In the wake of the NBA draft, and the Hawks doing all they can to destroy the franchise, let's compare and contrast the NBA's bad boy with one of my favorite musicians.
Way back in I don't remember, Ryan Adams was doing an unplugged concert in a small club. There was a drunk guy in the audience who kept screaming for him to play "Summer of 69". He thought this was funny because it's a Brian Adams song, and Brian sounds a lot like Ryan. Ryan got so mad that he eventually kicked the guy in the head and jumped off the stage and attacked him. A few years later, Ron Artest got into a fight during an NBA game, and when a drunk fan dumped a drink on him, Artest went into the stands and attacked the guy creating a media firestorm.
There is essentially only one real unbreakable rule for any musician/actor/athlete/performer: Don't attack the audience. Ever. Sounds easy right? These are the people who pay to see you perform, it's essentially career suicide to attack one of them. Yet both of these guys did the same thing, and really if you look into their respective industries, they were probably the guys most likely to commit such crimes.
Ryan Adams is the Ron Artest of singer-songwriters. They are both incredibly talented and incredibly infuriating individuals. Ryan Adams at times, seems bound and determined to wreck his career. After assaulting a concert-goer, Adams told a magazine the inspiration behind his album "Rock N Roll" was "I wanted to get drunk and stoned and play guitar with my band". In an interview with ESPN just last year, Ron Artest admitted that he used to drink Gin before NBA games, and even at halftime. Adams has a history of drug and alcohol abuse (the guy was in a band called Whiskeytown for God's sake!). He told Rolling Stone all about his love of speed balls, booze, cocaine and heroin, then got on his website and said that he was misrepresented and only did speedballs "a few times". (Hate to say it Ryan, but that still counts)
After "Rock N Roll" Adams began working on his follow up "Love is Hell", the label hated it. So Adams' left the label, formed his own, and released the record first as 2 EPs, then as 1 entire album (completely screwing over the people who paid for 2 seprate EPs). In 2005, he released 3 albums in 1 year.
Finally, he seemed to settle down some when he formed his backing band The Cardinals. He told AOL music that he no longer wanted to be "Ryan Adams and The Cardinals" he just wanted to be "The Cardinals". The band helped Ryan put out 4 really strong albums. (If you haven't noticed by now, Ryan could probably put out a new album every week). Between that and his marriage to Mandy Moore (one of the all-time weird marriages) it appeared as though he had settled down. Ryan Adams had found his Lakers, a team willing to put up with his antics and bring out the best in him. Less than a year after the AOL interview, Adams left the band and just finished heavy metal sci-fi concept record that he is only releasing through his website on vinyl. (No, I did not make that up.) These are the highlights of the career of a madman.
Adams carries that same cavalier attitude that Ron Artest brings to the hardwood. He has an air of "I don't care what you think about me" mixed with an attitude of "I don't care what happens to me". He's as likely to be arrested for a DUI as he is to win a grammy (or an NBA title). By the way, the guy writing this, owns 5 Ryan Adams albums. He's as good a songwritter as there is. The music is as undeniably good as Artest's defense on the court. They are so unpredictable, they've entered that weird realm where nothing seems impossible. Admit it, if Ron Artest became the leader of cult and Ryan Adams became an arsonist, you wouldn't really be that shocked. They both have their faults in their prospective areas of expertise: Ryan Adams can write a clunker of a song like no other, and Ron Artest can't shoot a 3 to save his life. But as crazy and infuriating as these two can be, their both really good at what they do, but wildly unpredictable and possibly self destructive. That's not always the best combination, but it sure makes for an interesting story.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Random Thoughts
As you can probably tell, I'm a guy with a lot of opinions and thoughts. Some of those opinions and thoughts are long and detailed and require lots of fleshing out in long and rambling blogs. Some are passing observations that are barely long enough to be considered a text message. As such, I have decided to occassionally throw in a Random Thoughts blog, wherein I will string together lots of little thoughts and save myself from having to sit down and really think about things. It's like a twitter page for a guy who's scared to death of twitter. So, without further ado, here we go:
That's all for now. Thanks for reading!
- It's taken awhile but I really like that Broken Bells song "The High Road". It's a cool combination of techno style mash-up melody and folk song. Kind of makes me want to check out more of their stuff.
- Matthew Sweet's "Girlfriend" is just a great song. It's ridiculously catchy and endlessly enjoyable.
- Even though it drives me nuts to hear their songs played over and over and over again until I hear them in my dreams; the Black Eyed Peas are probably the most popular hit-making group of the last 5-10 years. Ever since "Let's Get it Started" they really haven't missed. That's an impressive feat when you consider that pop music has become more and more dependent on one hit wonders.
- Snow Patrol is a band that has gotten progressively worse with every single they release. "Final Straw" was a really good album and "Hands Open" was pretty good but not as good. Ever since then they have gone down hill rapidly. "Just say yes" represents a new low.
- I had a moment in the car the other day when there were only 2 songs on the radio and I had to choose between Taylor Swift and Nine Inch Nails. I chose Taylor Swift (and yes, I know I just announced that to the entire internet). I'm perfectly willing to give up a man card for that. It's a good thing 15 year old me didn't live to see this day.
- Maybe it's just me, but the new U2 album seems to be imitating Coldplay's Viva la Vida. If so, then this may be the first ever case of the old band imitating the new band who got famous from imitating the old band.
- I know as an indie rock fan, I'm supposed to love Jack White's new band The Dead Weather. But I'm just not into it. I get the whole dark-eerie-blues-rock thing, their songs just don't seem that good.
- Only The Avett Brothers could write a song called "Die die die" that you wouldn't mind if your children were listening to.
- If I was in a 1940s blues bar in the Mississippi delta and the Black Keys were playing. The only thing that would seem out of place is that the band is made up of 2 white dude from Ohio. Their music is perfect for that specific setting
That's all for now. Thanks for reading!
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
Why I Hate KISS and You Should Too!
As KISS prepared to release their live album "Alive", they noticed something troubling: they didn't sound very good live, in fact, they were pretty bad. On the album, you couldn't see their out of this world show, you could only hear the music, and the music wasn't very good. It was really just a poor performance. So much so that the band went into the studio and re-recorded parts of the album. No other band in history has ever doctored a live record (or at least admitted to it). A live show is the truest representation of a band's skill. It's the litmus test, and KISS did not pass it. And that, in a nutshell is my problem with KISS.
Strip away the pomp and circumstance, the facepaint and the fireworks and there's nothing really there. They are the perfect example of style over substance. That "substance" is the music, the thing that's supposed to be the most important aspect of a band. Even their biggest hit "Rock N' Roll All Night", is just what it says, a bland song about wanting to Rock N Roll all night, and party every day. It doesn't get any deeper than party songs with KISS, and their party songs aren't that good. There's no monster guitar riff, no big solo, nothing musically interesting. Just bland music about partying and how cool it is. (By the way, if you can name another KISS song, I'll be impressed. They are really just a 1 hit wonder. Oh, and if you try to say "Dr. Love" you have to be able to prove to me that you knew that song before the Dr. Pepper commercial)
Now, there's nothing wrong with party music. Jazz, is mostly party music, but jazz is interesting. It takes talent to play jazz, a lot of talent actually. But when you listen to KISS, there's nothing interesting or different about the music. It's really bland rock music. It doesn't stand out in any way. The guitar work is average, the hooks are decent at best, and there's nothing innovative or interesting about it. Sure they look weird, and a lot of stuff blows up when they're on stage, and their light shows are the stuff of legends, but there's nothing to the music. The music HAS to be the most important part of any great band. There's nothing wrong with style, style is good, Van Halen has style for days, but they have the music to back it up. Showmanship and being able to own a stage are great qualities, but they don't make a band. The music does.
Now, there are tons of marginally talented bands out there, so how has KISS managed to elevate themselves to the status of "Rock Gods"? Because they have marketed themselves that way. They act the part: they drive big cars, live the lifestyle and put on the biggest concert show you've ever seen, all in an attempt to hide the fact that they just aren't that good. If I were to ask you what is the one thing that KISS does as well or better than any other band, if you really thought about it you would answer: marketing. Seriously?? This is a rock band, and the thing that sets them apart from everyone else is marketing?! But you have to give them credit, their name, face and likeness is on more crap than any other band in history. They've made movies, cartoons, lunch boxes, action figures and just about everything else under the sun. Everything they do, from the facepaint to Gene Simmons' tongue is done so that you will remember them. And again, that's not necessarily a bad thing, but when there's no music to back it up, now you've got a problem. Heck, their most "artistic" achievement is making a music video without the facepaint! That's it.
And it's because they're so memorable, because they put on such a show, that KISS has earned most of their notoriety. Watch or read any list of 100 greatest and KISS will without a doubt have snuck their way onto the list. It's egregious! It's like putting Dontrel Willis on a list of the greatest pitchers of all time because he has that super high leg kick. Or choosing Pepsi ahead of Coke because the label is cooler. At the end of the day, its what's inside that matters, and with KISS, there's nothing inside.
That's thing I can't stand about this band: style trumps talent. Its the thought that if there are enough bright lights and explosions, I'll forget that the music sucks. It's why I change the station every time their song comes on, why I almost throw things at the TV when VH1 puts them in a 100 Greatest category. There is no substance, no talent, no originality or skill, just a couple of hacks in Halloween makeup who missed their calling to become marketing majors. Or, more simply, they are everything that Rock and Roll SHOULDN'T be.
Strip away the pomp and circumstance, the facepaint and the fireworks and there's nothing really there. They are the perfect example of style over substance. That "substance" is the music, the thing that's supposed to be the most important aspect of a band. Even their biggest hit "Rock N' Roll All Night", is just what it says, a bland song about wanting to Rock N Roll all night, and party every day. It doesn't get any deeper than party songs with KISS, and their party songs aren't that good. There's no monster guitar riff, no big solo, nothing musically interesting. Just bland music about partying and how cool it is. (By the way, if you can name another KISS song, I'll be impressed. They are really just a 1 hit wonder. Oh, and if you try to say "Dr. Love" you have to be able to prove to me that you knew that song before the Dr. Pepper commercial)
Now, there's nothing wrong with party music. Jazz, is mostly party music, but jazz is interesting. It takes talent to play jazz, a lot of talent actually. But when you listen to KISS, there's nothing interesting or different about the music. It's really bland rock music. It doesn't stand out in any way. The guitar work is average, the hooks are decent at best, and there's nothing innovative or interesting about it. Sure they look weird, and a lot of stuff blows up when they're on stage, and their light shows are the stuff of legends, but there's nothing to the music. The music HAS to be the most important part of any great band. There's nothing wrong with style, style is good, Van Halen has style for days, but they have the music to back it up. Showmanship and being able to own a stage are great qualities, but they don't make a band. The music does.
Now, there are tons of marginally talented bands out there, so how has KISS managed to elevate themselves to the status of "Rock Gods"? Because they have marketed themselves that way. They act the part: they drive big cars, live the lifestyle and put on the biggest concert show you've ever seen, all in an attempt to hide the fact that they just aren't that good. If I were to ask you what is the one thing that KISS does as well or better than any other band, if you really thought about it you would answer: marketing. Seriously?? This is a rock band, and the thing that sets them apart from everyone else is marketing?! But you have to give them credit, their name, face and likeness is on more crap than any other band in history. They've made movies, cartoons, lunch boxes, action figures and just about everything else under the sun. Everything they do, from the facepaint to Gene Simmons' tongue is done so that you will remember them. And again, that's not necessarily a bad thing, but when there's no music to back it up, now you've got a problem. Heck, their most "artistic" achievement is making a music video without the facepaint! That's it.
And it's because they're so memorable, because they put on such a show, that KISS has earned most of their notoriety. Watch or read any list of 100 greatest and KISS will without a doubt have snuck their way onto the list. It's egregious! It's like putting Dontrel Willis on a list of the greatest pitchers of all time because he has that super high leg kick. Or choosing Pepsi ahead of Coke because the label is cooler. At the end of the day, its what's inside that matters, and with KISS, there's nothing inside.
That's thing I can't stand about this band: style trumps talent. Its the thought that if there are enough bright lights and explosions, I'll forget that the music sucks. It's why I change the station every time their song comes on, why I almost throw things at the TV when VH1 puts them in a 100 Greatest category. There is no substance, no talent, no originality or skill, just a couple of hacks in Halloween makeup who missed their calling to become marketing majors. Or, more simply, they are everything that Rock and Roll SHOULDN'T be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)