MUSIC: the official thread.

Nah, he has many fine songs

 

Sorry Cdogg, I realise you meant Andrew Ridgely

 

Let the love into your heart Cdogg, let it in.

 

isn't that the guy from Wham?

 

will do

 

Put a little love in your heart, and the world, will be a better place, and the world, will be a better place for you and me, just wait and SEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

 

::

 

Yeah.

 

<object width="640" height="480"><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true"></param><param name="movie" value="https://www.facebook.com/v/299392360180121"></param><embed src="https://www.facebook.com/v/299392360180121" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="1" width="640" height="480"></embed></object>

 

Because '70s rock is a great genre listened to and loved my fucking millions.
Jazz is a good, if not acquired-taste-genre listened to and artily-dissected by 20 people in a smoky club.

Anyway, I digress....as Slice pointed out a few pages ago....THE POWER OF PHIL:

<IFRAME height=315 src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ryrPE5XN3zU" frameBorder=0 width=560 allowfullscreen></IFRAME>

 

Well, to be picky and brutally honest about it, Rick Wakeman...plus every other artist that followed up to about 10 years ago. opcorn:

 

I lost ya. How'd you mean?

 

I mean, any music that isn't Katie Perry, Rihanna, Maroon 5, PitBull, One Direction, Flo Rida...etc, etc. is all 'Dad Music'.

The Beatles? Genesis? Jesus & Mary Chain? Oasis? 2Pac? Sonic Youth? It's all 'Dad Music', I'm afraid...

 

Among 13 year old girls, sure. Hasn't it always been thus? I spend half my drinking time in the art school where there's nobody over 30 and Orbinson, Jesus & Mary Chain, Sonic Youth isn't dad music. Prog rock is, but not because of it's age, per se.

 

No, you're wrong. Again.
You're just trying to excuse those artists by continually making out it is and always was for 'young people'.
Just because it's 'edgy' and 'angry' and 'distorty'(sic), doesn't mean it's exclusively for 'the kids' or 'cool'

Prog-Rock was never considered 'dad' music, ever. It was always considered middle-to-upper-class-public-school rock-music whose audience was 99% male, aged 15-25. (the only 'arty' or 'proggy' band from that era was Roxy Music - and they only attracted chicks because they wanted make-up tips of Ferry and Eno)
My cousin's husband tells me in the early 70s, they were all heavily into progressive rock until one day at school in early 1977, they all came into the playground: "we're turning punk!"

Go to any gig by an artist from the late 70s to late 90s and you'll find the audeience is pretty much the same as it was...40-year old Punk-Dads...30-year old Brit-Pop Dads. I had the first-hand experience a few years back of going to two shows within 3 weeks of each other: Sex Pistols at Brixton Academy and Rush at Birmingham NEC. Both were pretty shit and both comprised of the same audience they'd had 30 years earlier - only more grown-up.

When you've grown up a bit it'll all start to make sense.

 

It really depends what band it is & whether they're still relevant. Some bands age much better than others (not prog), and some bands attract more big music fans who's collections will tend to go back further. Nobody except Dads care about Inspiral Carpets or Beautiful South today but I saw Wire last year for instance and it was about half people my age. I saw Liquid Liquid not long ago and the crowd was overwhelmingly 18-35. Ditto The Fall. Ditto Frankie Knuckles. Ditto James Chance. Ditto Public Enemy.

A big part of the thing with the Sex Pistols was that tickets were about a gazillion quid. But I still knew plenty people who went and they were all about 20 at the time.

 

Again, "lots of people like it" means absolutely fuck-all when discussing art... you will not convert me with meaningless drivel like that

"Lots of people" love Coldplay... they are one of the worst bands I have ever heard, they can not play... same with U2... "They've sold 50 zillion records!" ... who cares? In 30 years of doing nothing but making music for a living, they still can not play worth a shit and sound like 15 year olds who bought their instruments last month... it doesn't fucking matter how many people are thick as molasses when it comes to music and are thus as easily manipulated and moved as teenage girls reading "Twilight"... Those same girls very likely don't read Dickens, so the fool says "Twilight must be greater than Dickens"

and yes, Phil Collins is a great drummer (as is Chester Thompson)... what's your point, Caller? Like I said, if Picasso or Dali produce Thomas Kinkaid paintings, then what good are their skills?

 

I agree with you to a point...Progressive Rock has no place in today's world. Last time I was in the UK, I was stunned to see that there was a monthly 'Prog Rock' magazine released (along the lines of I suspect, 'Classic Rock' magazine) - I was stunned. (one of my friends mentioned to me last week there's a fucking Rick Wakeman 'Journey To The Centre Of The Earth' special-magazine out at the moment. WTF?? :: )

This I guess, is how far music in general has dropped to...on the one hand, there''s pretty much NOTHING you can't get from any artist now - or it's shit that I mentioned above along the lines of 'X-Factor-disposable-forgettable-Radio-One-pop'

Back in my day ("when I were a lad"), you had bands releasing an album every 1-2 years, with 2-3 singles off it.
Now you can get so many special-deluxe-arsehole-editions packed with every demo the artist ever did for said album, with special, 250-page hardback book wth extensive liner-notes and zillions of pictures.
Who wants to see that for something like INXS's 'Kick' or Radiohead's 'OK Computer'? :dunno:

All of this, to me, is overkill shit.

 

::

Coldplay - the sort of band that accounts who don't really like music.....like.
U2 I liked up about their 4th or 5th release then it all got a bit too political-messiahs-for-the-masses for me.

Your last line: :bears:

 

:hammert:

 

That was really cool, cheers for posting that, fella.

:bears: Phil

 

yeah, it's a rare one that Ive never seen before.
Chester Thompson always said Phil never had the normal, rudimentary skills that most good drummers had, but was so good at listening/copying/learning stuff, that the end result was the same anyway.

 

More from The Power Of Phil:

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/k64AJZr_gsc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Fucking hell, this is nostalgic...I remember hearing this on a tinny little transistor-radio at night under the bedcovers....and the drums STILL sounded fuckig huge.

 

:bears:

It's a fucking great song. The story of how they achieved that drum sound is pretty cool too.

 

Anyone a fan of Lonnie Smith?

 

The story of how they "achieved" that drum sound is the story of the decline of popular music

Phil Collins did more to destroy good taste than a thousand Barry Manilows

 

Don't know if she did or not, but I know she dropped Love Delux in like 92 and two more albums after that. It did seem like she had retired in the 80's but then out of nowhere I saw her Love Delux cassette tape at the store I bought and listened to it over and over.

 

Why? Because of Hugh Padgham's production? :scratcher:

I think you'll find cdogg, in all seriousness, the absolute decline of music started on July 13, 1985: Live Aid.
That event, more than anything globalized music and made it acceptable for a kid of 10 and a Dad of 50 to like 'pop/rock' music, which in turn, saw that mass-marketization(sic) of the business and diluted it to fuck.

Because of Live Aid, you got all those less-than-stellar acts all go massive and start selling shitloads of dull, uninspired music and playing 5 nights at 60,000 seater-stadiums almost overnight.

An awful event.

 

I think she came back with a Top-10 album a couple of years back...but singles-wise, nothing for a long time.

She was and probably still is, what most X-Factor female-singers aspire to be yet won't get anywhere close to in terms of talent or looks.