Why you trippin' I ain't even do nothin..

http://www.negativland.com/news/?page_id=24

This article was quite refreshing, not because it dispels the reputation the music industry has for shady business. It actually reinforces it. No, I enjoyed this article because near the end it details how all of the industry's ratty business model is coming back to bite it in the ass. Years of exploiting the artist and consumer are finally coming to an end now that they no longer have an iron grip on intellectual property. By forcing a new format down our throats (CD's), the music industry inadvertently signed their own death warrant. The masses gained access to music on a scale never before imagined through music ripping and file trading. Not that this is all roses and magic brownies. I think that there's definitely going to be some serious growing pains as the industry is forced back to the real world, a world where people like to be respected and treated fairly. What a concept. I think that eventually large labels are going to have to come to terms with the fact that they no longer "own" intellectual property. Want a song? Well you can download it. For free. (not counting the moral cost, of course). Still what this means is that the music industry now has to work with both the consumer (to give us a reason to buy music) and the artist (to help develop said reason). Plus I think there will definitely be a revitalization of live music at some point, something that I wholeheartedly anticipate. Perhaps we'll see an era of alternative jam bands and indie bars (akin to jazz bars perhaps?). Who knows?

21st Century Music Man

I don't know how I feel about music these days. While I am an avid user of MP3s and services like Pandora and last.fm, I feel that they are changing the industry in ways that I'm not exactly comfortable with. Not that my personal feelings are that important in the grand scheme of things, but hey this is my blog. Primarily I'm concerned about the death of the album. File downloading has led to the proliferation of singles, rather than the development of full albums. This concerns me because I for one love listening to an album that has been carefully constructed and crafted as cohesive whole. While one can undeniably enjoy songs on their own, it is an entirely different matter to listen to an album and experience it as the artist takes you through a creative journey.

Take Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon, for example. That album is honestly one song. The ebb and flow of the musical tone and tempo are carefully crafted in such a way as to take the listener through the very depths of madness itself. To remove any song, or even change the order, would completely change the album. Blasphemy in my opinion. I suppose my point is that one can achieve a greater intensity and emotional expression by being able to tie in multiple songs together. It allows the artist room to develop the message they're trying to achieve, and the listener time to experience it.

It's not just white noise

So I decided to use the Office since I was watching it anyways. Now the Office was an interesting case because there isn't really background music throughout the show. Rather, the producers of the show play a track of various office noises, such as beeping phones and muted conversations, throughout the episode. This really enhances the feel that what you're watching is in fact a real office setting because such nosies would be present regardless of what people are doing in the foreground. That's not to say that music is never utilized in the show, rather it is only present when a character is directly interacting with it. Music is never just playing in the background separate from the environment of the show. I found this interesting in that it highlights how often we do use background music in tv shows. This to me seems very reminiscent of movies in that producers often use it to dramatically enhance certain points in shows, as directors often do in films. When you think about it however, this is kind of an odd concept because nobody's going to play "Born to Run" for you while you're trying to escape the zombie apocalypse. That may have been a poor example

Music in Everyday Spaces

I don't really like the concept of background music, at least in the way that the article described it. While I'm completely fine with having music in the background of say, a social gathering or party, I'm not too keen on the idea of using it as a tool to bring customers into stores and keep them there for longer. Music is something to be listened to and experienced, not something that companies should be using to lure people in to spend money. I do agree that music can and should be used to enhance your general surroundings, but no artist creates a song thinking "hey this will bring those kids into Hot Topic to buy more ironic t-shirts". That's absurd and, to me at least, seems disrespectful of music as a conceptual whole.

Furthermore, I feel like using music in such a way deadens it. I worked at a Sear's Hardware Store throughout high school, and I heard probably the same 30 or so songs (plus 10 Christmas - oops, "Holiday" songs) the entire time I worked there. Now while some of the music was admittedly bland, they also played some songs I really liked by artists like Aerosmith and Queen. The problem is that the atmosphere in which it was played, in addition to the delivery of the music, completely sucked the soul out of it. It was as though the music was an afterthought, which it honestly is. People are there to buy things, not listen to some poor rendition of "Billie Jean". Customers are looking for socket wrenches, not pondering the repercussions of their misguided interactions with women. Or maybe they are, but certainly that isn't foremost in their minds. Thus it almost seems absurd to try to listen to music in such an atmosphere, although I suppose that isn't really the point now is it? I guess when it comes down to it, I'd rather them use ambient music - collections of soothing sounds or generic melodies that a target audience might like. But please, please, refrain from using songs that I know and love. It's unfair to the artists who wrote them and its unfair to us as music consumers.

Choose 5? I'm not superman, but Ill try

The Beatles - Blackbird

This song embodies my love of music. I love the simplicity - there are only four sounds on the record: Paul's voice, the guitar, the tapping (which was actually a scratch made intentionally on the master) and the birds (which were dubbed in later). The song is so brilliantly simple and yet it is perfect in its simplicity. It has a beautiful sound with a sad tinge to it, appropriate considering the song is about the civil right struggles of Blacks in a post-civil war era. Paul says what he wants without any fancy bells or whistles. The song tears away any false pretenses that music need be complex and fancy and lays bare the emotional core which resonates so singularly with our souls.

Pink Floyd - Time

Few songs are able to so accurately embrace the things which they endeavor to describe. "Time" is one of these songs. From the ticking and ringing of clocks at the beginning to the flow of the rhythm itself throughout the song, everything about it is time. The lyrics are masterful, describing how easily we throw away our finite lives until we realize it is too late, time has slipped by. This is where my favorite line in the song comes in, "You run and you run to catch up to the sun, but it's sinking, and racing around to come up behind you again." This desperate attempt to catch up on lost time, lost life ends with the song, in an almost sad acceptance of fate. In the end we return home, to what we know and who we are at heart.

Blink 182 - Time to Break Up

I'm almost positive that every time I've broken up with a girl, I've listened to the song. It's almost as if the two are related. Nonetheless I love Blink 182 because, to me, they've always gracefully embodied the breathtaking, recklessness of youth and all of it's experiences. Breakups, hookups, parties, college - it's all there and they always lay it out there for all to see. I love that. As for this song in particular, it expresses what exactly makes breakups such miserable experiences: the aftereffects. All of a sudden every song on the radio is about you and your girl. Every love song throws into sharp contrast that which you no longer have. Then there's the shameless attempts to try and throw off these negative emotions, "...you fucked up my life." Finally the song ends with our final, desperate attempt at reconciling our emotions without having to deal with them, "I'm kicking out fiercely at the world around me"

The Goo Goo Dolls - Slide

This song will always hold a special place in my heart. Not only does it represent a musical decade that I grew up in and love, but I remember it particularly because I played it for my first girlfriend when i asked her out. That, in addition to the lyrics, is why when I hear this song I'm filled with a sense of overwhelming and unbridled love. He's singing about running away with his love, despite the mistakes she's made. Plus the line, "I wanna wake up where you are" just warms my heart. There nothing better than waking up next to the girl that you love with every ounce of your being, knowing that she feels the same about you.

Jimi Hendrix - Voodoo Child (Slight Return)

Oh Jimi, why'd you have to overdose? Jimi Hendrix took my appreciation for explosive guitar riffs, mind blowing distortion and absurd musical talent and turned it into fiery fanaticism. Between Jimi's mastery of the wah-wah pedal and his psychedelic lyrics, everyhting about this song seems otherworldly. It's like being led straight into the heart of Woodstock. This song for me represents the pinnacle of electric guitar expression. Everything about it screams individuality and soul. To listen to "Voodoo Child" is to stare into the very core of Jimi's being.

I'd also like to add that this list was hard to make in so many ways. There are numerous songs which all hold deep personal meanings to me and represent who I am as a person and what I try to find in my music. That said, I feel as though this is a pretty good snapshot.

Ear-rape

I try to keep an open mind with music, I really do. But there's some stuff that is just god awful. Case in point - Brokencyde. I'll even post a video just so everyone can see that I'm not just talking out of my ass - this stuff really is bad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qa6qpgLvH30. Man is this stuff terrible. It's like some twisted love child between screamo and dance that they like to call "punk crunk." I'm calling for euthanasia on this stuff, seriously. The dance music that they use, with smooth beats and heavy synth, completely conflicts with the vocals which pierce through the music abruptly and without contributing anything to the overall sound. There's no musicality present at all, it seems like a bunch of kids got together to scream over some beats. Now don't get me wrong, it's fun to make fun of, but I could never, EVER listen to it as music.

Please Present Proof of Purchase

Buying and selling music... man what a huge topic. I don't really know enough about the industry itself and its practices to comment on that. Of course there's the readings which we were given which were a bit confusing and more than a little infuriating. The issue seems to be that there is very little respect for the artist and their music. While it is understandable that the company needs to make money, it would seem as though the fall prey to the capitalist curse - the exploitation of those who have less power and control for the purpose of greater profit. But this is prevalent in all areas and industries in our society. As such I don't think it's a musical issue as much as it is an economic one.

That said I'm kind of torn on the idea of selling music in the first place. I suppose it's because on the one hand, I feel as though music is something very personal, to be created for expression and expression alone. As a consumer you don't really "buy" a song, what you pay for it the ability to listen to it. I suppose there is the issue of owning the "rights" to songs, but that seems amoral to me. The song belongs to its creator. Full stop. You can't really pay for the ownership of a song because you aren't paying for the experiences and feelings that helped create it, merely the right to reproduce and distribute that sound. Here I'm very biased though because I would never want to give up the rights to a song I created. It's something that I'm choosing to share with the world and that's something I wouldn't want to lose control of.

On the other hand it's necessary to acknowledge that both artists and music companies need to make money. While I believe that it's wrong to sell music that it's necessary to fund the distribution and production processes that make it available to us in the first place - and feed the artist too! That said, I DO NOT believe that this need is something that should influence the creative process. To me it is naught but a necessary evil and one that should not affect a musician's ability to play the music they want. To do so removes that whole expressive, personal touch and without that, why call it music?