Quote:
Originally Posted by Inuzuka Skysword
Using your taste to look at music is the most biased way to look at music. In other words, it is 100% opinionated, which means he can't be dumb for listening to a kind of music.
Now I am not targeting this just towards you, but towards people that judge music while using the bias of taste. Why can't music be judged on a more universal standard such as skill and originality? IDK maybe because people don't care about that anymore. So without using taste, I will judge your bands.
1. Danzig 7/10
2. Nirvana 3/10 (They ripped the Melvins, what did you expect?)
3. Alice in Chains 6/10 (Umm what exactly did they do for music that was so special?)
4. Screaming Trees 6/10 (Same as above)
5. Static Grim (No clue who they are.)
See now instead of arguing how cool these bands are, we can argue on a much easier base like talent.
|
based on talent, the orginal danzig line up should have a 9/10 after the line up change 5/10.
yea nirvana ripped the melvins, and the pixies.
and as for doing something for music, since when do you have to do something amazing to be a good rock band?
what did metallica do? what did led zeppelin do?
so while you are right about basing things on talent ,your wrong in your assumption that you have to be amazingly influencal to be good.