Music You cannot Stand & Why?

Hicks · « **Reply #100 on:** 10 Feb 2009, 08:37 pm »

Yeah I've always seen fade outs as a consequence of the limitations of either the media, length of the side of vinyl, CD, etc., or an attempt to keep the song length in the four to five minute range that lends itself to radio play.

stereocilia · « **Reply #101 on:** 11 Feb 2009, 12:45 am »

I figured there was a political reason for the fade out. I'm not sure if that annoys me even more. But, if I ever have my own band, which is way unlikely since my musical talent remains completely undeveloped, I'm going to try the fade out ending at a live concert. Of course, the even more annoying "hidden track" will be the encore.

You know, come to think of it, if there's room for eleven minutes of silence before the secret hidden track, then I think the rug is yoinked out from under the argument that there is not enough space to include the part of the song truncated by the fade out.

jqp · « **Reply #102 on:** 11 Feb 2009, 12:47 am »

I see fade outs as a producer's choice of a transition - to the end of the song (compare to movies that end this way) Also a way to end the song with a hook playing over and over....They were 'fashionable' at different times in my experience of recording history (e.e. The Guess Who). But a pretty tacky way to cut a song off based on a time limit

stereocilia · « **Reply #103 on:** 11 Feb 2009, 02:07 am »

I think it's Kings of Leon, whom I actually like, who have a "fade out psych" where the song starts to fade out and then, when you least expect it, fades back in! Maybe Uncle Tupelo, too, can't quite remember. Pegs the needle on the cheese-o-meter.

By the way, I'm seriously not the angry ranting type, so I find it impossible to "hate" any music of any type unless it somehow promotes irrational hate itself.

Russell Dawkins · « **Reply #104 on:** 11 Feb 2009, 08:55 am »

I know I've done fade outs purely because I know it is going to annoy someone, and hidden tracks many minutes after the end of the last song just for the hell of it.

Hey, if George Martin can do fade outs, I can, too.

Actually there is even an art in fades - there are artful fades and inept fades.

Also I routinely graft on a minute or two of silence on the end of the last song, so the CD player doesn't make that mechanical sound of the laser parking immediately at the end and break whatever spell has been cast. Bet you never thought engineers cared that much!
We're not just ham-fisted cretins using cheap wire!

stereocilia · « **Reply #105 on:** 11 Feb 2009, 05:57 pm »

The silence at the end of a cd for that reason is a clever idea.

I almost forgot the "inverse fade" like the end of "Antichrist Television Blues" on Arcade Fire's Neon Bible album (which I really like BTW). The sound rushes up on you and then cuts off abruptly, a totally eerie effect, I think.

nathanm · « **Reply #106 on:** 11 Feb 2009, 06:22 pm »

The whole "hidden track" thing has gotta stop. The purpose apparently is either a prank: messing with a listener who has presumably listened to the whole song, then maybe nodded off to sleep, only to be awoken by some psychotic noises that scare the crap out of 'em, or they are legit songs which for some reason needed to be separated by minutes of silence. Makes no damn sense. It was cool for awhile, now it's just silly. I will now use my incredible power and influence over the recording industry to see this trend crushed.

Russell Dawkins · « **Reply #107 on:** 11 Feb 2009, 10:24 pm »

Quote from: nathanm on 11 Feb 2009, 06:22 pm

The whole "hidden track" thing has gotta stop. The purpose apparently is either a prank: messing with a listener who has presumably listened to the whole song, then maybe nodded off to sleep, only to be awoken by some psychotic noises that scare the crap out of 'em, or they are legit songs which for some reason needed to be separated by minutes of silence. Makes no damn sense. It was cool for awhile, now it's just silly. I will now use my incredible power and influence over the recording industry to see this trend crushed.

OK. I will run it by you next time I am tempted to do it - maybe I can convince you of its artistic merit.

What I don't think makes sense is the obligatory 1.5 seconds or less of between track spaces. Even if the music is good, it becomes the equivalent of being force-fed a multi-course dinner, where each plate is whipped off the table the second you finish the last forkful, instantly to be replaced by the next plate. I've always wanted to do a record where there was time for the previous track to "settle" in the mind before the next one began. The space should not be silence, but could be extremely quiet ambiance of any appropriate kind.

What think ye, Nathan?

nathanm · « **Reply #108 on:** 11 Feb 2009, 10:52 pm »

So you want more than 2 seconds of space or just some sound above digital zero? Not a bad idea. That's one of those things you have to feel, it's kind of dependent on how the song makes you feel. You may need a good breather after a particularly rockin' track. I wonder how much thought is given to sequencing tracks these days. It's a tall order. Not only do you want to write good songs, but they should also work together as a unit. Not an easy task.

There are plenty of albums which have no silence between tracks. Sometimes the songs are crammed right on top of each other (some Slayer albums) or sometimes there might be a little filler track between the main songs (Blind Guardian "Nightfall In Middle Earth", King Diamond etc.) Either version tends to suffer in this age of shuffling iPods where an album as a complete work seems to be a lost art. You get a sharp jump when mixed together with other songs. "Gapless" albums sure do pose a problem with digital music. I am not sure if just-like-CD truly gapless playback is possible (with whatever version of Squeezebox I probably don't have), but it sure is a pain overall. We just don't live in the age of complex, cohesive works anymore. It's all a buffet now. Hmmm. The worst blasphemy possible would of course be separating Heartbreaker and Livin' Lovin' Maid. I think if a person did that the laws of the universe would be undone and we would disappear into a black hole.

There's also some album, can't think of it now, but if I remember correctly there is a droning, low-level sound which goes through the entire thing. I might be imagining that. Morbid Angel? Nine Inch Nails? Yeah, maybe it was Morbid Angel. I think there was like a swarm of bees sound that linked the songs together.

Russell Dawkins · « **Reply #109 on:** 11 Feb 2009, 11:00 pm »

Just to stay completely off topic for a second longer, there seem to be some songs that are pretty much made for a fade out ending. Can you imagine an alternative for Crimson and Clover by Tommy James and the Shondells? Not sure I can!

And, by the way, I was thinking of up to 30 seconds of space between songs, and at least 5 seconds..

rockadanny · « **Reply #110 on:** 12 Feb 2009, 02:03 am »

Another appropriate(?) fader: "Hey Jude" ... Na, na, na, nana , na, na ...

stereocilia · « **Reply #111 on:** 12 Feb 2009, 05:01 am »

I can't remember which Tool album has some creepy gnashing of teeth sounds for a long time, and Depeche Mode at the end of "Enjoy the Silence" from Violator. Also, Gob Iron has some short "Instrumental #1..#2"...etc. between the more substantial songs, I like that idea.

UBER-off-topic now.

hayseed · « **Reply #112 on:** 20 Feb 2009, 03:52 am »

I also want to add my vote in this category for YA[w]NNI and for Phil Collins.

On Bela Fleck, I haven't listened to his work enough to be bored by it, although run-of-the-mill bluegrass banjo doesn't thrill me. But there is nothing misplaced about the idea of "jazz banjo" -- before guitars were amplified ALL jazz bands had banjo players, and often no guitarists. The banjos were tenors and plectrums, more often than 5-strings.

There is country music I don't like, but Doc Watson and the best of Willie Nelson's work are head and shoulders above most of it.

So-called "Christian Rock" strikes me as just another flavor of bad "lite rock."

I like at least some examples of most kinds of music, but I avoid rap enough that I don't know if there is any of it I would like. The reason I avoid it is that I prefer melody-based far more than rhythm-based music. Also, the bad, unoriginal rhyming and nursery-rhyme cadences of the "poetry" strike me as doggerel, even if the subject matter might be intended to have some important social commentary.

I never listen to Celine Dion.

I like a couple of tunes on the Avril Lavigne CD I got for a buck at the Goodwill thrift shop. My Gypsy Kings CD makes me smile. I prefer Bing Crosby to Frank Sinatra. The best Joe Cocker was the version of him that Belushi did on SNL.

Fade outs on recordings are usually the refuge of bands who can't play well enough to all end at the same time. The Cheap Suit Serenaders, Ray Charles, Rotary Connection, Les Paul, never needed a fade out.

JerryM · « **Reply #113 on:** 20 Feb 2009, 04:12 am »

Music I can't stand?

Disco.

What an assault on the ears. I can't remember how those songs ended. I never heard one long enough. It's quite unfortunate that the songs didn't end with the players of such bursting into flames. I'd still listen to those tracks now.

Have fun,
Jerry

F-100 · « **Reply #114 on:** 20 Feb 2009, 04:26 am »

All rap music !! Because they are all CRAP.

orthobiz · « **Reply #115 on:** 20 Feb 2009, 10:46 pm »

Quote from: JerryM on 20 Feb 2009, 04:12 am

Music I can't stand?

Disco.

Have fun,
Jerry

That's why there's rap. To make me pine for the days of disco.
But when disco was out, I hated it. Except, of course, Dancing Queen and Love Is The Drug and Fame.

Paul

dragonwhip · « **Reply #116 on:** 20 Mar 2009, 07:57 pm »

If I have to hate any music my first choice is anything by Dave Matthews. The first time I heard it it reminded me of the time (when I was 8 years old) that I tried to make up music while taking a bath. Even at that tender age I recognized that I was just noodling aimlessly and I stopped after maybe thirty seconds. Dave Matthews not only didn't stop, he recorded it! What talentless dreck! The worst part is I worked with a surgeon who would play it and it took us two years to get him to stop. Imagine being stuck in a room for six hours where you can't leave and there is hour after hour of Dave %*&^$@*Matthews playing. Somebody just shoot me.

orthobiz · « **Reply #117 on:** 22 Mar 2009, 02:58 am »

Quote from: nathanm on 11 Feb 2009, 10:52 pm

The worst blasphemy possible would of course be separating Heartbreaker and Livin' Lovin' Maid. I think if a person did that the laws of the universe would be undone and we would disappear into a black hole.

Like early iTunes ripping with obligatory spaces. Hard to listen to Chicago II, too (or should I say also).

Paul

orthobiz · « **Reply #118 on:** 22 Mar 2009, 02:59 am »

Quote from: dragonwhip on 20 Mar 2009, 07:57 pm

If I have to hate any music my first choice is anything by Dave Matthews.

Me too. And how about hating the way people gush over him?

Paul

rodge827 · « **Reply #119 on:** 23 Mar 2009, 01:42 am »

Quote from: NewBuyer on 6 Feb 2009, 02:26 am

Not sure what it is called - but I personally can't stand that specific type of hard-rock music where the singer is angrily deep-voice screaming throughout.

On the flip-side though, I actually do really like Bela Fleck...

Agreed!!

Not too big on Bjork either.