16 bit files almost unlistenable now...

[gmgraves]

11 hours ago, Jud said:

 

@gmgraves does not enjoy rock and today's pop, so he likes to say it has no musical merit (or perhaps from his point of view, it has no musical merit so he doesn't like it).  You're not going to change his mind or get him to change what he says, so may as well not waste time and energy trying.

That's well put. From my point of view, pop/rock has no musical merit. I grew up hearing it, and it was a running obligato to my adolescence. I could not escape it. I heard it everywhere I went but I didn't like it. Thankfully, when I was a teen there was an alternative. In those days kids could either be "rockers" or "Folkies". I was a Folkie if anything. But was discovering jazz and classical at that time, and soon turned to those genres exclusively. 

Believe me, there is no accounting for taste. 

[gmgraves]

1 minute ago, mansr said:

Do you have any idea how ridiculous and snobbish saying things like that makes you seem? Is that really the impression you want to convey?

You want me to lie? I've honestly never heard of either that performer or that album. Look is this worth discussing? Pop and rock are foreign lands to me. When talking about them, I have nothing to add because I know nothing about them. Why don't we drop it. There's no common ground here!

[gmgraves]

4 minutes ago, jabbr said:

 

Agreed however @gmgraves's opinion about what music he likes is fact. I have little doubt that he would not like much 21 century "new music" either, whether it be taught at a conservatory or performed in concert.

It's fact for me. It obviously isn't fact for many others who post here. But it's also not really worth discussing. I made a statement about not liking Pop/rock singing in answer to someone's query. You and others have taken exception to my comment, and now we know where everybody stands. Does it warrant any more hashing about or are we flogging a deceased equine? 

[gmgraves]

3 hours ago, Richard Dale said:

If you think all rock/pop music made in the last 50 years or more sounds like 'screaming', you're simply wrong as such a huge body of music must encompass many different styles of singing at the very least. So please can you just say something along the lines of you aren't very familiar with rock/pop music and it isn't to your personal taste? Why do you feel the need to call it 'screaming'?

 

I've no idea why you've launched off into a tangent about the Grateful Dead, but if we were to talk about one of my favourite Dead albums, American Beauty the singing style on that is a long way off 'screaming', and I would say it was influenced by folk music singing if anything. I think I've got a CD called 'Roots of the Grateful Dead' or similar which is a really interesting listen, and it has the kind of music that was on the amazing Harry Smith compilations of early 20th century music IIRC.

Richard, I'm sorry.  I don't care enough about the subject to continue talking about it. The Grateful Dead were just an example of how tastes can vary that much yet people with wildly different tastes can still be friends. That's all. 

[gmgraves]

3 hours ago, SoundAndMotion said:

 

And yet you add... add... add....

I keep getting attacked for my opinion, and attacked and attacked. What do you propose I do. Roll over? 

 

[gmgraves]

1 hour ago, mansr said:

Clearly. It is impossible to have any interest whatsoever in music, let alone write for audio publications, and remain as ignorant of the biggest names in 20th century popular music as George makes out to be.

What does my taste in music have to do about with writing for audio publications? When I review a piece of equipment I use solely classical and very occasionally, jazz recordings as my references. In all these years nobody has ever written me to ask me to use pop music in my reviews. So clearly it IS possible to remain gleefully ignorant of "the biggest names in 20th century popular music" and write for audio publications! 

[gmgraves]

27 minutes ago, diecaster said:

 

This is just a stupid comment. The vast majority of Pop/Rock vocals are in no way screaming. If want to talk Hard Rock and Metal, yes, there is screaming there.There is maybe a few seconds of screaming on the "Who's Next" album by The Who.

 

I can buy the fact that you do not like the genre, but to classify the singing as screaming is pretentious and elitist.

And that negatively affects you, how?

[gmgraves]

2 hours ago, Richard Dale said:

But you can't just write off the culture represented by the last 50 years of rock/pop and what came before by describing it as all 'screaming' and therefore worthless, and then pretend that it was just nothing. Saying something like that is quite offensive, and you have not apologized.

But I can write it off. It has nothing to do with me. I despise pop and rock, I think it is an indicator of the decline of western civilization (and rap and hip-hop continue that decline). I'm not going to apologize because I have nothing to apologize for. My comments vis-a-vis this particular topic represent MY opinion, and I do not apologize for it. Perhaps you and others who seem to have taken offense at an honest expression of an opinion should grow a bit thicker skins. If I had a dollar for every time someone here over the last 10 years told me that they found classical music boring or impossible to listen to, I could go out this evening and buy myself an expensive steak dinner. But I didn't get bent out of shape like you rockers have in this thread. I figured that's their opinion, their taste and they are entitled to both.  Glad to discuss audio with you any time, but let's end this ridiculous thread here and now.

[gmgraves]

1 hour ago, mansr said:

I have no problem with someone saying they don't like certain styles of music, not even my favourite. It is, however, a bit elitist to declare that those styles are not music. Feigning ignorance and asking what "a Cat Stevens" is, that's pure snobbery. He's pulled that one with even more famous people too. I don't recall who, but think Paul McCartney level famous. Such behaviour is, in a word, unbecoming.

First of all, I see nothing wrong with being elitist and it seems to me that you do have a "problem with someone saying they don't like certain styles of music." And I'm not feigning ignorance. Until yesterday I had never heard of Cat Stevens or that album of his that someone mentioned. Where would I have heard of him? I don't listen to or follow popular music and haven't heard any except by accident since high school and while I've heard of groups like The Who, The Grateful Dead, Crosby, Stills and Nash, and Aerosmith, to my knowledge, with the possible exception of The Who (and I could have done well without THAT introduction) I've not heard them perform (at least not to know who I was hearing or caring to find out). And you must have me confused with somebody else, as I do know who Paul McCartney is. I had an entire day at the Forum in Rome ruined because McCartney and his ensemble were giving a free concert at the Colosseum with truck-loads of sound reinforcement equipment. The inhabitants in the catacombs likely heard that concert! I couldn't get away from it even by going up on the Palatine Hill!

I'm getting so much crap about an off-hand comment from you "rockers" here, that I have to wonder if you guys aren't protesting a little  too much? 

[gmgraves]

16 minutes ago, mansr said:

How many insisted it wasn't music and claimed not to know what "a Beethoven" was?

More than you think. But guess what? When confronted with those people, I don't get bent all out of shape and excoriate them for it. Because I don't care that they have no knowledge of or like classical music. I take it as fairly normal for most people that their musical "growth" stops at what was popular when they were in high-school and possibly college. Unlike with you rockers, there are no "classical music Nazis"  and even if there were, I wouldn't be one of them. 

[gmgraves]

3 minutes ago, mansr said:

At least you've heard of Hamlet.

Of course I've heard of Hamlet. I've read all the Shakespeare plays and Sonnets- many more than once. What's your point, Mansr? 

 

[gmgraves]

4 minutes ago, mansr said:

Here, have a mirror.

That's not only unkind, it's unfair. I wouldn't have thought that you would sink so low. I didn't call anybody a "rock Nazi", and if I were a classical Nazi, I would be trying to force my opinions on others, and there's a difference between stating an honest opinion and forcing one down other people's throats. As I've said many times in this unfortunate thread, I don't give a flying f__k what other people listen to, read, watch, eat or drink. It' still a free country (sort of) and you and I are both free to have good taste or poor taste as is our wont! Shame on you!

[gmgraves]

6 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

 

started with country music

Could be. On the other hand, Instrumental Bluegrass is delightful. But when they start singing, include me out. To much like C&W. 

[gmgraves]

6 hours ago, Hugo9000 said:

I disagree, it started with people like Mozart rejecting the glories of the Baroque era for their simplistic, Paisiello-inspired "Tiptoe Through the Tulips" type tunes!  ?

 

Beethoven brought things back on track, though, and Western Civilization advanced again for a little while.  Then the Strausses came along with their waltzes!

Well, that's kind of apple's and oranges. Beethoven, Brahms, Schubert, et al produced serious classical music, while the Viennese waltzes of the Strauss family were the popular dance music of their day. Of course, I do find it interesting that 200 years later, Strauss waltzes are still played and enjoyed. I wonder if the Beatles or the Beach Boys (yes Brian Wilson is considered a genius) or any other rock music will still be played in 200 years? Too bad we won't be around to find out. 

[gmgraves]

12 minutes ago, firedog said:

Saying something is boring or impossible to listen to is not the same as saying it isn't music.

The way that my detractors have been cherry picking my words, and using things that I'have said out of context in order to advance their own agendas over the last couple of days, has shown me a side of this "community" here on CA that I did not know existed. There's a lot of dishonesty here. Like firedog's out of context statement above. I never said that rock wasn't "music", but I have said, over and over, that it is not MY IDEA OF MUSIC! Leaving that part off so that my words could be thrown back at me, is in my opinion more than a little dishonest. 

[gmgraves]

10 minutes ago, firedog said:

I can compare the Beatles favorably to Beethoven in many ways. They were better at many things than Beethoven was or would have been. Does that matter or is it relevant to anything? No. 
 

The Beatles' music may often not be the world's hardest to play (though I'd like to see you or any other classical musician "play" a song like "Strawberry Fields" - you couldn't do it)- and neither is the music of Muddy Waters. But I guarantee you many virtuoso singers and players sound very lame playing or singing their music. They don't know how to do it convincingly, even though they have the technical chops. Just about all those attempts by opera singers to record pop and jazz are totally lame. They have the technical ability - but not the musical/performance ability to perform the music convincingly. 

You're making a very common mistake. Popular music is a very commercial enterprise. It is made, packaged and sold to make money, without any thought of it being art (although it certainly can turn out to be). This has always been true all the way back to the dawn of the pop music industry in the 1890's with the widespread adoption of the phonograph and the inauguration of the institution called "Tin Pan Alley". If the music transcended it's original function as topical fare; of tunes written for a specific broadway show like the pop tunes of Gershwin (who wrote serious music as well as pop songs) or Cole Porter, they weren't intended to outlast their commercial purpose. If you are going to compare the Beatles with anyone, It shouldn't be Beethoven, it should be the waltz Stresses or perhaps Paganini and in some ways, Mozart who wrote a lot of topical music for the contemporary theater. 

 

And I agree that listening to someone like Paverotti or Anna Netrebko trying to sing a Beatles song would be simply pathetic. These types of performers can't even sing a Gershwin or a Cole Porter song without it sounding pretentious, much less more modern fare. Jerry Vale could sell Neapolitan love songs even though he was an American and had to sing the Italian lyrics phonetically because he didn't speak Italian, but again, Pavoratti singing O' Solo Mio or Santa Lucia  is simply embarrassing. On the other hand, I'd hate to hear Jerry Vale try to sing Nessun Dorma. The mind reels. Opera singers were trained to sing in a certain way. It's not compatible with lighter music. Mario Lanza could sing certain pop songs and Neapolitan songs and get away with it because even though he did occasionally sing opera (after all he played Caruso in the movie), he was not trained as an opera singer.  

[gmgraves]

9 hours ago, diecaster said:

 

Listen to yourself. You have no idea what you are talking about.

Stop taking my words out of context. If you are going to disagree with me, at least be honest about it!

[gmgraves]

57 minutes ago, Allan F said:

 

You might as well have said that pop and rock music are "the enemy of the people", George. Your hyperbolic rants are sounding more and more like those of that fellow who occupies the White House, and make just about as much sense. Coincidentally, he never apologizes either.

I can't speak for the "President", but I have nothing to apologize for. I've said that before and I'll say it again. 

[gmgraves]

8 hours ago, semente said:

 

I think that this is going a bit too far.

There was always popular, traditional or folklore. With electric instruments and amplification and a freer society it has taken a more impactful form, and "freely available" domestic, personal audio and TV has help spread it more quickly.

Consumerism, fashion and profit have made it a worldwide phenomenon.

 

I do find it somewhat sad that the American culture, and one of low artistic and ethic level, has been infecting the whole world but that is the subject of another thread. MTV India? Why? (and MacDonalds, and Pizza Hut, and KFC) Leveling the youth of the world by the least common denominator... It's so sad to travel to the furthest hills in Morroco or deep in the jungles in Vietnam and see kids wearing ugly bright-coloured tennis, low-rise pants with their knickers showing and Ronaldo haircut... And listening to a version of ghetto music in their language.

And that's your opinion. And you are entitled to it. 

[gmgraves]

6 hours ago, ARQuint said:

There needs to be some sort of censure involved if an individual, an online community, a society is to maintain a standard of civility and moral conduct. Imagine if someone posted the "opinion" that one racial group was inherently smarter than another.

Seig Hiel! Whatever happened to freedom of speech? It's not enough that we, in the 21st century, have to put up with the notion of "political correctness", now we have "thought police" like ARQuint here advocating censuring people who voice opinions which differ from his. The fact that you and others here find my opinions on music offensive is perhaps the silliest thing I've ever seen. If I were insulting you or yours personally, or I were purposely denigrating some race, religion, or creed, I could see why you be offended. But getting offended over some aspect of pop culture? Ridiculous! It's like getting offended because someone thinks that your favorite baseball or football team is sub-par! Talk about overreacting! I question anybody's mental health who gets so worked-up about an item of personal taste. 

 

6 hours ago, ARQuint said:

Imagine if someone posted the "opinion" that one racial group was inherently smarter than another.

Let me ask you a question. What if it were true? Do you advocate keeping it a secret just to avoid "hurting someone's feelings?" I ask because what you postulate is actually true! Chinese and Ashkenazi Jews have the highest average IQs. Higher than non-Jewish Europeans.  

 

 

[gmgraves]

23 minutes ago, Sal1950 said:

George George, whatever are we to do with you.

So much music and so little time, I don't understand you constant tirade against popular music that's been going on for years here. I don't understand how you can listen to the same 200 year old songs being performed over and over by a 1,000 different artists, but if that's your choice, enjoy.

But you really do need to get over yourself and your preferences as the last word in music.

 

Hi Sal! Long time no hear from! Sal, this has gotten out of hand. I honestly don't even remember how it started. I made some comment in response to someone's query, and the roof fell in. No, I don't make any bones about my dislike for pop and rock. I don't see it as art. But here's the rub. It doesn't bother me that you and others do see it as fine art and an important piece of culture at that. You're entitled to raise to the position of high-art anything you wish. And if enough people agree with you, then it is art; whether I like it or not.

Not to draw any odious comparison's here, but all that has to happen for something, these days, to be raised to the exalted position of "high-art" is for enough people to believe that it is art. Do you know that in the Museum of Modern Art in NYC there is a piece of painted wall board there with a (non-functioning) commercial urinal mounted to it? It sold for hundreds of thousands of dollars! I'm not equating pop and rock music to a urinal here, I'm merely showing that the term art can cover things that perhaps good sense would dictate really aren't! With regard to the urinal, my only comment is that I wish that I had thought of it first! 

[gmgraves]

1 hour ago, jabbr said:

 

Pretty funny actually ... if you think about the original use of the Forum, an "invasion" by McCartney is a culturable improvement. In reality, opera in the day was the equivalent of today's: showtunes/broadway musicals/movie scores. I've seen wonderful large outdoor operatic performances in Rome and Italy in the Summer. These colosseums were designed to entertain the masses, as they do with concerts of all types including Rock.

Of course, you're right. Interesting thing, McCartney and company weren't actually in the Colosseum proper. They were set up on a portable stage on the wall, outside of the colosseum facing a wide Roman boulevard that had been blocked-off from traffic. The concert was free, and they had these huge scaffolded towers full of speakers  set up at intervals for perhaps a mile down this boulevard. Later read that there approximately 750 THOUSAND people at this concert. I do know one thing, I had the Forum to myself that day. I saw not another soul there, and this was a Sunday and usually the Forum is crowded.

The operatic performances you saw, was this at the colosseum in Verona? I saw one of Zeffirelli's performances of Verdi's Aida there one summer. I'm not a Verdi fan, particularly and I find even Puccini's operas hard to take, but I must admit that there, in that ancient venue, I was swept-up in the pageantry and majesty of the entire experience and enjoyed it thoroughly!

[gmgraves]

33 minutes ago, Allan F said:

 

You have no need to apologize for your musical preferences, but you should be embarrassed by your extreme critiques of a genre of music that you readily admit you are not familiar with. The weight to be afforded opinions is directly related to the knowledge upon which they are based.

 

That even applies to curmudgeons who love to stir things up.

I think you and your supporters in this particular debate are being a little unfair. Sure, I don't "listen" to pop and rock but that doesn't mean that I haven, over the years, heard a good deal of it whether I wanted to or not. And I didn't like anything I've heard. Let me put this another way. Do I have to eat an entire plate full of Brussels Sprouts to ascertain that I don't like them? Does one need to drink an entire bottle of castor oil to know that it's nasty stuff, or would a tablespoon of it suffice? Does one have to go into a room filled with ethyl mercaptan gas to realize that it's toxic or does a quick whiff from a small bottle passed quickly under your nose tell you all you need to know about ethyl mercaptan? Do you see my point? One doesn't have to be an expert in order to realize that one doesn't like something. There are people here who find classical music and jazz not to their liking, but I dare say that they haven't heard and didn't need to hear much of either genre to decide that there was nothing in that music for them. Oh, and I don't excoriate them for holding that opinion either, making me wonder...

[gmgraves]

1 minute ago, jabbr said:

 

Yes we had the opportunity to see my daughter perform with her quartet at the Castlevecchio courtyard and another evening the opera at the Verona Arena ... yes fantastic...

 

I became more knowledgeable about 20th century music and alternate scales from Hindemith, Walton Glinka and Shostakovich which each wrote terrific viola pieces and I had the opportunity of listening to close to 18 hours a day (or so it seemed), for stretches at a time -- the first time I heard Shostakovich 147 I thought it was being played incorrectly!

 

I also had the opportunity of listening to a prominent composer bang a bunch of metal pots together, while sitting in a hall near the shore in Switzerland. He said he was inspired by his then three year old son banging the pots in the kitchen -- that's what it sounded like!

 

So regardless of music type, there is very good and bad and overtime it gets sorted out...

Yep!

[gmgraves]

4 hours ago, mansr said:

No, but you'd be wrong to declare them "not food" and hold them responsible for the (supposed) decline of civilisation.

Irrelevant. The question was in response to a charge that I couldn't judge rock-'n-roll because I'd heard so little of it. Mansr, you are not an honest debater. You continually take things out of context in order to "win" points. It won't work with me. I'll call you on it every time.