Greatest Hit of the '70s, Round 2c: Feels Like the First Time (1977) vs. Half-Breed (1973)

[NAF1138]

@Pogo I could do a new thread if you want. I did go listen to both this song and Hot Blooded to properly respond here.

I don't think it's genre. Or at least not ONLY genre. These songs are... Boring. Hot Blooded less so. But Feels Like the First Time is so paint by numbers it could put me to sleep.

It's all the same volume. The bass literally picks out the 4 beats of the measure holding the same root note the whole time. The drums play the most stereotypical rock beat. There isn't a chord progression in the melody so much as just playing the same one chord riff up the next step of the scale. No change for the chorus. Then a bridge which is actually pretty nice, and the exit from the bridge is very effective, it's my favorite part of the song, then back for a chorus and a gratuitous guitar solo (I'm a guitar player, I usually want guitar solos, but this was unwelcome as it just extends the song over an already boring vamp) then outro.

So I am asking myself, "so what?" "why does this bug me?" I like punk rock which is way less complicated. It has keys, and usually I'm a sucker for anything with keys. The guitar player is good. Not great mind you. Not good enough to make up for stuff I don't like, but fine.

Why is it so damn boring?

3 things I have come up with beyond the nonspecific criticism of "generic sounding, paint by numbers, and lacking soul"

1) that rhythm section. It holds a beat I'll give it that. But ho boy does it do it in the least interesting way possible. The drummer and bassist aren't the backbone of this band, they are the session musicians that were hired to lay down a rhythm track that gets played to and replaced later, but they forgot to replace it with actual music.

2) tempo. Hot Blooded and FLTFT are within 10bpm of each other. That's, basically the same tempo within a reasonable margin for human error. It's 108-118 bpm. Which is just one click faster than what you would call medium speed. I'm not positive but I'm pretty sure all their songs are pretty close to this tempo. It also never changes. It's exactly the same tempo for the whole song.


3) dynamics. Every moment of these songs, every instrument in them, is played at the exact same volume the whole time. This volume is LOUD. It reminds me of the first garage band I was in. Just play full out as loud as we can with no changes in dynamics! It's not an inherently bad thing, but it adds to the feeling of same-ness that covers these songs.

Bonus point!

4) the lyrics are just really lazy. Again, reminding me a lot of my first garage band where the lyrics were literally just whatever we thought up while we were jamming at full volume.

And I guess it's just the woman in you
That brings out the man in me
I know I can't help myself
You're all in the world to me

Just. What? What is that? "You're all in the world to me". This is terrible even before we get to rhyming me with me.

Conclusion:
Given that these are not kids in their first garage band I have to assume that they are not making music for any reason other than to crank out songs as fast as possible so they can get to the real business of partying and picking up chicks.

I think this is genuinely mediocre music made by people who were not too concerned that they were making mediocre music. It's loud and has crunchy guitars and a singer who can sing really well and it's loud. But it's missing anything that feels real or authentic or betrays any evidence of a second draft of any of the writing. It's... Boring. Genuinely REO Speedwagon and all of Grand Funk Railroad is just more interesting to listen to.

As for the Art Student choices.

Yup. Went to art school. Theater arts, but still. Do I like all the art student regulars? Yup. Bowie is my favorite musician ever. I love Talking Heads and have seen David Byrne in concert more than once. I'm meh on Roxy music, but I like a lot of Brian Eno. Tom Waits. Elvis Costello. Patti Smith. Yup.

But, I like to think I'm both eclectic and open minded. I like Jazz and classical music a lot. I listen to metal. Both weirdo extreme metal and Judas Priest and Motorhead.
I grew up on "classic rock" . Like, a lot of classic rock. Zeppelin, Clapton, The Beatles, The Stones, The Who, Jefferson Airplane, Jannis, Hendrix, The Doors. I wore out a ton of cassettes as a kid. As a teen I was into punk rock and later "indie" rock. As a guitar player I mostly play a lot of blues and listened to and learn a lot of blues music. If I'm working on my bass playing I mostly play motown. I also spend a lot of time listening to hip hop. I will say the majority of what I like has something discordant about it. It isn't smooth sounding. It has ugly bits. But, not always. But usually I like stuff that sounds odd.

I like a lot of different stuff. I don't like a bunch of stuff too. How much is pretentious? I think at this point I'm only pretentious as a joke. But who knows. I genuinely do like the things I like. I understand you genuinely like Foreigner. I get what is there to like. For me it doesn't outweigh the other stuff. But, that is me. Regardless of what I say elsewhere, I am genuinely happy when people like stuff I don't. It makes the world more interesting.

[JackieLikesVariety]

I could do a new thread if you want.

I don't see why. if it's about the songs/bands here, post on! people can read - or not - as they please. same with any reply.

it's all good.

[Pogo]

I think your response was great!

Originally Posted by NAF1138

@Pogo I could do a new thread if you want. I did go listen to both this song and Hot Blooded to properly respond here.

I don't think it's genre. Or at least not ONLY genre. These songs are... Boring. Hot Blooded less so. But Feels Like the First Time is so paint by numbers it could put me to sleep.

It's all the same volume. The bass literally picks out the 4 beats of the measure holding the same root note the whole time. The drums play the most stereotypical rock beat. There isn't a chord progression in the melody so much as just playing the same one chord riff up the next step of the scale. No change for the chorus. Then a bridge which is actually pretty nice, and the exit from the bridge is very effective, it's my favorite part of the song, then back for a chorus and a gratuitous guitar solo (I'm a guitar player, I usually want guitar solos, but this was unwelcome as it just extends the song over an already boring vamp) then outro.

Obviously this was awesome to read.

Originally Posted by NAF1138

So I am asking myself, "so what?" "why does this bug me?" I like punk rock which is way less complicated. It has keys, and usually I'm a sucker for anything with keys. The guitar player is good. Not great mind you. Not good enough to make up for stuff I don't like, but fine.

Why is it so damn boring?

This is kind of what I was trying to ask you guys but you said (asked) it better.

Originally Posted by NAF1138

3 things I have come up with beyond the nonspecific criticism of "generic sounding, paint by numbers, and lacking soul"

1) that rhythm section. It holds a beat I'll give it that. But ho boy does it do it in the least interesting way possible. The drummer and bassist aren't the backbone of this band, they are the session musicians that were hired to lay down a rhythm track that gets played to and replaced later, but they forgot to replace it with actual music.

2) tempo. Hot Blooded and FLTFT are within 10bpm of each other. That's, basically the same tempo within a reasonable margin for human error. It's 108-118 bpm. Which is just one click faster than what you would call medium speed. I'm not positive but I'm pretty sure all their songs are pretty close to this tempo. It also never changes. It's exactly the same tempo for the whole song.


3) dynamics. Every moment of these songs, every instrument in them, is played at the exact same volume the whole time. This volume is LOUD. It reminds me of the first garage band I was in. Just play full out as loud as we can with no changes in dynamics! It's not an inherently bad thing, but it adds to the feeling of same-ness that covers these songs.

More good answer-parts and maybe you speak for the others.

Originally Posted by NAF1138

Bonus point!

4) the lyrics are just really lazy. Again, reminding me a lot of my first garage band where the lyrics were literally just whatever we thought up while we were jamming at full volume.

Just. What? What is that? "You're all in the world to me". This is terrible even before we get to rhyming me with me.

I don't mind "You're all in the world to me" which can express the basic idea (the importance she holds) in rhythm and meter. My problem there is rhyming "me" with "me."

Originally Posted by NAF1138

Conclusion:
Given that these are not kids in their first garage band I have to assume that they are not making music for any reason other than to crank out songs as fast as possible so they can get to the real business of partying and picking up chicks.

I think this is genuinely mediocre music made by people who were not too concerned that they were making mediocre music. It's loud and has crunchy guitars and a singer who can sing really well and it's loud. But it's missing anything that feels real or authentic or betrays any evidence of a second draft of any of the writing. It's... Boring. Genuinely REO Speedwagon and all of Grand Funk Railroad is just more interesting to listen to.

I expected you to hate REO and GFR, too. Perhaps you are right about Foreigner just trying to make money. From the Art School people, I often hear about Yes selling out in the 80s for money. So when prog rock guys like Ian McDonald (King Crimson) and Dennis Elliott (Ian Hunter) and Mick Jones (Spooky Tooth) formed Foreigner, maybe they were going in for the money. But to hear people toss their music aside as not-interesting, I am surprised. They have prog-roots and wrote good riffs.

Originally Posted by NAF1138

As for the Art Student choices.

Yup. Went to art school. Theater arts, but still. Do I like all the art student regulars? Yup. Bowie is my favorite musician ever. I love Talking Heads and have seen David Byrne in concert more than once. I'm meh on Roxy music, but I like a lot of Brian Eno. Tom Waits. Elvis Costello. Patti Smith. Yup.

But, I like to think I'm both eclectic and open minded. I like Jazz and classical music a lot. I listen to metal. Both weirdo extreme metal and Judas Priest and Motorhead.
I grew up on "classic rock" . Like, a lot of classic rock. Zeppelin, Clapton, The Beatles, The Stones, The Who, Jefferson Airplane, Jannis, Hendrix, The Doors. I wore out a ton of cassettes as a kid. As a teen I was into punk rock and later "indie" rock. As a guitar player I mostly play a lot of blues and listened to and learn a lot of blues music. If I'm working on my bass playing I mostly play motown. I also spend a lot of time listening to hip hop. I will say the majority of what I like has something discordant about it. It isn't smooth sounding. It has ugly bits. But, not always. But usually I like stuff that sounds odd.

I like a lot of different stuff. I don't like a bunch of stuff too. How much is pretentious? I think at this point I'm only pretentious as a joke. But who knows. I genuinely do like the things I like. I understand you genuinely like Foreigner. I get what is there to like. For me it doesn't outweigh the other stuff. But, that is me. Regardless of what I say elsewhere, I am genuinely happy when people like stuff I don't. It makes the world more interesting.

Here is something that you might've missed. I suppose I do genuinely like Foreigner. But as I said earlier, it's not like they're in my top 20 bands or anything. This was more about my non-understanding of the dislike others had for them or other bands. And that I thought I had discovered a common thread in GFR and Foreigner both being Arena Rock bands.

Oh! You are way more open-minded than I am, so no need to worry about pretension. The pretension part comes in during similar conversations when people with that kind of background insist that pure noise is great and you (that is, me) just don't get it. John Cage wrote terrible music. Mathematically a bit interesting, sometimes, but importantly it was very bad sounding or Not Even Music. And when I took my music writing classes (as a non-major) I was forced to compose from a math standpoint to keep up, so you might think I'd like Cage. My stuff sounds better than his.

A different type of pretension that gets me concerns Michael Jackson and Prince. Many Jackson fans I have argued with insist that he was a talented multi-instrumental musician. The closest I have ever come to seeing him play is when a cartoon of a white bald guy played piano while helping Lisa Simpson write a song. Maybe he played all the studio music, but I doubt it. So I think people's love of an artist can be more about the scene than the art and I don't like that position. In Jackson's case, I think people love his dancing so much that they think he is a great musician.

In a similar way, all of the Prince fans I know say he is a talented multi-instrumentalist. In this case, they are correct. The problem here (and the pretension) is that three different Prince fans who don't know each other, at different times and places, told me that Prince "is fluent" in 14 instruments. I should've slapped each of them for using fluent in that manner. Also, if Prince's career had been like his solo at the R&RHoF jam session, I would be a fan. But his real output was nothing like that smoking guitar on While My Guitar Gently Weeps.