Cactus Game Design Message Boards

(There are some exceptions to this)

Leeland

First example: Deas Veil. Complete carbon copy of Mew.
Demon Hunter: carbon copy of all death metal bands.
Christian rap: don't even need to start.
MxPx, Relient K, etc.: carbon copy of all pop-punk.
John Foreman: Trying to jump onto the folk/indie bandwagon.

You don't expect everyone to invent completely new genres do you?  This is America, if something works it is going to be copied.  That's just how it is.  You make it sound like the artists you list have no talent when they actually do.

I think people make too much of a hulabaloo out of the "secular music is just about drugs and rape" argument.  There are a plethora of musicians that put out music that have nothing to do with illegal or promiscuous activities.  Just because it isn't "Christian" doesn't mean it is of the devil.  

I'm calling making uneducated claims in regards to music theory, composition, and origins arrogant.

When did we change the topic?


Godspeed,
Mike

Quote from: Colin Michael on February 17, 2009, 09:47:20 PM

I'm calling making uneducated claims in regards to music theory, composition, and origins arrogant.

When did we change the topic?


Godspeed,
Mike

How is making a critical analysis of Christian music changing the subject?

Quote from: Sean on February 17, 2009, 09:44:32 PM

Just because it isn't "Christian" doesn't mean it is of the devil.  

I laughed at this.

Quote from: Colin Michael on February 17, 2009, 09:18:40 PM

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on February 17, 2009, 06:25:09 PM

I'm not isolationist. Secular music just stinks. Why would I listen to something I can't stand?

Secular music stinks? Christian music is bland copies of copies of copies of secular music, devoid of innovation or exploration.
The reason is because if a band can make it on a secular label, they wouldn't be on a Christian label. (There are some exceptions to this).
First example: Deas Veil. Complete carbon copy of Mew.
Demon Hunter: carbon copy of all death metal bands.
Christian rap: don't even need to start.
MxPx, Relient K, etc.: carbon copy of all pop-punk.
John Foreman: Trying to jump onto the folk/indie bandwagon.

notice Switchfoot is popular among people besides Christians.

they may be copies, but they're still awesome to listen to. what Sean said about new genres. they aren't going to make something new, but they can compete with the best of secular (IMO...) if you strip away the fame, and take it for just the enjoyablility of the music, Christian competes. difficulty, sure, but there are a few awesome people out there. look at Lincoln Brewster! former lead guitarist of Journey? he's gotta be good, and he's great to listen to, and he's Christian.

As a music critic (who hates most popular secular music), I challenge you to find a Christian artist besides Liegh Nash that can sing better or equal to Leslie Feist, write lyrics better than Bob Dylan, or play guitar better than Jimmy Page, Eric Clapton, or Jack White.

Secular music stinks? Christian music is bland copies of copies of copies of secular music, devoid of innovation or exploration.
The reason is because if a band can make it on a secular label, they wouldn't be on a Christian label. (There are some exceptions to this).
First example: Deas Veil. Complete carbon copy of Mew.
Demon Hunter: carbon copy of all death metal bands.
Christian rap: don't even need to start.
MxPx, Relient K, etc.: carbon copy of all pop-punk.
John Foreman: Trying to jump onto the folk/indie bandwagon.

So what I getting from your subjective opinion is, if you are a christian, a talented musician and want to make music or an album "Don't Do It" because it will only be a bland copy of copy of copy of secular music?  

It is a very arrogant statement to say something like this. Secular music "is" music, its not an attempt to make a Christian alternative to already existing music. As a music critic and the son of a music journalist/critic (and a Nashville resident), I listen to a large amount of music. In that, with the exception of Sixpence None the Richer, I have never heard an innovative Christian band, or one that I could even label as "talented".
One the contrary, there is a vast amount of Christians in the secular music world who are incredibly talented. Bob Dylan, Bono, the Edge, Gram Parsons, Kings of Leon, Jack White, Eric Clapton, and many others. Heck, the former lead guitarist for Prince, Dez Dickerson, leads a Bible study at my house.
Show me a Christian song with comparable lyrics to a Bob Dylan song.
Show me a Christian band's guitarist comparable to Jack White.
Show me a Christian band that has had any meaningful effect on the progression of music.

As a musician, isolating myself from secular music would have left me a horrible guitarist, pianist, and singer; how can you appreciate music when you ignore all of its roots?

Once again, this is all your subjective opinion. I have my doubts about some of the "christians" in the secular music world that you have listed, but that is just my opinion.


Godspeed,
Mike

The band doesn't have a choice in this? Get picked up by a secular label "cause you are good enough" or be wasted talent on a christian label?

Godspeed,
Mike

I challenge you to find a Christian artist besides Liegh Nash that can sing better or equal to Leslie Feist, write lyrics better than Bob Dylan, or play guitar better than Jimmy Page, Eric Clapton, or Jack White

They don't have to be better than these people in order to be considered good or talented.  Who is better, Roger Marris or Mickey Mantle?  There is no definitive answer, but they were both incredible players.

Concerning Leeland, I highly recommend both albums.  High quality on both.

Show me a Christian band's guitarist comparable to Jack White.

Phil Keaggy is better than Jack White.

Quote from: Colin Michael on February 17, 2009, 09:18:40 PM

Show me a Christian band's guitarist comparable to Jack White.

Phil Keaggy is better than Jack White.

Phil Keaggy, though, is only cool because he's distributed by Pol's dad.

And I'd disagree with you anyways (but as a matter of preference, not critic).

Quote from: Colin Michael on February 17, 2009, 10:17:57 PM

Well, I mean, wouldn't you rather make money and "reach more people" by being on a secular label?

It's like staying in the minor league instead of going into the Major leagues.

Not at the cost of compromise. If I'm to stay in the Minor League, so be it. If I'm to go to the Major League, it will happen. When it comes to music, I have my opinioin of music, contrary to the "music critics". You have your opinion of music, contrary to  "music critics". Being a "music critic" doesn't endow you with rights, only an opinion. Not being a "music critic" doesn't lessen my opinion or anyone elses. I have made choices based on what is best for me and my house in alignment with scripture, as I know it. Others have made choices on what is best for them. Arguing which is better music is subjective to the individuals opinion and taste. The burden of proof in this is not shouldered by anyone. What we are all to do, is make the decision that is best for our spiritual well being and ultimately to honor our God.


Godspeed,
Mike

Well, secular labels don't make bands comprimise their values in the least.

Just a band by their talent, not by whether their views line up with yours.

As far as good guitarist. Jimi Hendrix, John Fruciante are couple of my favorites.

Bassist- Les Claypool and Flea. Are probably the two best. The guy from tool is really good too though.

Totally off topic of what  you're all arguing about. but I don't care much lol.

Very well then, I will respect his taste.

I apologise for my typical bi-polarness that comes out on the internet.

I agree that coldplay isn't the best band on the earth, but they are a great band. I will judge them more, as I continue to listen to more of their older music.


I do believe this topic has completely gotten off course from it's original posting though.

Yeah, Viva La Vida is a great album but it has a lot of dry spots; that's why I'm glad Robert Plant and Alison Krauss got album of the year.

And yes, there is a difference between critique and taste (obviously).
For example, one can critique Twilight or the Harry Potter series (and in that sense judge them as bad literature) but the millions who read them don't care about whether or not it is good literature; they enjoy the content for itself.
On the contrary, one may love to watch Eragon; however, Lord of the Rings will always be far better literature than Eragon.
In this sense, one can enjoy Deas Viel; however, Mew (the band they sound exactly like) is better on terms of innovation, vocals, and composition. Now, if Deas Viel had taken the ideas of Mew and progressed it (by adding other elements) they could be placed on a tier of criticism subject to taste alone.
This is why (as incredibly annoying as I find them) I can give some respect to Panic at the Disco (as they are very innovative compared to other bands in their genre). I cannot give that same respect to a band like The All American Rejects who sound no different than every other pop punk band, nor can they write good songs.

Another point of criticism I will add to both Christian popular music and Secular popular music is the use of pitch correction on vocals (which is INCREDIBLY annoying if you know how to recognise it). If you can't sing, don't sing. If you watched the Jonas Brothers at the Grammys you could hear that when the singer's voice would go out of key, there was a little sound like a wah-wah pedal. Katie Perry over uses this too. (I personally think it fits well when used for effect in bands like Daft Punk or by someone like Kanye West).

In general, Christian pop music is formulaic. You play G, C, and D (and Bm if it's a sad song). If your vocal range doesn't fit, move the capo. Move the capo if you want to vary your set, too. The vocalists usually don't take many risks, staying around the same key. Electric guitar is either light fill or blaring distorted powerchords with string bends (i.e. Meant to Live). Most likely will be a SG or an LP, a stratocaster or telecaster if it's a Christian punk band. There's usually a slow bridge (with guitar fill and acoustic picking or piano), but no real change in key for the singer. After that, you go back to the chorus, maybe try to hit a few high notes vocally, and then end on the G. Drums are four-fourths (and symbol fills during the bridge). Piano and synths are light and usually not detectable. Bass clones the guitar, but in single notes. Lyrically, it is usually without conflict. All about how "perfect" the world is or how people are only sad because they don't have God.
Christian punk just tries to "sell" Christianity by making it rebellious (but being careful not to offend parents with any kind of anarchy, swearing, or unkosher topics). Christian straight-edge punk bands are (rather than being "angry" about people who have sex or do drugs, alcohol, or tobacco) are tied down with political correctness and trying to "watch their words" to not offend the society they're trying to change. Christian punk bands follow a Ramones formula (and the Ramones songwriting formula isn't exactly genius) while the straight-edge bands follow a Minor Threat formula.
I will say that Christian metal is incredibly innovative. Underoath has definitely been innovative (putting influences like Sigur Ros and Radiohead into their music). There are definitely bands that are trying to be on the "Christian metal bandwagon", but it seems like the secular world is merging with the Christian world rather than the opposite. Bands like He is Legend and Gym Class Heroes often tour with Christian metal bands.