From: brian@mel.dit.csiro.au (Brian May)
Newsgroups: aus.music
Subject: Re: Alternative Mainstream (Was: Erotica and Tom Waits)
Date: 8 Oct 92 06:59:15 GMT
Distribution: aus
Organization: CSIRO DIT (Melb.)


In article <leroy.718521403@ultima>, leroy@socs.uts.edu.au (Leroy) writes:
|> Brian May says:
|> 
|> >> I said:
|> 
|> >> With REM, Faith No More, Peter Gabriel, Tom Waits, Suzanne Vega, U2, Madonna 
|> >> and all those other bands changing their approaches or just producing very 
|> >> different music to their usual, is the mainstream now more interesting than 
|> >> the indie scene - or is it just more interesting than the Australian 
|> >> independents?
|> 
|> >depends on what you find interesting to start with.  If you find U2 and 
|> >Suzanne Vega making danceable songs interesting, then maybe the former applies,
|> >but to you.
|> 
|> There's more to the new U2 or Suzanne Vega than making "danceable songs." 
|> It's nice, occasionally, to hear something inventive. This is my point 
|> about the Australian independent scene - it could easily be described as 
|> "White boys with two guitars and a distortion pedal." It's a glib assumption
|> (and, like all glib assumptions, it's not entirely true) but no more so than
|> your description of the new U2 or Suzanne Vega, or Brent describing "Justify 
|> my Love" as 99% Public Enemy.

True, this country does have a posessive love for American Orientated Rock.
It is mainly a blind love affair ;-)  Mention music and sampler/synth/sequencer/
drum machine/etc in the same breath to some people and their hair literally 
falls out!  Or "What?!  No percussion _at all_?? That's not music!?"
It is good when something different enters the mainstream.  The only problem comes
after the fact, when 1/2 the world's musicians copy that change.  The enormous
success of Nirvana will have opened a few musical minds, but on the whole I 
would dare to say, it just changed the mainstream focus from one genre to 
another.

|> In the past few months, the "big" releases have all had substantial shifts in
|> sound, or in commerciality. It started with Achtung Baby, I think, then 
|> INXS to some extent, and seems to include most recent releases.

Hunnas have changed mightily too. Their horn section sounds progressivly 
ridiculous through each recording of their new songs (the few I've heard).

|> The album tracks I've heard from the new Peter Gabriel aren't easy radio fodder.
|> Neither is the REM album or Tom Waits. (His work rarely is.) Is this because 
|> the mainstream (and, following from this, the radio playlists) are prepared to
|> accept more interesting music? Two years ago, none of these albums would have
|> been considered mainstream. Now the definition has shifted to include things 
|> like Sonic Youth (just) and the Chilli Peppers, and alternative is starting to 
|> mean a couple of "credible" genres. It seems as if the independents are more
|> hidebound and afraid of change than the majors. It's particulary evident in
|> the Aus scene, with the emphasis on grungy three-minute guitar songs. 

The main problems with the mainstream (IMHO) are bandwagoneering, blatant
commerciality, stagnation.

The main problems with the 'alternative' scene (IMHO) are bandwagoneering,
exclusivity, stagnation 

Many commercial artists couldn't care less wether they are perceived as
'different' or 'fresh'  (on their income - would you? :-)

Many 'alternative' artists should extract their heads from their rectums before
shooting off about originality etc.

|> That's oversimplification, I know. But it's fun to think about.

ditto for the above four.

yours as-happy-as-you-can-get-on-a-wet-melbourne-day,

brian
--
| Brian.May@mel.dit.csiro.au |           Open Systems Program           |
| CSIRO/DIT, 723 Swanston st | TEL +61 3 282 2613 -- FAX +61 3 282 2600 |
|Carlton, VIC 3053, Australia|          Experimental Scientist          |
Newsgroups: aus.music,rec.music.misc