How Much Does The Written Word Influence Your Perception Of Music?
During the course of yesterday’s surprisingly contentious thread on Grizzly Bear’s “Knife”, a discussion of the influence of the written word on the way one hears pieces of music–particularly ones that are as lauded as “Knife,” which pretty much sounded exactly the way all the bloggers and other music writers who were freaking out over it said it did when I finally heard it–ensued. And I wondered: Even though people constantly say music writing is dying, doesn’t it have an effect on the way people eventually process music? Is that why I generally try to avoid reading one-sheets, “recommended if you like” blurbs, and other publicity about much-ballyhooed music until I’ve actually heard it? Excerpts from the discussion follow.
While talking about the genesis of the piece, I wrote:
And the only way I’d ever heard “Knife” before was the way that every writeup of it I read described it, i.e. being reminded that there were tons of Beach Boys-y “shimmering harmonies” and “gorgeous orchestrations.” (I’ve said this before, but “Knife” was the first time in a long time I listened to a song and it sounded *exactly the way everyone who wrote about it described it.*) Those writeups, you may not be surprised to learn, had zero allusions to doo-wop. Anyway, after I asked a few people what the deal was, Nick showed me the above video, and I said, “Hey! Write about it! Maybe others who are as flummoxed by the band’s popularity as I am will understand what’s going on here.”
Anyhoo, perhaps that’s another topic for another day — how much does reading about a song or record before you hear it influence what you ultimately hear?
(I also asked why everyone was so grouchy, but that’s definitely another topic for another time.)
A few people took the thread further, including Ned Raggett:
… I try to avoid press releases as muttered elsewhere on here. Bad enough that talk of any sort can caused preconceived listening notions, now imagine having to write about it as well…
and MayhemInTheHood:
Where can I read a good article on the tendency of the bloghouse/indie bands latching on to one influence, then another, and so forth? Like earlier this decade it was VU-type sounds. Then somewhere along the lines, The Band was on a lot of bands minds. Now it’s the Beach Boys…or anything that will permit them to label themselves “psych”. Obviously someone has had a good write up about this subject. I’d be curious to see opinions on this.
I only bring it up because Maura mentions reading about comparisons of Grizzly Bear to Beach Boys, and I read similar stuff, but it always seems like it’s just what they want to hear in the music…because I rarely agree. Maybe it’s just me.
and, finally, moulty:
Immensely, for me, which I think is why I and people like myself like hearing leaks/listening to albums before the professional reviews hit.
Incidentally, whenever I try to visualize music it always ends up being pretty similar to the album/single art. Maybe I am an empty vessel?
Perhaps, although this synthesis doesn’t bode well for the Metallica record at all.
So, I’m throwing the floor open to all of you, who I suspect read a lot more music-centric writing than the general population. Given that there’s so much music writing out there in the ether, but at the same time less than ever on a professional, mass-disseminated scale, what effect does reading about music before hearing it have? Is this why music-recommendation engines are so popular among a certain subset–because some people just want to be told that their friends like an album, and figure out why on their own? And finally, am I digging my own music-writing grave here by even bringing this up?
Earlier: Grizzly Bear Find Their Essence On The Streets Of Paris [Pic via the City of Albuquerque]
