"Good" Music

I think a lot of it has to do with that these bands like the Vines, the Hives, White Stripes, etc write their own songs and play their own instruments.

I know, I know, it has been shown here that Avril Lavigne writes her own stuff, too but the impression of her is still one of a manufactured pop star made by MTV.

I have the Vines, the Hives, White Stripes, and the Strokes latest CDs. They are okay, but I wouldn't say that they are the "saviors" to rock music.

It is all about taste.

 

Creed was the the band that saved rock.

As you were.

 

whoa.

nomar, how's your penis?

 

Here's why I think critics like these bands.

The Strokes: this one is easy. Critics long for the days when New York music was some of the coolest on the planet: when Talking Heads and Blondie and the Ramones ruled the roost. The Strokes hearken back to the punk days of yore. They have a great look, their videos are cool and they have a good, just-retro-enough sound which borrows fairly equally from the Velvet Underground, Television and (sshhhh!) Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers. The songs are catchy, too.

The Hives: well, their look is *fantastic*. Never underestimate that. They also have a great fictionalised backstory ('we were created by a svengali who wrote all our songs and named us things like Howlin' Pelle Almqvist' - that's endlessly funny to me). Their songs have a real immediacy - they kick you in the guts but you can also sing along to them. They too have good videos. Plus, they're Swedish. It's always useful for critics to hail the next big thing from an obscure corner of the world. NZ bands get a lot of mileage that way.

The White Stripes: another cool look (Jack White is a f*cking *pimp*, I love that!), another good backstory, another bunch of great videos. Good songs, with kind of a 'cool Led Zep/less annoying Jon Spencer' factor involved. Plus, all critics love a girl drummer, particularly if she's quirky-hot like Meg.

The Vines: easy to explain. Young, Australian, compellingly freaky lead singer, sound like Nirvana. All critics love Nirvana.

I really like the first three bands, not so keen on the Vines. I think my basic theory is that critics love context, because they listen to *so much music* all the time. So when you place these bands in a place in rock history (the Strokes being all nouveau-punk New York, for example) and they look just different/retro/new *enough* to be cool, then you can safely love them. Plus, none of these new bands have that awful constipated drone that passed for vocalising post-Nirvana/Pearl Jam. For that alone we should all thank them.

Avril peeves me not so much because she's a poser (they're *all* posers, although she doesn't seem to know it, unlike Jack White) but because all her melodies are so ******* predictable. Just for once, could one of these faux-punks pull a Paul McCartney or an Elliott Smith or a Weezer or an old-school Costello and do some glorious middle eight that makes me sit up and take notice? It can be done, you know. That latest Weezer album is filled with fantastic little moments. And really, it's not that far removed from Levigne's sound, when you listen closely.

Oh, and Nomar: Creed suck. Just wanted to let you know that again.

 

Led Zepplin
Creedence Clearwater Revival

enough said...

 

The White Stripes may look cool, but their music flat-out sucks. Their songs sound like they were written in 5 minutes. Total (LOUD!) crap garage band, IMO. Why anyone actually likes their music is beyond me. Now, having said that, the strange thing is, I like them as people. They give great (and hilarious) interviews and seem really down-to-earth. Meg and Jack play so well off each other, and like dimisie said earlier, there's just something about Meg that I like. But their music is pure, utter crap!!! I'm so torn. I wish them all the best luck in the world, but I really want them to suffer a horrible, painful death. Is that so wrong?

The Strokes get major play up here in NYC. Every critic here loves 'em. Their music is decent, but not the "new face of rock." Better than the White Stripes and worlds ahead of the Vines.

The Vines blow. Seriously, nothing more needs to be said about them. Someone make them go away. Please.

As for Avril. I don't think I've ever seen anyone with straighter hair. This girl probably spends more time in front of the mirror than Marcia Brady. As for her music, it's standard pop fluff. She's better than Pink, though (who I absolutely abhor). "Complicated" is the best song I've heard from her.


On an unrelated note:
Manny (if you read this), what do you think of Sigur Ros, that ambient group from Iceland?

 

Blech, she's just plain scary.

 

SCF,

Screw critics. No one can define good music because ultimately it ends up being a subjective decision. Millions of people like the Beatles. I, on the other hand, don't care for the music. Does it mean it's bad or good - no it just means I don't like it and others do. You'll always have the group of people that will bring up the obscure groups no one's ever heard of and say they're much better than the group that's getting all kinds of airplay. I think it's the chic thing to do. "Boy, Creed sucks, but the Flying Goat Boys from the Bowels of Hades is great music. They haven't sold out ya know!" Whatever.

Good music is what you think is good music and nothing else. Critics offer opnions and nothing else.
I own a Hanson CD... 'nuff said.

 

I think it starts with one band that the critics decide is the next cool thing. Then, other labels run off and try to find copies. I believe it started in this case with the Strokes. The Hives had actually been making records on indie labels for a few years, but nobody really cared. Then, boom, the Strokes happen, so some big label goes and 'discovers' the Hives, and reissues their album 'Veni Vidi Vicious', which had already been released in 2000 by the Epitaph label. I think similarly the White Stripes had already made at least one album that went relatively unnoticed as well, then they were 'discovered', because a label decided they matched what was now 'cool'.

Now, as for what made the Strokes cool in the first place, I don't know. I guess people like muddled sound and a guy that sings through a megaphone. Hey guys, with technology the way it is nowadays, you can actually produce your album so that we can HEAR it.

 

I think that they are okay, VS. I have "Agaetis Byrjun" and I have listened through it all the way twice. Pretty weird stuff. I'll need to listen to it again a couple of times before I can really say one thing or the other about them.

I know that they have a new album out titled "()", but it will probably be awhile before I get that album.

DoD,

I can't believe that you didn't talk about Screaming Atomic Buffalo and Pookie Daniels!

 

Avril's CD is like the best $7 I have spend on a CD EVER. Really, is is. I was expecting a CD with her rock/punkish tunes like Complicated and Sk8er Boi, but it turned to be an emotional/pop CD. I am not embarressed to say that this is the best CD I have bought this year.

The WORST CD i bought this year has to be the Christina Aguliera CD. I was expecting her pop stuff from the previous album (in which I admit, I liked alot), but its full of Mariah Carey wannabe songs. I heard it once and its still in my car in the case and looking for someone to take it.

 

Sorry man, but no. Objectively, no. Some things are *not* a matter of taste, and 'the Beatles are the best band ever' is one of them. The fact that you don't like them is actually a personal failing.

Uh, I like Sigur Ros too, if anyone cares.

 

Sorry, dimsie. I didn't think anyone else had heard of them (which meant that Manny definitely had... ) I'll echo Manny's sentiments: they're weird. I listened to their "Agaetis Byrjun" album, and I think they're cool in a foreign way, but not cool enough to make me wanna listen to them over and over again. Some of their stuff is total elevator music. Rolling Stone made them out to be gods or something, so I was expecting more from them. I might download some of their new untitled album just to see if it's better than what I listened to.

 

Sigur Ros are an awesome group. They are abstract to the point that the singing is more about the sound than the meaning, but it is really beautiful. They are one of the best groups to have emerged in a long time. Completely original. Almost pure music, if that makes any sense.

 

Your opinions are generally a tad questionable, though.

 

You're sure that I would like it? Dude, has it ever occured to you that maybe what feels warm and gooey to you, maybe might seem rough and intrusive to me?

RM95 - I've responded in another thread.

And, uh, its actually a roll of quarters. Laundry day.

 

Sigur Ros is great! However, the new one isn't nearly as good as the one before it...in my opinion.

Seeing them live was an experience. Usually the concerts I go to consist of people chatting, screaming, yelling while the band plays. At Sigur Ros you could have heard a pin drop! Definitely a different atmosphere.