Unpopular Music Opinions (punk, rock, beatles, Radiohead, The Smiths) - Music Banter Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > The Music Forums > General Music
Register Blogging Today's Posts
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-24-2008, 01:51 PM   #1171 (permalink)
Reformed Jackass
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,964
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Urban Hatemonger View Post
And how do they know that before they've experimented?

It's not a great album but it's far from bad.
Uh, it doesn't matter if they knew, the results are what counts. I'm not saying it was a bad idea, just the end result wasn't up to snuff. It's not bad, never said it was, in fact I think it gets an unfair amount of flak, it's just as good as their other work.
ProggyMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2008, 01:52 PM   #1172 (permalink)
Dr. Prunk
 
boo boo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Where the buffalo roam.
Posts: 12,137
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy jack fire drill View Post
For people who think if you take away Dylan's lyrics you don't have much left have you heard some of his Blonde on Blonde/Highway 61 Revisited stuff? I imagine you have since they're probably two of his most acclaimed albums ever. He wrote some god awful lyrics on some of the songs, take Ballad of a Thin Man for instance.
What in the hell are you talking about? Everyone has heard those albums, those are always the first albums people start with when trying to get into Dylan.

I do like Highway 61 Revisited and Blood on the Tracks alright, but I think they are incredibly overrated. And Blonde and Blonde just bored me to death.

Quote:
Oh and Johnny Marr is a much bigger twat than Morrissey. At least when you pay to see Morrissey perform he doesn't go up on stage and insult you.
Yeah, Morrissey prefers to insult people behind their back
__________________
It's only knock n' knowall, but I like it

http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs

Quote:
Originally Posted by Strummer521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowquill View Post
I only listen to Santana when I feel like being annoyed.
I only listen to you talk when I want to hear Emo performed acapella.

Last edited by boo boo; 05-24-2008 at 01:59 PM.
boo boo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2008, 01:54 PM   #1173 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WaspStar View Post
Nah, Elvis and the Beatles are the most overrated.
The Beatles are only overrated in the sense of being musical "innovators". In terms of being great melodists, they get all the praise they deserve and anybody who denies that is an idiot.

But it is true that they are overrated in terms of discussions about innovation and significance to the development of rock music. The Beatles were only influential in the sense of inspiring others to start playing, writing and recording. Far as the music itself goes, they invented very little and merely adapted the emerging popular and underground styles of the time, whatever year it might have been. Even then, their sound by all accounts was quite retro, with the focus being on melody and harmony while the rest of the rock movement had shifted away from that and were trying to break into completely unchartered territory.

Fair enough, "melody and pop" was the Beatles' musical vision, and they were the best of the best at those things. But then, people shouldn't try to construe them as the great musical innovators that they never actually were. The real sonic revolution was happening rather elsewhere.
Rainard Jalen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2008, 02:01 PM   #1174 (permalink)
Dr. Prunk
 
boo boo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Where the buffalo roam.
Posts: 12,137
Default

So according to you, The Beatles stopped making music after 1965, apparrently.
__________________
It's only knock n' knowall, but I like it

http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs

Quote:
Originally Posted by Strummer521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowquill View Post
I only listen to Santana when I feel like being annoyed.
I only listen to you talk when I want to hear Emo performed acapella.
boo boo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2008, 02:14 PM   #1175 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by boo boo View Post
So according to you, The Beatles stopped making music after 1965, apparrently.
No. According to me, they wrote their best music after 1965. But in spite of that, it was nothing new or cutting edge. It was always at least half a year too late, and usually much later. All they did differently was they took a large number of styles pioneered by other artists and made it into The Beatles, i.e. with their trademark strong melodicism and harmonies - the effect of course was that they were, by comparison to the real revolutionaries and innovators, quite retro in sound, harping back to 40s/50s pop and music hall.

Case in point: The White Album; I love it to pieces but it's the most intentionally and fiendishly derivative album of the rock era!

Nah, Paul and John never claimed to be great musical pioneers but were always explicit about their influences. They were, however, great pop songwriters, the absolute best in my honest opinion.
Rainard Jalen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2008, 02:16 PM   #1176 (permalink)
killedmyraindog
 
TheBig3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boston, Massachusetts
Posts: 11,172
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy jack fire drill View Post
He wrote some god awful lyrics on some of the songs, take Ballad of a Thin Man for instance.
Whats wrong with Ballad of a Thin Man? The stanza that ends with "Oh my god am I here all alone" reminds me of The Ice Cream King so much, for the orated words, its clever word play.

What don't you like about it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy jack fire drill View Post
Anyway reading the last few pages of this thread we're like slamming my head into a window on purpose.
And why is that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by boo boo View Post


I pretty much hate it whenever someone uses words like "they didn't feel the music". It makes me want to punch somebody. Because its pretentious bullcrap.
More emoticons. How will I ever compete?

Just because you're a soulless doesn't mean the rest of us are, or that we can't cite it in regard to why we like music. I wish you realize that anyone that committed to Prog has committed themselves to an a-emotional lifestyle.

Musically, its like you were subjected to watching you pets executed every couple of years or so as a child. I'd love to know what you love most on this planet.
__________________
I've moved to a new address
TheBig3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2008, 02:24 PM   #1177 (permalink)
Back to mono
 
WaspStar's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 509
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBig3KilledMyRainDog View Post
Whats wrong with Ballad of a Thin Man? The stanza that ends with "Oh my god am I here all alone" reminds me of The Ice Cream King so much, for the orated words, its clever word play.

What don't you like about it.
Yeah, I don't really get the hate for that song either. The only part that makes me cringe is the last line; "You should be made to wear earphones" is downright lame, particularly following all those great put-downs.
WaspStar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2008, 02:25 PM   #1178 (permalink)
isfckingdead
 
sleepy jack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 18,967
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBig3KilledMyRainDog View Post
Whats wrong with Ballad of a Thin Man? The stanza that ends with "Oh my god am I here all alone" reminds me of The Ice Cream King so much, for the orated words, its clever word play.

What don't you like about it.
I don't hate the songs I just think the lyrics aren't very good.

"You have many contacts
Among the lumberjacks
To get you facts
When somebody attacks your imagination
But nobody has any respect
Anyway they already expect you
To just give a check
To tax-deductible charity organizations
You've been with the professors
And they've all liked your looks
With great lawyers you have
Discussed lepers and crooks
You've been through all of
F. Scott Fitzgerald's books
You're very well read
It's well known"

Quote:
And why is that?
Because of blatant trolling like this, look below.

Quote:
More emoticons. How will I ever compete?

Just because you're a soulless doesn't mean the rest of us are, or that we can't cite it in regard to why we like music. I wish you realize that anyone that committed to Prog has committed themselves to an a-emotional lifestyle.

Musically, its like you were subjected to watching you pets executed every couple of years or so as a child. I'd love to know what you love most on this planet.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by METALLICA89 View Post
Ive seen you on muiltipul forums saying Metallica and slayer are the worst **** you kid go suck your **** while you listen to your ****ing emo **** I bet you do listen to emo music
sleepy jack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2008, 02:26 PM   #1179 (permalink)
Back to mono
 
WaspStar's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 509
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rainard Jalen View Post
The Beatles are only overrated in the sense of being musical "innovators". In terms of being great melodists, they get all the praise they deserve and anybody who denies that is an idiot.
What is this "greatness" you speak of? Sophistication? Variety? You can't deny their influence, their innovations, or the technical aspects of their music, but you can argue what you get out of it. Their melodies don't do anything for me (and I know I'm in the minority by saying that).
WaspStar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2008, 02:26 PM   #1180 (permalink)
Dr. Prunk
 
boo boo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Where the buffalo roam.
Posts: 12,137
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rainard Jalen View Post
No. According to me, they wrote their best music after 1965. But in spite of that, it was nothing new or cutting edge. It was always at least half a year too late, and usually much later. All they did differently was they took a large number of styles pioneered by other artists and made it into The Beatles, i.e. with their trademark strong melodicism and harmonies - the effect of course was that they were, by comparison to the real revolutionaries and innovators, quite retro in sound, harping back to 40s/50s pop and music hall.
Yeah. Tommorrow Never Knows. Norwegian Wood. A Day in the Life. Strawberry Fields. I Am The Warlus. Happiness is a Warm Gun. Such sheer lack of originality.

Quote:
Case in point: The White Album; I love it to pieces but it's the most intentionally and fiendishly derivative album of the rock era!
That is just plain wrong.

Quote:
Nah, Paul and John never claimed to be great musical pioneers but were always explicit about their influences.
Yeah, we can't forget that having influences make you unoriginal.
__________________
It's only knock n' knowall, but I like it

http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs

Quote:
Originally Posted by Strummer521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowquill View Post
I only listen to Santana when I feel like being annoyed.
I only listen to you talk when I want to hear Emo performed acapella.
boo boo is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Similar Threads



© 2003-2024 Advameg, Inc.