lucifer_sam

Radiohead isn't art pop. Not even close. (VU probably best approximates what good art pop should sound like). And if you want to hear pseudo-intellectual bullshit, download Tool's discography. Maynard doesn't even know what the fuck he's singing about. Certainly a must for your twonk friends.

__________________
first.am

whogivesaflux

Where is the encyclopedia you are referencing? I ask because as you are disagreeing in an absolute sense, I am certain you must have a solid and established stance from which to draw your conclusion from. I would also be interested in what *is* an excellent example of Art Pop?

Thanks!

ProggyMan

How is Radiohead pretending to be intellectual? How the hell are they 'art pop', whatever that means.

whogivesaflux

art pop is a term I confabulated out of my proverbial cobwebs on the spot. It's a term that for me describes more so an effect the artist/band has socially that constitutes a resulting clique mentality. It's a phenomenon that attaches and best lends itself to a commercial popularity drawn form a pseudo intellectual underground which is in reality neither.

I believe in identifying responsibility rather than the premise. The measure of anything is best taken from result rather than appearance.

art pop to me is not all bad either. For instance, Beck is Art Pop to me and I REALLY enjoy Beck. I just find Radiohead exceptionally boring, "safe", pedestrian, "correct". That sort of thing.

Bottom Line: ANY music that has a reputation that is popular enough to proceed it demands the sincerest of scrutiny from me as a listener and long time musical appreciator. Radiohead did not live up to that reputation for me. I just don't get it. It doesn't challenge me whatsoever. Just like certain people don't "get" Bob Dylan, I don't "get" Radiohead.


Radiohead is NOTHING like The Velvet Underground, I'll give you that. But the Velvets were most definitely the closest thing I can imagine to a pseudo intellectual garage/psych experimental pop group. The very essence actually.

Have you heard the Lou Reed E.A.P. thingamabob? I saw that the other day when I was picking up some new and used CDs. I was tempted to grab it but having been so disappointed with Lou's latter day solo cannon, I opted out.

ProggyMan

Wtf was that? How are Radiohead safe/pedestrian? They certainly take risks, and they don't really sound like any other band ever...

lucifer_sam

...

Sorry. I assumed you were talking about art rock, which actually exists. But if you're the person defining the genre, you can claim whatever the fuck you want, huh? Not really much sense arguing.

Shenanigans.

__________________
first.am

whogivesaflux

If that's the case you were REALLY off base via The Velvet Underground reference.

Friend, lets bring this full circle to a common ground of intelligent conversation. I took the time to defined clearly what I was referring to via the jargon I used. Maybe that's a misconception on my behalf. I will give you that much. But if all you can do as a music appreciator is be short, sarcastic and withdrawn, how could I possibly see the matter through your ears so to speak?

I have been searching and searching for an enthusiastic and INTELLIGENT music appreciation community. You wanna know what the two biggest draw backs that have hindered that process so far are? <whether you do or don't> Those two specific handicaps are comprised of age differences (most people under 18 live to insult themselves on message boards, not all though.) and cliques. Thankfully I haven't got a strong whiff of either here yet.

If you REALLY care about music AND communication, you'll avoid dismissive one sentence remarks that attempt to justify your brevity and take the time to honestly spell yourself out intelligently.

What the hell else is personal passion/special interest based discussion for?


Might try actually defending your position there boo boo.

No edge for me friend. Little groove and very minimal. Lame IMO. About as energetic as a boiled cabbage.

SD4LIFE

Lil Wayne, Cant Rap For ****

WeeLittleHobbit

Should he even be considered overrated? I mean, do the critics even take him seriously?

__________________
Tommy: I'm funny how? Funny like a clown? I amuse you? I'm here to f*cking amuse you? What do you mean, funny? How am I funny?
Henry: You know, how you tell a story.
Tommy: I don't know. You said it. You said I'm funny. How am I funny?

TROY148

As a self-proclaimed hip-hop head I feel I must re-open the discussion on Kanye West. I understand that you would say he is overrated, I've heard people compare Kanye's rapping to that of Lupe Fiasco which is a ridiculous comparison. the thing I have an issue with is the people saying that Kanye West is garbage and uncreative. Sure, as a lyricist, Kanye West is most definitely sub-par, but his production style more than makes up for it. He's not a conventional rapper either, Kanye is more of punchline rapper, he'll say a coupl okay rhymes and then say something that makes you chuckle, it's a breath of fresh air from a lot of hip-pop played on the radio. As for Kanye's use of samples, I don't believe it's lack of creativity, to be able to listen to one song and form something entirely different out of it, is a form of creativity. I'd compare it to garbage diving, he's found something that is forgotten in some sense and made something new.
Jay-z's "Lucifer" is a good example
Sample:
YouTube - Chase The Devil-Max Romeo
Lucifer:
YouTube - Jay-z - Lucifer

There is a distinct difference in feeling you get from both tracks which I like. So yes, Kanye is a ****y mutha and, yes, his rappig is sub-par compared to a Lupe Fiasco or a Jay-z etc.. but his skills lie as a producer/punchline rapper also keep in mind, another celebrated producer/MC, Dr. Dre, was never the greatest on the mic either.