[initialsBB]

Originally posted by not_so_new
When the Beatles entered this world with “long hair” they were absolutely SHOCKING to the establishment, that was the mind set of the world of the day...

Yeah, but just a few years ago people were trying to blame Marilyn Manson for the Columbine shootings. And only a few months ago people were "shocked!" at Janet Jackson's breast. Stupid people will always be shocked by something, and what you're talking about there doesn't really have anything to do with the music.

[i]What is new and different when as a society we are more accepting of new things?? Where is the underground where the new stuff lives if we are so accepting that nothing needs to be underground?? [/B]

If you don't see any underground or new music you're just not looking. You might not like it but it's there. As just one example there's an entire global underground making experimental electronic & computer music, the influence of which has already crept into the mainstream through artists like Radiohead, Bjork, or Timbaland. Think of how many people thought Radiohead's Kid A and Amnesiac were just "oh so crazy!" and incomprehensible when those albums are actually presenting a certain type of underground electronic music in a very poppy and accessible way.

[i]My idea here is that we have copied and copied for so long and the copying has been aided by the phonograph, radio, CD, tape and now the internet that at some point we will hit a wall. Things are going to sound like other things. Should we through out the things that sound like something else?? Only if it is bad.[/B]

That's simply absurd. How about sampling and the artform of hip-hop? There's a type of music that is completely constructed around this type of "copying" that you're talking about. And yet you wouldn't say that hip-hop sounds exactly like the old funk or jazz albums that the artists sample. Through "copying" we can create something new. And all of the people on your list of historical innovators were simply copying what came before them and adding their own creativity to it. Look at how Charlie Parker copied the chord progressions of Gershwin tunes to create his own tunes.

[i]Is someone would produce an album of white noise and called it cutting edge music would you call that new?? I would not like it but I would not be surprised if it happened and I would not be surprised to find that it already has. [/B]

Well no wonder you're not seeing an underground anywhere if you're not even aware of developments that happened almost 30 years ago! Yes there is a whole scene of noise music or "power electronics" which can arguably be traced back to the Italian futurists. Just the fact that you say you would not like it proves that there will always be lines that certain audiences won't allow themselves to cross and therefore always something new and shocking. People were shocked and appalled by Lou Reeds Metal Machine Music when it was released in 1975 and some people would still be shocked by a new release by Merzbow.

[i]Again I ask can any of you think of anything that has not been done at some point?? Anything?? [/B]

That's an inherently unanswerable question. Can you think of any great inventions that haven't been invented yet? In 1900 could you have anticipated Elvis? It all depends on your definition of "new." If you get right down to it there is truly nothing new under the sun as all human knowledge builds upon previous knowledge and achievements. But in the limited sense that we culturally define "new" (i.e. Elvis, Beatles, Punk, Disco) there will always be some new development somewhere.