Chicago Fanatics Message Board
https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/

BRick's Picks
https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=84&t=91421		 Page 1 of 12
Author:  Curious Hair [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 6:48 pm ]
Post subject:  BRick's Picks
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
I follow bad but popular music and I honestly believe that a lot of the more recent music is better than The Beatles.


Explain how.
Author:  Brick [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 6:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
Curious Hair wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
I follow bad but popular music and I honestly believe that a lot of the more recent music is better than The Beatles.


Explain how.
I will tomorrow.

Basically though, because the evolution of music and the increased influences from other genres have resulted in superior products which is why people listen to new music more than they do the old Beatles stuff. If the Beatles released that same music for the first time today no one would even care. We only care because they are "important" or for nostalgia.
Author:  pittmike [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 6:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
Rick I know it is local but when we were out we found a new "band" doing music at an outside stage on NYE. This was a music savant running electronics, one guitar player and a brass section. People were going nuts and they had the young and our age in their hands. I need to open my ears.

http://thebeautyslap.com/
Author:  Brick [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
One more hot take before I log off so rpb can tell me I'm a dummy.

If I had a car made in the 1950s and a car made today, the car made today would likely be a better car.
If I had a bridge made in the 1950s and a bridge made today, the bridge made today would likely be a better bridge.
If I had a house made in the 1950s and a house made today, the house made today would likely be the better house.

I'd view music the same way. Even if it is subjective to you, the evolution and improvement of music means that current music is likely better than the much older stuff. We can think the old house and car are cool but without the age being factored in we wouldn't choose to take the older one. We don't build things exactly the same way as we did in the 1950s because it isn't as good.

The Beatles could very well be making good and different music today, but the stuff they did in the 1950s is just going to be inferior to at least some modern day music.

I know "Britney Spears sucks and you are a dummy Rick!".
Author:  Curious Hair [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
That you're referring to new music as a "superior product" as if it's something to be tweaked and refined from year to year kind of says it all. It's not a sedan.

I'm a firm believer in the "great wine in every vintage" approach to music, dare I say the only correct approach, but evolution doesn't make better music in and of itself. "With or Without You" is as perfect a song as "In My Life," but is it better because it has electronics and more sophisticated production? I don't think so. Jesus, I don't know. When we have the entirety of recorded music at our fingertips, we can pretty well separate the wheat from the chaff without critical pressure or a nostalgia filter.

EDIT: let the record show that Rick literally compared music to a car and hit "post" before I could accuse him of figuratively comparing music to a car.
Author:  Brick [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
Curious Hair wrote:
That you're referring to new music as a "superior product" as if it's something to be tweaked and refined from year to year kind of says it all. It's not a sedan.
Of course it is something to be tweaked and refined.
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a firm believer in the "great wine in every vintage" approach to music, dare I say the only correct approach, but evolution doesn't make better music in and of itself. "With or Without You" is as perfect a song as "In My Life," but is it better because it has electronics and more sophisticated production? I don't think so. Jesus, I don't know. When we have the entirety of recorded music at our fingertips, we can pretty well separate the wheat from the chaff without critical pressure or a nostalgia filter.
So why aren't songs like The Beatles made created now and popular outside of The Beatles and the nostalgia tour associated with them?

Why hasn't some group come along and become The Beatles 2015 and made huge money and been the biggest act of the year again?

It's because The Beatles get bonus points for nostalgia and importance rather than pure sound. If that pure sound still was the best, then it would be how modern bands sound too.
Author:  Rod [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
If I had a car made in the 1950s and a car made today, the car made today would likely be a better car.

If I had a house made in the 1950s and a house made today, the house made today would likely be the better house.



I certainly don't think that's the case. I'm not sure about bridge construction.
Author:  spanky [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:13 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
Tough to compare improvements in technology and engineering to art.

If I paint today, I must be a much better artist than Da Vinci.
Author:  Curious Hair [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:15 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
Yeah, take it from someone who watched cheap particleboard houses cover Lake Geneva and Genoa City like dandelion seeds: new is not necessarily better. Those motherfuckers swayed in the wind.

Meanwhile, the housing stock on Chicago's northwest side will outlast three nuclear apocalypses and two Honey Boo-Boo spinoffs.
Author:  shirtless driver [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Curious Hair wrote:
That you're referring to new music as a "superior product" as if it's something to be tweaked and refined from year to year kind of says it all. It's not a sedan.
Of course it is something to be tweaked and refined.
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a firm believer in the "great wine in every vintage" approach to music, dare I say the only correct approach, but evolution doesn't make better music in and of itself. "With or Without You" is as perfect a song as "In My Life," but is it better because it has electronics and more sophisticated production? I don't think so. Jesus, I don't know. When we have the entirety of recorded music at our fingertips, we can pretty well separate the wheat from the chaff without critical pressure or a nostalgia filter.
So why aren't songs like The Beatles made created now and popular outside of The Beatles and the nostalgia tour associated with them?

Why hasn't some group come along and become The Beatles 2015 and made huge money and been the biggest act of the year again?

It's because The Beatles get bonus points for nostalgia and importance rather than pure sound. If that pure sound still was the best, then it would be how modern bands sound too.


Image
Author:  Rod [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
spanky wrote:
Tough to compare improvements in technology and engineering to art.

If I paint today, I must be a much better artist than Da Vinci.


Adam Smith couldn't even work an Excel spreadsheet!
Author:  spanky [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:25 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
So why aren't songs like The Beatles made created now and popular outside of The Beatles and the nostalgia tour associated with them?

Somebody more versed in music structure/education could answer this way better than me...but the simple response to this is:

There are thousands of bands that make songs "like the beatles" - rhythms, structures, etc. The Beatles are probably the biggest influence on current bands today.
Author:  Rod [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:30 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
spanky wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
So why aren't songs like The Beatles made created now and popular outside of The Beatles and the nostalgia tour associated with them?

Somebody more versed in music structure/education could answer this way better than me...but the simple response to this is:

There are thousands of bands that make songs "like the beatles" - rhythms, structures, etc. The Beatles are probably the biggest influence on current bands today.


Yeah, it's not just nostalgia or some abstract idea that the Beatles were "important". They are important because of their influence on all that came after. In a vacuum, if you just heard the songs without knowing any history, you might easily think Oasis was as great as the Beatles.
Author:  Hatchetman [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:32 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
oasis? are you shitting me. their stuff doesn't stand up. morning glory one song. rest is shit.
Author:  Rod [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:37 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
Hatchetman wrote:
oasis? are you shitting me. their stuff doesn't stand up. morning glory one song. rest is shit.


I'm not an Oasis fan. That was just an example. There are others here who can disagree with your premise. Regardless, if you just came from another planet and heard Blur and the Beatles you might like either one and never know the only reason one exists is because the other did first.
Author:  Chus [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
The Beatles have released albums this century that went gold and platinum, despite the band breaking up in 1970.
Author:  spanky [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
Great job throwing out the RPB-signal fellas.

This just came through the tweeter machine:

http://m.pitchfork.com/news/57970-real- ... eil-young/
Author:  denisdman [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
Non music guy here. Going to sit back and enjoy the shit show that ensues. Already seeing Adam Smith (invisible hand job) and cars being invoked. Oh this is going to be good!
Author:  Curious Hair [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
No, it really won't. The STEM perspective on music is about as useful as a fish-drawn carriage.
Author:  Brick [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
spanky wrote:
Tough to compare improvements in technology and engineering to art.

If I paint today, I must be a much better artist than Da Vinci.
You probably suck at painting. There are probably better artists than Da Vinci now though.
Author:  denisdman [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:50 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
Curious Hair wrote:
No, it really won't. The STEM perspective on music is about as useful as a fish-drawn carriage.


I love seeing how music gets you riled up. You want to talk science technology engineering math? Now you're stepping my toes. Shall we dance?
Author:  Brick [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
spanky wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
So why aren't songs like The Beatles made created now and popular outside of The Beatles and the nostalgia tour associated with them?

Somebody more versed in music structure/education could answer this way better than me...but the simple response to this is:

There are thousands of bands that make songs "like the beatles" - rhythms, structures, etc. The Beatles are probably the biggest influence on current bands today.
That is kind of the point though. Why aren't those bands making songs similar to The Beatles?

Don't take it that I'm not saying The Beatles weren't important or revolutionary. It's more about the expected evolution of pretty much everything. As a society, we improve and get better with just about everything. I don't think music is different. If Paul and George were 20 years old today they would be moving music forward again but they certainly would have a sound much different and likely better than what they did originally.
Author:  Brick [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
In a vacuum, if you just heard the songs without knowing any history, you might easily think Oasis was as great as the Beatles.
Thank you for agreeing with me! Finally a guy with bonafide music chops giving me some validation.
Author:  denisdman [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
In a vacuum, if you just heard the songs without knowing any history, you might easily think Oasis was as great as the Beatles.
Thank you for agreeing with me! Finally a guy with bonafide music chops giving me some validation.


You two are my wonder wall.
Author:  Curious Hair [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:55 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
the expected evolution of pretty much everything.

If this thread accomplishes nothing else, at least Andrew Bird got a new album title.
Author:  Brick [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 8:00 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
Curious Hair wrote:
No, it really won't. The STEM perspective on music is about as useful as a fish-drawn carriage.
Why don't you think music is on a path of improvement, and why did it peak with The Beatles?

It just wouldn't make sense if The Beatles were the peak of music. We basically wasted decades without ever moving things forward. It's even worse to think we have somehow regressed.
Author:  rogers park bryan [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 8:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
Rick knows more about football, college sports, and computers than everyone else here.


I prefer Oasis to the Beatles but love them both

Timing and environment is a huge part of art.
Author:  Furious Styles [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 8:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
Hell, even the technology involved in new music isn't better. Overly compressed digital mp3s, nevermind the fact that vintage drums, cymbals, guitars, amps, etc. are highly sought after.
Author:  spanky [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 8:04 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
spanky wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
So why aren't songs like The Beatles made created now and popular outside of The Beatles and the nostalgia tour associated with them?

Somebody more versed in music structure/education could answer this way better than me...but the simple response to this is:

There are thousands of bands that make songs "like the beatles" - rhythms, structures, etc. The Beatles are probably the biggest influence on current bands today.
That is kind of the point though. Why aren't those bands making songs similar to The Beatles?

Huh?

They are.
Author:  rogers park bryan [ Tue Jan 06, 2015 8:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: BRick's Picks
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
spanky wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
So why aren't songs like The Beatles made created now and popular outside of The Beatles and the nostalgia tour associated with them?

Somebody more versed in music structure/education could answer this way better than me...but the simple response to this is:

There are thousands of bands that make songs "like the beatles" - rhythms, structures, etc. The Beatles are probably the biggest influence on current bands today.


Yeah, it's not just nostalgia or some abstract idea that the Beatles were "important". They are important because of their influence on all that came after. In a vacuum, if you just heard the songs without knowing any history, you might easily think Oasis was as great as the Beatles.

Correct.

Could put Public Enemy and the A$AP mob in that analogy

Grandmaster Flash to Jay Z

Snow to Eminem
Page 1 of 12 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/