Unpopular Music Opinions - 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 08-26-2011, 12:16 AM   #6831 (permalink)
\/ GOD
 
Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Nowhere...
Posts: 2,179
Default

Brown Sugar is an abysmal song, one of the worst of all time, and has absolutely no redeemable traits. I am shocked that to this day it's considered one of the greatest rock songs of all time. Albeit, I don't have much respect for 'rock history', and it's bizarre slanted view, I don't understand how exactly this turd which is by far one of the Rolling Stones worst songs, can be so highly rated, and even by the standards of the darkest end of their overrated catalog, it's completely ridiculous.

I find it especially bad considering old fart classic rockers would covet it, and hold it as a protest against Justin Biebar, and Britney Spears even though it's obviously equally inane, and even more simplistic, and over-repetetive.
__________________
Quote:
Terence Hill, as recently confirmed during an interview to an Italian TV talk-show, was offered the role but rejected it because he considered it "too violent". Dustin Hoffman and John Travolta declined the role for the same reason. When Al Pacino was considered for the role of John Rambo, he turned it down when his request that Rambo be more of a madman was rejected.
Al Pacino = God
Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2011, 12:18 AM   #6832 (permalink)
( ̄ー ̄)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,270
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra View Post
Brown Sugar is an abysmal song, one of the worst of all time, and has absolutely no redeemable traits. I am shocked that to this day it's considered one of the greatest rock songs of all time. Albeit, I don't have much respect for 'rock history', and it's bizarre slanted view, I don't understand how exactly this turd which is by far one of the Rolling Stones worst songs, can be so highly rated, and even by the standards of the darkest end of their overrated catalog, it's completely ridiculous.

I find it especially bad considering old fart classic rockers would covet it, and hold it as a protest against Justin Biebar, and Britney Spears even though it's obviously equally inane, and even more simplistic, and over-repetetive.
Wait, did you just... compare Brown Sugar to "Baby"?
RVCA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2011, 12:19 AM   #6833 (permalink)
\/ GOD
 
Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Nowhere...
Posts: 2,179
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RVCA View Post
Wait, did you just... compare Brown Sugar to "Baby"?
From a compositional, or lyrical aspect, I'd like to know how Brown Sugar is necessarily more mature.
__________________
Quote:
Terence Hill, as recently confirmed during an interview to an Italian TV talk-show, was offered the role but rejected it because he considered it "too violent". Dustin Hoffman and John Travolta declined the role for the same reason. When Al Pacino was considered for the role of John Rambo, he turned it down when his request that Rambo be more of a madman was rejected.
Al Pacino = God
Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2011, 12:30 AM   #6834 (permalink)
Live by the Sword
 
Howard the Duck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Posts: 9,075
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RVCA View Post
Wait, did you just... compare Brown Sugar to "Baby"?
"Baby" is infinitely superior
__________________


Malaise is THE dominant human predilection.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Virgin View Post
what? i don't understand you. farming is for vegetables, not for meat. if ou disagree with a farming practice, you disagree on a vegetable. unless you have a different definition of farming.
Howard the Duck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2011, 12:34 AM   #6835 (permalink)
( ̄ー ̄)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,270
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra View Post
From a compositional, or lyrical aspect, I'd like to know how Brown Sugar is necessarily more mature.
Wait, really?

Quote:
And I was like baby, baby, baby, oh
Like baby, baby, baby, no
Like baby, baby, baby, oh
I thought you'd always be mine, mine
vs

Quote:
Gold coast slave ship bound for cotton fields,
Sold in a market down in new orleans.
Scarred old slaver know he's doin alright.
Hear him whip the women just around midnight.
Ah brown sugar how come you taste so good
(a-ha) brown sugar, just like a young girl should
A-huh.
Admittedly, both songs are about fairly shallow attraction to the opposite sex, but Brown Sugar clearly demonstrates a more mature approach to the subject and is infinitely more interesting to listen to, lyrically.

Compositionally, "Baby" is yet another manufactured commercial piece of garbage featuring uninteresting instrumentation (if you can call electronic "thump thump thumping" instrumentation), whereas Brown Sugar has "blues-rock riffs, a dual horn/guitar instrumental break, and danceable rock rhythms". Clearly the work of a band, in a studio, instead of a producer with a Mac.

I don't know, I just can't even fathom the comparison.
RVCA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2011, 12:47 AM   #6836 (permalink)
\/ GOD
 
Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Nowhere...
Posts: 2,179
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RVCA View Post
Wait, really?



vs



Admittedly, both songs are about fairly shallow attraction to the opposite sex, but Brown Sugar clearly demonstrates a more mature approach to the subject and is infinitely more interesting to listen to, lyrically.

Compositionally, "Baby" is yet another manufactured commercial piece of garbage featuring uninteresting instrumentation (if you can call electronic "thump thump thumping" instrumentation), whereas Brown Sugar has "blues-rock riffs, a dual horn/guitar instrumental break, and danceable rock rhythms". Clearly the work of a band, in a studio, instead of a producer with a Mac.

I don't know, I just can't even fathom the comparison.
Brown Sugar interpolates back, and forth between two oddly juxtaposed and generic guitar riffs. The horn section sounds like it's just highlighting a few chords to go along with the guitar, and really should not be considered an aspect of additional composition(I mean, if the series of notes is already written on guitar you can pretty much layer over it with any instrument, it doesn't mean you added much to it, really). It's slightly more polished, but sure as hell is not all that much more rhythmically structured. The millimeter it gains in sound depth it loses in the fact it literally sounds like the song is written from two very unimpressive guitar riffs slapped together.

Baby at least has some rhythmic consistency. Not just the feeling it's cycling randomly through two completely disconnected melodies for seemingly now purpose.

Now, I'm obviously a fan of jumpy music, but Brown Sugar is not trying to be 'jumpy' it's trying to be a catchy pop song. In that sense, it lacks the essence of any building subtlety. It's not an artistic quirk, it's just poor songwriting.

Furthermore, the lyrics themselves are just scattered with bizarrely politically incorrect themes for shock value. I'd say they're obviously more well thought out, but not necessarily more mature. I can't say I am offended, but it's not interesting or humorous enough to elevate the song above the state of 'cheap sex song'.

It's a miserably bad song, and a shallow inane disaster. The Rolling Stones CAN write decent songs(Sympathy for the Devil), but it doesn't mean that this song is anything more than a stinking turd. Furthermore, I'm 99% sure this song would be looked at in a different light if you replaced the guitar with today's more acceptable pop textures, gave it the exact same notation, and people who love it today would ****ing loathe it.
__________________
Quote:
Terence Hill, as recently confirmed during an interview to an Italian TV talk-show, was offered the role but rejected it because he considered it "too violent". Dustin Hoffman and John Travolta declined the role for the same reason. When Al Pacino was considered for the role of John Rambo, he turned it down when his request that Rambo be more of a madman was rejected.
Al Pacino = God
Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2011, 11:00 AM   #6837 (permalink)
VICTORY SCREEEEEEECH
 
Antonio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Are you a cop?
Posts: 3,348
Default

man, for a second i thought you guys were arguing about "Brown Sugar" by D'Angelo



/anyexcusetopostthissong
__________________
Been making some new music lately, check it out

My MB Journal-I talk about music and stuff!

add me on Steam!
http://steamcommunity.com/id/commandercool

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr dave
isn't this one of the main reasons for this entire site?

what's next? a thread made specifically to banter about music?
Antonio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2011, 03:06 PM   #6838 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Captain Ron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: in a boat with your girlfriend
Posts: 274
Default

nu metal sucks ass
Captain Ron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2011, 04:26 PM   #6839 (permalink)
Let it drip
 
Sneer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 5,430
Default

That's not that unpopular a music opinion.
Sneer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2011, 12:32 AM   #6840 (permalink)
Groupie
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Oakland, CA
Posts: 10
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Ron View Post
nu metal sucks ass
I think alot of people feel that way. I am one of them.
XMattX is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Similar Threads



© 2003-2024 Advameg, Inc.