WEBVTT Kind: captions Language: en 00:00:00.110 --> 00:00:01.110 Hi! 00:00:01.110 --> 00:00:04.049 I’m Dave from boyinaband.com 00:00:04.049 --> 00:00:07.600 This week I wanted to address people who claim that “it’s all about the music.” 00:00:07.600 --> 00:00:11.650 You know, the kind of guys who, when presented with an artist that has a strong image will 00:00:11.650 --> 00:00:15.249 immediately discount the music, regardless of how much they enjoy it, purely based on 00:00:15.249 --> 00:00:18.600 the fact that they’ve put effort into their image, saying something like “They’re 00:00:18.600 --> 00:00:21.770 trying too hard, they should just focus on their songs; it’s all about the music, man.” 00:00:21.770 --> 00:00:26.960 And then will proceed to go to their favourite clothes store to dress up their exterior in 00:00:26.960 --> 00:00:29.560 an attempt to attract more attention to themselves. 00:00:29.560 --> 00:00:31.180 Time for a thought experiment. 00:00:31.180 --> 00:00:36.910 I call this one [insert bastardised scientific theory name to do with multiple universes 00:00:36.910 --> 00:00:37.910 or images] 00:00:37.910 --> 00:00:42.110 So we’ve got this cat, who has just released a hip hop album. 00:00:42.110 --> 00:00:45.930 Two dudes are watching the cat’s music video on TV and agree “This is a pretty good song, 00:00:45.930 --> 00:00:47.270 that cat is talented.” 00:00:47.270 --> 00:00:50.800 Later on, the dudes are listening to the song on its own and have a pleasant enough experience 00:00:50.800 --> 00:00:51.800 listening to it. 00:00:51.800 --> 00:00:56.200 Now let’s transition to a parallel universe in which everything is the same, except the 00:00:56.200 --> 00:00:58.309 cat had decided to put a bit more effort into his visuals. 00:00:58.309 --> 00:01:02.000 Taking note of said visual aspect, dude #1 happens to mention “Wow, that cat is cool, 00:01:02.000 --> 00:01:06.180 I wish I was as cool as that cat!” but dude #2 gets thoroughly indignant, saying “This 00:01:06.180 --> 00:01:09.770 is terrible, it’s just some cat trying too hard, it totally ruins the integrity of the 00:01:09.770 --> 00:01:10.770 music.” 00:01:10.770 --> 00:01:14.080 but as dude #1 listens to the song later, he has that cool image mentally associated 00:01:14.080 --> 00:01:15.080 with that cool beat. 00:01:15.080 --> 00:01:18.440 As such, he has a stronger emotional response to the song and enjoys it more. 00:01:18.440 --> 00:01:22.990 Now in our third and final parallel universe, as dude #1 watches the video, dude #2 picks 00:01:22.990 --> 00:01:26.110 up a magazine and is shocked to find out that “That cat killed a guy.” 00:01:26.110 --> 00:01:29.870 All of a sudden this cat’s music seems much more intense, and as he listens later, Dude 00:01:29.870 --> 00:01:33.490 #1 is filled with a sense of horrified amazement at the actions of the feline emcee, resulting 00:01:33.490 --> 00:01:36.580 in an even stronger emotional attachment to the song than in either of the previous two 00:01:36.580 --> 00:01:37.890 parallel universes. 00:01:37.890 --> 00:01:41.240 If by getting into the story and visuals you find more enjoyment from the music, what’s 00:01:41.240 --> 00:01:42.240 wrong with it? 00:01:42.240 --> 00:01:45.200 And unlike things like politics and religion, no-one gets hurt if you suspend belief with 00:01:45.200 --> 00:01:46.200 musical imagery! 00:01:46.200 --> 00:01:47.259 Well, except the guy that cat murdered. 00:01:47.259 --> 00:01:48.259 Think about when a song reminds you of a person because you used to listen to it with them, 00:01:48.259 --> 00:01:49.259 or when you are reminded of a holiday because you heard that song on the radio during that 00:01:49.259 --> 00:01:50.259 trip - it’s the same principle of an outside influence giving you a more intense emotional 00:01:50.259 --> 00:01:51.259 attachment to the song, but people don’t say that “ruins the integrity of the music.” 00:01:51.259 --> 00:01:52.259 If the artist wants to utilise imagery to enhance their music in that way, why shouldn’t 00:01:52.259 --> 00:01:53.259 they? 00:01:53.259 --> 00:01:54.259 In some cases, image does take precedence. 00:01:54.259 --> 00:01:55.259 I imagine Marylin Manson wouldn’t be where he is today if he decided to dress in his 00:01:55.259 --> 00:01:56.290 favourite pair of jeans and novelty T-Shirt - the intense image he has created around 00:01:56.290 --> 00:01:59.310 his music makes it feel even more exciting, like that music is an insight into his warped 00:01:59.310 --> 00:02:00.310 style. 00:02:00.310 --> 00:02:01.450 Then there’s the “authenticity” that the “it’s all about the music” crowd 00:02:01.450 --> 00:02:04.340 advocate - the artist that made the music entirely on their own. 00:02:04.340 --> 00:02:08.110 Ironically, this is an image itself whether intentional or not; if these people listen 00:02:08.110 --> 00:02:11.380 to an artist thinking “this is so cool, they did this entirely themselves!” 00:02:11.380 --> 00:02:14.360 BAM- they’re allowing something other than the music colour their appreciation. 00:02:14.360 --> 00:02:15.480 But that’s okay! 00:02:15.480 --> 00:02:18.520 Our brains naturally associate images and ideas with sounds; we’re psychologically 00:02:18.520 --> 00:02:19.520 wired for it. 00:02:19.520 --> 00:02:21.990 This is why you’ll remember the alphabet to the tune of twinkle twinkle little star, 00:02:21.990 --> 00:02:25.640 why people over the age of 22 will associate this sound with a combination of nostalgia 00:02:25.640 --> 00:02:30.650 and frustration (modem sound), and why when people hear this *wind chimes/harp* it feels 00:02:30.650 --> 00:02:33.980 perfectly natural to see this image *fairy* but perhaps not this image *something inappropriate* 00:02:33.980 --> 00:02:38.260 One way to think about it, if you hear this *seaside wave sound* you’ll probably end 00:02:38.260 --> 00:02:41.750 up thinking of something like this *beach* - the sound itself isn’t interesting, but 00:02:41.750 --> 00:02:43.150 the image it triggers is. 00:02:43.150 --> 00:02:46.301 Someone who lived at the top of a mountain their whole life who had never seen the sea 00:02:46.301 --> 00:02:50.000 would wonder why the hell you were enjoying listening to that noise - the mental imagery 00:02:50.000 --> 00:02:52.340 can play a huge part in your appreciation of sound. 00:02:52.340 --> 00:02:55.489 What I’m getting at is that if you’re actively trying to ignore your ability to 00:02:55.489 --> 00:03:00.030 associate imagery with music, it is a huge wasted opportunity to feel even stronger emotions 00:03:00.030 --> 00:03:01.030 when you listen to songs. 00:03:01.030 --> 00:03:02.030 So try and open yourself up to the over-the-top braggadocio of popular hip hop, the futuristic 00:03:02.030 --> 00:03:03.030 imagery of a lot of electronic dance music, or the pristine-perfect production values 00:03:03.030 --> 00:03:04.030 associated with pop. 00:03:04.030 --> 00:03:05.280 If you don’t immediately discount the culture associated with the music, you might find 00:03:05.280 --> 00:03:07.160 you enjoy it in an entirely different way. 00:03:07.160 --> 00:03:10.269 Those are my thoughts, what do you think when it comes to music and image? 00:03:10.269 --> 00:03:13.060 Whether you’re pro or anti-image, I’d love to hear what you think in the comments. 00:03:13.060 --> 00:03:16.510 Don’t forget to hit like and favourite if this video resonates with you, and subscribe 00:03:16.510 --> 00:03:17.700 for weekly boyinaband videos. 00:03:17.700 --> 00:03:28.390 Cheers for watching, and have a nice day!