Bands that music snobs think are crap, but really aren't that bad
- Thread starter Melbourne Red
- Start date
Its not your opinion i was getting at, i'm open minded enough to let everyone have their own. Rather your inability to put together a meaningful sentence.
The 80's and 90's music scene was much better. Its as bad as its gets today.
Wrong. Exciting music is out there, it`s just not in the mainstream.
you can if your musical snobbery includes the knowledge that the clash are fecking dull.
1 good song.
I dont think this thread is for you
Indeed.
Which is their 'one good song'?
I'm genuinely confused here, I've never heard anyone call The Clash 'fecking dull' before.
Earth to Nearco.........there has ALWAYS been good music away from the mainstream. I used to go to a lot of small live gigs through the 80s and 90s, and the quality was pretty damned good.
Just to ask like - if you consider the clash to be "dull" who do you then rate as not dull and full of passion, vivacity and originality?
Genuine question
Again genuine question
Precisely why was Kurt Cobain in your opinion a "great" guitarist ?
(as opposed of course to him maybe being allegedly a great writer and vocalist of his own stuff)
I know, i`m just saying that is still the case.
Which is their 'one good song'?
I'm genuinely confused here, I've never heard anyone call The Clash 'fecking dull' before.
white man at the hammersmith palais
Ive given them a go but it just doesnt do it for me...
its always fun arguing with clash fans though, some of them just cant grasp the concept of someone thinking theyre keek, theyre a punk version of the eagles.
that usually gets clash fans ripping
lol this thread was about music snobs...and loads turned up.
so far we have learnt:
The clash are dull, U2 are shit,Cobain couldnt play guitar, and bill bailey is not funny.
so far we have learnt:
The clash are dull, U2 are shit,Cobain couldnt play guitar, and bill bailey is not funny.
She'd be a very good shout had The Sensual World been released three months later. It's still quite impressive to release brilliant albums in the 70s, the 80s and the 00s.
Anyway, Johnny Cash released great music from the mid-50s to the late 00s. That takes some beating. I think there's plenty of bands who've been around as long as U2 and REM without turning as shite as they have.
1. Why is "indie rock" an oxymoron. 2. I'm sure there's plenty of melodic death metal.
There's some, its massively overrated. None as good as U2. Lets leave this one right here, its a different in taste, known to happen you know.
I'm unable to answer this question without going completely ballistic like. Enjoy your Clapton. Cheerio.
Oh ........... I just thought you might be able to substantiate your views of why Kurt Cobain was a 'great' guitarist. That you might be able to point to many things about his purely 'guitaristic' abilities that make him a 'great'
I think he's excellent in his own idiosyncratic way as singer/songwriters generally are but I personally could'nt lable him as a 'great' on the instrument
I do like some of Cobain's stuff and Clapton's too so I have no particular 'axe'
to grind but maybe I'm missing the components that make a musician 'great' on his / her chosen instrument.Again if I am blind to this you could perhaps illustrate a few pointers
Music snobs out in full force.I think Bob Dylan is the correct answer to releasing a quality album every decade. Infact he's probably done it several times.
I don't find Bill Bailey funny. There's a difference though, between giving your own opinion on something, and implying that someone else's is rubbish if it isn't the same as yours.
Nowt wrong with having an opinion. I think Girls Aloud are rubbish, for example. In fact I don't even think you class the stuff they make as music.
No, nowt wrong with having an opinion. Except some people get slated for theirs.
Cobain can't play the guitar half as good as some people like to believe, Circus. That was the only point I was trying to make earlier. Infact I seem to remember Rolling Stone placing Cobain higher on a top 100 'great guitarist' than Mark Knopfler. Now thats a very serious and quite frankly delusional over-estimation of Cobains playing. He could play, hell he could play well, is he even in the running in one of the best ever? Nope.
One of the best lead men ever? Maybe, yes.
One of the best lead men ever? Maybe, yes.
Notice on the top 5 films thread there has been hardly any slating. I think that`s because with films and television the cream rises to the top - most people know what makes quality tv and movies. With music it just isn`t as clear. On film discussions you wouldn`t get someone coming out with garbage like this:
There's some, its massively overrated. None as good as U2. Lets leave this one right here, its a different in taste, known to happen you know.
This guy has said music outwith the mainstream isn`t as good as U2 - even though he has barely heard any of it. That`s not opinion, that`s burying your head in the sand.
That's because most of us can't be arsed. That said, if somone's got Shawshank, Green Mile, Saving Private Ryan or American History X in their top, then that';s just down to personal taste, although it's more likely hat they've not seen many films(if not, they;ve just got shite taste)
Opinion is great, but what happens is..some peoples opinions become more respected than others.
Take lists for example, what are the 10 greatest albums of all time.
if Rolling stone publish their list, it will completely diffirent to mine.
And mine would be diffirent to yours. whos list is nearest the truth?.
This is the same with bands, i think some people are swayed by opinion into believing that some artists are better than they really are.(in their own opinion).
Interesting to see people list artists that they like a great deal, but feel the general population does not agree. Also if an artist you like releases an album, but the reviews and critics hate it, can and does it effect the way you feel about it.
Take lists for example, what are the 10 greatest albums of all time.
if Rolling stone publish their list, it will completely diffirent to mine.
And mine would be diffirent to yours. whos list is nearest the truth?.
This is the same with bands, i think some people are swayed by opinion into believing that some artists are better than they really are.(in their own opinion).
Interesting to see people list artists that they like a great deal, but feel the general population does not agree. Also if an artist you like releases an album, but the reviews and critics hate it, can and does it effect the way you feel about it.
'Music outwith'? What is that supposed to mean?
So because i havent heard some non main stream music, U2 are wank. Your use of logic is extremely poor. Granted there must be some nice stuff out there that i havent dug up yet, but out of what i heard and i believe i've heard most of the great bands their have ever been (apart from the non mainstream ones still trying to make it), i like them the best.
Instead of slating my taste, and it is a taste thing, why not suggest some recent bands that are non commercial that you think are better, and open the door for others to decide for themselves? Instead of spouting out 'this is wank, that is wank, i am wank, i want to wank'. It would be appreciated.
And dont mention the well known plethora of great bands we all know about. I love them, i just happen to like U2 more.
These are all better than U2 eh? I'll make it a point to go through them at night. Thanks and if we do still disagree we'll just agree to.
One question, i'm assuming these bands have come out with a lot of good music each rather than a couple of songs each. If so, why arent they now mainstream?
Why aren't NWW mainstream! Brilliant question, that.
Not commercial enough I guess. I think Dirty Three could make it if their record company pushed them.
A better comparison would be someone like Sonic Youth though.
Mainstream exposure is something that happens to bands that
a)are marketable
b)make albums that with enough songs that follow the 3 minute, verse-chorus-verse formula that radio stations favour, and are accessible and uncomplicated enough for mass consumption
It is not something a band graduates to, or receives as a reward for artistic merit. Any line of thinking that assumes that it is, is misguided.
Yay, Nearco takes time out from being a surly, disagreeable twat and actually tells us who he likes.
I think I need a lie down.
If you look on the metal thread there are loads of examples of who I like.
What's funny Donald?
He probably think all metal is a low form of art.
He's just emailed me a heavy track, actually.
i think hes a bit of a cnut