i really hate the music on NESN...you know the "new england sports network" even though its main focus 24/7 is on the red sox.
don't get me wrong, that's okay...but not the point. the music they have during the game just doesn't live up the same as YES network. same with our announcers...but again that's outside the realm of this blog.
now that that's out of the way...onto the rave. so i've been researching some of the top "whatevers" of the 00's decade. or the 2000's decade. however you wanna put it. in other words, the decade that JUST finished. i love how they can already come with a top 100 songs and albums list (rollingstone magazine specifically). do you think that list would change in say twenty years or so? i sure do. after that amount of time, our opinion on what good came out of the 00's is going to be more valid than our opinion after six months.
now don't rule out the possibility that these sources may be basing their list off of radio and chart success. that may very well be so.
like in every one of these "nationally opinionated lists", there's stuff you agree with and stuff you don't. sure, give radiohead's "kid-A" the top album of the decade! i'm not being sarcastic at all. they deserve it. i could give a whole shpiel on why i think radiohead is one of the greatest music acts in the past thirty years. BUT again, that's for another post.
so that's one thing positive about rollingstone's list. on the flip-side, i'm not happy that dave didn't make it on EITHER of the lists. i think "big whiskey" is good enough to at least make the top 100! no? then where's green day's "21st century breakdown"? didn't that win rock album of the year? where is it?
what are they basing these lists off of? or better yet, what is the grammy's DEAL?! maybe i rely on them too much. i think i do. i'll start watching the "world music awards" (which happens to be on tonight). i mean, who's ever heard of THAT? i turned it on and all i saw was marc anthony and some random r&b artist i had never seen.
top song on the list is "crazy" by gnarls barkley. well deserved, i believe. hadn't heard it in a long time before it came on the radio two days ago. very modern motown-ish and i dig that.
lady gaga BARELY made it on. thank GOD! i was expecting her big craaaze album "fame" to be in the top 1 based on well it did in the media last year.
and it's also amazing to to find some of the songs that you hadn't heard in YEARS...and even some that you thought were from the 90's! or 80's! this applied for the white stripes' "seven nation army". i could have sworn that was older than 2003. wayyy older.
how did bob dylan make it into the top 15 twice for albums? were "love and theft" and "modern guilt" actually good? don't really care to find out, actually. just not a fan.
stick to victoria's secret commercials, will ya?
u2 had its fair share of the list, as did coldplay. however, coldplay's "x&y" did NOT make it, which i'm sad about. i thought that was great album. one of my favorites.
overall, the list is fairly accurate. it can always use a little switching around and shifting. but what doesn't? nothing's perfect, especially when there's 100 spots to fill. that's hard, and i give rollingstone props for that.
i just can't wait to look back on this decade and THEN make my own conclusion. what's the dominant genre of the era? what artists will be remembered? which will be considered "one-hit-wonders"? <---hmm...that's a good blog idea.
let's see what the '10's bring to the table.
Cheers!
-Johnny
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
"Still Here Dancing With the GrooGrux King"
i could go on a rave about how ridiculous it is to sit down and watch a world cup soccer game...but that defeats the purpose of this "music blog"
not much is on my mind today, so i'll write another album review. this time let's focus on dave matthews band's most recent album "big whiskey and the groogrux king". great album, and was vastly anticipated by fans, and me as well.
i kept myself updated with the album progress even a over a year before it came out. i was disappointed with 2005's "stand up" and overheard that the next one would be an improvement. so i followed antsmarching.org, a fan site for dmb.
when i first heard of the title, i knew it was going to be stellar. "big whiskey" was very dave-esque. the "groogrux king", after a bit of research on its meaning, fit perfectly. for those who don't know, "groogrux" was a nickname for the deceased leroi moore, former sax player for dmb.
anywho, on to the music side of the album. they took a new direction to their music, much like what they've been doing for the entire decade. when you think about it, "everyday" was very mainstream rock-ish, "busted stuff" was dark and complex, "stand up" was influenced by the band's hip hop styled producer, and then now "big whiskey" is a little melting pot in itself. it has a bit of everything.
the question that kept circling through my noggin as i listened to this album was: "is this as good as the Big 3"? the Big 3 stands for dave's first 3 albums, "under the table and dreaming", "crash", and "before these crowded streets". any dmb fan can tell you that those three are one in the same in terms of dmb's greatest work. those albums, although having mixed reception when they were first released, grew to become easy favorites among fans. as for me, i tend to analyze the musicality in its parts rather than as a whole...at least for the first few listens. after a while i can actually sit down and just enjoy the music; what everybody does.
i came to the conclusion that this album is NOT worthy of a "Big 4", and for a number of reasons.
for one, the first 3 albums include a lot of improvisation among the band members, especially leroi moore (sax) and boyd tinsley (violin). almost every song there would be a breakdown in which one of them would have a little solo...and if not, little "riffs" and "fillers" would be scattered within the song as decorations. that's what makes dmb's music so good. they include the little un-replicable decorations that add just a little more to an already great song. as for "big whiskey", there's hardly any improvisation. they decided to keep it safe and stick to the rules to modern day songwriting. same structure: intro, verse, chorus, verse, chorus, bridge, chorus, outro...as apposed to their first three albums where the structure was more like "intro (w/ improv), verse, chorus, verse/or improv, chorus, improv, outro, more improv?
secondly, where's boyd? where's the violin? not only is there no real evidence of violin solos and improvisation, but there's really no violin in general! he's a regular member of the band, so why isn't he a crucial part of this album? i was disappointed with the lack of blending among instruments. they seemed to include more of their guest artist, tim reynolds on electric guitar than boyd on violin.
so anyway this is more of an album COMPARISON rather than an album review. overall, the album is great and it should have won best rock album of the year instead of bile day. oh excuse me, GREEN day. and there isn't a band out there now that is able to play up to the standards of dave matthews band. nobody else is capable of creating something like big whiskey.
so in terms of musical talent and creativity, "big whiskey" gets 10/10.
based off of previous DMB albums, big whiskey gets 6/10.
overall enjoyment and comfortability of listening, big whiskey gets 7/10.
personal rating [which is all that counts lol], big whiskey gets a 7/10.
so there ya go. not the most in-depth review...but you get the gist.
night ch'yall. Cheers!
-Johnny
not much is on my mind today, so i'll write another album review. this time let's focus on dave matthews band's most recent album "big whiskey and the groogrux king". great album, and was vastly anticipated by fans, and me as well.
i kept myself updated with the album progress even a over a year before it came out. i was disappointed with 2005's "stand up" and overheard that the next one would be an improvement. so i followed antsmarching.org, a fan site for dmb.
when i first heard of the title, i knew it was going to be stellar. "big whiskey" was very dave-esque. the "groogrux king", after a bit of research on its meaning, fit perfectly. for those who don't know, "groogrux" was a nickname for the deceased leroi moore, former sax player for dmb.
anywho, on to the music side of the album. they took a new direction to their music, much like what they've been doing for the entire decade. when you think about it, "everyday" was very mainstream rock-ish, "busted stuff" was dark and complex, "stand up" was influenced by the band's hip hop styled producer, and then now "big whiskey" is a little melting pot in itself. it has a bit of everything.
the question that kept circling through my noggin as i listened to this album was: "is this as good as the Big 3"? the Big 3 stands for dave's first 3 albums, "under the table and dreaming", "crash", and "before these crowded streets". any dmb fan can tell you that those three are one in the same in terms of dmb's greatest work. those albums, although having mixed reception when they were first released, grew to become easy favorites among fans. as for me, i tend to analyze the musicality in its parts rather than as a whole...at least for the first few listens. after a while i can actually sit down and just enjoy the music; what everybody does.
i came to the conclusion that this album is NOT worthy of a "Big 4", and for a number of reasons.
for one, the first 3 albums include a lot of improvisation among the band members, especially leroi moore (sax) and boyd tinsley (violin). almost every song there would be a breakdown in which one of them would have a little solo...and if not, little "riffs" and "fillers" would be scattered within the song as decorations. that's what makes dmb's music so good. they include the little un-replicable decorations that add just a little more to an already great song. as for "big whiskey", there's hardly any improvisation. they decided to keep it safe and stick to the rules to modern day songwriting. same structure: intro, verse, chorus, verse, chorus, bridge, chorus, outro...as apposed to their first three albums where the structure was more like "intro (w/ improv), verse, chorus, verse/or improv, chorus, improv, outro, more improv?
secondly, where's boyd? where's the violin? not only is there no real evidence of violin solos and improvisation, but there's really no violin in general! he's a regular member of the band, so why isn't he a crucial part of this album? i was disappointed with the lack of blending among instruments. they seemed to include more of their guest artist, tim reynolds on electric guitar than boyd on violin.
so anyway this is more of an album COMPARISON rather than an album review. overall, the album is great and it should have won best rock album of the year instead of bile day. oh excuse me, GREEN day. and there isn't a band out there now that is able to play up to the standards of dave matthews band. nobody else is capable of creating something like big whiskey.
so in terms of musical talent and creativity, "big whiskey" gets 10/10.
based off of previous DMB albums, big whiskey gets 6/10.
overall enjoyment and comfortability of listening, big whiskey gets 7/10.
personal rating [which is all that counts lol], big whiskey gets a 7/10.
so there ya go. not the most in-depth review...but you get the gist.
night ch'yall. Cheers!
-Johnny
Monday, June 14, 2010
"Once, Twice, Three Times a Lady"
...more like "once, twice, three times just stop". even twice is unnecessary, most of the time.
i'm talking about song re-makes, re-mixes, and rrhea. we all know 'em, love 'em, hate' em (the ratio is 1:99). every so often a halfway decent one comes around, but even out of THOSE, there is a slim percentage of the song being as good as the original.
i mean, there are the type of artists that get big off of remakes, like michael buble. he keeps within the obligations of a song though, and makes sure it isn't a detriment to the original. plus, his music consists of american standards; the type of music that SHOULD be re-done and re-mastered just so it doesn't disappear all together into the brume of today's mediocre music.
*side-note* that's the good thing about jazz ensembles and combos in schools. they keep the intelligent music up and thriving. that's for a different post though...
so ANYWAY, beSIDES from the bubles and the dubonnets, we then travel into the spectrum of MODERN day remakes...
like someone that just shouldn't do this sort of thing is paul anka. he came out with an album a few years back named "rock swings", where he took modern day rock hits and "swung" them. made them jazzy. he probably thought he was doing these superhits a favor by de-hardcore-orizing them. like "smells like teen spirit", "it's my life", "eye of the tiger"...like really? it's enjoyable because it's stupid.
and then you have the artists that just take ONE song and reeeaaally go at it. full speed try and make it their own...which is bad.
just a few examples of bad remakes.
joe cocker - with a little help from my friends [originally by the beatles] - okay first of all, why that song, because it's not the greatest song in the world anyway. since i was little, i always secretly dreaded that song whenever it came on right after "sgt. peppers..." second, one hit is good enough joe, save your voice.
michael bolton - dock of the bay [originally by otis redding] - what a way to honor a dead man...have michael bolton sing his greatest song. i'll just leave it at that.
eric clapton - i shot the sheriff [originally by bob marley] - now this is a "good" example of a remake...but i just don't like it. i guess i never appreciated clapton's cream/solo career switch. shoot me now.
and the list goes on...
aaron neville - everybody plays the fool [originally by main ingredient] - just...no.
bangles - hazy shade of winter [originally by simon & garfunkel] - thanks to tangles and bangles there, the entire country except for my brother peter does not know the s&g version...which is incredible.
{too many to count} - i want candy [originally by the strangeloves] - i hate this song because of all the remakes...
okay, on to the handfull of GOOD remakes!
lenny kravitz - american woman [originally by guess who] - i had heard lenny's version before i had heard guess who's...the old version, released in 1970 is dry and un-exciting. the song was almost meant to be played at a high intensity level, and kravitz delivered that well.
phil collins - true colors [originally by cindi lauper] - anything from cindi lauper's repertoire can successfully be re-done in my opinion. the two songs are practically the same thing, with different vocals. and we all can agree that phil is more enjoyable to listen to than cindi. yes? yes.
stevie wonder - for once in my life [originally by jean dushon] - like, did you even think this was a remake? exactly...
johnny cash - hurt [originally by nine inch nails] - oh my VISHNU i cannot stress it enough, this song is amazing. johnny just makes this song so much more emotional, not only with the great backing music, but with his feeble old vocals. nevermind the fact that the two versions are completely different. you'd never know it was a remake. it's just a great song by johnny.
alrighty well that's all i can think of now. i'm sure all of you can come up with a slew of 'em off the top of your head. doesn't surprise me...they DO stick in your mind. feel free to share any more that you have in the comments section below. thanks ch'yall.
cheers!
-Johnny
i'm talking about song re-makes, re-mixes, and rrhea. we all know 'em, love 'em, hate' em (the ratio is 1:99). every so often a halfway decent one comes around, but even out of THOSE, there is a slim percentage of the song being as good as the original.
i mean, there are the type of artists that get big off of remakes, like michael buble. he keeps within the obligations of a song though, and makes sure it isn't a detriment to the original. plus, his music consists of american standards; the type of music that SHOULD be re-done and re-mastered just so it doesn't disappear all together into the brume of today's mediocre music.
*side-note* that's the good thing about jazz ensembles and combos in schools. they keep the intelligent music up and thriving. that's for a different post though...
so ANYWAY, beSIDES from the bubles and the dubonnets, we then travel into the spectrum of MODERN day remakes...
like someone that just shouldn't do this sort of thing is paul anka. he came out with an album a few years back named "rock swings", where he took modern day rock hits and "swung" them. made them jazzy. he probably thought he was doing these superhits a favor by de-hardcore-orizing them. like "smells like teen spirit", "it's my life", "eye of the tiger"...like really? it's enjoyable because it's stupid.
and then you have the artists that just take ONE song and reeeaaally go at it. full speed try and make it their own...which is bad.
just a few examples of bad remakes.
joe cocker - with a little help from my friends [originally by the beatles] - okay first of all, why that song, because it's not the greatest song in the world anyway. since i was little, i always secretly dreaded that song whenever it came on right after "sgt. peppers..." second, one hit is good enough joe, save your voice.
michael bolton - dock of the bay [originally by otis redding] - what a way to honor a dead man...have michael bolton sing his greatest song. i'll just leave it at that.
eric clapton - i shot the sheriff [originally by bob marley] - now this is a "good" example of a remake...but i just don't like it. i guess i never appreciated clapton's cream/solo career switch. shoot me now.
and the list goes on...
aaron neville - everybody plays the fool [originally by main ingredient] - just...no.
bangles - hazy shade of winter [originally by simon & garfunkel] - thanks to tangles and bangles there, the entire country except for my brother peter does not know the s&g version...which is incredible.
{too many to count} - i want candy [originally by the strangeloves] - i hate this song because of all the remakes...
okay, on to the handfull of GOOD remakes!
lenny kravitz - american woman [originally by guess who] - i had heard lenny's version before i had heard guess who's...the old version, released in 1970 is dry and un-exciting. the song was almost meant to be played at a high intensity level, and kravitz delivered that well.
phil collins - true colors [originally by cindi lauper] - anything from cindi lauper's repertoire can successfully be re-done in my opinion. the two songs are practically the same thing, with different vocals. and we all can agree that phil is more enjoyable to listen to than cindi. yes? yes.
stevie wonder - for once in my life [originally by jean dushon] - like, did you even think this was a remake? exactly...
johnny cash - hurt [originally by nine inch nails] - oh my VISHNU i cannot stress it enough, this song is amazing. johnny just makes this song so much more emotional, not only with the great backing music, but with his feeble old vocals. nevermind the fact that the two versions are completely different. you'd never know it was a remake. it's just a great song by johnny.
alrighty well that's all i can think of now. i'm sure all of you can come up with a slew of 'em off the top of your head. doesn't surprise me...they DO stick in your mind. feel free to share any more that you have in the comments section below. thanks ch'yall.
cheers!
-Johnny
Saturday, June 12, 2010
"Bean Town Boogie in My Mind"
...or is it "cheese fries twirl into my ride?"...or even "pizza pudding chips and fries"
no actually the correct lyric is "these sounds swirl into my mind". or at least that's what people seem to think. even the buckethead's themselves could be wrong. anywho, i'm talking about the song "the bomb" by the bucketheads. it's one of those 90's gay club dance songs that a few of us are familiar with. although, each of us seems to have a different interpretation of the lyrics.
i mean, those six words are really the only spoken text in that song, and we still screw it up. give it a listen if you haven't before and see what you come up with.
so i thought i would take this space to mention a few songs that have misheard lyrics. june nick and i have discovered a couple fan-made videos on youtube of what they THINK they are hearing in a song.
those vids include "even flow" - pearl jam (you could do a misheard lyrics video for pretty much every one of their songs), "smells like teen spirit" - nirvava, and "sowing the seeds of love" - tears for fears.
here are a few "betcha never knew"s:
keep on with the force, don't stop, don't stop 'til you get enough [don't stop 'til you get enough - michael jackson]
be my mirror, my sword, and shield [viva la vida - coldplay]
what you doin' in the back? (i thought it was "what you doing on your butt?" [you should be dancing - bee gees]
jeremy spoke in class today [jeremy - pearl jam]
i'm sure there are a ton more, and i wish i could think of some more now. what i don't get is how some artists who have a reputation of having unclear lyrics continue to make it harder for us to understand them. aka pearl jam, the bee gees, nirvana. like, do they realize that we have to look UP the lyrics to their songs rather than just listen. oh well i guess it's good not to change...especially the voice, which is pretty difficult to try and do.
so i'll keep today's post short. i feel an album review coming on tomorrow. sound good? neat. see you then.
Cheers!
-Johnny
no actually the correct lyric is "these sounds swirl into my mind". or at least that's what people seem to think. even the buckethead's themselves could be wrong. anywho, i'm talking about the song "the bomb" by the bucketheads. it's one of those 90's gay club dance songs that a few of us are familiar with. although, each of us seems to have a different interpretation of the lyrics.
i mean, those six words are really the only spoken text in that song, and we still screw it up. give it a listen if you haven't before and see what you come up with.
so i thought i would take this space to mention a few songs that have misheard lyrics. june nick and i have discovered a couple fan-made videos on youtube of what they THINK they are hearing in a song.
those vids include "even flow" - pearl jam (you could do a misheard lyrics video for pretty much every one of their songs), "smells like teen spirit" - nirvava, and "sowing the seeds of love" - tears for fears.
here are a few "betcha never knew"s:
keep on with the force, don't stop, don't stop 'til you get enough [don't stop 'til you get enough - michael jackson]
be my mirror, my sword, and shield [viva la vida - coldplay]
what you doin' in the back? (i thought it was "what you doing on your butt?" [you should be dancing - bee gees]
jeremy spoke in class today [jeremy - pearl jam]
i'm sure there are a ton more, and i wish i could think of some more now. what i don't get is how some artists who have a reputation of having unclear lyrics continue to make it harder for us to understand them. aka pearl jam, the bee gees, nirvana. like, do they realize that we have to look UP the lyrics to their songs rather than just listen. oh well i guess it's good not to change...especially the voice, which is pretty difficult to try and do.
so i'll keep today's post short. i feel an album review coming on tomorrow. sound good? neat. see you then.
Cheers!
-Johnny
Friday, June 11, 2010
"You're so Two Thousand and Late"
what does that even mean? i'm so 3008, you're so two thousand and late! like really fergie, could you create a more lame lyric to a more lame song?
well actually, "boom boom pow" by the black eyed peas isn't the worst song on their most recent album The E.N.D. but one of the worst of this decade. what a way to close the 00's with one of 2009's most commercially successful albums, but worst musically.
and here is my first album review...on the Black Eyed Peas' most recent release, The E.N.D. or (The Energy Never Dies). well which is it?! are you trying to be clever? is this the end as we know it? what are you trying to tell us will.i.am?
so the peas decided to "rock down to electric avenue" with this album. well not quite, that's actually a good song. i shouldn't compare the two. well anyway, they took a more techno route, different from their past albums "monkey business" and "elephunk"...you know i was expecting another quirky animal title like "wesuckapotamus" or "boom boom kung pow chicken" or just "bitch". but sadly they broke that chain. so the album really brings you into a whole 'nother dark dimension of your local hollister store. let me just say, whoever did the bass tracks (you know the cheek-rumblin' stuff when you're sitting in a car) is pretty good. the balance of the "heartbeat" (as i like to refer to it as) is just right with the rest of the music, except when fergie starts to flex the old galvanized pipes. and then you're forced to turn the volume dial wayyyyyy down, but even turning the whole thing off won't drown out her voice.
it's pretty piercing, and you can tell she's really trying to pull an aretha, but failing horribly.
then again, maybe she's doing us a favor, by making us turn the volume down far enough so that we can't hear the rest of the crap on the album. good for you stacey.
and don't get me started on the lyrics...
...or do, that's fine too. the black eyed peas have proven with this album that they are possibly the worst lyricists out there. sorry, "rock your body" has already been used. good effort. "you make me feel alive" - aw that's adorable...and well DUH the energy NEVER dies will.i.am. never. "party all the time"...possibly the simplest and least creative lyrics in that song, hence the title. "ring a ling" is actually a better song of theirs...oh but wait it's about sex. again. nevermind.
and then there's "i gotta feeling". this song will go down in musical history for being at number one for so long. i can't wait to look back at the old billboard albums that give all the number ones of each year. there it is 2009, i gotta feeling. i had the chance to listen to this album literally the day it came out last june. why i bought it so eagerly is beyond me. and even before that song came out as a radio single, i thought it was easily the worst on the album.
and it is. it's horrible. so what will has a feelin that tonight's gonna be a good night. good for him. it happens to the best of us. and the worst of us. there should be a song entitled "i got no feelin" and have it be about erectile dysfunction. that'll sell millions! well maybe not, it's a little TOO creative for the radio.
AGAIN i'll go back to the topic of simplicity, and how the radio features artists who spend 3 hours on makeup only to make them look like tools, have some rich producer behind them purchasing radio play, and only have to write a song based off of people's facebook statuses for it to be good. people eat up what's on the radio. they'll eat anything. they'll learn every word of every crappy song just so they can sing it to their poser friends in hope that they might find them not so socially awkward anymore.
so in conclusion, this album was (and is still) so commercially successful because the black eyed peas have built up their fanbase so high that no matter what color vomit comes out of their mouths, people are going to like it. and DON'T get me wrong, the unsophistication of their music and of every other current hip hop artist's music is catchy. and the lyrics are so bad that it's impossible not to learn them all on first listen. so go ahead, impress your friends by knowing every song on this album by heart. now THAT alone is worth $14.99 off iTunes.
Personal Rating: 3/10
Cheers!
-Johnny
well actually, "boom boom pow" by the black eyed peas isn't the worst song on their most recent album The E.N.D. but one of the worst of this decade. what a way to close the 00's with one of 2009's most commercially successful albums, but worst musically.
and here is my first album review...on the Black Eyed Peas' most recent release, The E.N.D. or (The Energy Never Dies). well which is it?! are you trying to be clever? is this the end as we know it? what are you trying to tell us will.i.am?
so the peas decided to "rock down to electric avenue" with this album. well not quite, that's actually a good song. i shouldn't compare the two. well anyway, they took a more techno route, different from their past albums "monkey business" and "elephunk"...you know i was expecting another quirky animal title like "wesuckapotamus" or "boom boom kung pow chicken" or just "bitch". but sadly they broke that chain. so the album really brings you into a whole 'nother dark dimension of your local hollister store. let me just say, whoever did the bass tracks (you know the cheek-rumblin' stuff when you're sitting in a car) is pretty good. the balance of the "heartbeat" (as i like to refer to it as) is just right with the rest of the music, except when fergie starts to flex the old galvanized pipes. and then you're forced to turn the volume dial wayyyyyy down, but even turning the whole thing off won't drown out her voice.
it's pretty piercing, and you can tell she's really trying to pull an aretha, but failing horribly.
then again, maybe she's doing us a favor, by making us turn the volume down far enough so that we can't hear the rest of the crap on the album. good for you stacey.
and don't get me started on the lyrics...
...or do, that's fine too. the black eyed peas have proven with this album that they are possibly the worst lyricists out there. sorry, "rock your body" has already been used. good effort. "you make me feel alive" - aw that's adorable...and well DUH the energy NEVER dies will.i.am. never. "party all the time"...possibly the simplest and least creative lyrics in that song, hence the title. "ring a ling" is actually a better song of theirs...oh but wait it's about sex. again. nevermind.
and then there's "i gotta feeling". this song will go down in musical history for being at number one for so long. i can't wait to look back at the old billboard albums that give all the number ones of each year. there it is 2009, i gotta feeling. i had the chance to listen to this album literally the day it came out last june. why i bought it so eagerly is beyond me. and even before that song came out as a radio single, i thought it was easily the worst on the album.
and it is. it's horrible. so what will has a feelin that tonight's gonna be a good night. good for him. it happens to the best of us. and the worst of us. there should be a song entitled "i got no feelin" and have it be about erectile dysfunction. that'll sell millions! well maybe not, it's a little TOO creative for the radio.
AGAIN i'll go back to the topic of simplicity, and how the radio features artists who spend 3 hours on makeup only to make them look like tools, have some rich producer behind them purchasing radio play, and only have to write a song based off of people's facebook statuses for it to be good. people eat up what's on the radio. they'll eat anything. they'll learn every word of every crappy song just so they can sing it to their poser friends in hope that they might find them not so socially awkward anymore.
so in conclusion, this album was (and is still) so commercially successful because the black eyed peas have built up their fanbase so high that no matter what color vomit comes out of their mouths, people are going to like it. and DON'T get me wrong, the unsophistication of their music and of every other current hip hop artist's music is catchy. and the lyrics are so bad that it's impossible not to learn them all on first listen. so go ahead, impress your friends by knowing every song on this album by heart. now THAT alone is worth $14.99 off iTunes.
Personal Rating: 3/10
Cheers!
-Johnny
Thursday, June 10, 2010
"(Blank)"
i will post tomorrow! too tired tonight, and swamped with last minute homework. the extra day will certainly give me more time to think of topics!
ob la di ob la da life goes on...
-johnny
ob la di ob la da life goes on...
-johnny
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
"Wednesday Morning, 3 A.M."
hey ch'yall, it's wednesday, NOT 3 A.M...in fact its 4 in the afternoon. by the time i'm finishing this up, it may be eleven o'clock tonight. HOPEFULLY not. i have yet another concert to play in, this time at cheney hall along side of Pratt and Whitney's Screamin' Eagles Jazz Band. pretty nifty! maybe grampy should whip out his jazz flute =)
anywho, i'd like to take this time to talk about drugs and music. nick gave me a great idea for a rave (not the techno type of rave) for this blog.
so i can't officially consider this a "part 2" to the previous post, because the yayo ain't just for the rappers out there. this sort of unnatural creativity showed up in music a hundred years ago. jazz greats like miles davis and thelonious monk were becoming close personal friends with dope. and then of course the beatles in the sixties, along with every other woodstock era band.
i did my junior thesis paper on the formation and evolution of rock and roll, so along the way i encountered many topics of drugs in my research. i mean, more so than what i already knew. it's a little hard for the beatles to go unnoticed when they title one of their songs using the letters LSD (lucy in the sky with diamonds), and create an album (and movie) named "magical mystery tour". if you haven't gotten a chance to watch that movie, don't. if you haven't gotten a chance to listen to that album, then DO SO!
why? because its creative!
why? because its trippy!
why? because they were all drinking the electric kool-aid...OH YEAHHH!
a lot of the great artists of the late sixties and seventies were dependent on their acid to help them with their creativity and originality. and believe me, you can tell when something is not just spurted from the sober mind. when you start claiming you're a walrus or and eggman (or BOTH for that matter), then you know you're tripped out of your mind. believe it or not, "got to get you into my life" is written specifically about lsd, and paul's difficult decision to start using it. he gave in and ended up taking "another road that maybe i could see another kind of mind there".
don't get me started on the psychedelic era of rock and roll, because i consider that the prime example of how drugs can be an advantage of lyric writing. sure, why not venture into a new state of mind, because it holds ideas that the clean mind cannot even touch.
sadly though, lsd is...well...bad. and at any point in your life, regardless of whether or not you are taking it, you can start tripping out. must be why paul mccartney continues to write music about his "feet in the clouds"...which actually is a good song. it's off his most recent album "memory almost full"...which ACTUALLY is a good album. so check it out.
well it's currently 11:03. see? i told you i wouldn't finish this till late. and it's not terribly long either. so i'll keep it at that. tomorrow i will start my album reviews! i'll basically pick a random album, most likely recent, and then rave/rate.
until then, cheers!
-Johnny
anywho, i'd like to take this time to talk about drugs and music. nick gave me a great idea for a rave (not the techno type of rave) for this blog.
so i can't officially consider this a "part 2" to the previous post, because the yayo ain't just for the rappers out there. this sort of unnatural creativity showed up in music a hundred years ago. jazz greats like miles davis and thelonious monk were becoming close personal friends with dope. and then of course the beatles in the sixties, along with every other woodstock era band.
i did my junior thesis paper on the formation and evolution of rock and roll, so along the way i encountered many topics of drugs in my research. i mean, more so than what i already knew. it's a little hard for the beatles to go unnoticed when they title one of their songs using the letters LSD (lucy in the sky with diamonds), and create an album (and movie) named "magical mystery tour". if you haven't gotten a chance to watch that movie, don't. if you haven't gotten a chance to listen to that album, then DO SO!
why? because its creative!
why? because its trippy!
why? because they were all drinking the electric kool-aid...OH YEAHHH!
a lot of the great artists of the late sixties and seventies were dependent on their acid to help them with their creativity and originality. and believe me, you can tell when something is not just spurted from the sober mind. when you start claiming you're a walrus or and eggman (or BOTH for that matter), then you know you're tripped out of your mind. believe it or not, "got to get you into my life" is written specifically about lsd, and paul's difficult decision to start using it. he gave in and ended up taking "another road that maybe i could see another kind of mind there".
don't get me started on the psychedelic era of rock and roll, because i consider that the prime example of how drugs can be an advantage of lyric writing. sure, why not venture into a new state of mind, because it holds ideas that the clean mind cannot even touch.
sadly though, lsd is...well...bad. and at any point in your life, regardless of whether or not you are taking it, you can start tripping out. must be why paul mccartney continues to write music about his "feet in the clouds"...which actually is a good song. it's off his most recent album "memory almost full"...which ACTUALLY is a good album. so check it out.
well it's currently 11:03. see? i told you i wouldn't finish this till late. and it's not terribly long either. so i'll keep it at that. tomorrow i will start my album reviews! i'll basically pick a random album, most likely recent, and then rave/rate.
until then, cheers!
-Johnny
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
"Only the Beginning"
welcome to my daily (hopefully) rave on the music that we all listen to! except country, because it is not music. i don't get why xm radio dedicates 5 whole channels to that crap, but okay. youre not gonna hear it here, except for the occasional gargling of my...
okay! so hopefully this blog will serve to entertain, if not at least get you thinking more deeply about the artists you listen to.
so what shall we begin with? well actually, lately i have been taking the time to listen to our local crunk channel on the radio. song after song passes, with the frequent fill ins for all the vulgarity that goes on, like "what the frack", "mothertrucker", and even "monday-to-friday". if youre lost already, im just simply talking rap music. some of the rhyming and structure of the words is very impressive. but that's all they do. most of the time they hire someone else like timbaland to do all the background music. well isn't that the musical part of it? to me, it sounds like aggressive and amateur poetry spoken over a heart beat. and by amateur, i MEAN amateur. lil' wayne gets a grammy for wanting to "touch lady lumps" and for how bad "shawty wanna hump".
don't get me wrong, the whole "shawty" scene makes for a good laugh between pete and i. and don't get me wrong, rap gets the blood pumpin'. and don't get me wrong, the music occasionally makes you wanna break free and dance like a demented mannequin, or as if you've been shot in the leg. swagga!
but why do so many people like that?
cuz it's simple. and it's loud. and 102% of the time about how much of a "donk" she got.
oh and that reminds me, as you all very well know, i was at the senior prom last saturday. and yes, there was the usual "horrible to decent" dj playing songs that make all the americano's go loco. and DON'T get me wrong, the songs are catchy. they stick with ya. and make all the guys want their date to "ride the pony-snake all the way to tuna town" right there on the dance floor. but that's just it. they don't analyze the music for its musicality and quality. all they care about is having their own portable abercrombie and fitch store to listen to...with the hope that a fine young baby-mama comes around eligible enough to be taken to dai-y queen.
all im trying to point out is that america's music today is simple. people are lazy (not all, but a lot of them), and so therefore don't want to have to decipher the complexity of dave matthews band...or jazz. they want something that they can easily bob their head to without losing the beat. they want something that relieves one of the simplest forms of human impulse; sex. they want something that they can possibly try on their own without having to factor in their total lack of musical talent.
why not rap?! what a great idea! it's simple...all you have to do is hire a professional drum-machine player, steal a guitar riff from an old 70's guitarist, read a cosmo, and auto-tune your voice because you can't sing for crap! perfect. you got it. go you. you're on your way to getting a grammy already!
how's that for an opening blog? too harsh? eh i don't know. i do confess that some of today's rap is worth listening to for more than five seconds.
but it's just not grammy worthy.
alright, i think this is good for tonight. tell me what you think! =) thanks!
-Johnny
PS. if anybody is confused by any of the musical terms i mention, please ask =)
okay! so hopefully this blog will serve to entertain, if not at least get you thinking more deeply about the artists you listen to.
so what shall we begin with? well actually, lately i have been taking the time to listen to our local crunk channel on the radio. song after song passes, with the frequent fill ins for all the vulgarity that goes on, like "what the frack", "mothertrucker", and even "monday-to-friday". if youre lost already, im just simply talking rap music. some of the rhyming and structure of the words is very impressive. but that's all they do. most of the time they hire someone else like timbaland to do all the background music. well isn't that the musical part of it? to me, it sounds like aggressive and amateur poetry spoken over a heart beat. and by amateur, i MEAN amateur. lil' wayne gets a grammy for wanting to "touch lady lumps" and for how bad "shawty wanna hump".
don't get me wrong, the whole "shawty" scene makes for a good laugh between pete and i. and don't get me wrong, rap gets the blood pumpin'. and don't get me wrong, the music occasionally makes you wanna break free and dance like a demented mannequin, or as if you've been shot in the leg. swagga!
but why do so many people like that?
cuz it's simple. and it's loud. and 102% of the time about how much of a "donk" she got.
oh and that reminds me, as you all very well know, i was at the senior prom last saturday. and yes, there was the usual "horrible to decent" dj playing songs that make all the americano's go loco. and DON'T get me wrong, the songs are catchy. they stick with ya. and make all the guys want their date to "ride the pony-snake all the way to tuna town" right there on the dance floor. but that's just it. they don't analyze the music for its musicality and quality. all they care about is having their own portable abercrombie and fitch store to listen to...with the hope that a fine young baby-mama comes around eligible enough to be taken to dai-y queen.
all im trying to point out is that america's music today is simple. people are lazy (not all, but a lot of them), and so therefore don't want to have to decipher the complexity of dave matthews band...or jazz. they want something that they can easily bob their head to without losing the beat. they want something that relieves one of the simplest forms of human impulse; sex. they want something that they can possibly try on their own without having to factor in their total lack of musical talent.
why not rap?! what a great idea! it's simple...all you have to do is hire a professional drum-machine player, steal a guitar riff from an old 70's guitarist, read a cosmo, and auto-tune your voice because you can't sing for crap! perfect. you got it. go you. you're on your way to getting a grammy already!
how's that for an opening blog? too harsh? eh i don't know. i do confess that some of today's rap is worth listening to for more than five seconds.
but it's just not grammy worthy.
alright, i think this is good for tonight. tell me what you think! =) thanks!
-Johnny
PS. if anybody is confused by any of the musical terms i mention, please ask =)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)