Posted on 08/22/2006 10:20:10 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Bob Dylan says modern recordings sound "atrocious," and even the songs on his new album sounded much better in the studio than on disc.
"I don't know anybody who's made a record that sounds decent in the past twenty years, really," the 65-year-old rocker said in an interview with Rolling Stone magazine.
Dylan, who released eight studio albums in that time, returns with his first recording in five years, "Modern Times," next Tuesday.
Noting the music industry's complaints that illegal downloading means people are getting their music for free, he said, "Well, why not? It ain't worth nothing anyway."
"You listen to these modern records, they're atrocious, they have sound all over them," he added. "There's no definition of nothing, no vocal, no nothing, just like ... static."
Dylan said he does his best to fight technology, but it's a losing battle.
"Even these songs probably sounded ten times better in the studio when we recorded 'em. CDs are small. There's no stature to it."
How dark is it?
It's too dark for goblins.
How dark is it?
It's so dark you can smell the moon.
How dark is it?
It's so dark the wind gets lost.
How dark is it?
It's so dark the sky's on fire.
How dark is it?
It's so dark you can see Fort Worth from here.
No dope smoking no beer sold after 12 o'clock
Rosedale Mississippi Magic City Juke Joint
Mr Johnson sings over in a corner by the bar
Sold his soul to the devil so he can play guitar
Yeah, Blonde on Blonde would definitely be in my top 3, and probably #1. (I didn't mention it because it's far from being underrated). His three-album string in '65 - '66 (right before his motorcycle accident) was his creative peak. ....although he's neared that peak (however briefly) several times in the subsequent decades.
Agreed - Dylan like Keith Richards is a survivor. If he had followed the trajectory of Joplin, Hendrix and many, many others the motorcycle accident would have been the end of him. Fortunately (for him and for us) it wasn't. John Wesley Harding (the album immediately after the wreck if I'm not mistaken) might be my second favorite - that's an impressive piece of work.
Thanks for checking in. I'm sure I speak for many when I say this thread was incomplete before you so eloquently expressed your opinion.
LOL! Leave it to Dylan. I have to agree with him about a lot of it. Rap and Hip Hop are terrible, IMO.
That's it exactly- also known as "insurgent country", "rural contemporary", or some such appellation. I'd also include Americana, American roots music, or the Texas Hill Country sound as very fertile grounds for the musical imagination.
Hey NP, DMI
Leann is still young (and ditzy) but she does have a very pretty voice and it shines seperate from the music.
And no, I don't expect you to know my autobuys either....though I will say that I make compliation CD's that I give students and all of them ask "Who is cut _____" so the addiction is passed on.
And yes, our music has become fake and artificial/electronic. There is something about listening to music with live musicians, drummers etc and just plain beautiful voices singing totally from the heart that will spoil you.
and this too..
Tony Bennett: 'America is culturally void' ^
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1688176/posts
Did he ever listen to any of his own music?
"Even these songs probably sounded ten times better in the studio when we recorded 'em. CDs are small. There's no stature to it."
Uh, Bob, if it is like your last album, Love & Theft, it'll be out on vinyl as well.
Why propagate the lie that records aren't being made anymore?
And there are good and bad pressings of records too. Vinyl and mastering are always factors.
I will definitely check it out.
Thanks!
Then again, there were many Communists in the folk movement and they were opposed to rock and roll until they found an opportunity to use it to subvert the establishment.
You suck2.
Bob, get new batteries for your hearing aid, willya?.........
Can't believe I'm the first to post this:
It's Bush's Fault!
Good point.
It could be that over much of human history musicians were mostly there for pleasant background noise. Sure you've got Bach, Beethoven, Mozart and the rest, but I would think typically the court minstrel was maybe just one notch above the status scale to the court jester. It could be there was a "golden age" of the Beatles, Presley, Hendrix, (and yes, Dylan) where music and musicians took on an importance that was out of line with historical precedent.
There was a great change in the culture. Beethoven and Mozart had an influence on the high culture. However popular their music was, it wasn't a mass phenomenon.
Sixties popular music was such a mass phenomenon, and some people thought it had a higher cultural significance. Whether or not it really did, a lot of people were taken in by it. Nobody could claim that today's popular music is very significant historically.
But really, could any popular music satisfy the expectations people vested in Dylan and the Beatles?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.