Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Glice
I can't help but feel that it's a consequence of getting older to be able to hear precedents to most music. Especially if you listen to a lot of it. When I was younger, something like Radiohead or Placebo (or Prolapse, Urusei Yatsura, Arab Strap etc) were completely unprecendented to me. It depends on what you mean by innovative. Has anyone ever really sounded like Arab Strap? Early Slipknot, Korn, RATM records blew a lot of people's minds at the time. I could happily put forward an argument saying that Korn's influence was so massive that people forget now that simply no-one did that in metal before Korn. Personally, I like them now, but I didn't at the time. I wouldn't ever seriously say they were that innovative, but in terms of did they blow a lot of people's minds - yes, yes they did. They also had precedents. You get older, you hear these precedents more easily.
Playing to the audience a bit more - does anyone else do what Philip Jeck does? What about Ground Zero? Fushitususha? Were Franco's TPOK jazz epoch-defining or just a great band? Alvo Noto? Has anyone really ever done what Oum Kalsoum does? Or Jacques Brél? I think if you want to hear innovation in music you will, but if you don't, it's not really that important.
|
To an extent, that's true. But I would consider Radiohead an innovator for the way they got their music to become popular, and not so much for a solely musical reason. They did a very strange turn-around, and as a massively popular rock band, I think that's where the innovation comes in. It has to do with perception as much as music.
That said, even their transition is not unprecedented, but it did change things. The effect is perhaps what we look at, and not even so much what the band is actually doing.
And I don't mean to defend Radiohead too much here. I like them, but I'm not saying they're genius or anything.