Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ✌➬
I don't think I can differentiate the two. Every time I listen to Sy I can see their pop melodies, especially their 90's output. This is also with other noise artist or those along the same lines. Magik Markers, Bardo Pond, Arab on Radar etc.
Every time I listen to pop albums, be Madonna or Britney Spears I find it that they could be the most noise artist than any one that claims to be a noise artist. I also think that pop and noise can be intertwined, as it has been with the Raveonettes, Jesus and Mary Chain, Late SY.
Are any of you in the same situation?
|
Noise as a genre, no.
Noise as an adjective, yes. One definition of noise (the definition pursued/ developed by your Cages and your concréte types who laid the foundations for your Merzbows, Reeds, Whitehouses etc) suggests that 'noise' is anything which falls outside of 'conventional' notation. Most percussion is, on some level, noise. The hyper-production on pop records (following the tradition set by Sgt Peppers/ Pet Sounds) uses a lot of 'noises'. They're not often at the forefront of the mix, but they're definitely there. Incidentally to this post, I'd like to mention here that while I can't stand the Beatles as songwriters, their records do make fascinating studies for their production (the later stuff at least).
There's quite a common technique in 'sexy pop', commonly used by Prince/ Madonna/ Britney (but found all over 'popular' music in the 20th Century), whereby the vocals are either miked very close or without one of those vocal baffle things, whereby you get the sound of the closing of salivaed lips, or the rushed intake of breath. This is a noise. The plectrum attack on garage records, and the pop equivalent in the Kinks/ the Who, which is often cleaned out in 70s pop - that's a noise. Pick slides - noise. Feedback - noise.
'Noises' are all over popular music, but they're not often emphasised - except, perhaps, in early hip-hop.
Is that what you mean?