|
November 2008
Recent Posts
'Twilight' soundtrack debuts at No.1 on 'Billboard' chart We were there: Sarah Brightman at American Airlines Center Drummer for Jimi Hendrix found dead, officials say Toby Keith should give us more ballads and blues on latest CD Mario Tarradell: Predicting the winners at the CMA Awards White Tie Affair bring electronic pop-rock to House of Blues Bask in Maysa's silky, soulful brand of adult R&B Killers, Ludacris, Kanye albums move up a day Categories
GuideLive.com
Entertainment Blogs |
Sorry, folks. I'm not all that into Amy Winehouse. I understand why her music is resonating with Baby Boomers, music-industry insiders and pop cultural trainwreck chasers. She's awfully poetic; I'll say that ... ... but like the vast, vast majority of British pop acts, she's almost banally derivative. Her songs are proto-big band romps with sharp hooks and decent arrangements. It's her voice that makes them, as well as her delivery when she's sober, on and into the song. Tonight via satellite, she was in and out of the songs. To my eyes she struggled at times, though it only took her a second or two to pull herself out of the trances she appeared to be nodding off toward. Dang, but she's got a fantastic voice for the material, though ... And now she just won for Record of the Year. I get why (Mario? I feel ya here). But I don't necessarily agree with it. "Uh ... thank you ... to everyone ... " Ugh. I think this will either clean her up or push her over the edge. |
|
Spotlight
|
|
Comments
Posted by Mario Tarradell @ 9:58 PM Sun, Feb 10, 2008
Mike, EVERY artist today is derivative. There's nothing COMPLETELY NEW to create. Can you name one artist now whose musical style can't be traced back to somebody else?
Posted by Mike Daniel @ 10:13 PM Sun, Feb 10, 2008
'Tis true, Mario, 'tis true ... but I find Amy's songs to be more of a copycat act than a melding of influences into something acceptably fresh.