Guns N Roses reunion confirmed - Music Banter Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > The Music Forums > Rock & Metal
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 01-06-2016, 06:09 PM   #121 (permalink)
Toasted Poster
 
Chula Vista's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: SoCal by way of Boston
Posts: 11,332
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland View Post
So the cream rises to the top not because of people who know what cream tastes like, but by people who don't even care if they're eating cream?

What I'm saying is popularity counts for nothing except for popularity itself.
I've been here for 1.5 years and you've made the exact same damn argument numerous times, and I still think you are ****ing daft. And stubbornly ignorant as to what the phrase really means.

Popularity counts for the fact that large numbers of people enjoy your product. Whether it be be bread, tires, video games, golf balls, or music. It counts AND MEANS SOMETHING to have a product that has lasted the test of time and remains "popular".

You, being on the fringe, hate to accept this simple concept, basically because most of what you enjoy, and create, will, or has never been, vastly popular.

To be clear: We're not talking validity here. Everything is valid: You abusing an acoustic guitar with a coat hanger being on the extreme fringe....

Don't discount popular as being inferior, in an effort to justify your fringe, unpopular, tastes.

Frowny comeback in 5..., 4..., 3..., 2...
__________________

“The fact that we live at the bottom of a deep gravity well,
on the surface of a gas covered planet going around a nuclear fireball 90 million miles away
and think this to be normal is obviously some indication of how skewed our perspective tends to be.”
Chula Vista is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2016, 06:11 PM   #122 (permalink)
Mate, Spawn & Die
 
Janszoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: The Rapping Community
Posts: 24,593
Default

Sometimes it just means that thing is lowest common denominator.
Janszoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2016, 06:12 PM   #123 (permalink)
SOPHIE FOREVER
 
Frownland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: East of the Southern North American West
Posts: 35,541
Default

It doesn't mean anything to me though. I'm aware that popularity means that you're successful (that's what I meant by "popularity counts for nothing but popularity itself"), but I don't think that's relevant in determining the quality of something. Also I never equated popular with inferior, much like how I'm not saying that popularity determines superiority. Pretty simple.

I have no need to justify my taste and have never done so on a popularity based argument. Whenever I bring the subject up its usually in response to people saying or implying that popularity counts for quality.
__________________
Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.

Frownland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2016, 06:25 PM   #124 (permalink)
Born to be mild
 
Trollheart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: 404 Not Found
Posts: 26,992
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Basil C. Thurston III View Post
Please call me basil, I don't know who this Mr Smarty Pants is. Is he the guitarist in Winger?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland View Post
So you're saying that popularity is a good indicator of talent? I don't trust the hive mind of the casual music listener to determine which artists are the most talented.
I agree. Some of the most popular music today is not what I'd call the least bit talented, and vice versa.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Basil C. Thurston III View Post
It can be, but it's not 100%. I think that the cream generally rises to the top most of the time but there are exceptions. What people like is not always based on talent but what sounds good to them. It's a different discussion, really. And the casual listeners are usually the ones who determine who becomes popular, not the hard-core, well-informed music nut.
No, something else generally rises to the top, hence the charts. Popularity is no indication of something being good. Just because everyone does it/likes it/goes to it does not necessarily mean it's the best of its type. You could have the most talented singer/songwriter making dollars in a bar in Pasadena while people vastly inferior in talent, but very popular in the charts, rake it in. So this particular cream is held down and does not rise to the top. Doesn't make him or her any less cream. That sounded better in my head.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Janszoon View Post
Nope. If I think they're talented songwriters, then I think they're talented songwriters. If not, then not. But songwriting isn't the only form of talent in the world. Someone can be a talented performer without being a talented songwriter (or vice versa), for example.
Of course they can. Many singers of note, sure even Sinatra, one of the most talented, and I believe Elvis (though correct me if I'm wrong as I'm no fan of his) never wrote any songs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chula Vista View Post
Sorry for the typo. Been a long day.

Slash is a killer rock guitarist. As mentioned earlier, he brought back pure rock tone. But there's millions of players that can ape his playing thing easily. He's nothing more than a Page/Perry/Young extension with killer tone.

Define big gigs?

Other than being a "guest star", when was the last time that Saul played a seriously big gig? Ya, he's gimmick to trot out now and then, but he's miles away from being relevant in 2016.
Then he must be arrested! Who did he kill????
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland View Post
"I don't like Jim's hat."
"But dude, Jim has a really nice voice."

Pretty similar connection there.
What do you have against Jim's hat? Oh, no! You're not one of those awful hattist people, are you??
Quote:
Originally Posted by Janszoon View Post
Sometimes it just means that thing is lowest common denominator.
It certainly does, or can do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland View Post
It doesn't mean anything to me though. I'm aware that popularity means that you're successful, but I don't think that's relevant in the quality of something. Also I never equated popular with inferior, much like how I'm not saying that popularity determines superiority. Pretty simple.

I have no need to justify my taste and have never done so on a popularity based argument. Whenever I bring the subject up its usually in response to people saying that popularity counts for quality.
This is of course correct. I've listened to and followed bands and singers here that nobody would even know, and who are certainly not popular, in the sense of having huge album sales or hits, but they're still damn talented. Sometimes in fact, being popular can work to the disadvantage of talent, as the artist thinks he or she need do the bare minimum and people will still buy their material. The creative urge dries up, but the bank account continues to grow.
__________________
Trollheart: Signature-free since April 2018
Trollheart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2016, 06:34 PM   #125 (permalink)
Toasted Poster
 
Chula Vista's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: SoCal by way of Boston
Posts: 11,332
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland View Post
Also I never equated popular with inferior, much like how I'm not saying that popularity determines superiority.
Not inferiority, but you've used the label to semi-slam tons of **** - basically based on the fact that if lots of people dig it, it must somehow be less than what it is.

If I come at you with the fact that LZ-IV has sold 23 millions copies in the US alone, your immediate comeback is: "Sales doesn't validate that it's good".
__________________

“The fact that we live at the bottom of a deep gravity well,
on the surface of a gas covered planet going around a nuclear fireball 90 million miles away
and think this to be normal is obviously some indication of how skewed our perspective tends to be.”
Chula Vista is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2016, 06:37 PM   #126 (permalink)
SOPHIE FOREVER
 
Frownland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: East of the Southern North American West
Posts: 35,541
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chula Vista View Post
Not inferiority, but you've used the label to semi-slam tons of **** - basically based on the fact that if lots of people dig it, it must somehow be less than what it is.
I think you need new reading glasses, I've never said anything of the sort.

Quote:
If I come at you with the fact that LZ-IV has sold 23 millions copies in the US alone, your immediate comeback is: "Sales doesn't validate that it's good".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland View Post
Whenever I bring the subject up its usually in response to people saying or implying that popularity counts for quality.
Because it doesn't.
__________________
Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.

Frownland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2016, 06:44 PM   #127 (permalink)
Toasted Poster
 
Chula Vista's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: SoCal by way of Boston
Posts: 11,332
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland View Post
I've never said anything of the sort.
Implication.

For the record, I think Kevin Gilbert may be the greatest rock/pop artist of all time.

Back to GnR. My fave thing they ever did was the video for Terminator II.

At the end of the video when the band was leaving the Rainbow, Slash was wasted out of his mind!

@6:10

__________________

“The fact that we live at the bottom of a deep gravity well,
on the surface of a gas covered planet going around a nuclear fireball 90 million miles away
and think this to be normal is obviously some indication of how skewed our perspective tends to be.”
Chula Vista is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2016, 06:52 PM   #128 (permalink)
SOPHIE FOREVER
 
Frownland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: East of the Southern North American West
Posts: 35,541
Default

You suck at inference, my friend.

Also, Kevin Gilbert was only popular because Sheryl Crowe got more popular than him and he got pissy about it.
__________________
Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.

Frownland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2016, 07:00 PM   #129 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Basil C. Thurston III's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 123
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trollheart View Post

No, something else generally rises to the top, hence the charts. Popularity is no indication of something being good. Just because everyone does it/likes it/goes to it does not necessarily mean it's the best of its type. You could have the most talented singer/songwriter making dollars in a bar in Pasadena while people vastly inferior in talent, but very popular in the charts, rake it in. So this particular cream is held down and does not rise to the top. Doesn't make him or her any less cream. That sounded better in my head.
.
We're saying the exact same thing using different terms. To me, the "cream" is the talent, and long-term, the talent generally sticks around and can become recognized by the mainstream. Everything else is the milk, the stuff that the general public is fed and accept as "good". I think of it in terms like a band such as The Ramones, who, to me, were special (or cream). They were ignored for the most part by the general public early on, for many reasons- they never had big hits, commercial songs, they weren't pretty, they played a style of music that had negative connotations to it, etc- but as their career lengthened, they became more appreciated by a wider volume of people. All I'm saying, like you, is that popularity does not equate quality, talent or technical excellence. I'm saying the cream has a better chance for a long career than the milk, albeit in a less financially successful fashion.
Basil C. Thurston III is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2016, 07:31 PM   #130 (permalink)
Zum Henker Defätist!!
 
The Batlord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Beating GNR at DDR and keying Axl's new car
Posts: 48,199
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Basil C. Thurston III View Post
You asked what separated them. I answered talent. You appear to think GNR is a "glam band". Big difference between being a glam band and being influenced by them. Don't know if you're old enough to remember, but Elton John was called glam. Abba was called glam. Bowie was called glam. Ian Hunter was glam. The Tubes were called glam. So were Alice Cooper, Slade and Sweet. Bay City Rollers, Brian Eno, Sparks and Roxy Music also got that title. Can you not see that it's not the music, it's the on-stage style? Glam had nothing to do with the music, it was an image, or a look. I don't base whether I like a band on whether they dress a certain way or not, I have always realized that looks don't necessarily translate to talent. GNR was a talented band on a level that wasn't approached by many other L.A. bands at the time. Many got signed simply because they were in the scene, not because they were great musicians.



All of those artists are glam ROCK. Glam ROCK. Not glam METAL. Which is what we are talking about. Either you're being intentionally obtuse or you're just clueless.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.R.R. Tolkien
There is only one bright spot and that is the growing habit of disgruntled men of dynamiting factories and power-stations; I hope that, encouraged now as ‘patriotism’, may remain a habit! But it won’t do any good, if it is not universal.
The Batlord is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Similar Threads



© 2003-2024 Advameg, Inc.