Why the world is going to hell.

Hey why not.

[the Butcher]

that's the fucking spirit. give me a few minutes.

[Niger Angelus]

UnderOATH, that is one I can think of off the bat that are pushing the electronic non-electronic mix. I see where both arguements are coming from, though I am partial to Butcher's because of preference, but I am not shutting off FC. I have gotten into The Postal Service, which gets into the electronic a bit, I would be interested in gettting a top 20 or 10 or what not list from you DJ. I would also like to get a list from the Butcher just because i respect you as far as the hardcore scene goes.

[the Butcher]

alright, so the fucking thing isn't working. fuckashitbitch. some other day...

niger, i hate to say it, but underoath aren't pushing any boundaries. just because they have a keyboard in their band doesn't mean shit. all they do is play the single notes that the guitar is playing under the other instruments. it's really quite overdone nowadays...and that's also really not electronic. that's just...having a keyboard.

not trying to be a dick, but i get so sick of people saying that underoath are a genre-expansive band, when all they have is a fucking keyboard. which, a million bands have. as far as a top 10 list of hardcore...that'd take me awhile. remind me about it in a little bit and i'll try to get something worked out.

[Niger Angelus]

Alright, of course I am going off of music mazagines. They just seem to have a sound that not too many bands have found, and a way to get it out that is just awesome.

[the Butcher]

Originally posted by Niger Angelus:
Alright, of course I am going off of music mazagines. They just seem to have a sound that not too many bands have found, and a way to get it out that is just awesome.

not too many bands have found? i'm pretty sure that i could name 5 bands off the top of my head that sound exactly like underoath. they're nothing new. nothing new has occured in hardcore for years, because it's all be done. and believe me when i say that most music magazines are bullshit. if you can't figure music out for yourself, you shouldn't be turning to people who are paid to discuss music, because they are more than likely just a bunch of fuckers who think that whatever will make the most money is amazing music. hence why they preach as such.

[Pliedes]

DJ, while I agree with much of what you've said about the need for diversity of emotions in music, I think you need to consider the converse for a moment. I'm going to give two examples, neither of which I advocate, but are being used strictly for the purposes of distinction.

Now imagine a band that in every song runs the entire gambit of emotions. Each song literally includes every emotion which music can, be that anger, happiness, sadness, fear, love, even insanity. Now while those songs would be quite interesting, so much time would be spent trying to cover each emotion that each one would only be vaguely touched upon, at best. Now sure, it's quite diversified, but how successful will each song be at getting those emotions across? Not very. A song which also touches upon depression and death probably won't get most people in the mood for a romantic candlelit dinner. (note I said most people)

Now imagine a band who's every song only focuses on one emotion. Let's use love. Because that band/artist is only focusing on one emotion, it allows for quite a broad exploration of ways to express love through music. Now while I'm sure many people might find this music perfect for a romantic candlelit dinner, it really just doesn't do the job when you're weightlifting and getting pumped up for weighlifting, knifefights, or whatever you're into.

I'm not trying to be deep or anything, all I'm trying to say is that there are both positives and negatives to the scope of emotion within music. Overusing one emotion can be a problem in the same way that trying to express too many emotions can become a problem. Stereotyping and trying to overclassify music, especially doing so based upon emotions characteristic of genres, is counterproductive to being open towards music as a whole.

.....
Niger.
Let me precurse what I'm going to say about Underoath with what I believe about music. When a new genre or style begins to take form, it goes through three stages of which certain bands usually fulfill the function of. There are the artists who create a sound, their are the artists who refine the sound, and the artists who bring that sound to the masses. (note, this is in no way an absolute statement of the way music works, but rather a general form for trying to understand how music develops. Also, there are many artists who span multiple, if not all of the functions. That doesn't falsify this theory, but still works within it...and mean that band is pretty fucking good.) To use a pretty generic example, let's look at punk music. The Ramones were at the forefront of creating punk, the Sex Pistols refined it, and the Clash brought it to the mainstream. Again, I'm not trying to make any absolute statements about punk rock history, I'm just trying to offer an example for how music (seemingly) develops. (feel free to disagree and say so, let's just do it in another thread)
So, that being said: no, Underoath is nothing new to hardcore. They've refined their style and they do it well, but it's nothing new or groundbreaking. If anything they're more at the end of the process where a sound is brought to the public. Don't agree? Find the ratio of 14 year old girls at a 2005 Underoath show, compare that to the ratio of 14 year old girls at a 1995 Hatebreed show. Seriously, it's pretty obvious what function of musical development they're accomplishing.

Alright, I'm done.

[ March 07, 2005, 03:19 PM: Message edited by: Pliedes ]

[Niger Angelus]

Well, we will see if you are correct, I am going to the 'Taste of Chaos' on Wednesday. If I kill one in a pit, I will mail her to you. [img]smile.gif[/img] you can make it a doll or something. or. No. Or I could just count, yeah, prolly should count. I will count.

[ March 07, 2005, 10:48 PM: Message edited by: Niger Angelus ]

[Pliedes]

Please do.

[ March 08, 2005, 02:45 AM: Message edited by: Pliedes ]

[THEINCREDIBLEdork]

Hey Pliedes, z301 much?

[Pliedes]

Originally posted by THEINCREDIBLEdork:
Hey Pliedes, z301 much?

I'm assuming that you're refering to one of the 'history of rock' classes here at IU. Never taken any of 'em. I just actually know my ass from a hole in the ground when it comes to music.

Ahhh Pliedes, be easy now.

I thought I'd let the topic go, but now you insult my musical tastes.

Be honest with yourself, Pliedes. We both know damn well that associating emo with sadness and hardcore with anger isn't a stretch by any means, especially when considering that this is the way that the majority (not necessarily the most savy) of listeners of these 2 genres believe. Indeed you may be a more savy listener of these genres than your average joe (evidenced by your ability to make an argument better than 'well rap sucks and techno is gay'), but it is not a wrong to use these stereotypes because they do exist and are perpetuated within the atmosphere. Every EMO song I've ever heard was a depressing teenage ballad, a genre so warn out that I begin to reach for my emotion rape whistle.

What's the obvious solution to this problem? It's not that I havn't heard the right emo, it's that the emo that most kids are listening to is the wrong emo. It's a fact that some how, some way, the populace will latch on to some of the shittiest artwork being created of any time period. There are always exceptions, of course, but as a proponent of 'underground' music, you should be the first to doubt the quality of what MTV is throwing at you. And what's being thrown at the youngsters today? Anger and Depression.

This is just to add some humor to the thread.

[ March 08, 2005, 09:31 PM: Message edited by: DJ FC ]

[the Butcher]

Originally posted by DJ FC:
Be honest with yourself, Pliedes. We both know damn well that associating emo with sadness and hardcore with anger isn't a stretch by any means, especially when considering that this is the way that the majority (not necessarily the most savy) of listeners of these 2 genres believe.

how can you say that the majority believes that when you've never been to an underground show, you've never listened to good bands and you don't know shit about it? you can't say that we all associate it with sadness and anger, because we fucking don't. YOU may do that based off of your stereotypical biases which you don't know shit about, but the rest of the world doesn't. and if they do, then there's a good chance that they don't listen to music for music and they should probably be hung.

Originally posted by DJ FC:
What's the obvious solution to this problem? It's not that I havn't heard the right emo, it's that the emo that most kids are listening to is the wrong emo. It's a fact that some how, some way, the populace will latch on to some of the shittiest artwork being created of any time period. There are always exceptions, of course, but as a proponent of 'underground' music, you should be the first to doubt the quality of what MTV is throwing at you. And what's being thrown at the youngsters today? Anger and Depression.

wow. everything that you have ever said about music is now void for the single fact that you think the music on mtv is what people only listen to. i love to break it to you, but emo and hardcore have never been staples of mtv, hence why they were called UNDERGROUND, you fucking dumbass. it wasn't until recently, and i mean the past few years, that any type of emo and hardcore would ever even be considered to be played on mtv. you don't think we doubt mtv? i think the correct way to describe the way i feel about mtv is hate. utter, spiteful hate. they will of course play the shittiest, most easy to digest versions of music because they are in it for the fucking money. what don't you understand about that?

this is just to expose the truth.

Have you read a single word I said?

I said that I'm talking about the music that I've witnessed kids actually listening to.

I used MTV as an example for something else. We both acknowledge that MTV is trash. That's what I'm saying.

What I'm saying is this:

It's more likely that most kids are listening to the trash. This is evidenced by the fact that MTV is so popular. There may indeed be some good stuff in there (emo, hardcore; I'm inclined to say indeed there is, since many people are able to make good arguments for it), but most kids are listening to the trash, and this is what I'm experiencing... the trash.

When you tune into BET's 106 and Park, you witness the trash of hip hop. But people swear by it, because most people swear by the trash.

It's not a hard concept. I'm actually agreeing to your point, if you'd read my argument.

Edit: Your link does nothing for me, I agree that ravers are nothing more than pillheads who need the most extreme stimulous. They are wasting their lives.

[ March 09, 2005, 12:05 AM: Message edited by: DJ FC ]

[the Butcher]

alright, since the fucking zip folder i kept trying to upload isn't working, i'm just going to post links directly to the mp3 files online for you dj fc. every song that i'm going to show you is from a band that is dominantly indie/emo/whatever but has electronic instruments and influences. fucking listen to them all. don't make me pissed for wasting my time doing this. i'm doing you a fucking favor by showing you that there is so much more to music than you think.

portugal. the man - pelicans.
anna ranger - the ghost of solomon grundy.
at the drive-in - enfilade.
the faint - how could i forget?

enjoy you motherfucker.

I see once again, we've been comparing apples to oranges. The music I've been mostly talking about (and don't tell me it doesn't exist, I hear it way more often than something like your 4 posts above) is where within the first 3 seconds of every song, a young, whiney voice imediately starts singing (screeching might be a better word) and playing a guitar. The quality sounds like it was recorded in the bathroom of a Wal-Mart. I hear this all too often. If this isn't your typical "emo," but perhaps some twisted - yet popular form of it (Dashboard is the only name that comes to mind, but I swear I've heard the exact same style in more groups, and kids listen to this junk constantly) then I am sorry for ever associating it with the genre. It only logically follows that the most popular material of a genre, will be the least-refined most-over-the-top-junk you will ever encounter.

Basically I was taking my rant on a few (but most popular) examples to be reflective of the whole, and this is usually wrong. I didn't actually believe that all the shit was bad, I just like to argue. But please agree with me that the shit I described above (whiney voice, guitar, no creative lyrics) is bad, no matter how prevailent it may be, but a strong number of kids have latched on to it, and are bringing down the genre - and tarnishing it for the true followers.

Edit:
This is my idea of good music with electronic influences.

[ March 09, 2005, 09:13 AM: Message edited by: DJ FC ]

[the Butcher]

the music that you described is very prevalent, yes. however, that is the most shitty version of emo. the reason that kids listen to that is because they don't know what good music actually is. they hear that a certain band is "emo", and since they want to be "emo", they listen to that band. fuck 'em. that's why i hate scenesters and local shows. fucks like that.

and yes, i know who radiohead is. they are absolutely fantastic. however, what did you think of the songs that i posted?

Much better than the kind of emo that I hate, that's for certain, I think I could ride in a car with my friends listening to this and not want to gouge my eyes out.

Portugal. The Man - Pelicans
I like the beat, I hate the vocals.

Anna Ranger - The Ghost of Solomon Grundy
Not too bad. Not a big fan of the "nintendo" sounding synths, but to each his own.

At The Drive-In - Enfilade
I like everything except the chorus. Sounds like a mix of screaming and some British soccer chant. This song actually sounds like it was produced pretty well. I especially like the brief interlude around 3:20.

The Faint - How could I forget
I really don't know what to say about this song, it seems too random with no common unifying theme, but then it all comes together around 2:20, and we get the dark metal sound that many of us love and enjoy. The buildup at the end is great, but why does it end so abruptly?

And yes, everybody knows who Radiohead is, yet strangely they are still fucking amazing.

[ March 09, 2005, 04:25 PM: Message edited by: DJ FC ]

[the Butcher]

Originally posted by DJ FC:
Portugal. The Man - Pelicans
I like the beat, I hate the vocals.

yeh, the guy who sings absolutely sounds like a girl, but what can you do?

Originally posted by DJ FC:
Anna Ranger - The Ghost of Solomon Grundy
Not too bad. Not a big fan of the "nintendo" sounding synths, but to each his own.

i personally love the nintendo sounding synths, but hey, that's what you just said. i just believe that they incorporate it all so well that it creates wonderful harmoies.

Originally posted by DJ FC:
At The Drive-In - Enfilade
I like everything except the chorus. Sounds like a mix of screaming and some British soccer chant. This song actually sounds like it was produced pretty well. I especially like the brief interlude around 3:20.

understandably so. it was produced very well because those guys know good sound. yeh, the interlude and the middle eastern riff are quite possibly the best part of that song.

Originally posted by DJ FC:
The Faint - How could I forget
I really don't know what to say about this song, it seems too random with no common unifying theme, but then it all comes together around 2:20, and we get the dark metal sound that many of us love and enjoy. The buildup at the end is great, but why does it end so abruptly?

it ends abruptly because it transitions right into the beginning of the next song. hence why the song isn't too deep or long. another song by the faint that you might like better is: the faint - the conductor. it has much more of an industrial feel, with more electronic vocals.

either way, i'm glad to see you at least acknowledge that some underground music is worth listening.

[underwater]

I really have no say in this thread except this:

The music I listen to is music I like, and any more discussion or explanation really isn't necessary.

[Pliedes]

Originally posted by underwater:
I really have no say in this thread except this:

The music I listen to is music I like, and any more discussion or explanation really isn't necessary.

That stance is fine, so long as you don't ever discuss it or try to explain anything about it. Keep that in mind.

[underwater]

That works. I don't dive too deeply into the mechanics of a band or song. If I like it, I just like it, and that's that.

The only sort-of exception to that is if we're talking about one of my absolute favorite bands. Then I might tell you what makes them so fucking fabulous, based on their individual qualities, not the qualities of their genre.