Yonge Street Revitalization (Downtown Yonge BIA/City of Toronto)

[freshcutgrass]

It's funny how 1977 creeps into the present as well. Take this year's Grammies for Record of the year/Album of the year. Daft Punk's Random Access Memories is really just Nile Rodgers and Giorgio Moroder...both straight out of the 1977 list, which was a seminal year for electronic/house/techno music (special nod obviously to Kraftwerk who's on the list as well).

 

[Lenser]

But you're just pointing to how the list is simply a list... it's extremely random. You want to present it as an impressive sampler of the breadth and depth of musical roster of that period, but for me it simply opens up more questions than ever. I mean, there's no logic to having named Air Supply but not Donnie Osmond, considering all the albums sold. And as you point out, you left out Kraftwerk.... which, to me, is a grave error (insert winkie here).

But reducing Daft Punk to being some kind of cheap repackaging of Nile Rodgers and Giorgio Morodor... do you really want to go down that road? All music has its antecedents in earlier music. All the stuff you loved back in the day didn't just magically spring into being - it referenced stuff that came before it. This is where plain old fogyism comes into play - the conceit that the hot stuff you listened to in 1977 was utterly original and therefore had more innate meaning and worth than music you hear now, in 2014. Why won't you acknowledge that reality for today's music? You don't think Daft Punk is original?

Doubtless the game has changed in certain key ways. The way music is marketed and how it spreads out is totally different. The fracturing of the musical world into dozens, hundreds of different streams helps make things like top 40 lists increasingly meaningless. YouTube itself has been bypassing the old-school channels for years now - the very pathways to commcercial success have changed.

You want quality? Don't just go for what wins those windbag televised music awards. That's a celebration of MOR pablum and the lowest common denominator... it's the big labels and players congratulating themselves and the cult of celebrity's machinery in full gear - such narcissistic spectacles needn't be confused with music that matters.

 

[MisterF]

I think the challenge was to pick one single year, as Fresh did. I don't know, I guess I'm just not understanding how a list isn't empirical? It speaks for itself, it's not about personal taste at all. You compare the lists and can start to have a real conversation rather than just dismissing people as sappy old nostalgics.

Nope, the challenge was to compare one single year with the entire period post-2000. And freshcutgrass has defended that claim vigorously, resorting to calling people ignorant if they question it.

On the contrary, discussing places like Sam the Record Man, the Gasworks or El MO or so many many more is to allude to the wider cultural movements that gathered and interacted there (music, fashion, political ideology, cultural identity, sexuality), the cultural 'forests' so to speak. These places aren't closing and being replaced by newer venues that have the same cultural impact, they're closing for the very reasons that the music industry is limping: iTunes... so if tapas restaurants are the new cultural hotspots it's because a smart phone can't serve up a hot meal (yet):

By the forest I mean the vibrancy of the city as a whole, of which music is one small part. You're talking about larger cultural trends that are affecting the entire western world. If those trends have made Toronto less vibrant, then there's not a city in the world that is more vibrant than it was 30 years ago. Which is, of course, ridiculous. A city's vibrancy comes from people going out, in public, patronizing businesses and doing stuff. There's much, much more of that now than there was then. Tapas bars are just as valid as record stores.

Yes, the city is bigger, busier and glossier today, no question. This absolutely does read as vibrant and urbanely vital, but according to a very specific and modern definition only and one that is largely consumerist. The point is not that Toronto today isn't vibrant, only that Toronto in the past was too but for different reasons and for arguably better and more meaningful reasons.

You guys keep bringing up consumerism. Is buying records not innately consumerist? Are tapas bars more consumerist than buying music? People go out to socialize, buy stuff, experience culture, eat, relax in public spaces, or just get around. Are those things really any different from the 1970s? Of course, if you want to look at public spaces or non-consumerist culture as a measure of the vibrancy of the city, there's a lot more of that now too.

 

[freshcutgrass]

But you're just pointing to how the list is simply a list... it's extremely random. You want to present it as an impressive sampler of the breadth and depth of musical roster of that period, but for me it simply opens up more questions than ever.

It's random in the fact that I listed the artists in no particular order. It isn't random in the fact that it's all 1977. I could list them by the many genres they represented at the time, or in order of importance/influence to music in general, album sales, or in terms of of writing ability, production, or musicianship...or whatever.

But just looking at the artists on the list should make it painfully obvious that while my general statement was a bit tongue-in-cheek, not very far from the truth. I shouldn't really need to go any farther than just a "random" list of the artists releasing material in that year to make my point...unless of course there is a certain level of non-awareness of artists on the list.....and for someone trying to give the impression of being informed (" I write music a blog"), I'm a bit mystified that the only name you have mentioned on the list is Air Supply. They hardly "defined" music in 1977.

And as you point out, you left out Kraftwerk.... which, to me, is a grave error (insert winkie here).

Except I didn't point that out and Kraftwerk is on the list. (insert winkie here)

Since you want to be a writer ("I have a blog"), you should put reading comprehension higher on your list of priorities. Not to go off on a tangent, but it's just so easy to put it out there today (I write a blog). Same thing with music. The reason the 1977 list has a much higher talent-to-material quotient, is that back then to "put it out there" required you to impress a whole lot of industry experts before that happened (or be one hell of a great live gig band, which a lot of did both). The ass-clownery that passes for the bulk of music today would simply get their demo tapes thrown in the garbage can and that would be the end of it. But in a consumer-driven world, that filter is no longer there. In a way its a good thing...and in a way a bad thing.

But reducing Daft Punk to being some kind of cheap repackaging of Nile Rodgers and Giorgio Morodor..

It's not a cheap repackaging at all...it's a very slick repackaging. ha ha

All the stuff you loved back in the day didn't just magically spring into being - it referenced stuff that came before it.

Of course it did (and please don't make the mistake of putting words in my mouth). But while Zeppelin may have been influenced by the delta blues, Blind Willie Johnson didn't write, produce and perform on any of their albums. They reinvented the blues.

You don't think Daft Punk is original?

There's a reason Nile Rodgers went up and collected 3 grammies for Daft Punk's album. He wrote, produced and performed on the album. He just didn't wear a robot suit.

I like Daft Punk. I like their sound. But did they reinvent electronic dance music? No more than Jamiroquai reinvented funk, but they put their own spin on it...and I like it.

Listen to Moroder's 1977 album "From Here to Eternity". The same 4 on the floor, vocorder dance sound is there. While it was hardly a mainstream album, it's quite amazing to listen to this groundbreaking album and realize it was 37 years ago. While I'm sure he had influences as well, it sounds fairly original to me. He also composed, produced and performed the entire album.

His other song, also from 1977..."I feel love" with vocals by Donna Summer was a huge hit though and a massive influence on the future of dance music. It may very well have never been bettered.

You want quality? Don't just go for what wins those windbag televised music awards. That's a celebration of MOR pablum and the lowest common denominator... it's the big labels and players congratulating themselves and the cult of celebrity's machinery in full gear

I'm glad you brought that up. And I don't disagree with the general sentiment....it's pretty true. But the difference is that back then, a good percentage of mainstream popular music also happened to consist of the critically acclaimed music as well.

 

[freshcutgrass]

Nope, the challenge was to compare one single year with the entire period post-2000. And freshcutgrass has defended that claim vigorously, resorting to calling people ignorant if they question it.

And his point was that the ball is now in your court to present your evidence to refute the claim. Which you haven't done.

People go out to socialize, buy stuff, experience culture, eat, relax in public spaces, or just get around. Are those things really any different from the 1970s?

Yes...people didn't spend the majority of the time staring at their phones.

 

[Tewder]

Nope, the challenge was to compare one single year with the entire period post-2000. And freshcutgrass has defended that claim vigorously, resorting to calling people ignorant if they question it.

I see, and agree this is a way more ambitious claim. In fact, his point about 1977 would be strong enough if he had made it a one year to one year comparison, even in a 'pick a year of your choice' scenario.

By the forest I mean the vibrancy of the city as a whole, of which music is one small part. You're talking about larger cultural trends that are affecting the entire western world. If those trends have made Toronto less vibrant, then there's not a city in the world that is more vibrant than it was 30 years ago.

I completely agree that this is not a phenomenon unique to Toronto, but yes for argument's sake I would make the claim that almost any city that I can think of (within my very limited purview at least) is net/net less 'vibrant' today than in the past for the very same sort of reasons i've been fleshing out here. What is Times Square (area) today really - for instance - but a glorified, touristy M&Ms store/Olive Garden/Broadway revival-jukebox musical, disneyfied mall now, rather than the gritty, urban 'scene' it once was in the latter part of the 20th century or the cultural mecca it was in the earlier part? I'm picking this as a pretty obvious NYC analogue but there are many others too.

You guys keep bringing up consumerism. Is buying records not innately consumerist? Are tapas bars more consumerist than buying music? People go out to socialize, buy stuff, experience culture, eat, relax in public spaces, or just get around. Are those things really any different from the 1970s? Of course, if you want to look at public spaces or non-consumerist culture as a measure of the vibrancy of the city, there's a lot more of that now too.

Though buying records is a commercial activity the experience wasn't.

Consumerism always exists in urban areas (they are commercial centres after all) but it's the degree to which it has come to define the urban experience now... so yes, tapas bars are great, the problem arises when all we are left with are tapas bars. If this is how we define urban spaces now then why not Yorkdale or Mississauga City Centre, are the activities there really all that different than Ossington or Queen West say? If the average urban experience is reduced to consumer experiences (and by average i mean that which is experience by most, not the niche urban experiences of hipsters etc, for example) it becomes less vibrant.

 

[AndreaPalladio]

Yes...people didn't spend the majority of the time staring at their phones.

Oh, these young whippersnappers. In the old days we only had pay phones AND WE LIKED IT!

 

[freshcutgrass]

his point about 1977 would be strong enough if he had made it a one year to one year comparison, even in a 'pick a year of your choice' scenario.

Nope...you can always make an excuse for a bad year, but how could you excuse a bad decade and a half? LOL

I've purposely and methodically been slow in elaborating on the claim so that the evidence is slowly brought forward and digested. Only then is it possible to admit that my claim isn't as crazy as you think.

The ambitiousness of the claim IS the entire point.

 

[Lenser]

It's random in the fact that I listed the artists in no particular order. It isn't random in the fact that it's all 1977. I could list them by the many genres they represented at the time, or in order of importance/influence to music in general, album sales, or in terms of of writing ability, production, or musicianship...or whatever.

Cool. Do you feel the power resonating in your fingers as they hover, poised over the keyboard?

for someone trying to give the impression of being informed (" I write music a blog"), I'm a bit mystified that the only name you have mentioned on the list is Air Supply. They hardly "defined" music in 1977.

Ok, I catch the gratuitous insult, thanks for the nastiness. And I mention Air Supply because... you used it in an argument about the alleged glories of 1977! Believe me, I would have been happy to avoid mention of them at all, but clearly you were on a roll.

Since you want to be a writer ("I have a blog"), you should put reading comprehension higher on your list of priorities. Not to go off on a tangent, but it's just so easy to put it out there today (I write a blog)... for someone trying to give the impression of being informed (" I write music a blogâ€)

Oh, you're subtle, aren't you. I brought up the blog to suggest that we likely have far more in common in terms of musical tastes than you realize. But what's far more important is your amping up on the snark, of course. Carry on!

It's not a cheap repackaging at all...it's a very slick repackaging. ha ha

Stop it, you're killing me here.

I like Daft Punk. I like their sound. But did they reinvent electronic dance music? No more than Jamiroquai reinvented funk, but they put their own spin on it...and I like it.

So for you, in order to be original you have to invent - or reinvent - an entire genre. Is that about right?

But the difference is that back then, a good percentage of mainstream popular music also happened to consist of the critically acclaimed music as well.

You misread me. The bands and artists winning the big awards today are also getting lots of positive critical press. Things haven't changed in that regard. But the mainstream misses out on a lot of quality, too. And your comments about critical acclaim are suspect - you're acting as if the fans of even one band on that list you gave us would equally love all the other bands and their music. It's simply not true. I mean, Air Supply!

 

[freshcutgrass]

In the old days we only had pay phones AND WE LIKED IT!

In 1977, social media consisted of interacting with people in person or calling them on a land line, and people were too busy having fun to waste time talking on the phone.

Understanding the context is an important factor if you are going to understand the difference between 1977 and 2014. Not only was it lacking social media access, 1977 was also the height of the sexual revolution, decadence and hedonism. It's important to remember that this was the pre-AIDS era as well.

As far as clubbing is concerned, the music may not have evolved all that much beyond 1977, but one look at this video (ok...released in 1978, but recorded in 1977) and it's clear they wouldn't be wasting time texting even if they had cell phones then. Sadly, Sylvester and many of the men dancing in this video would have succumbed to AIDS within a few years. AIDS is another empirical factor in why talent went off a cliff after the 80's.



[video=youtube_share;oG2ixYJ79iE]http://youtu.be/oG2ixYJ79iE[/video]

 

[GenerationW]

Genesis is on your list twice.

And Trooper is pure evil.

 

[AndreaPalladio]

In 1977, social media consisted of interacting with people in person or calling them on a land line, and people were too busy having fun to waste time talking on the phone.

In the old days, we didn't need fancy smart phones with apps like Grindr or Tindr. If we wanted to talk, which we didn't much, or hook up, we went to the discotheque to dance to Air Supply and Boney M AND WE LIKED IT!

 

[Tewder]

Ya man! Speaking of which:

[video=youtube;150TX5uJVCY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=150TX5uJVCY[/video]

Just about one of the most famous of the time, where people from fashion, music, the arts all came together to get down and boogie... Interestingly, today it is a legitimate theatre and is now housing a revival of 'Cabaret' which was also from the 70s... so if popular music has tanked post-millenium has theatre too?

 

[M.R.Victor]

Perhaps multitasking has become a very common thing and having a divided attention is an adaptive skill. Mind you I just turned 29, so I'm not exactly one of these "damn kids." But when I chill with friends I can answer a work email or two, maybe work on setting up a tinder date, and post photos of my last art fair on facebook to gain more exposure which will hopefully translate into clients. I am definitely not "wasting time texting," and I feel that none of this detracts from my experience. I'm very present for the intimate moments and deep conversations.

Also, the notion that human interaction is this magical bucket of rainbows is a matter of pure fiction. Let's face it, the vast majority of time, breaking the ice and setting up a social hierarchy consists of a fair bit of one-upmanship, banter and douchebaggery. If I'm not up for it, I have better things to do, thanks to the phone I carry.

 

[freshcutgrass]

Genesis is on your list twice.

Well, they did release two albums in 1977 (Jan & Oct). But so did a lot of artists, and while I tried to not list them twice, I guess I missed that one. I can't apologize enough for such a grave mistake.

And Trooper is pure evil.

They did raise a little hell didn't they.

So....Air Supply and Trooper sucked.

Is that the devastating evidence to refute my claim? ha ha