user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
?!? Hmmm ... a decent jappy ballot. This requires reinforcement. I think you make a good point; much of today's music does seem formulaic and one has to wonder if the easy access to synthesizer-generated tracks doesn't have a lot to do with it.
Most rock and pop has been recorded in that way since the late sixties. And actually most recordings use real drummers, certainly more so than in the 80s and early 90s. The trouble is that most acts signed are bland and unthreatening, most arrangements are bland and unthreatening. The same couple of dozen session musicians with note- and millisecond- perfect, bland, unchallenging instrumental ability play on half the records that make the charts. And, yes, the whole thing, especially the vocals are digitally processed to give them that bland, expensive-sounding sheen (no pun intended) that makes them all sound much the same.
And most of the radio stations are owned by the same companies and play the same bland unthreatening records. As one senior radio executive stated (I can't remember who) 'we're not in the business of selling records, we're in the business of selling advertising'. So bland and unthreatening (did I use those words already?) is the order of the day. Nothing too challenging or exciting, for fear it might make you switch off.
It's been coming for years now. Even back in the American Bandstand Era (am I carbon-dating myself or WHAT?), singers felt the need to amp up their recordings throught judicious engineering. We're just starting to notice it now (Ashlee Simpson, Milli Vanilli (BTB, you CAN blame it on the rain)).
Excellent Ballot, Jappy!
by Ezri on Mon Jan 31, 05 11:51pm
[+]
|
|