Dallas Blog

I doubt Pete Freedman will be as critical of this festival and its organizer as he was of the Melodica Festival which had a more diverse and better line-up.

@Anonymous: Shockingly, I'm gonna wait to see how it goes before I pass any judgment.

But there is one difference: I'll be blogging the fest, sure, but Daniel Rodrigue will be one who reviews it in print next week.

daniel rodrigue who writes for the same paper. wow, what a fucking difference. Now you get to deal with that word you all like to throw around so much: OBJECTIVE.

Have fun trying to squirm out of it.

Pete, what are you talking about? I'm confused?

You sound paranoid as shit though, dude.

waaa waaa waaa

Yet another line stolen from Stone ranger's handbook. Pete, this is unbecoming.

So Pete, are you trying to keep us from being critical of the Observer by announcing that you know when anonymous comments are by the same person? Doesn't that kind of destroy the point of allowing anonymous posting in the first place, and just how anonymous are these comments to the Observer?

@Anonymous:

1) No, I'm not trying to do that at all. By all means, continue critiquing us. I appreciate it, really. But, to be clear: When I respond to criticism, it isn't me looking down on those sentiments; it's me defending the paper in the face of them. Which is part of my job as an editor.

2) Am I somehow destroying the point of allowing anonymous commenting? I don't think so.
Although, to be honest: I much prefer a comment that comes from a reader's handle over one that comes in anonymously. At least in those instances, there can be a legitimate discussion between parties, and not just random arguments and name-calling. I don't, however, think it's within my rights to force you to not post anonymously. So feel free to continue doing it. Anyway, my guess is that, most of the time, people post anonymously to hide their identities from other readers instead of me. I'm generally OBJECTIVE (there's that word!) and thick-skinned enough to not let it affect my writing or opinion. And should that not be the case, I understand that it's my job to assign that piece to another writer.

3) Lastly, how anonymous are your anonymous comments? I'd say they're pretty anonymous. Or, at least, as anonymous as a random string of a dozen or so numbers can be. Which, actually, I'd again say is pretty anonymous. Sometimes, it's just tough to ignore seeing the same set of numbers over and over again over the course of an hour. Even so, I'm not tech-savvy enough to figure out your actual identity based off those numbers. And, honestly, I'm not that bored either.

Hope this helps...?

I love the idea of the festival but why is all the music the same endless sameness - clone bands of 60 year old rock in a 60 year old style with none of the soul of the original and not a drop of originality.
I know Dallas is the provincial music capital of the world, but why the endless stubbornness to even acknowledge the new music of THIS century - post bands music.
For the Denton NX 35 to grow into anything other than the corporate art showcase of Austin's SXSW, it'll have to at least try to carry music that isn't everything rock started out opposing. When you have a generation that doesn't even have a word for square - that can't even imagine rebelling against corporate music - you got problems.
Time for a revolution in music and that includes Denton, Dallas, and Austin. ( btw when music goes south, you end up in Austin!)

wow!!

Anonymous @ Wednesday, Mar. 11 2009 @
3:48PM has a serious case of sour grapes.

Tom, with all due respect, what you call "corporate music" isn't worth the time or energy to rebel against. The music business is on life support right now. It's like picking a fight with somebody who is already in a coma.

If there is ever going to be a new revolution in music, it won't an aesthetic one; it will be a rehabilitation of a broken business model.

Right now we need to be thinking about more important issues than whether or not an artist's music sucks. All of us need to be thinking about how we can support and protect the well-being of anyone who does something creative for a living; this also includes artists, photographers, filmmakers, dancers and journalists.

This next generation of musicians will be the ones who will ultimately take it upon themselves to figure out a viable way to make a living doing this.

All of the "old school" music execs who are our age are the ones responsible for ever letting this happen in the first place. Your assertion that young people need to get their shit together really only holds water because our generation fucked it up so bad over the last twenty years.

I do agree with your general premise that we need an artist to step up and Be Somebody. It's hard to imagine that a singer like Bob Dylan, James Brown, Bob Marley or John Lennon could once make music that inspired people to march in the streets. In 2009, is there a single musician who captures the undivided attention of our youth culture with a message of cultural revolution or human rights?

I'd have to say no - because most of our musicians are all working day jobs just so they can keep a roof over their own heads.

Thanks for your smart comments Liles. But for me I can't support 60 year old clone music no matter who does it. That doesn't mean there isn't great music out there. Here's a hundred of them and each one is a hit - something I haven't heard in the mainstream in years.

Musea's Worldwide Favorite Music LIST
"100 Plus Favorite Music from Youtube and Myspace"
http://musea.wordpress.com/2008/12/10/100-plus-best-music-from-youtube-and-myspace/

For music to thrive in this century - instead of rehashing last centiuries music, I think we need to do two things. One oppose rock because it has become everything it started out opposing - and there is no music on planet earth that has ever become more mainstream established boring, narrow, and bland.
And two we have to get back to basics. That's what I'm doing with my beat up guitar and post-bands music - one of the few new types of music this century. I don't play in the same place (box office instead of a club) I don't play with electric guitars or in a band ( I play a beat up 1964 standard Silvertone bought from Sears), I love to take requests from anyone in the world in what may be the first world request and dedication weekly live performances, I play every genre of music I can, including instrumentals, originals and covers, I'll never sign with the Big Four. In other words I'll do anything to break the dull rules that bands seem determined to follow.
Instead I say dump over production, get back to melody, write good songs - even hits or better yet leave it to songwriters who know how, have lyrics that make sense, sing about your life with real events, be honest in the music - no trendy puff whining, strive for innovative musicianship with technique, play for people not fame, and rebel against SOMETHING - anything - what you believe in!
Enough of us do that and we have a music revolution right here in Dallas.

The beauty of original rock that people today are trying to ape seems to allude them. The music of the last decades has drifted into two separate mainstreams ;
The psychotic hard beat violent crowd
The mushy whiney me-me-me melodic pop.
The reason rock and roll was so good in it's earlier days was that it had both a beat and a melody, energy and a heart. It didn't drift off into one side or the other.
Time for a reckoning. Musicians can either fit in - like every band on earth now, or they can stand out for something that rebels against the blandness.
Sure the majority is opposed to what I say. When has it been that new music fit in with the crowd?
I find great music everywhere from every continent that is breaking the rules (see list above). I applaud them whether they are from Australia, Japan or Denton.