but unlike punk (and you are probably talking about brit punk, because that crap was disposable as shit) noise HAS edition but not from the artists themselves but from the listeners, thanks to the internet.

true, in the early days, making noise was a whole lot harder and more expensive, so artists used to take a lot more time and dedication to their art unlike today, add that recording wasn't as easy or cheap as now and you can see why there was a lot more self-editing, when people recorded, they needed to record their very best stuff not just whatever they fancied; also, back then (as noted), if you wanted noise you had to buy records, cassettes, etc. but today, you can actually hear noise and decided whether is good or not, thanks to the internet; you can try as many noise artists and as many tracks by them and decided whether they are good or not, it takes a lot of dedication because there's so much stuff out there. it flips the roles as now the audience gets to be picky...yet, it doesn't happen because people still fall for the "LIMITED TO 25 COPIES!!!! OH SHIT I GOT TO HAVE IT!!! WHO KNOWS IF THEY'LL RELEASE ANOTHER 3" NEXT WEEK!!!"
mentality and bands get to sell their shitty music to people buying and paying as much as they wish, if they are buying it, why try harder?

all i'm saying is that if you are into noise and want good, quality stuff, there's a possibility to find it and trying out before spending money on mediocrity. plus, even if you spend money on crap, there's always ebay, where you can stick it to some dork who'll think he'll be belle of the ball at the next local basement no wave/laptop show.

now, on another subject, how about naming the best noise albums each of us have ever heard?

they are talented, they are great, they just dont have the self confidence, the motivation and the passion to pursue it.

lets start another thread for that

Go for it.

Actually Golden Child is right. Though to have that kind of dedication, passion, motivation, etc, etc, that fire, ad infinitum; is generally considered humanly impossible... Though that doesn't mean that it cannot be cultivated if one is so inclined and determined enough to pursue their inclinations. Talent usually dictates at what level of the field you will be playing at. For example, there are countless players in the English Premier League; but not all of them are earning Micheal Owen's or Alan Shearer's wages... Again there are also players in the second division and so on and so forth. All of these players are doing mostly what they like and most of them are probably capable of football ordinary people can only dream about, but the point is, they're all playing football... I'm sorry if I'm not making any sense, but what I'm trying to say maybe is, it doesn't really matter if you don't become the next Wolf Eyes or merzbow, if you really are dedicated and passionate about noise...

But this is total rubbish that has no tangible proof in the real world.Can you give me some proof of what you are saying?Sorry but statements per se interest me very little.I need to know what makes you think that what you've just said is right.

i'm sorry, that is complete feel-good self-help rubbish. i've seen so many passionate, motivated, confident, intelligent people continualy produce bad art that i couldn't even begin to tell you how many. and this includes people i'm studying art at university with, people who work hard, care about art, but over the course of the years their ideas and skills have not improved. whereas the talented people i know, can be as lazy as they like, or work hard, either way they still produce better work.

This is true. Talented people who are lazy and live off other people should be shot and fed to hungry people all over the world.

you think owen and shearer are only in the position they are in due to the amount of effort they make? no, they have innate levels of skill, and a higher potential for brilliance than almost anyone playing football on the planet. do you mean to say that second division players wouldn't like to be playing premiership or international football, that the only reason they aren't is because they aren't passionate enough? rubbish. this applies to sport and this applies to music, and eveything else.

it's all well and good to say doing something for the sake of it is enough, it doesn't matter if you're the best or the worst, doing it is more important. well fine, just don't expect other people to react kindly to paying for the pleasure of experiencing your shitty work.
(in fact not fine, if you're rubbish at what you're doing have the decency to keep your work to yourself)

original question.

i suppose it depends on what your defintion of noise is. i say yes why not.

yes, of course, there should be more noise, there's always the possibilty of there being someone who'll be an ace.

Well,my original question didn't certainly imply that there isn't talent out there.I've been going through many a record thinking:'Why the hell did i buy that?''.But that doesn't mean that there isn't good stuff out there and i'm the merrier for knowing that.

so let's name our favorite noise albums, thread is already started.

and i quote myself:

Again, I have to say that this is complete tosh. If only that were the case. Sure confidence and motivation are important and it's surprising how far arrogance and bullshit seem to take some people. But ultimately talent is pretty important and, I think, a fair deal of good fortune. Also, it helps if you know people.

Alas, I think (and this is in life in general, not just the arts) that arrogance, bullshit, nepotism and networking get you further than talent, passion and all that.

talent is subjective.

There is a plethora of musicians who are talented as musicians, not composers.

wHAT?????????????

Shut it,p.marras.I'll get you.

of course! like: