded sound to be formless. if it begins and it ends it has form.


You're broadening the definition of "form" to such an extent that it really has no meaning anymore.

why should i like a song because it uses a form fewer people have used?


Because cliched, worn-out forms are a bore for everyone. New forms generate the excitement of the unexpected. As Ezra Pound said, "Make it new!"

Group: The Carpenters

Posted: Wed Nov 29, 2006 12:07 am
by nihil_Archive
NerblyBear wrote:
nihil wrote:What about The Jesus Lizard?


I don't recall ever hearing Duane play power chords. Well, maybe post-DOWN, but that latter material is not too hot.

Have you ever listened to Goat? Do you have any idea of what a "power chord" is?

He was much too inventive for that. He is a superb guitarist.

You're right. An inventive guitarist would never stoop so low as to use an interval.

Group: The Carpenters

Posted: Wed Nov 29, 2006 12:09 am
by whiskerando_Archive
You're broadening the definition of "form" to such an extent that it really has no meaning anymore.


Because cliched, worn-out forms are a bore for everyone. New forms generate the excitement of the unexpected.


OK. So for the next 50 years everyone uses the forms passed down from US Maple. These forms become cliched, worn-out forms. Do you like the US Maple songs less? You're giving too much credit to something, given time, really will have no meaning anymore.

Group: The Carpenters

Posted: Wed Nov 29, 2006 12:13 am
by NerblyBear_Archive
nihil wrote:Have you ever listened to Goat? Do you have any idea what a "power chord" is?


Yes, Mr. Smarty Pants Bertrand Russell Man, I know what power chords are. And now that I remember it, "Mouthbreather" obviously uses power chords. But where else? Duane's playing does not rely on such cliches, though, even if he uses them now and again. He mostly plays strange jazz chords, either straight or via arpeggios.