Free Republic

I should have mentioned Toto in that list.

Not only are we more than casual music fans, we’re musicians working in the industry.

Despite the fact that the market has been revolutionized, and the way in which musicians record and build a band have changed, musician are still creating great music.

There are elements to the industry that I think is great for the artist. Everyone has there own home recording studio. Production’s now in the control of the artist. With that freedom comes the influx of mediocre music.

I”m envious. I haven’t seen him perform live.

Of the artists you’ve listed, I liked Wilki and Edyta Bartosiewicz. Still have to spend more time with the music, though. Thanks.

I’ll have to check that out.

Have you ever listened o Gizmo (Stewart Copeland), Salif Keita, Richard Bona, or Tinariwen?

True, but there are times in which the end game is not popularity...especially when popularity threatens creativity.

That’s music’s timeless.

Thankfully I was raised on international music as well as country, pop, rock, jazz, and classical.

What artists are you currently listening to?

Touring has always been a major part of an artists income. You have to promote your music. Steely Dan was the exception, but musicians have to hit the road and promote their album, besides the fact that we just need to perform.

Teenage angst was and is just a byproduct of what happens when families deteriorate. The music was just another way for these youths to express their frustration, confusion, and anger. Add the liberal agenda into the public education system as well as the continued slide from Judeo-Christian values in society, and there you some of the causes.

If you add to this fundamental shift in society the change in the way ppl understand economics, the role of our government, commerce/trade, or lack there of in a free society and there you have it....our current situation.

Trust me when I say I understand. I come from a multi-generational family of artists in the professional film and music industry...on both sides of the family.

“...from the inception, was a band that had a flaming peacock with a bullhorn, a saltbox to stand on, and empty ideas.”

I hate to break this to you, but you just described the average rock/pop band.

“I find it funny,that everybody who rushed to put that latest release of music on YouTube, had their posting MUTED, ‘according to YT copyright policies’.”

Oh, you mean GOOGLE’s youtube? Google, the multinational corporation that is in direct competition with APPLE?

I find it funny that you failed to do the math in your correlation between the two.

One of the main reasons for this extreme lack of originality, creativity, and ingenuity is the way in which our youth have been educated in the public schools.

Your money, your time, your dime.

I tend to do the same. Our family owned the chicks CD until Natalie decide to show the world how much of a blithering idiot she is. I tossed the music. My sentiments are the same for Gerth Brooks, Willie Nelson, Faith and Tim Hill. :^), etc.

I cut U2 some slack because I’ve heard a number of interviews in which he praised President Bush for his various humanitarian efforts. Something other artists didn’t have the integrity to do. Also, he has expressed a love and support for America while artists-especially American artists-express nothing but hatred.

lol.

No forgiveness is necessary. One mans U2 is another mans Thin Lizzy.

I’m not convinced that we’ve reached the zenith of our creative musical exploration. Although, music is in a odd flux right now. The market’s been over-saturated with sanitized music.

It will be interesting to see where artists take us musically.

Have you actually listened to their library? If that’s the case ,you may as well say that the Stones music sounds “similar”. All bands/artists possess a signature sound.

Fair enough, but who do you listen to? Who do you like? I’ll bet some of the artists you love are just as liberal as those you’ve mentioned.

I believe you’re referring to The Who.

A fan, I take it. :^)

You stated it well. It truly is what’s right. In all of its pain and suffering, I do find beauty in the sacrificial love for those who are dying. I also see the courage and beauty in our loved ones who face their death with more dignity and resolve than those who wish to sell the alternative.

Winter storm’s heading our way as well. It’s been windy throughout the day/evening. Snowfall above 7000 ft. We’re hoping the weatherman’s wrong on that count. Stay warm, and wishing you and yours a good weekend.

TJI

I've always been a fan of U2. Truly the original article. They don't make 'em like they used to, thanks-in part-to the change in the way music is produced/recorded/created.

During his interview in Esquire, Gene Simmons of the iconic rock group, KISS, stated:

"It's very sad for new bands. My heart goes out to them. They just don't have a chance. If you play guitar, it's almost impossible. You're better off not even learning how to play guitar or write songs, and just singing in the shower and auditioning for The X Factor. And I'm not slamming The X Factor, or pop singers. But where's the next Bob Dylan? Where's the next Beatles? Where are the songwriters? Where are the creators? Many of them now have to work behind the scenes, to prop up pop acts and write their stuff for them.

Here's a frightening thought: from 1958 to 1983, name 100 musical anythings that are iconic, that seem to last beyond their time.

NS: The Beatles, The Stones...

GS: Elvis, the Beatles, Michael Jackson, the Stones, Jimi Hendrix, the numerous classic Motown artists, Madonna, U2, Prince, Pink Floyd... The list goes on. Individuals, all unanimously considered classic, timeless, revolutionary. Now from '84 until today, name some. Just give me a few — artists that, even after their passing, are or will be inescapable. Artists on the same level as the ones I just mentioned. Even if you don't like them, they will be impossible to avoid, or deny, even after they've stopped making music and maybe passed on. In fact, they become bigger when they stop. Name artists that even compare with the ones I just named.

NS: Nirvana?

GS: Nirvana. That's about it. They are the notable exception. Keep thinking. It's harder, isn't it, to name artists with as much confidence? The pickings are so slim, and it's not an arbitrary difference. There was a 10- to 15-year period in the '60s and '70s that gave birth to almost every artist we now call "iconic," or "classic." If you know anything about what makes longevity, about what makes something an everlasting icon, it's hard to find after that. The craft is gone, and that is what technology, in part, has brought us. What is the next Dark Side of the Moon? Now that the record industry barely exists, they wouldn't have a chance to make something like that. There is a reason that, along with the usual top-40 juggernauts, some of the biggest touring bands are half old people, like me."

U2 will always be one of those icons. Their songs often asks the deeper questions, their lyrics conveying a desire to reveal more than the stereotypical "sex, drugs, and rock and roll" anthem.

I don't agree with all that Gene Simmon's expressed in that interview, but it is true that bands like the Stones, Van Halen, the Beatles, as well as U2 are fewer and farther in comparison to what we are seeing today.

I'm still listening through Songs of Innocence, but at the very least, U2 continues to step out of the comfort zone, take risks, and truly create music rather than just make music.

Thank you, Lord.