A controversial opinion on Springsteen

add Brill Building expertise that puts him, as far as music goes, a bit more on the savant side of pop.

yes and no. Tin Pan Alley actually referenced 3 kinds of songwriters
- those known mainly or strictly for their Broadway works - Rodgers, Gershwin, Kern, Porter & the likes. Their Broadway status guaranteed respect.
- those working primarily in Hollywood - Harry Warren or James Van Heusen come to mind. They suffered snobbery even when their music matched their Broadway peers'
- those called "pop" songwriters (Walter Donaldson,..) whose work was more loosely linked to Broadway - they're best remembered for pop hits and were mostly considered "paid by the yard" indeed. Hoagy Carmichael is the one exception to the rule, he always got the respect he deserved

 

I agree mainly with that.
There's a lot of reasons BITUSA 'upset" hardcore fans in my own example I had been listening to Bruce for about 5 years next thing I know a group of my mates are off to Newcastle to see The Boss....that never really bothered me but the album did become a really big hype....now the chances of a duff album doing that are limited it has to have some redeeming features and it would be churlish to say it doesn't.
It was however planned and as such it was both a dilution of his themes and an overblown projection of Springsteen it really didn't lack a lightness of touch but I've said this before that type of planning and execution to deliver a killer record cannot be easy and to be fair to Springsteen he did pull back from aspects of the album later on but the other truth is the impact and fall out of that album shaped the rest of his career..........

 

Of course ... as ridiculous as sneering at Abba for not having that Hendrix attitude or his instrumental skills. But unfortunately many people here and an even greater proportion in the general public have very narrow criteria for what makes someone good or valuable and they're always ready to write someone off on the basis of what they can't do instead of what they can.

 

Springsteen was never one I liked much.. although I certainly respect his talent. I suppose watching him as a performer, I find it hard to get past his facial expressions which always seem to signal extreme constipation or explosive diarrhea. I have to say "Born To Run" is a killer song, with one the best guitar riffs ever dreamed up.

 

Much of rock and roll is built from forms that were never recorded so I'm afraid that doesn't work as a theory....a lot of Dylan's work even up util the 1970's was built on songs that were handed down just as Schubert's were and never recoded at the time. There's no doubt there's a technical quality in both classical and say Porter et al that is "superior" to the more basic rock and roll but of course that is the beauty of rock and roll very basic musicality delivered fantastic results. And of course there are plenty of technical or classically trained people who are either heralded as musicians or writers.

I'm not sure as well music is as easily defined and easily to separate the way you just did......would ABBA have been happy with the melody of Little Wing? I think they might have and I think someone like Prince might just put the whole theory in a big blender and hit you with a killer pop tune and killer performance.

If we take Won't Get Fooled Again the analogy I would make it is like a child...you can't separate it from it's constituent parts-it's there it exists-the first time you ever heard that song it was the product of performance and composition-the artist presented in this form....not like Schubert but as a separate final entity....the best performance of the composition.... without the composition where is the performance?....without the mother or indeed father where is the child?

There's another theory that kills your argument and from my experience most people agree with this (and of course it is not universally true but I would say at least 80% true)-why is it we usually like the first version of a song we hear the best? That negates the performance aspect and shows that our brain will cut through to the composition.

 

No, I'm not sure it is either, but just because it isn't easy doesn't mean it shouldn't be attempted. Unfortunately there is a practical limit to how far you can pursue these arguments in an internet forum.

I listen to a lot of improvised music and doing that trains the ear to disregard the version you already know. I personally think that people like the first version of a song not because they see through the performance to the song behind it but because they're not very good listeners and imprint on the first thing they hear. By contrast, for example, serious Classical fans will often buy twenty performances of a work before they nail the one that they're happy with.

 

If it's improvised how can you already know a version?

 

Could be an improvisation on 'My Funny Valentine' for example. Could be a song with a written head and mandatory improvised section like a lot of Umphrey's McGee or Grateful Dead.

 

I thought when you suggested improvisation you meant like Keith Jarrett but really again you are making hard work of this...that's not clear definitions you are giving here.

 

The titles of my two favourite Bruce Springsteen albums feature a location. Born In The USA isn't one of them.

 

Ah Lucky Town and the town of High Hopes....

Poor choices my friend.

 

I've listened to a lot of Jarrett as well but that wouldn't have been responsive to your question. And I don't think I have to give a clear definition of the word improvisation on a music forum: it would make for rather harder work if I stopped mid-sentence to give an Oxford Dictionary definition of every commonly-accepted term I use.

 

I needed a good laugh today. Thanks!

 

I'm more interested in when I lost interest in his music, and that was with Lucky Town and Human Touch.

 

The Promise is vastly superior as a double album.

 

To me, from the beginning, the cornerstone of Springsteen's worth has always been in the performance, both from punch to punch and for duration, if you have never seen him live, your simply don't understand. Yet, I don't believe he can be discounted as anything less than one of the all time great song writers.

Now, BITUSA had just too many hit singles for one album, got way too much air play, it's just too cheeky, pop sing-along friendly, (and if one didn't know better) too damn flag waving patriotic, and it simply became too mainstream popular. My Mom liked the record, geez! Good thing he immediately saved face by doing a bunch of broody, dark, self loathing, obtuse, crap for record albums after...

(I'm a huge fan of it all, actually).

 

I always liked "Born by The River in the Darkness on the Edge of Nebraska"...

 

arguably the finest of pedigree...but can you shuffle?

 

Sure, "Born in Nebraska by the Edge of the River of Darkness"

 

I'd say if you asked most people to name a Springsteen album most would name one of those two.

My favorites are the three album run that had Born to Run in the Middle, with TWTI&TESS being my favorite. Can't decide which of the other two is the runner up.

If live albums are allowed, then it is the 5 LP set and TWTI&TESS

 

"Working on a Dream" is a decent album. Sorry @Monosterio.

 

Oh no! How will I live after reading that?

Not sure why you're sorry about it, though. I'm sure Springsteen has made some good music since the '80s. I'm probably just too superficial to appreciate it.

 

'I come from down in the valley'. "The River". It is almost born as well just put it another way.

 

I don't know about the two best, but the best starts with the word "Darkness".

 

Have you given Tom Joad, The Rising, Magic or Wrecking Ball proper listens?