Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016) • Hacker News Board

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#61

Post by analog31 » Sat, May 08, 2021, 2:42 PM UTC

drewcoo wrote: post #46

sjg007 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Classical music is 300+ years old. I also love Opera as do my parents and grandparents. I think it is more about what gets played on the radio. The music is good and new. That tricks our brain into pursuing it. Eventually each genre finds its own classics that basically capture most of the attention.

Is the classical you all listen to all "top 40" "oldies" from folks like Bach and Beethoven or do you listen to anything reasonably new? I'm talking 20th or 21st century classical. Say John Adams or Kaija Saariaho, maybe? That's the classical music that I enjoy that my mom can't stand. And that is the difference this is talking about.

The new stuff. My mom introduced me to Hindemith and Bartok.

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#62

Post by criddell » Sat, May 08, 2021, 2:43 PM UTC

TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #43

criddell wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think radio still matters?

For people who drive, yes. It does to me at least.

Most of the time when I'm driving, I'm streaming music. I'd be okay if my next car had no radio as long as it has Android Auto or CarPlay.

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#63

Post by eplanit » Sat, May 08, 2021, 2:43 PM UTC

drewcoo wrote: post #46

sjg007 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Classical music is 300+ years old. I also love Opera as do my parents and grandparents. I think it is more about what gets played on the radio. The music is good and new. That tricks our brain into pursuing it. Eventually each genre finds its own classics that basically capture most of the attention.

Is the classical you all listen to all "top 40" "oldies" from folks like Bach and Beethoven or do you listen to anything reasonably new? I'm talking 20th or 21st century classical. Say John Adams or Kaija Saariaho, maybe? That's the classical music that I enjoy that my mom can't stand. And that is the difference this is talking about.

"I'm talking 20th or 21st century classical"

I can't consider anything so recent to be "classical" -- it might imitate the style of older music, but to call that 'classical' makes the word basically meaningless, or that it's only a style (however that would be defined). To me, 'classical' means that it has survived and thrived across _many_ years.

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#64

Post by analog31 » Sat, May 08, 2021, 2:43 PM UTC

criddell wrote: post #32

sjg007 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Classical music is 300+ years old. I also love Opera as do my parents and grandparents. I think it is more about what gets played on the radio. The music is good and new. That tricks our brain into pursuing it. Eventually each genre finds its own classics that basically capture most of the attention.

Do you think radio still matters?

I find it super convenient to turn on one of the streaming radio stations such as WFMT in Chicago. It eliminates all of the organizational overhead of curating the music that I listen to, and it's good enough. I certainly hear a lot of stuff that I've never heard before.

Also, re streaming, I have a throttled cell phone service, so my data usage isn't unlimited.

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#65

Post by krapp » Sat, May 08, 2021, 2:45 PM UTC

dangerbird2 wrote: post #59

moomin wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "Old Town Road" Billboard kerfuffle was a great demonstration of the thesis of the piece: that the hard categorisations of music are racially driven.

Yep. If you listen to "hillbilly music" and "blues" from the 20s and 30s, or "rock" and "r&b" from the 50s or 60s, they are musically indistinguishable. The difference almost always solely lies in the race of the musicians or the target audience

Literally the reason "rock and roll" exists as a label was to segregate "ethnic" (read: Black) music in record stores and on the radio for a white audience.

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#66

Post by acomjean » Sat, May 08, 2021, 2:45 PM UTC

drewcoo wrote: post #46

sjg007 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Classical music is 300+ years old. I also love Opera as do my parents and grandparents. I think it is more about what gets played on the radio. The music is good and new. That tricks our brain into pursuing it. Eventually each genre finds its own classics that basically capture most of the attention.

Is the classical you all listen to all "top 40" "oldies" from folks like Bach and Beethoven or do you listen to anything reasonably new? I'm talking 20th or 21st century classical. Say John Adams or Kaija Saariaho, maybe? That's the classical music that I enjoy that my mom can't stand. And that is the difference this is talking about.

I like modern classical.. some of it.

There is a radio show with some interesting modern classical I check out weekly. (They archive the shows on the wmbr site for 2 weeks.

https://wmbr.org/cgi-bin/show?id=6708

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#67

Post by dijksterhuis » Sat, May 08, 2021, 2:50 PM UTC

ehnto wrote: post #26

llamataboot wrote: post #3

I often reflect on the similiarities to that and how techno and house became EDM. When I started going to Midwestern raves in the 1990s they were literally some of the first fully integrated places I hung out in. Definitely some of the Detroit techno parties we went too, some of the first places where it was a majority Black space. EDM now is thought of as this totally white music, all electronic music really, by eve…

Hm I don't quite agree but it could be that the scenes are different in different places. It could also be that our definitions of EDM differ. I might also be missing something so take my comment as just my perspective from where I stand. I think there is a split between commercialized EDM and "real" EDM. The true culture and heritage of house and techno definitely live on in the greater electronic music scene in gen…

> I think there is a split between commercialized EDM and "real" EDM.

This could be a locale thing, but in the UK what you call "real" EDM is often known as the underground electronic music scene (at least in my circles). I.e. the long tail of folks pissing about with machines in their bedroom.

Note the lack of "dance" as not all underground electronic music needs to be danced to. Autechre is a good example of this.

In the UK at least, EDM as a whole is often viewed as a commercialisation that started over in the USA (e.g. with Skrillex) and spread. What the EDM term generally refers to has changed over the years, and is now closer to "pop trance with super saw synths EVERYWHERE" these days.

So, at least for us Brits, it's a catch all term for a specific type of electronic music (and most of the time a disparaging term).

I think we mostly agree on the differing content, and in disagreeing with the parent, but it's the general "lumping in" with the same terminology that is often protested by the underground folks over here.

Personally, I would hate for my tracks to be called EDM (I'd rather stab myself repeatedly in the eye with a spoon).

Disclaimer: I'm just one UK dude who has spent a lot of time around electronic music. Other UK residents may have other opinions or nomenclature that they prefer to use.

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#68

Post by dragonwriter » Sat, May 08, 2021, 2:51 PM UTC

eplanit wrote: post #63

drewcoo wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the classical you all listen to all "top 40" "oldies" from folks like Bach and Beethoven or do you listen to anything reasonably new? I'm talking 20th or 21st century classical. Say John Adams or Kaija Saariaho, maybe? That's the classical music that I enjoy that my mom can't stand. And that is the difference this is talking about.

"I'm talking 20th or 21st century classical" I can't consider anything so recent to be "classical" -- it might imitate the style of older music, but to call that 'classical' makes the word basically meaningless, or that it's only a style (however that would be defined). To me, 'classical' means that it has survived and thrived across _many_ years.

> . To me, 'classical' means that it has survived and thrived across _many_ years.

Classical is either all of Western art music or a particular style within that body whose original heyday was between that of Baroque and Romantic; creating a third definition doesn’t aid in communication.

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#69

Post by ebiester » Sat, May 08, 2021, 2:54 PM UTC

TomSwirly wrote: post #51

stuart78 wrote: post #41

I think that the narrative of last twenty years has been a re-blending of genre in a way that is not fully appreciated. While you can certainly find plenty of music that fits the mold established in the 60s, 80s or 90s around you also find much more at the top of the charts that challenges those categories. Right now the top 10 Billboard chart includes Lil Nas X and The Weeknd, neither of whom fits comfortably in the…

To compare this to the 1950s is... very strange. For listeners, the broadening of access to the full diversity of music between 1950 and 1990 was unprecedented in history and will never happen again, simply due to the rise of technology, and the sudden access to all the traditions of the world within a single generation. > Lil Nas X and The Weeknd, neither of whom fits comfortably in the genre they are assigned to by…

You miss the point.

Lil Nas X and The Weeknd are placed in R&B almost exclusively because they are black. In your eyes, sung by a white person in 1986, would be synth pop.

Did Billy Ray Cyrus make Old Town Road suddenly country? Is Montero (call me by your name) rap or a gay dance anthem?

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#70

Post by criddell » Sat, May 08, 2021, 2:58 PM UTC

analog31 wrote: post #64

criddell wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think radio still matters?

I find it super convenient to turn on one of the streaming radio stations such as WFMT in Chicago. It eliminates all of the organizational overhead of curating the music that I listen to, and it's good enough. I certainly hear a lot of stuff that I've never heard before. Also, re streaming, I have a throttled cell phone service, so my data usage isn't unlimited.

I don't have unlimited data either, but have found that streaming doesn't seem to use up all that much data. I think it's something like 100MB / hour.