Take That Circus tour

RedSky At Night said:
Your missing the point though, Take That is a very different animal from Blue/Backstreet Boys. They are far more popular, they're here to stay Pops. Infact I'd expect them to do at least another 2 albums and considering their concerts sell out in mere minutes I won't be shocked if they stay around for another 5 years.

Take That may eventually disappear off the Radio, but they'll be staying on Ipods for the future.
Click to expand...

Okay, before they're comeback how often did you hear them?
 
MockneyRevil said:
No, because your refusing to give ANY credit!...Your blithering on about the machine that made them as an excuse to not give Barlow any credit for being a song writer...

I will always give my opponents argument credence in a football debate, and always present my opinion as just that, opinion...but you're presenting yours as fact

I don't like Take That...Of course Dylan, Jackson, Wonder, even Albarn (who actually is a half decent song writer Brad) are better than Take That...I'm not trying to argue that, nor have I ever...I'm trying to argue sanity and fairness in giving them some credit for being partially responsible for their own success...however minimal it may have been

You on the other hand, and Popper to a degree, are completely unwilling to give them any credit what so ever, putting it soley down to marketing,,,essentially saying it could have been any 5 lads and it would of worked... I'm saying, however shit, or basic, you think his music is, It wouldn't have worked without Barlow...and certainly not for as long
Click to expand...


this i will concede, as for the rest , read back , all i ever said was that their sucess was not built on talent alone and is wildy disproportionate
 
Half Decent...Coxon wrote Blurs best songs...Albarn certainly isn't up to the level of the other names mentioned...but I quite admire his genre stretching philosophy and his attempt to make a chinese opera
 
Eyepopper said:
Because the guy that wrote it no longer owns its copyright so isn't allowed have it recorded.

Oh right, its played at funerals which means it must be stuffed full of emotion, people who choose to have Robbie Williams blasted out as they put their loved ones in the ground, are generally discerning like that.
Click to expand...

So we're insulting the intelligence of all who play Robbie Williams to see off their loved ones now?

You've got a personal connection to this which accounts for your bias, but however good you may consider the original version, the finished Robbie version is a belting tune, and will endure. Absolutely passes the test of songs that will still be heard in 20 years time
 
Okay okay, I cant stay out

I've never been a lover of Take That but as a performing musician who has played many of their songs and the whole gamut of pop and rock for 40 plus years I feel I know something about it

Barlow can write good songs and a few great ones too

Back for Good is as good a crafted pop ballad as any ever written - by anybody

Many of the hits are both attractive in a dancefloor way and as a decent tune - all backed up by some good vocal performances

That was it for me, when they split I thought well for a boy band they're good at least there are no albums full of covers.

However Barlow proved with his solo career that
a / he was no prolific high quality writer and
b/ no great vocalist in the class of George Michael who he was desperately trying to emulate

It was a massive failure as a project. Also he was arsey when it came to dishing out band member plaudits expecting himself to go on and conquer the world as G Michael 2

Barlow then spent many years in production and again although writing some decent stuff was relatively anonymous

Clearly without the other band members he could not function inas creative a way - not unusual when a band split and the main man goes solo

The reformation was based on Barlow needing a vehicle to get back on top but actually the other lads would'nt go near it unless the royalties were shared. In their earlier incarnation they were not - Barlow took all the credits and the money

Now its for all of them and properly shared

The batch of songs in the last three years has propelled Barlow into the a top writer no doubt about it

Anyone wanting to argue that Shine and its stunning harmonisations / vocal performance are not as good as any of the best Queen tunes would be foolish

This is one of the best songs of the last 50 years absolutely fking brilliant.

While were' at it why oh why is a pop song rated any less crafted than a so called song of depth ?

What is a song of depth that is so much better than a brilliantly crafted pop rock song that also says everything it can in its 3 minutes

Pop songs are an art form and any one musician or otherwise who think that makes them inferior is an idiot

For me the greatest musicians of all time are classical ones - Bach Mozart etc and having played that and pop music I can with confidence say that any one of those lofty composers would have full respect for any great song be it a one off or a bunch be it Jazz Rock a show song anything worthy of the name

We should stop the snobbery and just recognise that even if a song personally is not your cup of tea its still fking brilliant
 
MockneyRevil said:
Half Decent...Coxon wrote Blurs best songs...Albarn certainly isn't up to the level of the other names mentioned...but I quite admire his genre stretching philosophy and his attempt to make a chinese opera
Click to expand...

I agree, I was in his bar in iceland with a trad act, he was very cool, really interested in the music the lads were playing and jammed as best he could with them, very cool, humble and very musical.
 
moses said:
so mockney is your new musical oracle. gayers
Click to expand...

I can't stand Albarn, Blur, that shit monkey cartoon stuff, his 'world music' efforts...

I'm not gunna lecture someone who does like it on how shit it is though

Unless I'm in a crap mood, and / or the daft git tries to tell me they're better than Oasis :smirk:
 
moses said:
this i will concede, as for the rest , read back , all i ever said was that their sucess was not built on talent alone and is wildy disproportionate
Click to expand...

:lol: And all I've ever said was that it was built partially on their own talent (however minimal or great you think it may be)...I think we can all agree they're packaged to feck...

SO essentially we've just been arguing over the small print for 4 or 5 hours
 
Agreed that Barlow deserves credit, he can write dyer, unimaginative boring tripe suitable for a team of producers to doll up and a marketing department to roll out to consumers.

I'd take an educated guess that the reason he's around so long is that he's like minded to those holding the controls, and that keeping it in house means that there's no royalties to be dished out to pesky songwriters.
 
Jopub said:
Okay okay, I cant stay out

I've never been a lover of Take That but as a performing musician who has played many of their songs and the whole gamut of pop and rock for 40 plus years I feel I know something about it

Barlow can write good songs and a few great ones too

Back for Good is as good a crafted pop ballad as any ever written - by anybody

Many of the hits are both attractive in a dancefloor way and as a decent tune - all backed up by some good vocal performances

That was it for me, when they split I thought well for a boy band they're good at least there are no albums full of covers.

However Barlow proved with his solo career that
a / he was no prolific high quality writer and
b/ no great vocalist in the class of George Michael who he was desperately trying to emulate

It was a massive failure as a project. Also he was arsey when it came to dishing out band member plaudits expecting himself to go on and conquer the world as G Michael 2

Barlow then spent many years in production and again although writing some decent stuff was relatively anonymous

Clearly without the other band members he could not function inas creative a way - not unusual when a band split and the main man goes solo

The reformation was based on Barlow needing a vehicle to get back on top but actually the other lads would'nt go near it unless the royalties were shared. In their earlier incarnation they were not - Barlow took all the credits and the money

Now its for all of them and properly shared

The batch of songs in the last three years has propelled Barlow into the a top writer no doubt about it

Anyone wanting to argue that Shine and its stunning harmonisations / vocal performance are not as good as any of the best Queen tunes would be foolish

This is one of the best songs of the last 50 years absolutely fking brilliant.

While were' at it why oh why is a pop song rated any less crafted than a so called song of depth ?

What is a song of depth that is so much better than a brilliantly crafted pop rock song that also says everything it can in its 3 minutes

Pop songs are an art form and any one musician or otherwise who think that makes them inferior is an idiot

For me the greatest musicians of all time are classical ones - Bach Mozart etc and having played that and pop music I can with confidence say that any one of those lofty composers would have full respect for any great song be it a one off or a bunch be it Jazz Rock a show song anything worthy of the name

We should stop the snobbery and just recognise that even if a song personally is not your cup of tea its still fking brilliant
Click to expand...


And why can ye lot not realise that just because you think it's brilliant doesn't mean it is. Both are valid opinions.
 
MockneyRevil said:
:lol: And all I've ever said was that it was built partially on their own talent (however minimal or great you think it may be)...I think we can all agree they're packaged to feck...

SO essentially we've just been arguing over the small print for 4 or 5 hours
Click to expand...

:lol: not a new departure for me in all fairness
 
moses said:
And why can ye lot not realise that just because you think it's brilliant doesn't mean it is. Both are valid opinions.
Click to expand...

Most of us here don't think it's 'brilliant', you're the one saying they deserve no credit whatsoever, and that's just not fair

And will you stop whining about not being allowed your opinion. You're posting aint ya? No ones preventing you by beating you with a rusty spoon, or censoring your posts. You put your opinions on a public forum, and folk have a right to put their own opinion up, even if it differs or even questions / challenges yours. If you don't want that, don't post
 
Brad said:
I can't stand Albarn, Blur, that shit monkey cartoon stuff, his 'world music' efforts...

I'm not gunna lecture someone who does like it on how shit it is though

Unless I'm in a crap mood, and / or the daft git tries to tell me they're better than Oasis :smirk:
Click to expand...

they're better than oasis, although that cartoon monkey shit is the pits
 
Brad said:
So we're insulting the intelligence of all who play Robbie Williams to see off their loved ones now?
Click to expand...

Pretty much, yeah....

Brad said:
You've got a personal connection to this which accounts for your bias, but however good you may consider the original version, the finished Robbie version is a belting tune, and will endure. Absolutely passes the test of songs that will still be heard in 20 years time
Click to expand...

How can you say I'm biased Brad, I just dont think its a very good song, certainly not a belting tune.... saying I'm biased is implying I'm wrong. Its a question of taste.

I agree it'll be played long into the future, but then cheesy songs can be...

As for take that, I dont think any of their stuff will be listened to in any great numbers a couple of years after they call it a day...
 
Brad said:
Most of us here don't think it's 'brilliant', you're the one saying they deserve no credit whatsoever, and that's just not fair

And will you stop whining about not being allowed your opinion. You're posting aint ya? No ones preventing you by beating you with a rusty spoon, or censoring your posts. You put your opinions on a public forum, and folk have a right to put their own opinion up, even if it differs or even questions / challenges yours. If you don't want that, don't post
Click to expand...

feck off brad I'm not whining , I'm just saying it boils down to opinion , not snobbery.
 
MockneyRevil said:
:lol: And all I've ever said was that it was built partially on their own talent (however minimal or great you think it may be)...I think we can all agree they're packaged to feck...

SO essentially we've just been arguing over the small print for 4 or 5 hours
Click to expand...

That's my speciality :D

I think we can all safely agree that we're all homosexuals, and shake hands... at the same time wondering where it might have been and washing it straight after
 
Brad said:
That's my speciality :D

I think we can all safely agree that we're all homosexuals, and shake hands... at the same time wondering where it might have been and washing it straight after
Click to expand...

only some of us are homos , the rest are snobs, I'm happy with snob if we have to be tarred
 
Eyepopper said:
As for take that, I dont think any of their stuff will be listened to in any great numbers a couple of years after they call it a day...
Click to expand...


But Popper, We aren't arguing that Barlow deserves the Ivor Novello or that Take That are the greatest of all time...We're arguing that their success was partially built on their own talent and as such, deserves credit

The argument started by Brad & I was that they deserve more respect than Boybands like Westlife or Backstreet boys, who only do covers and/or have their songs written for them....and as such, have more credibility than most Boybands...

That was all the argument initially was...not that we actually thought they were brilliant!
 
A Million Loves Songs has just come on my TV and my flatmate is refusing to change it...I can't fecking escape!!!!
 
MockneyRevil said:
But Popper, We aren't arguing that Barlow deserves the Ivor Novello or that Take That are the greatest of all time...We're arguing that their success was partially built on their own talent and as such, deserves credit

The argument started by Brad & I was that they deserve more respect than Boybands like Westlife or Backstreet boys, who only do covers and/or have their songs written for them....and as such, have more credibility than most Boybands...

That was all the argument initially was...not that we actually thought they were brilliant!
Click to expand...


No no no, I'm arguing that they've no musical credibility... well I think thats what I'm arguing...

Ah feck it, can we not all just admit that, popular or not, long lasting or not, they're shit.. then have a big wet group snog.......
 
Brad said:
Erm because you said you knew the guy who originally wrote it, and you think his version was better than the one Williams eventually sung?
Click to expand...

Thats just taste... the guy that wrote it is actually a bit of a wanker...
 
Eyepopper said:
Pretty much, yeah....



How can you say I'm biased Brad, I just dont think its a very good song, certainly not a belting tune.... saying I'm biased is implying I'm wrong. Its a question of taste.

I agree it'll be played long into the future, but then cheesy songs can be...

As for take that, I dont think any of their stuff will be listened to in any great numbers a couple of years after they call it a day...
Click to expand...

'Shine' will go down as one of the great pop songs
 
Now, new direction of thread.


This cnut...

mark.jpg


Gayest looking straight man in the world?
 
Jopub said:
Why are Blur "better" than Oasis ?

They're both very good bands and have both written some classic tunes
Click to expand...

i was having lark with Brad , but in lots of ways one can be better than the other ... all music is equal now is it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.