Will there be another original music form ever again?

Discussion in 'Music' started by dhs, May 28, 2004.

  1. dhs

    dhs Senior Member

    This is building off my thoughts from another thread, but will there be one? Sure there will be original songs, I'm a musician myself and I've written plenty of songs that are 'original', but my influences are obvious and can be classified. I love music, it is the center of my being, but at the same time I feel its somewhat dead. Classical was done and sense then, beebop, jazz, blues, rock, reggae, country, western, r&b, soul, progressive, rap, skaw, hip hop, electronic, fusion...I know I'm missing many forms- but has it all been doen is my question? I know there will be millions of original artists to come in the future, but what about musical style.
     
  2. WayfaringStranger

    WayfaringStranger Corporate Slave #34

    yes. take bluegrass for example. bill monroe took old time and crossed it with the blues. then cus he was a mad man, brought it to warp speed, and then you get a new music style. someone will develope something. look at turn tables too, that spawned two new art forms. or when dancehall and ska went reggae. always be new music.
     
  3. Music is always developing and changing although people don't always like these changes.
    The Beatles some people thought 'Were trying and failing to emulate the black sound of rythym and blues and were white pop crap'
    You don't hear many people saying that THESE days!!'
     
  4. dhs

    dhs Senior Member

    combining two art forms does not equal a new art form. yes it does equal change, but not necessarily new exploration
     
  5. Pressed_Rat

    Pressed_Rat Do you even lift, bruh?

    As time goes on, the ability to be original greatly decreases. This doesn't mean that there still can't be music created which pushes the boundries, but there is a lot less of it than there was. And a lot more imitators, too! These days to find good, original music, you really have to sift through a lot of pseudo-original crap.
     
  6. All depends what you define as good orginal music though, Rat. Everyone views things differently.
    I would call the Rolling Stones one of the greatest orginal rock bands ever, but from the amount of times you and I have argued over that, I know for sure that YOU wouldn't.
     
  7. dhs

    dhs Senior Member

    no offense Mick, but I'm talking about 2004, not 1964


    not that I don't love the stones, but I'm sure Matt would agree, they're a bit of Howlin' Wolf and a bit of Muddy Watter's fronted by a sex symbol
     
  8. nightwanderer

    nightwanderer Member

    I consider the "original" groups or artists to be people who have made avant- garde music. that doesnt mean other bands arent original, but they didnt create a new form of music.
     
  9. I would call them orignal because of the way they - a white English band - interpretered the sounds of Muddy and Wolf as well as other, much older black music.
     
  10. dhs

    dhs Senior Member

    Are you a Micheal Jackson fan or something? kidding - but really, your statement sounds boringly political, but then again I'm not avant - garde.
     
  11. Pressed_Rat

    Pressed_Rat Do you even lift, bruh?

    I agree with your first sentence. But I don't think I've ever said that the Stones weren't original or great. The Stones were one of the great innovators in rock & roll. Sure, they might have derived a lot from the blues, but they made these influences into something that are truly their own. The '64-69 period of the Stones is nothing short of brilliant in its own right. The Stones have influenced so many bands, they're every bit as important as the Beatles.

    What I think you might be confused about is the comment I have made about the Stones and their more recent endeavors. As time progressed, the Stones become more and more redundant. These guys just keep milking it for everything they can get out of it. Personally, I think they should have hung it up 25 years ago. Now, it's less about the music and more about their legacy. They've become nothing more than corporate rock sellouts. I'd have a lot more respect for them than I do now if they had just retired gracefully, instead of churning out the same predictable garbage that has been polluting their catalogue since the late 70's.
     
  12. dhs

    dhs Senior Member

    a white guy interpreting a black guy doesn't make you original. If I recited every verse to Eddie Murphy's 'Raw' (I'm white) does that make me original?
     
  13. *rolls eyes*

    The way they made it into their own SOUND is what I would classify as orginal.
    BTW, I cant be bothered arguing.
     
  14. Pressed_Rat

    Pressed_Rat Do you even lift, bruh?

    Right! And I said they were original, did I not?
     
  15. dhs

    dhs Senior Member

    The key word in this thread is 'Form'. I will not deprive the Stones of their originality - there are plenty of original artists out there emerging all the time - but are they creating a new form. The Stones were definitely original artists and I am not arguing that, but as far as form is concerned? Sorry this is pigeonholing - making a new category in a record store - that is what I am getting at.
     
  16. WayfaringStranger

    WayfaringStranger Corporate Slave #34

    i dunno bluegrass and reggae are definately new music genres. all blues is is modified/ simplified jazz. all rock n roll is is blues, all jazz is is modified classical. new music comes from old music.
     
  17. dhs

    dhs Senior Member

    Bluegrass and Reggae new genres? I know Marley and Old in the Way existed before I exited the womb.
     
  18. WayfaringStranger

    WayfaringStranger Corporate Slave #34

    although marley did have a hand in the creation of reggae, he wasnt the first. now jerry was a bluegrass picker before the Warlocks, but Grisman isnt a good example of a bluegrasser. rock-n-roll, bluegrass and reggea all came out of about the same time period, and are the newest forms of music. maybe with the exception of hip hop techno and punk, if you accept them as forms of music.
     
  19. nightwanderer

    nightwanderer Member

    My point, was your point. you were talking about a new form of music, not whether bands are original or not.
     
  20. dhs

    dhs Senior Member

    I certainly accept them as new forms of music. This is outta my charecter but it is a generalization thread. I know Marley wasn't the originator of regae, nor was Jerry or David the originators of Bluegrass. Personally I would consider 'Hip Hop' or 'Rap' to be the most recent industry categorized forms of music. My question is whether or not its done. Will there be some new category and yes all categories derive from historical influences, but I honestly don't think there has been a new 'form' in the last 15 years. Not that I want one though - there has been so much music created that I'm sure I'll be amazed for a lifetime with what is new to me - I just am curious as to whether someone thinks a new 'form' will arise. Now the term 'form' is quite generic, but when you think about it, 'form' really relates to something that is culturally significant. Jam bands have been significant enough to spurn their own culture as has hip hop, punk, rock, heavy metal - you name it.
     

Share This Page


  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice