TTLG|Thief|Bioshock|System Shock|Deus Ex|Mobile
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 57

Thread: What does music mean to you?

  1. #26
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Not to put too fine a point on it, not really.

  2. #27
    SShock2.com
    Member

    Registered: Apr 2001
    Location: The land of ever sideways rain
    I love you so much right now. That feeds exactly into my sense of humour. Thank you.

  3. #28
    Am I the only person who
    Don't mean to rain on anyone's parade, but at least from my experience with teh internets, people who start their sentences with that phrase are in 99.99% cases so not alone with their thoughts

  4. #29
    SShock2.com
    Member

    Registered: Apr 2001
    Location: The land of ever sideways rain
    Am I the only person to hope you're right?

  5. #30
    Level 10,000 achieved
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Finland
    Quote Originally Posted by Gray View Post
    I hate to quote myself, but I want to emphasise this point. Am I the only person who always has a song at the back of the head? ... always
    Always always? How do you manage to think about anything else?

    When I'm alone I often find myself humming or singing a line from some song I'm into at the moment("Pale blue eyes" by Velvet Underground atm), but it's not, like... always.

  6. #31
    SShock2.com
    Member

    Registered: Apr 2001
    Location: The land of ever sideways rain
    Yes, always always. I just woke up, and right now it's Seabound: Poisonous Friend, because I played four remixes while I was out last night walking in the rain. When I woke up during the night, it was Eisbrecher: Rot Wie Die Liebe. I often hear that song when I'm half asleep.

    How do I manage to think about anything else? Quite a lot of the time, I don't think, I'm pretty stupid now, but if there is something to distract my brain and requires attention, the song fades. But as soon as things are quiet again, boom, there's a song playing. Usually with words relating to what just happened. If someone says the word "letter", the song playing at the back of my head will be They Might Be Giants: Letterbox. And later tonight, I'm going to a gig with Bombskare headlining, so at some point during the day, I'll be hearing their songs at the back of my head, well before I actually start playing them on my stereo.
    Last edited by Gray; 10th Aug 2019 at 08:38.

  7. #32
    SShock2.com
    Member

    Registered: Apr 2001
    Location: The land of ever sideways rain
    Let me approach this from a different angle: I'm trying to figure out what music means to you, and how important it is. Is it important? Do you listen to any old random crap, or are you a proper music nerd and seek out very specific bands because you know they'll make you (briefly) happy? Do you even have a favourite band? A genre? Many genres? Any genre you can not stand for some reason, and if so, why?

  8. #33
    New Member
    Registered: Nov 2016
    Music is sometimes everything to me. It's certainly a mood changer, which is important for me to remember as an option when it starts feeling to me like my day needs a reboot and it's too rainy to go for a walk and get some more oxygen into my brain, switch things up. I honestly think music saved my life more than a few times when I was mourning the loss of family and friends who died way too soon. I could not come to grips with my grief and spent too long even in the denial stage, but I needed to find a way to feel the pain and loss, because I knew feeling nothing was way too dangerous. Music put a reliable floor under me. A priest once counseled me that the only real sin is that of despair, since that one enables all the others. I believe that, and sought solace or even anger from music when I could not stop feeling I was heading towards unremitting despair.

    As a kid I was exposed mostly to classical music including "contemporary" American and European composers of the 20th century, plus assorted kids of jazz that my dad liked. I studied piano, violin and cello from childhood on up into my 20s (the 1960s), and most of that was classical or jazz as well. So there are huge gaps in my sense of American pop and early rock music; a lot of it I have never filled in properly.

    The Everly Brothers... Elvis... I think I remember them on Sullivan shows but I might be remembering much later references to them in mass media articles about the development of American pop/rock music. anyway pop music per se didn't make much of a connection.

    Once I was out on my own and working, then when it wasn't about classical or jazz, I did get interested in rock, blues, assorted alternative and singer/songerwriter stuff, some alt-country but not country per se, a few hip hop tracks because I admire Lupe Fiasco's ability to talk in English faster than a Mexican radio ad reader on lunchtime shows back in my exchange student days in Mexico City... and a liking for traditional Mexican and other Latin pop probably hails from then too.

    I'm the kind of person who doesn't think of requiem masses as gloomy, nor of Bach cantatas as sitting in church waiting for it to be over lol. I think of those works as architectural wonders, no less inspiring than the cathedrals in which they were meant to be played and sung. I could listen to Fauré's Op. 48 or the Brahms German Requiem all night.

    By the same token --architecture, use of space and time-- I'm a huge fan of Bartok's six String Quartets. I think no more of putting them in a loop then of taking 15 or 20 U2 tracks I like and making a playlist of them to repeat while I go about straightening up my studio or cooking food on a weekend to freeze for use later in the week.

    So again, music can be "everything" to me. Essential ingredient, background, learning opportunity. Every Friday night is jazz night for me, so that I don't forget to explore with the explorers. I use Spotify or Apple Music to prowl around and learn something new in a huge world that's just out there ready to inform and entertain. I like reading reviews and email briefs on new music. I love the random discovery of a reference to some music I don't know well in a novel or someone's biography or memoirs.

    And I'm grateful for the internet making learning more about music a much more expansive opportunity than back when I was a youngster rummaging through boxes of stuff in grandma's attic and finding old concert programmes. I would sit there then imagining what it must have been like to hear a famous pianist show up in their small town for a recital in the 1920s. Maybe even one who had made a recording my grandparents might have let me listen to in their living room, where their humongous console record player was practically a shrine. WWII was on when I was that kid and the times were very different from the idyllic 20s and musicians touring the country to put on shows in small towns, but the dreams were still there, the record player still there, the piano and music stands for family members' musical instruments still there. So music was a kind of glue holding some things still for us while the newspapers were full of the chaos of another world war on the heels of the first one.

    Heh, so much is different now. We can click on a link and "know everything" about a musician right down to the last time he was hauled into divorce court. I don't want to go backwards but I try not to let the internet's educational offerings distract me from what matters to me about music-making. The music... the music.. the music itself... and that spark of human creativity that both makes it and makes us want to hear it.

  9. #34
    SShock2.com
    Member

    Registered: Apr 2001
    Location: The land of ever sideways rain
    Interesting.

    Yes, I know what you mean about us now having full access to all information all of the time. As a massive music nerd, I own thousands of CDs, but apart from the most famous bands, I have no idea of what most of their real names are or what they look like, there just was no information to be found that wasn't on the album sleeve. Sometimes they were mentioned in magazines, but mostly, just unverified rumours. As I got older I stopped caring about who those people are, and just focused on their music and what it means to me. My rock posters on walls ended in the 80s. I could walk past a guy in the street that I own 20 albums by and not recognise him, I'd probably just think those tattoos look stupid.

  10. #35
    Member
    Registered: Feb 2003
    For a long time as a kid, music meant nothing to me. I lived in my own silence. The wind in the trees and the birds sang to me. The sound of falling snow. My own thoughts hitting the ground. When music was played, I disliked it. Even the music targeted at me. Especially the music targeted at me. "Why are they acting like this?" I have always been bad at being a fan. It doesn't interest me. This is, partly, why I eventually got into making my own, but also before I discovered the good that was out there, which took a while. Maybe music meant everything to me all along. Now I listen all the time and go explore, just as I would the woods. The wind and the birds and the falling snow are still there, but so is also music. Dreaming it was a thing for a while, but those days are gone now.

  11. #36
    SShock2.com
    Member

    Registered: Apr 2001
    Location: The land of ever sideways rain
    It has been pointed out to me in another thread that maybe I'm weird because I hear music in my dreams. I often dream about songs, or fragments of songs, drifting in and out, depending on whatever other dreamy weirdness is going on. Surely, it can't just be me that hears music in dreams? Sometimes I even compose full songs while dreaming, and I'm struggling to remember the best bits as I wake up and write them down before I forget. Most of them turn out to be crap, but every now and then, some melody I come up with came to me in a dream, I just forgot what the context was, the chords, the structure, and I have to reinvent that, and it's never as good as it sounded when I was asleep. When I'm awake, I'm pretty good with drum machines, but less so with melody. When I'm asleep, it's all about melody, chords, building up drama, that I can never recreate later. I never dream about drum machines.
    Last edited by Gray; 16th Sep 2019 at 01:44.

  12. #37
    Chakat sex pillow
    Registered: Sep 2006
    Location: not here
    Depends on your criteria for weird. If weirdness is the factor of how uncommon something is to you vs. a population sample of this forum, you've got nothing to worry about.

    For what it's worth, I don't have a musical bone in my body, but I sometimes wake up with a fucking orchestra playing in my head, sometimes a plain melody. I have no idea what to do with it, and by the time I've had a mug of coffee, there's only a whisper of what it was soughing in my head and the trees outside. You're not the only one.

  13. #38
    SShock2.com
    Member

    Registered: Apr 2001
    Location: The land of ever sideways rain
    It doesn't matter if you're musical or not, get Caustic for £6 and jot down your ideas quickly before they fade. It's a simple and quick tool, and you don't even have to know about music. I'd point to my own face, but that doesn't quite work in text.

  14. #39
    SShock2.com
    Member

    Registered: Apr 2001
    Location: The land of ever sideways rain
    Some music annoys me, and some does not, even though it might on the surface seem very similar. For example, I'm a huge fan of Nine Inch Nails. I love emotional whiny noisy crap, and the oft-repeated silent-loud-silent-angry-shouting template. So why do I then dislike a band like Linkin Park so much? The similarities are there. Eisbrecher are doing the same thing, and yet I absolutely love them. Why? I love Depeche Mode, and I tend to love Depeche Mode clone wannabe bands as well. Why does Linkin Park annoy me? Is it because the vocals sound like some whiny teen boyband and not like actual grownups? Perhaps just because I hate Justin Timberlake. Is it because it for some reason doesn't sound "genuine" to me, whatever that means? Or perhaps just because they were so much younger than I, and I'm just a grumpy old miserable bastard dismissing them as lame because I'm too old to get it? Very possibly either of those. But what is "authentic"? I love The Monkees and many Motown acts, clearly factory made and mass produced, exactly like the boybands I hate. What's the difference? I love The Smiths, but if I had seen how prancy and annoying Morrissey was on stage before hearing them, I probably would have dismissed them outright and never bothered, thus missing out on some of the greatest songs in pop history. What else am I wrong about? What else have I missed, just from being a narrow-minded clueless fool? If I was more homophobic than I am, I might have missed out on Erasure and some truly great love songs. In fact, I'm pretty sure that almost 30% or more of my CD:s are very gay in ways I'm too thick to realise, but I don't care, as long as it appeals to my ears, my feet or my soul. Sometimes all three, like with VNV. Sounds very gay but I can relate on every level and absolutely love it.

    I guess my point is this: musical taste. What is it? I know what I love, and I know what I hate, and the stuff I hate seems to be everywhere. The stuff I love is harder to find, but once you find it, it's all the more rewarding. And when you find a kindred spirit who likes the same crap you do, you somehow instantly bond. Why is that? Because you feel some kind of soul connection? "We get stuff that others don't see"?

    Questions, questions. Yes, I think about music a lot. Often while listening to it, but probably more when I'm not. Thoughts?


    [Edit]

    Just to clarify, it's not a binary question. There's a lot of music I'm largely indifferent to. Some I like a bit, some I'm not too into, but don't actively hate. Just thought I'd add that for balance. Despite my very grumpy nature, when it comes to music, I'm quite open and accepting, unless it's directly awful. But then again, what is "awful"?

    [Edit again]

    The main reason I reposted in this thread is because I saw the Netflix show Explained, the Music episode, where they questioned what music is, why and how it affects us. Watch it if you can. It made me think. I'm now more full of questions than ever. I'm not necessarily looking for answers, just opinions and viewpoints. Any wildly crazy ideas or wrong opinions are welcome, as long as you can motivate your stance.
    Last edited by Gray; 14th Oct 2019 at 19:52.

  15. #40
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Melbourne, Australia
    Well N.I.N and Linkin Park are completely different in sound. A lot of N.I.N's early stuff has a very machine-like feel to it (and went onto inspire a fair bit of the music in System Shock 1). Linkin Park is far more pop.

  16. #41
    SShock2.com
    Member

    Registered: Apr 2001
    Location: The land of ever sideways rain
    Well... yes and no. To me they sound vastly different, but to someone who's not into the genre, it may sound as the same thing. I don't mean to disrespect the memory of Chester Bennington, but I could never stand his vocals for some reason. I can't explain why, it just sounded....wrong to me. Perhaps like a little boy trying to sound like a tough man but failing. I didn't like Trent's vocals either to begin with, but I got over that, and he got better with time. I'm not above cursing, but I did find it quite tiresome with all the various "fucks" all over The Downward Spiral, but I eventually grew to like it nonetheless. Maybe Chester would have eventually become a good singer I'd enjoy, had he lived, but unfortunately, I think his voice was probably the main reason I could never get into them as a band.

    Taste is a tricky thing.

  17. #42
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Melbourne, Australia
    To me their music just sounded very emo. I'd NEVER say that about anything from N.I.N.

  18. #43
    LittleFlower
    Registered: Jul 2001
    Location: Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by Gray View Post
    I guess my point is this: musical taste. What is it?
    Quote Originally Posted by Gray View Post
    Taste is a tricky thing.
    Question answered ?

    Indeed, taste is not an easy subject to talk about. Same thing with movies, books, food. There are objective measures on how to judge something. However, there are many other measures too. Those subjective measures don't need to make sense. They don't need to have a system. They don't need to be fair.

    One thing that makes the whole discussion even more problematic, is the fact that imho music as (youth) culture is dead. Well, pretty much dead. Music is everywhere. But at the same time, it has very little meaning any more. Music is entertainment now. Not art. The same is true with painting and sculpting. Up until the sixties, paintings would be able to change something in society. Change people's views. Spark discussion. That's not the case anymore. No painting can have any impact in society today. Same with sculptures. Paintings are decoration now. Illustrations. Not art. One of the things I like to say to people who paint (I knew a few who painted, even professionaly) was: "I like brown paintings. With just a little bit of pink". That would drive them through the wall. There will be no new Van Gogh's or Picasso's or Rothko's anymore. Painting as an art is finished. Done. Completed. Poetry is another example.

    Music as youth culture is very much like that. I think the music from the fifties and sixties had some real value as "counter-culture". Youth. Kicking against the establishment. I think the hippies and their music really changed something in the sixties. Maybe they didn't change society itself (the laws, the structure), but they certainly changed people. I think the establishment in the UK really got a bit worried when punk came around. Even house music seemed to have some authenticity. But after that ? If painting as an art-form died in the sixties, music as a counter-culture art-form died somewhere in the nineties or around 2000. No pop music will change the world. It's all entertainment now. Also because the music industry has gotten much better at embracing anything they might be able to sell.

    Another thing is the fact that all information is global now. If something interesting happens anywhere in the world, at any scale, it can be propagated and announced and spread around the world in a matter of days. That's good. But it also means nothing will stay small for a while, so it can be nourished and refined and slowly mature. New stuff is thrown into the deep end immediately. I don't like that. I think it kills a lot of creativity.

    So my point is: we can talk about music for days. Talk about what music means to us. Talk about our memories, which are often intertwined with music. We can talk about the significance. Talk about the details and nuances. But fact is: for most people, music today is just a product. Produced and sold by an industry. Consumed like another throw-away product. So to talk about "what is musical taste", or "why do we like music", we first have to make sure everybody is on the same page here. Otherwise it'll be like a discussion about food between Heston Blumenthal and someone who really likes McDonalds burgers.

  19. #44
    SShock2.com
    Member

    Registered: Apr 2001
    Location: The land of ever sideways rain
    But what about someone like Banksy? He certainly seems to change people's minds. I mean, I largely agree with you, just trying to find a counter-argument.

    I know I'm old and grumpy and should by definition dismiss all youth culture as crap and nonsense, but there's probably a lot of stuff out there I never see or hear, or if I do, I'm too old and out of touch to get it.

  20. #45
    LittleFlower
    Registered: Jul 2001
    Location: Netherlands
    True, Banksy is one of the artists that remain interesting. But imho, you can't judge all of (visual) arts because of what one single guy is doing.

    My posts always tend to get too long. So I didn't mention it. But I think film and novels (books) will always live on. And be interesting. Because films and books tell stories. And I think there will always be new stories to tell. The problem with painting (or sculpture or photography) is that you have only so many angles to show the same stuff over and over again.


    Another aspect that I forgot to mention is: musicians versus non-musicians. Some music might be performed in a magnificent way. (Especially in classical music the performer is of utmost importance, it seems). The skill of the musicians, how they have mastered their instruments. The hours and years that went into training. How a musician can improvise on the spot (think Jazz, or live music). People who play an instrument tend to take all these aspects into consideration when listening to music.

    I'm the opposite. I don't care at all how something is created or performed. I only care about the result (the music and sound I hear). Maybe it is because I was young when punk came on. But I don't care about guitar-solos. I don't care about 80-part drumsets, or keyboard-players with 25 synthesizers. I only care about what I hear.

    So more reason for confusing discussions. Someone might be discussing the musicians they appreciate, while I only talk about the music I lappreciate. Except of course the hair-dos. I care about that. My musicians shouldn't look like hippies.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray View Post
    I know I'm old and grumpy and should by definition dismiss all youth culture as crap and nonsense, but there's probably a lot of stuff out there I never see or hear, or if I do, I'm too old and out of touch to get it.
    I'm a little older than you. So for sure if something new and interesting pops up, I'm likely to yell to get it off my lawn.

    But a lot of the stuff I see is very commercial. It's a product, made by people who want to make money. Lots of music-by-the-recipe (I don't know the exact english word for this). Lots of rehashed stuff. And even if it is new or succesfull, I don't think it has any impact on society or youth. I'm sure we exaggerated the importance of music when we were young. But nowadays it music seems to be even more entertainment than it used to be.


    Could it be that we lost some of the mythical aspect of music too ?
    I remember that albums were sold out. Not printed anymore. You couldn't buy certain records even if you wanted to. That meant you could not listen to that music at all !!
    How easy was it so see a band ? Did they tour ? Did they come to your city or country ?
    I remember buying a "book" with interviews and pictures of Joy Division. Stencilled ! Inky and dirty and blurry. A stencilled copy of something that wasn't even a real book to begin with. Why did we buy it ? Because there was nothing else.
    I remember ordering "In Strict Tempo" by Dave Ball. It didn't arrive. Wasn't available anymore. Six months after I ordered it, I walked into my record store, and the owner was really excited: my "In Strict Tempo" had finally arrived !

    Nowadays all info about all bands and musicians and music is available on the net. Wiki-pages for everyone. You can google interviews and pictures everywhere. All music is on YouTube (for free) and Spotify (one-click listening anywhere). How much effort does it take to listen to something ? Can any music be "underground" anymore ? Can you have your own emotions and memories with music anymore ?

    Heck, we haven't even talked about video-clips. I bet for you, music is about listening. For me it is too. But for many younger people, music is just as much about the visuals. It is weird, but the old music I still like the best, is the music of which I have never seen a video. Bands who I have never seen live. And maybe I like artists from whom I have hardly seen any pictures more than others. It seems I enjoy "faceless music" a lot more than music that has strong visuals connected to it. Visuals of video-clips, visuals of live concerts, or even pictures in magazines or on the web.

    So my point is: musical taste is not just a tricky thing. Music is something with lots and lots of aspects to it. So when you want to discuss music or musical taste, many people will approach it totally different.
    Last edited by Gryzemuis; 15th Oct 2019 at 14:11.

  21. #46
    SShock2.com
    Member

    Registered: Apr 2001
    Location: The land of ever sideways rain
    Interesting. Quite a lot to respond to there, I'll see if I can work through it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gryzemuis View Post
    Another aspect that I forgot to mention is: musicians versus non-musicians. Some music might be performed in a magnificent way. (Especially in classical music the performer is of utmost importance, it seems). The skill of the musicians, how they have mastered their instruments. The hours and years that went into training. How a musician can improvise on the spot (think Jazz, or live music). People who play an instrument tend to take all these aspects into consideration when listening to music.

    I'm the opposite. I don't care at all how something is created or performed. I only care about the result (the music and sound I hear). Maybe it is because I was young when punk came on. But I don't care about guitar-solos. I don't care about 80-part drumsets, or keyboard-players with 25 synthesizers. I only care about what I hear.

    So more reason for confusing discussions. Someone might be discussing the musicians they appreciate, while I only talk about the music I lappreciate. Except of course the hair-dos. I care about that. My musicians shouldn't look like hippies.
    I largely agree with you. Sure, sometimes I can be quite impressed with someone's skill at a particular instrument, but I'm more interested in how it sounds and how it makes me feel. A bit of the punk spirit. Some music can be very simple, yet make me feel very strongly. But if it's simple and does nothing, it's much easier to dismiss than someone who's really skilled at what they do, even if what they do doesn't appeal to me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gryzemuis View Post
    But a lot of the stuff I see is very commercial. It's a product, made by people who want to make money.
    Also true, but making money has always been a strong motivator for people to make music. Some people just want to get rich and famous, or get laid and get drugs, but the stuff they produce can still be brilliant and interesting, or dull and pedestrian. Depends on the talent and the work they put in.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gryzemuis View Post
    Lots of rehashed stuff. And even if it is new or succesfull, I don't think it has any impact on society or youth. I'm sure we exaggerated the importance of music when we were young. But nowadays it music seems to be even more entertainment than it used to be.
    Possibly. But as a not-young person, I can't assume what it means to them. I sometimes hear anecdotal evidence of how some teenager completely changed how they think about life because of some song made by an artist I already dismissed as pointless fluff. But I see your point, it might be leaning that way nowadays.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gryzemuis View Post
    Nowadays all info about all bands and musicians and music is available on the net. Wiki-pages for everyone. You can google interviews and pictures everywhere. All music is on YouTube (for free) and Spotify (one-click listening anywhere). How much effort does it take to listen to something ? Can any music be "underground" anymore ? Can you have your own emotions and memories with music anymore ?
    Yes, for good and bad. Sometimes it took me years to track down a specific album. How great it would have been if I could get it instantly, but it just wasn't possible back then.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gryzemuis View Post
    Heck, we haven't even talked about video-clips. I bet for you, music is about listening. For me it is too. But for many younger people, music is just as much about the visuals. It is weird, but the old music I still like the best, is the music of which I have never seen a video. Bands who I have never seen live. And maybe I like artists from whom I have hardly seen any pictures more than others. It seems I enjoy "faceless music" a lot more than music that has strong visuals connected to it. Visuals of video-clips, visuals of live concerts, or even pictures in magazines or on the web.
    I have thousands of CD:s, but I hardly know the faces of the vast majority of those, let alone their names. If something wasn't printed at the back of an LP sleeve, you'd never know it. Since Wikipedia, I now know way more about artists I listened to 20 years ago than I could possibly know at the time. But largely, I don't particularly care about who did what, or what they look like, I just care about how it sounds. I have now discovered, a few times, that two bands I own that I thought were completely unrelated had some members being in both of them. Maybe that's why I liked them in the first place, but I didn't buy band B because I knew it was related to band A. Well, sometimes I did, but you get my point. I purposely bought everything related to Front Line Assembly since I was a massive fan, and that's a LOT of side projects. All of them good.

    [Edit]

    I just remembered something to illustrate my point. To make it slightly more clear, I'll invent some fake names for these people, because I don't want to give away their actual identities. Sometimes I link my TTLG posts to my friends, and if I'm giving away too many details, they might figure out who's who. There was a band I saw at a rock festival, a fairly small EBM/electronic/techno band that I liked, so I got their CD, and enjoyed it greatly. Let's call them Band A. This was down south, hundreds of miles away from where I lived. More on that later. Completely unrelated to that :ahem:, I knew a girl, let's call her Jane, who was a fan of the same music genres I was. She was not a musician, but wanted to get into making music, and asked me for advice of what synth to buy. I gave her my opinion, I recommended the Access Virus which was a pretty cool machine at the time, and she said that one of her friends, let's call him Bob, recommended the very same thing, so she bought one. She would sometimes ask me on how to do certain technical things in music, it was me and Bob that'd help her. At one point we all three met up at a cafe and discussed synths. Bob, who I'd previously casually bumped into a couple of times at gigs or festivals but never really spoken more than a dozen words to before, we seemed to share many opinions about music and synths. He asked me if I was in a band, and I said I just make noise on my own, and at the time I didn't release any of my crap to the world. So, just out of politeness, I asked him the same, and he said he was in a band. They just split, but they released one album, and he was now working with some of his old band mates and some other people on a new project. Oh, what was the name of your band, I asked. As you must have guessed by now, it was of course Band A, that I had listened to for the last two years and enjoyed a lot. I had no idea this was the main songwriter. I mean, I had seen them live, I had seen their faces from quite close up, only 4-5 meters away, and now that he was sitting in front of me, yeah, that was probably the same guy, but I would never have guessed. When I got home I checked the liner notes on the album, and sure enough, there was his name. Bob.

    That sort of sums up how bad I am at knowing who's making the music I'm enjoying.

    Anyway, I lost contact with Jane, she was interested in me but she had previously been in a relationship with someone I knew (let's say, Mike), so it felt a bit too weird for me. It became difficult to see each other at that point. Probably the only woman I've ever said no to, it's usually the other way around. And it was quite difficult as she was very attractive, funny and clever, and we shared many opinions and music tastes, but it was just too weird, given that I knew Mike quite well. Dating her would have felt like me betraying Mike. Not seen her in years now, nor Bob. She later hooked up with another friend of mine, and he told me she had a cocaine habit and was somewhat mentally unstable, so I probably dodged a bullet there. They didn't last long, she was quite volatile and he was too dull for her. End result was I never met Bob again. But, somewhat ironically, I bought another album by a different band, let's say Band B, and later saw Bob's name name in the liner notes, but only after it was pointed out to me by another friend. Again, I had owned the album for over a year before I noticed, and only then did I realise the vocals were quite similar to Band A. Yeah, even back then I was pretty thick.
    Last edited by Gray; 15th Oct 2019 at 22:57.

  22. #47
    LittleFlower
    Registered: Jul 2001
    Location: Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by Gray View Post
    Interesting. Quite a lot to respond to there, I'll see if I can work through it.
    Your questions (what does music mean to you, and what is musical taste) are wide open questions. So I thought you'd rather have people bring up points of discussion than us just answering the question.

    Possibly. But as a not-young person, I can't assume what it means to them. I sometimes hear anecdotal evidence of how some teenager completely changed how they think about life because of some song made by an artist I already dismissed as pointless fluff. But I see your point, it might be leaning that way nowadays.
    Did any music ever change your life ? Really change ?
    There is lots of music that made me feel different. Or music that still brings back certain memories or emotions. But it didn't really change anything in my life.
    Also from a political point of view, music is not the game-changer that it used to be. There will never be another Woodstock. The Queen will never be worried again when someone calls her not a human being. Even black music in America has little political meaning anymore, it seems.

    Yes, for good and bad. Sometimes it took me years to track down a specific album. How great it would have been if I could get it instantly, but it just wasn't possible back then.
    I agree that it is better to have everything available. But at the same time, this also has some drawbacks. Like taking away some of the magic. Or maybe I just think that, because I am an old-fashioned Romantic. I always want stuff that is out of reach.

    edit:

    I don't particularly care about who did what, or what they look like, I just care about how it sounds.
    My point was: even when you or others don't care, there are lots of people who do care. Music is not only sound, it is culture. When a musician is your idol, you might want to copy what they are wearing, how they act, how they talk, etc. I don't have any idols, so I never tried to copy any individuals. But at the same time, I must admit that the fact that I (still) only wear black clothes is probably influenced by music from the early eighties. And I bet you don't walk around in expensive suits or in golf clothes.

    I agree what following links between musicians can make you discover more music you like. I've done that. But it's a bit nerdy. Most people hardly know the names of the artists of the songs they like. They know the song, they know the pictures/videoclips, but little else. I have some friends that I used to talk with about music. But I rather not do that anymore. Music is too personal for me. And I rather not leave the impression I'm nerdy.

    Nice story about Bob from band A. I have a pretty good memory (for stuff that interests me). So I remember many more details than that I would like to. A related, but completely different story I have: I know this girl who has a terrible boyfriend. It turns out the boyfriend was in a (local) band 35 years ago. I happen to own one of their records. Bah. This is a nice song. But I can't bring myself to listen to that band's music anymore. (I also kinda remember that all their other songs were not as good as this one).
    Last edited by Gryzemuis; 17th Oct 2019 at 10:25.

  23. #48
    Member
    Registered: Feb 2003
    Quote Originally Posted by Gray View Post
    It has been pointed out to me in another thread that maybe I'm weird because I hear music in my dreams.
    If that is what makes someone weird, then I'm weird too -- or at least I used to be. I had a period spanning a couple of years when my dreams were very vivid, detailed, even lucid, and regularly also dreamt about music I had never heard before, finding a bunch of CDs, walking into a concert hall and so on... I tried to recreate it for others to be able to listen to, but, frustratingly enough, I never could, supposedly because I don't have any classical training nor schooling, so I could never put down on paper what I had heard. Might have just been things I've picked up while awake, though, without taking notice, and mashed together in my dreams. No one will ever know, because it soon faded and now I dream only on occasion and very much not to that extent when I do.

    I might write something about taste another time. Some of it might come down to three keywords: expectations, familiarity, and curiosity.

    Edit:
    Also taste versus mood.
    Last edited by qolelis; 18th Oct 2019 at 00:04.

  24. #49
    LittleFlower
    Registered: Jul 2001
    Location: Netherlands
    I watched this song:

    It fits me perfectly.
    It made me realize something.

    Music does not impact my life in the sense that I see something, and then change my ideas or actions.
    I can't think of a single instance of that.
    However, I do like to listen to music that fits with my thoughts or feelings or actions. So there is something in me first, and then I find, or run into, music that fits with that. Not the other way around.
    I would expect that to be the case with most people. Do you guys think there are people who really get influenced by music in the sense that they hear music first, and then that changes their thoughts or actions ?

    (One extreme example I can think of, is Lou Reed who has told that he often got fans talk to him: "He Lou, because of you I started doing heroin". Those are cases of music first, actions/thoughts later. Pretty stupid in this case).

  25. #50
    SShock2.com
    Member

    Registered: Apr 2001
    Location: The land of ever sideways rain
    Quote Originally Posted by Gryzemuis View Post
    Did any music ever change your life ? Really change ?
    Oh, absolutely! Especially when I was in my whiny teens, feeling sad and depressed and alone, it made my whole life so much better listening to whiny songs by, say, Depeche Mode, or The Smiths, to get the feeling you're not alone. And not only that, music had brought me so much joy, changed my mood, changed my behaviour. Made me do things I wouldn't have otherwise done. Some songs were even pivotal making the most important decision in my entire life, of giving up my whole life in Sweden, moving to Scotland and marry the most amazing person I ever met. Music did that. SONGS did that. Really, really good songs that meant a lot to us both.

    This is probably a little bit beside the point, but I'll mention it anyway: listening to awesome bands growing up triggered an interest in me making music of my own. I'm still, 35 years later still crap at it, but I've been trying to make music at least, and it's been a huge part of my life. If all I had heard growing up was the terrible chart stuff I'd probably never have bothered, and focused my energy into something I'd be even worse at. Like, ugh, painting.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gryzemuis View Post
    There is lots of music that made me feel different. Or music that still brings back certain memories or emotions. But it didn't really change anything in my life.
    Well, that's where we differ, my friend, because music has changed my life several times. I don't know why it's so important to me, it just is. Perhaps it's just a way for me as a boring stiff frozen northern computer nerd to get in touch with my feelings, but it has certainly changed my life. Loving certain bands made me start going to rock festivals, despite being terrified of doing so. I was afraid of everything, but my desire for good music was stronger. It opened up a whole new world to me (no, not drugs, music!). So many new things to explore and enjoy. I'd say, music probably shaped 80% of my personality. 15% bullying, 5% DNA. But I am a self confessed music nerd. I'm still afraid of everything, but my attitude to my own fear has changed, through music, and it's easier to deal with now. It's become much easier now to say "fuck it, it scares the living shit out of me, but let's do it anyway."

    Quote Originally Posted by Gryzemuis View Post
    Also from a political point of view, music is not the game-changer that it used to be. There will never be another Woodstock. The Queen will never be worried again when someone calls her not a human being. Even black music in America has little political meaning anymore, it seems.
    Fair point. But there will always be young people who will discover new things through music. Perhaps it won't start a revolution, but it might change the way they think, if only briefly.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gryzemuis View Post
    I agree that it is better to have everything available. But at the same time, this also has some drawbacks. Like taking away some of the magic. Or maybe I just think that, because I am an old-fashioned Romantic. I always want stuff that is out of reach.
    Agreed. Sort of.


    Quote Originally Posted by Gryzemuis View Post
    My point was: even when you or others don't care, there are lots of people who do care. Music is not only sound, it is culture. When a musician is your idol, you might want to copy what they are wearing, how they act, how they talk, etc. I don't have any idols, so I never tried to copy any individuals. But at the same time, I must admit that the fact that I (still) only wear black clothes is probably influenced by music from the early eighties. And I bet you don't walk around in expensive suits or in golf clothes.
    Well, yes and no. I felt I distinctively left my rock-idol-phase-with-posters-on-walls in the mid 80s as a lowly mid-teen, when all heavy metal turned into crap. I haven't really had any idols as such since. I've never tried to dress like anyone else, musician or otherwise, but listening to alternative music certainly fed into my alternative thinking. I reject fashion on multiple levels(1). I only wear grey and black(2), very simple, minimalist clothes, which you could argue is very sterotypically "alternative", but I never wear bandname t-shirts, no prints, no text, no logos, no brands, no other adornments, I reject them all. Only simple, basic, and cheap. T-shirts, cargopants, hoodies. I've worn exactly the same style for the last 30 years, and only changed colour schemes when I was forced to because they didn't sell what I wanted. I never try to look like singer so-and-so, I shave my head but not to look like someone. Example: in pretty much all subcultures I've inhabited, it is more or less the law that you have to wear Doc Martens boots. I don't know why, it just is. Both of my brothers would swear by them (although the vegan later switched to Happy Cow, which is basically the same only sweatier and smellier). Metal, industrial, techno, goth, synth, punk, EBM, same boots. I found this both hilarious and sad, so I never did. If you really want to be alternative, why do you all have to be alternative in the exactly the same way? So I never bought a pair. In the same way of thinking, back when tattoos were a pretty alternative thing, I found it ridiculous that everybody had to get exactly the same lame tribal tattoos to prove how alternative they were, thereby just conforming to a different stereotype. This put me off getting tattoos, and my skin is still clean. I'm happier about that now than ever, given how popular shit tattoos are now. Bad tattoos automatically makes me think I don't want to talk to this moron, so in that sense, they're very useful.

    However, perhaps more ironically, now that I live in a warm rainy country and I walk a lot for exercise, I've figured out that sneakers are not good in this weather. I've been researching for something more practical and comfortable to walk in for hours and hours that suits this climate. Predictably, my research now points to Doc Martens (or something similar), so I may get a pair anyway, but for a completely different reason other than fashion. If it turns out they're crap or vastly overpriced, I clearly won't buy them.


    (1) Trust me on this, I can give you a two hour lecture on everything that's wrong with fashion, in bullet point form, breaking down exactly what I reject with A, B, C, D, E, F...

    (2) Black and grey, mostly, but not black in the summer, I'm not goth enough to wear black just to melt in the sunshine. Practical use is much more important than fashion. I basically have the same basic requirements as the military: simple, plain, practical, cheap. Except they usually have a vastly different definition of "cheap".
    Last edited by Gray; 20th Oct 2019 at 02:19.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •