Only days after making my last post, which featured a short word of praise for the latest album from Brit singer Amy Winehouse, I was informed that she we will be making the trek across the pond to North America for a tour (March 23rd, The MOD Club, Toronto). What excellant news, a chance to perhaps see if it's simply "studio magic" that makes her stunning, authentic sound hold up (somehow I doubt it). Surfing my way through the internet I am directed to a review on popularly opinionated bible of music "Pitchfork.com". The quick review touches on the first single from Back to Black, more specifically how London outfit "Hot Chip" have made it sound good with their own reworking of her recorded material. The text doesn't just put down the original, it bluntly proclaims it as "awful, awful" (yes, for some reason there really was a need to make the distinction between an awful rating of "one" to the sensational, yet highly effective "two").
What is my point? Am I blasting the writer for not making the same connection I have made with the song and the album? Does she know something I don't? On the contrary, my point is simply this; If a reputable source, a demi god if you will of musical taste like Pitchfork can simply dismiss something that I have taken a liking to, then all is right in the world. It's important that people in the business of waxing poetic about the sounds they like and dislike (music journalists and bloggers alike) air their thoughts and feelings without pressure to make something sound like it's great, when it's shite. It opens up discussion and proves that there are people out there with differing opinions about what constitutes really great music. Isn't that the whole point of art? It's objectivity?
If there is one thing I've learned while DJing all these years it's that everyone who listens to music has an opinion or two to share. And some of them are actually right.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment