Music Banter

Music Banter (https://www.musicbanter.com/)
-   General Music (https://www.musicbanter.com/general-music/)
-   -   The Definitve List: Most Overrated Bands\Artists ever (https://www.musicbanter.com/general-music/31336-definitve-list-most-overrated-bands-artists-ever.html)

sleepy jack 07-29-2008 07:40 AM

He did give one, The Velvet Underground.

whogivesaflux 07-29-2008 07:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ProggyMan (Post 501768)
How is Radiohead pretending to be intellectual? How the hell are they 'art pop', whatever that means.

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleepy jack (Post 501885)
He did give one, The Velvet Underground.


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 07-29-2008 08:53 PM

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 07-30-2008 12:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whogivesaflux (Post 501890)
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.

...

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.

boo boo 07-30-2008 11:19 AM

I f*cking hate it when people argue over weither or not a band is part of a genre they just made up.

whogivesaflux 07-30-2008 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lucifer_sam (Post 502067)
...

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.

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

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?

Quote:

Originally Posted by boo boo (Post 502162)
I f*cking hate it when people argue over weither or not a band is part of a genre they just made up.


Might try actually defending your position there boo boo.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ProggyMan (Post 502032)
Wtf was that? How are Radiohead safe/pedestrian? They certainly take risks, and they don't really sound like any other band ever...

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

boo boo 07-30-2008 11:52 AM

Radiohead shouldn't be pigeonholed into such a dumb term weither it's taken seriously as a real genre or not. Radiohead are their own band, hipsters and proggies argue all the time over weither or not they should be considered alternative rock or progressive rock or something else, they don't quite conform to anything. Theres very few well known bands that have that kinda ambiguity.

I don't know what art pop is, but it seems like a very limiting term for a band like Radiohead since I don't think of them as a pop group. I don't think something should be called pop just becauses there some pop structures being used, because just about anything could be called pop then.

whogivesaflux 07-30-2008 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boo boo (Post 502170)
Radiohead shouldn't be pigeonholed into such a dumb term weither it's taken seriously as a real genre or not. Radiohead are their own band, they could be considered alternative rock or progressive rock, but they don't conform to either. Theres very few bands that have that kinda ambiguity.

Progressive Rock! rotflol....dooooooodd! That's the longest stretch for the term I have ever heard. Alternative pop rock maybe, "Progressive" No way. Incidentally "pigeonholed" comparison and my original thoughts are miles apart. By that definition you gave, ANY band that a person felt sincerely fanatical about is above personal classification. I don't buy that for a second. The term "deserve" is mighty subjective.

Urban Hat€monger ? 07-30-2008 12:12 PM

I would love to debate your definition of art pop , but it's trying so hard to be clever it just ends up being totally meaningless.

I mean let's look at your definition

Quote:

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.
In what way?

Any band could claim to have what could be considered 'a clique mentality' That's why you buy t shirts and sing along at gigs.

A band's image? it's message? it's politics? it's fashion? all of them? none of them?

You're being far to vague on this.

Quote:

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.
You could have just written 'commercial' and saved yourself some time here , assuming that's what is you meant. If it isn't then perhaps you can clarify this as well.

Quote:

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

Sorry but in this context this means absolutely nothing unless you are prepared to explain it.

Quote:

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.
I think that most people here would consider themselves something of that sort. I don't really see why it needs spelling out though, and it doesn't really tell us anything about what you are trying to define.

Quote:

Might try actually defending your position there boo boo.
Until you define what you are talking about with something more concrete I don't really see what Boo Boo has to defend.

whogivesaflux 07-30-2008 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban Hatemonger (Post 502176)
I would love to debate your definition of art pop , but it's trying so hard to be clever it just ends up being totally meaningless.

I mean let's look at your definition



In what way?

Any band could claim to have what could be considered 'a clique mentality' That's why you buy t shirts and sing along at gigs.

A band's image? it's message? it's politics? it's fashion? all of them? none of them?

You're being far to vague on this.



You could have just written 'commercial' and saved yourself some time here , assuming that's what is you meant. If it isn't then perhaps you can clarify this as well.



Pardon ?

Sorry but in this context this means absolutely nothing unless you are prepared to explain it.



I think that most people here would consider themselves something of that sort. I don't really see why it needs spelling out though, and it doesn't really tell us anything about what you are trying to define.



Until you define what you are talking about with something more concrete I don't really see what Boo Boo has to defend.

bummer, the way the board is set up it removes the thoughts you responded to. I PROMISE you a sincere response that I am certain you will appreciate as soon as I have time to open a second window and arrange the cut n pastes. I will say that by separating the linearity of the thoughts I presented, you are hacking the contextual meaning. I honestly think you know that though. Clever. I will be back soon.

edit: I think what I am going to do to show a sincere level of sincerity and appreciation for Radiohead is dig out my copy of Kid A and give it a spin. I remember going...OMG, this is terrible. Who knows, maybe I will re-orientate myself. I have done that with MANY groups. I will feedback along with a detailed response before the end of the day if I can find it readily. I have roughly 6000 CDs in the room I believe it's in so it may take a while to find it.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:36 AM.


© 2003-2024 Advameg, Inc.