Jump to content

What Happened to Music?


Recommended Posts

Brown Sugar wasn't titled as such to capitalize on any "bubblegum" pop phase that was going on at the time. Same with Sticky Fingers. You do know what "brown sugar" is a euphemism for, right? Or at least in the way the Rolling Stones used it.

You've got to be kidding. That's some of the weirdest logic I ever read.

Whether or not they did it on purpose they got cash for it. Listen up, here's another lessen in music.....bubblegum got it's name from the double-entendre lyrics relating to your sweet tooth and sexuality. 1969's Let It Bleed was to be called Sticky Fingers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 323
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Again I'm not sure what your on about there, I and I guess the other people in this conversation are well aware of the wide impact of hip hop, its just that we believe that impact has created alot of good music. Whats your opinion on this track for example?

It brings up another thing that's ruining a lot of music...drum-programing. It is to drums what auto tune is to vocals. With real drums, the guy never hit's the skins the same way twice and I believe that gives the song that much more texture. There's been many great songs lost to drum programing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're correct about the double entendre, and you're also correct about Let It Bleed. What you're not correct about is imagining that calling a song Brown Sugar would make it appeal to bubblegum fans, or that it had anything to do with that genre. It's not like nobody knew what sort of music to expect from the Rolling Stones.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I defend rap only because it's a valid genre of music. Yes, it's influenced other forms of music and vice versa, it's what happens with all kinds of music not just rap. Sometimes it results in absolute crap such as Limp Bizkit but in other instances you get some really creative stuff such as Portishead or Rage Against the Machine.

I think you defend it because you spend more time reading about music than actually listening to it.

There's been a lot of talk about music's past on this thread and I suspect those who bitch about Disco or what happened in the 70's or 80's just may be the same people who fell for the crap at that time. Now they're falling for rap.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're correct about the double entendre, and you're also correct about Let It Bleed. What you're not correct about is imagining that calling a song Brown Sugar would make it appeal to bubblegum fans, or that it had anything to do with that genre. It's not like nobody knew what sort of music to expect from the Rolling Stones.

It was a number 1 hit for them in a time of bubblegum. When the Stones have number 1's it's because the song appeals to more than just their regular fans. It's funny, the DJs on the local classic rock station will say they don't play bubblegum and then they turn around and play Crazy Elephant's "Gimme Gimme Good Lovin'". Crazy Elephant's style isn't that much different than the Ohio Express. And BTW, I wasn't knocking "Brown Sugar" or Sticky Fingers, it's my favorite album. But I don't think the average bubblegum song was as far removed from good rock 'n' roll as today's rap is.

Edited by Gospel Zone
Link to post
Share on other sites

It brings up another thing that's ruining a lot of music...drum-programing. It is to drums what auto tune is to vocals. With real drums, the guy never hit's the skins the same way twice and I believe that gives the song that much more texture. There's been many great songs lost to drum programing.

Perhaps some songs(such as this one) do not need that "texture" with the dehumaized hypnotic drum programing helping to create there desired atmosphere? Drum programming can of course be misused but so can any number of techniques devolped in the 60's and 70's, god knows how many records suffered for excessive use of multitracking in that era for example.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was a number 1 hit for them in a time of bubblegum. When the Stones have number 1's it's because the song appeals to more than just their regular fans. It's funny, the DJs on the local classic rock station will say they don't play bubblegum and then they turn around and play Crazy Elephant's "Gimme Gimme Good Lovin'". Crazy Elephant's style isn't that much different than the Ohio Express. And BTW, I wasn't knocking "Brown Sugar" or Sticky Fingers, it's my favorite album. But I don't think the average bubblegum song was as far removed from good rock 'n' roll as today's rap is.

Correlation does not necessarily equal causation. In other words, you can't say that because Brown Sugar was a hit during an era with a lot of bubblegum pop hits/artists, the song was intended to appeal to them as well as the group's own fan base. As popular as The Rolling Stones were and continue to be, I find it doubtful that someone who was a devotee of "bubblegum" pop, or even pop music in general, would go nuts about a song that refers to raping slaves in New Orleans, and has a title that is a euphemism for a black woman's vagina. The Rolling Stones were a lot edgier than even other rock groups at that time, and it's not likely that there was a lot of overlap between the two styles/genres, and their respective fans.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like Al Pacino in GF III...

OK, so I know I vowed never to post in this thread again. But sometimes a post appears that truly beggars belief...

"Bubblegum"....now there's a bonafide scapegoat. In 1971 so called bubblegum was still going and The Rolling Stones cash in on it with "Brown Sugar" from their Sticky Fingers album. "Brown Sugar" and "Sticky Fingers" were perfect bubblegum titles.

WTF?!?

Look, I realize in any discussion with a group of people you're going to have many divergent viewpoints. But it helps if you know going in that everyone has a basic knowledge of the topic at hand.

With the above quote...well, it all makes perfect sense that this thread has gone off the rails from time to time. For it's hard to have a rational discussion in the face of such nonsense.

And no, Gospel, your subsequent attempts to explain do not convince.

Hell, I'm willing to give spidersandsnakes a pass on his disco misinformation (but NOT his use of the phrase "old coloured guy"), but to lump "Brown Sugar" and the Stones with "bubblegum" is sheer lunacy.

Yeah...the Ohio Express and the 1910 Fruitgum Co. should have opened for the Stones instead of those "darkies"(there's another golden oldie for you spiders) Ike & Tina Turner and Stevie Wonder.

As to the latest topic of discussion: Rap/Hip-Hop...it needs no defending. Just as classical, bluegrass, jazz, metal nor any other musical form needs defending.

Music, whatever form it takes, is a form of self-expression...be it emotionally, intellectually, politically, sexually, whatever.

That's the beauty of music; it allows for many modes for expression and gives voice to the voiceless.

And if you don't like one form of music you can simply find another you DO like...or even better, CREATE a new form that suits you and your social circle.

And that's how music has evolved from its simple beginnings to the multifaceted kaleidoscope it is today.

You don't like rap...or disco...fine, don't listen to it! Nobody's got a gun to your head forcing you, do they?

But to suggest that rap has ruined music is just as pointless as blaming disco or soft rock. Led Zeppelin flourished as Bread and Carol King ruled the charts.

I can't remember if it was Electrophile or Aquamarine or maybe both...but the gist of what the post said was how amazing it was that some fans of Led Zeppelin, a band known for its wide-ranging influences, appear to have extremely narrow tastes themselves.

I have often wondered about that myself. The hatred towards rap is especially ironic, as the rise of rap coincided with the rise in Led Zeppelin's standing with the critical community.

You think it's an accident that Led Zeppelin has appeared on more Rolling Stone covers post-1980 than they did in their heyday?

Go back to 1980...the critical consensus was pretty much goodbye and good riddance. Punk and new wave was supposed to sweep out the old dinosaurs anyway...the fact that it didn't made some critics more bitter towards Zeppelin.

So when Bonham died and the band called it a day, some critics of the time treated it as a victory for the punk generation...now if we could just get those geezers Pink Floyd, Yes and the Stones to join them, oh happy day!

Admittedly this view was more prevalent in the UK press than the US. But if you read Rolling Stone's reviews of Knebworth and ITTOD, you knew their feelings towards the band hadn't changed since their first review of the band in 1969.

As the 80's dawned, it was the opinion of many that the Zeppelin era was over and that as the years passed their influence and hold on a generation of kids would wane until their records collected dust in cut-out bins and radio moved on to newer and shinier bands, making Zeppelin sound old and obsolete.

Of course, THAT never happened. By the 90's, Led Zeppelin's reputation and mystique had, seemingly against odds, not been diminished but actually increased. It had to gall Rolling Stone magazine when they were printing their special issues celebrating each decade, that they realized that they couldn't put their beloved Rolling Stones on the 70's cover...that Led Zeppelin was the proper choice for the cover.

So what happened? How did the critical consensus shift so dramatically to the point that How the West Was Won was one of the best-reviewed releases of the past decade? Or that no one now bats an eye if someone suggests Led Zeppelin is better than the Stones and the Who(the Beatles remain sacrosanct)?

Well, of course first and foremost is the quality of the music itself. And being that Zeppelin was always a "people's band", it helped that the people never abandoned them. They still requested them on radio to the point that stations had to create Get the Led Out programs to satiate the fans.

So even as we embraced new bands and genres we never left Zeppelin behind. I was a huge punk fan from the beginning...loved the Ramones, Clash, Buzzcocks, Sex Pistols, X, Black Flag and all that...but there was no way I was getting rid of my Zeppelin records.

But fans are one thing, critics another. And there were two developments of the 80's that I believe helped with the resuscitation of Zeppelin's reputation in the eyes of the critics: "hair metal" and rap.

Hair Metal was a boon to Led Zeppelin because in the wake of all those atrocious bands, critics realized how good Zeppelin sounded in comparison. Even with the NWOHM and thrash metal bands like Metallica and Slayer, the limited variety in their music served to highlight Zeppelin's eclecticism and many critics came to realize that dismissing Led Zeppelin as just a heavy metal band was wrong. Zeppelin was just as all-encompassing in their music as the Beatles and the Stones and Dylan.

The second, and in some ways most important, thing that happened was the development of rap and hip-hop.

You see, as hard as it may be for you kids to believe, but one of the most common complaints directed towards Zeppelin in the 70's was Bonzo's drumming. They complained he was too loud...he didn't swing like Charlie Watts...you couldn't dance to the band.

Don't believe me? Look it up...the reviews from back then are rife with slurs against Bonham's drumming.

Then rap comes along...and rappers need beats. Since they couldn't keep using the same Chic groove over and over, they looked elsewhere for some

slamming and RHYTHMIC beats. And guess what...they found a whole

repository of them on Led Zeppelin records.

It is said that Bonham is the second-most sampled drummer after Bernard Purdie, the drummer for James Brown.

So after a decade of critics harping about Led Zeppelin's supposed lack of rhythmic sense and clumsy beats, here we were in the 80's and Zeppelin was supplying a large chunk of the beats to a new genre that people were DANCING to...and a genre that was developed primarily by African-Americans.

Led Zeppelin had taken from the blues and transcended the form...now blacks were taking from Led Zeppelin, a band primarily thought of as the music of working-class white kids, and used their beats to fuel a decidedly urban and ethnocentric music revolution.

You could hear critics heads explode all over the country. Not only had the punk (and post-punk) scene fail in destroying Led Zeppelin, "classic rock" radio popping up all over the nation, but now Zeppelin was seeping its way to the younger and hipper generations by infiltrating the cool new rap scene.

And since rap and hip-hop had been embraced almost immediately by the hip crowd and critics, the way rappers and/or their producers repurposed Led Zeppelin's music practically forced critics to re-examine their stance on Zeppelin.

By the late 80's you could sense the beginning of a critical shift. Of course it helped that some of the old guard haters like John Mendelsson no longer were around, replaced by younger writers...writers who perhaps were fans of the band.

By the time the first Zeppelin box set was released in 1990, reviews were almost universal in their praise...even from sources that previously were antagonistic, ie. Robert Hilburn of the LA Times and Rolling Stone.

So hate rap if you want. Just know that it played a part in Led Zeppelin enjoying more critical cachet today than it did in its 70's heyday.

Meanwhile, as to the question of what's happened to music? I don't know about you, but music is HAPPENING RIGHT NOW on my stereo as I listen to the latest releases by PJ Harvey, Lucinda Williams, Radiohead, the Strokes, and Deerhunter.

Edited by Strider
Link to post
Share on other sites

So ture Strider!!

Ironic signature too! As I recall Dave Marsh HATED every Zeppelin album. When Presence came out I remember him writing something like Achillies Last Stand sounded like "Bonham had forgotten how to play drums".

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you defend it because you spend more time reading about music than actually listening to it.

There's been a lot of talk about music's past on this thread and I suspect those who bitch about Disco or what happened in the 70's or 80's just may be the same people who fell for the crap at that time. Now they're falling for rap.

It's actually comical to listen to you berate rap and disco.

You allude to black rappers "stealing other artists songs" to rap to, yet have no problem with The Stones and Zeppelin who built their careers basically doing the same thing, lifting tunes and riffs from old black bluesmen from years past.

And as bad as you seem to hate disco, your own beloved Stones were the worst kind of bandwagon-jumpers when they released Miss You, trying to cash-in on the success (yes, success) of disco.

It is painfully obvious you actually know very little of rap, just the bare minimum of obvious examples upon which you base your narrow and prejudiced opinions.

To begin with, many rap songs use their own beats, not those of previous songs.

Just as Zeppelin took Nobody's Fault But Mine and totally changed it (and most would agree, for the better), many rap songs do the same thing.

Flo-Rida took a mediocre 80s song by Dead or Alive You Spin Me Round (Like a Record), and made Right Round a fairly large success. It's been used in a number of movie soundtracks, and is decidedly preferable to the boring original 80s tune.

Snoop Dogg's latest release Boom does the same thing with yet another barely-memorable tune from the 80s, Yaz's Situation. While the original has that same 80s malaise/emo sound, Boom is energetic and fun to listen to.

I think the way these new versions recall the older ones in your memory is what makes them even more enjoyable - it's like when the way you remember something is often a lot better than the way it actually was.

Admittedly, it's not for everyone, but that doesn't make it not legitimate, and it certainly doesn't mean "it sucks" across the board.

It just happens to suck in your particular and oddly narrow-minded view.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's actually comical to listen to you berate rap and disco.

You allude to black rappers "stealing other artists songs" to rap to, yet have no problem with The Stones and Zeppelin who built their careers basically doing the same thing, lifting tunes and riffs from old black bluesmen from /years past.

And as bad as you seem to hate disco, your own beloved Stones were the worst kind of bandwagon-jumpers when they released Miss You, trying to cash-in on the success (yes, success) of disco.

It is painfully obvious you actually know very little of rap, just the bare minimum of obvious examples upon which you base your narrow and prejudiced opinions.

To begin with, many rap songs use their own beats, not those of previous songs.

Just as Zeppelin took Nobody's Fault But Mine and totally changed it (and most would agree, for the better), many rap songs do the same thing.

Flo-Rida took a mediocre 80s song by Dead or Alive You Spin Me Round (Like a Record), and made Right Round a fairly large success. It's been used in a number of movie soundtracks, and is decidedly preferable to the boring original 80s tune.

Snoop Dogg's latest release Boom does the same thing with yet another barely-memorable tune from the 80s, Yaz's Situation. While the original has that same 80s malaise/emo sound, Boom is energetic and fun to listen to.

I think the way these new versions recall the older ones in your memory is what makes them even more enjoyable - it's like when the way you remember something is often a lot better than the way it actually was.

Admittedly, it's not for everyone, but that doesn't make it not legitimate, and it certainly doesn't mean "it sucks" across the board.

It just happens to suck in your particular and oddly narrow-minded view.

To use an internet term I learned from Electrophile: QFT :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Talking about the Rolling Stones' Brown Sugar, I don't understand how someone could be sold as a slave in the market at New Orleans and have a mama who was a tent show queen. I thought the tent shows came along after slavery ended, when people no longer had guaranteed employment and shelter at the cotton plantations and had to seek a living as entertainers. I thought that was how the tent show circuit developed.

Edited by Silver Rider
Link to post
Share on other sites

Use the multi-quote button if you're going to quote more than person at a time. It's right there, next to the Reply button. There's no need for you to post four times in a row, to respond to four different posts.

:):):)WEll, NORMALLY, in many of the other half a dozen forums I'm on, I DO post multi- replies, but with YOU LOT I need to highlight each and every reply so that you can get what I mean.....you guys are lost in musical space, I tell ya, hehehehehehehh:):):)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Half of you guys should not even bother being on a Led ZEp forum judging by your BIASED knowledge of music.....I thought there were IGNORAnt PEOPLE ON THE nET BUT SOME OF YOU guys go far beyond the tolerability line, I assure you:):)!!!

Edited by spidersandsnakes
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's actually comical to listen to you berate rap and disco.

You allude to black rappers "stealing other artists songs" to rap to, yet have no problem with The Stones and Zeppelin who built their careers basically doing the same thing, lifting tunes and riffs from old black bluesmen from years past.

And as bad as you seem to hate disco, your own beloved Stones were the worst kind of bandwagon-jumpers when they released Miss You, trying to cash-in on the success (yes, success) of disco.

It is painfully obvious you actually know very little of rap, just the bare minimum of obvious examples upon which you base your narrow and prejudiced opinions.

To begin with, many rap songs use their own beats, not those of previous songs.

Just as Zeppelin took Nobody's Fault But Mine and totally changed it (and most would agree, for the better), many rap songs do the same thing.

Flo-Rida took a mediocre 80s song by Dead or Alive You Spin Me Round (Like a Record), and made Right Round a fairly large success. It's been used in a number of movie soundtracks, and is decidedly preferable to the boring original 80s tune.

Snoop Dogg's latest release Boom does the same thing with yet another barely-memorable tune from the 80s, Yaz's Situation. While the original has that same 80s malaise/emo sound, Boom is energetic and fun to listen to.

I think the way these new versions recall the older ones in your memory is what makes them even more enjoyable - it's like when the way you remember something is often a lot better than the way it actually was.

Admittedly, it's not for everyone, but that doesn't make it not legitimate, and it certainly doesn't mean "it sucks" across the board.

It just happens to suck in your particular and oddly narrow-minded view.

Every single example of how hip hop "made lame songs" better is based on your personal tastes and preferences. I disagree, especially with regards to "Situation" by Yaz. Seriously now, Snoop did better than Alison Moyet? That's laughable. I'm also guessing you probably weren't even alive when Dead or Alive had that hit club record. If you were and went to any dance club anywhere in the world, that song would have been playing and people would have been dancing and having a good time. Flo-Rida did that one better too huh?

Opinions are great, but they're not facts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a whole lot of ignorance and musical snobbery going on in this thread. It's rather sad. No one has to like rap, no one has to like disco, no one has to like anything. There's a difference between disliking something and dismissing it, and there's too much of the latter going on here. There is plenty of music or artists I don't like, but I don't dismiss them or what they do. I just don't listen to it/them. I find something else that strikes my fancy. Again, it all comes back to disliking, not dismissing.

The idea that if you like Led Zeppelin, you shouldn't like XYZ, is just ridiculous. I can listen to classic rock and then the Beastie Boys and not find that weird, strange, or otherwise nonsensical.

I feel sorry for some of you lot. Oh well. Your loss, and not our problem. Go bitch about it somewhere else.

Edited by Electrophile
Link to post
Share on other sites

Some people shouldn't be talking about bitching somewhere else unless they stop the bias talk about alleged 'non knowledge of music' and silly if not absurd remarks on other people's posts. Some people say it's possible to listen to diff kinds of music without dismising it or disliking it..I agree....but if I hear people dismissing or dislliking Led Zep's music just because it's rock and not Motown-oriented or, as I've often heard, NOT eaSy-listening enuff to dance to, then they will promptly find me here or elsewhere kicking there 'lil asses, heheheh :):):).....I WILL NOT BACK OFF A GOOD HEARTY DEBATE...BE SURE ABOUT THAT, HEHEH :):):):)

Edited by spidersandsnakes
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's actually comical to listen to you berate rap and disco.

You allude to black rappers "stealing other artists songs" to rap to, yet have no problem with The Stones and Zeppelin who built their careers basically doing the same thing, lifting tunes and riffs from old black bluesmen from years past.

And as bad as you seem to hate disco, your own beloved Stones were the worst kind of bandwagon-jumpers when they released Miss You, trying to cash-in on the success (yes, success) of disco.

It is painfully obvious you actually know very little of rap, just the bare minimum of obvious examples upon which you base your narrow and prejudiced opinions.

To begin with, many rap songs use their own beats, not those of previous songs.

Just as Zeppelin took Nobody's Fault But Mine and totally changed it (and most would agree, for the better), many rap songs do the same thing.

Flo-Rida took a mediocre 80s song by Dead or Alive You Spin Me Round (Like a Record), and made Right Round a fairly large success. It's been used in a number of movie soundtracks, and is decidedly preferable to the boring original 80s tune.

Snoop Dogg's latest release Boom does the same thing with yet another barely-memorable tune from the 80s, Yaz's Situation. While the original has that same 80s malaise/emo sound, Boom is energetic and fun to listen to.

I think the way these new versions recall the older ones in your memory is what makes them even more enjoyable - it's like when the way you remember something is often a lot better than the way it actually was.

Admittedly, it's not for everyone, but that doesn't make it not legitimate, and it certainly doesn't mean "it sucks" across the board.

It just happens to suck in your particular and oddly narrow-minded view.

I've been one of the first one's here to point out the Stones bandwagon-jumping, as you put it. Somewhere on this site, maybe even on this thread, I mentioned that one of worst things about disco is that about a fourth of the soon to be released The Rolling Stones: Complete Singles (1971-2006) CD set will be those horrible dance mixes. To make this short and not so sweet, you obviously have trouble comprehending what you read and I've never heard a rap influenced song that was better for having been so influenced.

Edited by Gospel Zone
Link to post
Share on other sites

Correlation does not necessarily equal causation. In other words, you can't say that because Brown Sugar was a hit during an era with a lot of bubblegum pop hits/artists, the song was intended to appeal to them as well as the group's own fan base. As popular as The Rolling Stones were and continue to be, I find it doubtful that someone who was a devotee of "bubblegum" pop, or even pop music in general, would go nuts about a song that refers to raping slaves in New Orleans, and has a title that is a euphemism for a black woman's vagina. The Rolling Stones were a lot edgier than even other rock groups at that time, and it's not likely that there was a lot of overlap between the two styles/genres, and their respective fans.

Can you say that the bubble gum crowd didn't buy "Brown Sugar"? And what's your definition of going nuts? "Brown Sugar" made number one on the local top 40 station here in 1971. And part of my point is that bubblegum was based on the same music that much of the rock bands that are taken more seriously is. This may be a wild guess but I think they used the same 3 chords and same blue notes, so it's not the evil some may think it to be. I think the definition of bubblegum is quite subjective. The Shadows Of Knight, who were sometimes referred to as the American Rolling Stones, were the studio band for Buddha Records and their hit "Shake" was released on Buddha's Team label. At the time "Shake" was considered bubblegum, but if it had been released in in 1966 on the Shadow's Gloria or Back Door Men albums would anyone even consider it as bubblegum? And if the Shadows had recorded the Stones "Stupid Girl", which had the same Vox like organ sound as "Shake" and released it on the Team label would it have been then considered bubblegum?

Edited by Gospel Zone
Link to post
Share on other sites

Led Zeppelin, the Rolling Stones, The Who Neil Young, David Bowie, Pink Floyd, Elvis Presley, the Beatles and others use to be known all around and we loved them! But know, since just before the 00's, music has gone berserk and literally sucks.

Now the new generations (apart from a few like me) are listening to crap and some strange adults are following. If you mention one of the above bands, they are like, "What are you talking about?". Most don't even want to listen to new bands because they want to stick to their "generation".

What is your opinion on this outrage?

You forgot to mention Black Sabbath, Groundhogs and Beefheart, I blame Pete Waterman for all this non talent thats about, A band used to be a band with guitars and things! now all you need is a stupid girlie hair cut and a couple of gay looking mates who wear them idiot looking pants!, its a joke all this crap im sick of it being rammed down my throat on every advert on the bleeding tele, Im off to a desert island somewhere to get away from all this sickness, Oh and yes im taking my records with me along with my B&W`s and Denon amp.....Save the Vinyl ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...