smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | "Robert Mootz" <thinkzinc@msn.com> |
| Subject | The dividing line.... |
| Date | Thu, 26 Feb 2004 16:46:22 -0800 |
[Part 1 text/plain iso-8859-1 (1.2 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
It was posted:
> From the couple of minutes I sampled, it's pleasant enough, but you'd be better off just listening to actual Radiohead music rather than
> another pretender. The Bends / OK Computer."
And it kind of made me wonder, how exactly does one go about deciding whether something is *pretend* or *extend*? *Derivative* or *inspired*? And why might/should one gravitate to one over the other? It seems in any genre, when something "cool" gets popularized, there is always a rash of others who grab hold and run around with it and on the whole, music is better off for the exercise.
Sure, at the one extreme, blatant copy-cat cash-in is pretty obvious (and more spandex metal is just around the corner, I'm sure). But an awful lot of great music has come about because something struck some folk's innards and caused 'em to write, pick up their machines and thrash away *like* their heros, and friends/colleagues. (BTW, just in case cybermurk disguised my intent, this is meant as a general query of auditees types, not a challenge to Gary's observation. I often react the same way.)
Bob
NP: "Elmo James' got nothing on this baby"
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.