|
Register | Blogging | Today's Posts | Search |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
![]() |
#1 (permalink) |
Dr. Prunk
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Where the buffalo roam.
Posts: 12,156
|
![]()
Bullsh*t. Literature needs interludes and it's what ties things together and gives the reader time to process certain parts of the theme and story in their minds. Classical composers often considered them one of the most important parts of a composition as it segues on part of a classical piece to another. Films need interludes to provide breathers otherwise they will get criticized for being too fast paced and noisy.
A song not being a goddamn 3 minute verse/chorus/verse singalong rock anthem doesn't translate to being a bunch of wank and I'm ****ing tired of people spouting that bull****. Last edited by boo boo; 07-19-2010 at 02:40 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 (permalink) |
Dr. Prunk
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Where the buffalo roam.
Posts: 12,156
|
![]()
Pop Genesis still beats prog Genesis wannabes by my book.
About prog bands going pop in the 80s. How many were successful at it? King Crimson bordered on pop at that time but not without rejecting prog elements, they never went totally pop. Going totally pop gave Yes ONE commercially successful album followed by some epic failures. And going pop pretty much destroyed Gentle Giant and ELP. But Genesis goddamn pulled it off. They were the only band that made the transition, suceeded at it and stayed successful for longer than one album. And yet of all the prog bands that get hate for going pop Genesis get it the most just because they were the one that was really f*cking good at it. Maybe because it's easier to forget all the miserable failures their other favorite prog bands made at going pop? Prog fans really get me with their passionate anti-pop fetish. |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 (permalink) | |
Horribly Creative
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, The Big Smoke
Posts: 8,265
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#6 (permalink) |
Dr. Prunk
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Where the buffalo roam.
Posts: 12,156
|
![]()
Well I forgot about Rush. But I tend to think Rush were always more of a "rock" band than a "prog" or "pop" band. Their transition to a more accessible sound came with less of a compromise over their trademark sound. They always sound like Rush.
While with Genesis the distinctions between their earlier and latter material is much more obvious. |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 (permalink) | |
Horribly Creative
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, The Big Smoke
Posts: 8,265
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#8 (permalink) |
Dr. Prunk
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Where the buffalo roam.
Posts: 12,156
|
![]()
I'm changing my vote for Genesis just to be the contrarian. And when people have irritated me enough to make me vote against my favorite album from my favorite band out of spite that's saying something.
Yes: 6 Genesis: 2 |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 (permalink) |
Dr. Prunk
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Where the buffalo roam.
Posts: 12,156
|
![]()
Both of these are in my top 10 albums of all time. It's not a pity vote, I'm just gonna help Genesis out because if they lose just because a lot of people voted against them without having heard either f*cking album in question then that will be totally bogus and unfair.
|
![]() |
![]() |
|