WowBB Forums Home 
WowBB Forums > Sports And Wrestling > General Discussion > Unpopular Opinions You Might Carry Towards Music

 Moderated by: Ron, brodiescomics, beejmi  
AuthorPost
WongLee
Hall Of Famer


Joined: Fri Oct 19th, 2007
Location: Bay Shore, New York
Posts: 7138
Status: 
Offline
So what are some of the opinions you carry that go completely against the grain of popular opinion. Where do you stand on certain singers, bands, vaudeville that would even cause your own sainted mother to hate your guts. Now I'm not talking about the mundane everyday stuff like Beatles vs. Stones or whether or not you hate Springsteen, U2, Coldplay or a million other multi-platinum bands that you just don't like. I'm looking for specific things. Some of mine.
-Freddie Mercury did not have that good a voice - I've seen Queen six times back in the day. While every show they did was amazing, it was because they were so tight as a band and the songs were timeless. However, Freddie's voice live was just not that good. Every single time I saw them he did nothing to blow me away with vocal gymnastics. He sounded flat most of time to me. Of course these days he's thought of as a god. I think the vast majority of people who think that never saw them in their prime.

-Ronnie Van Zant had zero charisma. Another guy who's raised up to sainthood in death. Ronnie had a mediocre voice. Was short and almost squat. Was not a true frontman in any way, shape or form. Once again, the songs and musicianship carried the band. I enjoyed Skynyrd just as much in 2017 when I saw them as much as I did in 1977.

-KISS doesn't suck. I was first attracted to them in 1975 by their songs. Even though their first three albums were horribly engineered, to me, the quality of songs shone through. To me, they were a band which actually improved every year. They peaked musically on Revenge which was far into their non-makeup years. Bruce Kulick and Eric Carr were better than Peter and Ace even though Peter and Ace are the icons. They have a large catalogue of amazing songs and their ballard type stuff was off the charts.



srossi

 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: New York USA
Posts: 49817
Status: 
Offline
Black Sabbath was better with Dio than with Ozzy

That John Corabi album was the best that Motley Crue ever sounded.

Sammy Hagar blows David Lee Roth away and it’s not even close.

KISS absolutely fucking blows in every way. 

The Beatles are overrated and McCartney in particular is a moderate talent at best who was carried by Lennon and Harrison. 

For the most part, punk sucked just as much as disco. 

“The Spaghetti Incident?” is a killer album, maybe the best cover albums ever. 

Cinderella is one of the most talented bands that came out of the ‘80s. 

Rock isn’t dead and there’s a lot of talented young bands out there if you give local live music a chance.

Last edited on Thu Oct 31st, 2019 04:05 pm by srossi

WongLee
Hall Of Famer


Joined: Fri Oct 19th, 2007
Location: Bay Shore, New York
Posts: 7138
Status: 
Offline
Good list. I agree with most. I especially agree with the Corabi/Crue record. A couple of the ones you put like Sammy over Dave and Dio over Ozzy are true from a technical standpoint. However, I feel both bands were best in their classic forms. Maybe it has something to do with seeing them in their prime. I also strongly agree with The Spaghetti Incident. I still play it constantly. Rock is dead. As a form of music it may be alive, as far as influencing culture, dead dead dead.

tamalie
Hall Of Famer
 

Joined: Mon Oct 22nd, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 4465
Status: 
Offline
Here are a few of mine.

- I won’t name names because there are too many to mention, but most of the popular vocalists these days that are known for having great voices are undermined by not actually knowing how to sing. There is a lack of vocal training and a feeling that every other note must be turned into an epic in the overdone way indy wrestlers in the 3rd match on the card must go 25 minutes, have several major spots, and a million false finishes like they’re in the Wrestlemania main event.

- "Rapture" was a groundbreaking song due to the rap by Debbie Harry at the end along with lyrics that name checked a lot of the New York hip hop scene at the time. However, it's actual impact on hip hop and how it eventually became more widely accepted is vastly overrated. The genre didn't get any significant crossover from this song or its association with what was then one of the biggest bands going. It's influence in that regard was hyped up retrospectively much later.

- The Beastie Boys are a group I like, but their influence on hip hop has also been overrated to a great extent. MCA, Ad Rock, and Mike D were very witty and could toss in a pop culture reference with the best of them. However, a lot of their rhymes weren't very complex. They were punk rockers who sort of stumbled into hip hop and while I absolutely believe that they were fans of it and eventually took it seriously, in the beginning it was absolutely a goof for them. They got respect in hip hop circles over time, in part because they were charter Def Jam artists when being on that label truly meant something, but I don't think they were ever taken as seriously as a straight up hip hop act by black fans to the extent of their Def Jam successors and occasional rivals 3rd Bass. "Paul's Boutique" was a landmark album for sampling, but the Dust Brothers seem to not get as much credit as they deserve while there was a lot of other amazing hip hop sampling going on at the time and beforehand that should not get overlooked.

- As long as I am piling on the Beastie Boys, I'll put this one in its own bullet point. The debauchery of their "Licensed To Ill" era personas and tour has been long put across as them goofing on the party hard frat boy types who didn't get that they were butt of the joke. In particular, "(You Gotta) Fight for Your Right (To Party!)" has been put across as a parody as well with Mike D even expressing regret later that the song and video reinforced values the band supposedly was against and that people singing along didn't get was a rip on them. I am calling shenanigans on that. The Beastie Boys were well known to play with history during interviews, changed up their image quite a bit during their first few albums, and didn't adopt the image of deep thinking, globally concerned spokesmen for Generation X until around the "Ill Communication" era which was when the idea that "Licensed To Ill" was some sort of parody and commentary originally came into play.

Looking at it then and now, their persona and material immediately before and during the "Licensed To Ill" era contain absolutely no suggestion that there is any attempt at irony going on. "Fight For Your Right" lyrically doesn't hint at irony either and actually comes off as a pretty universal and straight forward teen rebellion song, the likes of which have been in pop music since at least the 1950s. I think that once they embraced a politically correct image, they retroactively changed their 1984 to 1987 motives and creative inspiration to climb out of the frankly sexist hole they'd dug themselves into.

- Pink Floyd is really boring. I know they have fans and more power to them, but I can't get into them.

- "Be Here Now" was a better album than it's given credit for being. The hype ahead of its release was so great it never had a chance of meeting expectations after the two albums that preceded it. It also is undone by being overproduced with songs that are too long and far too much guitar track layering. Cut out a couple of extraneous songs, add in B side "Stay Young", peel back some of the production, and cut some of those 7 minute plus songs to 4 minutes plus and the album would be viewed entirely differently.

- SiriusXM has an all Grateful Dead station. I pass by it now and then while flipping around and the station plays a ton of live concert recordings, most of which are official bootlegs that came right from the board. This band was really sloppy live and Jerry Garcia's voice was weathered and strained even during their prime. It amazes me that they built such a big following. I get that their concert crowds were generally drugged into oblivion and many Dead Heads were there for the atmosphere and community as much as anything, but it still amazes me that they got so big while being so bad.

- I like the Byrds. I like Buffalo Springfield. I like some of Neil Young's solo stuff. I like some of what Stephen Stills did on his own and with other projects in the late 1960s and early 1970s before he got too coked out. However, I can't stand Crosby Stills and Nash or Crosby Stills Nash and Young. Why is this? I blame Graham Nash! A critic once called him "The Ned Flanders of rock & roll" and another one accused him of making CSN's and to a lesser extent CSNY's harmonies sound like folk rock so bland that they border on barbershop.

Franchise
Low key big hog


Joined: Mon Oct 15th, 2007
Location: Cincy, Ohio
Posts: 3640
Status: 
Offline
I can see that with the beastie boys

Married Jo



Joined: Fri Dec 21st, 2007
Location: Hickory NC
Posts: 6774
Status: 
Offline
KISS doesn't suck. I was first attracted to them in 1975 by their songs. Even though their first three albums were horribly engineered, to me, the quality of songs shone through. To me, they were a band which actually improved every year. They peaked musically on Revenge which was far into their non-makeup years. Bruce Kulick and Eric Carr were better than Peter and Ace even though Peter and Ace are the icons. They have a large catalogue of amazing songs and their ballad type stuff was off the charts.

Sammy Hagar blows David Lee Roth away and it’s not even close.

The Beatles are overrated

For the most part, punk sucked just as much as disco.

Cinderella is one of the most talented bands that came out of the ‘80s.


Agreed with all those...

also, this isn't something a lot of people would call "scandalous" to say, but the Gram Parsons-era of The Byrds smokes every other version of that band..

KGB

 

Joined: Wed Jul 4th, 2012
Location:  
Posts: 1208
Status: 
Offline
tamalie wrote: Looking at it then and now, their persona and material immediately before and during the "Licensed To Ill" era contain absolutely no suggestion that there is any attempt at irony going on.
 
100% agree with this.  Didn't they also tour that year with a giant inflatable penis that shot confetti into the crowd?  I'm sure that was ironic, too. 

Principal_Raditch



Joined: Mon Feb 18th, 2008
Location:  
Posts: 6878
Status: 
Offline
Dan Chernau was a better Drummer than Buddy Rich.

broke



Joined: Tue Jan 22nd, 2008
Location: Bolton, ON
Posts: 3181
Status: 
Offline
I'll agree on Revenge being Kiss's peak, and the Corabi record (even though it didn't really sell). Also 100% agree on CSN and CSNY, but I'll give David Crosby some of the blame - post-Byrds he just didn't have the songs in him.

I'll punt on McCartney... I think John Lennon and George Martin really tempered his whimsical side. And I'll wager they were the driving force in picking out Harrison's good songs (his solo stuff is the shits for the most part).

gwlee7



Joined: Mon Oct 15th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 5316
Status: 
Offline
The Allman Brothers were better when Dickey Betts was the only guitar player in the band. Duane Allman was a phenomenal talent but the band sounded better with the two keyboards (Gregg Allman organ, Chuck Leavell piano), one guitar, bass, drums, and percussion line up.


Edit to add that Stephen Stills on his on or Manassas is better than any combination of or with  Crosby, Nash or Young.   I like Young by himself better too.  

Last edited on Fri Nov 1st, 2019 03:36 am by gwlee7

Erick Von Erich

 

Joined: Thu Mar 26th, 2015
Location: Texas USA
Posts: 574
Status: 
Offline
Nirvana sucks. About the only song of theirs I can stand is "In Bloom".


According to Vh1 and journalists who were listening to Phil Collins in 1991, "hair metal" supposedly died overnight when Nirvana's "Smells Like Teen Spirit" arrived in the fall of 1991. Douchebags like Sebastian Bach of Skid Row claimed that they were suddenly unable to get bookings or airplay and had to go into hibernation in September 1991 (yet let's not forget that Skid Row released an album that fall...and it did pretty well). The Nirvana/grunge trend was definitely ONE of the reasons hair metal bands went away, but it wasn't the only one.

What actually killed "hair metal" was a combination of many things. Most prominently a tune called "Enter: Sandman" that hit the airwaves in August 1991. That's what ended the abundance of hair bands like Firehouse, Pretty Boy Floyd, Shotgun Messiah, Danger Danger, etc. Suddenly the "scary" thrash/speed metal that you only heard on late-night radio shows was now front and center.

Combine that with the "college rock" or what became known as "alternative". Bands like Living Colour, Bad Brains, Jane's Addiction, Fishbone, Red Hot Chili Peppers and others all grabbed some fans from the metal camp, well before September 1991. When grunge came along, it kinda' piggybacked on that movement.

I'll always say that Soundgarden was a metal (maybe "alternative metal") band from Seattle that got a big break in that fall 1991 era.

indikator



Joined: Fri Jan 23rd, 2009
Location: Bratenwender City, Germany
Posts: 2574
Status: 
Offline
I believe George Harrisons solo career was basically him being guided by Jeff Lynne. No wonder everybody was up in arms because of "Free as a bird". But I have to say I like that Lynne-Harrison "collaboration" very much.

KGB

 

Joined: Wed Jul 4th, 2012
Location:  
Posts: 1208
Status: 
Offline
I don't get the reverance for The Pixies.  Cobain liked them, yeah, but so what?  Doolittle is an enjoyable album, but to hear many people tell it, it's one of the seminal albums of rock and one of the greatest albums of the 80s.  I don't see what makes it better than, say, your typical REM album from that decade. 
If I could trade in the rap/hip-hop music that I do enjoy for the complete disappearance of that genre and its erasure from the past, I'd do it in a heartbeat.  Nothing has contributed more to the dumbing down of popular music in the last 30 years. 
 
 
 

indikator



Joined: Fri Jan 23rd, 2009
Location: Bratenwender City, Germany
Posts: 2574
Status: 
Offline
You mean alternative rock?

Coincidentially, as a European I can only say I was blown away when I was able to first see 70s episodes of Soul Train. And I also have to say that the the decline from the 70s stuff on that show to the 80s was really depressing. So I would rather enjoy the disappearance of everything from the hip hop and soul genre post 1975 if it would mean that people would do the older stuff (funk, the Detroit labels, blues etc) again.
In a nutshell - Chic good, Sugarhill Gang bad. And I vastly prefer Sugarhill Gang style covers to the abominations of Puff Daddy and other acts.

indikator



Joined: Fri Jan 23rd, 2009
Location: Bratenwender City, Germany
Posts: 2574
Status: 
Offline
I just realized that I wanted to shill some obscure Doo Wop groups. I am turning into Ken Viewer!

KGB

 

Joined: Wed Jul 4th, 2012
Location:  
Posts: 1208
Status: 
Offline
indikator wrote: I believe George Harrisons solo career was basically him being guided by Jeff Lynne. No wonder everybody was up in arms because of "Free as a bird". But I have to say I like that Lynne-Harrison "collaboration" very much.
George's solo career is pretty much rubbish from start to finish.  Even his "masterpiece" All Things Must Pass is an overlong, tiresome collection of self-indulgence.  Apart from a few songs on that album, the only thing I liked by him post-Beatles is "All Those Years Ago". 
 
Lennon's solo career started well with Plastic Ono Band, which kicks all kinds of ass, but it too sunk into a morass of uncreative pap.  Maybe the 80's would have been kinder to him than the 70's but as long as he insisted on giving equal time to Yoko he'd have had mixed results at best. 
 
Macca's solo career is far and away the best.  Even 20 years after the breakup he was doing enjoyable, if harmless, work on Flowers In The Dirt.  Knock him all you want for his saccharine tendencies but the guy just kept writing great melodies after leaving The Beatles.   

indikator



Joined: Fri Jan 23rd, 2009
Location: Bratenwender City, Germany
Posts: 2574
Status: 
Offline
Yeah, I could read an epic rant that would prove to me that "Hope of deliverance" is insipid and I would still enjoy the hell out of that tune.

Btw, you can watch the Dick Cavett show with John & Yoko on Youtube, they went on in order to promote their artsy crap. Holy shit was that stuff bad. So you might be able to guess how good or bad Johns output would have been, depending on the involvement of Yoko

silentkiller



Joined: Thu Oct 18th, 2007
Location: Flatbush, Brooklyn
Posts: 1244
Status: 
Offline
- In 1978 hip hop music was an unrecorded music played only at block and house parties in a few of the worst neighborhoods in the Bronx to becoming one of the most dominant forms of American and worldwide music in less than 20 years, the rise of hip hop music is the most astonishing rise of any form music in the last 150 years.
-Elvis Presley should get more credit for being an incredible musician than he currently does
- Prog rock should have never been a thing

srossi

 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: New York USA
Posts: 49817
Status: 
Offline
KGB wrote: Macca's solo career is far and away the best.  Even 20 years after the breakup he was doing enjoyable, if harmless, work on Flowers In The Dirt.  Knock him all you want for his saccharine tendencies but the guy just kept writing great melodies after leaving The Beatles.   

If he wasn't Paul McCartney, everyone would say he has the songwriting skills of Britney Spears.  His lyrics are saccharine sure, but they're also complete and utter shit.  One thing that helps him is that he is willing to evolve with the times and collaborate with current pop and hip hop stars, so he doesn't come across as a bitter relic who hasn't done anything relevant in 50 years.  But those collaborations are just atrocious.

KGB

 

Joined: Wed Jul 4th, 2012
Location:  
Posts: 1208
Status: 
Offline
srossi wrote: KGB wrote: Macca's solo career is far and away the best.  Even 20 years after the breakup he was doing enjoyable, if harmless, work on Flowers In The Dirt.  Knock him all you want for his saccharine tendencies but the guy just kept writing great melodies after leaving The Beatles.   

If he wasn't Paul McCartney, everyone would say he has the songwriting skills of Britney Spears.  His lyrics are saccharine sure, but they're also complete and utter shit.  One thing that helps him is that he is willing to evolve with the times and collaborate with current pop and hip hop stars, so he doesn't come across as a bitter relic who hasn't done anything relevant in 50 years.  But those collaborations are just atrocious.

Songwriting skills of Britney Spears?  Uh, okay.  If you say so. 

srossi

 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: New York USA
Posts: 49817
Status: 
Offline
KGB wrote: srossi wrote: KGB wrote: Macca's solo career is far and away the best.  Even 20 years after the breakup he was doing enjoyable, if harmless, work on Flowers In The Dirt.  Knock him all you want for his saccharine tendencies but the guy just kept writing great melodies after leaving The Beatles.   

If he wasn't Paul McCartney, everyone would say he has the songwriting skills of Britney Spears.  His lyrics are saccharine sure, but they're also complete and utter shit.  One thing that helps him is that he is willing to evolve with the times and collaborate with current pop and hip hop stars, so he doesn't come across as a bitter relic who hasn't done anything relevant in 50 years.  But those collaborations are just atrocious.

Songwriting skills of Britney Spears?  Uh, okay.  If you say so. 

Yeah I definitely say so.  This was Paul McCartney's 9/11 song which was one of his last big hits:

This is my right
A right given by God
To live a free life
To live in freedom
Talkin' about freedom
I'm talkin' about freedom
I will fight for the right
To live in freedom
Any one
Tries to take it away
You'll have to answer
'Cause this is my right
I'm talkin' about freedom
I'm talkin' about freedom
I will fight for the right
To live in freedom
Yeah oh
I'm' talkin' about freedom
I'm talking about freedom
I will fight for the right
To live in freedom
Everybody talkin' about freedom
We're talkin' about freedom
We will fight for the right
To live in freedom
Oh
Talkin' about freedom
I'm talkin' about freedom
I will fight for the right
To live in freedom
I'm' talkin' about freedom
I'm' talkin' about freedom
We will fight for the right
To live in freedom

broke



Joined: Tue Jan 22nd, 2008
Location: Bolton, ON
Posts: 3181
Status: 
Offline
The Beatles solo catalogue to me demonstrates the sum of the parts being greater than the parts - and the importance of having a good producer to say Yes to good ideas and No to shitty ones.

John: Really like Imagine and the first Plastic Ono Band album - He had a pretty long dry spell between Imagine and Double Fantasy.

Paul: Memory Almost Full and that covers album are among the best things he's done, which includes A LOT of shit post break-up (Mull of Kintyre, Red Rose Speedway, Uncle Albert, My Love etc.)

George: Post Beatles I can name maybe a half dozen songs I like, with 1 being a cover and 1 being a piece of plagiarism. And I had to really think hard to get to 6.

Ringo: It don't come easy, Photograph and ummmmm....

Qaenos

 

Joined: Tue Jan 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 1119
Status: 
Offline
Disco was and still is great.  

I think it took so much flak because:

a) it replaced a lot of rock on the radio at the time and a lot of rock groups (Rolling Stones, Queen, Rod Stewart) turned to disco instead of giving rock fans the same old music they loved.

b) it was popular with a lot of people that rock and/or "music" fans can't stand.

Last edited on Sun Nov 3rd, 2019 03:37 pm by Qaenos

Kriss
Citizen of nowhere


Joined: Wed Dec 12th, 2007
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 6928
Status: 
Offline
The Battle of Britain during the BritPop/Cool Britania: Blur vs Oasis.

They were both shit, save for one or two good early songs. Most of the other music from this genre was complete garbage. It was enjoyable at the time, but he musicians were unskilled and the lyrics were forgettable. For what was the dominant scene in the UK in the mid-90s, my teenage years, music I spent almost all my money on at the time. I almost never listen to any of it anymore.

Pass marks only for Pulp and Manic Street Preachers who were both fantastic.

srossi

 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: New York USA
Posts: 49817
Status: 
Offline
Kriss wrote: The Battle of Britain during the BritPop/Cool Britania: Blur vs Oasis.

They were both shit, save for one or two good early songs. Most of the other music from this genre was complete garbage. It was enjoyable at the time, but he musicians were unskilled and the lyrics were forgettable. For what was the dominant scene in the UK in the mid-90s, my teenage years, music I spent almost all my money on at the time. I almost never listen to any of it anymore.

Pass marks only for Pulp and Manic Street Preachers who were both fantastic.

Blur and Oasis both being shit should be common knowledge, not an unpopular opinion.  Maybe this is a British thing.

I have only heard a little of Manic Street Preachers but really like it.

Kriss
Citizen of nowhere


Joined: Wed Dec 12th, 2007
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 6928
Status: 
Offline
srossi wrote: Kriss wrote: The Battle of Britain during the BritPop/Cool Britania: Blur vs Oasis.

They were both shit, save for one or two good early songs. Most of the other music from this genre was complete garbage. It was enjoyable at the time, but he musicians were unskilled and the lyrics were forgettable. For what was the dominant scene in the UK in the mid-90s, my teenage years, music I spent almost all my money on at the time. I almost never listen to any of it anymore.

Pass marks only for Pulp and Manic Street Preachers who were both fantastic.

Blur and Oasis both being shit should be common knowledge, not an unpopular opinion.  Maybe this is a British thing.

I have only heard a little of Manic Street Preachers but really like it.


I know you are a bit of an old school rock guy, so listen to their first album, Generatiln Terrorists. They were still excellent after that, but they definitely mellowed in style.

The Blur - Oasis thing is definitely for British people growing up in the 90s. I don't think either band cracked the States, and certainly no other BritPop band did.

nyhack56

 

Joined: Wed May 15th, 2019
Location:  
Posts: 81
Status: 
Offline
I like Sammy Hagar's voice more than David Lee Roth's.

I prefer Brian Johnson to Bon Scott, though I do think they each brought a distinctive sound. Johnson sounds more like a rocker, where Bon sounds like a bad guy from an early 80s animated movie, like The Secret of Nihm or Watership Down.

I like ABBA, probably more because I get a kick out of my 3 and 5 year old daughters sing the songs.

All current Country music sucks. It sounds like pop music with a Southern accent.

KISS are better musicians than given credit for. Same with Weird Al.

James Taylor is overrated and puts me to sleep.

broke



Joined: Tue Jan 22nd, 2008
Location: Bolton, ON
Posts: 3181
Status: 
Offline
Oasis definitely cracked the States - Morning Glory was massive. They got over-exposed.

srossi

 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: New York USA
Posts: 49817
Status: 
Offline
broke wrote: Oasis definitely cracked the States - Morning Glory was massive. They got over-exposed.
Yeah, that album was a huge hit here, but definite pop and not taken all that seriously by many.  Some music critics loved them though, but then they became a parody and they're best known today as two asshole brothers who kept punching each other in the middle of recording sessions. 

Erick Von Erich

 

Joined: Thu Mar 26th, 2015
Location: Texas USA
Posts: 574
Status: 
Offline
nyhack56 wrote: I prefer Brian Johnson to Bon Scott, though I do think they each brought a distinctive sound. Johnson sounds more like a rocker, where Bon sounds like a bad guy from an early 80s animated movie, like The Secret of Nihm or Watership Down.
Like a lot of kids my age, I first got exposed to AC/DC circa 1981 with "For Those About to Rock". AC/DC was pretty much an FM radio staple until 1994 or so, I grew up thinking Brian Johnson was the definitive voice and sound of AC/DC. During those years, on the radio, I'd maybe hear "Highway to Hell" or "TNT" with Bon Scott.

Around 2001, when all the retro video shows started airing, I realized I liked the Bon Scott AC/DC more. The reason I liked it was because of what you mentioned--- I think I even said: "Bon Scott is like a drunk, evil Bilbo Baggins". Sounded more like a band you'd see in a seedy bar. "Jailbreak" and "Touch too Much" became my favorite AC/DC songs.



The Hagar/Roth comparison is one that seems to keep popping up, even more, nowadays. Biggest concert I ever went to (Monsters of Rock in 1988) was headlined by Van Hagar and I liked it. It was cool that Hagar could play guitar, as well, but I'll always prefer DLR's Van Halen. I consider Dave one of the greatest rock front-men of all time--- if not THE greatest. Entertaining, funny, guys thought he was cool, and chicks wanted to be with him. I even like his odd attempts to work scat into his songs. Plus he's 1/2 of Dr. Rockzo.

martini
Sunny's White Knight


Joined: Fri Aug 13th, 2010
Location:  
Posts: 3899
Status: 
Offline
I don't get the Beatles. They do nothing for me.

tamalie
Hall Of Famer
 

Joined: Mon Oct 22nd, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 4465
Status: 
Offline
You don't like them or you don't get them, as in you don't get the appeal? Those are two different things. I'm not a Pink Floyd fan, but I see the appeal. Given the context, I would see the appeal of The Beatles as pretty apparent even someone wasn't a fan.

srossi

 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: New York USA
Posts: 49817
Status: 
Offline
tamalie wrote: You don't like them or you don't get them, as in you don't get the appeal? Those are two different things. I'm not a Pink Floyd fan, but I see the appeal. Given the context, I would see the appeal of The Beatles as pretty apparent even someone wasn't a fan.
You mentioned Pink Floyd before, and I agree that they're boring.  I do like some of their bigger hits, but deep cuts and later albums are enough to put me to sleep.  However I see the appeal for stoners.  With the Grateful Dead, I don't even see that.

tamalie
Hall Of Famer
 

Joined: Mon Oct 22nd, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 4465
Status: 
Offline
With the Grateful Dead, I think it was as much about the spirit of community among the band and its followers and the diverse set lists with regard to what was played and when as opposed to how it actually sounded. I once worked with a former Deadhead. He looked like any clean cut, white collar working, suburban, ultra responsible husband and dad, but in his 20s he traveled months at a time following the Grateful Dead on tour. Our co-workers were as surprised as I was to hear about his former life. He backed it up by showing us pictures of him with his long hair, tie dyed shirts (which he made and sold on the road along with scalping tickets to finance everything), and his many funny and crazy stories from the road. What I gathered from him was everyone had so much fun traveling around, just being together, and waiting for that obscure cover or deep album track that hadn't been played for several tours that the band playing sloppily and the singing sounding ragged was beside the point.

kargol



Joined: Thu Oct 18th, 2007
Location: Brum, United Kingdom
Posts: 4388
Status: 
Offline
Kriss wrote: The Battle of Britain during the BritPop/Cool Britania: Blur vs Oasis.

They were both shit, save for one or two good early songs. Most of the other music from this genre was complete garbage. It was enjoyable at the time, but he musicians were unskilled and the lyrics were forgettable. For what was the dominant scene in the UK in the mid-90s, my teenage years, music I spent almost all my money on at the time. I almost never listen to any of it anymore.

Pass marks only for Pulp and Manic Street Preachers who were both fantastic.Pulp were fantastic.  Manics were second-rate Clash ripoffs.  And The Clash weren't all that, student politics from posh pseudo-intellectuals dressing in working class music.
Radiohead are utter toss.  Classic example of emperor's new clothes.
Madonna was never hot.  From the same era the 39 year old Toni Basil was far more wankworthy.
Prince was massively overrated.  A few good songs but mostly experimental filler.  Bit like Michael Jackson.


tamalie
Hall Of Famer
 

Joined: Mon Oct 22nd, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 4465
Status: 
Offline
I find Radiohead to be boring and unlistenable for the most part.

Madonna always took herself seriously, but around 1989-90 she crossed over into taking herself too seriously and then became not at all fun considering she made pop music and dance music that in its essence needed to be fun. This was when she lost any remaining connection she had to being a real person as opposed to a celebrity living in a sheltered fantasy land.

I live in Prince central and have never been a huge fan although I love all the big singles. However, since his death I can't escape him. If I never hear "Let's Go Crazy" again, it'll be too soon.

Last edited on Tue Nov 5th, 2019 09:15 pm by tamalie

WongLee
Hall Of Famer


Joined: Fri Oct 19th, 2007
Location: Bay Shore, New York
Posts: 7138
Status: 
Offline
I look at the Grateful Dead the exact same way I look at Bruce Springsteen. They have quite a few individual songs that I love, however, their body of work as a whole falls far short IMHO. Plus, I just "don't get" their live performances. Sorry, three and four hour shows by these two bands while admirable, would put me asleep faster than 3 ambiens washed down with a bottle of Fireball. It's filler, it's outdated, it's just not necessary in 2019.

srossi

 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: New York USA
Posts: 49817
Status: 
Offline
NIN and Tool are mostly awful, boring drivel, with the exception of a very few of their radio hits. I defy anyone to get through a full album.

martini
Sunny's White Knight


Joined: Fri Aug 13th, 2010
Location:  
Posts: 3899
Status: 
Offline
tamalie wrote: You don't like them or you don't get them, as in you don't get the appeal? Those are two different things. I'm not a Pink Floyd fan, but I see the appeal. Given the context, I would see the appeal of The Beatles as pretty apparent even someone wasn't a fan.
I haven't heard anything of theirs that just sets my ears on fire.
Same with U2. Talk about overrated. They're probably at the top of my list.

Last edited on Thu Nov 14th, 2019 12:35 pm by martini

Infamous
必 勝


Joined: Mon Oct 25th, 2010
Location: Slums Of Shaolin
Posts: 2505
Status: 
Offline
silentkiller wrote: - In 1978 hip hop music was an unrecorded music played only at block and house parties in a few of the worst neighborhoods in the Bronx to becoming one of the most dominant forms of American and worldwide music in less than 20 years, the rise of hip hop music is the most astonishing rise of any form music in the last 150 years

I listen to everything & anything. Hip-hop has been a constant though. I think there is better hip-hop out there now than at any point in the past

BitterOldMan

 

Joined: Thu Jun 30th, 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 126
Status: 
Offline
John Lennon was absolute rubbish as a human being. He sang about peace and love, yet his first wife divorced him, in part because he beat her.

To ne, that totally undercut all of his efforts to become St. John of Liverpool. He always came off as a bit of a self-satisfied douche at his best.

KGB

 

Joined: Wed Jul 4th, 2012
Location:  
Posts: 1208
Status: 
Offline
BItterOldMan wrote: John Lennon was absolute rubbish as a human being. He sang about peace and love, yet his first wife divorced him, in part because he beat her.

To ne, that totally undercut all of his efforts to become St. John of Liverpool. He always came off as a bit of a self-satisfied douche at his best.

I'm not sure Lennon ever aspired to be saintly.  If nothing else, he was always honest about the things that went on in his life, good and bad.  Off the top of my head I can probably name a few dozen rocks stars who shame Lennon when it comes to being a garbage human.



UltraBB 1.172 Copyright © 2007-2013 Data 1 Systems