Forum Closed
The forum is now to new posts. All the historical content is still available to browse.
if you are looking for musicians to play with, please view the Bands Seeking Musicians list, or use the Musicians Directory
You can use our pages on social media to connect:
the element of chemistry - the best isn't always the best
| Message Board > Music Chitchat - Heavy > the element of chemistry - the best isn't always the best |
| --{-(X)-}-- User Info... | I recently saw a band perform, this is the story. I walked in to the hall to see a band. The band that I came for was playing second. The band that was in front of me was the band that was on first. Although I had never heard this band before, I recognized every one of their members as members from bands in the past who had long since faded out like so many do. The guitarist was one that possesed a raw talent that only birth can bestow upon you. The other guitar player was of equal if not greater ability, his riffs sending me into a trance like state. Not to mention the drummer, who was as good as any I have ever seen. But does all of this make for a good band? No. The music was uninspiring, although technicaly sound and precise in it's delivery, the music was bland and unprovoking. What was the problem? ____________________ The problem is that no matter how much talent you put into a band, that band may never succede in scratching the surface of goodness. Talent does not equal good music. In most cases I've found, a good band isn't the the one with the best guitarist or with the nbest singer or best bassist or best drummer, it is the one where the chemistry of the band is perfect, where a song isn't a song, it is a voyage through the imagination and creativity of a group. Like any other team, a band is group, and just like any other group, each member of the band music have a focused and shared vision in order to be successful. ________________ Good bands come together, they aren't made. ________________ What do you think? . - Wed, 10 Dec 2003 6:02pm | ||
| OLd Fart User Info... | dont be a pussy:name the band. - Wed, 10 Dec 2003 8:14pm | ||
| Nik Olaz User Info... | yeah gangster who was the band? - Wed, 10 Dec 2003 10:44pm | ||
| Grain fed User Info... | I thought that to be one of the most intellegent and thought provoking things I've ever read on here. I also like that you didn't name the band. It's not often you get to see that kind of respect on this board. - Wed, 10 Dec 2003 11:17pm | ||
| BBJones User Info... | Sounds like the New York Rangers to me... - Thu, 11 Dec 2003 12:15am | ||
| ROSS B AY User Info... | respect, you asshole? fuck you pussy. - Thu, 11 Dec 2003 3:16am | ||
| Teste Coils User Info... | Yeah, like, I think it was Hendrix who was in a little "band" with a couple other guitar gods... and it was really crappy music. Oi oi, man, yer totally right. - Thu, 11 Dec 2003 6:26am | ||
| ticklefish User Info... | That is a perfect description of Rush, Yes, and anything involving Robert Fripp, Stuart Copeland or Andy Summers (outside of the Police: where there was chemistry). Niel Young is at the other end: a shit guitarist, a shit singer, but he has heart. - Thu, 11 Dec 2003 9:13am | ||
| Zippgunn User Info... | Two of my favorite artists are prime examples of your theory. The 1972-75 Miles Davis band was one of the best ever but when they tried to do stuff without Miles they stank (I have records to prove it). Similarly the classic edition of Capt. Beefheart's Magic Band (with Zoot Horn Rollo, Rockette Morton etc.) were one of the swampiest blues rock bands ever but when the band quit en masse and formed Mallard they suddenly sounded like the Doobie Bros. Good music always seems to have to have a vital catalyst without which it often turns into sheer hackwork. Fripp is a good example; with Crimson he's at worst really interesting but those records he did with Andy summers are booooooring. I find that the best bands are benign dictatorships; certainly the best bands I've ever been in had one pivotal member who was the, how you say, titular head of the whole band. That doesn't mean that they should boss everybody around or that other members can't contribute ideas, it just means that the main person's vision should be the primary guiding light for the group. And hey, BB Jones, the Rangers analogy is right on! - Thu, 11 Dec 2003 9:28am | ||
| ticklefish User Info... | yeah, some of Fripp's stuff with King Crimson was tolerable, even interesting, but god that Fripp/Summers stuff was unbearable. There is something about having a "leader", but sometimes it is about tension between competing leaders that makes for amazing dynamics due to the tension that gets created, but like everything in music, that tension needs to be resolved somehow or other either with the right chord or with a producer/manager keeping egos in check(Lennon/McCartney, Richards/Jagger, townsend/Daltry, and to a much lesser extent the Verve: Ashcroft/McCabe [ignore bittersweet symphony: a crap song if there ever was one]) - Thu, 11 Dec 2003 10:51am | ||
| micoll User Info... | imho, neil young is neither a shit singer or a shit guitarist. he's got an odd sounding voice and poor technique, but beats the shit out of geddy lee any day. also, he is a decent guitar player technically. i guess i just hate the whole "technical" defn. of good. if it doesn't make you feel something, it is utter shit. - Thu, 11 Dec 2003 1:13pm | ||
| norm User Info... | This debate is about technique vs. talent. Not one and the same, although they often go hand in hand. In other words, Neil Young, Dylan: good. One million technically brilliant bands playing generic crap: bad. - Thu, 11 Dec 2003 2:53pm | ||
| Dr.V User Info... | I saw The Tubes at the Commadore ballroom without Fee Waybill and it sounded just like a Tubes cover band - Thu, 11 Dec 2003 2:55pm | ||
| --{-(X)-}-- User Info... | I'm not going to name the band, not beceause I'm a pussy, but beceause I'm not here to trash anyone, just to raise a point and some discussion on the subject. But I will tell you that they are a Victoria band with credibility. ___________ QUOTE: if it doesn't make you feel something, it is utter shit true. __________________ Neil Young? Neil Young isn't shit. I recently recorded in a studio were one of the engineeres was the drummer for The Grassroots, an old band that was very popular in the Rolling Stones'ish era (he showed me several of his gold records that he had recieved, put me in awe), and he introduced me to Neil Youngs earlier recordings, before Young went solo. The drummer told me that the album sold like shit and the band had to fold. Very talented group, but as a group they lacked the magical element which seperates the bad bands from the good bands, chemistry. As it turned out, some of the individual talent that exsisted within that group, would lead to produce some of the most profound artists of our time. ________________ When a band is signed by the industry, the industry must not only look at what the band has produced, but what the band can produce. I believe that a bands potential is directly related to that bands ability to work as a group, to form some sort of chemistry. The industry realizes that a band with good chemistry isn't something that you can 'make' therefore this is a highly sought after and coveted possesion. ________________ Don't call me a pussy, get your head out of yer ass and post something inteligent, or something that adds to the discussion. . - Thu, 11 Dec 2003 3:23pm | ||
| Muhammid User Info... | i think i now the band you're talking about.... a group called Buffalo Springfield from way back. Yeah they really were talent packed: steven stills, richard fuary, neil young etc... all talented musicians but the band just couldnt write songs... check out their song called bluebird or something and you'll see what i mean. Rock on grassroots great band! - Thu, 11 Dec 2003 3:55pm | ||
| Broccoli User Info... | I thought that was "the Birds" Also, I thought this string was gonna be about chemistry. Too bad for you guys, I was gonna kick you some awsome science. Common, ask me about organic chemistry, I know lots... okay, okay, fun fact: Anabolic steroids (like the 'roid monkeys take) increase your libido, while making you impotent: thus adding to the agression factor. - Thu, 11 Dec 2003 4:45pm | ||
| micoll User Info... | not the byrds. neil was never a member. could've been springfield, they certainly sucked. however, neil's songs with them are fugging amazing. that's the thing about neil: he doesn't rely on the sound of the band. some songs with neil playing piano, or guitar all by himself are my favourites. in this sense, neil stuff doesn't sound great because of "chemistry" per say, although he did assemble some bands with tonnes, but songwriting and singing ability. for chemistry, see the stones "exile." that is a great band with chemistry who couldn't play 2112 worth shit i'm sure (but who fucking cares). - Thu, 11 Dec 2003 6:50pm | ||
| -=PeNgUiN=- User Info... | Grassroots are my heroes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! . - Thu, 11 Dec 2003 8:20pm | ||
| Zippgunn User Info... | Buffalo Springfield sucked and weren't successful??? Hmmm let's see both Steve stills (writer of "For What It's Worth" easily his best and biggest selling song, and Richie Furay who wrote "Kind Woman" which was so obviously his best song that he kept playing it even after he formed Poco) haven't come close to the work they did with Springfield and "Bluebird" is a great proto-country-rock song that was years ahead of it's time. The only Neil Young song that I know he recorded twice was "Mr. Soul" which also debuted with Springfield and is, again, one of his better songs. As are "Expecting To Fly" and the indescribable "Broken Arrow". They were good but young and full of ego which is why they broke up, much to the chagrin of their label (Atco). As for the Grass Roots they were one (or maybe two) hit wonders whose hit(s) completely escape me but I've heard some of their LP's and believe me THEY suck. - Thu, 11 Dec 2003 9:24pm | ||
| Old Goat User Info... | I like my head up my ass it's quite warm on the ears...BUT like my daddy said:opinions are like assholes,everybody has one and most peoples stink. - Thu, 11 Dec 2003 9:25pm | ||
| micoll User Info... | i hate steven stills' shit w/ buffalo springfield. ok, they didn't suck, but they're not my favourite. best song: "everydays" off of "buffalo springfield again." they were about to blow up when the broke up. then: poco, csn(y), "neil young," - Thu, 11 Dec 2003 10:15pm | ||
| _Griphin_ User Info... | How best to explain this... music is a moody thing, you learn to appreciate new styles or forms of music based upon what you were doing at the time/how you were feeling/what you were thinking of at that exact moment. But image also plays a huge role with a band (stage show, dress, etc.). Then there's also other factors, such as videos. I've appreciated songs more after I saw a great video. Course, a bad video can make you really hate a song. It's hard for me to explain this at the moment, so hope you get the jist of this msg. - Thu, 11 Dec 2003 10:47pm | ||
| Zippgunn User Info... | Being an old fart I'll put in my 2 cents and say that I hate videos because when I was younger I would create them in my head when I heard a particular song and sometimes they would be different every time I heard the song. Modern rock videos ruin it for me because when I see a video for a song that can't happen; I always think of the video and they are usually lousy. Back when a new Beatles or Stones or Who single would come out i would listen to it a million times and I would get a different image in my head every time. I thought it was cool! - Fri, 12 Dec 2003 12:27am | ||
| -=PeNgUiN=- User Info... | bad vid's can definetly kill a song for me - Sat, 13 Dec 2003 3:04pm | ||
| ROSS B AY User Info... | yeah bad vd really kills the mood for me. well, not really. Scott? You? - Sat, 13 Dec 2003 3:06pm | ||
| lonemonk User Info... | Video Killed the Radio Star. - Mon, 15 Dec 2003 10:42am | ||
| ticklefish User Info... | I lost this thread for a while, and now I see virtually everyone misunderstood what I said about Neil Young, so I must have made it too muddy: I honestly believe that in terms of technical ability, Neil Young is a mediocre-at-best guitarist and singer, but as a writer and artist he is absolutely brilliant. His songs are wonderful, but they are dead simple, which is half their beauty. - Mon, 15 Dec 2003 10:46am | ||
| ROSS B AY User Info... | every great song is dead simple. it's the common denominator. - Mon, 15 Dec 2003 11:26am | ||
| Zippgunn User Info... | I had never heard of Neil young until I heard "Helpless" from CSNY's "Deja Vu" LP and his singing was so wobbly that I laughed out loud and figured that the rest of the band had let him sing one song as a sort of favor. Then I heard "Everyone Knows This is Nowhere"... - Mon, 15 Dec 2003 11:37am | ||
| Wreaker of Havoc User Info... | So is every great woman ROSS B AY.... - Mon, 15 Dec 2003 11:43am | ||
| --{-(X)-}-- User Info... | QUOTE: every great song is dead simple. it's the common denominator sometimes this is the case, but not if the whole album is full of songs that sound the same i.e chord progression, drum beats, vocal style. - Mon, 15 Dec 2003 2:28pm | ||
| mi.coll. User Info... | i don't think he meant that every simple song is great. - Mon, 15 Dec 2003 3:49pm | ||
| --{-(X)-}-- User Info... | i didn't mean that he meant every simple song was good. I just wanted to point that alot of albums come out that are overly simple. They often end up sounding cheap and uninspired. - Mon, 15 Dec 2003 3:53pm | ||
| mi.coll. User Info... | so do most (or all, even) of "technical" albums- . rush are a lot things, but inspired isn't one of them. - Mon, 15 Dec 2003 10:20pm | ||
|
|||
Not logged in
Log In / Register (optional)
