Quality of Music Journalism?

[ladylex]

Im sorry. Im not bored. I just have verbal (or in this case ‘literal’) diarrhoea

Please note: the following is a sweeping generalisation. There are of course, many quality Music Journalists - but theyre unfortunately mislaid amongst the trash.

I read plenty of music reviews, articles etc from across the spectrum: jazz, pop, rock, classical, Dance and so on. And I am finding myself bored krapless or annoyed for a number of reasons:

1) The content is generally regurgitated (more often plagarised) material from previous articles written on the same subject
2) The content is written rather in a boring staid and old fashioned way to the point it comes across as pompous and still boring
3) The writer has very little understanding about music generally, let alone specifically.
4) There are more comments directed at silly unnecessary things based upon image
5) The writer generally slams the hell out of the artist (especially in pop) to the point of bitchiness (which is incredibly unprofessional) harping on such unnecessary ‘facts’ of image (this is not restricted merely to pop) and hardly commenting upon production, musicians, producers, content etc. HOWEVER: when the album goes platinum or receives success, the writer will inappropriately gush how incredible the album is; garrulous long winded praise combined with sickly sweet grovelling.

I find this extremely annoying actually. What bothers me more than anything is that the majority of these so-called journos are paid. (maybe not well, but still, their words are still getting $$). Yet: when you read the journalism provided by ‘volunteers’, the quality is much higher and well explored.

So after a long winded load of schnozzle: (welcome to my world)

What are your thoughts on the quality of Music Journalism? Especially those how have been the subject of these journalists – what do you think?

[Kenny]

Half a star! ;D

[ladylex]

Im a noob and I have no clue what you mean ;D

[isaacs]

My complaint about jazz music journalism is lack of discrimination in this fuzzy-fuzzy politically correct world. Everything lumps into the middle: nothing is truly outstanding, nothing is utter trash.

My main complaints about music journalists in Australia writing about jazz is their tepid, passionless, lukewarm prose. And the brevity of the reviews (but that's not their fault).

Also I was pissed off that one critic said publicly that I should have included a fast, swinging piece on my latest CD. Who says? Somebody's got to tip over this assumption that every jazz CD has to have a burner, a ballad, a Latin piece etc. Whatever happened to concept CDs? Composers choose to focus on a particular soundworld for their latest symphony or whatever. But jazz players have to make a cliched "jazz album" every time.

As a good friend (and internationally-renowned jazz musician) said to me a few weeks ago:

Aren't you getting tired of these small minded people that can't accept (your) music at face value and always wonder why you aren't doing whatever it is you chose not to do with any given recording project?

Why standards and no originals?
Why originals and no standards?
Why slow not fast?
Why up not down?
Why in not out?
Why white not black?

JEEZ

[timothystevens]

admin said:

My main complaints about music journalists in Australia writing about jazz is their tepid, passionless, lukewarm prose.

Indeed. If only more people were brave enough to put 'tepid' and 'lukewarm' together in a sentence. (This is all in good humour - I'd put a smiley thingy in here except that I don't know how.)

[isaacs]

Touche Tim. But I don't get paid to write.

[ladylex]

Me neither. :/ I have put tepid and lukewarm in a review once. But it was for lounge music and highly appropriate

[isaacs]

BTW Tim.

Smileys are directly above the box you type in. But not if you use the "Quick Reply" box. Hit Reply in the post itself and you get all the formatting options too. All this well within the capabilities of a PhD recipient

[isaacs]

ladylex said:

Me neither. :/ I have put tepid and lukewarm in a review once. But it was for lounge music and highly appropriate

I think Tim is stirring me because they are used in the same sentence and mean exactly the same thing. It's not the first time I've gilded the lily, I do it in my music at times too (now there's some passionate critique)

[ladylex]

You Gilded a lily? lol Poor lily.
Illiteration and excessive adjectives are my staple writing diet haha.

And thats what I meant about music journos too - why cant you just comment on what IS rather than what ISNT. If music journos are so good, theyd be musos right? :/

[Kenny]

ladylex said:

If music journos are so good, theyd be musos right? :/

I happily chose writing over playing by the time I was about 15. Just didn't have it for the other stuff - and I did try, long and hard. Have no regrets. And this tired old line that writers would be players if they could is just plain bullshit, at least in the cases of people I know and/or admire. I'm sure there are exceptions - certainly in the rock/pop world, and also there's always Stanley Grouch.

[ladylex]

kennyweir said:

ladylex said:

If music journos are so good, theyd be musos right? :/

I happily chose writing over playing by the time I was about 15. Just didn't have it for the other stuff - and I did try, long and hard. Have no regrets. And this tired old line that writers would be players if they could is just plain bullshit, at least in the cases of people I know and/or admire. I'm sure there are exceptions - certainly in the rock/pop world, and also there's always Stanley Grouch.

Too bad I say. If you (not YOU personally, but YOU generally) are a half arsed muso who can only apply your musical talents in words, and have to be a bitch about it – be prepared to be slammed by musicians. Be prepared to be disrespected by the musical community. Its too easy for a writer to source their unhappiness of 'lost dreams' and apply it to bands etc that theyre likely to be jealous of.

BUT, if you ARE a musician who prefers to write about it (I am one of those), surely the compassion and understanding can reside within you to be objective without applying unprofessional jaded bouts of general dissatisfaction. *shrugs

[Kenny]

So is it not possible to actually choose the writing just for the sheer joy of it?

Must one be either a bitchy, failed muso or a muso who also chooses to write? In order to write well and spread the gospel and the good news?

Crap.

[ladylex]

kennyweir said:

So is it not possible to actually choose the writing just for the sheer joy of it?

Must one be either a bitchy, failed muso or a muso who also chooses to write? In order to write well and spread the gospel and the good news?

Crap.

So we are referring to you personally then? Sorry - I was being quite general.

Of course - thats why people write right? because they like to and can? And circulating the goods is what its all about. But to write about music - surely youd have to have SOME idea of music? surely? I mean, are you going to start writing about fashion simply because someone offered you the $$ to do so?

[marksiks]

you can do smilies in a quick reply box i think