Girl Talk and Temple of the Dog

2

Comments

  • Jeremy1012
    Jeremy1012 Posts: 7,170
    catch22 wrote:
    i didnt say it wasn't fun. i'm saying it's a long way from genius. and the album does sound good on the preview, and im not saying the doesn't have talent, he does. but he isn't a musician. playing on a computer does not make a musician. you have to play a musical instrument to be a musician. he's not doing that on here. he's not even writing any music or lyrics. he's taking other people's work and pasting it together. and it does take a certain kind of talent, but it's the aesthetic talent of, say, an interior designer as opposed to the craftsman's talent of the man who built the furniture.

    i just don't see anything in this that could be labelled genius. beethoven was a genius. einstein was a genius. pearl jam is not, and neither is this guy. that word is thrown around so much it has no meaning. he's good at what he does, and what he does is fun and interesting. but there is nothing ground-breaking in this. people have been doing this for years and he just seems to be better than most of them at it.

    if kid rock asking producers to make something does not make him a producer, how does this guy NOT playing any musical instruments or writing any music of his own make him a musician? answer me that.
    Evidently you did not read my earlier post advising that those who dispute the validity of sampling as a musical talent should watch some videos of legendary hip-hop producer Pete Rock sampling in real time on his samplers. Tell me, what happens when a guitarist plays a note? He plucks a string and then sounds come out. He's not actually creating noise, the string is. Sure, a lot of aspects of his particular style will affect the sound and tone of the note but ultimately, he plucks a string and a note resonates. How is that any different from painstakingly crafting a tune from other tunes, loading them onto a sampler, which is in essence an instrument, and then triggering those sounds with a selection of pads in order to build up a collage of sounds?

    I'm a guitarist. I can tell you something, I reckon it's a shitload easier to play guitar than become a GOOD producer who uses samples. You can tell the hacks easily. Like I said earlier, Puff Daddy is a hack, he just literally loops other peoples songs. To an extent, Kanye West is a hack. Getting Boogie Down Productions, Faith No More, Queen (!), The Police, Argent, The Wu-Tang Clan and TERENCE TRENT-DARBY into ONE song and making it work is an example of musical talent. Not the equivalent of interior design.

    Tell me, do you think Woody Guthrie, Leadbelly, Robert Johnson etc weren't artists? Because they plagiarised liberally from their predecessors and, certainly in the case of Guthrie and to a lesser extent, Leadbelly, they were hardly virtuoso musicians. They were ok guitarists playing other people's songs and sometimes changing bits here and there to make them original. Making the songs their own is what mattered.

    A sampler is an instrument and it takes mastery to use well and make convincing records. It's the 21st century people, you don't need to play a string or a reed to be a musician.
    "I remember one night at Muzdalifa with nothing but the sky overhead, I lay awake amid sleeping Muslim brothers and I learned that pilgrims from every land — every colour, and class, and rank; high officials and the beggar alike — all snored in the same language"
  • mole1985
    mole1985 Posts: 1,119
    If you have to use other people's music to get noticed then why bother? He's got a talent maybe but i would never consider him an 'artist'. He is no different then Kid Rock. There is nothing wrong with using a sample here and there, Jurrasic 5 have done it but tastefully and incorporated it with their own music.

    Unfortunatly this is becoming more and more common in today's music just rip offs and covers. Come to think of it the film industry is the same.
    Dublin 2006
    Katowice 2007
    London 2007
  • carolinabeerguy
    carolinabeerguy Kernersville, NC Posts: 2,517
    Seems Led Zeppelin did pretty well ripping off other artists...

    Just finished listening to the first Girl Talk album Secret Diary and I must say it's pretty unlistenable. He's definitely progressed and gotten much better since 2002.
    I wish I was as fortunate, as fortunate as me.
  • catch22
    catch22 Posts: 1,081
    Jeremy1012 wrote:
    Evidently you did not read my earlier post advising that those who dispute the validity of sampling as a musical talent should watch some videos of legendary hip-hop producer Pete Rock sampling in real time on his samplers. Tell me, what happens when a guitarist plays a note? He plucks a string and then sounds come out. He's not actually creating noise, the string is. Sure, a lot of aspects of his particular style will affect the sound and tone of the note but ultimately, he plucks a string and a note resonates. How is that any different from painstakingly crafting a tune from other tunes, loading them onto a sampler, which is in essence an instrument, and then triggering those sounds with a selection of pads in order to build up a collage of sounds?

    I'm a guitarist. I can tell you something, I reckon it's a shitload easier to play guitar than become a GOOD producer who uses samples. You can tell the hacks easily. Like I said earlier, Puff Daddy is a hack, he just literally loops other peoples songs. To an extent, Kanye West is a hack. Getting Boogie Down Productions, Faith No More, Queen (!), The Police, Argent, The Wu-Tang Clan and TERENCE TRENT-DARBY into ONE song and making it work is an example of musical talent. Not the equivalent of interior design.

    Tell me, do you think Woody Guthrie, Leadbelly, Robert Johnson etc weren't artists? Because they plagiarised liberally from their predecessors and, certainly in the case of Guthrie and to a lesser extent, Leadbelly, they were hardly virtuoso musicians. They were ok guitarists playing other people's songs and sometimes changing bits here and there to make them original. Making the songs their own is what mattered.

    A sampler is an instrument and it takes mastery to use well and make convincing records. It's the 21st century people, you don't need to play a string or a reed to be a musician.

    fair enough. i have trouble accepting sampling as an instrument. i still think the interior design analogy applies. loading other people's songs onto your computer and playing with them is different even from the examples you gave. guthrie, etc, were still able to create that music on their own with their own playing. they didn't rely on a computer to capture note-perfect copies of someone else's music. they played it with their own hands and injected their soul into it, which is what made the song theirs instead of the original person's. there's no soul in a computer recording. i feel like there is nothing individual in this music. it's like eddie van halen's guitar playing, technically impressive, but there is no soul, nothing personal from the artist in it.

    kanye may be a hack producer, but his lyrics are personal and funny and they combine with the way he uses the music to produce a personal statement. daft punk only plays on computers, but they build their songs from the ground up.

    this guy does not. the way he splices things together is impressive and undoubtedly takes talent. but it is all technical prowess, with no personal statement, no soul. not in the lyrics, the beats, or anything. it is ALL note-for-note built by other people. he just put it together, like a good compilation... a friend making a really complicated mix tape or a power hour cd.

    i see where you're coming from and you may be right. i just don't buy it. to me, an artist has to have something personal on the line.
    and like that... he's gone.
  • Jeremy1012
    Jeremy1012 Posts: 7,170
    mole1985 wrote:
    If you have to use other people's music to get noticed then why bother? He's got a talent maybe but i would never consider him an 'artist'. He is no different then Kid Rock. There is nothing wrong with using a sample here and there, Jurrasic 5 have done it but tastefully and incorporated it with their own music.

    Unfortunatly this is becoming more and more common in today's music just rip offs and covers. Come to think of it the film industry is the same.
    ...
    "I remember one night at Muzdalifa with nothing but the sky overhead, I lay awake amid sleeping Muslim brothers and I learned that pilgrims from every land — every colour, and class, and rank; high officials and the beggar alike — all snored in the same language"
  • MonsterOfTheMidway
    MonsterOfTheMidway Posts: 416
    Art is Art. Girl Talk is art. It take a good amount of skill to mix like he does.


    He is taking these songs and changing them, manipulating them, and skewing them into something completely different. Sure it's not like a classical composition, but he definitely makes them his own and it's very unique.


    Plus I saw him at Lolla and he was awesome and fun as hell


    If you don't like it, don't listen to it, but don't for the love of god tell me Kid Rock is more of musician than him. A musician is an artist and art is an expression. Kid Rock expresses himself through bullshit rock-country-rap stuff that hasn't been popular since 1997 while Girl Talk expresses himself through extremely clever and thoughtout mashups.


    And you're saying that Eddie Van Halen's guitar playing has no soul? Yeah, your opinion is now void.
    16

    Lil Wayne is better than Pearl Jam.

    Bitches ain't nothin' but hoes 'n tricks
  • catch22
    catch22 Posts: 1,081
    MonsterOfTheMidway wrote:
    expresses himself through bullshit rock-country-rap stuff that hasn't been popular since 1997 while Girl Talk expresses himself through extremely clever and thoughtout mashups.


    And you're saying that Eddie Van Halen's guitar playing has no soul? Yeah, your opinion is now void.

    i see, so because you don't like it, it's not art? and if it's not popular and "hip" at the moment, then it's not art?

    so if kid rock put down his guitar and started doing this stuff, he would become an artist because now he's playing music that you like and he is cool enough for you and your pitchfork friends to admit to liking?

    ps. never said what the guy was doing wasn't art. i said he's not a musician, and that taking other people's music and making it into a mix tape, however much talent and thought goes into it, does not make him a musician.
    and like that... he's gone.
  • MonsterOfTheMidway
    MonsterOfTheMidway Posts: 416
    catch22 wrote:
    i see, so because you don't like it, it's not art? and if it's not popular and "hip" at the moment, then it's not art?

    so if kid rock put down his guitar and started doing this stuff, he would become an artist because now he's playing music that you like and he is cool enough for you and your pitchfork friends to admit to liking?

    ps. never said what the guy was doing wasn't art. i said he's not a musician, and that taking other people's music and making it into a mix tape, however much talent and thought goes into it, does not make him a musician.



    To be able to mix like he does and use stuff in the same key, time signature, and etc takes musical knowledge and ability.

    He is a musician. Just he utilizes electonic samples rather than standard instruments. So you're telling me that Vladimir Ussachevsky, Paul Lansky, Pauline Oliveros, and Laurie Anderson are not musicians?


    And I never said that what Kid Rock wasn't art. I just said his art is rock-country-rap stuff. Please re-read what I said.
    16

    Lil Wayne is better than Pearl Jam.

    Bitches ain't nothin' but hoes 'n tricks
  • Jeremy1012
    Jeremy1012 Posts: 7,170
    catch22 wrote:
    i see, so because you don't like it, it's not art? and if it's not popular and "hip" at the moment, then it's not art?

    so if kid rock put down his guitar and started doing this stuff, he would become an artist because now he's playing music that you like and he is cool enough for you and your pitchfork friends to admit to liking?

    ps. never said what the guy was doing wasn't art. i said he's not a musician, and that taking other people's music and making it into a mix tape, however much talent and thought goes into it, does not make him a musician.
    Do you disregard all electronic musicians as not musicians or just those who use other people's music? If it's the latter, PLEASE, since you've been sidestepping it for the whole thread, tell me why a sampler, or a laptop used as one, is not an instrument?
    "I remember one night at Muzdalifa with nothing but the sky overhead, I lay awake amid sleeping Muslim brothers and I learned that pilgrims from every land — every colour, and class, and rank; high officials and the beggar alike — all snored in the same language"
  • Brain Of E
    Brain Of E Posts: 499
    after listening to this a few times, i kinda don't like it. I mean the whole concept is pretty cool and i'm sure it took a lot of work/time/talent to put this together but in my opinion it moves to fast for me. It's kinda all over the place, going from thing to another. Maybe I don't know too much about DJ/sampling and stuff, maybe this is a masterpiece in that world, but it's not for me. good thing i only paid fifty cents.
    Down in the hole, Jesus tries to crack a smile beneath another shovel load.
  • catch22
    catch22 Posts: 1,081
    Jeremy1012 wrote:
    Do you disregard all electronic musicians as not musicians or just those who use other people's music? If it's the latter, PLEASE, since you've been sidestepping it for the whole thread, tell me why a sampler, or a laptop used as one, is not an instrument?

    chiefly those who exclusively use other people's music. they are not musicians, just artists. just like a novelist is not a musician and a sculptor is not a poet.

    these are not instruments, because instruments form songs. you play a note on a guitar, then another, and you build a song. or daft punk builds each beat and instrument note by note into a song. it's close enough because they are crafting an original song one note and tone and sound at a time. or kanye samples in between beats and add lyrics of his own to form his own song, an original artistic creation.

    this guy presses play on his computer, and somebody else's song begins playing, note for note. he did not create any of it, just lifted it wholesale from another artist. then he presses stop and plays another song. maybe there's some tinkering to get them to blend into each other. but that's like being the tracer (little chasing amy reference for you ;)). he does not produce any music of his own. daft punk does. kanye west does. he simply takes musical compositions of other people and edits them together. there is talent in that, and it sounds cool as hell. but he is not a musician because he does not make any contribution to the music, as daft punk and kanye west do, even when they use samplers and computers. he just takes music others have made and edits it together to sound cool.

    it's like saying the guy who makes commercials for a movie is the same as the director who controlled and created and filmed the movie itself.

    i'll distill briefly to clarify. a guitarist plucks a note. it makes a sound. daft punk, punches a key, it makes a sound. this guy does not do that. he presses a button and a song plays. there is no creation of a song by individual sound. he just plays a fully formed song. that is the distinction to me.
    and like that... he's gone.
  • MonsterOfTheMidway
    MonsterOfTheMidway Posts: 416
    catch22 wrote:
    chiefly those who exclusively use other people's music. they are not musicians, just artists. just like a novelist is not a musician and a sculptor is not a poet.

    these are not instruments, because instruments form songs. you play a note on a guitar, then another, and you build a song. or daft punk builds each beat and instrument note by note into a song. it's close enough because they are crafting an original song one note and tone and sound at a time. or kanye samples in between beats and add lyrics of his own to form his own song, an original artistic creation.

    this guy presses play on his computer, and somebody else's song begins playing, note for note. he did not create any of it, just lifted it wholesale from another artist. then he presses stop and plays another song. maybe there's some tinkering to get them to blend into each other. but that's like being the tracer (little chasing amy reference for you ;)). he does not produce any music of his own. daft punk does. kanye west does. he simply takes musical compositions of other people and edits them together. there is talent in that, and it sounds cool as hell. but he is not a musician because he does not make any contribution to the music, as daft punk and kanye west do, even when they use samplers and computers. he just takes music others have made and edits it together to sound cool.

    it's like saying the guy who makes commercials for a movie is the same as the director who controlled and created and filmed the movie itself.

    i'll distill briefly to clarify. a guitarist plucks a note. it makes a sound. daft punk, punches a key, it makes a sound. this guy does not do that. he presses a button and a song plays. there is no creation of a song by individual sound. he just plays a fully formed song. that is the distinction to me.


    OK THIS MAY BLOW YOUR MIND, BUT DAFT PUNK IS PRACTICALLY ALL SAMPLES!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJPdVVOmbz4

    Also, did you see what I said? You have to have musical knowledge to do this so change the pitch, key, time signature...it's not as easy as you make it out to be.

    And I like how you didn't even respond to my last reply.
    16

    Lil Wayne is better than Pearl Jam.

    Bitches ain't nothin' but hoes 'n tricks
  • Kilgore_Trout
    Kilgore_Trout Posts: 7,334
    jeez guys... didnt intend to start some music integrity battle... greg doesnt claim to have written any of this stuff by himself and its all in good fun... go see him live... im not gonna say hes an "artist" but he sure puts on a great show and its the best party soundtrack out there
    "Senza speme vivemo in disio"

    http://seanbriceart.com/
  • Songburst
    Songburst Posts: 1,195
    MonsterOfTheMidway wrote:
    Art is Art. Girl Talk is art. It take a good amount of skill to mix like he does.


    He is taking these songs and changing them, manipulating them, and skewing them into something completely different. Sure it's not like a classical composition, but he definitely makes them his own and it's very unique.


    Plus I saw him at Lolla and he was awesome and fun as hell


    If you don't like it, don't listen to it, but don't for the love of god tell me Kid Rock is more of musician than him. A musician is an artist and art is an expression. Kid Rock expresses himself through bullshit rock-country-rap stuff that hasn't been popular since 1997 while Girl Talk expresses himself through extremely clever and thoughtout mashups.


    And you're saying that Eddie Van Halen's guitar playing has no soul? Yeah, your opinion is now void.
    Lol -- I highly doubt that Girl Talk is expressing himself through his art. He found a way to make a lot of money in a short period of time because he understands that 99% of people really don't give a shit about music and that those 99% would eat up short clips of popular songs while they were drinking at a bar.

    It's a great way to make money. None of this shit has any staying power or is any kind of contribution to music in general and at the end of the day, he's rich and people are still stupid.
    1/12/1879, 4/8/1156, 2/6/1977, who gives a shit, ...
  • MonsterOfTheMidway
    MonsterOfTheMidway Posts: 416
    Songburst wrote:
    Lol -- I highly doubt that Girl Talk is expressing himself through his art. He found a way to make a lot of money in a short period of time because he understands that 99% of people really don't give a shit about music and that those 99% would eat up short clips of popular songs while they were drinking at a bar.

    It's a great way to make money. None of this shit has any staying power or is any kind of contribution to music in general and at the end of the day, he's rich and people are still stupid.



    LOL! Rich? What makes you think he is rich? Just because he is a musician doesn't mean he is rich. He released his newest album online with a pick how much you pay deal. He also has a degree in biomedical enginneering.


    And your whole argument is people are stupid? That's the dumbest thing I've read on the message board today.

    By expressing himself I'm just saying that he is a musician except he uses samples the same way EVERY DJ does and even DAFT PUNK does. Just because they don't compose the music doesn't mean they aren't musicians. They just utilize other peoples music and shape it to creat it their own. ZEPPELIN DID THE SAME THING WITH OLD BLUES SONGS. Almost every band has songs derivative from other artists.

    "Good artists borrow. Great artists steal."
    16

    Lil Wayne is better than Pearl Jam.

    Bitches ain't nothin' but hoes 'n tricks
  • Songburst
    Songburst Posts: 1,195
    MonsterOfTheMidway wrote:
    LOL! Rich? What makes you think he is rich? Just because he is a musician doesn't mean he is rich. He released his newest album online with a pick how much you pay deal. He also has a degree in biomedical enginneering.


    And your whole argument is people are stupid? That's the dumbest thing I've read on the message board today.

    By expressing himself I'm just saying that he is a musician except he uses samples the same way EVERY DJ does and even DAFT PUNK does. Just because they don't compose the music doesn't mean they aren't musicians. They just utilize other peoples music and shape it to creat it their own. ZEPPELIN DID THE SAME THING WITH OLD BLUES SONGS. Almost every band has songs derivative from other artists.

    "Good artists borrow. Great artists steal."
    Wow I have a degree in electrical engineering. Does that mean that I get instant respect if I cut and paste clips from Sweet Child of Mine with 2 Legit to Quit? That sounds like a good deal.

    These songs are meant to be bar songs. There's nothing wrong with that but don't try and say that the music comes from the same place as music from artists who write their own stuff. The guy is smart and he knows what the masses want and he feeds it to them on a catchy platter.
    1/12/1879, 4/8/1156, 2/6/1977, who gives a shit, ...
  • catch22
    catch22 Posts: 1,081
    MonsterOfTheMidway wrote:
    To be able to mix like he does and use stuff in the same key, time signature, and etc takes musical knowledge and ability.

    He is a musician. Just he utilizes electonic samples rather than standard instruments. So you're telling me that Vladimir Ussachevsky, Paul Lansky, Pauline Oliveros, and Laurie Anderson are not musicians?

    And I never said that what Kid Rock wasn't art. I just said his art is rock-country-rap stuff. Please re-read what I said.

    i don't know who any of those people are, so i can't say. i didn't know that about daft punk. they just fell into girl talk category for me then. only they at least get credit for using semi-obscure songs to build their tunes from. girl talk seems to have just bought the entire NOW cd collection and pasted them together to make music for drunk people at a party to go "oh i love this tune!" while they rock out to the chorus/hook and then go back to figuring out which girl gets their rufie tonight.

    and no, it doesnt. i can tell when a song makes a jarring transition in timing. does that make me a musician even though i can't play shit for instruments? he's it takes a certain artistic and aesthetic sensibility. but this makes him an artist, like i said. not a musician. just like playing with photoshop or clip-art on a computer does not make you a painter or photographer if you're just altering the work of others.
    and like that... he's gone.
  • MonsterOfTheMidway
    MonsterOfTheMidway Posts: 416
    catch22 wrote:
    i don't know who any of those people are, so i can't say. i didn't know that about daft punk. they just fell into girl talk category for me then. only they at least get credit for using semi-obscure songs to build their tunes from. girl talk seems to have just bought the entire NOW cd collection and pasted them together to make music for drunk people at a party to go "oh i love this tune!" while they rock out to the chorus/hook and then go back to figuring out which girl gets their rufie tonight.



    Great way to sterotype all Girl Talk fans.


    Bars music? Pearl Jam is far more bar music than Girl Talk. I'm positive I've seen more drunken asshole frat guys at a Pearl Jam show than a Girl Talk show.
    16

    Lil Wayne is better than Pearl Jam.

    Bitches ain't nothin' but hoes 'n tricks
  • catch22
    catch22 Posts: 1,081
    MonsterOfTheMidway wrote:
    Great way to sterotype all Girl Talk fans.

    Bars music? Pearl Jam is far more bar music than Girl Talk. I'm positive I've seen more drunken asshole frat guys at a Pearl Jam show than a Girl Talk show.

    im quite certain you're right. my bad. girl talk fans are not the drunk frat boy type. they're the wannabe hipster types who want to feel cool by listening to obscure bands but are actually suburban crackers who want nothing more than a good bon jovi tune. girl talk allows them to listen to the music they actually like by packaging it in a form that won't get them ridiculed by their hipster friends. they can hear their hit pop songs and not have to admit they like them because it's playing on a girl talk album instead of kelly clarkston's album.

    if i photoshop a van gogh painting on my computer, does that make me a painter like van gogh was? so why would 'photo-shopping' other people's music on a computer make one a musician? because people will pay to see me do it in real time?
    and like that... he's gone.
  • MonsterOfTheMidway
    MonsterOfTheMidway Posts: 416
    catch22 wrote:
    im quite certain you're right. i hope you've enjoyed meeting the kettle, mr pot. since i took such time to answer your post like you wanted and you refused to respond to any of my points.

    if i photoshop a van gogh painting on my computer, does that make me a painter like van gogh was? so why would 'photo-shopping' other people's music on a computer make one a musician?



    That is completely different.


    It all comes down to if you think a DJ is a musician. Sampling is a new form of creating music. Girl Talk creates new songs by taking pieces of other songs and splicing them together so that they form new pieces. Ever heard of a collage?

    Is this art: http://www.artasauthority.com/images/Joey%20Burns.jpg

    Or this: http://www.poprockart.com/images/glow.jpg

    What about this one: http://www.gregpalast.com/madhouseposter.jpg

    Collage is an art form just how today, DJ-ing is a form of musicianship. Sure it's not the classic way of a musicianship in terms of plugging in a guitar or bangning on a drum, but a form of electronic music. It's not as easy as just pressing play on iTunes. Like I said many times you have to change the pitch of songs(like Kanye does), or shift a time signature, or find songs in the same key. It's like The Beatles' Love album...that was done in a collage way...was that not music? Girl Talk does not have jarring transisitons in any of his songs and if he did then it would take away from what he is trying to do.

    So whatever. Obviously if you don't think DJs are musicians then my argument is moot. I guess it's up to the ear of the beholder.


    And what is the deal with sterotyping fans? Who gives a shit who listens? That's a red herring agrument.
    16

    Lil Wayne is better than Pearl Jam.

    Bitches ain't nothin' but hoes 'n tricks

Categories