Unpopular Music Opinions

Dotoar · 05-15-2011, 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BastardofYoung

So i may be not remembering something I said. link me to a specific comment where I praised grunge, so I can see where this came from.

I could, but the effort would by far override the adequacy level of this whole discussion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skaligojurah

At least, Prog pretension stays in the field of 'musicians playing music' not 'musicians being poets, and deep social commentators'.

Thank you for that! At least it outweighs your being wrong about Yes.

Neapolitan · 05-15-2011, 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skaligojurah

C) The Clash is a mindnumbingly dull, outdated, and boring band. I highly doubt 20 years from now they'll be deeply celebrated, because they BARELY are today. The Sex Pistols will, The Ramones will, but the Clash will ****ing remain an obscurity to those who are not self educated rock historians. ****, Even The Misfits will probably connect deeper to future youths than The Clash will, whether you like it or not. Furthermore, with the cheesyness, pretension, and outdatedness of their sound. The Clash are more laughable than 90% of prog will ever be.

The Clash are a band that played Punk when it was popular they are not a Punk band per se. The Clash's influences and the music they listen to was American R&B and their music direction changed through the years, they are a dynamic band that were willing to redefine their sound. Sometimes genre tags are useful, when they are used to explore similar sounding groups, but sometimes they are useless because they really don't explain what a band has done throughout its career. I can't predict the future but The Clash should be remembered because they evolved they are an example of mindnumbingly dynamic band. The Ramones The Sex Pistols then groups like and Rancid sound have a signature sound. Me First & Gimme Gimmes a good example of a mindnumbingly static band that has a schtick that doesn't change - no offense. Another thing they were conscience of their fans. Like The Beatles who offered more songs per album then most of the bands in the 60's (at the time) The Clash tried to keep their music within reach of their fans and put out albums that were cheaper and then also made a double and triple album - more bang for the buck, more music for their fans.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skaligojurah

Turn of VH1, please. Quit reading 'The Rolling Stone'. The world is much bigger than spelled by 1960+ American/British rock biased tabloids. The accumulative history of music that spans centuries is far to big to think the world centers around the post-Shadows world of Anglo-American rock n' roll. The proggers only sin is acknowledging that, and trying so hard, ultimately failing, to bring The Shadows, Jazz, classical, and misunderstood world music to an already 'Beatles and Stones are Christ and Yawei'-brainwashed music youth. A very noble concept, one of which is not 'laughable' in the least.

^fixed
Steve Howe was a huge fan of the Shads, and Gilmore brought Hank's Strat & echo-echo-y sound wholesale, so you have to include The Shadows as well.

Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra · 05-15-2011, 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoundgardenRocks

An unpopular opinion that I have would be that Alice In Chains' 1995 Self titled album was their best. Even better than Dirt.

Oh, and Soundgarden's Down On The Upside is better than Superunknown.

Second statement, ditto.

First Statement, I think their 1995 self entitled isn't bad. I really like Sludge Factory, Again, and Head Creeps.

Not a bad song, really. Not excellent by any standards, but not bad.

Howard the Duck · 05-15-2011, 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier

I`d consider Television to be new-wave and Wire to be post punk. I`d put both on a similiar level with the Clash, despite the fact that Televison only ever released one good album.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Pat

I actually consider Television's other two studio albums to be pretty decent. They just receive less hype than Marquee Moon. Plus, Television doesn't really have a definite genre label. They range anywhere from punk rock to protopunk to art punk to post-punk to new wave.

I actually like Adventure more than Marquee Moon

and yeah the reunion album rawks

BastardofYoung · 05-15-2011, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoundgardenRocks

An unpopular opinion that I have would be that Alice In Chains' 1995 Self titled album was their best. Even better than Dirt.

Oh, and Soundgarden's Down On The Upside is better than Superunknown.

Agree on first one, i too enjoy self-titled a lot. Disagree on second part.

Anteater · 05-15-2011, 10:42 PM

I think people's taste ultimately comes down to appreciating certain aesthetics more than others. For example, genres like prog. rock, classical, jazz and certain brands of pop will always appeal to me more than punk, blues or post-punk because I love how richly embellished those genres are. Slick production, keyboards, saxophones and epic, inspired sounding hooks are my bread and butter. Furthermore, I enjoy the high-octane dynamics present in my favorite genres that get scoffed at or ignored often in a raw, stripped down sonic world. Although post-rock attempts to bridge that gap somewhat, you don't get much of those things I love with today's punk/New Wave influenced Indie rock unless they're on a Roxy Music worship binge.

That being said, more power to jazz punk: the stuff's raw, improvised, and unhindered by the perceived weaknesses of its father/mother genres.

Dotoar · 05-16-2011, 05:11 AM

^ Talking of Roxy Music, here's one for ya: They seem to be one of those bands everyone is supposed to like, especially if you consider yourself 'artsy', but I find them boring, bland, melodyless and simply uninteresting and Bryan Ferry's voice is downright annoying at times. (Not to mention his mug, but that's another story).

Howard the Duck · 05-16-2011, 05:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dotoar

^ Talking of Roxy Music, here's one for ya: They seem to be one of those bands everyone is supposed to like, especially if you consider yourself 'artsy', but I find them boring, bland, melodyless and simply uninteresting and Bryan Ferry's voice is downright annoying at times. (Not to mention his mug, but that's another story).

i have to agree that there's quite a lot of crap on their albums

and yes, Bryan Ferry can't sing

but the singles are arrestiing

Dotoar · 05-16-2011, 05:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Il Duce

and yes, Bryan Ferry can't sing

Well, he can sing, it's just that he prefers not to do it ever so often.

Philreno · 05-16-2011, 06:24 AM

'Remain in Light' was the last great thing David Byrne did.

Boys and Girls by Brian ferry was actually a really good album.

05-16-2011, 05:11 AM	#5747 (permalink)
Dotoar Supernatural anaesthetist Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Örebro, Sweden Posts: 436	^ Talking of Roxy Music, here's one for ya: They seem to be one of those bands everyone is supposed to like, especially if you consider yourself 'artsy', but I find them boring, bland, melodyless and simply uninteresting and Bryan Ferry's voice is downright annoying at times. (Not to mention his mug, but that's another story). __________________ - More is more -

05-16-2011, 06:24 AM	#5750 (permalink)
Philreno Groupie Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 5	'Remain in Light' was the last great thing David Byrne did. Boys and Girls by Brian ferry was actually a really good album.