Thought I'd share this, especially since it's from the Guardian, my main source for music news. The writer's saying pretty much what I would like to say if I were a better writer -- there are a lot of micro-scenes in music now that are perfectly happy to be micro-scenes, which is all well and good unless you're an obsessive like me who wants to hear everything that's good. What he says about the lack of musical progress during the decade is something I hadn't really thought about, but it makes total sense, especially when contrasted with other decades. There's been a lot of rehashing but nothing really really new that's captured the public's attention -- not sure if I see that changing in the future? If people have easy access to their preferred micro-scenes, and are happy with that, then what need is there for a big mainstream change? Another article on the site also mentioned how easy it is now to access old music, which ends up competing with our attention too. Add DVD box sets, Youtube, DVR's, free newspapers, blogs, etc etc, and it's enough to make you miss FM radio and four TV channels as your only access to pop culture! Or is that just me?
Hmm I disagree with Petridis. Just because grime and dubstep didn't cross over and become big, doesn't mean that they're not innovative new genres. They evolved out of other sounds but there was really nothing like them beforehand.
ReplyDeleteAs for him saying there hasn't been "dizzying, rupturing musical progress" - hello, what about MIA? When Arular came out there was nothing else like it - obviously there were a lot of influences on that album such as grime but really, I still think her sound was completely unique at the time. Her sound still can't really be labeled to a certain genre or type - she's a whole mish-mash of stuff. And she's not just making music that's been made before. So I think MIA really represents musical progress in the past decade. On top of that, she did cross over.
I don't think he's denying that they're innovative new genres -- in fact I think that is his point when he talks about cool new things that end up being microscenes. As for MIA, it can be argued that she's totally different (I don't think she's that different, to be honest), but at the end of the day she's one artist, not a movement, and I think that's what he says is missing -- there's no brand new overall huge musical thing this decade, something unmissable like rock n roll was in the 60s, or punk in the 70s, or synth pop and rap in the 80s, or rave in the 90s. there is new stuff, but you could say "dubstep" to lots of people and they'd have no idea what you're talking about. that isn't bad, but it does make what he says true.
ReplyDeleteI've got access to something like 70 free channels now and 9 or so BBC radio stations. However, I still just stick to the first 4 channels and one or two of the radio stations. You should be more like me bruv.
ReplyDeletethat would mean turning on the tv and/or radio. i don't even bother over here, nor do i listen to internet radio. can't be arsed like -- tv and radio are pretty crap and internet radio is too much hassle.
ReplyDeleteyo, speaking of new genres, have you heard the new TRACK by Mormon republican senator Orrin Hatch? yo dat shit is tite!!
ReplyDeletehe threw down some lyrics for the Chosen people, roped some middle-eastern woman to sing it and it all came together in this ground-breaking raw studio footage:
http://vimeo.com/7971216
(c'mon, you guys call yourself a music review site? how could you sleep on this shit??)
ae
is that abhay or some spammer...
ReplyDeleteAll you gotta do is go on BBC iPlayer and switch it to Radio 6.
ReplyDeletethat... was abhay
ReplyDelete