VT’s Music Chat

[Mark Albrighton]

Hello everyone and welcome. 

With all the music chat appearing in the things you don’t get thread, general chat etc, I thought a thread for general music discussion might be useful.

My intention with this thread is that it would be different to the “what song/album I’m listening to” or “new music” threads as it wouldn’t be video after video which, sometimes, I find a bit of a pain to scroll through.

More a place where we can chat broadly about whatever band you’ve found a new appreciation for, which band you should have liked in theory but never could quite get into, whether you’ve just seen a BBC four documentary and you had no idea that singer was on that particular drug at the time, whatever...

By all means link a video to back up why you think that song by that band you like is great...but generally just chat I was thinking.

This thread may well die an early death, but I thought it was worth a go.

 

So there’s this band Coldplay who look like they might be going places...

Edited May 12, 2021 by Mark Albrighton

[villa4europe]

Whoever said they were off to buy the new squid album 

My ears hate you 

[Brumerican]

It's all music.

ALL IS music.

 

[bickster]

9 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

Whoever said they were off to buy the new squid album 

That would have been me. i've only heard a couple of tracks because I'm trying to avoid it until I actually buy it. I already own Squid records, so I know they are a band I like. They are in the same nu-post-punk ranty ballpark as Idles (who I'm not a fan of), Shame (I liked their last album but I'm wavering on the current one), Parquet Courts (really liked the last album) etc but to my ears Squid are the best of the bunch. All the others mentioned are a bit one dimensional, they've found a formula and they stick to it. Drawing a parrallel back to the original post-punk era, that's sort of the Gang of Four approach. Squid on the other hand really do go all over the place, there's so many more ideas and styles in there compared to their contemporaries and that for me is why I really like them, they aren't afraid to go to completely different places in each song

[mjmooney]

Can't be arsed to actually draw it, but we could have one of those 2 x 2 matrices (e.g. like the Johari window) to place ourselves on. The four squares are essentially: 

A :  Older person who DOES listen to new music 

B :  Older person who does NOT listen to new music 

C :  Younger person who DOES listen to old music 

D : Younger person who does NOT listen to old music 

How you define older and younger listeners and old and new music is of course open to interpretation. 

I'd put myself largely in square B, with the caveat that by 'new music' I mean new developments or trends in music beyond my cutoff point of the mid-1970s. I actually listen to loads of contemporary, young artists, but broadly speaking they are ones that are working in genres that existed before about 1976 (singer-songwriter, folk, jazz, blues, progressive, psychedelic, country, soul, etc.) So punk, post punk, post rock, math rock, grunge, britpop, hip hop, acid house, EDM, etc. hold little or no interest for me. However, within those limitations, I still consider my tastes pretty damned eclectic - I can go back as far as you like - right through all the ages of classical music, for example. 

 

 

[chrisp65]

Quote

We are together, we are unified… and all in accord… Because when we are together we got power… and we can make decisions…

Today on this program you will hear gospel, and rhythm and blues, and jazz. All those are just labels. We know that music is music… All of our people have got a soul, our experience determines the texture, the tastes and the sounds of our soul. 

Jesse Jackson, 1972

[Xela]

Everyone should just listen to Pink Floyd all the time. 

[sharkyvilla]

15 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

Can't be arsed to actually draw it, but we could have one of those 2 x 2 matrices (e.g. like the Johari window) to place ourselves on. The four squares are essentially: 

A :  Older person who DOES listen to new music 

B :  Older person who does NOT listen to new music 

C :  Younger person who DOES listen to old music 

D : Younger person who does NOT listen to old music 

How you define older and younger listeners and old and new music is of course open to interpretation. 

I'd put myself largely in square B, with the caveat that by 'new music' I mean new developments or trends in music beyond my cutoff point of the mid-1970s. I actually listen to loads of contemporary, young artists, but broadly speaking they are ones that are working in genres that existed before about 1976 (singer-songwriter, folk, jazz, blues, progressive, psychedelic, country, soul, etc.) So punk, post punk, post rock, math rock, grunge, britpop, hip hop, acid house, EDM, etc. hold little or no interest for me. However, within those limitations, I still consider my tastes pretty damned eclectic - I can go back as far as you like - right through all the ages of classical music, for example. 

 

 

I wonder what age people become 'old' when it comes to music, in other words start hating or at least finding virtually nothing vaguely interesting in new, mainstream stuff, and whether it's roughly the same for every generation.  For me it was pretty much when I turned 30, which I believe is when Radio 1 is designed to ditch you and send you packing to Radio 2 and beyond.

Edited May 12, 2021 by sharkyvilla

[Brumerican]

Just now, sharkyvilla said:

I wonder what age people become 'old' when it comes to music, in other words start hating or at least finding virtually nothing vaguely interesting in new, mainstream stuff, and whether it's roughly the same for every generation.  For me it was pretty much when I turned 30.  

Never if you're intelligent.

[Brumerican]

Why close yourself off like that ?

People who hate change won't survive what's coming.

[bickster]

2 minutes ago, sharkyvilla said:

I wonder what age people become 'old' when it comes to music, in other words start hating or at least finding virtually nothing vaguely interesting in new, mainstream stuff, and whether it's roughly the same for every generation.  For me it was pretty much when I turned 30.  

I've never liked what I would consider to be mainstream music. I've always looked for something that is an alternative to that

[Seat68]

I have a thick skin. If anyone wants to criticise the music I listen to and I love, I shrug it off as one mans disdain for something I feel, means nothing to me. The music I love and loved hasn’t been fashionable and even now the most mainstream artist I love is Taylor Swift, water off a ducks back if people find that it isn’t cool. By the same token I hate oasis, u2, reggae but me hating those is never a reflection on the person that holds them dear. Apart from U2. 

[bickster]

18 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

Can't be arsed to actually draw it, but we could have one of those 2 x 2 matrices (e.g. like the Johari window) to place ourselves on. The four squares are essentially: 

A :  Older person who DOES listen to new music 

B :  Older person who does NOT listen to new music 

C :  Younger person who DOES listen to old music 

D : Younger person who does NOT listen to old music 

How you define older and younger listeners and old and new music is of course open to interpretation. 

I'd put myself largely in square B, with the caveat that by 'new music' I mean new developments or trends in music beyond my cutoff point of the mid-1970s. I actually listen to loads of contemporary, young artists, but broadly speaking they are ones that are working in genres that existed before about 1976 (singer-songwriter, folk, jazz, blues, progressive, psychedelic, country, soul, etc.) So punk, post punk, post rock, math rock, grunge, britpop, hip hop, acid house, EDM, etc. hold little or no interest for me. However, within those limitations, I still consider my tastes pretty damned eclectic - I can go back as far as you like - right through all the ages of classical music, for example. 

 

 

I guess I'd be in the middle of the X Axis on the Old side. I'm still discovering old stuff I like and the same for new

[Seat68]

22 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

Can't be arsed to actually draw it, but we could have one of those 2 x 2 matrices (e.g. like the Johari window) to place ourselves on. The four squares are essentially: 

A :  Older person who DOES listen to new music 

B :  Older person who does NOT listen to new music 

C :  Younger person who DOES listen to old music 

D : Younger person who does NOT listen to old music 

How you define older and younger listeners and old and new music is of course open to interpretation. 

I'd put myself largely in square B, with the caveat that by 'new music' I mean new developments or trends in music beyond my cutoff point of the mid-1970s. I actually listen to loads of contemporary, young artists, but broadly speaking they are ones that are working in genres that existed before about 1976 (singer-songwriter, folk, jazz, blues, progressive, psychedelic, country, soul, etc.) So punk, post punk, post rock, math rock, grunge, britpop, hip hop, acid house, EDM, etc. hold little or no interest for me. However, within those limitations, I still consider my tastes pretty damned eclectic - I can go back as far as you like - right through all the ages of classical music, for example. 

 

 

A and B. I have a brand new CD by Alan Jackson and a Frankie Valli LP arriving over the next week. 

[Mark Albrighton]

I’ve changed the title from “musical differences” as it might seem a bit negative in tone.

[Mark Albrighton]

12 minutes ago, sharkyvilla said:

For me it was pretty much when I turned 30, which I believe is when Radio 1 is designed to ditch you and send you packing to Radio 2 and beyond.

I think that’s where something like 6 music should step in. I keep meaning to listen to it more but it’s very sporadic. When I do listen to it (typically in an evening) there’s normally something that piques my interest.

[mjmooney]

3 minutes ago, Brumerican said:

Why close yourself off like that ?

People who hate change won't survive what's coming.

It's not a conscious decision, it just happens. You can be as open minded as you like, but if you find you're not enjoying it, it just becomes a pointless chore and a waste of time when you could be listening to stuff that gives you pleasure. As I suggested in my above post, I'm not one of those people that just listens to the same old familiar 'classic rock' tracks on repeat - I mean, I love The Beatles, Stones, etc., but I don't really need to ever hear those 'greatest hits' ever again - they're already hardwired in my memory anyway. But I do still keep discovering previously unheard gems from 'back then' and new recordings by young bands playing in those older styles - we're actually in a golden age for that. I can barely keep up with my Spotify browsing, so I'm not going to head off into the world of grime and hard house, when I know that every second I've heard of them so far has had me reaching screaming for the 'off' button within seconds! 

tl;dr version - Check stuff out, but don't make it a chore. 

[Mark Albrighton]

27 minutes ago, Xela said:

Everyone should just listen to Pink Floyd all the time. 

I believe their stuff takes up more shelf space than anyone else for me (even taking into account the double albums). 

I still don’t own everything they released. The band regularly slating the likes of “Ummagumma” and “Atom Heart Mother” certainly didn’t make me want to rush and check them out. Although I think the live stuff at Erdington on “Ummagumma” is well regarded.

”A saucerful of secrets” is probably the most notable absence from my collection.

[tonyh29]

by my definition you aren’t old until you wear gloves and a cap to drive a car and you aren’t young if you don’t wear white trainers and baseball caps in the gym 

so on Mikes list I guess I’m on the invisible category between B and C

Probably the most “modern” new bands I’ve kinda liked enough to buy their music would be “The music “ and “MGMT”  Both of whom I stumbled across by accident .

but just about every link to new music I’ve clicked on from this website , I’ve usually hit the off button after 20 seconds … Band Maid  being the only exception

limiting myself , indeed … but I’ve got enough music to be going on with for now, when you be run out I’ll look at finding some more 

 

[tonyh29]

2 minutes ago, Mark Albrighton said:

I believe their stuff takes up more shelf space than anyone else for me (even taking into account the double albums). 

I still don’t own everything they released. The band regularly slating the likes of “Ummagumma” and “Atom Heart Mother” certainly didn’t make me want to rush and check them out. Although I think the live stuff at Erdington on “Ummagumma” is well regarded.

”A saucerful of secrets” is probably the most notable absence from my collection.

I’ve seen the Aussie Floyd band and I saw Roger Waters at Hyde Park the other year , both events I went to with mates to be social and drink beer … don’t own any of their music but know a few tracks that I find decent … but I find Brick in the wall tedious .