sleepy jack

Technically music can't be lame. You're going to have to give us a more concrete description of their music or define lame by your standards.

__________________

Seltzer

It wasn't poor - let me explain it if you don't get it. People nowadays are accustomed to having their music drenched in bass because that placates the people of today. You (like those people), feel uncomfortable when you have to actually put some effort into listening for the bass.

There are some people who claim to like movies, yet they refuse to put in the effort to read subtitles for a foreign movie. In other words, as you are uncomfortable listening to music without the bass being nice and easy for you to hear, they are uncomfortable watching movies which aren't nice and easy for them to understand (because the language is foreign and they have to read subtitles). Laziness is the undermining factor in both cases.


Analogy aside, it is quite sad if you judge music by how loud it is. And really, you don't have to strain to hear a bassline in a Beatles song.

__________________

Oomph!

My standards? Well, how about I give you a dictionary standard, I know we are all fans of the dictionary in this forum, right?

Lame:
3. weak; inadequate; unsatisfactory; clumsy: a lame excuse.

When I say lame in this context, I mean (regarding the sound of music) "lacking in passion; weak; ineffectual; shallow"

sleepy jack

lol

__________________

boo boo

Paul McCartney is without a doubt one of the most important bassists of all time, people often overlook that.

He along with other bassists from that time like John Entwistle, John Paul Jones, Chris Squire, Phil Lesh and Jack Bruce were very important in giving bassists a more important role in a rock band, they didn't have to be just the guy in the background, they could play a very significant part in the music.

Also. Wild Honey Pie > anything by Godsmack

__________________
It's only knock n' knowall, but I like it

http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs

Oomph!

I'm reffering to 'lameness' (another word I probably made up) as a value. It has nothing to do being lazy, low bass is ineffectual, it doesn't move you. Plus, when you have to strain yourself to hear the bass you can't hear the rest of the song that well.

Being too lazy to read subtitles isn't a 'value'. Either the film is in the language you speak or it isn't.

I'm not talking about volume. You can play any song as physically loud as you want.

Doesn't change the fact that the bass was lower (among other factors), thus more lame.

boo boo

I'm sorry, but if Julia dosen't touch you in any way, but Godsmack does, well damn, I don't even know what to say.

__________________
It's only knock n' knowall, but I like it

http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs

Seltzer

So you're saying lameness is proportional to how quiet the bass is, relative to the other tracks, and you're using that as a criterion for judging a band. Surely you can see something wrong with that?

Maybe you have to strain hear the bass in Beatles songs if jungle electronica is all you listen to all day. But provided that your hearing/multi-tasking abilities exceed a tiny human threshold, I'm sure you can pick out the basslines in Beatles songs without losing yourself and getting confused as to what's going on. McCartney's bassplaying isn't exactly recorded at an inaudible level.


Um, it is volume you're talking about. You're talking about the volume of the bass track relative to the other tracks in their music.

__________________

boo boo

What in the f*ck are you talking about?

Your speakers must really suck, maybe you have to strain yourself to hear the bass in their earlier stuff. But certainly not for Revolver, Sgt Peppers, Magical Mystery Tour, The White Album or Abbey Road. Some of the best bass work you will find there.

__________________
It's only knock n' knowall, but I like it

http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs

Oomph!

LAME COMPARED TO THIS:

GODSMACK

OOMPH

ALSO GODSMACK

I'D LIKE TO SEE PAUL MCCARTNY DO THAT! ^^^