How about a Tool thread? (1 Viewer)

[Vince Maskeeper]

I've been thinking a bit more about this thread, and how to expess what I'm trying to say... and I think I've come up with it:
Music, like any art, is really a long form of expressing an emotion. It can be a complex emotion. At any point you find yourself listening to musical noodling- what emotion are you hearing? Are you even hearing an emotion, or are you hearing a cerebral attempt to create complexity for complexity's sake?
I geuss another way to say it is this. If you're going to create a portrait of art- you start with inspiration and an emotion you want to capture. You then build on creating a visual representation of that emotion.
Just think if instead of starting with that emotion, you look over what tools you have to create the "art"- deciding on what techniques you'd like to employ.
Instead of allowing the tools to serve the emotion and using them as needed (or not using them as not needed) - the decision is based upon the tools. You don't create art, a service of emotion-- you create craft, a service of the tools and the technique.
And people who see you piece, created with the utmost attention to the tools- they often marvel at "look how great the use of XXX is" and "the XXX of this is just great". It doesn't move them. It isn't a translation of the emotion, rather it an excercise in great tool use.
And that is where my thinking on "bloatation" of music begins. The concentration on the techniques doesn't create moving or true music. It creates craft. "That drummer kicks ass"- the fact that that is noticed usually shows that the emotion was overlooked and the techniques invade.
This further permiates my personal ethos of music recording. Obsession with production, obsession with the tools and what the tools can create. Allowing the music to serve the studio tools, rather than the other way around... this has been the downfall of music in my opinion. The tools are always there to serve the music- to serve the best possible presentation of the creation of organized sounds. Instead, decisions are made based upon what the tools can create.
That thinking is, to me, backwards. Doesn't matter if were talking about good "rock music" or good "music"- the idea, if you accept that music is an artform and that art is an expression of, mostly, emotion-- then the point at which the emotion is lost in the technique- you have failed the song.
But, i'm also often wrong, so...
-Vince
------------------
http://www.musicianassist.com
AIM: VinceMaskeeper
Do you want SOUTH PARK on DVD in order, rather than themed sets? Join our overwhelming majority!!

 

[Dean DeMass]

But, i'm also often wrong, so...

Yes you are Vince.
Just kidding Vince.
I agree 100% with you on your last post. However, I don't feel that way about Tool. When I listen to the bands I like, I listen for the music. I listen to everything as a whole and that is were I get my feelings from. Tool's newest CD makes me appreciate them as artists. They are always looking to try and do something different. Which is what I like in a band. It may not work all the time, but when it does, you get a good appreciation for the types of musicians these people are. I am not the type of person who likes to hear rehashes of previous albums, I like something "new" and "fresh" from a band. I am a big Rage Against The Machine fan, but they really didn't do anything different after their 1st album. When their last CD, Renegades, came out it was something different. I loved hearing them do some of their favorite cover songs. It was a fresh change.
To sum this rambling up, when I hear Tool, I don't hear a colletion of musical tools, I hear art. The thing with art though is it is very subjective and opinionated. But then again, what isn't.
Again, good post Vince.
-Dean-
------------------
My HT Equipment
"I've seen you and you are not cool."

 

[Bill Leber]

Kolya,
How was the show?
"Art saves lives" -Maynard James Keenan

 

[Brian Crowe]

Personally I would rather have bands play what THEY like and what THEY want to hear and let the fans vote with their dollars. A band that plays what they want to play is one who believes in the art. A band playing "for the fans" is marketing a product. Metallica and Aerosmith are two bands I used to enjoy who realized that they could play music that the majority liked and make a whole lot more money even if it alienated their hard-core audience.
Geez, I'm having DVD J6P OAR flashbacks here... someone help me.
There are several reasons I like Tool.
For one, they don't hog the limelight. How many times do they give interviews? How many people here could pick them out of a lineup? The music is the star and they let it speak.
Two, they don't sound like a lot of other bands.
Three, I LIKE long songs. Case in point, when I listen to the new System of a Down album I constantly have to hit repeat since the songs are only 2-3 minutes long. I can drive halfway across the state on a Tool album. I'm waiting on an In A Godda Da Vita cover... sometimes I'm just in the mood to "noodle" I suppose.
~Crowe~

 

[Mike Broadman]

I happen to feel that 46&2, Aenima, and most of Tool's songs are exactly the right length. If "emotion" is the point of the song, then the songs need to be the length that they are in order to convey the emotion. The songs would be incomplete if they were a minute or two shorter. The musical idea/goal is complete: no waste, no want.
The greatest artists are those that create for themselves, not for their audience. If you want to see "crowd-pleasing," go to the circus. Music, literature, and art are done honestly (a term thrown around by those who hate Crimson, Tool, etc) when the artist does it for him/herself. It is up to us to decide whether we appreciate it or not, rather than point a finger and say, "You can't do that."
Craft is a tool (no pun intended), certainly. The greatest music comes from people using craft and applying it in a way to get their point across. Sometimes I resent music being heralded as greatness when there is no craft, but lots of "feeling." Feeling is easy, craft is harder, craft applied with and for feeling is music.
I'm sorry, Vince, but being a songwriter doesn't give your argument any added weight (neither do my ramblings, btw. We're all equally useless ). You seem to be demanding that bands confrom to your personal view of songwriting. That doesn't your view wrong, but it doesn't make it the "correct" way to write songs, either. There is no such thing.
My example of Pink Floyd was just that they are extremely popular. Obviously they connect to audiences, yet they don't write songs the "right" way.
No, of course Tool isn't a jazz band. My point is that it's considered acceptable for jazz musicians to blow for hours on end, yet it's a sin for a rock band to play an extended solo. Why hold different standards and expectations from musicians just because they are labeled differently? Music is more important than rock 'n' roll.
I am not a musician myself, so how is it that Crimson, Rush, etc appeal to me, if they are supposedly "musicians' bands?" I hate that term. I've known musicians who have told me that they envy my lack of musical training as it allows me to be more subjective, and that I can just listen to music and enjoy it. I've even gotten into arguments with Dream Theater and Rush fans who said, "Oh, you have to be a musician to appreciate it." To knock that silliness out of them, I went and dragged a couple of girls (who are notorious for not liking this stuff), sat 'em down in front of the stereo, and played some of this "weird, musician" stuff. They liked it. Plain and simple, no rhyme or reason. They listened without pretense, expectations, opinions, reviews, or any theoretical preconceptions.
Sadly, many "fans" of the music I love hurt the music by their own arrogance and fettishisation of the music.

 

[MikeDeVincenzo]

In defense of Tool's longer running times....This snippet is taken from Rolling Stone's well written and thoughtful review of Lateralus
"Ticks and Leeches" needs every one of its eight minutes to reach its bloody apogee. The song is an opera of nervous tics: the vicious chop of the central hook; a sudden drop into virtual nothing; the cleaving effect of Keenan's charred screaming; a final triple-time freakout. Some sections stop on a dime, in mid-rage; the quiet bit is a serious test of patience, a long veil of faint strum and smothering peril. But each of those changes is a potent, necessary link in a snowballing indictment of parasitic evil. When Keenan goes into his climactic seizure ("Suuuck! Meee! Dryyy!"), he sounds like he's truly up to his neck in harpies and lawyers."
The review also freely admits Tool's sound is an acquired taste, and certainly not for everyone. To be honest, when I first started listening to Aenima I couldn't figure out what all the fuss was about. It took a good long while for Tool to grow on me. But now, I can't stop playing The Grudge in my car on my way to work

 

[Peter_A]

Well I just got back from their concert tonight here in Vancouver, and it was amazing!
I have to say the highlight was when Tool played Opiate and Tricky(Tricky was the opening act) came out and lended some vocals to the performance. Unreal! Tricky screaming "rape you" and then Maynard cutting in was simply amazing. Tricky's drummer and one of his fellow singers also helped on two other Tool tracks.
This was my first live Tool show and they covered a few songs from their earlier albums, but most were from Lateralus. If they role through town again, I'd have no hesitation about seeing them once more.

 

[Jay W]

Peter glad you had a good time, they do put on a good show.
Just stumbled upon this thread
Saw them 4 times on this 2001 tour, including last week at Verizon where they did Ticks & Leeches, certainly a highlight for me. Wiltern in LA was pretty special too, mostly because of the smaller venue and the energy.
As for the albums, I too enjoyed the older stuff a lot more (Undertow in particular), however I'm learning to like the new album - probably aided by the fact I've heard a lot of it live. The length doesn't bother me, quality of the music is still excellent... I do miss having Maynard being more aggressive out on stage. Compared to the early days he is much more reserved at these shows, not to say they don't please - their concerts are still right up there with the best (which is probably why they sell out those large arenas, or get pretty close).
Plus, if I ever get the longing to revisit the old times, I pull out one of their old shows and give it a good listen (the 20-30 boots I collected since 92').
------------------
[ Home Theater | DVD Collection ]
[Edited last by Jehan on November 08, 2001 at 04:45 AM]