Bands you hate that everyone else loves

Mirrorball95 · 05-22-2009, 08:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Unfan

I hate to break it to you kids but masks/face paint, and pointy things have been a popular rock gimmick since before Mushroomhead.

You dont need to break anything to us 'kids'. Who are you supposed to be, some kind of Music banter godfather?

I know Kiss did it years before & sorry to say (to all mad mental Kiss fans including Homer Simpson) that they suck balls also.

~~coryallen2~~ · 05-22-2009, 08:12 AM

You don't have to break anythign to us mate. Yeah Kiss started alot of it but basicaly the "Metal" genre started it. Those bands were unipue they were all diffrent. Kiss had the wild out fits and face paint and Alice Cooper had his stuff. Mushroom Head and Slipknot look basicaly the same and are not up to the standard to even be sat next to someone with that legends of metal like Kiss and related.

~~The Unfan~~ · 05-22-2009, 08:15 AM

While they both had some amount of influence of metal I'm not sure I'd call either metal.

Slipknot and Mushroom Head don't look anything alike.

Unrelenting · 05-22-2009, 08:20 AM

The Killers. Brandon Flowers has such an annoying voice

~~coryallen2~~ · 05-22-2009, 08:22 AM

^Mushroom Head

^ Slipknot

Both look alike to me

Unrelenting · 05-22-2009, 08:25 AM

They really don't though. Everyone in Mushroomhead (save one guy) have matching masks, where Slipknot all have customized one.

boo boo · 05-22-2009, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Comus

My 1,500 post so I'll make this one special just for you.

Let me make a few guidelines clear:

1. This thread is about bands you hate that everyone else loves
2. The thread is thus subjective
3. All music is subjective
4. As such words such as "listenable" are subjective
5. Disliking the Beatles =/= not knowing anything about music

The Beatles influence is undeniable, but when put up against say Muddy Waters, or any of the Delta Blues greats that inspired the early-mid-60's British blues movement it's virtually nil. Beatles inspired countless bland pop groups, and still does. These blues guitarists directly inspired bands and players such as the Rolling Stones, The Yardbirds, Jethro Tull, Peter Green, Jeff Beck, Jimmy Page, Eric Clapton, who's collective influence surpasses the Beatles tenfold in terms of rock music.

Well lets see. For one, half of those artists are also influenced by The Beatles. The Roling Stones did their share of trying to copy their Beatles, and failed horribly at it. Jethro Tull abandoned blues rock very early in their career to persue folk and prog.

Comparing them to the influences of other artists is pointless. Maybe they're not the most influencial but you're calling yourself a prog fan, which owes much of it's existance of The Beatles.

Quote:

If you want to listen to bland, boring poppy rock, why not just turn on your radio?

Have you heard anything by this band since 1964 or are you just trying to troll me now?

For one, you like goddamn Billy Joel. I have without a reasonable doubt that you haven't given this band the time of day because of their pop culture status.

I can understand not liking The Beatles. Urban doesn't, but I at least know he has actually given their albums a chance. And his statements are unquestionably his subjective opinions. He doesn't try to pass it off as common sense.

You're saying all they did was bland pop rock and that they're incompetent musicians. That goes beyond hating The Beatles, it just gives me the impression that you don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about.

Quote:

You're kidding yourself if you think that listening to the Beatles is any different than your regular pop band of today, it's all the same, the Beatles are just more musically acceptable. My point that they were not about the music is valid, they got famous for portraying an image. Girls loved them, guys wanted to be them, and that old cliche.

This applies to so many f*cking bands its ridiculous.

Image has always been an important part of marketing rock artists, hell image in music marketing goes way back to the days of Mozart.

To discredit a band for that alone is just dumb. You wouldn't have Rock N Roll without the rebellious image. The Stones were even more about image than The Beatles were. The Who and The Kinks had the mod image. David Bowie had the glam image, and even when he abandoned that image, he was always adopting some trendy image to stay fresh. Velvet Underground had the hipster image. Black Sabbath and Led Zeppelin had the dark and mysticism image. And then you have punk.

And if The Beatles were only about the image, and that's all they were ever about. Then sure, it makes a lot of since that they would abandon touring, all the screaming girls. So they could make such bland poppy albums as Revolver, Sgt Pepper and The White Album.

And contrary to popular belief, they didn't break up over creative musical differences. It was because John Lennon refused to get a mustache.

Quote:

I remember watching a Robert Plant and John Bonham interview recorded about 1970 where they were talking about the Beatles. Bonham said something along the lines of "People went there to look at them, not to hear them play, I went to a beatles concert to look at them too." They then went on to say that their music was all about the music, and after that it got a bit more boring, but the point stands. And what greater perspective than right there? Plant and Bonham both said it wasn't the Beatles fault, it was just the times, people needed something to look at and not listen to.

Because image never played a part in Zep.

Quote:

Modern rock today would be the same without the beatles

Yeah, if you don't mind no prog. I can tell you're not really into that stuff.

Quote:

of that I have no doubt, but modern pop wouldn't. People immediately assume that every british band to come out from the sixties did so because of the Beatles, I mean come on what? Beatles released their first albums when? 1963? By that time the underground scene was all about the Blues The Rolling Stones had formed, and the Pretty Things were well on their way. This had nothing to do with the Beatles, but everything to do with the likes of Howling Wolf, Jimmy Reed, Willie Dixon and the likes.

I'm not talking about The British Invasion at all. If you can't think of ANY influencial bands who were signficantly influenced by The Beatles, then you just don't know your music history.

Quote:

The argument that "without the beatles a lot of the bands you listen to wouldn't exist" is utter rubbish. Come back when you change "without the beatles" to "without the delta blues".

Yeah. THAT'S where prog and indie got all it's influence. Not from The Beatles redefining what rock and pop could be in the late 60s. It was ALL about the blues. Sure. You can hear a lot of Howling Wolf in such blues rock classics as "Close to the Edge" and "Suppers Ready".

Quote:

You clearly have no clue about the true influences. We're talking about rock here, hard gritty, filthy rock. What about Chuck Berry? He was shredding it half a decade before the Beatles, what about Buddy Holly and the Crickets? The Shadows (they were even british!) What about Little Richard? He had already gone gospel for a short time before the Beatles had even formed!

My god, this is the stupidest thing I ever read.

Are we now discredting bands for having influences? The Beatles were influenced by 50s rock n roll and even though they reinvented it to create something different, Chuck Berry still deserves the credit for every band The Beatles influenced? Instead of the damn Beatles?

The Beatles music was much broader, and so it had a broader influence on music. Chuck Berry has influenced such groundbreaking music as Aerosmith and ZZ Top, well whoopedy doo.

I highly doubt prog and alternative bands listen to more Chuck Berry than The Beatles.

If you're gonna discredit The Beatles for having influences, then you should be consistant. Look up the roots of popular wrestern music. Rock N' Roll, R&B, Blues, Country, Jazz, Folk, Bluegrass and Gospel. By your logic it's all a direct ripoff of West African lute players.

Quote:

Now that your point is totally and utterly moot. What about you? The moment anyone, in a thread totally unrelated to you, talks bad about a band you like, your immediate reaction is to launch personal attacks. To be quite honest that type of behaviour is not really the kind of thing we want from a moderator. You more than anyone should know that everyone is entitled to their opinions, and that it's no crime state them. You've said yourself that I've done nothing worthy of even an infraction, but I'd quite argue you have. You constantly step out of line, yet you do exactly what you chastise others for doing.

I'm not being out of line, you come here acting like the god of musical knowledge. And that's fine I guess but when you display that kind of attitude and yet say things that are objectively wrong and try to pass them off as some common sense fact. Then I have the right to challenge you.

Quote:

When you bash a band it's "expressing my opinion" when someone else bashes a band it's "ignorant".

Saying they are all about image, that it's the only reason people like them and calling them musically incompetent musicians is not expressing an opinion, it's saying something that is objectively incorrect.

I don't like neoclassical metal, but I'm not gonna say Yngwie Malmsteen can't shred. Because that's objectively wrong.

I don't mean to personally insult you, but you're passing off anti-fanboy statements as common sense and fact and mod or not I have the right to challenge you. This IS music BANTER.

I'm bantering about music, what more do you want?

Urban Hat€monger ? · 05-22-2009, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boo boo

Urban doesn't, but I at least know he has actually given their albums a chance.

I don't hate them. I did put Revolver in the Urban 100.

I'd just prefer other bands from that era.

~~someonecompletelyrandom~~ · 05-22-2009, 05:35 PM

boo boo, congratulations on a great post! Finally something that makes sense around here.

Comus · 05-22-2009, 06:31 PM

Boo Boo, if you're going to discredit blues and early rock n' roll as influences on modern music, then we should discredit the Beatles as well based on the fact that the bands you say they influenced must have influenced the next generation.

EDIT: regardless I posted here talking about how I hated the Beatles, which is the point of this thread. Randomly attacking that for posting an opinion seems pretty ****ty to me. Also on the matter of influence, it's undeniable that the Rolling Stones had a far greater influence on the shape of modern rock music.

05-22-2009, 08:20 AM	#144 (permalink)
Unrelenting True to username Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 1,100	The Killers. Brandon Flowers has such an annoying voice __________________ My lastfm

05-22-2009, 08:25 AM	#146 (permalink)
Unrelenting True to username Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 1,100	They really don't though. Everyone in Mushroomhead (save one guy) have matching masks, where Slipknot all have customized one. __________________ My lastfm

05-22-2009, 08:12 AM	#142 (permalink)
~~coryallen2~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: lorain,ohio Posts: 909	You don't have to break anythign to us mate. Yeah Kiss started alot of it but basicaly the "Metal" genre started it. Those bands were unipue they were all diffrent. Kiss had the wild out fits and face paint and Alice Cooper had his stuff. Mushroom Head and Slipknot look basicaly the same and are not up to the standard to even be sat next to someone with that legends of metal like Kiss and related.

05-22-2009, 08:15 AM	#143 (permalink)
~~The Unfan~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Methville Posts: 2,116	While they both had some amount of influence of metal I'm not sure I'd call either metal. Slipknot and Mushroom Head don't look anything alike.

05-22-2009, 08:22 AM	#145 (permalink)
~~coryallen2~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: lorain,ohio Posts: 909	^Mushroom Head ^ Slipknot Both look alike to me

05-22-2009, 05:35 PM	#149 (permalink)
~~someonecompletelyrandom~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 4,538	boo boo, congratulations on a great post! Finally something that makes sense around here.