Eyes Closed, Ears Open
Five or six years ago, we were begging for a band that wrote their own tunes and didn't sound like someone farting into a microphone. Now we've got them, and we're all still bitching.
It's refreshing to see that a whole bunch of rock bands nowadays are making concept records and double albums. These bands grew up with these pieces of art that mean something and require dedication as a listener. Now they're doing it for themselves. In my seven years as a serious music listener, I've never seen anything really like it. With iTunes and all these other downloading services (okay, and pirating), the album the way we know it may not make it much longer. If that's the case, it's nice to know it's going to go down in a blaze of glory.
Anyways, after reading the comments on the Goodie Bag from a few weeks ago, I felt I had more to say then what I was posting.
Take My Chemical Romance for instance. Maybe it's that they are an 'emo' band. Maybe it's because Gerard doesn't have the greatest voice. Or maybe it's my favorite, that they just "suck". When Three Cheers for Sweet Revenge blew up two years ago, the band was finally financially capable of recording an album that was derivative of their influences. I'm not talking about the modern ones that shaped their early sound. I'm talking about the Pink Floyd's and the Queen's they grew up listening to.
The result? The bombastic, dramatic The Black Parade, an album that rocks just as hard as those band's classics did thirty years ago.
What's this band guilty of? Other than being a little more melodramatic than they need to be, nothing. Think about it, did those classic rock bands you grew up listening to strive to make music to change the lives of yours and your parents? Probably not. They were just trying to make the best music possible. Were these bands theatrical? Absolutely. Look at The Wall and anything Queen did. For fuck's sake, their most well known record is called A Night at the Opera. MCR shares all these qualities.
The internet is so powerful when it comes to our music listening habits. I frequent probably a half dozen music blogs daily, trying to find new sounds. It can be a great resource, but it's also narrowed our view on what's out there. Every band has a category it fits in. I don't really think that this was so influential thirty years ago than it is now. What 'label' did Queen hand Floyd have back in the day? 'Prog rock?' 'Heavy Metal?' Not likely. This is just something some dude at the All Music Guide got carried away with a dozen or so years ago. Now that we hear that something sounds like a 'hardcore' group or 'sounds sort of emo-ish", it turns us off. We're probably missing out on something good just because of these small descriptive words.
I'm not saying that you need to like the new My Chemical Romance record. I'm not saying you need to listen to hardcore or emo bands. I'm completely guilty of lambasting these types of bands, but it doesn't mean I haven't given them a shot before. Mainstream music was so bad a few years ago. If you don't like something the first time, give it a second listen. You may discover there's more there than what you realized.
It's refreshing to see that a whole bunch of rock bands nowadays are making concept records and double albums. These bands grew up with these pieces of art that mean something and require dedication as a listener. Now they're doing it for themselves. In my seven years as a serious music listener, I've never seen anything really like it. With iTunes and all these other downloading services (okay, and pirating), the album the way we know it may not make it much longer. If that's the case, it's nice to know it's going to go down in a blaze of glory.
Anyways, after reading the comments on the Goodie Bag from a few weeks ago, I felt I had more to say then what I was posting.
Take My Chemical Romance for instance. Maybe it's that they are an 'emo' band. Maybe it's because Gerard doesn't have the greatest voice. Or maybe it's my favorite, that they just "suck". When Three Cheers for Sweet Revenge blew up two years ago, the band was finally financially capable of recording an album that was derivative of their influences. I'm not talking about the modern ones that shaped their early sound. I'm talking about the Pink Floyd's and the Queen's they grew up listening to.
The result? The bombastic, dramatic The Black Parade, an album that rocks just as hard as those band's classics did thirty years ago.
What's this band guilty of? Other than being a little more melodramatic than they need to be, nothing. Think about it, did those classic rock bands you grew up listening to strive to make music to change the lives of yours and your parents? Probably not. They were just trying to make the best music possible. Were these bands theatrical? Absolutely. Look at The Wall and anything Queen did. For fuck's sake, their most well known record is called A Night at the Opera. MCR shares all these qualities.
The internet is so powerful when it comes to our music listening habits. I frequent probably a half dozen music blogs daily, trying to find new sounds. It can be a great resource, but it's also narrowed our view on what's out there. Every band has a category it fits in. I don't really think that this was so influential thirty years ago than it is now. What 'label' did Queen hand Floyd have back in the day? 'Prog rock?' 'Heavy Metal?' Not likely. This is just something some dude at the All Music Guide got carried away with a dozen or so years ago. Now that we hear that something sounds like a 'hardcore' group or 'sounds sort of emo-ish", it turns us off. We're probably missing out on something good just because of these small descriptive words.
I'm not saying that you need to like the new My Chemical Romance record. I'm not saying you need to listen to hardcore or emo bands. I'm completely guilty of lambasting these types of bands, but it doesn't mean I haven't given them a shot before. Mainstream music was so bad a few years ago. If you don't like something the first time, give it a second listen. You may discover there's more there than what you realized.
The content is good, I can see you are trying to accomplish something big here, your stance is prominent and that is good.
Your thesis statement or opening, however, needs improvement. It should forecast the direction of your essay. You mention something about "the album as we know it going down in a blaze of glory," but you do not follow this up at all. Or maybe I just missed that part.
Posted by
Anonymous |
3:06 PM
From now on, I dub thee "English Chris".
Posted by
Brendan |
3:08 PM
I STILL can't agree with you on the comparisons to Queen... and now Pink Floyd?
I just can not compare them to either of those bands. Sorry.
"Five or six years ago, we were begging for a band that wrote their own tunes and didn't sound like someone farting into a microphone. Now we've got them, and we're all still bitching."
Well we had those bands before too, but no one gave them a chance. Now they're getting big AFTER their existence (Neutral Milk for example...).
You're right, we do have bands like that now, but people are too busy to give them a chance NOW, because they're busy listening to bands like the one you're defending.
Posted by
Matt |
3:26 AM
trying to be a band is a little different than actually pulling it off.
brendan, what happened to "he's not totally gifted vocally, I admit that. I went in thinking that this really wasn't going to be anything more than some kind of fun pop record. That's what I got. It's not some era-defining statement."
...I'm pretty sure you're saying the complete opposite now.
And using "not totally gifted vocally" to describe that MCR twat "only strengthens" MY argument; MCR should not be compared to Queen. Pretty sure vocals were one of their strongest points....
you guys can go hump my chemical romance's leg all you want, but i still say they suck. i've been saying the same thing from the beginning... and i'm done saying it.
Posted by
Matt |
4:08 PM
Without taking the article apart piece by piece, I can simply state this.
Matt, I know for a fact that you have a very diverse taste in music. It's just what I tried to get across with this is that many people take music too seriously. I like a lot of stuff and with this site I try to get that message across.
When I was writing this, I understood I'd probably come across some controversy like this.
For myself as a music listener, I really don't feel that there any boundaries between 'underground' and 'mainstream' music. I simply listen to what interests me. If it's some new and innovative sound, fantastic. But if it's a new spin on something old, that's fine with me as well.
I hope this makes sense.
Posted by
Brendan |
9:56 PM