A discussion about 'regressive music'
 

Certain musical styles will never die out. They'll always be there generally, but they evolve, as everything does. However, within every genre fans will view a certain era, scene or approach as being the purest, and greatest exponent of that genre. What then of bands in the year 2009, who deliberately, and often totally unashamedly, attempt to replicate this? They will always have an audience, albeit a largely ageing one. This applies to so many different genres I don't want to be specific - goth, hip-hop, punk and it's various styles. But I'm interested in what people think about these bands, is it harmless nostalgia, if they're happy to play it and people are happy to listen to it, why fuss about it? Or, does it signal regression in music and the miserable death of originality?
(We can discuss various examples people want to name, but I think this discussion should rest more on the 'wider' picture.)

I'd never heard this term before, and I'm going to swipe it.

Nostalgia is fine. It's when people treat it as something else that the problems start. 99% of music discussed here could be described as being nostalgic in some way or another.

it doesn't mean anything

Copyright of This Is Not Here

Hmmm, I disagree, every band has it's influences and some are more blatant than others, but I'm talking about groups who knowlingly reproduce, say, hip hop as it was in 1989, to the extent that they're more of a cover group than a group in their own right. That sounds horrible I know, but alot of these bands are the first to admit thats what they're doing.

Yeah, fair point. Being influenced by the past (which is, as you say, pretty much inevitable) doesn't necessarily lead to being nostalgic for it. If anything though, I'd say nostalgia is probably more prevalent among music fans that it is music makers. Unless you happen to be a member of Orange Goblin, of course.

I I see it in all the rockabilly bands, the "swing" bands, the "exotica" bands that came out over the past decade.
It is cool if you bring something new to it, or just of you do it well, since people just wanna hear music.

but it is not for me. I am not big on nostalgia acts, nor on re-tread stuff.

What Rob said.


But I'd like to point out that musical genres don't have some kind of linear progression. You could go back to 70's punk and take it in a different direction than where it went if you'd like.

How could it be harmful to create music that's still being enjoyed? Artistic progress will never stop, and what's it to us if it slows down a little? Regressing does not eliminate what progress has brought, and we can't miss what it hasn't. With postmodernism, regress has come to be an understood part of progress. Who knows what's coming next. I say let people enjoy what they enjoy, and not worry about the "progress of music," or art at all for that matter.

Honestly I get sick of people talking about this. People aren't allowed to play music just to have fun playing music? They can't write within a certain style because that's what they ENJOY?

What are you suggesting here, some sort of alternative musical reality? A little far fetched really isn't it? I guess we're discussing the history of music here, it did follow a linear progression, all history does, despite what MIGHT have happened.

No ones said they can't. This is a discussion, not an attempt at slagging off nostalgic acts. I guess this issue comes down to the conflict between music as entertainment and music as an artform, and for many this compromises the latter.

I understand what you're getting at (although I wouldn't say it's an either/or issue of artform vs. entertainment). Sometimes it frustrates me when re-treads are packaged and portrayed as being cutting edge ("post punk revival" anyone?), but ultimately I think people worry about this kind of thing so much because they're still obsessively searching for the 'new' or 'avant-garde' which I'm not sure holds much meaning anymore (at least in rock music). I've stopped caring about that so much as some of my favorite music is rooted very much in tradition (jazz, Sufi singers, R&B- not the polished kind).

I think he meant that even now you could go back to 70's punk and create an alternate branch from it. Like, instead of innovating from the latest innovation, innovate from past innovations in new ways.

I have some mates in a ska-punk band. Lovely fellas. I hate ska-punk. I don't think it was ever a genre that needed to happen, let alone continue to happen, unchanged, for 25-odd years now. However, I had a really good time seeing them live. So, that doesn't really bother me. I think it's only annoying when you get something that's deeply conservative that's thrust into the eyes and ears of the record-buying public over something that's slightly more interesting - Keane over, say, I Am Kloot or somesuch.

For myself personally, if these bands play well, and write decent tunes, it acts as some consolation for the fact that they're not trying anything new. I may enjoy their gig, but the fact remains the ability to write decent tunes is not enough in music for me anymore. Theres loads of decent tunes out there, and they're actually easier to accomplish then I true innovation with your sound. Maybe I ask alot, but I require of bands to write decent tunes and play them in a way I've not come across before - or else the magic and unexpectedness of music would die out for me. So for regressive acts, I may enjoy their gig if they pull it off well, hell- i may even tap my feet. But would I ever take them more seriously or buy their music? Not a chance.

I just wish people would learn some lessons from captain beefheart instead of simply ripping him off.

everything is regressive.

Urrrrrrrrghhh!!! Do elaborate!

There's always a place for nostalgia: old blokes playing Acker Bilk at summer fetes, those 'Back to '88' Raves, things like that. They're fine so long as they're taken for what they are. Then there's band like Witchcraft who go all out simply to replicate a by-gone era for a modern young audience that seems to want contemporary music simply to replicate what they perceive as a kind of Golden era. For these people I suspect that nostalgia isn't just a comfy stroll through a certain yesteryear (that most of them would've never actually experienced) but a corrective to what they perceive as the cultural ills of their own time. It's that same mindset that I think makes bands such as Monster Magnet so appealing to certain people: a kind of unconscious desire for music to get back to a time when bands did things supposedly 'properly'.

ok, sorry..
almost everything is regressive.

Is this this attitude that in the big scary 21st century true originality cannot be accomplished? This kinda annoys me, it smacks of a lack of persistence and downright laziness.

no i dont believe that because if we cant move forward then we may as well be dead! i dont believe that at all....

im just simply pointing out that most things are regressive.. the drum..the heartbeat in the womb..we all seek where we were in history all the time.. its not my fault, its human nature... ive no real proof of this but it is fact and facts cant be argued with so therefore i lay my hat on my home and call it a bridge to cross the torrent with......

I always think the important thing is the tunes. I don't like Witchcraft or Monster Magnet, but then I don't like the bands they're copying. This song, meanwhile, is very obviously copying a style and an era, but it's a cracker.
This one, as well, I couldn't abide it at first, but it is a fucking blinder, regardless of how obvious a Motown rip-off it is.

Ultimatum - the avant-garde will never happen to rock again. Let it go and get on with enjoying it.

This thread kind of made me think about something I was talking about with a friend a while ago regarding some essays he was reading on what makes human beings happy. We concluded that the very essence of happiness for a person is something as simple as being able to survive, and having to look forward to another day of existence in the hope that your day is improved by a whole enviroment which allows you to, say, rest an arm on a table, having storage space for essential things like food, an ashtray to put your cigarette ash in etc.

It's all very unoriginal and essentially primitive, and nothing that has not been thought or written about many times before. I apply the same thing when it comes to music as well, my only hope is that a chord I've listened to many times previously sounds slightly different than before and brings some sort of variation to pre-existing songs, or at least a personal approach to it that I can immediately identify with the person who has written the song. I also like music that pushes the boundaries when those boundaries offer the chances to be pushed for reasons that seem logical, rather than being an act of harsh disintegration of no-consequence to what's coming next.

I'm not sure what I mean with all this, I'm just masturabating the brain.

Maybe what I'm trying to say there is that I'm aware that too much music out there has pushed those boundaries the way it seemed logical to push them already, so I'd rather enjoy what I already have, and create a space at the back of my mind where I secretly hope that not everything has been done the way it should be done or has been bettered.

Ok, another thing that came up in my mind is the whole thing about fashion. Some people like their jeans cut a certain way, but essentially the change they see in what they wear is a slight variation on something that is very similar to what countless others are wearing, with some different decorations to a tried and tested formula at the basis.

More masturbation from me: Another thing that I concluded about music discussion is the fact that it's hard to make it flow endlessely without incurring the wrath of mental stasis, simply because a lot of it takes place outside a music-making enviroment, where it is created, and therefore a place that stimulates any ideas which might eventually give it one more kick up the arse. There's only so much that can be said about it on, say, a forum, the pub, or a blanc sheet of paper. Not to suggest interesting things aren't written about it, it's just that over-reading or writing without disciplined listening seems kind of pointless, at one point.

One more thing about nostalgia: I can't relate to it at all, since its very essence prevents anyone from striving for better things. This is not to say that by constantly seeking out for 'new' sounds you won't also often end up back in time. I don't think nostalgia has a meaningful use in this time and age, though, since you can always listen to, and appreciate, old records while you have your feet firmly on the ground in the present world.

is there even an avant-garde anymore?

why do people always think that artisitry is synonymous with breaking new stylistic ground? i think this is erroneous and bogus line of thought

That's something I was thinking while reading this thread. And anyway, who the fuck sits down playing music purely to break new ground? I mean, some of the stuff I heard on grime records I find genuinely new, then again I strongly doubt it's been created with that in mind. Also, what is the point of innovation when it comes to rock music? How is it even possible to be seriously innovative in band with a guitar, a bass, a drum, and a singer?

Exactly. But I think there are a lot of people who do that. I think that's the worst way to go about progress. I think the greatest artistic innovations will be stumbled upon when they become emotional needs.

It's not just "rock" that's regressive - a fair amount of current so-called "experimental" stuff is regressive too. Pardon me for digging up this old corpse, but personally, I'd label No Neck Blues Band as regressive, in that they quite explictly reference a lot of older avant-garde shit (AMM, Airway, Zoviet France etc etc). This is not to say that they are bad - far from it - but I honestly see them as almost harking back to a time of "purer" music (whatever the hell that is)...

When something becomes an 'emotional need' doesn't that show total desperation that your music be original? Not only are sitting down trying to be original, but you're willing it with all your soul to validate your efforts, surely?

The NNCK/ AMM connection is the tools of rock - NNCK are by no means avant-garde, but they are fucking awesome. I'm more interested in a band being awesome than I am them being avant.


Agreed. My point was more that there was a historical moment at which rock could've been argued to be avant-garde, in the purist sense - perhaps this was the beginning, perhaps it was Napalm Death (yes, I'm aware of Sore Throat et al), but I'm pretty confident rock has lost its ability to be beyond the zeitgeist. I'm happy to come across as a prick because I'm also happy to be right.

Classical music is where the real art is and maybe some jazz.

No, I don't think it even implies effort. An emotional need simply finds an outlet. What I mean is, when anyone needs an outlet, it should to be expressed in a way that comes naturally. For the most part, that involves embracing existing methods that move the person. Occasionally that natural outlet is innovative and new--especially in creative people. But they don't have to plan it, or even get it wrong once. It's natural.