Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Objectivist Bands

Rate this topic


realitycheck44

Recommended Posts

I addressed this earlier on this thread; so I'll just quote myself!

There is definitely a "Wynand" type of mentality in the music/entertainment industry. There is much of a "let's sell swill to the lowest common denominator & make a fortune" approach by some people that should know better. I know; I've met them years ago when I was a making a meager living as a working musician.

But...

I also know the vast majority of people that make "pop" music are truly making music they love to the best of their ability (the artists & the record co. people).

And I would never have it any other way. The only way that I can even afford a home studio full of gear & some free time (away from my day job) to make my own music is because of the glorious remnants of capitalism in our economy.

Most of the people I know that buy, own, use digital audio/sequencing software & rack mounted synths don't know the difference between an augmented 6th chord & a screwdriver. But if there weren't enough of them buying equipment to make their simplistic techno/house/rave stuff I wouldn't be able to afford the equipment I use to make more "complex & difficult music" that I love.

There will always be "mass produced music serving popular taste"; & there will always be a "lowest common denominator". They do not necessarily have to coincide but even when they do...who cares? What are you gonna do about it? Regulate? Limit freedom? Nobody is allowed to buy Celine Dion, Brittany Spears or "gansta rap" CDs? I am not saying that you are suggesting/implying this. I am merely taking this to an absurd extreme to make my point.

Why worry about it? Just be happy there is music you love.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 179
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I thought of a band last night that I used to listen to. Blue's Traveler. One of my all time favorite quotes if from them;

"Life i embrace you

I shall honor and disgrace you

Please forgive if i replace you

You see i'm going through some pain

But now i see clearly

And the dawn is coming nearly

And though i'm human and it's early

I swear i'll never forget again"

Their music was always happy and upbeat. I'll have to try to find one of their cd's and listen to it again. See if I still like it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(Co-written by Paul Anka & Frank Sinatra

As performed by Frank Sinatra

Hit # 27 on the Top 40 charts in 1969)

My Way

And now, the end is near, and so I face, the final curtain.

My friend, I'll say it clear,

I'll state my case, of which I'm certain.

I've lived, a life that's full, I've traveled each and every highway.

And more, much more than this,

I did it my way.

Regrets, I've had a few, but then again, too few to mention.

I did, what I had to do, and saw it through, without exemption.

I planned, each charted course, each careful step, along the byway,

and more, much more than this,

I did it my way.

Yes, there were times, I'm sure you knew,

When I bit off, more than I could chew.

But through it all, when there was doubt,

I ate it up, and spit it out.

I faced it all, and I stood tall,

and did it my way.

I've loved, I've laughed and cried,

I've had my fill; my share of losing.

And now, as tears subside, I find it all so amusing.

To think, I did all that, and may I say --- not in a shy way,

"Oh no, oh no not me,

I did it my way".

For what is a man, what has he got?

If not himself, then he has naught.

To say the things, he truly feels,

And not the words, of one who kneels.

The record shows, I took the blows ---

And did it my way!

I did it my way.

Recommended from my mom. :D Apparently she used to listen to it with her parents. :lol:

Zak

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must have poorly asked my question. The question was not meant from a listening stand point but from a creation stand-point. A Howard Roark story. Should we, as musicians, be told how to create our art, (i.e. allowing the music industry to change our music and force our "sound" to project an image contrary to what we want it to be), or should we rebel or strike against it with true and open music that is truly the art of the artist? Should we compromise our musical integrity?

Sorry for any confusion on this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Should we, as musicians, be told how to create our art, (i.e. allowing the music industry to change our music and force our "sound" to project an image contrary to what we want it to be), or should we rebel or strike against it with true and open music that is truly the art of the artist?

Who is we?

I think you may be disappointed to find that many people are in fact creating the exact music they want to create. But you may find it trite, banal, & view it as a crass attempt to generate "money at the expense of art".

I think your use of the word "force" in this context is inappropriate. The music industry is still generally a free-market institution. You (or any artist) are perfectly free to create whatever art/music you want.

However, IF (big IF) you expect the "music industry" (record co's, distribution networks, ad agencies, radio & A&R personnel) to pay attention to you & help "push" YOUR music, you will have to do something that enough people desire in order for them to find enough incentive for profit in it.

In as far as any cynicism that creeps in I think Evan ("Tryptonique") addressed that issue very well here.

Should we compromise our musical integrity?

Is that a rhetorical question? Of course not, no artist SHOULD. Are you in a position where it is a viable option?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jazz is an interesting idiom since most jazz is simply a copy of the music before it.  Most jazz that you actually hear is just a new interpretation of an older tune.  Jazz is rarely "pushing the limits" anymore and fusion sounds the same in just about everysong.  Miles Davis is probably the pinnacle of jazz.  (He's one of my absolute favorites)  There is something to be said for crazy improv stuff, but it is equal (not greater) than to be said about great rock composition and orchestrating.

I've been immersing myself in Jazz lately since I have almost completely ignored the genre in the past. I have a good friend who used to be the onboard historian on the steamboat Delta Queen so he's been telling me a lot of the history of Jazz and getting me really interested in all of it (apparently Jazz spread during the early part of the 20th century by steamboats).

I just picked up Miles Davis' "Kind of Blue" last night and I love it! It features John Coltrane on tenor sax before anyone knew who Coltrane was. Wonderful, wonderful stuff!

In the Classical category, has anyone else ever heard of Joshua Bell? I just picked up one of his violin albums and he does some wonderful interpretations of Brahms and Tschichaosky among others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the Classical category, has anyone else ever heard of Joshua Bell? I just picked up one of his violin albums and he does some wonderful interpretations of Brahms and Tschichaosky among others.

If I'm not mistaken, he was the Violinist for the movie,"The Red Violin." I've been meaning to pick up stuff of his, but, a general lack of money has limited my music purchasing. But, what I've listened of him, He's AMAZING. The soundtrack to that movie was more moving than the flick itself (which is saying something).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Try 'Rush'.  They dedicated their album 2112 to Ayn Rand... look for their older music.  Their current music isn't that great, and they've probably drifted away from Rand now.  But 2112, Hemispheres, and much of the older stuff is SUPERB.

I had never really listened to Rush; however, most recently I have begun to sample some of their music. To anyone who is at all interested in listening to them, I recomend hearing "Free Will." In my opinion, it sums up their music and correlates very well with Rand's philosophies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I'm not mistaken, he was the Violinist for the movie,"The Red Violin."  I've been meaning to pick up stuff of his, but, a general lack of money has limited my music purchasing.  But, what I've listened of him, He's AMAZING.  The soundtrack to that movie was more moving than the flick itself (which is saying something).

Yeah, he is awesome. (I play violin too). If I'm not mistaken, he also did the soundtrack (or just a cd) for A Westside Story. It's such a good cd.

"The Red Violin" is a great movie.

Zak

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had never really listened to Rush; however, most recently I have begun to sample some of their music.  To anyone who is at all interested in listening to them, I recomend hearing "Free Will."  In my opinion, it sums up their music and correlates very well with Rand's philosophies.

Objectivist (or close to) Rush songs, include:

Tom Sawyer/ Moving Pictures/ 1981

Freewill/ Permanent Waves/1980

2112 Suite/ 2112/ 1977 (Based on Ayn Rand's "Anthem")

Something for Nothing/ 2112/ 1977

Anthem/ Fly By Night/ 1976

Driven/ Test for Echo/ 1996

Natural Science/ Permanent Waves/ 1980

One little Victory/ Vapor Trails/ 2002

Ceiling Unlimited/ Vaport Trails/ 2002

Carve Away the Stone/ Test for Echo/ 1996

Stick it out/ Counterparts/ 1994

Cut to the Chase/ Counterparts/ 1994

Cold Fire/ Counterparts/ 1994 (A fantastic view on love)

Ghost of a chance/ Roll the Bones/ 1991 (Another good view on love)

Anagram (for mongo)/ Presto/ 1989

That's pretty much as much as I can find.

If you'd like to read the lyrics first, check out

http://www.2112.net/powerwindows/Albums.htm

Edit: I have no idea how to do the hyperlink thing, so just copy and paste link into browser.

Edited by Styles2112
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holy smokes! Was Tom Saywer really a Rush song? I heard the song in it's original version (it sounded like it had a female vocalist) and a modern band I like called Deadsy did a cover of that son on their album "Commencement."

I always wondered who did that song originally, but I never bothered to check it out.

Aiiiie...gotta run to class. Midterms week...:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi, I don't know if its just because this was playing while reading Atlas shrugged, but 'The Unforgiven' by Metallica seems like an Objectivist song to me here's a few snippets -

New blood joins this earth

And quikly he's subdued

Through constant pained disgrace

The young boy learns their rules

With time the child draws in

This whipping boy done wrong

Deprived of all his thoughts

The young man struggles on and on he's known

A vow unto his own

That never from this day

His will they'll take away

They dedicate their lives

To running all of his

He tries to please them all

This bitter man he is

Throughout his life the same

He's battled constantly

This fight he cannot win

A tired man they see no longer cares

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hey everyone,

My friend and I would like to start an Objectivist rock band--that is, a band made up of Objectivists, to write original songs that express rational values. We are amateur guitar players in southern California. We're just hobbyists (but serious ones) who are looking for a drummer, bass player, and singer, and keys wouldn't hurt either, to start a garage band.

We want to write heavy songs, with lyrics that are implicitly inspired by Objectivism, through poetic metaphor, allegory, etc., but that are not explicity preachy, per se. We don't want to create the Objectivist equivalent of gushing bible-thumper Christian tunes--"Reason is the way," yadda, yadda.

I can play rock and metal rhythm and lead, and my friend is pretty much rhythm. Our tastes are in straight rock, old-school metal and prog-metal. If you're in sourthern California and might be interested, drop me a note! Beginners with some proficiency are encouraged!

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right on Roark, 3 doors down isn't bad at all.

I would have to say that my favorite band is Metallica. Number one, the energy you can draw from their music is great. On top of that, the skill level in their music is superior to just about everyone around.

And most importantly is the lyrics. It takes time to understand what the songs are about which is because none of it is just simple. The more songs I understand, the more I see that James shares many of the same aspects for a masculine view of life that I have grown to live.

Anyone who says that they only like the "old" Metallica only listens to music superficially. They never understood the driving force beneath the music which is the most part.

Metallica, old, new, fast, slow- I love it all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have often held the view that 'rock' and 'heavy metal' were just noise and distortion and thus, not real music. Granted, I have heard a few rare instances of virtuosic guitar-playing in some of that genre of music, but few and far between. And what of the fact that such music is performed at sound pressure levels that are destructive to the human body? All of these factors seem to point in the direction of this genre not being objective at all.

I believe that the objective music falls more in the genre of Classical music, because of the complexity, sense of life and the ability to communicate ideas.

I have an engineer friend, a very bright man whose work is published in all the trade journals, who explicitly likes RAP. He has tried to explain to me the merits of it, that it's intelligent and conceptual, more so than the top 40 tripe, and that he identifies with it because he grew up in Brooklyn, NY, in "the 'hood".

I wish I could find a particular Objectivist work by a person by the name of Anna (last name starts with an R and ends in an A and sounds like 'rokovana') who wrote a technically-astute essay on the meaning of music and how it's defined.

I've always been biased toward symphonic music as the most intellectual music--the works of the great composers, for instance. I have written off most of 'modern' music. But maybe I'm missing something here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Jazz IS IN FACT quite comparable to pop music. It WAS IN FACT the pop music of the early 20th century." [Christopher Schlegel

No, IN FACT jazz was not THE pop music of any era. Jazz had great popularity during certain times, and great influence on other music, but IN FACT it was never THE pop music of any time.

"Many jazz pieces did have lyrics (Gershwin, Berlin, Kern, Porter, Ellington, etc.)."

That might be misunderstood. Jazz musicians played and sung songs by Gershwin, Berlin, Kern, and Porter, but they were not jazz compositions. The songs are an important part of the jazz repetoire because of what jazz musicians have done with the songs and because they're great songs, but they are not onto themselves jazz compositions.

"Even when jazz started becoming "instrumental" (swing, bop, fusion) [...]"

Jazz was largely instrumental well before swing style.

"Parker & Coltrane built their careers & techniques around interpretations of old jazz standards that originally had lyrics."

That might be misunderstood. Parker, Coltane, and many other great jazz musicians used standards as an important part of their repetoire, but their repetoire also had a lot of original compositions (some based on harmonies of standards, but others not).

"The early jazz that did not have lyrics (Joplin, Jelly Roll Morton, Fats Waller, Willie Smith, etc.) finds it's roots in the Baroque Era when it was typical practice to write a theme with a figured bass pattern that could then be "interpreted/improvised" within a certain framework by the performer."

Baroque figured bass and improvisation prefigure jazz, but it would be a hard case to make that there's an impoatant enough direct connection with jazz to call it among the roots of jazz (except, of course, in the sense that Bach and the period are a root of just about all Western music).

"Jazz is an interesting idiom since most jazz is simply a copy of the music before it. Most jazz that you actually hear is just a new interpretation of an older tune."

Jazz is not a copy of anything. Jazz takes elements of other music and makes an entirely new art form. Much jazz is based on chord changes of older tunes, but the reharmonizations, elaborations, and improvised melodies are so extensive and creative that they evince breathtaking originality and individuality. Also, a great amount of jazz uses original harmonies.

"I just picked up Miles Davis' "Kind of Blue" last night and I love it! It features John Coltrane on tenor sax before anyone knew who Coltrane was." [redfarmer]

John Coltrane had been famous in the jazz world for about three and a half years before Kind Of Blue, or at least he had become increasingly famous during the two years before Kind Of Blue.

Edited by LauricAcid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW, it seems you have about the same musical tastes as me. Have you heard Flogging Molly? Very awesome and very different.

I sure have. Mind you, I'm wearing a Dropkick Murphy's t-shirt right now. Sorta Oi' meets pipes, meets punk. It's that whole Boston music sound that combines the anthmen loving Oi music, plenty of horn players and jazz combined with a low class love of punk rock. As long as you can ignore some of their politics they aren't bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, IN FACT jazz was not THE pop music of any era. Jazz had great popularity during certain times, and great influence on other music, but IN FACT it was never THE pop music of any time.

Perhaps we should define which artists & songs were "jazz" & which were not. In my estimation, the majority of tunes pulled from Broadway musicals or performances can be safely considered jazz. This means Gershwin, Porter, Berlin, etc. As well as these types of tunes as performed by Al Jolson, Bing Crosby, etc. You can look at any "Top 40" list of most performed, most purchased, most recorded list of tunes from the early 20th century & you will see a vast amount of what I refer to as "jazz tunes".

I also refer to jazz as the composers/performers/bandleaders such as Ellington, Goodman, Miller, Dorsey, etc. These artists were immensely popular not only in bigger cities that, granted, were their mainstay, but also across America in smaller clubs, dance halls, etc.

Perhaps you have a different estimation of which tunes/artists deserve this designation?

Jazz musicians played and sung songs by Gershwin, Berlin, Kern, and Porter, but they were not jazz compositions. The songs are an important part of the jazz repetoire because of what jazz musicians have done with the songs and because they're great songs, but they are not onto themselves jazz compositions.

Why not? What else is it? You only claim what is NOT a jazz tune. Could you please offer your estimation of what IS a jazz tune?

That might be misunderstood. Parker, Coltane, and many other great jazz musicians used standards as an important part of their repetoire, but their repetoire also had a lot of original compositions (some based on harmonies of standards, but others not).

I don't see how what I said could be misunderstood. If you think I am wrong, fair enough, please correct me. But how is what I said essentially different from what you've said? How does your reply make my post more understandable?

Baroque figured bass and improvisation prefigure jazz, but it would be a hard case to make that  there's an impoatant enough direct connection with jazz to call it among the roots of jazz (except, of course, in the sense that Bach and the period are a root of just about all Western music).

(Emphasis added)

While it is true that it is a "root" in a general sense, I was referring to the specific manner in which improvization is approached. It is quite similar in both genres. Especially considering the notated form. I have played both so I was pointing out a parallel between them.

A typical figured bass/baroque score has a melody & bass line/counterpoint with the suggestion of what harmonic structure to play (i.e. what inversion of the chord, tonal function of chord). The performer is expected to improvise at least to a degree based on this info. In the Baroque era a performer's skill level & ability was sometimes judged on how well this task was accomplished.

A typical jazz gig finds me handed a chord chart of a tune that contains the melody & the chords (but often without their exact voicings notated). The jazz performer is expected to improvize to a certain degree using the info on the chart & skill acquired through years of practice.

There are similarities in both situations.

Finally, you apparently have knowledge about musical topics/issues, so I am sincerely interested in anything useful you may have to say. I am certainly open to correction or refinement of what I have claimed, provided of course the claim is rational! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"[...] the majority of tunes pulled from Broadway musicals or performances can be safely considered jazz. This means Gershwin, Porter, Berlin, etc. As well as these types of tunes as performed by Al Jolson, Bing Crosby, etc. You can look at any "Top 40" list of most performed, most purchased, most recorded list of tunes from the early 20th century & you will see a vast amount of what I refer to as "jazz tunes"."

Your definition is too broad, and it's inconsistent with any jazz historian I've ever read. The tunes you mention became jazz tunes as they were performed by jazz musicians. But the tunes are not onto themselves, especially in their original context, jazz tunes. And, unless there are exceptions in his career, Jolson did not make jazz recordings. And the hits of the early decades of last century included occasional jazz recordings, but most of the most popular recordings were not jazz, though the influence of jazz was important. Most pointedly,with only few exceptions, the Broadway musicals were not jazz performances or jazz shows. The song standards that became vital to the jazz repertoire are not jazz onto themselves but jazz only as they have been interpreted as jazz.

"I also refer to jazz as the composers/performers/bandleaders such as Ellington, Goodman, Miller, Dorsey, etc. These artists were immensely popular not only in bigger cities that, granted, were their mainstay, but also across America in smaller clubs, dance halls, etc."

Even during the peak of the swing era, most of the popular recordings were not jazz. Even among the big bands, the most popular recordings were non-jazz. Glenn Miller is a perfect example. His band recorded some fine jazz (contrary to the canard that he did not) but the preponderance of his recordings were not jazz. And since you mention Ellington, you pretty much made my point. Ellington had few hits, and his hits tended to have less jazz content than his recordings that were not hits.

"Could you please offer your estimation of what IS a jazz tune?"

As an arbitrary example, "Yesterdays" is not a jazz tune in the sense of being composed as jazz. The song can be performed as non-jazz or as jazz, and it' first performances were not jazz. So the song is not in its own nature jazz. But it became a jazz tune in another sense - as jazz musicians played it. But "Confirmation" is a jazz tune. It might be possible to play a non-jazz version of "Confirmation", but it would be a tremendous strain to accomplish. The tune, in the very nature of its melodic line and rhythms, is jazz.

"[About the repertoire of Parker or Coltrane] If you think I am wrong, fair enough, please correct me. But how is what I said essentially different from what you've said? How does your reply make my post more understandable?"

I don't think you're wrong. I just wanted to make clear that these musicians did not rely solely on standards. You said they "built their careers around" standards. I'm not inclined to evaluate whether that's a good summary, so I don't say it's incorrect, only that it should not be overlooked that original compositions were also a vital part of the careers of these musicians (though, granted, most of Parker's originals were based on chord changes of standard songs or the blues (though, he did devise an original blues chord pattern)). Thus, I commented so that your remark not be misunderstood to preclude the importance of original compositions in the careers of those musicians.

Regarding Baroque, I don't see a significant disagreement here. I said that I recognize that Baroque prefigures jazz in the sense you've discussed, so the parallel is undisputed. I merely questioned whether the connection is close enough to call Baroque at the root of jazz. But 'root' is just figurative speech anyway, so I don't feel a need to take any more exception to it than the mere skepticism I already mentioned.

Finally, thanks for your closing comment. I'm glad that we share a love for this great art.

Edited by LauricAcid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

CORRECTION

In an earlier post I failed to attribute this quote to the poster Styles2112:

"Jazz is an interesting idiom since most jazz is simply a copy of the music before it. Most jazz that you actually hear is just a new interpretation of an older tune."

The above quote is by Styles2112, not by ChristopherSchlegel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

when you're talking about good ol' rock and roll, theres nothing better than AC/DC. like was mentioned before, i forget by whom: its rock n roll, not an opera. when you want good, quick, fun rock theres nothing better. i only post this here because a lot of these songs are, as far as im concerned "objective" as your going to find in popular music. Highway to Hell -- we like to rock, were gonna rock, if you dont like it shut up and leave us alone. Back in Black -- you might knock us down a peg every now and again but if you think i'll ever leave without a fight your "bloody crazy"......its all good and if anyone thinks they know any music better fitting for: driving with the windows down, putting in sports highlight films, working out when youre trying to actually accomplish something, or just have the itch to air guitair.....go buy Highway or Flick of the Switch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
I wish I could find a particular Objectivist work by a person by the name of Anna (last name starts with an R and ends in an A and sounds like 'rokovana') who wrote a technically-astute essay on the meaning of music and how it's defined.

I've always been biased toward symphonic music as the most intellectual music--the works of the great composers, for instance. I have written off most of 'modern' music. But maybe I'm missing something here?

I've always been into Jazz rock or Prog rock, Rock that expands upon itself (i.e. getting away from simple three chord progression) I've found Rush to be one of the best bands at telling a story and musically interesting and complex. King Crimson falls in that boat as well. I took an instrumental by Rush, called "La Villa Strangiato," and orchestrated for my orchestration class, and it was awesome. It translated really well, especially with the dynamics and power of the brass section.

I tend to like most music if it's catchy (i.e. some pop metal and other pop stuff) but I find that the music I listen to the most is (in order)- Prog Rock(Rush, King Crimson, Yes), Jazz (Buddy Rich, Miles Davis, Ahmed Jamal) and Classical (Beethoven, Stravinsky, Joshua Bell [a new favorite], Grieg). All very complex and interesting stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
The pure, childlike optimism is gone replaced by something more melancholy.

Although I like the version by Iron and Wine a little bit more, I very much agree with what you say (that's probably why most people like the Postal Service version more).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...