Bob Dylan's new album Tempest is now released and it is really really good. His voice is of course limited and harsher, rougher etc than ever, but his singing is, to me, almost better than ever anyway. Just listen to the last track of the album, Roll on John, it's fantastic, and the music is too! Incidently, that song is written about John Lennon, who once said about Dylan's voice (somelike like this): "It's not what he sings that's so special, it's how he does it."
And I agree, I love his way of singing, his phrasing, both on his new album and how he as a live artist comes up with these witty and always surprisingly new things to his old songs. Some songs a drastically rearranged and some are not, but no matter what, every version of each song is unique. You just have to listen closely, and maybe even observe his moves on stage, especially these years, he's not as dull or stiff as people say. He is great! |
Rok2id-I have to say I envy your position of not being familiar with Dylan's music from the past 15-20 years, there is so much in there that I really love and admire and respect, I wish I could find an artist like that who I am not familiar with and then take the time to discover the treasure trove that awaits me. I hope you derive pleasure from the discovery.
Richard |
Rok2id-I suggest you take a listen to Time Out Of Mind. Or Modern Times. Enjoy. |
Onhwy61 / Rpeluso:
I guess I will have to haul out my box set and get to know Mr Dylan again. My memory could be faulty. After all, it was a few centuries ago when I was 'young'. I did see him live once in concert in Nurnberg, Germany.The concert was held at the same stadium that the nazi party rallies were held. Sort of ironic. Thanks for your posts. |
Rok2id, I think you are confusing the mass media's representation of Bob Dylan with Bob Dylan the artist. Limiting him to a protester/social critic is like saying Louis Armstrong only sang "Hello Dolly". |
Rok2id I think you are leaving lots of great music on the table based on incorrect assumptions you seem to have, but that's my opinion and your choice.
r |
Rpeluso:
Yes I am. He was a protest / social critic type performer. He delivered a message. When the object of the message / protest fades, so do the protesters.
BTW, The first LP I ever purchased was one of his. Loved him back in the day, but that day is long gone. The 2nd LP I ever purchased was by Joan Baez. Shows you where my head was, and I was in the Army!!
Cheers. |
Rok2kid-are you being serious? |
perhaps he meant that most music is "atrocious". |
When the war is Viet-Nam and civil rights violence ended, his 15 minutes were up. He had a very small window. I think his latest outburst is driven by envy and sour grapes, because now, there are a lot of people with little or no talent making tons of money.
I have several of his albums, but seldom play them. He seems dated. |
"music is not worth anything anyway" I'm sure his assets would show just how much it isn't worth. I think the old duffer is talking out his ass.
How pissed would he be if he missed one of his royalty checks? Anyone can say anything but reality is usually a bit different. |
.
RE:
In a recent interview Bob Dylan called music recordings "Atrocious" and went on to add that no good music has been made in the last 20 years, he went on to add that downloads should be free because the music is not worth anything anyway.
I have never really liked Dylan except for a few songs, but it is nice to see someone take a stand on how badly most music is recorded.
I highly doubt that dylan is an obsessive audiophile type who splits hairs about recording quality, about vtf, azimuth or things like this. My memory is a bit fuzzy but i remember reading about him exploring music and having a stack of cassettes on a table and exploring music like this! I would venture to say as a dylan fan that dylan is interested in "the song", how it hits him viscerally, whether from vinyl, cassette, am radio or 8 track.
When he lays down tracks its usually very quickly, the first or second take! Sometimes if he feels the song should come from a different angle he might go back and try it a different way but for the most part they are recorded quickly without alot of fuss.
It's nice to see someone not obsess about sound quality!
. |
The past 20 years has seen the onset of a cultural dark ages. Anyone disputing this simply has not been following the Whitney biennials of the past 20, maybe 40 years. It is obvious that pop/conventional tastes have deteriorated to the level of "digesting with the stars". Be that as it may, in the world of high art, particularly 'classical' or high culture music (which includes forms of improvised music such as some jazz, IMO), the case id quite different. There has been a tremendous amount of achievement in the past 20 years, despite its difficultly in being recorded, and recorded well. Dylan was speaking about his area of knowledge directly: rock/folk/pop AMERICAN music. He still speaks with authority about american culture, and knows it better than almost anyone. However do not think that this applies to the high culture of the world in a more general sense.
In the past 20 years art has fallen to the realm of the people, instead of being a tool to raise people up to the level of high art. |
So I guess he will donate all the money he has made from his music over the last 20 years to a good charity then? |
Dylan was commenting on the plasticity and hollowness of alot of pop artists out there these days, that they lack substance and depth and that ultimately this music has nothing to offer. Most of it he feels is crap and therefore should be "free" cause it has no value!
Dylan is an intriguing figure. Complex and has a high regard for artists who have "something to say"
At one time i used to think that his songwriting was just a trick and that it didnt make sense at all but today i believe his lyrics especially on certain albums are rich in depth, insight and complexity and can be received and understood for people from different angles and perspectives, on different levels, and yet at the same time are understood universally. He's witty, sharp, sensitive, tough, wise, generous, irritated by the media machine,friendly.
When all is said and done, i think it really is fair to say that he is a musical genius, for sure a lyrical genius, a rare "accident" that happened in our time. It is his story, together with his discography that keeps me entertained forever! Of course, i think its true that you either get dylan or you dont. |
The iPod and quality of recordings are completely seperate issues.
Many people have multi-thousand dollar systems are very interested in the quality of recordings but will use an iPod.
As for Dylan marketing iPods do you think the vast majority of younger folk even know who he is?
A high end system and iPod can live in tandem-they do for many folks. I love my iPod.
Dylan never made any comment about sound quality of MP3's etc.-he did make a very vague comment about how CD's sound in comparison to what he heard in the studio but as I've stated before it is so vague as to be almost irrelevant.
I rather suspect as a teenager listening to distant radio stations Bob wasn't questioning the mids, highs and bass quality.
Still a vague comment has got Audiophiles foaming about the mouth and his appearance in an Ad has them screaming "Judas".
Forty years on and things ain't changed much-people still screaming about their sets of values, their ideals and their perceptions at a man who simply couldn't function if he had to consider that type of crap.
If your upset because Dylan has promoted iPods then fine-it's not the end of the world, his music remains as it is.
|
I bet he's devastated to hear of your turn around! |
So yesterday I saw Dylan pimping IPODS on TV, is this a bit of a Hypacritical move on his part?
To take a stand against bad recordings and then market the Ipod seems a bit odd, maybe he smoked to many joints to not understand that as long as the IPOD is marketed by folks like himself nothing is going to change.
No matter how you feel about my opinion I think Bob Jumped the Shark and sold out. |
Nrchy,
Good comments. I've been collecting music since the late 1950's. I still purchase many of the newest releases including the stuff from Dylan, Gabriel, Young et.al. Much of the current music from older artists is excellent; some even exceeds, IMO, quality of their earlier work. However, that is not the case with all artists. I will single out The Who here for argument's sake. There, and in my opinion again, has been nothing substantial released from these guys in over 20 years and now they are going on tour with only 2 original members to rehash "Won't Get Fooled Again" and "See Me, Feel Me"? Sorry Rog and Pete, stay home. Unfortunately, The Who is not alone.
I'm not a critic but I know what I like. I've seen most major bands, except the Beatles, multiple times and as painful as it may seem, we can't go home. Although it might be nostalgic watching some of these folks perform, it is often painful watching fat old bald guys trying to recapture fled youth.
To address your question, we should not be turned away from our jobs because we are aging. However, I would expect to be turned away if the quality of my work was unacceptable.
I appreciate your clarification. Thank you.
|
Audiofeil I'm not sure what you might have said, but I think it's more critics that deem the aging musician irrelevant. I was thinking of many who have condemned artists for supposedly not putting out material as good as their 'last LP.'
I'm not sure that there is a critic anywhere that has ever really added anything to the musical landscape! BUT maybe some of the earlier comments got me thinking along those lines...
Should any one of us be turned away from our jobs because we are aging, or not as handsome/pretty as we were in our prime, whenever that was... I'm still waiting. How did I get to be over the hill without ever making it to the top??? |
Tell 'em Nrchy -- Once a fan, always a fan. And the reason the old songs/artists are revered like Gods? Because many of them had and still have more writing AND performing talent than most of the overproduced musicians today (although there are many great ones). I'll listen to Dylan and the Stones live anyday over just about anyone beacause they are still great. |
Easy Nrchy. If you're directing your vitriole at me, you need to read a bit more carefully. I never said stop doing it and/or questioned the relevancy. BTW, personal attacks are unnecessary.
Try decaf at the Gordon Lightfoot concert. Maybe he can hit the high notes but you can't hear them. :-))) |
So at what point is an artist deemed irrelevant, and when should they stop doing what they love?
Because an artist is no longer handsome, or writing songs about teenage lust, underage drinking, or fighting with their mom and dad, they should just die! Maybe Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Nick Drake et al had the right idea albeit unconcious.
It verges on the hieghts of stupidity to expect someone like Bob Dylan, Pete Townsend, B.B. King, or Carole King to quit because someone who has never done anything relevant decided that they are no longer relevant.
If Bob Dylan loves to play concerts and fans continue to show their love for his concerts by buying tickets, good for Bobbie! When people dumber than the geniuses here decide Bob et al are no longer relevant they will discontinue the purchase of tickets and these gross offenders will stay in the old folks home where they belong. Until then, fans like me can continue to enjoy the shows and the new music.
FWIW my wife and I are going to see Gordon Lightfoot in the UP in a couple of weeks. No he can't hit the high notes he used to hit with ease, but we still enjoy the show, and he does too. |
Jsonic makes a good point. For whatever reasons, many musicians and their work are looked upon as something sacred. Wasn't one of the original intents of the music to make money? Yeah I know, artists don't care about money. BS!! The title of the third Mothers of Invention album says it all.
Regarding the tour circuit I agree. Keith, Mick, Roger, Pete, et.al., do the Metamucil commercials, dye your hair, go for the Botox shots, but stay home. I know you sell a lot of tickets but PT Barnum had it right. |
The Who, The Beatles, Led Zeppelin, Johnny Cash and so many artists with audience-perceived integrity have sold their music for use in TV commercials. The 60's were over 40 years ago and the people slamming groups for doing this aren't dropping acid and protesting the Viet Nam war any more. These musicians have bills to pay and families to feed. What's more annoying is bands that are aged cartoonish caricatures of their former selves who refuse to hang it up. I'll buy your remastered rehashed cd with the bonus tracks but please stay off the touring circuit. |
If benifiting monetarily for working is crass, then I guess everyone of us that work for a living instead of being a trust fund baby must be crass.
I know that wasn't what was meant but, I don't know why people think that people with special talents shouldn't benifit from their jobs. In the case of musicians, music is their job.
Everybody who would turn down a couple of hundred thousand to endorse i-tunes or Victorias Secret raise their hands now. I guess Tiger Woods is crass also, he accepts endorsement money from sports clothing companies.
I doubt that Mr. Dylan is broke anymore than Tom Cruise is, doesn't mean his agent isn't always looking out for new ways to increase his income. |
That was like being savaged by a dead sheep........
:-) |
Always interesting to get an update from the groupies. |
Bob's been saying one thing and doing another his whole career please try to keep up.
:-)
Remember money doesn't talk it swears.......... |
Very sorry to hear of Dylan's financial situation. Truly tragic considering the great contributions he has made. I was referring to his recent negative comments about digital sound. It just seemed so very odd to see him saying one thing and doing another. |
"Does the guy really need the money that bad?"
Well, the partial (at least) answer is: "yes". Dylan should be looked at in an historical perspective when it comes to this. While I don't really appreciate his Victoria's Secret moments or the recent "commercialization" (yes, it is to make money), one needs to understand that Bob was truly ripped off by his manager and record company in his prolific years of the early to late 60's. He does not, in fact, own the rights to most of his great songs. Ironically, (someone correct me if I'm wrong, I don't have the new CD or record) I believe he is now taking writing credits for rehashed versions of old blues songs on his most recent Modern Times (the song I'm referring to is "Someday Baby" which Bob is really stretching to say he wrote-he may have re-jigged a new verse or two but this is a very heavily recorded and performed blues tune-if he does not take a writing credit on the new album I apologise for my mistake but that was what was implied when the song was played on the radio last week-by the way, I love his interpretation of the song.) cashing in on artists from the past who were just as exploited as he was early in his career. But Bob has always been a "medium", if you will, in which big chunks of historical Americana (both musically and lyrically) have been cranked into what has ultimately become popular music. That is what he is all about. That he is now trying to benefit somewhat monetarily is, I suppose, somewhat crass, but, personally, I can forgive him for that in that his recent work, although maybe not up to the high standards of his early career, is certainly not artistic drivel and is heads and shoulders above most of the crap we are subjected to today on FM radio. Yes, he tours relentlessly, but his ticket prices are reasonable by today's standards and Bob toured just as much, or more, in the very lean years of the 80's and early 90's. Any guy that plays small baseball parks and has kids under 12 admitted free to the shows can't be all that bad. The Stones, whose early stuff I also really admire, avoided being ripped off and have proceeded to become the ultimate commercial machine. In my view, Bob is really not like that. He is more of a troubador, much like the old blues players like Muddy Waters, Howlin Wolf, Junior Wells and others who have now left us, but played right up until their deaths. And Bob may be checking out soon, too, so I plan to see him while I can. From what I can see of popular music, there probably won't be another on like him for a long time. |
Sorry mate you've obviously never seen Stonehenge as part of it fell over centuries ago.
Bob Dylan is only a man.
Anyway serves you right for watching the tennis you could have been re-positioning your speakers............ |
I am watching the US Open Tennis Tournament right now and I am seeing Bob Dylan being featured in iPod ads dressed up like a cowboy. Bob Dylan Sells It Like It Is?
Does the guy really need the money that bad?
"Something is happening here, and you don't know what it is. Do you, Mr. Jones?"
It's like watching Stonehenge fall over. |
There is little I can add after Ben CampbellÂ’s thoughtful and well stated viewpoint other than after many hours of listening to his music and attending concerts is that no matter how much you think you know an artist through their music I gained a much better insight to him after reading his autobiography |
Not to mention:
Elvis
Jerry Lee Lewis
Carl Perkins
Sam Cooke
Bonnie Raitt
Eric Clapton
Willie Nelson
Stevie Wonder
Bryan Ferry
Bruce Springsteen
Lonnie Donegan
Johnny Winters
Everly Bros.
and on and on and on |
I have no data on this, but I would rate Dylan as the most covered song-writer ever. The Byrds and The Band launched their careers off of him. Tom Petty, Johnny Cash , Hendrix, Joan Baez , Peter Paul and Mary all covered his material along with countless others. If imitation is the purest form of flattery- then Dylan stands alone. |
Nrchy...I agree with you on the 3-4 defense. It does work however, when the OLB can shift to DE and vice-versa. ie...Jason Taylor...Miami Dolphins. That versatility will.......
Aw hell, sorry.
Back to Dylan. |
Some call him a great poet. I don't know about that. He's a tremendous song writer. Pretty good poet--I don't think being a poet matters to him. Some say he's only an okay musician. If musicianship refers to instrumental or vocal virtuosity, than okay. But I agree with those who say he's an outstanding musician. He is all about music. His words and thoughts are so sparkling that I think it's possible to get lulled into viewing him as simply a lyricist, with the music-- the melodies, rhythms, song structure, styles, arrangements-- just showing up on their own, or being provided by collaborators. But they're his. He writes (composes) songs, not lyrics. He's got a great command of musical styles and has been a fearless, restlessly creative musical explorer all his career. He's all about the music--an amazing musician, IMO. |
Everybody, lighten up. Go purchaes Modern Times, bring it home , put it on, and enjoy! |
Dylan was a lousy pass-rusher, he never could have played the 3-4. He also couldn't play whatever the hell that character was supposed to be in "Pat Garrett & Billy The Kid". (I do quite like his guitar and harmonica playing however.) |
Ben Campbell - I don't know that we've ever really disagreed here on whatever subject, but I have nothing but respect for your knowledge of music! Nearly everyone here could learn a lot from you. I have to respect Capt for his willingness to revisit the issue, or should I say artist!
There is never going to be consensus on Dylan any more than there is on SS vs Tubes CD vs Vinyl, or anything else...
Johnny Cash said that "Dylan had a profound effect of country music..." I would contend, and Johnny Cash would I'm sure agree that his effect on much more than country music was profound. He changed the way the Beatles looked at music and the potential for what a song could achieve. His "Basement Tapes" had an effect (arguably) which brought about the end of Cream and a change in direction for Eric Clapton.
People will always debate "who made who?" but I will continue to believe that Dylan influenced his and subsequent generations more than they have him.
Musicians never criticize Dylan for his music, while they are often unsympathetic towards his personal choices or endevors(sp).
It's hard to take criticism of Dylan seriously when it is leveled by people who have made no lasting impact on society.
I would agree that the quality of music recordings other than a few startling exceptions is not good. Bass is boosted, mids and highs are compressed, soundstages are collapsed, and imaging is painfully thin. BUT when artists record with the idea that music will be heard on POOR quality formats, whats the point of making good recordings?
The 3-4 defense is practically impossible to do well. Most teams that employ it only get away with it because they are constantly blitzing to make up for the lack of pass rush and run stopping. The 3-4 demands three huge men with the mobility of a ballerina, and there are not enough people of that caliber to effectivly employ that configuration. UNLESS the 3-4 is just a name rather than a functional defense... |
As an artist, Dylan's goal is to evoke an emotional reaction and inspire thought. Judging by the number of posts here, he's still doing a pretty darn good job. |
...there hasn't been anything great that has come out in a long time. For the most part, modern music sounds like a bunch of noise to me. Dad, is that you? |
oops...I meant a 3-4 and 4-3 defense. |
Ben...I`m not an expert on the evolution of music. My thoughts and analysis of Dylan`s work were based on observations made almost 40 yrs. ago.
Until now, I`ve been more interested in whether a trolled split-tail mullet would be almost as effective at fooling a sailfish as a live thread-fin in a 5 ft. chop, or whether, with the proper personnel, the 3/4 defense is more effective and versatile than the 4/3, or in disciplining myself enough to leave the driver in the bag and stick with the 3-wood.
I actually admire your passion and insight regarding Dylan`s influence on modern music. I`ll now re-visit his work and perhaps see it in a new light. I`ll let you know. At the very least, you`ve peaked my interest.
Now, if I could only pay attention to that little voice deep inside that says: leave the driver in the bag...leave the driver in the bag... |
How can anyone say anything negative about Bob Dylan. He has done so much for music in America. When people were booing him on stage for going eletric back in the 60's, he played on. My favorite album is 1966 live. This was an awesome album just because he played his heart out and put on one hell of a show. I'll agree his voice may have lost some musicality but what he writes about and the way he says things is just so well put. He wrote some of the greatest music of a generation and I agree with him, there hasn't been anything great that has come out in a long time. For the most part, modern music sounds like a bunch of noise to me. |
I did not actually say that Dylan is overrated, I said "Any votes for" him being overrated. Obviously, you can "vote" No also. |
Capt369 I like most of the Jazz artists you mention also.
However your comments on Dylan are based on some cliched terms referring to his fame or legend.
Your dismissal of what he did with music is crude and largely wrong.
If you have even a basic interest in songwriting you have to realise he turned that world on it's head, changed what a song could achieve (in an artistic sense)and operated lyrically on levels that your silly dismissal doesn't even begin to consider.
I'm no Dylan apologist he has made some terrible records and self destructed on numerous occassions but really how interesting is any debate on any musician based on throwaway criticisms with no depth-he's overrated, he can't sing, he isn't a good musician blah blah blah?
I've never read a single criticism of Dylan on Audiogon that went beyond that a child might make.
There are several above as well as yours.
He is actually very similar to Miles Davis in attitude and approach to music if in a totally different sphere.
The ability to take a musical form, analyse it,play it classically straight at times, take it apart to see how it worked and reform it in a new fashion , stretch the rules of that form, break the rules of that form, introduce aspects that baffle and enrage their audience, be a complete artistic maverick full of integrity only to look a human hypocrite a few steps further on.
Above all else they took their genres to the very peak of artistic achievement.
It's all in there................if you listen. |
I have never understood why Bob Dylan seems to be loved or hated only. Not to many, "whaterever" responses about him. I just love him and think his humble opinion of himself and his life is amazingly refreshing for a person so worshipped by so many people. He was Jimi Hendrix favorite musician and has written more great songs than anyone I can think of outside of Willie Nelson. Music is spiritual so I guess that explains Bob Dylan. You are either there with him or not. |
08-23-06: Ben_campbell
Capt369's post shows the depth of thinking about music for a whole lot of people and I think that's fine but it's neither interesting or thought provoking in itself.
Audiogon is filled with this level of comment time and time again on music.
Well Ben, my "depth of thinking" about music has nothing to do with my thoughts on Dylan and his rise to prophetic and poetic fame. My musical interests were, and are, elsewhere.
To put it simply, we dug Davis, Adderley, Coltraine, Monk, J. Smith, Mann etc.
There`s also a strong argument that these artists had a great influence on todays music as well.
To each their own, eh?
Peace
08-23-06: Tfkaudio
If you don't get Dylan, that's too bad.
Tfk, with all do respect...Nah. |
