Would You Rather Hear a Bad Song in a Style You Adore or a Good Song in a Style You Hate?

Or, High Llamas, C/D?

how is this even a question? i'd love to hear the best a genre i don't listen to has to offer, and generally speaking bad songs in genres you love usually generate the most passionately negative reactions.

Really? Then how is anyone a Ladytron fan...

Uhhh... because they don't think that Ladytron write bad songs?

This is a ridiculous question. Totally agree that bad songs in styles you adore will just make you much more riled than bad songs in styles you don't like, because you already know you won't like the latter, and nobody is likely to associate your taste with that song.

i don't know, most days i'd rather hear a bad new orleans band or hip-hop track than some really well-performed opera (not that i always hate opera or anything, but i'm usually not in the mood)

bad songs say so much

I think it is a very good question... I don't know, if I really hate a style then I probably wouldn't like ANY song in that style. I'm trying to think, for example, about the Lost Fingers cover versions of some of the songs that I like (Tainted Love or Billie Jean). Are these good songs in a style I hate? No, they are no longer good songs because IMO there aren't any universally good songs. They've become bad songs (songs I don't like).

The context changes if we are referring to songs in a style you hate, but considered good by people who usually like that style vs. songs in a style that you like but that you consider bad. If I, myself think one song is better than another one, then I prefer to listen to the good song, regardless of the style, no?

There are two styles of music: Good music and bad music. Now, what was the question again?

yeah, i don't think we need any more shitty new wave songs reinvented as rap songs this year

Free Bird/Baby I Love Your Way - Will to Power

which category does this one belong in?

I'm not sure which one is supposed to refer to the high llamas

the former, most likely

probably, but imo the latter makes more sense. (but I like them.)

There is no such thing as a good song in a style I hate. There may be a handful of bad songs in styles I love though, and I am not sure if I prefer them to much at all.

It's terminology, right?

If you like *any* song, you can't hate the genre, right?

Geir Hongro — Famous Lover of Tejano.

Is that where he lives?

Hearing a good song in a genre I hate is, like, the best thing about being a music obsessive. 'Cause it signals the breaching of another wall in my listening habits. Lord how I wait for those moments. They seem to occur about every two years. Someday I hope to enjoy Latin pop!

Would You Rather Hear a Bad Question in a Style You Adore or a Good Question in a Style You Hate?

are you insane?? of course everyone with an open mind wants to hear a good song no matter what the style is.

See, I disagree. Maybe we want to, but that's not how it works. I think most of us would LIKE to believe we'd listen to a good song over a bad song regardless of style. But—and I say this as someone who harps on crappy songwriting today—I think the reality is that style has become a much bigger reason why even the most sophisticated listeners listen to the music they do.

There's nothing the High Llamas ever did that was a speck on what the Beach Boys did during Pet Sounds or Smile. But if you like the sound of those records—and I surely do—you'll be more inclined to overlook the fact that most of the songs are meaningless crap.

And the High Llamas are really just the most extreme example. With the proliferation of cheap music production tools—softsynths, Reason, etc.—you've got countless bands now that can appropriate a very, very specific sound and make a pretty listenable record (or, in the case of M83, several records) that tread almost entirely on vibe.

There's nothing wrong with that, but it's how a lot of people listen to records nowadays and, thus, the reason there are so many "If you liked that band/genre, you'll love THIS band" records today.

There's nothing the High Llamas ever did that was a speck on what the Beach Boys did during Pet Sounds or Smile. But if you like the sound of those records—and I surely do—you'll be more inclined to overlook the fact that most of the songs are meaningless crap.

as opposed to the intellectual depth behind Smile?

(by that I mean - Smile is highly stylized 'meaningless crap' as much as anything)

Assuming we're talking about the song itself (as opposed to a particular performance of a song), most of the time I'll go for the bad song in the adored style. It's the difference between visceral enjoyment and clinical admiration. Like, there's a whole world of classic C&W songs that I'll probably never discover because I'm so resistant to the form itself. My loss, but that's just the way it is. Hey, i hate onions too (unless they're in chili or turkey dressing.)

The sensible choice would be Good Song in a Style I Hate, yet I'm a big High Llamas fan, so maybe I don't know myself too well.

Or maybe the Llamas are better than you're giving them credit for. FWIW, yes they've done some songs that blatantly reference Beach Boys, but I hardly think the High Llamas style can reasonably be reduced to Beach Boys sound-alike.

And the High Llamas are really just the most extreme example. With the proliferation of cheap music production tools—softsynths, Reason, etc.—you've got countless bands now that can appropriate a very, very specific sound and make a pretty listenable record (or, in the case of M83, several records) that tread almost entirely on vibe.

This here is confusing me the most. You make it sound as if there's some amazing software out there, where you just click on "appropriate" and it will dish out a tune in your preferred genre. Is this really how M83 or High Llamas make music? Did I miss something?

Also, I think it is weird that you are picking on groups that make music that could be considered mostly "atmospheric". Yes, they make music that sounds, in a fairly superficial way like music from the past, but I don't think these groups have the same goals as some of the bands from the past. These newer groups are much more concerned with sound texture and less with songwriting.

Does this mean their songs are bad? No, they just aren't "songwriterly", nor are they trying to be.

don't much want to get involved in this clusterfuck but must rep for sean o'hagan as both an exceptionally talented arranger (yes, no reason button that pops out tasteful marimba arrangements) and generally underrated songwriter.

I should code a "tasteful marimba arrangement" plugin for Reason

Wasn't Tasteful Marimba Arrangement the name of a Stereolab spin-off band?

Ooops, I'm thinking of Imitation Electric Piano...

Isn't this kind of a self-correcting phenomenon in that hearing enough bad songs in the style you like will eventually cause you to hate that style?
(heard enough non-weird al caliber weird al type songs to sour me on parody music for a while, but the 'we are pork products' kraftwerk parody brought me back!)

parody music isn't a style though, it's the act of doing music in a style

there are certain stylistic tropes in parody music -- use of kazoos, sound effects, "boi-yoing" sounds, etc... grunting... hand farts...

hahaha

Smile is highly stylized 'meaningless crap' as much as anything

I think Van Dyke Parks might disagree with you there. I would, too.

You make it sound as if there's some amazing software out there, where you just click on "appropriate" and it will dish out a tune in your preferred genre. Is this really how M83 or High Llamas make music?

No -- esp. not High Llamas who didn't have that gear when they started out. But you can't underestimate how easy it is nowadays to very, VERY quickly throw together an arrangement that sounds like a carbon copy of your favorite Human League or New Order track. And while there is no "tasteful marimba arrangement" preset in Reason...you could make one. Seriously!

Listen, that's not to say that everyone making this music is talentless. But—and I say this as someone who uses Reason and rips off his idols—it doesn't require the same craftsmanship or effort to put together a sophisticated production that it used to. That's just a fact.

Also, I think it is weird that you are picking on groups that make music that could be considered mostly "atmospheric". Yes, they make music that sounds, in a fairly superficial way like music from the past, but I don't think these groups have the same goals as some of the bands from the past. These newer groups are much more concerned with sound texture and less with songwriting.

So, you think if any of these bands could write a "Love Action" or a "Perfect Kiss" they wouldn't? I don't think I agree with that. I think a lot of folks wish they could...but can't.

Regardless, I think it's more of a cause/effect thing, and I think a lot of people listen to music for familiarity and comfort than they'd care to admit.

"I think a lot of people listen to music for familiarity and comfort than they'd care to admit."

You say that as though you think it's a bad thing.

So, you think if any of these bands could write a "Love Action" or a "Perfect Kiss" they wouldn't? I don't think I agree with that. I think a lot of folks wish they could...but can't.

Maybe they can't, who knows? Is that the goal? Are we supposed to judge musicians solely on their ability to write pop hits?

I suspect most people that play in bands wish on some level to be famous rock stars, and most end up failing spectacularly. That alone doesn't make the results any less interesting or valid.

I think you're all confusing 'bad' with 'not quite as amazing as classic record x, which it sounds a bit like or is possibly influenced by'.

i'm just happy to see Reason getting the DAW "digital magic" strawman nod over Protools for once. and of course it (and every other DAW) can do marimbas (and anything else), texturally, and I guess probably to the point of generating the right intervals via a harmonizer or just midi.

I think this whole fandango might be more interesting in terms of "vertical vs. horizontal" listening or something like that, or maybe applied to Ween instead

I think you're all confusing 'bad' with 'not quite as amazing as classic record x, which it sounds a bit like or is possibly influenced by'.

not all of us