Quality vs. Quantitiy

Guys, I've been thinking.

I've been trying to post roughly every Wednesday and I feel like things just don't seem right lately and it's half posts about not posting half posts that sound...off?

Barring any albums that come across my desk/impromptu shows,  Your humble narator will return in March.

I'm sorry about this guys, but I don't want to produce anything less than my best.

--Arin.

Update

So last week I had the plague and missed  a post. It also gave me time to think more about this lil blog. I want to go for quality, not quantity. So, I'm skipping this week in terms of Armchair Music Theory.  Expect a minor revamp soon. Review coming up sunday.

Music Wednesday (early edtion): Album Review: –Geocities– Oui Oúi

Oui Oúi-- Geocities (4/6)

Guys, Geocities is free here. The rest are sliding scale.  Go buy their music.

Oui Oúi is an independent "ambient/drone/electronic" duo hailing from St. Louis, MO. I was gifted their six track album (on cassette tape no less) from a friend this Christmas.

This, right here, is why I like electronic music so much. It’s pure innovation. Unlike a lot of music it it's genera though this little album doesn't make the mistake of becoming cluttered but still maintains the strong layering that electronic music is known for. An excellent balance of the rasping drone work and a stead background loop that layers on itself beautifully makes this little underdog a real gem.

Overall, I love it. Geocities has a cinematic, but not overbearing feeling that is very easy to get lost in.

Pop music, Lip syncing, and the Art of Mass Production.

Business first: I will in all likelihood not be posting next wednesday or the following one as it is Christmas/ New Years and I will be on vacation.  Things will resume the 8th in all odds.

Thanks for your patience. 

Now to music:

So, practically every five minutes in the music industry we see another performer “caught in the act” of lip-syncing.  Usually they are pop artists and it becomes a big deal briefly before it fades out.

I’m here to defend them.

(I actually got distracted from this entry arguing about weather pop music is art or not, I’m not exaggerating but that’s another entry(touched on it a bit here))

The lip-syncing is an artifact of the industry. There are several reasons for it. First, those of you who consider yourself fairly able bodied and have the space, try a little experiment for me. Stand up and sing. Not mumble sing, but actually sing. Now try to keep that consistency, range, and sound while crouching, jumping twisting and shimmying.

Not easy, is it?

But, people in Broadway do it all the time! If you watch a good musical the vast majority of the intense dancing is during musical breaks, not when the lead is trying to belt out a long note. Furthermore, Pop stars are not hired to be Broadway stars. It’s not just their talent they are hired for (nor should it be) it’s their marketability. They have to look good up close, be able to dance and be able to at least carry a tune. Moreover, they have to do so consistently. If they get 2/3 there, we fudge the rest in studio. If a rock star gets grungy, or his/her voice goes a little gravely it’s all part of the sprit of rock and roll. If a pop star starts looking older, or gains weight they are immediately torn apart.

So yeah, they lip sync. They have to or they’d get eaten alive for being imperfect. There are enough variables out there. And the more popular a particular song is, the more vital it is that everything sound *perfect* and homogenous. It is the double-edged sword of pop music.

Don’t misunderstand me I’m not saying pop music is more challenging than other genres. Each genre has it’s own unique challenges and struggles. It is part of what makes music so powerful. However, pop music is often unfairly criticized as being much weaker than it is.

What We Talk About When We Talk About Genre, Pt. 2

Music has always been broken down into genres and eventually subgenres as people innovated and musical styles merged and split. People who listen to these genres often define genres, (or the genres define them, perhaps.)

If you were to look just at Wikipedia there are twenty-one primary genres listed alone, and dozens upon dozens of sub-genres. I can guarantee without even getting it into the fabricated genres named solely to make a band sound more impressive that there are twice as many sub-genres out there and more on the way. Music is in a perpetual state of evolution.

So, how does someone like me whose career is based on knowing things like the criteria for various genres and sub-genres even begin to tackle the concept of genre?
To be honest? I don’t to a degree. I could make an entire blog all of its own on genres/sub-genres some of with, frankly, I could happily go the rest of my life without hearing again.

So where does that put us?

As humans, we have a creative drive to make things that are uniquely ours or at least take owner ship of existing things. Musicians in particular have an itch to make their mark. This is in no small part how subgenera get birthed. It also stems from one person or band liking certain components of a genre but actively disliking others. And then the media asks, “Well what do you call yourselves?” Almost every artist I’ve seen answer this question starts with one sound “Uhhh” No one really knows, some bands will outright say “We cannot be classified” Unfortunately, in order for people to find your band, you need things to demarcate what your sound is to someone who hasn’t ever heard your work. You need to know whom to tour with. I vividly remember when Shawn Mullins was popular in the 90s. He’s a county/folk singer who really isn’t a fan of big crowds and yet he found himself opening for backstreet boys, as he recalled during one of the shows. His popularity faded from mainstream quickly partly because of this. You can’t bill a folk singer as pop. But if we lived in a world whiteout genera borders, we would be constantly doing just that. Things are changing; I’ll be the first to admit it. There are things like Pandora that analyze the sounds and aesthetics of what you listen to and try to find more but as is commonly quoted on memebase-- a lot of the music we love is a lot like music we cannot stand. Sub genres and genera markers can warn us about this and make billing, choosing and listening to music easier. There are probably at this point Billions of songs out there knowing the sub genes can narrow things down much faster than thumbing through all the songs out there.

So, genre has its use? But how the hell do we figure out what genres and sub-genres we enjoy.
It used to be you had to spend time either with friends with obscure taste, or waiting for a good song to play on the radio. Now it’s as easy as typing, all you have to do is find one song you like. Even then, its really easy to post on Facebook (for example) “Hey guys, I’m bored throw some good music at me.” Even clumsy old Pandora helps.

And for musicians it’s becoming easier to say “We’re like a fusion of subgenre A and Sub-genre B with influences from sub-genre C.” and as fans we can look up those sub-genres. The evolution continues.

Why, Yes, it is personal, pt.2 "Somebody's Gotta Feel This."

Yeah, yeah I quoted Kid Rock. Call the Taste Police.

Subtitle part two: Wherein Arin gets personal

I try to be not personal in this blog, but frankly I'm having a shit day. 

Another reason music is ridiculously personal, at least for me anyway, is that everyone has Pavlov-like reactions to certain music (You remember That One Song from a few entries back?) Maybe you hate that song because it's associated with an ex, maybe that other song makes your heart go nuts because it played when you found out you got into your first choice school. Maybe it’s that song you play to get yourself gunned up for something.

Whatever it is these songs are twined to things in our lives that are ours alone. They take us back to that one moment or that feeling. Sometimes you can't even explain it just *is*. 

Then someone has the damn nerve to say, "I really hate that song."

Oh, hell no.

 Weather we admit it or not we have this immediate gut reaction to people's reactions. Ever been forced to listen to a song you hate? Yeah. There’s that reaction again that "oh my god, I want to stab something."

And then when you try to share That One Song and someone else doesn’t like it, a part of you gets crushed. And it kinda ruins part of it. 

Folks, listen to me very carefully.

I don't give a fuck what song it is. It’s *your* song. Own that song with all of your heart. Don't let people try to fuck with that, even by accident. They don't like it? It’s their loss, not yours.

And that one song you hate? Fuck that song. You don't have to love all music ever.  But here's where I encourage a little compassion. Someone else might love that terrible song. It might have saved a life. Yes, that song. So have some respect about it. Stand by your hatred, but have respect.  

These are your songs. Especially in a day and age when we can pick and choose exactly what we hear. Music is that much more personal because you've hand picked these songs and artists.  This is your music. Not theirs. Own it. 

And don't be embarrassed by it either. I don't care if your song is "I love you, you love me" (or whatever that Barney song is called) own it. Hold onto it like the world's gonna catch fire. If it does it’s going to be you, the apocalypse and that music. 

Music Wednsdays: Hard Out Here: Liking Problematic Music

Errata: Last week's post cited Lily Allen's newest song as "Hard Out There" it should be "Hard Out Here" I have corrected it.

Note, the first: this post veers into politics bit, feel free to skip on if you don't want to go there

note the second: I’m white (though biologically female) I acknowledge that I’m coming at this from a privileged perspective. I just thought I'd address it given that I have already mentioned the song in passing. Feel free to drop me an ask/message/email if I've said something really out of line.

Under a spoiler cut so that people who don't want to read political stuff can skip it easily

A Brief Review and Music Wednesday: Controversy and Commentary (Everybody Talks)

Hey  I’m on time, check that out!

First: a short review of Lily Allen’s  “Hard Out Here” (Released 11/12/13)
This message brought to you by the zinger of a new single that Lily Allen just put out “Hard out there”
Hard out there is a sharp edged jibe hypersexualisation in music and, more particularly at Robin Thicke’s  “Blurred Lines”  (which I could rant on for hours, but  it’s already been done a lot) it does so without sex shaming.  Hard out there“ showcase’s Allen’s signature razor sharp sarcasm and dry wit alongside smart commentary and a surprisingly well choreographed music video. (The new album is due out sometime next year)

Which brings us to my topic of the week: Social commentary and Controversy.
Putting yourself out there as an artist is dangerous enough. With a spot light on you at all times any move can catapult or decimate your career. All music has something to say and most songs have undertones that hint at something more than just the basic lyrics, which can be cause enough for gossip. Some artists take it one step further and put forth a clear-cut message. The bigger the statement the more talk, the more talk the more potential for controversy. Controversy is a double-edged sword, on the one hand everyone wants to hear what the fuss is about, on the other hand if the fans don’t like it, that can really damage your career.  Regardless, it is media mayhem, doubly so if anything controversial comes up in the video. The commentary doesn’t need to be explicit to get attention either.
Lets look at a few examples
Robin Thicke’s “Blurred lines”* has a very clear very controversial message: That there’re blurred lines between consent and non-consent. When this song came out the media lit up. Did he actually mean it to be about rape? What kind of signal was this song sending? Thicke’s response only served to fuel this controversy. He claims the song is not promoting rape but feminism because of the line ”the man is not your maker“. Most people looked at the rest of the song as being very degrading and promoting rape.
Controversy or not, this song climbed to number one very quickly and became one of the top hip-hop songs of all time.(source)
What gives? This song has a horrible message and an equally horrid reputation. Why the popularity?
it’s the method of execution is what really made this song so insidious. It is presented as a catchy hip-hop song, not one people are meant to listen to closely. It is almost as though Thicke thought that he could get always with what he was saying if it was masked in a sexualized genera and catchy.
(I am not dignifying this video with a link, I fall very firmly into the group of people who believe  that Thicke is a rape apologist piece of pond scum, to put it nicely)

Then we have a much more positive message in Rise Against’s  “Make It Stop(September’s Children)” The song it self as a very powerful, very explicit  message: We need to put a stop to the hatred and bullying that are bringing the young GLBTQ et. people to commit suicide.  It was well received, but what really got people talking was the bridge wherein front man (Dude) lists off the names of publicly known GLBTQ teen suicide victims and their ages punctuated with “Seth Walsh, age 13” as a final, sharp reminder. It was a big eye opener to a lot of people. What really makes this song work is that, unlike “Blurred Lines,” it sends a clear, honest message with no pretense of being anything else and it shows people the face of the issue it talks about. This technique can be seen as heavy handed or worse yet capitalizing on tragedy. Either way, it managed to really win the attention of many people

While LillyAllen’s “Hard Out There” has only been out for less than 24 hours, it has already garnered a lot of press. This song represents another flavor of commentary: the jab.  While the song pulls absolutely no punches, it isn’t as self-important as something like ”Make It stop“ it’s not a gut-wrencher. Rather, it uses wit and sarcasm to make it’s point accessible without diluting it. In fact, comedy and sarcasm often serve to make the ideas in a song more palatable to the audience and thereby much more readily attended to.  (Linked above)

These strategies are all powerful methods of expressing a point that work in very different was to at least get attention drawn to their cause. However, they all also have the ability to push listeners away for the very same reason. Nevertheless, they become popular very readily.

* I am trying not to let my biases get the better of me in analyzing these artists but robin Thicke gets under my  skin in a very nasty way
** This is the word that I use for myself. I do not like calling it gay because it rules out the ideal of fluid sexuality/ bisexuality. I do not mean any offense with this term.

Music Wednesday: Why Music? (Yes, it is personal)

First, Business:
In the interest of getting my readers involved, I’m opening up a tumblr wherein I am asking/encouraging you all to stop by and drop me an ask. Questions and comments welcome! It will be anon or not and asks will not post by default (though the odds are high I will post them unless you ask me not to). So ask away.
The URL is
Askthewolfe.tumblr.com

Now then, on to our topic: Why music?

Okay, so I’m not a sociologist by any leap I have very little understanding of the origins of music. While it would be a very interesting thing to research, that’s not what I’m going for here.

What I’m talking about is why I picked music as my obsession and a little bit about why other people listen to music.

Music has been around pretty much since people figured out how to make sounds. It serves as a means not only of communication but also of self-expression.  It is how we talk both to ourselves and to other people.

Most, if not all songs are built to say something, even if its something simple or something that cannot be expressed with words. Even bad, shallow songs have something to say. The beauty of music though lies in the fact that even with a very clear song no two people will interpret it quite the same way.
I’ll use a shallow example that I’ve heard other people’s opinions on so have some anecdotal evidence
Lets look at Lady Gaga’s Poker face.
I have heard the following interpretations:
1. Bouncy pop song, flirty if shallow
2. a song about reclaiming female sexuality
3. a song about rape
I made the same face you probably just did (for the curious I can go into a longer explanation/analysis if it is requested) and it took me a lot of thinking to get the idea that the song could be interpreted as being about a cold, wounded, woman who is just out for the game because someone hurt her or is hurting her.
I personally am not a fan of the rape interoperation, but I can see it.

That song got dark fast and it's a very simple song. The interpretations get more intense and complex as the songs do. I just picked a simple one to illustrate with.

Go to any music forum (Particularly check out songmeanings.com) and find a thread about a particular song I f someone says anything about what they think a song is about you will get dozens of comments about either very much agreeing with them or about how incredibly wrong they are according to the commenter. And these aren’t even toned  “I respectfully disagree” type comments, rather they are vehement, often a little insulting and very adamant that they are the right ones not the poster. The passion and conviction in the comments is unparalleled. Lest you think this is just an Internet thing, I’ve seen it happen in real life as well. Hell, I’ve been guilty of being involved in these conversations myself.
So why do we care what some random person has to say about how we listen to a song? It’s just music right?
Wrong. Very wrong.
Time and again I see comments about how music saves lives or brings people together. Hell there’s an old adage about how music soothes the savage beast. I’ve heard people declare that a particular song either saved them from suicide or pulled them through a particularly dark place in their life.  Most people are quick to say that these are predominately melodramatic teenagers, but in my experience their ages range all over the map. There’s an incurably heartwarming video of an elderly man in a nursing home and how he responds to his music(Warning: tearjerker) There are also countless testaments from young people about how music has saved them.) What’s even more interesting is what songs do it. Its not always the fearless, motivational songs or the songs explicitly meant to save lives. Sometimes it is a song that most people would write off as shallow. Not to obsess on Lady Gaga, but I recall very vividly someone explaining how a friend of theirs, after losing someone they cared about a great deal four the strength to carry on through Lady Gaga’s “Just dance.”
I can hear your eyes rolling from here. Stop that. Right now.

Because of how many interpretations even the shallowest of songs can have, music is very personal. Who am I to take trivialize something that could well have saved a life? And weather we admit it or not it stings like hell when someone shit talks a song that hit you right in the gut the moment you heard it. I tend to feel a lot like a kid with a crayon drawing who’s just been shrugged off or an angry teenager. This is why we get defensive of our music and why a lot of people trivialize music. Better to not get attached to something that’s “just a song.” lest someone hurt you. Nevertheless, ‘m wiling to wager that everyone has that one song that got under their skin and just won’t leave. That one song that speaks directly to something so deep in your bones that it is imposable to describe what it does to you. You might even keep this a guarded secret. But that song is always there, like an old friend.

And I’d  bet you know exactly what song it is without even thinking about it.
(hell if you’re feeling brave, throw it in my askbox)
In short, yes it is personal when you insult my music. And it is precisely that vulnerability that drew me to do what I do.

Music Wednesdays(the acually on Wednesday edition):Music, crowds and Influence

I keep thinking back to the feeling I get whenever I go to a big, high-energy show. Staring out over the fray it always takes me aback watching how obedient a crowd is. The artist says jump, they jump, the artist says “get your fists in the air” they do it for a good artist. A strong artist has a huge amount of power over the crowd for that few hours, but that power can be fragile. The crowd also has an extraordinary amount of power. If you've gone to enough concerts, you've seen the crowd turn on a band at least once. The artist say for does something the crowd really doesn’t like (’m not talking about a clumsy song. I'm talking out right bad things) there is a rumble in the crowd and then the quiet happens. When a show is going we’ll, the crowd has a pulse of its own. You can feel it. Even if you don't believe in anything supernatural, there is an unmistakable, palpable surge when the right song plays. A roar. Like with large predators, when the roar goes quiet is when you worry. Now a good artist can sometimes recover some of the energy, but most of the time the artist has shot himself in the foot for that night, longer if it’s a really explosive problem. Hell, if it’s on video it might last decades like the time Axel Rose beat up a fan for recording his show. What artists do up there has a huge amount of impact. It is madness and magic.

I can already hear the anti-rock and roll voices saying, “But If music is so powerful, can’t it also have a bad influence?” As an audiophile, I can say that yes, it can. However, its not how you think. Violent lyrics don’t make people violent, in fact it  is often how people release  the pent up anger that might otherwise spill over and actually hurt someone. If someone flames music as their influence for harm, then they were already going to hurt someone, they just had a way to put it into words.

Remember what I said about the crowd above? They aren’t completely blind. Where music becomes weaponized is when something has been ticking in our cultural, or social hearts and someone finally puts into words that with we cannot. When someone speaks up on behalf of those who are muffled. Suddenly, the people who didn’t think they had any allies have someone and they look around and see that they are not the only ones cheering, and it spreads like a wildfire. It’s a weapon against the darkness, a weapon against our own demons. It’s solidarity, not murder.

Marilyn Manson didn't cause Columbine, but the right artist might have been able to stop it.

Another genre rant: Metal (part 1)

Metal is often seen by non- metalheads as a loud, angry genre with lots of screaming and not a lot of content.  And yes, metal deserves some of that reputation, however, it is also one of the most diverse, complex genres I’ve listened to. It’s sound ranges from symphonic to grinding  by way of disturbing*(Beware clown phobic people, contains creepy clowns!) and haunted. And thats just the very tip of the iceberg.

Ask three metal fans and they'll tell you three different ways to categorize metal and what sub-genres/bands count and do not count. This will provoke an impassioned debate that may or may not devolve into four letter words.

With all these differences, it is hard to find what makes metal metal. One could make the argue that it is the use of down tuned power cords, or the drum work that you can feel deep in your chest or even the signature growls that come with the genre.

To me all of these things are part of metal, and I could analyze them for the next millennium.  However, what makes metal what it is for me is the energy and tone.  Metal is often teaming with brooding, raw emotion. It is a hard genre. This emotion propels a primal energy that is a force unto itself.  Even in the symphonic metal or the softer songs, this energy is palpable. It’s obviously strongest live, in a good metal piece, it shows through like nothing else.
This energy is what defines metal.

*Yes, I am including nü metal, I know it’s contended, but In my view it has the same core tenants as other metal.

Music Weds: Catch Up Post

No armchair music theory this week. Catching up on reviews and the novel. More to come next week. In the meantime, have some reviews.

The Reviews:

Matchstick Men –Acoustic Grooves To Soothe The Soul–:(3.5/6 for the electric 4/6 for the acoustic)

The originals:

In the era of wavering voices, it is refreshing to hear a vocalist  who isn't  strictly  tenor but can still stretch into the tenor range without his voice breaking. The vocals do go a little flat, but that works with the overall sound. The background vocals work to round out the sound and serve to complement the lead vocals.

The guitar work is catchy and has a delightful grind to it, though I'm still not quite satisfied with the sound balance.

Overall, it was a good single

The acoustic versions:

I always brace myself for acoustic versions of any band’s songs as it really distils their sound, especially the vocals, and can bring out little problems that are not audible on the electronic versons.  Matchstick Men does a great job and avoids this problem.  Their acoustic numbers are, if anything, better than their electric stuff. I love the addition of the electric bass it makes the vocals shine and emphasizes the acoustic guitar work.  I'm delighted by the versatility of the lead singer’s voice and cannot wait to hear more.  The only complaint I have is that the guitar work is a little imprecise in places. However, I feel like that actually works with their overall sound.

Listen to Acoustic Grooves To Soothe The Soul in Full

Check out the original versions of the tracks

October Game––Balancing(4/6)

"I don't need your advice, i need your silence instead"

Defiant, confidant lyrics, oddly simple sound or how layered it actually is. Delightful bass work. THe lead singer’s throaty, ragged vocals flex within a low tenor range that is nested in a musical sound that combines industrial sensibilities with a hint of 80s flair. My only complaint about the vocals is that the vocalist pushes his sound a too hard in places.  Musically, my only issue is that the bass is a too tight and focused  in places.

At times the instrumentation is disorganized. If the music itself was simplified a fraction these guys would have a really spectacular sound.

Make no mistake, these guys are good, but I feel like there's more there. I would love to hear a live track from these guys.

Released tracks below:

"We Built This Wall To Destroy It" music video

"Beg Cycle" soundcloud: 

Traitors!–– Boys of the Double Cross EP––(2.5/6)

Traitors! are fun  and  have  a punk  core with a definitively British sound. The drum work is incredibly solid. However,  the vocals need to be honed to really cement the punk sound. I would encourage the lead to really go for broke in the punk sound and either blend in with the background vocals or completely stand out, right now it's somewhere in the middle and that doesn't work for their sound.  Boys of the Double Cross is  an average EP  and don't see a lot of potential in their music.

Video link for "We Build Towers"