Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
davieG

NME now free

By davieG, in The Music Forum

Recommended Posts

Sampson

Sampson

Posted
Posted

The fact Rihanna 'perfectly embodies the spirit of the new NME' is one of the reasons it's failing.

Not at all. The reasons it dived were its atrocious and hilarious attempts to big The Libertines up as anything other than the derivative crap they wrote in the early 00s and made them out to be some sort of trailblazers in some incredible crappy Top Shop approved "post punk revival" which was more about image than music via string of now entirely forgotten bands. When there was far more exciting stuff out there.

It's movement back into mainstream pop at least show it stopped just wanking over the latest British guitar band no matter how dire or derivative they were based on the band's image, which is at least some kind of branching out.

But really the magazine hasn't been relevant since the late 80s, it's pitiful attempts to create uber-hype out of Madchester and britpop earnt it popularity but it was the beginning of the end in losing its core readership to what was considered derivative commercialisation of its ideals and just hyping artists based on the entirely irrelevant image or the fact they were British.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
purpleronnie

purpleronnie

Posted
Posted

Not at all. The reasons it dived were its atrocious and hilarious attempts to big The Libertines up as anything other than the derivative crap they wrote in the early 00s and made them out to be some sort of trailblazers in some incredible crappy Top Shop approved "post punk revival" which was more about image than music via string of now entirely forgotten bands. When there was far more exciting stuff out there.

It's movement back into mainstream pop at least show it stopped just wanking over the latest British guitar band no matter how dire or derivative they were based on the band's image, which is at least some kind of branching out.

But really the magazine hasn't been relevant since the late 80s, it's pitiful attempts to create uber-hype out of Madchester and britpop earnt it popularity but it was the beginning of the end in losing its core readership to what was considered derivative commercialisation of its ideals and just hyping artists based on the entirely irrelevant image or the fact they were British.

Maybe they should change their name to smash hits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
separator

separator

Posted
Posted

Picked a copy up in London this morning, pretty much a throw away rag now, full of ad's like all the other freebies you get shoved in your face leaving a tube station. Such a shame, they used to have decent compilation cassettes sellotaped to the front as well back in the day. Honourable mentions to Q, Vox, Select & Melody Maker that did the same back in the 90's when I used to buy music mags.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sampson

Sampson

Posted
Posted

Maybe they should change their name to smash hits.

 

It's not about just focussing on chart music. The problem was it basically was just Smash Hits for mainstream British guitar music.

In the mid-80s it used to be about innovative music - be it the new and exciting hip hop and electronic music scenes or indiepop music, then during the late 80s it started to turn its back on this and just start hyping incredibly mediocre mainstream or semi-mainstream British guitar bands who'd done what had been done a thousand times before. My point was at least talking about mainstream pop shows it has some kind of variety to it now, rather than the incredibly dire and mediocre and narrow style it used to focus on. I think Caroline Sullivan pretty much summed up the problems that have dogged the paper since the late 80s/early 90s:

""NME bands" fall within very narrow parameters. In the 80s, the paper prided itself on its coverage of hip hop, R&B and the emerging dance scene which it took seriously and featured prominently – alongside the usual Peel-endorsed indie fare. Now, though, its range of approved bands has dramatically shrunk to a strand embodied by the [Arctic] Monkeys, Babyshambles and Muse – bands who you don't need specialist knowledge to write about and who are just "indie" enough to make readers feel they're part of a club. Like everything else in publishing, this particular direction must be in response to reader demand, but it doesn't half make for a self-limiting magazine."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Finnaldo

Finnaldo

Posted
Posted

Didn't they call Kurt Cobain and Nirvana shite, either just before or just after Nevermind? lol

As long as I've been around to read it (2008ish) , it always seemed awful, especially more recently where it's became the publication-version of MTV e.g. everything but music, but when it is music, the easy-to-cover chart shite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alf Bentley

Alf Bentley

Posted
Posted

I always found it a bit pretentious. i used to get the Record Mirror, a little more mainstream than NME not as kiddyish as Smash Hits.

 

I started off with Popswop at about 11 (good for Slade & Sweet but too much David Cassidy & Osmonds), switched to Record Mirror (Record & Radio Mirror at the time, I think) in teens, then moved onto the NME in late teens (late 70s).

Occasionally read Sounds at the same time, but it was more into Heavy Metal and Oi! Music (not my taste)/

 

You may or may not be surprised to hear that I enjoyed the NME during its pretentious era, Webbo...  :whistle:

It launched a few major careers, though: Julie Burchill, Tony Parsons, Paul Morley & Danny Baker, to name but a few...

 

As a teenager, my Dad wanted me to subscribe to Melody Maker instead of Record Mirror. I remember him telling me that I'd be able to learn to play an instrument properly by getting Melody Maker, and thinking "you're not getting this, are you, Dad?"

He had visions of me learning to play the mandolin and joining the Clancy Brothers, I think....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fox92

Fox92

Posted
Posted

Didn't they call Kurt Cobain and Nirvana shite, either just before or just after Nevermind? lol

As long as I've been around to read it (2008ish) , it always seemed awful, especially more recently where it's became the publication-version of MTV e.g. everything but music, but when it is music, the easy-to-cover chart shite.

 

Dunno but Nirvana are another band they are biased towards these days. How they published "Smells like teen spirit" as the best song ever in an edition last year was ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Julian Joachim Jr Shabadoo

Julian Joachim Jr Shabadoo

Posted
Posted

Dunno but Nirvana are another band they are biased towards these days. How they published "Smells like teen spirit" as the best song ever in an edition last year was ridiculous.

 

It's impossible to say what the best song ever is (it's subjective), especially considering that most of us have probably heard about 0.0000000001% of every song ever recorded. But as far as singles go, Smells Like Teen Spirit was pretty fantastic. They didn't invent grunge or alternative rock, even Kurt admitted he was ripping off the Pixies when he wrote the song but it really was a number - it was an anthem

 

Don't know why you'd think that choice is ridiculous

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fox92

Fox92

Posted
Posted

It's impossible to say what the best song ever is (it's subjective), especially considering that most of us have probably heard about 0.0000000001% of every song ever recorded. But as far as singles go, Smells Like Teen Spirit was pretty fantastic. They didn't invent grunge or alternative rock, even Kurt admitted he was ripping off the Pixies when he wrote the song but it really was a number - it was an anthem

 

Don't know why you'd think that choice is ridiculous

 

Not doubting it's a good song but it's not in the same category as something like 'Hurricane' by Bob Dylan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Julian Joachim Jr Shabadoo

Julian Joachim Jr Shabadoo

Posted
Posted

Not doubting it's a good song but it's not in the same category as something like 'Hurricane' by Bob Dylan.

 

But it's subjective. Why is it not in the same category as Hurricane by Bob Dylan? Because Bob's lyrics are more what you'd call poetic? Or because you're personally averse to someone raising their voice?

 

I'm sure Hurricane is technically a good song but I wouldn't rank anything by Bob Dylan as potentially the best song in the world - to me it sounds like someone who's just had a mouthful of fillings talking while riffing on an acoustic guitar, and doesn't do anything for me. I can see why he's popular, but it's not enjoyable for me in the slightest. 

 

But I wouldn't say "Hurricane by Bob Dylan is a good song but it would be ridiculous to consider it someone's idea of the greatest song in the world". 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'd definitely raise an eyebrow if someone considered anything by Bruno Mars as the greatest though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Renart

Renart

Posted
Posted

Not doubting it's a good song but it's not in the same category as something like 'Hurricane' by Bob Dylan.

 

I would like to take my Rep Point back please :) Webbo, HELP please. I wanted to 'quote' rather than give credit, but got daft.  I like 'Hurricane and might well prefer it to 'Smells Like Teen Spirit', but the argument is flawed. As has been stated, the choice has to be subjective. I am sure that if we got people on here to give their 'best song of all time' we would get a whole heap of different answers. I would probably go for something like 'A Day in the Life', but that is not the point and it might change on a day-to-day basis.

 

We would then have to look for different criteria for judging what is 'great', such as technicality (Dylan) and/or impact (Nirvana), and we are back to division and subjectivity. For you 'Hurricane' is the 'greatest song ever' for others it could be (~and probably is) very different. At the end of the day a panel would have to score on criteria and then thrash it out and comprimise - it would still, however, be subjective, how could it not. By-the-way, 'Smells Like Teen Spirit' is not a bad call along with many others that 'might' take that crown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...