Friday, October 30, 2009

sounds like

something struck me

it's a common compulsion to identify 'influences' in music - even if they aren't there. 'sounds like artcic monkeys, ya. though she says she's never heard them even.'

it's even more common to dismiss music that seems to mimic other music. 'ohmygod. do they KNOW they're (insert trendy band) derivatives?'

my question is, isn't it more important whether someone is enjoying a sound than whether it's been done before, done better, or overdone?

you can't expect everyone to be a sound snob, you know.

(it's true that i might have written this in hopes of hiding the fact that i listened to Celine Dion on repeat when i was 17, or at least to absolve my deep sense of guilt about it, but actually, i just want us to stop a minute and think about the real beauty of music - it's not how' good' it is, it's how good it is for the listener. it's true of course that music is fighting to be heard and that the masses have managed to have pretty lame taste (and we're not too sure who's to blame, but we'll blame the media in the meantime), but next time you hear someone listening to what you think is a kak band or solo artist, maybe introduce them softly to your sonic heroes, instead of looking down your musically literate nose at them. (and use it for sniffing out new sound, too)

it brings to mind something that PASS says
that music is a meeting place...

1 comment: