artistic "child prodigy"

just to hit one back at nos.

Now, musical bigots such as yourself deny the talent evident in any genre outside of the one they enjoy sucking the crotch danglings of - which in your case is classic rock.

Hendrix had talent, yes - but if every single artist played classic rock, where would the innovation be? Musical innovation requires talent.. raw skill is useless if you're just echoing an idol's style.

Who in the world said I only liked classic rock? I love all sorts of music. Jazz, blues, latin, fusion, classic rock, progressive rock, classical, *real* punk, funk, soul, reggae, ska, grunge, the list goes on... and every single one of these genres have been built up on something else. Everything came from something. Nothing just fell from the sky.

I agree with what you say, that uniqueness is something to be regarded in high light as far as music goes. I agree 100%. I embrace innovation in music. This is the reason why I hate most emo music - there's nothing new in it. Same **** no matter who you listen to. No one thinks outside the box. No one grows with their music as their band matures. It isn't to be found, and that's why I think it's crap. Hell, if you think that emo is "outside the box" and "innovative" you should try some Pink Floyd or Yes, or hell put on a Monk cd. THAT'S innovative.

Just like deker thinks that the abstract stuff is crap no matter what, call him ignorant or uneducated, doesn't matter. I have the same opinion of emo and pop-punk.


And one more thing.

You're just looking at guitar talent, apparently, because that's all you mentioned.

That's kind of true, I do only listen to musicians with talent. Not just guitar, but anything. But talent doesnt mean playing FAST. Talent means playing WELL. Prime example is Jimi hendrix - he had great chops but he was FAR from the fastest player on this earth. Guitarists like Allan Holdsworth and some of the Dream theater and 80s hair rock stuff blow Jimi away at speed. But Jimi's lines were just so damn melodic, and that's why I love his music.

With emo, there IS no innovation. There is hardly any creativity. Same music, same chords just in different places, same theme, same whining. Same everything. That's why I'm tired of it.


And one more thing. It's not that i didn't give emo a "chance." Maybe it's more accurate for me to say that I don't hate emo, I just happen to hate almost every single "emo"-considered band that has been presented to me. So you can see why I'd get that sort of thing mixed up easily. I mean, any genre can be done to sound good - it just has to be done PROPERLY.

With emo, there IS no innovation. There is hardly any creativity. Same music, same chords just in different places, same theme, same whining. Same everything. That's why I'm tired of it.

But you mentioned liking *real* punk, right? To quote fourfa.com..

[quote] In the beginning, these [emo] bands consisted mostly of people who played in hardcore punk bands, got burned out its limited forms, and moved to a guitar-oriented, midtempo rock-based sound with emotional punk vocals (i.e., no posed soulful crooning like pop music). The central aspect here is the guitars - distorted, strummed mostly in duo unison, with occasional catchy riff highlights. This becomes known as the classic "D.C. sound," along with the octave chords that show up in later emo music.[/quote]

Now, i am not sure what bands you are listening to, but chances are if it was made post-1995, we aren't talking about the same genre. There are too many people out there, like yourself, that call emo "whiny", raising a big red flag for people who actually know what emo is. Think the 1985 punk scene without the limitations of the 1985 punk scene.

You have to give it some credit here. Okay, so maybe you hate this 1998+ post-emo trash, but i can't see how you can call *real* emo non-innovative.

Nos.

Hey Supah & Nos... quick hijacking one of the few intelligent sounding discussions we've had about art and life--with your music argument... not that music isn't art--but the tread isn't... okay, now I'm confused.

Interesting discussions. I often take Deks' side in things of this sort, but I'd have to say he sounds like he's completely dismissing the genre--not just the splatter of a 4 yr old. We haven't seen much of her work--and people are often lemmings. But the little bit they show intrigues me. All art does not come from experience and pain (as the angst generation would have us believe--sorry, I'm just tired of tortured 'artists'). There is a certain built in piece of instinct, or part of the soul that sparks the guiness. Maybe she does have it... or maybe her parents are telling her where to splatter the paint and have a wonderful sense of marketing that will pay for her college education. The idea of a gifted child not unprecidented. Simply look at classical music history, or any of a plethora of of other examples to find the child prodigies. These little snots have accomplished things that I could only dream of, so.... Don't be so easy to dismiss.

Kids are stupid! ;)

Every artist is a cannibal, every poet is a thief
All kill their inspiration and sing about their grief
- U2

seemed appropriate... ;)

chris

Hey Supah & Nos... quick hijacking one of the few intelligent sounding discussions we've had about art and life--with your music argument... not that music isn't art--but the tread isn't... okay, now I'm confused.

Wer'e not hijacking anything... the music issue which we are discussing on intelligent terms is as valid an argument as any.

As for nos, rather than try to argue more, i'm just curious... why not recommend to me a song you consider emo and i'll give you a blow by blow opinion... i'll list all the good things as well as the bad that i can get from it.

Argueing and complaining about emo is pretty emo in itself, whether for or against. Haha.

Like I do with the crappy Top 40 station in town...I turn it off, but I don't care who else wants to hear it.