whatever happened to intros

[Jay J.]

I was just thinking today as I was listening to the local classic rock station about how most music today, mainly rock, wheather it be heavey metal or punk or anything does not have much of an intro or ending. Like the song "Long Time" by Boston I remember having a real neat intro. and you don't hear many solos these days eather of bass or g**tar. not much purpase to this little rambling just a thought I had. anyone have an opinion on this?

[Jason Hoyt]

I have had that thought kicking around my head too. I think it is mostly because newer rock music is (for lack of a better term) less dramatic. It is more neatley packaged for ease of consumer consumption. (<---uhh, sorry). It makes sense that the downward spiral of rock artists, would cut out the stuff that added texture and depth. It allows the material that would have been used for a mood-setting intro, to be stretched into the bands "concept song". Think about how talented John Paul Jones was/is. Jack Bruce, etc.These guys were stusio greats even before they were in famous rock bands. Now think about the current assortment of bands. Is there even ONE band that is a "superpower" the way Led Zep was? Just my thoughts...

[dcr]

There are other ways of looking at this that are less pessimistic. This need not mean that people are less artistic. Artistic sensitivities change.

 

Imagine someone in 1970 watching Monty Python's Flying Circus and sighing, "Ah, whatever happened to good comedy writing? Look at this--no introductions, no punch-lines, no endings...sad, really, this young lot." That would miss the whole point! They weren't doing the same format badly, they were doing a NEW format. I think Seinfeld made a good choice to drop the opening intro & credits, & go straight into the show.

 

These things change. Isn't it possible that the format of the pop song is changing in exactly these sorts of ways? Maybe it's not that new musicians are shirking their intro-writing duties; maybe the intro is becoming obsolete in the new form.

[g.]

Just the saem refrain u will usually get from me: if u look around a little someone is doing it. but if u just look at what is being "pushed" by the mediaglomerates, u will hear the flave of the month.

 

Between bands that like the post-grunge styles but want to add to them, the great shockabilly things happening, and the hybrids built around styles from the sixties and seventies and eighties, and the instrumentalists that are looking back to early fusion -- well, it's around.

 

And hey -- if u want things to progress (or get back to where they were depending on ur point of view), then -- Do It Yerself! That is the ultimate reward -- making music the way u think it should be with ur own band / recording gear!

[Jason Hoyt]

"DIY"... my favorite "punk" ideal! I'm trying Greenboy, I'm tryin'...

[g.]

I'm quite sure you have your eyes on the prize, bassape!

[jeremy c]

I just advised a singer friend of mine to shorten all the intros on his demo cd....I said no one will listen to them, they will just fast forward to hear the singing.

 

So I guess I'm guilty of ruining everything.

[adz]

I think the places where we listen to music have changed. Quite a lot of listening now is done in the car/on the move so we tend to become more impatient with solos, intros etc. and just want to get to the main part of the track.

 

The band i think that comes close (maybe not musicianship wise but for pure rock) to what Zeppelin had in their era is Creed.

 

And if you want some good intros/solos try any of Tool's albums.

[g.]

Lots of intros I've heard kind of seem like they were tacked on because "songs are supposed to have an intro, ya know -- don't want to put this on the album 'til ya's have one".

[Datsame]

The way I see music that is played on radios today is that you need to have something catchy and to the point (like getting to the chorus which is generally the easiest part to sing along with in a song) to keep the audience listening so they wont switch stations because they have to think too much about the song.

Also if the song is longer than say 3 1/2 mins they run the risk of losing the listeners attention because not everybody listens to the radio the whole time they have it on. Usually people turn the radio on to provide back ground noise/sound when they're working or driving or whatever.

The reason why music is becoming simpler(I don't know if that is the word I was looking for.... please don't attack me for it) is that it has to be used in a way to gain your attention but not distract you from what you are actually doing.

[davebrownbass]

To a certain extent, doesn't this have something to do with the radio thread we were talking about last week?

 

I got to thinking about the old hits, with intro's. It seems to me that these were there for the purpose of air-play. Remember back in the old days, people would play back to back cuts, and have talk-over during the intro...so the music seemed back-to-back but the public was given the impression of listening to a guy spinning his favorites and getting to know you at the same time.

 

In fact, I remember some guys playing records where the outro of one and intro of another were played together.

[dcr]

DBB--exactly. In fact, Pink Floyd exploited this phenomenon on Dark Side (& to an extent on Wish You Were Here & Animals), blending intros & outros of songs as if the album were a bunch of songs played on FM--it's like its own radio show. In fact, check out the intro to "Wish You Were Here" which was actually recorded from a car radio; the long guitar solo on the tag of "Have a Cigar" is cut short when someone switches over to another station & searches around a bit, & then switches over to the intro of "Wish You Were Here" already begun; a second guitar comes in, like someone playing along with the radio. Cool idea.

 

Radio doesn't just play the music. It changes how people think about music.

[Jason Hoyt]

Boston and the Steve Miller Band had some cool intros too. To reply in regards to Creed, I am not trying to flame anyone,but Creed has about 1/16th of the playing ability and creativeness Led Zepplin had. True they can definitely write a catchy (almost christian-sounding) rock song, I am not denying THAT talent. But for pure layered DEPTH of musical dynamics, and the interweaving of Blues, Rock, and Psychodelia, I don't think there has been a rock band of that caliber(of LedZep) for quite some time. But then again, with the current popular taste for Rock, there isn't necessarily a demand for one either.

[rumpelstiltskin.]

you know, though, he said nothing about songwriting or talent. however, for being the most "pure rocknroll" band out there, creed is comparable to led zeppeling in his opinion (if i read it correctly).

robb.

[Jason Hoyt]

Maybe it is just my warped perception of "pure Rockn'Roll" Maybe I just long for the day I will hear another great bassist within the Rock theatre inspire me and my own playing.It's selfish I know... I think "I" as a bass player have that bias. The me that likes Creed, thinks they are okay, but won't go spend the $15-18 bucks on thier album. They dont make me want to play the disc repeatedly, trying to cop that riff thier bass player is doing. I guess I just miss that sense of amazement and wonder that came when I discovered Led Zepplin in my Dads collection (right next to Jethro Tull). I keep hoping to find a new Rock band to "discover". And yes, for all intent and purpose, Creed probably is the modern day equivelent. I just don't want to accept it, because if they are THE "bar" to rise to, what is coming at us next? ...THAT is what scares me...

[Zack]

(Sorry, my finger slipped... )

 

I totally agree, guys. I think that intros, outtros, and songs in general are becoming, shall we say, less focused and more driven to just not aleinate the listener. I liked Dats'ame's post on the listener, and I agree. Although I do like intros, I hated it when Pink Floyd's intros would last over 5:00, such as "Shine On You Crazy Diamond." Anyway, I think that Creed at least tries to keep rock & roll alive these days, but I just don't get that rush, that excitement when I hear their stuff. I hope someone will come along who does inspire that feeling in us all, but we can only hope.

[dcr]

I don't want to derail this, but I wouldn't say that "Shine On" has an intro at all. Having an intro suggests having a certain format or structure, and that song completely breaks out of any such format. (You wouldn't say that the first 3.5 movements--before the vocals come in--of Beethoven's 9th are just "intro," would you?) I'm not comparing PF to Beethoven, but the point is that "where the vocals come in" is NOT necessarily "where the intro ends." "Shine On" is written as a series of sections, each with its own musical idea, and the sections with vocals are just a few sections among many. It doesn't fit the mold that allows us to talk about intros in anything like the conventional sense.

 

Hmm, it turns out that some damned fine music has done without intros...

[Jay J.]

got a lot of replies here, good points by everyone. just a final thought -- the newer music by people's point of view can be better or worse but I think it is just different, I do agree that there is much less talant out there today. but as far as intros and song structure goes I don't think every song should have an intro or big ending..but some should. songs should be different and more unique. that is what we are trying to do in our band (vary our song structures and styles) but the same stuff over and over again just get repetive. so people just need to mix it up a bit to keep things interesting.

[rumpelstiltskin.]

there's a song on the new chili peppers record called "midnight" that has a wonderful, albeit short, orchestral intro.

 

robb.

[davebrownbass]

Originally posted by J-Funk Allstar:

got a lot of replies here, good points by everyone. just a final thought -- the newer music by people's point of view can be better or worse but I think it is just different,

Music is music...it will grow to meet the needs of the listening public. It will also reflect society...there was a social reason Nirvana did what it did (just ask my daughter) as well as a musical one.

 

I do agree that there is much less talant out there today.

Well, it would be hard to say there was "less talent," since, as far as I can tell, the genetic balance between the smartest and dumbest humans appears to be consistent for recorded history.

 

Rather, in music, talent doesn't mean what it used to, again, for social reasons. So those same talented people apply it elsewhere.

 

Historically, for example, there was a "bloom" of philosophical talent centered around 3 guys, each students of the other. (Socrates, Plato, Aristotle--and I know some say Socrates is just an invention of Plato's) They used thier talent in the pursuit of truth, and came up the the basic philosophic underpinnings of all subsequent Western thought.

 

Then, for whatever reason, the next generation of talent didn't continue in that direction.

 

Same thing with this group: Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert...

 

It could be argued (though I don't have the talent to do it) that there was an amazing "bloom" of talent in, say, rock or blues or jazz or whatever, during the 20th Century. And now, all who follow them are mere practicioners of those geniuses.

 

So, where will the next bloom of musical genius take us?

[g.]

Ah, the incessant whining sound about lack of talent and good songs that has assailed mine ears as I have traveled through time!

 

Ironic that it still persists given the fantastic tool the internet has provided us with, to research, to seek out new and old sounds and morphs of all that has gone before. And there are magazines now and then whose reviewers sometimes are able to permit us a glimpse into styles and genres that some people in our very own communities may also be furthering as they play in willing live venues.

 

We have so much recorded material from all corners and so many historical periods at our beck and call, and yet we retreat into our little shells of safe familiarity, and disparage all that does not easily fit within those confining walls.

 

We listen to our mediocre radio stations and we watch our pathetic "music right after these messages and youth snares" MTV, and we think of only the bands that are represented at the local Wal-Mart... and we whine.

 

We fail to understand the contexts and the methods of expression - and their priorities - of others, when we could be so enriched were we to learn to listen in new ways. We close ourselves off from uncertainty and risk, and we even may fail as performers thinking that the great God Mammon and all his megaglomerate corporate subsidiaries own The Pulse of the nation. We crawl when we could fly; we cry when we could shout with inspiration.

 

We have no-one to blame but ourselves.

[Jason Hoyt]

We close ourselves off from uncertainty and risk, and we even may fail as performers thinking that the great God Mammon and all his megaglomerate corporate subsidiaries own The Pulse of the nation. We crawl when we could fly; we cry when we could shout with inspiration.

 

We have no-one to blame but ourselves.

AHA! But how does a young musician who is caught up in "trying to make it", see beyond the boundaries of what is popular in the context of his chosen genre?!

[g.]

We are pretty close to that future - unless we dig a little deeper into the catalog. There are so many underappreciated musical artists working in various genres today that almost any style has hopefuls who are worth hearing and seeing, rather than harping on about the examples that one can't avoid in merchandising schemes and movie promos.

 

Buy their stuff, see their shows, vote with your wallet. Find and support the vets, and give the worthy tyros a shot.

 

And quit missing the point! ; }

[g.]

-- And support / help build a local scene, for any and all styles. Modestly, it starts right on the bandstand and in the practice room, and when choosing and writing songs. Be aware of public needs - but excel and exceed expectations! Make links with others who are towing their part of the dream.

 

Think global, work local. Don't play into the It Must Be MegaNational To Be VALID trap.

[g.]

...And I'll bow out here. Either you hear it or you don't. I'm only trying to do my part : }

[Jason Hoyt]

I hear you... I completely agree w/you. It is just getting from point "A" to point "B" sometimes gets a bit complicated by life, especially within the context of what "I" can do...

[jeremy c]

I hear people complaining about what is on the radio.

 

There is a newscaster around here who after reading the news reports says, "if you don't like the news, go out and make your own."

 

So if you don't like the music on the radio, write something different.

 

Why are you listening to the radio anyway? There is nothing for musicians on the radio. However, you can listen to thousands of cds and records covering the entire world and the last 75 years of pop music history and the last 400 years of classical music history.

 

I wouldn't be so quick to have a "chosen style" you are going to try to make it in. Styles go by pretty fast in pop music. Many of the "overnight successes" in pop music have been working at what they do for years and their time finally came. If you like their style and try to continue it, you may be completely dated by the time you are any good.

 

If you look at the biggest names in the music business, most of them do something reasonably unique. They had a vision and continued at it.

 

Hendrix, Nirvana, the Who, Dave Mathews, the Beatles, Elvis, Michael Jackson, Joni Mitchell, Pearl Jam, the Eagles, ZZ Top, Chic, James Brown, Bob Dylan, the Red Hot Chili Peppers, Jane's Addiction, Alanis Morissette, Bonnie Raitt, Weather Report, Steely Dan (to give a motley listing of people I like) did not pick a chosen style and then try to make it. They did what they did and the world came around to them.

 

Obviously I'm not counting the manufactured bands. But even the Britneys of the world have been working at their thing for many, many years and have connected with business people who had an idea how to make it into a product.

 

I know it's harder these days. Record companies are all run by corporations with boards of directors and focus groups and marketing directors deciding what groups to invest in. But you don't have to join their game. Do what you do, do it well, perhaps you will have some fans, perhaps you will sell some self-produced cds, perhaps you will "make it."

 

But I guarantee that if your goal is "making it" you will not have a good time. If your goal is expressing yourself you may not make a penny but you will always hold your head up high.

[Jason Hoyt]

Bravo!

[g.]

Never no bravos for greenboy . Don't mind me; I was just muttering to myself, taking the long way back home. Like the hypocrite I am, I'll go sulk now... Waaaah ; }

[davebrownbass]

Originally posted by greenboy:

Never no bravos for greenboy . Don't mind me; I was just muttering to myself, taking the long way back home. Like the hypocrite I am, I'll go sulk now... Waaaah ; }

Yessss, Precioussss. Nasty Hobbitses takes all the bravos for themselvessss. Not forever, no no no.