[Trash-talk] NGR: the datsuns & the music

[Mattex Hib-Igster]

On 12/03/2003 at 18.31, Lindsay <shirleyzas at hotmail.com> wrote:

> I don't mean this in a rude or accusational way, I'm just curious...why is
> it so bad to sound like the Vines or the Libertines?  I haven't heard that 
> much of the Libertines (maybe only three songs or so) but I really don't 
> think they sound much like the Vines.

neither i heard much of em, just 1 or 2 songs. the vines seems to me a
band that want to do some very easy rock'n'roll, catchy and
commercial. i saw their single on mtv.
they went out many time after the stokes, so i
supposed: see, now than someone had success, clones came out all
together, tryin to make easy money. the vines' cd was also very pumped
on media, so my thought got stronger in my point of view.

> All these "new rock" bands are 
> getting lumped together, all the critics' darlings - the Yeah Yeah Yeahs, 
> the Strokes, the Vines, the Hives, the White Stripes, Datsuns, Libertines, 
> the Rapture, the Gories, the Greenhornes, and I could go on and on and on.  
> But honestly, what do most of them have in common except they're being 
> noticed at the same time?  And why are they now receiving this backlash?

i personally heard only a bit of hives, white stipes and i got the
strokes cd. i like these three, most of all the strokes and the hives.
nothing marvellous, just good. compared to almost everything on mtv,
they sounded as fresh air. i don't like the nu-metal scene, for me
that's all crap, so when the strokes and the hives came out i
thought: well, sounds good, much better than linkin park and co. but
when also all the others invaded the mtv scene, that was a bit
patetical, most of all because i think they are worse than originals,
from what i heard from magazines and friends (excetp for the vines: i
saw their single clip).

> I think it's because there are a LOT of them, so the public feels it is its
> duty to knock 'em down.  It's the same thing that happens with any genre 
> movement, so to speak.  I just think it's interesting.

it's natural. the problem is divide those who carry on their music
believing in what they're doing, just taking influences from others
but re-elaborate the whole whing in a personal way, and those who just
take advantage of a particular situation to make easy money, supported
by some big majors. in my humble opinion, the strokes and the hives
are in group A, many others in group B.

> For instance, it 
> seems it's the really cool and elitist thing right now to hate the Vines.  
> That's cool, if you don't like the Vines, that's fine.  But don't not like 
> them because everyone else tells you they suck.

i saw their single clip, but i didn't liked it. i konw that's maybe
too little to judge a band, but for me the first impression counts.
and, i have to admit, i have prejudices to those clean faces who try
to appear angry and raw you sometimes catch in mtv :o\ .
as once said iggy pop: "those new kids (talkin of new rock'n'roll bands)
knows perfectly their notes, but they don't even know what 'vomit' means!".
i'm with the ig.

> I personally like the Vines. Their live show is a bit lacking but
> the CD is very good, and believe me it doesn't sound ANYTHING
> like the Hives or the White Stripes, the two bands
> they're most often compared to.

see, music is all a question of tastes :o)
the fact i didn't like the vines but i like the hives -sounds like a
rhyme? :o) - and you wrote the vines have nothing to do with the
hives, just make it 1 + 1 = 2.


> So yeah...I'm not meaning 
> this as an attack on you, Mattex, I'm just sort of thinking aloud about 
> things I have been noticing about the way people and music interact. Sorry
> for my rambling.

no problem Lindsay, we are on this ml to discuss and share different
points of view, so it's all fine.

see you
--
>M<
"I'm born to rock'n'roll... I'm here to stay!" -Ozzy Osbourne
[now playing: raw power - screams from the gutter]