Music Banter

Music Banter (https://www.musicbanter.com/)
-   General Music (https://www.musicbanter.com/general-music/)
-   -   Best Artist: Round 2: Poll C (https://www.musicbanter.com/general-music/30082-best-artist-round-2-poll-c.html)

boo boo 04-23-2008 06:51 PM

You're right, Ethans wrong.

Lock thread.

British_pharaoh 04-23-2008 06:55 PM

and your precious Pitchfork magazine has Siamese Dream highers than Odelay among 90's albums

but of course this is where the convenient
magazine lists mean nothing comes into it

sleepy jack 04-23-2008 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by British_pharaoh (Post 472984)
You'd put The Velvet Underground and Nico up with say Rubber Soul or Pet Sounds wouldn't you?

well you bloody should do anyway

now the latter 2 are hardly as innovative and experimental as the Velvets but they are still marvellous albums that are held in just as high esteem and by a lot of people maybe even higher

Hardly relevant since you don't know my opinions on those is it?

Quote:

but they are 3 albums that are completely different just like Odelay, Siamese Dream and oh I dunno something like '69 Love Songs'
You're the one who compared them not me so don't complain that Siamese Dream is being placed next to Odelay.

Quote:

innovation and originality is always revered but just because a band is able to make a tremendous record despite being (like you stated) like 200 other bands shouldn't mean they are regarded as an inferior artist.
In comparison to someone doing something completely singular and innovative yeah they're inferior.

Quote:

In fact it can sometimes say more for a band if they can clearly stand out from their contemporaries.
So? They're still not doing something original and when you place them next to someone doing something original guess who's generally going to be seen as more important? The artist doing something original.

Quote:

Originally Posted by boo boo (Post 472985)
You're right, Ethans wrong.

Lock thread.

Will you shut the fuck up if you're not going to contribute something?

Quote:

Originally Posted by British_pharaoh (Post 472986)
and your precious Pitchfork magazine has Siamese Dream highers than Odelay among 90's albums

but of course this is where the convenient
magazine lists mean nothing comes into it

I don't even like pitchfork's reviews in fact I've criticized them several times as being ridiculous and a completely elitist joke. Stop making completely irrelevant and unfounded comments please, it doesn't do anything for your argument.

boo boo 04-23-2008 07:00 PM

And what are you contributing? Right now you're trolling your own thread.

British_pharaoh 04-23-2008 07:02 PM

Quote:

Hardly relevant since you don't know my opinions on those is it?



You're the one who compared them not me so don't complain that Siamese Dream is being placed next to Odelay.
I wans't comparing as such I was placing Siamese Dream in amongst a few random memorable and brillaint albums of the 90's



Quote:

In comparison to someone doing something completely singular and innovative yeah they're inferior.
I never said either were inferior
but you were insinuating in your posts that somehow Smashing Pumpkins should be penalised for being less original and innovative than Beck (I'm not saying that's what you strictly meant but that's how it came across)
now would you care to respond to the rest of my post instead of dodging the more difficult opinions I made




Quote:

So? They're still not doing something original and when you place them next to someone doing something original guess who's generally going to be seen as more important? The artist doing something original.
Never did I make this thread about who was more important
I stated the Smashign Pumpkins' Siamese Dream album should be regarded as just as important as other great albums released in the 90's

sleepy jack 04-23-2008 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boo boo (Post 472989)
And what are you contributing? Right now you're trolling your own thread.

You seem to have a very warped concept of what trolling is. If I was trolling my own thread my post would just consist of "LOLS SMASHING PUMPKIN SCUKCS111" and not provided any argument whatsoever. Which I'm doing and you're not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by British_pharaoh (Post 472991)
I wans't comparing as such I was placing Siamese Dream in amongst a few random memorable and brillaint albums of the 90's

I never said either were inferior
but you were insinuating in your posts that somehow Smashing Pumpkins should be penalised for being less original and innovative than Beck (I'm not saying that's what you strictly meant but that's how it came across)
now would you care to respond to the rest of my post instead of dodging the more difficult opinions I made

Never did I make this thread about who was more important
I stated the Smashign Pumpkins' Siamese Dream album should be regarded as just as important as other great albums released in the 90's

How is it just as important? Maybe you should explain this before you make such claims because I don't see it as anything more than your typical 90s alternative guitar rock album and I hardly think it deserves to be placed next to Odelay or Loveless. Slanted & Enchanted, Ten, Nevermind (ignoring the impact factor), and the Blue Album sure because those are championed as classics but not necessarily innovative or groundbreaking ones.

boo boo 04-23-2008 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crowquill (Post 472987)
In comparison to someone doing something completely singular and innovative yeah they're inferior.

Actually no it dosen't, if the music is not good it dosen't matter if you're original or not. Siamese Dream is a damn good album, I don't even see whats so unoriginal about it.

Quote:

So? They're still not doing something original and when you place them next to someone doing something original guess who's generally going to be seen as more important? The artist doing something original.
I'm sorry Fall of Troy are not more importing than Smashing Pumpkins. :laughing:

Add to that, Fall of Troy are just mixing hardcore with prog, its a novel concept, but I don't see how that makes them so damn original.

Add to that originality has NOTHING to do with importance, unless you're seriously gonna tell me The Residents are more important than The Rolling Stones.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crowquill (Post 472992)
You seem to have a very warped concept of what trolling is. If I was trolling my own thread my post would just consist of "LOLS SMASHING PUMPKIN SCUKCS111" and not provided any argument whatsoever. Which I'm doing and you're not.

You made a poll where one of the options was Smashing Pumpkins, then you insulted people who voted for them, leading to this retarded argument.

GravitySlips 04-23-2008 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crowquill (Post 472987)
So? They're still not doing something original and when you place them next to someone doing something original guess who's generally going to be seen as more important? The artist doing something original.

sorry, but this is not true.

the Taj Mahal Travellers (japanese band) were very original, unlike anything else really

Nirvana were not particularly original.

by your logic the Taj Mahal Travellers are more important than Nirvana...obviously not the case.

sleepy jack 04-23-2008 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boo boo (Post 472994)
Actually no it dosen't, if the music is not good it dosen't matter if you're original or not. Siamese Dream is a damn good album, I don't even see whats so unoriginal about it.

I don't see how its much different than all the 90s alternative guitar rock, British Pharaoh seems to have no problem with me saying its unoriginal in fact you agreed with him when he said they should be praised for doing the same thing as their contemporaries and standing out while doing it. Weird how you're saying something different now.

Quote:

I'm sorry Fall of Troy are not more importing than Smashing Pumpkins. :laughing:
I never said they were, just more original.

Quote:

Add to that, Fall of Troy are just mixing hardcore with prog, its a novel concept, but I don't see how that makes them so damn original.
Who else sounds like the Fall of Troy?

Quote:

Add to that originality has NOTHING to do with importance, unless you're seriously gonna tell me The Residents are more important than The Rolling Stones.
Yeah but we're not comparing a fairly unknown act to a popular one. We're talking Beck and The Smashing Pumpkins.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GravitySlips (Post 472995)
sorry, but this is not true.

the Taj Mahal Travellers (japanese band) were very original, unlike anything else really

Nirvana were not particularly original.

by your logic the Taj Mahal Travellers are more important than Nirvana...obviously not the case.

I repeat: "Yeah but we're not comparing a fairly unknown act to a popular one. We're talking Beck and The Smashing Pumpkins."

boo boo 04-23-2008 07:11 PM

Also, Yes are more original than Modest Mouse (who are just ripping off Built to Spill).

And ELP is more original than Animal Collective (who are just copying early 90s Flaming Lips)


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:03 AM.


© 2003-2025 Advameg, Inc.