Ports of Call

Ketchikan, Juneau, Icy Straight Point, Victoria, Astoria and San Fransisco.

Tuesday, April 20, 2010

Musical Elitism?


So, I've been thinking a long time about this post the last week or two, but the last 12 or so days have been totally hectic. Between working a 10 day streak and the four gigs I had last week, it was a wonder I found time to eat and sleep properly. Oh wait, I didn't... oh well, so it goes.

Before all the crazy happened, my brain was kick started by this post from Alex W. Rodriguez. It was a pretty lighthearted piece, and I didn't dwell on it long until I stumbled across a particular documentary on Hulu.

Firstly, if you haven't watched Before the Music Dies, do so right now. I mean it, stop reading and watch all of it. Mainly because it is eyeopening, but also because this post was born of my thoughts after seeing it fully for the first time.

I remember some years ago while visiting with a friend, someone had brought the documentary over and I had watched the first 45 minutes or so. That had been enough to stick with me for close to four years, but when I discovered (it's amazing what you will find while researching bands on youtube) that it was free to watch whenever I wanted on the internet, I was overjoyed. More importantly however, the film's relevance to me had changed completely.

Four years ago I didn't play in a band I could consider my own. I didn't really understand the time commitment and mental effort it took to play with a group that wanted to succeed professionally. I wasn't spending most Sundays working eight hours and eating quickly before going to a 3-4 hour rehearsal. I didn't play 4 gigs in a week, I wasn't writing music. I hadn't been to a sound check in my life, nor was I playing gigs that went over four hours in length. So while the documentary by Andrew Shapter and Joel Rasmussen was incredibly interesting to me, I didn't connect with it as I did now.

One of the things I came away asking myself was, "What makes quality music?" The main concern of the filmmakers was the rapid decline in the quality of the current pop music and musicians. To explain this decline they pointed to Clear Channel and pop radio as the culprits. I can totally agree with them on this end, and I started looking more closely around me at the music my peers were listening to.

I already knew most of my fellow music heads could be just as opinionated as I, but what intrigued me was their knowledge and open enjoyment of the pop music industry. Do they look at Telephone they same way they do a piece by Mozart or Brahms? Not that I can tell, but they often find an equal amount of short term enjoyment in it. Lia often says, "it's catchy, don't judge it so quickly. People enjoy this rhythmic style." And both she and Kim like to listen to Beyonce (Play Put a Ring on It and they go nuts). These are young, intelligent musicians with degrees in performance and education, and perhaps that is something Shapter and Rasmussen overlooked.

I understand the filmmakers intent, and I completely agree with their take on the industry and radio. I can't stand to listen to Z100 or 107.5 for more than ten minutes, but it isn't always because of the music. Part of the argument presented by Before the Music Dies is the influence of advertisement and the advent of playlists on radio stations. It was interesting to hear about a time when local DJ's were popular and radio stations had a hometown feel to them. I also recognize the lack of substance in much of the pop world. Branford Marsalis says in the film, "The reality is that superficiality is in, and depth and quality is kind of out." Listening in on pop radio today, you can hear what he's talking about.


I was left thinking that my fellow music majors and I were the only ones left on earth who didn't listen to pop radio. So I set out, as the filmmakers had, to find people around me who enjoyed other kinds of music. Like the documentary, I didn't look far.

I started with my coworkers. Working in the electronics industry, we're exposed every day to the pop elements by way of the car stereos and speaker systems that are always on during store hours. It seemed to go 50/50. Some care little about music, concerning themselves more with the cultural aspect of pop radio. A few seem to genuinely like Jay-Z and Usher, as well as most of the songs on the radio, but I would hear one common complaint: "I'm tired of hearing this song." The other half are really invested in their music. One of my coworkers owns a few hundred records that he is in the process of converting. I was amazed, because as he is relatively close in age to myself it was apparent that he had gone out of the way to collect a obsolete form of recording. Why? Because he liked the sound of vinyl better. Another coworker and I spent the better half of a shift talking about what he finds enjoyable in music. Chris the Comcast rep is a reggae nut, but enjoys a wide variety of non-pop music, from rock to funk.

When the Phunkestra opened for the B*Side Players, I was happy to note the group of fans who were there, singing along with the San Diego based band. It is evident that people want to hear substantial music, as the film points out. But does that mean anything and everything on pop radio or coming from Sony Records or written by Lady Gaga is to be deemed superficial? I will always be skeptical, but I would hate to jump on something that way.

I'd be really interested to hear what everyone thinks. I know I don't have a ton of readers, but I feel like this is a subject that everyone who cares about music should be talking about with each other and friends. What is music with substance to you? Do you shun pop radio? What makes a great band or artist?

I leave you with my substance for the week.

EDIT: It's now open for commenting for anyone.

3 comments:

  1. Let's see if I can remember everything I wrote lol

    To me, "substance" music has to be about the music, not any political message or anything. Even with bands like Pink Floyd, whose music was highly political, it is their music that sets them apart from other classic rock bands.

    "Good" music is memorable - it gets stuck in your head. Hence why even though I don't regularly listen to her music, I had a Lady GaGa song stuck in my head all day - the melody is simple & catchy and it's very rhythmic.

    The hard part for a great performing artist is to create a song that is memorable (that appeals to the masses) & also features interesting musical content (to appeal to fellow musicians) without emphasizing either too much. Go too far into the unique music side and you enter the realm of "masturbatory music" - which is cool to play & features lots of cool stuff, but often bores listeners because it is simply too complex. On the other hand, going too simple creates the "problem" many people have with pop music - it is too cookie-cutter. The music industry finds "something" that works & clones the ever-living-crap out of it. That's why Lady GaGa is so popular right now - because she offers something different. But then why is Beyonce popular? Simply because she does the cookie-cutter pop "better" than anyone else.

    As for what makes a great band/artist? A classical music education. You have to know the rules before you can break the rules. One of my favorite rock guitarists began by playing classical guitar. Yes, I'm talking about Eddie Van Freaking Halen.

    But what the hell do I know?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Interesting discussion. Being a well educated musician, sometimes I need some music on that doesn't make me think. We spend all day analyzing and critiquing music recordings or in our live ensembles, sometimes its refreshing to just listen to a song. I think sometimes people need pop music, or something 'singable' to grab onto or just relax to. However, sometimes you want to be entranced and intrigued by the sounds that you are hearing. Something that you want to know where the music came from, where the artist's inspiration came from, or how the music was made. This, in my opinion, is the music that lasts in people's minds. I LOVE listening to Beyonce and Lady Gaga, but do I think that they will stand the test of time? Hell No. Are they entertaining? Absolutely. However, I respect both Lady Gaga because she is innovative and artistic, and writes catchy songs. I respect Beyonce, Mariah Carey, Christina Aguliera, and Alisha Keys (among many other talented young pop stars) because they have incredible voices.
    Now, for the 'artists' that only have one thing going for them: looks, I have a problem with that (which the documentary mentions). Just because they look good, it automatically pardons them from being able to sing, write, or perform in any respectable manner. I am not arguing that these people aren't entertaining and that they don't have a fan group, but its their gobs of money they are making off of CRAP that bothers me. It is an insult to musicians who pour their heart and soul into their art.
    So, my point is, there is a place for all music, just like there is a place for ALL ART. Take cinema for example. Some people enjoy watching mindlesss comedies that make them laugh, others prefer movies that make you think. Both are entertaining, both make you feel a certain way, but there is a reason that the 'serious' films win the academy awards. (don't even get me started about Taylor Swift winning 5 f*%$ing Grammy's). I love becoming captivated by great music that I want to find out more about and listen to over and over again to understand it and to be consumed by it. This is what I consider MY definition of 'substance' music. However, I LOVE to rock out to some catchy stuff that has a melody and a beat. Life has to have a balance, including genre's of music.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm going to veer away from directly answering the question and post my thoughts about the content of your post.

    I completely agree that ratio to which the mainstream audience listen to "music with substance" is few and far between. For some people this is all they know because not enough focus is placed on the shift between what beautiful quality music once was and how it has been transformed into a considerably smaller sound bite of "music" that is tailored to satiate the listeners dwindling attention span. My argument takes in to consideration that a majority (around 80 percent) of all music that is put on the airwaves is 2:30seconds - 3:45 seconds long. Don't believe me, check the TIME section in your iTunes. I would consider this an insult because the subtle message here is that we (as rational consumers) cannot understand and appreciate the longer and complicated sophistication of quality music.

    Before I delve into a rant that would bring in the tenets of Hedonism and Critical Theory's Media Consolidation I am going to yield. Good job Brian for pointing out what ubiquity of the stupidity that surrounds us, ha!

    ReplyDelete