hey hey
andrew and theresa have started a blog for their baby. you can find it here
also, please take the time to check out this post on their blog. its worth a grin!
Saturday, November 11, 2006
Monday, November 06, 2006
j award - two thirds of the way thru?
so, the J award is being anounced early december, but i have a funny feeling that we will get at least 3 or 4 nominations in the next 4 weeks.
if i do recall, last year there were 15 nomiations, and so far this year there are only 10! Yet, i strongly doubt that 2005 in any way was meant to be prescriptive, and they have always said that they are going to nomiate those that are worth it, not a particular number of albums. having said that, i think the last 4 or 5 all came in november, quite fittingly, due to it being aus music month. of those nominations in november last year came 4 out of 5 of the big aria awards (best male, female, group and album) - eskimo joe, best single, the only omission (not that it was out then).
i dare say that this is pure coincidence, and well... i had little idea who was going to win it last year, and this year find myself in the same place... i havent had a listen to all the nominated albums, but on the other hand am quite familiar with some of the others, and really enjoying them... (in particular goyte, augie march, hilltop hoods).
and there a couple there that i have read yto give a good listen to (sarah blasko and bob evans).
and others there that ive give na listen to and responded with... "meh... its just not really my thing" (sorry to say this, but as a whole "the grates" wasnt exactly my cup of tea) - mind you i see why they were nominated..
well, we'll see what happens from here eh?
if i do recall, last year there were 15 nomiations, and so far this year there are only 10! Yet, i strongly doubt that 2005 in any way was meant to be prescriptive, and they have always said that they are going to nomiate those that are worth it, not a particular number of albums. having said that, i think the last 4 or 5 all came in november, quite fittingly, due to it being aus music month. of those nominations in november last year came 4 out of 5 of the big aria awards (best male, female, group and album) - eskimo joe, best single, the only omission (not that it was out then).
i dare say that this is pure coincidence, and well... i had little idea who was going to win it last year, and this year find myself in the same place... i havent had a listen to all the nominated albums, but on the other hand am quite familiar with some of the others, and really enjoying them... (in particular goyte, augie march, hilltop hoods).
and there a couple there that i have read yto give a good listen to (sarah blasko and bob evans).
and others there that ive give na listen to and responded with... "meh... its just not really my thing" (sorry to say this, but as a whole "the grates" wasnt exactly my cup of tea) - mind you i see why they were nominated..
well, we'll see what happens from here eh?
what makes a good cover version?
coming to you from a blog named edgar, we ask the big questions, the tough questions... that is... what indeed makes a good cover of a song. I have to warn you all that this is a post filled with assumptions and possibly weak definitions that will have us all going... hmmmm
I believe that a good cover requires at least one of these 2 essential criteria...
1 - It pulls a song from unkown obscurity into a place where people can enjoy it and recognise how good it is.
2 - It is unique, is performed, arranged and delivered in a creative way that although still lets us see the original, it helps us apreciate it in a different light.
A couple of points of clarification...
1 - There is a difference between a tribute and a cover. A tribute should only be seen at a live show or on an album specifically dedicated to an artist. A tribute doesnt need to have either of the above criterium, and indeed, it could well be spoilt if it does.
There are some songs that should NEVER be covered, and really should only be delivered under the guise of a tribute. In my opinion these are the songs that music itself has been built on, and in general number few and far between.
2 - A remix, for the sake of the argument is generally a cover, although in some circumstances, if it helps ppl to be able to dance to it again would probably fall under the category of tribute (or... do we need a 3rd category, a tertiam quid if you like?)
Problems with these working definitions?
The most obvious if this idea of pulling something out of obscurity. There were probably actually people out there who had never heard american pie before madonna did it, but for some reason, that just doesnt seem right. On the other hand, huge fans of Wayne Cochran and the C.C riders may well be ofended to think that Pearl Jam did anything but defile their beloved "Last Kiss" (which charted quite high (number 1?) 99/00?).
So... its obviously contextual. Yet... does that mean that it will be best to do a cover? or a tribute?
Last thought for now, and I have a feeling that certain individuals will take the bait and respond here... but heres my last thought...
Is it OK to make money off a tribute album, or is it exploitation and oportunism. Should tributes, stay in the realms of charity? I think they should, but, to be honest, I havent really thought this one through all that much...
So either...
human nature are doing weak as covers, that dont really fit that category... or using tribute, to boost their careers and not pay homage to the originals (a la standing in the shadows of motown). or... are they bring these songs out of obscurity? its all possible... but I'm not too sure...
In my opinion not since Westlife's Uptown Girl has there been such an obvious rip off with no creative value (when maybe their is more of contextual gap in communicating that song when these guys do it?).
I believe that a good cover requires at least one of these 2 essential criteria...
1 - It pulls a song from unkown obscurity into a place where people can enjoy it and recognise how good it is.
2 - It is unique, is performed, arranged and delivered in a creative way that although still lets us see the original, it helps us apreciate it in a different light.
A couple of points of clarification...
1 - There is a difference between a tribute and a cover. A tribute should only be seen at a live show or on an album specifically dedicated to an artist. A tribute doesnt need to have either of the above criterium, and indeed, it could well be spoilt if it does.
There are some songs that should NEVER be covered, and really should only be delivered under the guise of a tribute. In my opinion these are the songs that music itself has been built on, and in general number few and far between.
2 - A remix, for the sake of the argument is generally a cover, although in some circumstances, if it helps ppl to be able to dance to it again would probably fall under the category of tribute (or... do we need a 3rd category, a tertiam quid if you like?)
Problems with these working definitions?
The most obvious if this idea of pulling something out of obscurity. There were probably actually people out there who had never heard american pie before madonna did it, but for some reason, that just doesnt seem right. On the other hand, huge fans of Wayne Cochran and the C.C riders may well be ofended to think that Pearl Jam did anything but defile their beloved "Last Kiss" (which charted quite high (number 1?) 99/00?).
So... its obviously contextual. Yet... does that mean that it will be best to do a cover? or a tribute?
Last thought for now, and I have a feeling that certain individuals will take the bait and respond here... but heres my last thought...
Is it OK to make money off a tribute album, or is it exploitation and oportunism. Should tributes, stay in the realms of charity? I think they should, but, to be honest, I havent really thought this one through all that much...
So either...
human nature are doing weak as covers, that dont really fit that category... or using tribute, to boost their careers and not pay homage to the originals (a la standing in the shadows of motown). or... are they bring these songs out of obscurity? its all possible... but I'm not too sure...
In my opinion not since Westlife's Uptown Girl has there been such an obvious rip off with no creative value (when maybe their is more of contextual gap in communicating that song when these guys do it?).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
