yearlongday

is it agreed that MTV’s “unplugged” series had an significant impact on the direction taken by music over the past decade?

in my opinion, popular performances, like those by eric clapton and neil young, who re-opened their catalogues to share obscure songwriting gems, revealed that both live acoustic music and edited studio recordings are equally valid artistic and commercial ventures.

consider the amount of “remastered”, “repackaged”, “reissued” music that followed in the second half of the nineties, and continues today. would major record labels invest so much into those three R’s if consumers weren’t interested in demo recordings, outtakes, and B-sides?

i once had the pleasure of giving a private, mini-concert for a close friend and her family. between songs, we talked about how a song changes along the way from a basic idea to a finished recording. my friend said that the songs she knew sounded refreshing when pared down to a simple, unaccompanied acoustic guitar. however, of the songs that were new to her, she expressed excitement about hearing them presented on a finished recording.

the question i have for not only my close friends, but for all readers is this: which do you prefer, “plugged” or “unplugged”? let’s not discuss my songs only, but all music in general. are there such things as “B-sides” anymore? is an in-home acoustic demo any less valid than a final studio recording?

unfortunately, i don’t have a firm position on the topic of “plugged” versus “unplugged”. i like both. because my songs usually begin as simple acoustic melodies, many of them succeed when performed that way. yet, like my friend, i also look forward to hearing them supported with full-instrumental accompaniments on a finished studio recording.

i hope you do too.

… jonathan t marlowe

Leave a Reply

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

CAPTCHA Code