shitting on their own legend

maxi

maxi

Well-known member
luka said:
this is what i mean he gets a free pass whereas nas' past is used as a stick to beat him with, again, i know why but also slightly unfair
Click to expand...
snoop is more charismatic and has more fun-sounding music, which is part of it. he also stuck to the g-funk sound for a while whereas nas immediately started picking beats that everyone hated.

also to be fair snoop made a fair amount of good stuff for the rest of the 90s and there was chronic 2001 and some good neptunes beats at their peak. it didn't really go off the rails until he became a huge celeb later on.

 
maxi

maxi

Well-known member
actually it's the unfairness of the nas fans that probably kept nas making bad albums. he felt he had to make something momentous and people kept hoping the next one would be the one. which meant a lot of dull and self-important music with bad grandiose beats. and it also meant the fans actually listened to the albums carefully and kept saying 'yep this ones shit again.' whereas snoop had more freedom, less expectations and probably no one even listening to his actual music for the last 10 years or so
 
B

blissblogger

Well-known member
one of the things that got me thinking on this topic is that I remembered interviewing a guy who specialized in organising the reformation of bands and doing it in a classy way that burnished the legend

he used the Buzzcocks as his negative example of reformation - where the group just "runs the brand into the ground"

they did the original classic 3 albums + near-flawless run of a dozen singles or something like that (compiled - ace A-sides on one side, ace 'n' weird B-sides on the other - as Singles Going Steady). split, did unsuccessful offshoots and solo careers. and then when it became clear that this wasn't panning out, they reformed - did a bunch more albums in the classic Buzzcocks style but not as good, "classic" but not actually classic - toured and gigged endlessly, like a punk version of the Tremeloes or something

for this bloke, this was the exact opposite of how he thought an iconic group should curate its legacy

seemingly the Buzzcocks are carrying on even after Pete Shelley's death - i think they did some mega-concert at Albert Hall not so long ago

in the case for the defence - with Shelley still in them, they could do a terrific concert even as late 2012 (i caught them at a festival, never having seen them originally). but I can't imagine this vestigial version can be much cop

but again, i suppose, what are Diggle & Co supposed to do? they too have a stake in the legend, they don't want to sit on their arses, they like the affirmation
 
B

blissblogger

Well-known member
maxi said:
so what did he think was the right way to do it? total reinvention?
Click to expand...
he thought a reformation should be a finite project rather than an open-ended thing - oriented around a single tour or set of dates - a reissue and / or a 'first album in X number of decades' - an exhibition - some kind of focus for the endeavour, rather than "we can't think of any else to do and this is for the rest of our lives". the goal was some kind of neat closure to a career that seals the reputation and brings the music to a whole new younger audience, rather than an exercise in pure nostalgia / "guaranteed enjoyment night out for the oldsters getting to hear the golden oldies"

TG's reformation was something he'd instigated, and there were a few others of that ilk (Suicide maybe)

he also thought of it as therapy, the band as a quasi-family that was probably estranged and coming together would remind them why they'd liked each other or at least had been able to conjoin in something valuable
 
maxi

maxi

Well-known member
blissblogger said:
he thought a reformation should be a finite project rather than an open-ended thing - oriented around a single tour or set of dates - a reissue and / or a 'first album in X number of decades' - an exhibition - some kind of focus for the endeavour, rather than "we can't think of any else to do and this is for the rest of our lives". the goal was some kind of neat closure to a career that seals the reputation and brings the music to a whole new younger audience, rather than an exercise in pure nostalgia / "guaranteed enjoyment night out for the oldsters getting to hear the golden oldies"

TG's reformation was something he'd instigated, and there were a few others of that ilk (Suicide maybe)

he also thought of it as therapy, the band as a quasi-family that was probably estranged and coming together would remind them why they'd liked each other or at least had been able to conjoin in something valuable
Click to expand...
I suppose he would’ve approved of the way My Bloody Valentine did it then. and outside of music, Twin Peaks: the return comes to mind.

it helps that the material in both those reunions was actually good. and both had a good balance of nostalgic elements and something new/different. and both finite events (think that twin peaks series was even called “a limited event series”)

a tv version of the buzzcocks example might be arrested development. returns with something reminiscent but mediocre and then keeps going.

I'm not sure if there’s anyone in music as bad in this area as the simpsons though. At least in terms of the ratio of good to bad
 
Last edited:
B

blissblogger

Well-known member
maxi said:
I suppose he would’ve approved of the way My Bloody Valentine did it then. and outside of music, Twin Peaks: the return comes to mind.

it helps that the material in both those reunions was actually good. and both had a good balance of nostalgic elements and something new/different. and both finite events (think that twin peaks series was even called “a limited event series”)

a tv version of the buzzcocks example might be arrested development. returns with something reminiscent but mediocre and then keeps going.

I'm not sure if there’s anyone in music as bad in this area as the simpsons though. At least in terms of the ratio of good to bad
Click to expand...

that's very true about the Simpsons. it's hard to remember how much i loved it in its golden age.

actually in terms of duration, it's a bit like drum & bass - the golden age has now been temporally dwarfed by its not-golden-age by a factor of three or four or even five
 
subvert47

subvert47

I don't fight, I run away
john eden said:
Digital has just kept on quietly releasing workmanlike tunes that do the job and the occasional dubby extravaganza that I love.
Click to expand...

Quite so. He never dropped off much at all. Probably the only one from the old Metalheadz crew who didn't.

Though (IMO obviously) the only dnb producer who has maintained a consistently high level over nearly 30 years is DJ Trax.
 
Last edited:
shakahislop

shakahislop

Well-known member
more or less everyone isn't it. there's almost no-one who's been consistently great over a 30 year period. is there? one thing i like about how long-running the indie-rock thing is by this point is that some of them have been around for so long that they've entered second periods where they're actually good again (like nick cave for a bit).

the financial side of it really interests me. i totally understand why eg terror danjah at some point decided to go for the cash (i think i read an interview with him where he was pretty clear that that's what he was aiming at). if you think about it compared to normal life it's a weird career structure, where you're best and make most money in your 20s or whatever and then you can easily get stuck.

the one person i can think of who was absolutely brilliant and then disappeared from view before getting shit (without dying) is durrty goodz. i know he puts things out but all those releases feel super low key.
 
maxi

maxi

Well-known member
shakahislop said:
more or less everyone isn't it.
Click to expand...
I think it's a challenge to think of the really good examples. a lot of artists peter out with a couple weak albums but not that many just keep going forever making crap.

ghostface killah with all those comic book albums and collabs with live bands. it doesn't bother me though I just don't listen to any of it. im glad he's got a career
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top