Bio, Photos, Influences

[Oedo 808]

Could you explain to me how stating influences increases meaning and broaden understanding? I'd hardly call not knowing a band/act's influences being ignorant. When you're listening to their own output it's completely irrelevant.

I already did. Context.

Lack of knowledge is ignorance. If a band does not include influences it leaves everyone save for the band themselves or those with pre-existing and relevant knowledge ignorant or lacking in the knowledge of their influences. Hardly ignorance? It is precisely ignorance.

[Graham]

A thing I like about bands stating influences is it has introduced me to bands I might not of necessarily discovered otherwise. For example, if I like a band and see that they are influenced by a band that I have not heard before I would be inclined to check that band out. I discovered Red House Painters this way after seeing them listed as an influence on Aereogramme's myspace page. I doubt I would of ever heard of them otherwise and they are now one of my favourite bands.

[Huw]

The quote "far flung depths of the north-east" makes my balls shrivel up inside me and is pretty much the sole reason I prefer not to have a bio on a band page. I might quote some press or something, but writing your own makes me nauseus. I think being modest (as previously stated) about the band, the members and it's output can do as much, if not more good for you than the third-person, self-hyping garbage that a lot of bands come out with.

Citation of influences has spoilt as many bands as it has gotten me into. So many times I've dug a band and then realised they've just totally ripped off one of their influences. That's my problem, but I don't see why you should spoonfeed a listener like they are some sort of technically inept moron. They are on your page so, by default, they should have a rough idea of what your about. - especially back when Myspace was real popular. Even if they don't know what you're about, why do they need to know? I don't understand this. Even if it is, by definition, ignorance. You said it in your first post, let the music do the talking. Obviously this presents a bit of a cyclical argument.

Ultimately, I think the demise of Myspace and the move toward using the likes of Bandcamp and Soundcloud in connection with Facebook proves the point I am quite badly trying to make. Clean page - album art, and tunes - no shitty bio, no 'top mates', no sluts trying to get you to comment on their photos.

[waltz]

Fuck bands.

[Monk Rocker]

If a band do want to go a little bit further than releasing an EP themselves, then they need a bio and to reference influences. God forbid, they may even have to have some photographs. Personally, I like to read a bands influences and see what they look like while I'm streaming their songs. And I like to know who their "top friends" are, because they my actually be good.

Ambition and effort are not mutually exclusive.

[FOX]

And I like to know who their "top friends" are, because they my actually be good.

Assuming everyone's got MySpace is probably not the best thing to do in 2010.

[FOX]

May as well go on and talk out my arse for a bit

My website is foxhunting . I don't have photos of me. Why don't I have photos? I've had one gig and nobody there had a camera. I'm not getting my mate to photograph me with a guitar in my bedroom either, it just doesn't really reflect my music (in my opinion, of course) and frankly the only photograph that would is live - and if you haven't played live, where the hell are you getting a photo from?

I guarantee if I listed influences they'd be the same as everyone else in my genre, so what's the point? It'd be a list of favourite bands, for the most part, anyway.

And I thought the idea of album art was to provide artistic context for music? If you want to see their faces, see them live.