The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Hmmm. I switched the telly on earlier, and I guess what I saw?
Louise on Top of the Pops doing an atorcious version "Stuck in the Middle With You". Add that to Robbie Williams' complete abomination of "We Are The Champions" and I get the feeling that I must have moved to Cover City without knowing.
What's going on?
Ok, I know that chessy pop songs have to exist for the masses, but why cover older songs? Surely there's enough song writing talent out there (even if they're not actually the ones singing) to get some decent stuff written.
Why resort to covers of old songs when you just know that it'll never be as good as the original? Five did a version of Well Will Rock You earlier in the year, another piece of utter poo.
What really worries me though is that these songs actually do well in the charts. Louise was at number 4. Excuse me? How did that get there?
I guess some 14 years old actually thought it was a good song, which worries me a lot. But it must have been a lot of 14 year olds....
I suppose it's only inevitable. The charts reflect our society (at least in my opinion they do), even if we don't like what they are showing us.
What do we see when looking at the top 40? A load of pop stuff, sung by pretty people, going straight in really high, and then dropping swiftly the next week. I guess this tells us that we live in a society of instant gratification with no thought to the future. "Yep, this is good for now, it'll do." Then they get bored of it and go out buy some other stuff the next week.
Having said all that, we do seem to be seeing a return to form in the music scene, slowly but surely. In 1996 the radio was full of indie. Like, nearly every track.
Since then it's gone with pop, dance and rap. But there seems to be a light at the end of the tunnel. "Proper" music is starting to get some airplay again, which in my opinion is a good thing.
Louise on Top of the Pops doing an atorcious version "Stuck in the Middle With You". Add that to Robbie Williams' complete abomination of "We Are The Champions" and I get the feeling that I must have moved to Cover City without knowing.
What's going on?
Ok, I know that chessy pop songs have to exist for the masses, but why cover older songs? Surely there's enough song writing talent out there (even if they're not actually the ones singing) to get some decent stuff written.
Why resort to covers of old songs when you just know that it'll never be as good as the original? Five did a version of Well Will Rock You earlier in the year, another piece of utter poo.
What really worries me though is that these songs actually do well in the charts. Louise was at number 4. Excuse me? How did that get there?
I guess some 14 years old actually thought it was a good song, which worries me a lot. But it must have been a lot of 14 year olds....
I suppose it's only inevitable. The charts reflect our society (at least in my opinion they do), even if we don't like what they are showing us.
What do we see when looking at the top 40? A load of pop stuff, sung by pretty people, going straight in really high, and then dropping swiftly the next week. I guess this tells us that we live in a society of instant gratification with no thought to the future. "Yep, this is good for now, it'll do." Then they get bored of it and go out buy some other stuff the next week.
Having said all that, we do seem to be seeing a return to form in the music scene, slowly but surely. In 1996 the radio was full of indie. Like, nearly every track.
Since then it's gone with pop, dance and rap. But there seems to be a light at the end of the tunnel. "Proper" music is starting to get some airplay again, which in my opinion is a good thing.
Page:
Talking of covers, the Alien Ant Farm version of Smooth Criminal is fantastic. But it's normally only groups that aren't mainstream that do good covers.
Not many people had heard of AAT before their cover was played on the radio, now probably 100 times more people have heard of them.
It's only cheesy pop groups/people that do rubbish covers. Why can't they do decent covers?
Why make them worse than the original?
Not many people had heard of AAT before their cover was played on the radio, now probably 100 times more people have heard of them.
It's only cheesy pop groups/people that do rubbish covers. Why can't they do decent covers?
Why make them worse than the original?
Why cover old music? Because it can be fantastic. A lot of cover versions are just indentikit wastes of time but there have been a number of incredible cover versions that bring something totally new to a song.
For example, a lot of people didn't like it but Tori Amos took Nirvana's 'Smells Like Teen Spirit' and held it up in a totally different light.
And sometimes it's just fun for the hell of it. I've been listening to Me First & the Gimme Gimmes a lot recently. A supergroup of hardcore bands (people from NOFX etc) doing punk versions of tracks from Sweet Caroline and Leaving on A Jet Plane to Tomorrow and Somewhere Over the Rainbow. Silly, maybe. It's starts off being a fun novelty but you soon realise that the songs are actually great once you ignore the dated sounds of some of the originals.
Cover versions can be great.
For example, a lot of people didn't like it but Tori Amos took Nirvana's 'Smells Like Teen Spirit' and held it up in a totally different light.
And sometimes it's just fun for the hell of it. I've been listening to Me First & the Gimme Gimmes a lot recently. A supergroup of hardcore bands (people from NOFX etc) doing punk versions of tracks from Sweet Caroline and Leaving on A Jet Plane to Tomorrow and Somewhere Over the Rainbow. Silly, maybe. It's starts off being a fun novelty but you soon realise that the songs are actually great once you ignore the dated sounds of some of the originals.
Cover versions can be great.
Tarrant, I'm afraid to say it, but I think you summed it up there perfectly.
When I said "I'm afraid to say it", I didn't mean to make it sound like I don't like admitting you're right, only that I - Oh sod it, I'm sure you know what I mean.
:-)
When I said "I'm afraid to say it", I didn't mean to make it sound like I don't like admitting you're right, only that I - Oh sod it, I'm sure you know what I mean.
:-)
Pop music = Disposable music.
Thats not just me saying its all pants (which I believe it is), but infact an observation on the state of it.
In the same way that you buy, say, a disposable camera. You use the camera to take 24 pictures and then hand it over to someone who will process the film and chuck the camera in the bin. It's the same with the music industry, all the music that is being produced is for the kids to lap up, dance to and enjoy, for a week or two, then it goes in the bin only to be replaced by something that sounds overly familiar to anyone who knows anything about music.
The problem is, that the mass market doesn't know a thing about music so the record companies can manufacture the band and the cheesy songs and get away with it every time, because the people who are funding them don't think they're being screwed in any way.
As things stand in the world of pop, its all about the image. Thats why we are seeing a lot of "pretty" teenaged bands being stuck together, its ALL about the pretty people in the band.
I'd go as far as saying that the record producers could probably use the same song over and over, as long as the eye candy kept changing the records (or record depending how you look at it) would still sell in their millions.
Perhaps it is for this reason that the ever so slightly more established pop icons (Robbie Williams, Louise, etc) are using songs that, within the pop world, have stood the test of time. It's a last ditch effort to actually be remembered after they step back from the lime light due to being too old or ugly.
Thats not just me saying its all pants (which I believe it is), but infact an observation on the state of it.
In the same way that you buy, say, a disposable camera. You use the camera to take 24 pictures and then hand it over to someone who will process the film and chuck the camera in the bin. It's the same with the music industry, all the music that is being produced is for the kids to lap up, dance to and enjoy, for a week or two, then it goes in the bin only to be replaced by something that sounds overly familiar to anyone who knows anything about music.
The problem is, that the mass market doesn't know a thing about music so the record companies can manufacture the band and the cheesy songs and get away with it every time, because the people who are funding them don't think they're being screwed in any way.
As things stand in the world of pop, its all about the image. Thats why we are seeing a lot of "pretty" teenaged bands being stuck together, its ALL about the pretty people in the band.
I'd go as far as saying that the record producers could probably use the same song over and over, as long as the eye candy kept changing the records (or record depending how you look at it) would still sell in their millions.
Perhaps it is for this reason that the ever so slightly more established pop icons (Robbie Williams, Louise, etc) are using songs that, within the pop world, have stood the test of time. It's a last ditch effort to actually be remembered after they step back from the lime light due to being too old or ugly.
There's a big difference between the kids who buy music in the charts and those who are actually in a band and understand the work involved in actually creating the music in the first place. Besides, most kids in bands probably have dads who used to do the same at their age and have influence their child into doing it.
Remember when they started using Motorhead's Ace Of Spades for the Pot Noodle advert? My nephew said to me "Uncle Tim - have you heard that new track by Motorhead? It's better than the stuff you listen to ..."
*groan*
Remember when they started using Motorhead's Ace Of Spades for the Pot Noodle advert? My nephew said to me "Uncle Tim - have you heard that new track by Motorhead? It's better than the stuff you listen to ..."
*groan*
I don't know... a lot of kids will have heard of those songs. They're very popular with schoolkid bands learning a few covers to back up their repetior.
That Louise cover is freakin awful, it makes me cringe just listening to it.
I was talking about this at work today, heard that cover of Steeler's Wheel and wanted to pull my ears off so they wouldn't become tainted.
And the answer that we came to was astoundingly obvious and scary at the same time.
Most singles are bought by 8-14 year olds with pocket-money and money earned from saturday jobs.
It's the reason that the charts are filled with pop bands, because that's the music that kids are into.
And chances are, kids have never heard of The Bangles (Eternal Flame), Billy Joel (Uptown Girl) or Steeler's Wheel (Stuck in The Middle).
So they think it's a great track, older folk shake their head and we all wonder what's happening to music
And the answer that we came to was astoundingly obvious and scary at the same time.
Most singles are bought by 8-14 year olds with pocket-money and money earned from saturday jobs.
It's the reason that the charts are filled with pop bands, because that's the music that kids are into.
And chances are, kids have never heard of The Bangles (Eternal Flame), Billy Joel (Uptown Girl) or Steeler's Wheel (Stuck in The Middle).
So they think it's a great track, older folk shake their head and we all wonder what's happening to music
Page: