Make fun of your favorite artist.
 

Tool: 10 minute songs with pretentious lyrics that manage to say nothing interesting.

Queens of the Stone Age: Safe commercial rock

Nirvana: Look how depressed and cool I am!

Slipknot: If we wear spooky masks they might think we're good.

Dude... Sick burns

Wolves in Sheepskin: Let's just say we sound like this on purpose.

Tori Amos: Emotional porn with increasingly nonsensical lyrics the further you move up through her discography.

Dir En Grey: Dumb costumes and a singer that sometimes sounds unnervingly like Donald Duck throwing a tantrum.

Waltari: The most nasal singer you'll ever hear plus an endless parade of badly mistaken ideas such as "hey we should totally mix Euro-dance with thrash metal and funk - what could possibly go wrong?"

Suzanne Vega: Glorified adult contemporary for people who think drinking coffee while listening to a New Yorker sing stories about people and places in a soft drone makes you seem sophisticated.

Son of Abbot: I don't know how to actually make music, so I call it experimental in an attempt so people don't call me out on my ****ty guitar playing...

Shit... thats a confession.

Queens of the Stone Age: Aspiring Foo Fighters

Loreena McKennitt: Pretty nice music if you're 80 years old and get scared by sudden movements.

Be'Lakor: What happens when the cookie monster learns 3 sad sounding chords and buys an electric guitar.

The thread is about making fun of your "Favorite Artists"

If QOTSA is aspiring to be the Foo Fighters in Frown's eyes... That can only mean one thing...

[explains joke and ruins it in the process]

Yeah I don't think of Frownland as a QOTSA groupie either.

But you never know it it was a Freudian slip.

I don't get it... Could you explain?

Well you see, since jokes are typically based in absurdity, applying systematic logic to them counteracts that and once the joke is explained, the person who it is being explained to will find the joke less funny than if they had just got it in the first place.

But what if the real joke is in the explanation?

"typically"

Marillion: "**** guys, why aren't we Genesis? I want us to be Genesis! Not that crappy eighties pop ****, but the seventies boring drony Gabriel-led art rock. Wahhh! Why am I named after a piscean?"

Iron Maiden: "You know, if we get TWO guitarists we can ... Thin who??"

Rush: "I can't write lyrics! I have to perfect this screech! Ah **** it, let the drummer do it: what's the worst that could happen?"

Slayer: Oh look, another post-80s Slayer album. Goodie.
Ke$ha: Your last two songs. *mic drop*
Manowar: Could someone give Eric Adams pants that can't be described as "assless"?
ICP: Don't really have to say anything here.

Lana del Rey: music for women in their 20s who still shop at Forever 21, make vague suicide threats on social media under usernames like "daddysbbygirl666" and repeatedly miss the point of the book Lolita

Meredith Monk: Pretentious gibberish that only elves and the restless dead can understand

Depeche Mode: Music for depressed, masochistic cornballs who love to bask in self pity and wear leather pants

Dead Can Dance: See above

I feel personally attacked!

Brant Bjork: Any importance I have as an artist begins and ends with my involvement in Kyuss.

Sturgill Simpson: I'm gonna try to make country music relevant by singing about psychedelic drugs.

Choking Victim:
See, the title is accurate to the listeners, because STZA Smells that bad.
On top of that, you'll also be a victim of his edgy lyrics.

Rip STZA

I choose Arcade Fire because their new album suuuucs

Duh, of course I'd love Depeche Mode (I've been hooked ever since I stole a cd of theirs from Walmart like 15 years ago.)

I wholeheartedly retract this statement. The amount of criticism and praise seems split right down the middle for this record and I for one clicked with it immediately. "Chemistry" Is a little too hokey though.

http://cps-static.rovicorp.com/3/JPG...er=allrovi.com

Nice man bun, Layne.

Hey look, melting clocks. Sooooooooo trippy amiright? *twirls stache*

Just ignore all music critics all together. I can't mention anyone who's very good at talking about music with words. Anthony Fantano is the best we've got, and I've even stopped watching his reviews. Professional music criticism redundant when it's so easy to just listen for yourself these days.

I've found a few good blogs to visit where interesting music keeps getting posted, but finding those who can, as you say, sort through the garbage for me, is really hard.

About Fantano, I think he's really good at talking about music and haven't found anyone better at it. Anyone else I've found is either tedious or idiotic to listen to.
Just a shame that I don't like his taste in music at all.

They're a good resource for providing contexts and views on an album that can help you learn a lot more about the album. It's especially useful for albums you don't enjoy, because you never know when you're ignoring something that makes an album great in favour of your expectations.

I mean if you're incapable of using your own brain to form your opinions, avoid them, but otherwise there really isn't any harm in it.

I think it's more that I find it frustratingly unrelatable to read about music.

Most writers can't really put words to what they're hearing in a way that gives me anything to go on. When I do use music review sites and blogs, I usually just look at album covers, lists and scores, then go to Youtube and take a listen myself. I don't read the text.

Well you have to read the text if you want to see them describe music :crazy:.

What I'm saying is that I don't want to read their descriptions of the music because I find that they usually suck at getting across the essence of the music they're talking about. Like I said, it gives me nothing to go on, with which I mean I don't feel compelled to check the music out based on the way they describe it. If review texts can't make me interested in music, then what's their use for me.

I was joking with my last post, but the usefulness of reviews is that they provide perspective on music to help you better understand it.

I suppose I agree with that in theory, but I've kind of stopped reading. I still watch documentaries about music now and then, so it's not like I'm completely disinterested in the wider context.

Thinking about it, I think the one thing that I do appreciate is to know what motivated the creation of an album. That is often best heard directly from the artist, when possible at least. If I could have my way, all albums would have detailed liner notes talking about the ideas behind every single track.

Are there any specific writers you feel do a very good job of providing some any particular degree of insight into whatever kind of music they tackle?

I just peruse rym reviews. I like Scaruffi has great taste and provides awesome historical context on a lot of music, but his description of music and why he likes it is kind of subpar.

I mostly just like someone who has a strong opinion on an album and expresses their viewpoint adequately. And hopefully entertainingly. I honestly just like watching people be passionate about music. I'll take the recs, but it's just fun watching people have fun with music. Anthony Fantano clearly is having fun, so he's fun to watch and even gives me things to think about.

I think I agree with this. I'd rather watch/read someone who is burning with passion (or hate) for the album they're talking about. That's probably why I tend to read comments on albums, while ignoring reviews. I do watch Fantano a rare time, but mostly when there's an album I actually care about. Or his Y U No Review videos. Those are entertaining to me.

The youtube channel Deep Cuts is an excellent example of by all means intelligent, well made, well spoken, profesionally filmed music reviews that I find unbearable dull and uninteresting.

I'll drop Dead End Hip Hop in here because their discussions are great, there's a spread of opinions, and they're all clearly very passionate about the music.

Bomb the Music Industry's Jeff Rosenstuck's vocals sound as drunk as he likely is.

I've heard members of Radiohead talk about how when they first started playing Paranoid Android live, before they recorded it, the song had two long organ solos and everyone looked at them like they were crazy when they dragged the organ out and played it. Removing the solos reduced the song's length from 14 to six and a half minutes. I think that's a funny story and sums up some of their excesses.