As a paying user of Spotify, I love how it has really opened up the amount of music I can listen to. I love it's portability, the fact I can instantly listen to really old records as well as jams hot off the press. Still, while I do buy vinyl and pay for streaming I'd feel a lot more comfortable knowing the artist's who made the music are getting a fair cut. So I find it encouraging to see projects like this opening up the discussion.
That being said I find this whole press event really stupid. Firstly, why the hell do they go into great detail of parading rockstar after rockstar in front of the camera, reeling off staged lines candy coated with buzzwords. Why is Daft Punk toasting champagne glasses?! At what point do they actually offer any explanation of what they're offering?! If you look at the launch of the original iPhone, the event was incredibly practical in that it was digestible and made sense. In this event Steve Jobs talked about the current options on the market, addressing the problems and then finally presenting how their product has solved them. I mean who launches anything like this these days without providing an mobile App from the word go? I'm pretty intrigued to see what Apple brings to the table first. After seeing them invest in Beats, work with Trent Reznor and acquire BBC radio 1's prime DJ, I'm curious to see if they have anything innovative to offer us all? Though I expect the artist cut will probably be nowhere as fair as Tidal.
Ah sorry, maybe I should have explained a bit deeper...
I agree it makes perfect sense to have the colours and the die cut. It would be as sad to see him ditch the iconic rectangle as much as it would be for The xx to ditch the iconic X on their next LP. What I meant was the execution of this idea was rather poor. I think many designers agree too. There's not much compositional play between the cut and the shapes of the colours for a start.
Here's some other approaches I just made:
http://i.imgur.com/3X5Tjmr.png
http://i.imgur.com/ZsAoSp0.png
I'm not saying they're any better (they took me five minutes). What I am saying is there's lots of options and they could have come up with something a bit stronger - Perhaps a better example would be the work Farrow did for the Pet Shop Boys Yes :
http://www.creativereview.co.uk/cr-blog/2009/march/pet-shop-boys-say-yes-to-farrow
One thing is clear though then - they did a terrible job of executing the concept of Star Power. They should have made sure all the shows, lps, digital shit, merch ect are listed as Star Power and not Foxygen. When Arcade Fire did all those Reflectors shows they got it right. I don't think anyone really understands where the hell Star Power is coming from and if they (record labels with targets to hit) wanted to distance it from Foxygen so people take it as it's own thing, then it probably would have served them better.
Wait?
...is this a STAR POWER farewell thing?
...or a FOXYGEN farewell thing?
I never really got the whole renaming thing?
Maybe because it was never really a thing?
Regardless, to be fair it's probably a good thing?
Time for a new healthier thing?
Did Taylor Swift only just discover New York last year or something? It's been there for a while love, no need to sing and dance about it like your on some Broadway musical.
It's kind of sad isn't it. I remember liking the Foos, in my adolescence. I still love Everlong mainly because of that Gondry video and I have respect for the music that was relevant for that time. Unfortunately they haven't aged well in many respects. This is definitely in Dad rock terrority. Would have been nice to see them mature too and do something different seen as they didn't call it a day, all these are old ideas for them.
At least with the original song you felt like the artist's had put their time and effort into creating a song for a cause because they wanted change. Also in 2014 do we really need another song like this to change things, possibly in some respects, it'll overthrow Simon Cowell's rampage of UK Chiristmas number ones and help people think about others at Chirstmas. Still I'd prefer that was a bit more of a modern solution to do something a bit more engaging with the times, like er...Kim Kardashian breaking the internet or something?
Wow Stereogum you love a bit of shit stirring these days eh?
Can't just just report about you know, the music and leave it at that?
I feel like a lot of good articles don't get through the net because Kanye, Grimes, Ariel or someone said or did something today that was actually completely unimportant in the scale of things constituting as music news.
For example how come on here you've not even given Iggy Pop's John Peel lecture a mention, far more interesting if you ask me.
While it is noble of her for holding her own, despite my hopes this initial song doesn't fill me with confidence of her potential. I'm sure the quality of her debut's goes beyond Kevin Parker's production, but I believe this is what made it truly special. KP's ability to drive a song off a complex but subtle groove is really something else. The array of ideas he brings to the table, evident on her first record clearly set it apart from the standard, which is why I consequently enjoy it as much as any Tame Impala record, though it is still a different thing. I think this record was very production focused also due to the amount of effects, instrumentation and even a backwards song. Sure it's not revolutionary music, it's a indulgent throwback approach, but one that has a modern twist on it. I hope the rest of this record is much more interesting and also hope to hear more of Kevin Parker's production, for whoever hat may be?
So if this is sarcasm then what you are saying is that you weren't perfectly aware of his ability to cover 30 year old songs?
In that case you're welcome!
Here's another one for you babe:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzKcPqzQeh0
(he can't stop the press)
Regardless of what you think of the pink.
He made some good points.
Madge needs to get behind good songs way before whatever producers, promo, video etc.
Pop music is seriously depressing right now, due to the amount of money poured into anything but the actual music. This is something we perhaps may not be able to change?
For me, pop is almost now invalid. I think when a band or musician appeals to such a wide category despite all odds then I take notice. However to me the rest has all become irrelevant because of all the flesh flaunting, talent seeking, hype driven soul snatching money machine backing it. If you can take a song for what it is and it stands by itself then fair play to you.
Holy hell, what the hell is going on with Edgar Wright here?!
This could have been done by any old director, he has so much more style than this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vedJVCvdBgI
Comments