Living In Rhythm

If there's one genre of music I admittedly shy away from (other than, like, techno and, say, Miley Cyrus/Leona Lewis/Justin Bieber) it's Christian music. I'm not a religious person; it's just not how I was brought up, really. My parents took us to church some Sundays, had us baptized, took us to communion classes, all that. Then it was up to us to decide. I won't get into a big discussion about why I am not exactly religious. I'm just not.

I've said before that there are a few artists I can listen to sing about Jesus (Vince Gill, Dave Barnes, Brian McKnight). They all have songs that are blatantly about religion and Jesus, and they are still great. Barnes' Your Love Will Never Change and Carry Me Through are amazing examples.

That said, I tend to shy away from strictly Christian artists. (Someone who doesn't believe in love isn't going to buy a compilation of love songs, are they?)

But see, I'm not too closed minded to give any given artist a chance. I'm just not. (Except, say, Miley Cyrus, Leona Lewis, and Justin Bieber.)

So when I heard Love Is Not A Fight by Warren Barfield, I loved it immediately and had to Google him. When his name came up on Wiki with the description of him being a Christian artist, I was only slightly turned off. (Hi, listen to that voice...It'll take more than just that label to make me not at least give his other songs a listen.)

Anyway, I went to iTunes and sampled his music. (Have I ever explained how much I love the thirty second previews on iTunes? I wonder whose job it is to decide which thirty seconds of the songs get chosen. How awesome would that job be? I'd do that in a freaking heartbeat.) There are a couple songs on his latest album that are obviously about Jesus and God and religion, but not in a way that turns me off his music completely. (I don't enjoy being preached at in any capacity, unless I'm actually in a church. I hope that does not offend anyone.)

The bottom line is (and I know I've said this before), if the music is good, it doesn't matter what label is put on it. Folk, soul, acoustic, Christian, country, rap, R&B, rock, whatever. It doesn't matter. If the songs are good, if the music is good, I want to listen to it.

Also, music is (obviously) about expression (as much as I hate using that cliché). So who am I to judge someone for singing/writing about what they believe in? That'd be the most hypocritical thing for me to do, especially since I consider myself a fellow artist. Even if I don't like the music, I'm in no way ever going to tell someone that there's no place in world for what they're singing about. Chances are, if they believe it, someone else does, too. This goes for all genres, all art forms.

And as I write this blog about Christian music, I'm listening to Drake. I'm eclectic that way.

This post is archived under brian mcknight, dave barnes, vince gill, warren barfield

Like I said, the B's section in my collection is pretty huge, so I'm going to give some thoughts as I have them, so as not to forget.

My morning consisted of Lloyd Banks (yes. I know) and Barenaked Ladies. This afternoon is Dave Barnes, The Beatles, Bedouin Soundclash (I think I will cringe...not into them AT ALL anymore) and maybe a little Beyoncé if I can get to it.

Here's the thing: Lloyd Banks' The Hunger for More is one of those albums I bought...I don't know why. But I liked it, legitimately liked it, for a long time. Listening today, I was a little disgusted by my own lack of taste. The rappers I like are Common, Kanye, Jay-Z, Lupe Fiasco, Mos Def, etc., and so on. Lloyd Banks raps about pretty much everything I hate about rap. But I listened to the whole thing, because I couldn't break that promise to myself to listen to every song on every album (slightly neurotic, I know). There are a few good tracks, but there's a good chance that album is not coming off the shelf again any time soon.

Now. Barenaked Ladies. Gordon came out in 1992. Which would make me 8 at the time of its release. This is an album that is a Canadian classic. I'm sure we all remember hearing If I Had $1,000,000 on the radio and laughing at how ridiculous it was. But that album is a bit of a stroke of genius, really. Highlights are Enid, What a Good Boy (that song is absurdly good), and Blame it on Me. The harmonies, the musicality, the jazz sensibilities...It's all just really good.

Now I'm onto Dave Barnes. I listen to a little Dave Barnes (1 or 2 songs) almost every day. He always seems to come on myTunes (almost always on shuffle), and I very rarely ever skip over him. But here's what I've discovered: Listening to the album in its entirety, from start to finish, is far, far more fulfilling. I can appreciate the songs better this way somehow. This pretty much goes for every artist/album.

Albums are created meticulously. They don't just throw the songs on there in any order and hit 'burn' and that's the record. There's a serious thought process that goes into it. Which songs go where. One thing I've noticed over the years is that very, very often, track #5 on any given record will be a slower song or a serious ballad. This makes sense. After five up-tempo or mid-tempo songs, you can slow it down without losing your listener.

Anyway, I guess what I'm getting at is that in the day and age where you can download one song off an album, or shuffle up your entire collection, we're losing a little of the artistry that goes into making a record.

It's nice to enjoy that again.

This post is archived under barenaked ladies, common, dave barnes, jay z, kanye west, lupe fiasco, the beatles, the collection