Jump to content

Monicker

Members
  • Content Count

    1,582
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Monicker


  1. The term Baroque Pop is mostly a joke. It irks me, not because it’s “pretentious” or anything like that, but because it’s simply inaccurate. The majority of the stuff that’s given that label exhibits no Baroque elements whatsoever, but it seems that as soon as a pop song has a chamber string arrangement and some woodwinds suddenly it’s Baroque Pop. I think Chamber Pop is a much more suitable name.

     

    I think this is one of the few songs that can actually fit Baroque Pop and make some sense:

     

     


  2. ^ Gosh, such an odd backing track. Parts of it sound like they were played entirely on some, like, weird, electronic Futurist-like machine, and recorded on a toy computer inside of the bathroom stall of a discotheque in 1978 whilst Freddie was summoning your brother.


  3. I don’t know what that implies, really...i never read Billy Shakespeare, honestly. Jeez, that’s embarrassing. Haa but what do you know, Mendelssohn is the composer i dislike the most. Man, i can't stand that guy's music. Good thing ol' Rich Wagner tore him some new assholes. Anyway, Handel and Haydn follow after Mendelssohn. How can someone write over a hundred symphonies? I mean, you must be doing some real shit work if you're cranking out that many symphonies. That’s interesting that you prefer Baroque over Romantic. Very rare. You’re a special bird, Madrigal. I imagine you will probably hate most of the composers toward the end of that list. I knew this real stodgy guy who didn’t consider Shostakovich to even be music, SHOSTAKOVICH. As far as this guy was concerned, music ended after the early Romantics. I mean, what in the fuck? You're not that bad, are you? Give me some hope. Still, my brain is bleeding trying to figure out how someone can be indifferent toward Chopin.


  4. Quality. Tee hee. What is and isn’t quality? What criteria do we use to measure this? And why that criteria? Says who? Toward the end of his life Bach, considered today to be the most important composer in all of music history, was pretty much cast aside because his style of composing was falling out of favor with the general public.

     

    Quality ultimately amounts to nothing more than “good” and “bad,” and no one can conclusively make that determination in any meaningful way other than stating their opinion. Is the goal of music to, say, perfectly reproduce objective reality, like Realism aimed to do with painting? Does it have a concrete objective like that? Or is it simply to move someone, whether emotionally or physically? Unlike, say, architecture, which, amongst other things, aims to be functionally and structurally sound, or literature whose goal is to translate a narrative to its reader, music (with some exceptions) doesn’t have a goal beyond simply being “good” (and sometimes purposely bad!) If “good” = “quality,” again, how do we measure this? What, how unique a chord progression is? How “memorable” a melody is? How many notes the melody has? How complex the structure is? Whether it has key changes? What scale it's in? A particular instrumentation, key, or time signature? How “good” of a performance it is? How “catchy” the end result is? Why? What if we say (totally arbitrarily) that a criterion is that the melody should have "a lot" of notes? Well, what if they're all shitty notes? What then?

     

    As much as i spout off my opinions on the quality of music, sometimes in an overzealous manner, i will go to my grave arguing that no one can prove to the kid hanging out at the mall food court drinking a giant sized coke and stuffing greasy pizza in their face that Bach is better than Avril Lavigne. Do i think it’s insane that some people may not recognize a difference in “quality” between the two? Absolutely. But nothing that i or anybody uses to arrive at this conclusion is substantial or meaningful. Music resonates with everyone differently, and for totally different (and mysterious!) reasons.

     

    This is one of the beautiful things about music--with its unique, unprecedented language and its inexplicable power, so long as the LYRICS aren’t blatantly espousing a certain ideology, music can transcend the ugly side of its creator, of human beings--the racism, the misogyny, the homophobia, bigotry, hate, greed, etc. Wagner did what no one before him had done, completely changing the face of music forever--even today people are still trying to take the next logical step--and he was a raging anti-semite. Does that take away from his musical accomplishments? Does that change a single bar, even a single note, of Tristan and Isolde?

     

    But maybe Maru was just talking about one's obviously subjective view of what quality means. :P


  5. What about the fact that it's listed as Born to Die The Paradise Edition, not Paradise?

    tumblr_mdbzkkGDUa1qdwzoro1_500.png

     

    That implies that it's the double album that they're selling, and Without You and Lolita are already on the BTD portion of the Paradise Edition, so they're not going to be on there twice.

     

    Also, to anyone who is familiar with exclusive editions from Target/Walmart/Barnes & Noble, etc., they don't master differently for these releases, do they? And is there anything printed anywhere on the packaging that denotes it's an exclusive edition, like the name/logo of the store or anything? I've never purchased a special edition of an album exclusive to a particular store. This shit is new to me. Hold my hand, tell me that everything is going to be okay.


  6. :O :o

     

    Wait, do you think this means it will be a "clean" version of the album? Does Target sell "explicit" records? I just looked on their site and it's not even listed yet as an item.

     

    Oh, see, good things do cum 2 those who wait. Suckers.

     

    EDIT: Also, $8.99? Really? That cheap for a double album? It does say Born to Die Paradise Ed. rather than just Paradise, so...That's so cheap! AND it has two exclusive tracks?!

     

    EDIT #2: Ugh, it's probably remixes.


  7. Handel's Messiah.

    Listening again.

    Hope I don't hurt any of your feelzzzz by saying this, but this piece in and of itself is better than anything so far posted in this thread.

    :legend:

     

    Handel sux, dude. Listen to some real shit like JS Bach, late Beethoven, Chopin, Wagner, Brahms, Mahler, Rachmoninoff, Scriabin, Debussy, Ravel, Stravinsky, Ives, Bartok, Messiaen, Varese, Webern, Shostaknovich, Schnittke, Ligeti, Penderecki and then come into this thread and say that. Go play baseball with Handel's dead skull, Madrigal.

    :excited:


  8. It's really weird that Oprah figures prominently on this forum because Oprah jokes used to figure prominently in my life some years back, although i don't know how that ever happened. I'm thinking now about Orpah Winfrey destroying people. Do you think she'll be in attendance at the EMAs? Maybe downing a few brewskis with Barrie behind the scenes??


  9. She has a fanbase in the US and Canada, it's just not like Katy Perry's... yet

     

    Yet? On the contrary, i reckon. I imagine her popularity with the general public is only going to dwindle over the years rather than increase, and i'd say she already peaked, in that regard, at the beginning of this year. Although i do think critics will become more and more receptive to her over time.

     

    What do others think?


  10. A Bosch painting on an LDR record would be great! Neal, we can just forget '50s/'60s art forever. I love the back cover of the record, seems very Lana to me. Is that just for the box set or is it also on the double disc and single disc sets? I can't wait to buy the CD on Tuesday! I still haven't listened to the album because i want to listen to it on my stereo. Fuck mp3s.

     

    Question: Can anyone confirm for sure whether tracks 1-15 are remastered or if they use the same master as BTD? Is there any info in the booklet maybe? Any mention of "Remastered by" or something like that?


  11. This is just plain fucking gross. Toast toppings do not belong on your dick.

     

    I don't know if you're joking or not, but this line of thinking is absurd. What belongs on your dick, chemicals from some product sitting on the shelf at CVS? Everything applied topically gets into the blood stream. Your skin is the quickest, easiest, most efficient path to your bloodstream. There's a rule of thumb in some health circles that says: if you wouldn't put it in your mouth and ingest it, don't use it on your skin. You should be able to EAT anything you're putting on your skin because it all ends up in the same place anyway. You think what you put on your skin just stays there on the surface? You'd rather have weird chemicals and god know's what--stuff you don't recognize when you read the label or have never even heard of--leaching into your bloodstream than...coconut oil, pure 100% organic, raw coconut oil, just the oil that comes from coconuts and nothing more? You'd rather put the toxins that are in shit like commercial lubes, sunscreen, moisturizers, chapstick, makeup, etc. into your body and bloodstream than simple, natural things that are sitting in your kitchen that you eat everyday? Oh yeah, how gross...


  12. WHY AM I SO SLOW! WHY AM I SUCH AN ANALYTICAL PERSON, BUT WITH WHEELS THAT TURN. SO. SLOWLY?!?!? I am a monster. A MONSTERRRRRRRRRRR!!!

     

    You are in my head again. Get out of my head. Why are you inside my head? Why?

     

    Why?

     

    Why?

     

    ?

     

    ?

     

     

    ?

     

     

     

    ?

     

     

     

     

    ?

     

     

     

     

     

    ?

×
×
  • Create New...