Music Banter
Page 92 of 1852 « First 42829091 92 93941021421925921092 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Music Banter (https://www.musicbanter.com/)
-   General Music (https://www.musicbanter.com/general-music/)
-   -   Unpopular Music Opinions (https://www.musicbanter.com/general-music/19170-unpopular-music-opinions.html)

boo boo 05-10-2008 12:51 PM
Absolutely not.

Alfred 05-10-2008 12:55 PM
Absolutley not what?

boo boo 05-10-2008 01:09 PM
Um. Low?

boo boo 05-10-2008 01:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfred (Post 478413)
Absolutley not what?
Not lame. And I'm talking about their popularity or their massive influence. They were just a great band, anyone who is familiar with their work and calls them lame, I don't know how thats even possible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayfarer (Post 478419)
For a short period, he experimented a bit, but I don't see how anyone could call him "experimental rock" overall. He sure wrote more pop tunes than he did experimental music.
Yeah, but when he started out his music was a bit more on the psychedelic side, before making his transition to glam rock.

Alfred 05-10-2008 01:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by boo boo (Post 478420)
Not lame. And I'm talking about their popularity or their massive influence. They were just a great band, anyone who is familiar with their work and calls them lame, I don't know how thats even possible.
With the Beatles for me, there are only four songs that I like. They are Day Tripper, Revolution, Helter Skelter, and Come Together (though the latter is better done by Aerosmith).

I don't give a shit about what they did for music, or how everyone else likes them, their music is lame in general to me.

The Who made way better music.

The Unfan 05-10-2008 01:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oomph! (Post 478395)
I don't give a s*** how highly the Beatles are regarded by everyone, it doesn't change the objective fact that they were lame.
How can an opinion be objective? How can a personal non-science based thought or feeling be objective? That would be like having an objective hate or an objective gladness. It just isn't really something which holds the properties of falsifiable factuality and thus isn't really objective in nature.

ProggyMan 05-10-2008 02:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oomph! (Post 478395)
I think we've had this converstation before.

What about David Bowie? Experimental Rock =/= Pop. Besides, I don't think he particularly 'exciting', not necessarily lame but not that good.

What is with you pop elitists thinking that just because a band is more popular it's better. I don't give a s*** how highly the Beatles are regarded by everyone, it doesn't change the objective fact that they were lame. I don't care how many lists they appear on, how many times they are on rolling stone, etc.
Pop elitists? You're the one dismissing entire genres and calling your ridiculous opinions objective fact. You don't find Bowie's work exciting? Fine, but it certainly doesn't suck and it sure as hell isn't experimental rock.

sleepy jack 05-10-2008 06:51 PM
Yeah the Beatles were lame despite being one of the most creative, influential, original, dynamic and important bands ever.

Alfred 05-10-2008 06:51 PM
I still don't like their music.

ProggyMan 05-10-2008 06:53 PM
Doesn't mean that they're lame.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:15 PM.
Page 92 of 1852 « First 42829091 92 93941021421925921092 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page


© 2003-2024 Advameg, Inc.