The Song Fight Bulletin Board

Isn't it really fantastic that we don't have to worry about any of that stuff on Songfight?

15-16 puzzle wrote:

HeuristicsInc wrote:I just feel like it should be possible to appeal to a wider audience without making yourself sound just like the rest of what's on the radio. Isn't it?

Hmmmmm, it should be possible to do this, but can you think of anyone who has made a concerted attempt for a larger audience while not mainstreaming their sound?

All such examples are debatable.

Peter Gabriel
Talking Heads
The Police

Also, how much value is in an artist's statement "I'm making a concerted attempt for a larger audience, but I'm not trying to mainstram my music". I think Peter Gabriel certainly tried to produce a commercial hit with Bigtime, and certainly Sting with his solo stuff. But I can't deny that artists enjoy writing pop music, regardless of where they came from (see Genesis post Wind and Weathering, and King Crimson's Elephant Talk).

It's exhausting to write good, sophisticated music. When instant validation tells you a song "works" it gets more attractive to write such music. That's part of the magic of hit songs, both to the audience and the artist. Complicated/progressive/sophisticated music requires a greater effort to "get", and while the payoff is often greater as well, the overall appeal will be limited.

Well written Roymond.

Just a follow-up hubba-hubba for Jill Sobule. Quirky little tunes with amazing quirky little lyrics. "Tracy (Ullman) Takes On..." that HBO (?) show, had a recent skit about a lesbian golfer and her nutritionist / girlfriend and at the end of the piece, they used Jill's song "I Kissed A Girl..."

Charles (Art is my middle name!)

Jim of Seattle wrote:Give me PJ Harvey or Bjork any day.

Yeah, Bjork kicks everyone's ass musically. And PJ Harvey too beats all those others you listed. But I'd put Liz Phair up there with Bjork and PJ.

15-16 puzzle wrote:

HeuristicsInc wrote:I just feel like it should be possible to appeal to a wider audience without making yourself sound just like the rest of what's on the radio. Isn't it?

Hmmmmm, it should be possible to do this, but can you think of anyone who has made a concerted attempt for a larger audience while not mainstreaming their sound?

When REM changed from minor record label to major record label, back between the Document and Green albums, there seemed to be a definite change in sound to appeal to a wider audience - yet I don't think they could have been accused of sounding like the rest of what was on the radio at the time

Caravan Ray wrote:

15-16 puzzle wrote:

HeuristicsInc wrote:I just feel like it should be possible to appeal to a wider audience without making yourself sound just like the rest of what's on the radio. Isn't it?

Hmmmmm, it should be possible to do this, but can you think of anyone who has made a concerted attempt for a larger audience while not mainstreaming their sound?

When REM changed from minor record label to major record label, back between the Document and Green albums, there seemed to be a definite change in sound to appeal to a wider audience - yet I don't think they could have been accused of sounding like the rest of what was on the radio at the time

I think there's also something to be said for bringing greater resources to bear. On a major label, you might be able to afford that string section you always wanted to use instead of the accordion.

such as when cradle of filth made their latest album (and major label debut), which features a string orchestra instead of the synth strings they formerly had to work with. and with the new label backing, they are steadily increasing their exposure and fan base (perhaps not significantly by mainstream numbers, but they are becoming fairly well-known in terms of the black metal oeuvre) without altering their style...

15-16 puzzle wrote:

HeuristicsInc wrote:I just feel like it should be possible to appeal to a wider audience without making yourself sound just like the rest of what's on the radio. Isn't it?

Hmmmmm, it should be possible to do this, but can you think of anyone who has made a concerted attempt for a larger audience while not mainstreaming their sound?

Depends on what you mean by "Mainstreaming their sound." The example I want to pull out is Modest Mouse. It seems to me like they tapped their catchier and more accessible side without losing what made them great. But there are a couple of vocal Modest Mouse haters out here, so I dunno. I do know that when "Float On" started getting radio play, one of my friends got pissed: "It sucks that Modest Mouse went all mainstream, man." Was it a concentrated effort? Did it result in a bastardization of their sound?

15-16 puzzle wrote:
So, is Ms Phair's reach for stardom working? Do people know who she is? Will she be able to continue on the road towards household name, or will her next album take a turn back towards Reallyfamousunkownperson-ville?

I think she failed in the worst way. She isolated her fans by putting out an uninteresting pop record, and then put herself out there to a whole bunch of people who'd never heard of her before as an uninteresting pop singer. And then, because the album lacked her usual flare, it became forgettable, and the public moved on. Someone savvy to pop music might remember "Why Can't I" from last year, but it's already gone and forgotten for the most part.

Still, she did make some money off that album, I believe.

c hack wrote:

Jim of Seattle wrote:Give me PJ Harvey or Bjork any day.

Yeah, Bjork kicks everyone's ass musically. And PJ Harvey too beats all those others you listed. But I'd put Liz Phair up there with Bjork and PJ.

How about them Kate Bushs and Jane Siberrys? Chick singers rock!
(I'm soooo yesterday, I know)

Generic wrote:Depends on what you mean by "Mainstreaming their sound." The example I want to pull out is Modest Mouse. It seems to me like they tapped their catchier and more accessible side without losing what made them great. But there are a couple of vocal Modest Mouse haters out here, so I dunno. I do know that when "Float On" started getting radio play, one of my friends got pissed: "It sucks that Modest Mouse went all mainstream, man." Was it a concentrated effort? Did it result in a bastardization of their sound?

I was in the unique position of falling in love with "Good News..." before I knew they went mainstream. All I knew of Modest Mouse was that my friend Matt said they were good, and I heard a fraction of "The Good Times Are Killing Me" playing at a Newbury Comics. So I figured they were all indie. After hearing the album, I was like "wow, this indie band is amazing -- I bet if they had a major label backing, they could be huge, I can't imagine anyone not liking them." Later on, I was flipping the channel and I saw part of the Float On video on MTV and I couldn't believe it. MTV was playing good music! After quickly checking the window for four horsemen descending, I decided that maybe the MTV programmers weren't 100% morons after all.

I think your friend is suffering from the affliction so loquaciously recounted in Front's "Indier Than Thou."

roymond wrote:How about them Kate Bushs and Jane Siberrys? Chick singers rock!
(I'm soooo yesterday, I know)

The first time I heard Kate Bush I was amazed at how much Tori's vocal stylings are ripping her off (assuming it's not just a cooincidence). But I still like Tori better.

roymond wrote:How about them Kate Bushs and Jane Siberrys? Chick singers rock!
(I'm soooo yesterday, I know)

Oh YEAH!!! I used to LOOVE Kate Bush. And man, she was hot. What ever happened to her?

jb wrote:I think there's also something to be said for bringing greater resources to bear. On a major label, you might be able to afford that string section you always wanted to use instead of the accordion.

Sometimes that works to the artist's disadvantage, of course.

Jim of Seattle wrote:

jb wrote:I think there's also something to be said for bringing greater resources to bear. On a major label, you might be able to afford that string section you always wanted to use instead of the accordion.

Sometimes that works to the artist's disadvantage, of course.

there's a great story about when the Who were recording "a quick one while he's away". pete townshend wanted a bunch of cellos to come in one part of the song (the song is a mini rock opera composed of numerous 2:50 songs....) and they couldn't afford it at the time. so instead of the cellos, they all just sang the word "cellos" over and over in harmony.

sometimes, having limited resources makes you more resourceful and creative.

Jim of Seattle wrote:Give me PJ Harvey or Bjork any day.

Jim, I think I love you Throw in some Tanya Donelly (either solo or from the Throwing Muses days) and I'm putty in your hands, baby.

Jack, the new avatar got coffee to come out my nose. Seriously. Good one.

Jim of Seattle wrote:

roymond wrote:How about them Kate Bushs and Jane Siberrys? Chick singers rock!
(I'm soooo yesterday, I know)

Oh YEAH!!! I used to LOOVE Kate Bush. And man, she was hot. What ever happened to her?

As far as I could tell, she would not get on a plane, so touring was out, for the most part. She got more into production with her brothers (the whole family was pretty intense musically). She was doing a lot of her own programming on the Fairlight as well and worked with other artists in that capacity...back when Synclavier and Fairlight ruled the high-end audio world. I sort of lost track of her after Hounds of Love.

Huh, here's a news page: http://homepage.eircom.net/~twoms/katenews.htm#1 - mom and all that...

jack shite wrote:sometimes, having limited resources makes you more resourceful and creative.

well duh, hence songfight. my point was that greater resources might be a more likely explanation for the "change" in sound when a band gets signed than is "trying to appeal to a wider audience".

so much for the cute and funny anecdote.