Pop music cutups
January 25, 2012 6:28 AM Subscribe
The Beatles, "Revolution," cut up, scrambled, and looped. The Beatles sing "one two three four" for an hour. All of Billy Joel's greatest hits played at once. Celine Dion screams for 1.5 minutes. Please enjoy responsibly. (Mostly via I Love Music.)
The Beatles, "Revolution," cut up, scrambled, and looped.
That stuff is e-e-e-e-e-e-easy to do easy to do easy to do-do-do-do-do-do and at the v-v-v-v-v-v-very start-t-t-t-t of the clip-clip-clip-clip I w-w-w-w-was readyreadyreadyreadyready to n-n-n-n-n-n-not like-like-like-like-like it, b-b-b-b-b-b-b-but it g-g-g-g-g-g-grew onnnnnnnnnnn me-me-me-me-me-meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 6:36 AM on January 25, 2012 [1 favorite]
That stuff is e-e-e-e-e-e-easy to do easy to do easy to do-do-do-do-do-do and at the v-v-v-v-v-v-very start-t-t-t-t of the clip-clip-clip-clip I w-w-w-w-was readyreadyreadyreadyready to n-n-n-n-n-n-not like-like-like-like-like it, b-b-b-b-b-b-b-but it g-g-g-g-g-g-grew onnnnnnnnnnn me-me-me-me-me-meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 6:36 AM on January 25, 2012 [1 favorite]
I'd really rather have none of Billy Joel's greatest hits played at once.
posted by davemee at 6:42 AM on January 25, 2012 [6 favorites]
posted by davemee at 6:42 AM on January 25, 2012 [6 favorites]
It's a good thing all of this is incredibly, utterly illegal, or people might accidentally be exposed to novel, interesting things.
posted by mhoye at 6:48 AM on January 25, 2012
posted by mhoye at 6:48 AM on January 25, 2012
The video loses sync near the end. I'm not entirely sure why that bothers me.
posted by lumensimus at 6:50 AM on January 25, 2012
posted by lumensimus at 6:50 AM on January 25, 2012
The Beatles, "Revolution," cut up, scrambled, and looped.
They already did that themselves.
posted by shakespeherian at 6:51 AM on January 25, 2012 [1 favorite]
They already did that themselves.
posted by shakespeherian at 6:51 AM on January 25, 2012 [1 favorite]
Previously: All of Billy Joel's greatest hits played at once.
Also previously: Each Beatles Album With All The Songs From It Played Simultaneously.
posted by Herodios at 7:04 AM on January 25, 2012
They already did that themselves.
Well, John did, anyway.
with some help from Yoko, apparently
posted by flapjax at midnite at 7:07 AM on January 25, 2012
Well, John did, anyway.
with some help from Yoko, apparently
posted by flapjax at midnite at 7:07 AM on January 25, 2012
Sounds better than the standard Celine Dion overblown warbling.
posted by GallonOfAlan at 7:08 AM on January 25, 2012
posted by GallonOfAlan at 7:08 AM on January 25, 2012
I've listened to the "Beatles sing one two three four" for five minutes now, and I am pretty sure it is, in fact, "one two three AHH!".
posted by mysterpigg at 7:18 AM on January 25, 2012
posted by mysterpigg at 7:18 AM on January 25, 2012
Well, John did, anyway.
If we're going to start doing that the liner notes for The White Album are going to be a lot longer.
posted by shakespeherian at 7:19 AM on January 25, 2012
If we're going to start doing that the liner notes for The White Album are going to be a lot longer.
posted by shakespeherian at 7:19 AM on January 25, 2012
The Gitmo Tapes, Volumes One through Four
posted by mochapickle at 7:24 AM on January 25, 2012 [2 favorites]
posted by mochapickle at 7:24 AM on January 25, 2012 [2 favorites]
It's a good thing all of this is incredibly, utterly illegal, or people might accidentally be exposed to novel, interesting things.
Just so happens, however, that none of these things are. Novel and interesting, I mean.
posted by slkinsey at 7:37 AM on January 25, 2012 [1 favorite]
Just so happens, however, that none of these things are. Novel and interesting, I mean.
posted by slkinsey at 7:37 AM on January 25, 2012 [1 favorite]
(Mostly via I Love Music.)
That's an odd definition of "love".
posted by Thorzdad at 7:37 AM on January 25, 2012
That's an odd definition of "love".
posted by Thorzdad at 7:37 AM on January 25, 2012
All of Billy Joel's greatest hits played at once.
Isn't this a violation of the Geneva Convention?
posted by Philofacts at 8:01 AM on January 25, 2012 [6 favorites]
Isn't this a violation of the Geneva Convention?
posted by Philofacts at 8:01 AM on January 25, 2012 [6 favorites]
Amazing! If you cut music into bits and then string them together again randomly, or layer multiple tracks atop each other, you get annoying cacaphony.
The point of "music" is arranging tones such that they will be pleasing, engaging or compelling to the ear. This is anathema to that definition. Meh.
posted by kinnakeet at 8:10 AM on January 25, 2012 [1 favorite]
The point of "music" is arranging tones such that they will be pleasing, engaging or compelling to the ear. This is anathema to that definition. Meh.
posted by kinnakeet at 8:10 AM on January 25, 2012 [1 favorite]
God. Given the internet, I suppose these must exist. Revolution and Billy Joel were at least a little interesting. Celine Dion was good for 10 seconds of lolz. But the 1, 2, 3, 4 video? What the hell's the point?
posted by DarkForest at 8:17 AM on January 25, 2012
posted by DarkForest at 8:17 AM on January 25, 2012
I'm bored, think I'll go and listen to Yesterday for 10 hours...
posted by Webbster at 8:20 AM on January 25, 2012
posted by Webbster at 8:20 AM on January 25, 2012
1, 2, 3, 4 is cool, but it needs more boots and cats.
posted by maudlin at 8:28 AM on January 25, 2012
posted by maudlin at 8:28 AM on January 25, 2012
They already did that themselves.
Well, John did, anyway.
with some help from Yoko, apparently
And George.
posted by aught at 8:32 AM on January 25, 2012
Well, John did, anyway.
with some help from Yoko, apparently
And George.
posted by aught at 8:32 AM on January 25, 2012
Considering the Beatles are featured so prominently in this FPP, I foolishly expected fewer I-hate-everything-experimental curmudgeons.
posted by shakespeherian at 8:40 AM on January 25, 2012
posted by shakespeherian at 8:40 AM on January 25, 2012
The "I Am The Cute One" related video starts out like it should be a Fragile-era NIN track.
posted by a snickering nuthatch at 9:04 AM on January 25, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by a snickering nuthatch at 9:04 AM on January 25, 2012 [1 favorite]
I love experimental stuff, but there has to be at least a little something there. The contracted/expanded Beatles songs featured here are excellent. I think they were previously linked from mefi.
posted by DarkForest at 9:14 AM on January 25, 2012
posted by DarkForest at 9:14 AM on January 25, 2012
I really, really liked the Revolution cut up. There are bits in there that sound like the foundation of a modern electronic track (not necessarily a good one, but it's still interesting). Also I love the ending.
posted by JimBennett at 12:01 PM on January 25, 2012
posted by JimBennett at 12:01 PM on January 25, 2012
It's funny how the 80's conception of "video art" has been repurposed as "shit people do on YouTube." That "one two three AUGH!" could have been on loop on a monitor somewhere at the MOMA 10 years ago and the dude would have been paid 50k. And them's 2001 dollars!
posted by Peevish at 12:01 PM on January 25, 2012
posted by Peevish at 12:01 PM on January 25, 2012
The Beatles albums all played simultaneously are really interesting--thanks Shakespeherian. I'm intrigued how distinct the sound of each album is. That is, you listen at first and think "OMG, that's just noise"--but of course it's not really "noise" because it's conveying quite a lot of information.
It's also fun to find the point where the songs start dying off one by one, leaving only the last, longest song on the album still playing. The slow descent from chaos to mash-up to a single song is very intriguing.
posted by yoink at 12:14 PM on January 25, 2012
It's also fun to find the point where the songs start dying off one by one, leaving only the last, longest song on the album still playing. The slow descent from chaos to mash-up to a single song is very intriguing.
posted by yoink at 12:14 PM on January 25, 2012
...and I thought no Beatles music could ever be more annoying than Number 9.
posted by Chuffy at 1:10 PM on January 25, 2012
posted by Chuffy at 1:10 PM on January 25, 2012
The point of "music" is arranging tones such that they will be pleasing, engaging or compelling to the ear.
I've never actually heard this definition before. I don't think it holds up to scrutiny.
posted by Hoopo at 1:31 PM on January 25, 2012
I've never actually heard this definition before. I don't think it holds up to scrutiny.
posted by Hoopo at 1:31 PM on January 25, 2012
I've never actually heard this definition before. I don't think it holds up to scrutiny.
Well, depending how elastic you want to be with the word "compelling" it's probably workable. Although I suppose you could say that there is music that is made to be compelling to the mind rather than to the ear--but it's still engaging the mind via the ear (possibly by denying stimulus to the ear as in the Cage piece) or it's not music, surely?
posted by yoink at 1:49 PM on January 25, 2012
Well, depending how elastic you want to be with the word "compelling" it's probably workable. Although I suppose you could say that there is music that is made to be compelling to the mind rather than to the ear--but it's still engaging the mind via the ear (possibly by denying stimulus to the ear as in the Cage piece) or it's not music, surely?
posted by yoink at 1:49 PM on January 25, 2012
I didn't listen to the "one two three four" video for a full hour, but I listened to it way longer than I thought I was going to, certainly longer than most actual Beatles songs last -- doesn't that mean it was compelling in some way?
posted by escabeche at 1:58 PM on January 25, 2012
posted by escabeche at 1:58 PM on January 25, 2012
I didn't listen to the "one two three four" video for a full hour, but I listened to it way longer than I thought I was going to, certainly longer than most actual Beatles songs last -- doesn't that mean it was compelling in some way?
The contention is "if not pleasing, engaging or compelling to the ear, then it's not music." If you did find it compelling, then it's not a useful datapoint for testing that claim. Either you think it is music or you think it's "compelling" non-music. In order to defeat the claim we have to find something that is indisputably "music" but which is not intended to be "pleasing, engaging OR compelling to the ear."
posted by yoink at 2:09 PM on January 25, 2012
The contention is "if not pleasing, engaging or compelling to the ear, then it's not music." If you did find it compelling, then it's not a useful datapoint for testing that claim. Either you think it is music or you think it's "compelling" non-music. In order to defeat the claim we have to find something that is indisputably "music" but which is not intended to be "pleasing, engaging OR compelling to the ear."
posted by yoink at 2:09 PM on January 25, 2012
The point of "music" is arranging tones such that they will be pleasing, engaging or compelling to the ear.
The whole *point of music* or *definition of music* thing is a philosophical dead end. Words like "pleasing" or "compelling" or "interesting" or whatever are essentially useless considering the enormous variations in the way people perform, listen to and utilize music, across various cultures (and sub-cultures!) of this wide world we live in. The only definition for "music" really worth a damn is composer Edgard Varese's: Music is organized sound.
but it's still engaging the mind via the ear (possibly by denying stimulus to the ear as in the Cage piece)
First time I've heard it posited that Cage's intent was "denying" anything to the ear. I think it's generally recognized that Cage's intent (in 4'33" as well as in other pieces) is to "point" the ear toward sound that the listener doesn't necessarily consider music, and in doing so, expand the listener's definition of what might be considered "music". In the case of 4'33", that means random sounds generated by a concert hall full of people.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 3:09 PM on January 25, 2012 [1 favorite]
The whole *point of music* or *definition of music* thing is a philosophical dead end. Words like "pleasing" or "compelling" or "interesting" or whatever are essentially useless considering the enormous variations in the way people perform, listen to and utilize music, across various cultures (and sub-cultures!) of this wide world we live in. The only definition for "music" really worth a damn is composer Edgard Varese's: Music is organized sound.
but it's still engaging the mind via the ear (possibly by denying stimulus to the ear as in the Cage piece)
First time I've heard it posited that Cage's intent was "denying" anything to the ear. I think it's generally recognized that Cage's intent (in 4'33" as well as in other pieces) is to "point" the ear toward sound that the listener doesn't necessarily consider music, and in doing so, expand the listener's definition of what might be considered "music". In the case of 4'33", that means random sounds generated by a concert hall full of people.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 3:09 PM on January 25, 2012 [1 favorite]
I'll see your shuffled Beatles and raise you Every Instance of Someone Saying "Crazy" or "Baby" in a Britney Spears Song
posted by albrecht at 3:18 PM on January 25, 2012 [4 favorites]
posted by albrecht at 3:18 PM on January 25, 2012 [4 favorites]
I'd really rather have none of Billy Joel's greatest hits played at once.
The best thing about this is that they are all over quickly.
posted by mattoxic at 6:50 PM on January 25, 2012
The best thing about this is that they are all over quickly.
posted by mattoxic at 6:50 PM on January 25, 2012
« Older "Knowing trees, I understand the meaning of... | Our burrito's will not be made of people! Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 6:32 AM on January 25, 2012 [1 favorite]