h a l f b a k e r yI like this idea, only I think it should be run by the government.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
The music biz is big on verification plaques. You don't get
a
gold record with your name on it until the RIAA does an
audit verifying unit sales, minimum price etc.
So using a smaller version of the same kind of little
plaques
they
have on gold and platinum album awards, have auditors
verify that a particular instrument was used on a
particular
recording and affix the certification to the instrument.
The
back of a guitar for instance.
The certification process would be rigorous, basically the
person who played the part would have to certify it.
Perhaps a producer or sound engineer but ideally the
person who actually played it.
The plaque could even feature the signature of the artist
certifying this was the instrument they used.
Not just to enhance the worth of the instrument,
although
there'd be that, but to document a bit of music history.
"Damn I'm getting sick of this crappy weather already."
https://www.youtube...watch?v=u1V8YRJnr4Q
"Hmm. Let's try a more interesting take on that concept. " [doctorremulac3, Mar 07 2020]
for the good doctor 3 ...
https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/vah
[pertinax, Mar 10 2020]
Yes, someday we'll all be dust, but in the meantime some people enjoy pieces of rock history.
https://cartervinta...r-stratocaster-2041
[doctorremulac3, Mar 11 2020]
The millennial whoop
https://www.youtube...watch?v=mqiK8b8nHaM
The equivalent of putting sugar into crappy food products to sell more of it. [doctorremulac3, Mar 14 2020]
"I'm not an old fuddy duddy! I'm still cool!"
https://www.youtube...watch?v=QWWIpECf3Sg
South Park perfectly addressed the phenomena of gullible old people trying to look hip by pretending to like formulaic corporate shit music. [doctorremulac3, Mar 14 2020, last modified Mar 15 2020]
[link]
|
| |
Can any group other than the RIAA verify it? I like
this idea, just not the "RIAA" part. |
|
| |
I get what you're saying about the RIAA because it's an
American company but the American gold or platinum
record award is the one people typically display. Ask the
Beatles about how excited they were getting their first
10,000 units sold in Austria resulting in a gold record
award certified by the International Federation of the
Phonographic Industry. I mean, Austria, great country,
great people but would you bother displaying a gold
record from there? I wouldn't. If you were to put gold
records on your wall from every country around the world
you sold records in you'd look kind of silly. America has
always been the big market goal so those are the awards
people typically display. |
|
| |
I suppose you could have another organization like
Sothebys but they're not a musical organization. |
|
| |
Naa, the biggest is the RIAA, it's the award everybody,
from whatever country goes for and it's the hardest to get
so I'd give the gig to them. |
|
| |
By the way, I can attest to the almost religious experience
of handling historical pieces of music history. I was invited
to check out the vault at the Fantasy Records building and
holding what felt like a religious relic in my trembling
hands, reading the notes on a humble looking 1"
multitrack tape I got a rare insight into a musical icon's
creativity. |
|
| |
The master tape was labeled "Creedence Clearwater
Revival" and the part that gave me a chill up my spine
was the working titles of the various takes on the song
they were working on as it progressed from a rough idea
to a classic rock musical masterpiece. I don't remember
the titles exactly, but I remember how they progressed
from rough idea to finished product: |
|
| |
"Wow, the Weather's Crappy" |
|
| |
"Can We Get Some Friggin' Sun For A Change?" |
|
| |
"Getting Sick Of Driving To The Studio In The Rain" |
|
| |
"Have You Ever Seen Such Horrible Weather?" |
|
| |
"Have You Ever Seen Rain Like This?" |
|
| |
"Have You Ever Seen The Rain" |
|
| |
I realized seeing this that amazing music is made by
human beings, not gods who were struck by lightening
bolts of creativity from some parallel universe. John
Fogerty just
took a thought we've all had, "God this weather sucks"
and made it into something incredibly beautiful. |
|
| |
(See link if you're not familiar with the song.) |
|
| |
I think if I found out I was playing a Jimi Hendrix guitar, I'd
faint and fall. |
|
| |
Me too. Would I even dare to play it? I would have
to, but
inside
I'd be saying "Forgive me Jimi for this, my impious
clumsy
noodling, but I must jam on thine guitar for I have
no
choice. It
is that inner demon inside me that whispers to my
soul when
facing majesty such as yours: "Hell, that doesn't
look so
hard, I could probably do better than that."" |
|
| |
"and the wind cries Mary..." |
|
| |
And by the way, I'm quite sure John attached a matching
story to this after the initial outline knowing people aren't
going to get much of an emotional connection with
somebody bitching about the weather. Sometimes a song
is born of a chord progression you like, sometimes the
story is first, sometimes the story is written to match
what the song sounds like after you've heard it for the
first time and still other times the story is added with a
punched up plot to the outline you came up with just
because you're in the recording studio and time is money.
"Gotta sing something, we'll worry about the words
later.". Or you can just be like Led Zeppelin and not give
a damn about the lyrics meaning anything, just make 'em
sound good. Now I might be wrong, Led Zeppelin's lyrics
might mean something but if somebody offered to explain
them to me I'd probably just turn up the music to drown
them out. Sometimes art doesn't need to mean anything,
it just needs to sound, look or feel good. |
|
| |
//deign to play it// I am sure most artists be saddened if they thought they had stopped an instrument being played. Even if played in a learny way. |
|
| |
I think used the word deign wrong. What's the opposite of
that,
dare? |
|
| |
Not fancy enough. (looks past the camera) LINE! |
|
| |
A lot of this stuff ends up in the Rock n' Roll Hall of Fame. Just do more of that. |
|
| |
Hard Rock Cafe also did the rock museum / restaurant
thing. Very brilliant. |
|
| |
But if it's in a museum people can't buy it, play it, invest
in it etc. Ok to put some in a museum, but it would be
cool to have some be collectible and available if you had
enough money. But are you going to pay $500,000 for a
guitar without it being verified as having been played on
some famous classic song? I had mentioned Sotheby's,
they've probably already done something similar but
without the
plaque. |
|
| |
Vintage guitars are already quite collectible, this would
enhance that. The plaque would have to be affixed in
such a way to not hurt the finish though. |
|
| |
You could use neutron beam activation to impress a unique pattern of mild radioactivity into the structure. It doesn't cause any harm and the emissions aren't dangerous. It's nearly impossible to fake, and the pattern can be "read" reatively easily simply by clamping some unexposed photographic film* over the site and then developing it later. |
|
| |
*For younger readers, you can ask your grandparents about what film was. |
|
| |
You could try "presume". There are fancier constructions with
more words, but they might not add much value in this case. |
|
| |
Yea, that's pretty fancy, but I want a word that
makes people think I'm really like, you know, totally
smart 'n stuff. One where people have to look up the
word online. |
|
| |
It has to make people say "Wow! How does he do all
such good word talk without doing a dictionary about
it, and then sentencing maker too?" |
|
| |
// One where people have to look up the word online. // |
|
| |
What sort of people ? Clever, normal (stupid), or very stupid ? |
|
| |
Without a specification, it's a big ask. |
|
| |
(PrtX) re link, I once did an impression of a well spoken
gentleman with a mouth full of crackers spitting out
crumbs as I spoke. Got great laughs. Next time I do a
public speaking engagement I'd like to do that again.
While making all sorts of deep, heavy points just casually
grab a couple of crackers and then just start talking
again, spraying crumbs everywhere. Not just crumbs
falling out of the mouth, that would be gross, projecting
them by using a lot of Ps and Ts. |
|
| |
Could be a thing like Gallager with his watermelons. |
|
| |
Anyway, try it sometime. I was on a fishing boat when I
did it, you have to pick the right time and place. I
wouldn't do it as the best man at a wedding, or speaking
at a funeral. |
|
| |
//emissions aren't dangerous. It's nearly impossible to
fake,// |
|
| |
Right, we'll see about that. (downloads multiple plans for
Farnsworth fusors and extracts the "key of destiny" a key
passed down from postdoc who's nice to the guys in the
loading dock to postdoc who's nice to the guys in the loading
dock. A key to a room where old things cursed with the
mark of the asset number go to spend eternity. I've seen
things you wouldn't believe....) |
|
| |
// I've seen things you wouldn't believe... // |
|
| |
Yes, but all those ... moments ... will be lost, in time, like ... tears ... in rain. |
|
| |
This is a lot of effort just to give boomers a chance to
feel
like the music of their youth is in some way culturally
significant. My contention is that in 50 years - once the
boomer generation is all good and dead - the proportion
of
people giving a fifth of a fuck about Led Zeppelin and
who
played what instrument on what song will be at or very
close to zero. 8th appears to be pre-emptively agreeing
with me. This comment will apply mutatis mutandis for
all other generations obsessed with their own pop cultural
artifacts. What purpose does this serve? Who gives a
shit? Except the TR-808. That is eternal. |
|
| |
//This is a lot of effort just to give boomers a
chance to feel like the music of their youth is in
some
way culturally significant. My contention is that in
50
years - once the boomer generation is all good and
dead -
the proportion of people giving a fifth of a fuck
about Led
Zeppelin and who played what instrument on what
song
will be at or very close to zero.// |
|
| |
Damn calum, save some dark bitterness for the
rest of us. |
|
| |
Obviously you don't have children. (Which might be
a good thing.) It's already been
50
years or more for much of this music and more
people are
listening to it now than they did then. |
|
| |
With downloadable music, people have the choice
of
what they listen to and they're going for quality,
not
garbage. "Boomer" music is huge and continually
creating
new audiences with subsequent generations by
virtue of its quality, nothing
else. |
|
| |
There was a golden era of music, from the 50s to
the 80s.
Yes, it was the baby boomers who made this music
but
what made this period different was because such
a large
portion of the population was young, the values of
the
population created a market geared towards young
consumers so the best and the brightest put their
genius
into creating music. A modern Paul McCartney or
Jimmy
Page would be creating a high tech startup
company with
their
genius today, not starting a rock band. |
|
| |
That's why this music was great, young people with
creative talents
were drawn to this industry. |
|
| |
And this isn't some old timer with a wall full of old
gold
and platinum records saying "These young
whippersnappers just don't make music like they
used to!"
Music before the 50s was garbage too. If you were
a
genius in 1930 you didn't start a band, you
invented some
new process or started a company. Modern music
bears a
striking resemblance to the crap people listened to
in the
1920s. Absolute formulaic garbage. |
|
| |
As far as the idea, I guess Picasso's might be
worthless
someday as well, but as for people investing in
pieces of
rock history, see the link to a guitar used on the
song
"Sweet Home Alabama". It's going for almost half a
million dollars. |
|
| |
Sometimes it's OK to invest in something that
makes people happy. |
|
| |
// "Sweet Home Alabama" // |
|
| |
We know that movie ! It's the one with the yellow DeHavilland Beaver DHC-2 floatplane. |
|
| |
Can't recall anything else about it tho. A lot of rubbish about some stupid girl, and far too little about the aircraft. So dull. |
|
| |
//Music before the 50s was garbage too// Have you told Bach? I think he should know. |
|
| |
What about Gödel and Escher ? |
|
| |
//Music before the 50s was garbage too// Have
you told Bach? I think he should know.// |
|
| |
We're talking about modern music. Last hundred
years or so. |
|
| |
So that's Fauré, Butterworth,
Dvořák, Elgar, Prokofiev, Bartók, Williams, Respighi, Vangelis, Khachaturian, Casals, Barber, Mahler, Debussy ... all consigned to the "49¢ remainder bin" of musical history by [doc]'s ineffable discrimination... |
|
| |
Do you mind letting us know your Truspilot and Tripadvisor userids ? Jus so's we can spot the dodgy reviews ... |
|
| |
How about this, did you ever start a music company
that generated a tenth of a billion dollars in record
sales worldwide? |
|
| |
// Do you listen to music? // |
|
| |
Some music ; opinions vary as to what constitutes "music" ... |
|
| |
<Placeholder for extensive condescending elitist putdown/> |
|
| |
Ah, you have thought ! Congratulations ! Now, you just need to keep the process going. It's like riding a bike- just a lot harder to stick baseball cards in the spokes... |
|
| |
// How about this, did you ever start a music company that generated a tenth of a billion dollars in record sales worldwide? // |
|
| |
"It's clever, but is it Art ?" |
|
| |
// Asking for a friend. // |
|
| |
Another first for you ! Double congratulations ! |
|
| |
Do they know they're your friend yet ? |
|
| |
Yup, those are words, good job. |
|
| |
No need to thank us yet; after all, you haven't had the benefit of the extensive condescending elitist putdown ... |
|
| |
Would you like a free side order of smug intellectual denigration with that ? For just 98¢ - the price of two hour-long orchestral masterpieces - you can upgrade to our Premium Insult Service, where you get accused of being "a ghastly little troglodytic prole" and "having the aesthetic sensitivity of a geriatric cave snake*" |
|
| |
*cave snakes do not have functional eyes, and are deaf, although they can detect some forms of vibration. |
|
| |
Hey Max, get in here, you're missing the fun! |
|
| |
// Not sure why they ever let you out of room 12, really // |
|
| |
We'd chewed all the padding off the walls. |
|
| |
<Goes to listen at closed door of Room 13/> |
|
| |
//did you ever start a music company that generated a
tenth of a billion dollars in record sales worldwide? Asking
for a friend. // |
|
| |
//Do they know they're your friend yet ?// |
|
| |
I think you missed my message there. |
|
| |
But as King Arthur said in The Holy Grail: We'll call it a draw. |
|
| |
Actually, it was the Black Knight ... |
|
| |
Like you, he didn't have a leg to stand on either ... |
|
| |
// Montgomery isn't in there. // |
|
| |
//Damn calum, save some dark bitterness for the rest of us.//
I am not bitter, just aware of the passage of time. I had
hoped that the obvious hypocrisy of my comment re the 808 would have made my tone clear. Alas. |
|
| |
// Obviously you don't have children.//
Wrong. |
|
| |
//(Which might be a good thing.)//
Rude. |
|
| |
//It's already been 50 years or more for much of this music and more people are listening to it now than they did then.//
If we accept this unsupported assumption, the question becomes "are they enjoying it?" and the answer, I would posit, is fuck
no. |
|
| |
//With downloadable music, people have the choice of what they listen to and they're going for quality, not garbage.//
Cursory googling reveals that "Shape of You" by Ed Sheeran is the most streamed song on Spotify, with over 2 billion streams. |
|
| |
// "Boomer" music is huge and continually creating new audiences with subsequent generations by virtue of its quality, nothing
else.//
Or maybe its popularity is increasing by virtue of Grandpa getting an ipad and Apple Music. |
|
| |
//There was a golden era of music, from the 50s to the 80s. Yes, it was the baby boomers who made this music but what made
this period different was because such a large portion of the population was young, the values of the population created a
market geared towards young consumers so the best and the brightest put their genius into creating music. A modern Paul
McCartney or Jimmy Page would be creating a high tech startup company with their genius today, not starting a rock
band.//
Is this automatic writing? |
|
| |
//That's why this music was great, young people with creative talents were drawn to this industry.//
The music is great (to you) because you like it. All else here is a post hoc rationalisation. |
|
| |
//And this isn't some old timer with a wall full of old gold and platinum records saying "These young whippersnappers just don't
make music like they used to!" Music before the 50s was garbage too. //
Philosophers will in years to come use this
sentence as an example of the pure paradox of being both subjective opinion and objectively wrong at the same time. |
|
| |
//If you were a genius in 1930 you didn't start a band, you invented some new process or started a company. Modern music
bears a striking resemblance to the crap people listened to in the 1920s. Absolute formulaic garbage.//
I am beginning to suspect that you yourself might be a boomer. |
|
| |
//As far as the idea, I guess Picasso's might be worthless someday as well, but as for people investing in pieces of rock history,
see the link to a guitar used on the song "Sweet Home Alabama". It's going for almost half a million dollars.//
I have only heard that song in the context of the movie Con Air. Con Air is at least twice the artistic statement that Sweet
Home Alabama is. |
|
| |
//Sometimes it's OK to invest in something that makes people happy.//
This is as close as you came in your comment to
saying something correct so, great, good, yeah. |
|
| |
So let me get this straight. The music produced (by certain commercial producers) from the 1950s to the 80s is demonstrably better than the music from the 1920s to the 1950s, and better than the music that was produced from the 1980s to the present day, because the people who like the kind of music that was produced from the 1950s to the 1980s have better taste than the (significantly larger number of) people who like listening to Ed Sheeran. And music before the 1920s is quite possibly miles better than any of that stuff which is why we're not allowed to use it as a comparison. And in 50 years time these facts will still be true. |
|
| |
Is that a fair summary of the state of knowledge so far? |
|
| |
I feel like "knowledge" is stretching it a bit. |
|
| |
OK, is that a fair summary of the state of arbitrary opinion so far? |
|
| |
That accords with my reading of the good doctor's position,
once you've done the necessary winnowing. |
|
| |
It's generally considered a valid hypothesis if no more than 50% of the data points have to be excluded to get the graph to fit the theory. |
|
| |
Can you do repeat iterations of the 50% removal? |
|
| |
If you're subtle about it, yes. |
|
| |
Note that the specification was "no more than 50%". To convince the reviewers, you have to qualify your justification for the "tweak". |
|
| |
For example:
"12.3% - excluded on the basis of being outside the predicted normal distribution"
"18.1% - unsatisfactory signal quality, or lacked repeatability"
"4.31% - experimental error"
"8.12% - signal-to-noise ratio below threshold*"
|
|
| |
... etc. etc. Total 42.83% ... |
|
| |
For specific expertise on massaging the numbers to fit the desired result, what you really need is a biologist. Try [bs] or [MB} ... |
|
| |
*choose a nice large value. |
|
| |
OK, Calum, I think enough time has passed since
Max's sad
passing for me to address this. I wanted to have
this
forum retain a nice respectful tone for a bit in his
honor,
but now I'll respond in kind to the nasty post you
put up. |
|
| |
First off, I'm assuming your name is shortened
version of
calumny, which would be pretty appropriate. You
didn't
say anything clever, insightful or even interesting,
just
nasty and boorish so I'm not going to bother
responding to
stuff like: "Is this automatic writing?" Plus you put
in
about 30 lines that almost put me to sleep trying
to get
through them so I'll just give a brief
synopsis. |
|
| |
As for your "argument", some people do a little
trick of
picking one part of a statement such as "Airbags
save
lives" and try to show how clever they are by
refuting it,
pointing out for instance that accidental airbag
deployments kill a certain amount of people per
year as
proof that airbags DON'T save lives. They parade
around
with "airbag death statistics", throw in the
occasional
uselessly flowery lines like "post hoc
rationalisation" or
"the pure paradox of being both subjective opinion
and
objectively wrong at the same time" and proudly
do a
victory march back into their mother's basement.
You
chose to make up your own version of this by
saying music
from a certain period isn't more successful (after
50
years) than new music because a contemporary
artist may
currently be selling
more music than music from a period 50 years
ago. A great
way to win arguments is to do both sides like you
did,
pretend the other guy made an assertion he never
made,
then rebut it. You're going to "win" every time. I
could say
"When Ed Sheeran's 50 year old catalog ages as
well as the
Beatles, then we can compare." but even that
would be
addressing a statement I never made. Compare the
modern decade's catalog in 50 years to the 1960s
or 1970s
catalog at 100 years. Some music survives, some
dies and
there's a reason for that. The Blue Danube is a
quality
piece and it's survived very well, but I guess I'd
have to be
160 years old to like that one. I'm sure it's just the
same
as anything by Antonio Salieri. (who?) And Ironic
you cited
Ed Sheeran. I'm quite sure he'd agree with me on
this one.
He stars in a movie that's a tribute to the genius of
the
Beatles, but you probably didn't see that because
you're
not a
music fan, just an expert on music. |
|
| |
So I guess you're saying that music is purely
subjective,
there
is no quality, no good, no bad, all music is the
same, it's
just a matter of the person listening to it. Hmm,
maybe
you do have a future in the music biz after all. |
|
| |
So tell you what, if you ever sell ten records, write
the
music, perform, produce or in any way have
something to
do with its creation I'll be happy to hear your
views. Not
ten thousand, not one hundred thousand, not a
million,
not ten million. Ten. One-zero. |
|
| |
Do that and I will be genuinely interested in what
you
have to say about the music business and the art-
form in
general. I really will. |
|
| |
And as far as insulting art, like disparaging the
particular
song you referred to, here's something I do know.
The
person who can see beauty in something is the
person
who's winning at the art critic game, not the bully
who
walks up to somebody sniffing a flower who swats
it out
of
their hand and says "That flower's stupid and you're
stupid
for thinking it's pretty!" |
|
| |
OK, what's next... pocmloc, I can address your
question a
bit more
succinctly. Music is a product. There are good
quality and
bad quality products. There are also factors that
contribute to the quality of products, be it music,
or cars
or milkshakes. One can argue what those factors
are or to
what extent those
various factors affect the product, but to deny the
concept of quality is probably not something you
want to
do if you want to create... whatever it is. |
|
| |
Which opens up the whole concept of purposefully
lowering the quality of a product to make more
money,
something that does happen and is an interesting
subject
but eh, maybe some other time. |
|
| |
By the way, see link for an exploration of how the
music
industry's dumbed-down music to make more
money without depending on talent, which can be
expensive and rare. For one thing, much of it
features
one repeating
note sequence that helps
sell the product. This is done on purpose, the
equivalent
of putting sugar into crappy food products to sell
more of
it. South Park also addresses the concept of stupid
old
people
trying
to act hip by pretending to like this modern
dumbed down shitty music in a
particularly
brilliant episode. (link) |
|
| |
I'll wrap up by saying I can judge a song as good
quality or
bad quality without liking it. I have a particular
taste, I
like heavy metal music, but a song like Bridge Over
Troubled Water or Dancing Queen by ABBA is brilliant. My
cup of
tea? No, but I know quality from shit. Incidentally,
I have
"Shape of You" on my phone. Amazing song. |
|
| |
LOL, I've gotta say, it's brawls like this where old
Max
would step in with a clever quip, insightful one
liner or
just a calm and thoughtful tone that would turn
one of
these street fights back into a gentleman's debate.
Ahh
Max. Sure miss ya. |
|
| |
Perhaps this exchange between [calum] and [doc3] about
boomer music would make more sense in the light of
metonymy. That is, people would not get so heated if
that music
had been just music, but it wasn't; the boomers were the
first people
to make musical genres fundamental to personal and
political
identity. That's why, for example, some people got angry
when
Bob Dylan turned out not to be a messiah. |
|
| |
Remember that old slogan written on a guitar - "This
machine
kills fascists"? There are some clues there as to why this
debate
is still angry. |
|
| |
I don't think calum likes music, just arguing for the
sake
of it. Which is fine. I'm down for the occasional
brawl. |
|
| |
Hey calum, prove me wrong. Tell me a song you
like and
why. What's good about it? Is it moving? Is it
energetic?
Drum beat? Bassline? Chords, structure? |
|
| |
What makes YOU so passionate about music, and
be
specific. |
|
| |