If the topic is quality control for labels, let me suggest one thing that nearly all labels do that doesn't help - hyperbole. Is it possible for people to advertise releases without gushing on like it's the second coming of whatever? If you want examples, just go to any label website or any post on new releases and read for yourself. Shit like that just puts me off.
Quote from: Andrew McIntosh on October 03, 2012, 04:10:36 AM
If the topic is quality control for labels, let me suggest one thing that nearly all labels do that doesn't help - hyperbole. Is it possible for people to advertise releases without gushing on like it's the second coming of whatever?...Shit like that just puts me off.
This isn't anything new to music, but it seems to be at an all-time high in the past few years. I thought Relapse made its releases sound like shit, but they were novices compared to some of the utter bullshit I read for noise releases. Is this the Aquarius Records Bullshit Effect? Or maybe how online noise journalism culture goes about their business? I feel like everyone attended a class on Creative Writing for Music 101 and dropped out after two weeks. After a couple of sentences of that quasi-Rolling Stone gibberish, I stop. It could be something really great and/or interesting, but I'll never know; not by the absurd write-up and because I'm then reserved to not ever listen to it.
I split this into another topic... I guess hyperbole would be be those "Suffering souls buried under avanlaches of cosmic feces", while you could have said "screaming vocals over lo-fi rumbling pedal distortion"?
I was recently reading this very recommended swedish new noise zine FÖRDÄMNING #1. There is interview with P.Henning which sparks some good discussion worthy points. He expects more from labels texts telling details of their releases. Perhaps connected directly to quality control. You can tell and you can describe why this is essential and why it was put out in first place.
In many way I sympathize this idea, yet also same time wonder why not "brutal harsh noise" enough - that how tiny nuggets of information artist or label needs to dissect material for listener?
Even if we could say these almost meaningless generalizations as "harsh noise" tells very little, but also if one would need to know more of 5$ tape than "includes brutal harsh noise" or "includes filthy PE", I think it is kind of lazy. How detailed is the need of knowing what exactly one will get? You know, "I'm now in need of some German style PE, but no delay effects. And I don't want to hear about nazis or communists. Oh, this info here promises the release meets my needs"... heh...
How analyzed, and well written essays should be about material LISTENER needs to experience? Pre-dissected, chewed material.
Reviews of course would be different, but I'm personally quite hesitant to phenomena of style where album itself in moment of release (in linernotes or promotexts) is being dissected & analyzed too far. What is too little, what is enough, what is too far.. obviously matter of taste.
Certainly the hyperbole nonsense attached on top of just average noise blast seems totally out of place.
this looks good:
Francisco Meirino & Michael Esposito
GHOSTS OF CASE FILE 142 (40'46)
EVP research by Michael Esposito, Case File 142 from source recordings done
by Francisco Meirino at an ancient school of anatomy, now a library, in Lausanne, Switzerland 2011.
Assembled, edited and mastered by Francisco Meirino at Shiver Mobile, Nov-Dec. 2011.
this looks like it was copy-pasted from the liner notes:
Quote from: Mikerdeath on October 03, 2012, 10:21:46 AM
Francisco Meirino & Michael Esposito
GHOSTS OF CASE FILE 142 (40'46)
EVP research by Michael Esposito, Case File 142 from source recordings done
by Francisco Meirino at an ancient school of anatomy, now a library, in Lausanne, Switzerland 2011.
Assembled, edited and mastered by Francisco Meirino at Shiver Mobile, Nov-Dec. 2011.
Surely, a healthy middle might be achieved?
Certainly, the psuedo-poetic wankery of a lot of descriptions of Noise/abstract music these days is simply headache inducing and say more about the aspirations of whoever writes them then what they are meant to be writing about. I was also thinking about how nearly every release is lauded as being wonderful. I realise this is a bind that labels have - they have to advertise their product, have to get people interested to get them to buy it, all of that. But it gets a bit much when nearly everything released is supposed to be so fucking indispensable. Again, examples abound, particularly of releases by more known projects.
My solution - online excerpts of releases. A single track, or a few decent minutes excerpt, on something as easy to upload to as Soundcloud, or Bandcamp, or Youtube, or even on your own site/blog. Let the Noise do the talking.
Quote from: Andrew McIntosh on October 03, 2012, 04:40:21 PMLet the Noise do the talking.
I think a combination of samples for those who absolutely must "know" before purchasing and a few basic summary words should be sufficient.
I have often trusted more written analysis than sample. Of course depending on style. Lets say the usual harsh noise wall, you may get the point in 2 minutes clip. But out of more complex album, how to show in sample or even full song the arch of album what finally makes it what it is? I notice certain impatience in checking samples, and it works negatively for my own listening.
I don't really bother to upload samples of my releases, but I have said and can say it again: Anyone who feels like uploading (ideally good quality) soundfiles of my releases online for free distribution is welcomed to do so. You got blog, you got youtube account, whatever - feel free to upload single songs or full albums.
In cases where tracks are many and separate I think that sound samples are fine. But on releases which are constructed as coherrent longer pieces this is a little troublesome, as a specific dramaturgy/construction of the music will be most certainly cut off, not being able to represent the work as a whole. Also, on a strictly personal level - I have nothing against downloading a whole release and then buy it, but I never listen to samples (unlkess they are whole songs in which cases I do so sometimes). There is a certain thrill in unpackaging a release, playing it and find it good without having heard it in advance. Even the disappointment felt with some relases are worth it.
Comparisons to other artists, or rather associations to other artist periods or styles, goes a long way with me. I understand how that can make the artist at hand cringe, or maybe even be a bit insulted that their work cannot stand on its own. That is the consequence to this style of sales pitch. This is how I do it in my own listening notes, so maybe it is better for a review than a label release advertisement. I know it would help me either way, though.
This longwinded release advertisement seems to me to almost be a competition. Who can write the best prose. Ego. It is difficult to keep ego out of the involvement with a label.
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on October 03, 2012, 06:23:13 PM
I have often trusted more written analysis than sample. Of course depending on style. Lets say the usual harsh noise wall, you may get the point in 2 minutes clip. But out of more complex album, how to show in sample or even full song the arch of album what finally makes it what it is? I notice certain impatience in checking samples, and it works negatively for my own listening.
I don't really bother to upload samples of my releases, but I have said and can say it again: Anyone who feels like uploading (ideally good quality) soundfiles of my releases online for free distribution is welcomed to do so. You got blog, you got youtube account, whatever - feel free to upload single songs or full albums.
To me, this is why a combination of sound and write-up works. When I say a few basic words, some releases of course will require a little more elaboration as some things just can't be summarised in a couple of buzz words, some releases will talk through how they sound. I guess it's a difficult balance to strike as any given release may lend itself to promotion in a particular way. I guess ultimately the put-off for me is nonsense thrown together as clever wordplay... words that are to the point are more gladly received.
The old Cold Spring printed catalogues from the 90s were the first I remember using ridiculous over-the-top descriptions to try and sell noise, experimental and PE releases - kudos to the guy for selling some great rare material of course but I know for a fact even some of the artists were disgusted or amused by how stupid his write-ups were ("The sounds of blackest solar eclipse and ultimate war, using as sound source only the toilet seat in the visitor centre at a concentration camp, limited to 200 with obi and digipack, this essential addition to your collection will bring the Four Horsemen themselves to your speakers!")
EDIT - NB that description was my attempt at parody if it wasn't clear...
Quote from: HongKongGoolagong on October 03, 2012, 11:35:08 PM
The old Cold Spring printed catalogues from the 90s were the first I remember using ridiculous over-the-top descriptions to try and sell noise, experimental and PE releases - kudos to the guy for selling some great rare material of course but I know for a fact even some of the artists were disgusted or amused by how stupid his write-ups were ("The sounds of blackest solar eclipse and ultimate war, using as sound source only the toilet seat in the visitor centre at a concentration camp, limited to 200 with obi and digipack, this essential addition to your collection will bring the Four Horsemen themselves to your speakers!")
wow. Aoch. I could imagine this was either an example of pompous ironical attempts at humor, or the expression of total lack of personal insight. Either way its pretty atrocius, but I suppose quite funny in hindsight.
Quote from: Peterson on October 04, 2012, 12:24:50 AM
I think if people rave on and on in descriptions it's OK, and often intrigues me more, if it's obvious that the person writing was really passionate about the release, especially when you can tell it made an impact on their life, etc. I think it's fine to gush about something as long as it's shameless. Shameful gushing, on the other hand, would probably be comparing something you are releasing to a bunch of classic albums that it doesn't really sound like. That, IMHO, is the definition of a hyperbole description, even though there's no "total quasar blast" language being used.
Good point. Perhaps like in some interviews where the artist just totally drops out of comprehensible style of communication and it's obvious that saying the "right" things doesn't mean anything as long as the artist is able to communicate his own beliefs?
Mr Peterson puts it very well. Lets take recent examples from two labels 1) Hospital - these are normally very short descriptions but usually are quite fancy but say pretty much nothing about the release in question and I can never get much understanding as to what it will sound like 2) F&V - very recent descriptions of current 7"s are passionate but have a point and gives me a clear idea that I will no doubt love these releases. Hyperbole descriptions do very little apart from increase the word count.
Quote from: Black_Angkar on October 04, 2012, 01:10:01 AM...like in some interviews...
That's another bugbear of mine - the re-use of acceptable clichés in interviews. "I don't care if anyone listens to my music" being one of the most over-used. Sometimes I think artists should not be interviewed but asked to write statements, so they can clearly express what it is they want to express.
(PS - Black Angkar, I realise that wasn't the point you where trying to make, I just picked up on your mention of interviews and wanted to go from that).
Quote from: Bloated Slutbag on October 03, 2012, 12:05:11 PM
this looks like it was copy-pasted from the liner notes:
Quote from: Mikerdeath on October 03, 2012, 10:21:46 AM
Francisco Meirino & Michael Esposito
GHOSTS OF CASE FILE 142 (40'46)
EVP research by Michael Esposito, Case File 142 from source recordings done
by Francisco Meirino at an ancient school of anatomy, now a library, in Lausanne, Switzerland 2011.
Assembled, edited and mastered by Francisco Meirino at Shiver Mobile, Nov-Dec. 2011.
Surely, a healthy middle might be achieved?
Yeah I thought It was a bit minimal, but for sake of example. This description alone sold me on the release and that's hard to do. I can't attribute that to how the description was written, it was simply the content of the description that worked.
So the less Hyperbole the better.
In the interest of not completely boring the reader to tears: a healthy middle might offer the straight set of descriptors up front, complete with useful nuggets such as reference to comparable work... and the interpretive fancy further on. If I'm getting something out of the former, I'm more likely to get something out of the latter - however unhinged.
(On the other hand, the image of the exceedingly po-faced narrator of an exceedingly over-the-top sequence of (auditory) events falls firmly within the category of Comedy, Classic.)
Also, in the interest of saving time:
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on October 03, 2012, 06:23:13 PM
I have often trusted more written analysis than sample.
Several such analyses may be scanned in the space of time it takes to sample a single clip that does reasonable justice to a piece of work.
Somehow this thread reminded me of this old classic from 2000 or something, by the utterly jaded and cynical James Hanna. Funny text, but on a more serious note, the section concerning product descriptions has some good points in it as well, hehe.
HOW TO BE A CULT INDUSTRIAL PROJECT: THE UNSPOKEN RULES OF THE DARK-ELECTRO-POST-INDUSTRO-NOISE "SCENE" (http://www.noisedir.info/industrial.txt)
Quote from: Andrew McIntosh on October 04, 2012, 02:32:33 AM
Quote from: Black_Angkar on October 04, 2012, 01:10:01 AM...like in some interviews...
That's another bugbear of mine - the re-use of acceptable clichés in interviews. "I don't care if anyone listens to my music" being one of the most over-used. Sometimes I think artists should not be interviewed but asked to write statements, so they can clearly express what it is they want to express.
(PS - Black Angkar, I realise that wasn't the point you where trying to make, I just picked up on your mention of interviews and wanted to go from that).
well yes I do agree. even if clichés are true (as most of surely create music for mostly selfsatisfaction) artists have some kind of responsibility to try and sidestep the formulaic answers. Or perhaps to elaborate on clichés in a way that makes it more personal or analytical than just the basics. This also applies to the interviewers, of course. This do mirror the process of marketing records as well, I suppose.
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on October 03, 2012, 09:27:49 AM
I was recently reading this very recommended swedish new noise zine FÖRDÄMNING #1. There is interview with P.Henning which sparks some good discussion worthy points. He expects more from labels texts telling details of their releases. Perhaps connected directly to quality control. You can tell and you can describe why this is essential and why it was put out in first place.
In many way I sympathize this idea, yet also same time wonder why not "brutal harsh noise" enough - that how tiny nuggets of information artist or label needs to dissect material for listener?
Even if we could say these almost meaningless generalizations as "harsh noise" tells very little, but also if one would need to know more of 5$ tape than "includes brutal harsh noise" or "includes filthy PE", I think it is kind of lazy. How detailed is the need of knowing what exactly one will get? You know, "I'm now in need of some German style PE, but no delay effects. And I don't want to hear about nazis or communists. Oh, this info here promises the release meets my needs"... heh...
How analyzed, and well written essays should be about material LISTENER needs to experience? Pre-dissected, chewed material.
Something like "brutal harsh noise" could say everything that needs to be said about certain releases, but are we only looking for a description of the actual sounds or do we want something more? Is it only about guiding the potential consumers? Now I hardly ever check out samples, but if it's just the sounds we're curious about, a picture may say more than 1000 words (not necessarily true of course, just trying to make a point). Even if it's just a $5 cassette, I'm not sure why I should pick up another "brutal harsh noise" cassette with a for me unknown act today when there's already tons of sweet, brutal harsh noise tapes in my collection. I get a laugh out of blatant "Buy me!" descriptions, but on the other hand, if the label really don't think it is an fantastic release, why was it even released to begin with?
I tend to think about it as how wine can be presented; first you're happy with the descriptions provided, like "Mature and rich, with a touch of cacao and a small hint of liquorice", but when you get more into it you start to read on the labels to get more details, you may want to know more about the region, grape, soil etc. Personally I'm interested in the motives behind the release, why did the recording even warrant a release? When and why was it recorded. I want to "feel it" before hearing it. Put some heart into it. Some passion. It could be a fine line though, over analyzing is certainly not good either. Sometimes "brutal harsh noise" may be everything that can be said, but then it has to the fucking BRUTAL harsh noise...
Taking mentioned Sprachlos Verlag as an example, what I appreciate is that texts almost works as exensions of the releases. Someone is taking the music dead serious, and you can feel it. One could raise the question, what purpose does labels even fill today? Somewhere the label has to become a part of the release, beyond the logo on the back. Too many times it just seems like a guy fronting the capital for the pressing plant bill. Different discussion perhaps...
That begs the fundamental question of what is the purpose of release notes and advertising write-ups? To me, it is to provide the best possible information. Not to window dress it. Not to sell it. But to be utilitarian and to stay as close to that line while also [hopefully] expressing genuine enthusiasm and belief in the release.
That's what bugs me about 95% of the release notes I read. They tell me nothing about the music. They give me no clue as to what it is. I know no more about it after than before. Information is sexy. What only appears as snakeoil is not.
Quote from: Zeno Marx on October 05, 2012, 01:08:32 AM
That begs the fundamental question of what is the purpose of release notes and advertising write-ups? To me, it is to provide the best possible information. Not to window dress it. Not to sell it. But to be utilitarian and to stay as close to that line while also [hopefully] expressing genuine enthusiasm and belief in the release.
That's what bugs me about 95% of the release notes I read. They tell me nothing about the music. They give me no clue as to what it is. I know no more about it after than before. Information is sexy. What only appears as snakeoil is not.
This makes me think again of the current thread "Quality control" (which inspired this thread initially)... How can you create genuine enthusiasm unless you really have belief in the release? If you're convinced that the release is truly worthy of being put out there, then it shouldn't be too hard to transfer that conviction through some lines of text. If not even the label is convinced, maybe hyperboles, exaggerations and clichés are all that remains to try to sell the product?
Quote from: Zeno Marx on October 05, 2012, 01:08:32 AM
That begs the fundamental question of what is the purpose of release notes and advertising write-ups? To me, it is to provide the best possible information. Not to window dress it. Not to sell it. But to be utilitarian and to stay as close to that line
Pretty much agreed. Though when looking at label descriptions, my approach is far from scientific, or even rational. On the contrary, I'm basically looking for an excuse to spend. I want to be convinced and it doesn't take much to do that. So not scientist, but rather: dupe. Mark. Sucker. And into my sucker-brained calculus any number of idiotic factors may gain entry. Chief among these is, yes, the straight info. And it's nice when this info can be accessed quickly; that is, tagged onto the top, or the bottom, rather than buried in the middle, of a given exercise of poetic license. Dispensing with poetics altogether is a viable, if not I hope the only, prescription; but I wouldn't hold my breath.
In some respects, my approach to reviews is comparable, and often subject to the above-mentioned calculus. Given a long list of reviews, such as in a zine, I start with the artists I like, then progress to the seemingly most positive reviews. Finally, much later – days, weeks, months later - the more in depth "scientific study", as such. I suppose this approach may explain my relatively favorable appraisal of ratings systems, re- "Okay pal. Your score indicates you dig the shit; or you think it's really harsh; or that it sounds like a souped up harmonica. Now, convince me."
But I wonder if any of these concerns matter. In serving the better interests of suckers seeking satisfying sonics, a million and one potential filters may apply. Actually seeing them in practice, of course....
Not holding my breath.
The real question is - does hyperbole descriptions make a release sell better?
Quote from: bogskaggmannen on October 05, 2012, 10:32:32 AM
The real question is - does hyperbole descriptions make a release sell better?
Answer - yes.
Quote from: Matthias on October 04, 2012, 07:56:10 PM
Something like "brutal harsh noise" could say everything that needs to be said about certain releases, but
Certainly I have slight exaggeration when it was stated (originally used as feedback to mentioned interview where it was said such description wouldn't be enough anymore.. which is valid point after all). One would obviously have to think usage of description. Is it the part of labels site/announcement or perhaps catalogue of style like my label has - where several thousands of CD's are listed one after another, and short to-the-point description may be necessity if one would expect anyone to actually browse list through.
Certainly "harsh noise" is so diverse, one could want to know a bit if it's dense or stripped down, fast or slow, crunchy or fierce, etc. But I'm still quite firm about what constitutes as description suitable for communication (introduction to potential listener) and what is meant to be review/analysis - where you dissect the material much further. I believe magazine reader would hope for... journalism of some sort. While customer looking to buy albums, is most likely rather looking to get merely few essential quotes instead full on review.
I do believe - you like it or not, hyperbole descriptions sells releases. If I write short to the point description in style of "fast, dynamic harsh noise with exceptionally good sense of composition". It may lure something, but the far out mythical story of cosmic ear-drills seems to appeal even more, hah..
I am sure that I am guilty of this, I know that some of my reviews on the Pure Stench have probably came off as a bit gushy and pretentious or showy, as sometimes I read them months later and think the same thing. But for me, personally, it can sometimes be difficult to express certain feelings and ideas that I get from listening to such an abstract genre without the use of abstract descriptions, sometimes "wordy" or a bit over the top maybe, but there are those times where I can't find a single better way to describe something than the way it just comes out.
For descriptions that labels give I like to know what I am paying for, a good short description. I really don't want to read shit like "Desire for harm is the comfort of a steady faith in the imperishable. To seek possession of this absolute illuminates a destination marked by a path concealed by stones hurled from the veiled recesses of sanctuary." What the fuck does that mean? What does this band even play? Metal? Punk? Noise? I don't want to read your poetry journals as you sit in your cold dark room stroking your ego while all I am trying to do is decide how to spend my money. Most of the good labels don't really do this, they say what it sounds like and also give a bit of a personal opinion which helps pump you up to buy the album. There are times where I listen to a tape once and am like "meh, it's OK" and won't plan on listening to it again, and then I will see Mikko or Andrew give a description about it and I will think "shit I gotta hear that!" and pop it back in and really enjoy it, I'll catch something that I didn't before and actually really pay attention to it just because of a little description or opinionated review. So opinions, some sincere introspection about what you heard and vivid analysis/expressions can work great as long as it's coupled with an actual description of the music itself, some idea of the genre you are buying (especially if you have never heard the artist or they are completely changing their sound) and maybe a nod to the subject matter or content, is usually perfect, just enough. That's what I prefer.
now I think there's a difference to hyperbole and hyperbole. sometimes a little hyperbole is jut a part of a certain language or pattern of speech, where its still obviously humorous or not meant to be taken seriously. within some limits I think that is completely OK.
a for reviews AND label descriptions I think one shouldn't try to avoid pretentiousness completely as the opposite option is completely boring as well. In the end a balance is appreciated. at the same time I think this could/should be distributed over several people - there shouldn't be a general style, but several distinct voices present in the "scene".
Quote from: RyanWreck on October 06, 2012, 02:54:45 AMI am sure that I am guilty of this, I know that some of my reviews on the Pure Stench have probably came off as a bit gushy and pretentious or showy, as sometimes I read them months later and think the same thing.
I think any of us who have ever tried writing reviews have been guilty. I used to do a review zine/website and recall some absolute shockers. I shamefully remember one particularly bad load of froth I submitted for a glossy music mag that, fortunately, the editor didn't include. That's the trouble with initial enthusiasm, it does wear away.
Quote from: Andrew McIntosh on October 06, 2012, 05:16:09 AMThat's the trouble with initial enthusiasm, it does wear away.
That's a good life lesson in general. Of things that matter, it is almost always a good idea to step away from them for a period to let them rest and ferment. If they hold true when you come back to them, then send them on their way. Personally, I've found that rest period to be a top-level tool, for whatever it was that I thought, felt, wrote, or needed to express has since changed. One of the greatest ways to edit isn't to keep to the grindstone, but to step away and forget about it for a while.
There's a kind of negative-as-positive hyperbole one often encounters in the marketing/reviews of this scene, "This is the most unpleasant, depressing, joyless industrial noise album you will ever hear..." Are we really supposed to take this sincerely, and still want to send them money?
Quote from: Brad on October 08, 2012, 01:26:43 AM
There's a kind of negative-as-positive hyperbole one often encounters in the marketing/reviews of this scene, "This is the most unpleasant, depressing, joyless industrial noise album you will ever hear..." Are we really supposed to take this sincerely, and still want to send them money?
Peter Henning (Sprachlos guy, interviewed in Fördämning) delivers a real classic take on this subject in an interview me & some friends did a while back... it's pretty funny but it's unfortunately only available in Swedish so far.
The discussion is something like, you always develop a language and a way to discuss these things and that litterary quality of reviews etc. is maybe often overlooked. A lot of noise is described in these terms, like "This is really dirty, piss-stained and depraved, I felt really shat on while listening to this", which is in fact a positive description. It's a style of music that thematizes these negative emotions and aspects of society, it's only natural to use such a language, but at the same time, it can get very ridiculous if taken at face value and written uncritically.
Writing descriptions/blurbs for releases is probably the hardest and least rewarding aspect of running a label. I've been guilty of hyperbolic descriptions in the past and probably will be in the future.
"Like planets burning down or the day ten million tons of filthy black shit rained down on the heads of a beaten species".
I didn't come up with that one myself. It was a friends comment on the Bulk CD after he'd heard it for the first time. Relevant to the sound or not, I loved it. In the realm of hyperbolics it's a fucking gem!
I guess for reviewing, almost all have done this. As for me, I'll confess that I was doing such things on two occassions:
1. when I truly don't have anything else to say, but somehow should fill the missing space up to what's my minimum limit. I'm not that professional writer about HNW let's say as is Roger Batty, so when there is HNW album to review, if I see that I have nothing else to say, then here we go with a story that is associated with the release, the context, the idea and so on - "black tunnels to China" etc.
2. when I was rather new in reviewing all that industrial stuff and this was overmystified for myself. And thus these were attempts to describe the "evil" or something like that, that should be felt.
But over time this habit is almost gone. But I sincerely hate reading such stuff... IF I remember correctly, it was sewer election's sex & death review from heathen harvest that seemed the most retarded one ever. it was like listing some random words "desert, vomit, sand, darkness, ghosts" etc. for the whole review! that's not hyperbole I guess. that's just plain silliness so this should be kept in mind i think about everything - label descriptions etc.
I would think there are certain terms or phrases you can identify to specific mood. So would it qualify as worst examples of hyperbole?
Thinking of something in lines of cosmic swirls echoing from distant galaxy -type, and you basically (should) know what it probably sounds like. Even if you could say modular synth jam with lots of reverb, the former option does the job. I would guess problem is when text means nothing and has absolutely no connection to sound or composition style.
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on October 09, 2012, 10:15:29 PM
I would think there are certain terms or phrases you can identify to specific mood. So would it qualify as worst examples of hyperbole?
Like "filthy"? Seems like a current buzzword
Well, it can be useful to try understand meaning of words.
According to dictionary:
"Hyperbole is the use of exaggeration as a rhetorical device or figure of speech"
Rhetorical device = for example using exaggerated metaphors ("comic swirls...").
Does metaphors work out, is entirely different case. And that do we seek scientific and rational language, or language that awakes ideas and feelings - like material it describes?
Using regular adjective (like filthy) is hardly "exaggeration" of any type.
Filthy, according to dictionary:
1. Covered or smeared with filth; disgustingly dirty.
2. Obscene; scatological.
3. Vile; nasty
In context of noise or PE, this word simply carries plenty of meaning what sums up certain type of stuff - it's sonic quality or presentation - very well.
Word I often refer with certain type of noise is crude. And what's that?
1. Being in an unrefined or natural state; raw.
2. Lacking tact or taste; blunt or offensive: a crude, mannerless oaf; a crude remark.
3. Characterized by uncultured simplicity; lacking in sophistication or subtlety
4. Not carefully or skillfully made; rough: a quick, crude sketch.
5. Undisguised or unadorned; plain: must face the crude truth.
6. Statistics In an unanalyzed form; not adjusted to allow for related circumstances or data.
7. Archaic Unripe or immature.
And that again covering great deal of works out there. One simple word, and it covers plenty from aesthetic choices to technical qualities.
Of course, as writer, one would have to consider, does reader know what you try to say, if you gather load of information in one word. Lets say, what exactly is "menacing" noise? I know what word means, and I know how I would use it - and in what purpose, but I see it used basically attached to any type of stuff.
I have been thinking of resurrecting that old "language of noise" topic - and this kind of nerd talk probably fits there better, hah!
One case of hyperbole that I think can actually work as describing a new release is this -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0IucMOOc5A (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0IucMOOc5A)
"...a miraculous outrage!...tumbling crazy saxophone!...fuckin' roaring guitar!!....screaming and shouting!!!...amazing electronic instruments!!!!...indomitable drumming!!!!!..." - and then two gentlemen calmly describing the albums, politely and concisely yet with genuine enthusiasm. Combined with the actual sounds of the recording session, this clip has to win some kind of award for how to get over-the-top description right.
Quote from: Zeno Marx on October 06, 2012, 05:41:16 AM
Quote from: Andrew McIntosh on October 06, 2012, 05:16:09 AMThat's the trouble with initial enthusiasm, it does wear away.
That's a good life lesson in general. Of things that matter, it is almost always a good idea to step away from them for a period to let them rest and ferment. If they hold true when you come back to them, then send them on their way. Personally, I've found that rest period to be a top-level tool, for whatever it was that I thought, felt, wrote, or needed to express has since changed. One of the greatest ways to edit isn't to keep to the grindstone, but to step away and forget about it for a while.
May I ask which Magazine this may had been?
Personally I believe if an artist or label goes overboard with a desicription then whats to judge for ones self?Why not offer something simplistic,something that gives a bit of detail but not to the point were one feels like there reading a review rather then a basic discription of an album?Sure some albums deserve a little hype but when it goes on and on and then there is really no need to buy the album as we already know and expect what we are purchasing?Marketing overkill...The feeling of something new is gone,replaced with words and depictions that make little if any since regarding the actual product.Nothing is wrong with letting the music itself have a voice,full streaming on bandcamp or any other site is not a bad thing,honestly,if people like it and a label and the artist have confidence then people will notice it,regardless if a sample is posted or not,comes down to brief discriptions or full samples,everything else just dilutes the experience the album may have given its potential listiners ...
Quote from: RyanWreck on October 12, 2012, 08:31:13 AM
Quote from: Zeno Marx on October 06, 2012, 05:41:16 AM
Quote from: Andrew McIntosh on October 06, 2012, 05:16:09 AMThat's the trouble with initial enthusiasm, it does wear away.
That's a good life lesson in general. Of things that matter, it is almost always a good idea to step away from them for a period to let them rest and ferment. If they hold true when you come back to them, then send them on their way. Personally, I've found that rest period to be a top-level tool, for whatever it was that I thought, felt, wrote, or needed to express has since changed. One of the greatest ways to edit isn't to keep to the grindstone, but to step away and forget about it for a while.
May I ask which Magazine this may had been?
Magazine?
Best hyperbole ever written were the reviews by Pushead in Thrasher magazine. What's-his-name in Forced Exposure were pretty entertaining- Byron Coley?
Quote from: RyanWreck on October 12, 2012, 08:31:13 AMMay I ask which Magazine this may had been?
Did you mean which magazine I've done reviews for? There was this professionally done glossy thing from the US called Mouthy which was put out by Ian C Stewart, who used to do a great home taping 'zine called AUTOreverse, which at the end of the 90's and beginning of the 00's pretty much featured everyone who ever recorded at home. Mouthy was a more up-market version, and was pretty good in it's own right, very eclectic. It lasted, I think, three issues.
I have written numerous descriptions for labels and numerous reviews. For release descriptions, I frequently employ some amount of hyperbole. One label I write for usually posts the entire albums on a soundcloud page so a description of the music is often pointless. I still attempt to do so, but occasionally just add descriptive filler. Occasionally I dont even like the work that I am describing, but writing copy doesnt always mean that the writer likes the product. For reviews I always give an honest assessment and generally try to stick to describing the music.
I agree though that balance is ideal, but achieving balance is an incredibly difficult task. Writing about music in general is quite difficult. It is near impossible to write descriptions of music that are themselves intriguing to read while also serving the function of conveying information. I have occasionally succeeded and often failed miserably. But that is the goal. Honestly, I do not think I would ever buy or investigate a release based solely upon a description like "fast paced harsh noise with industrial elements" or anything so vague.
Finally, if a label likes a release enough to put it out it sort of goes without saying that the label owner is usually enthusiastic. In many cases, it may not actually be hyperbole for that individual. It may be a genuine belief in the quality of the music that the label is attempting to articulate, although that may be difficult to believe considering the dearth of quality music these days.
Does anyone really expect a label that has invested time and money into a release to give it an honest appraisal anyway?
"This is another mediocre release that sounds like hundreds of other tapes that you already have bought from a label and sold at a loss on discogs. Its boring drivel with no personalilty. Sounds like some kid banging a piece of sheet metal around in his parents' garage and running it through 6 RAT distortion pedals. Cover art features some generic Japanese bondage porn photos collaged with some serial killer images. I am only releasing this unlistenable tape because I went to high school with the guy who made it. Lim 25. $10"