Re: Negative music.../ Positive Solutions

From: Steven Catanzaro (stevencatanzaro@sprintmail.com)
Date: Thu May 30 2002 - 18:38:16 CEST

  • Next message: william@bluecat.it: "Re: [acid-jazz] Re Re the power of sound-52902"

    Take a look at the altitude of my nose? Is that some kind of anti-Italian
    dis?

    >
    > So, why is 99% of what people listen to, crappy (according to the acid
    jazz list
    > consensus)? Because crap is cheap and easy to mass produce.

    Uhm, I think that's the definition of snobbery, right there. But, the funny
    thing is, you aj cats don't know from snobbery until you've hung out with
    some classical musicians for a while. Do you think *they* can hear a big
    difference between Roots Manuva and Jay-Z? Do they hear a big difference
    between Dr. Dre and Common? Or does it all sound kind of silly to 'em?

    I remember when Michael Jackson's "Bad" came out, back in the day. I was
    listening to 2 musicians talk about it. One musician was saying, "Man, that
    is really horrible. I don't see why people like it so much." Another one, a
    more seasoned one, came back with, "Well, if it's so bad, if it's so easy to
    do, you're pretty stupid not to put out something better."

    You negate the artistry of Timbaland, the Neptunes, or whoever based on
    what? You say you "couldn't even name a Jay Z song." Well, before you decide
    NOT to play it, maybe you ought to listen to it first!

    So what do you think is happening in the studio anyway? You're saying that
    Timbaland, Missy, Dre, and the like are just working away in a factory,
    while Dego is doing some Jackson Pollack running up on ladders and tossing
    paint on the floor?

    I think BOTH of them are trying to define themselves by coming up with their
    own sound. One sells 4 million and one sells 40 thousand. Does that mean,
    ipso facto, that Dego is "better" or "purer?" (And btw, you're talking with
    a cat who has all 4 Hero stuff and no Jay Z.)

    What about someone like Outkast. Do they suck, or do they only suck now that
    they're super large? And, if Jurassic 5, The Roots, and Blackalicious go out
    with Outkast, do they suck by association?

    I encourage you all to check out the online interview with Blackalicious
    from KCRW's Chocolate City. Garth Trinidad, who is a great DJ with a great
    show, tells how DJ Spinderella rocked the house; http://www.kcrw.org/show/cc

    ********

    GT: "It's been something that's been on my mind for a while but especially
    since I had DJ Spinderella from Salt & Peppa down here. She did a 2 hour
    guest DJ set, and I told her to play what she wanted to play. So she played
    everything from Dialated to Wu to, like, Snoop and Dre, to remixed No Doubt.
    Just all kind of stuff she was throwing on. And it was beautiful because she
    was able to weave it together like a DJ should."

    GofG: "Yeah. Cuz it's all one. Cuz people like be tryin' to seperate it and
    act like "those are those guys" but it's all the same."

    GT: "All in it together."

    ********

    Now, I never said I think the status quo "works" and I never said the system
    is "fine the way it is." And I wouldn't want to say that a DJ should play
    music that "grates on their ears." And who wants to hear dj marv or dj
    t-bird or steph99 spinning a top 40 set? Not me definitely.

    BUT, to dismiss "99%" of mainstream music, while admitting you've never even
    heard it, don't even know the players, I'm sorry, there's only one word for
    it... S.N.O.B.

    That sounds like a
    > money thing, not a music thing. It sure would be nice if the music people
    had a
    > little more room to do what they do best, if the pursuit of art were given
    its
    > proper importance (what's the point of life without beauty?), and if
    business
    > were played more or less fairly. It would be nice if music production
    were
    > treated differently from aluminum widget production. The way things are
    now is
    > not necessarily the way things should be, from a particular perspective,
    though
    > some think the system is fine the way it is, and you seem to be one of
    those
    > people. Some people who want to make a change, choose to do so from the
    inside.
    > Some prefer not to, and it works for them. I find it childish,
    short-sighted,
    > and insulting to dismiss the second method with an exasperated flourish,
    and
    > misconstrue the motivation as snobbery rather than strategy, situation, or
    > simply taste. One of the smartest, most opinionated peeple I know gave me
    this
    > elegant corollary that's so simple you forget it all the time: People do
    things
    > for their own reasons, not yours.
    >
    > Also, turn up the sensitivity on your sarcasm meter when you get a chance.
    >
    >
    >
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu May 30 2002 - 18:55:55 CEST