Taxman

So I think I should correct myself a bit. In spite of all the criticism, I own five Queen records. And two by Bruce plus I have seen him playing live and I enjoyed it a lot. So I respect Bruce's ability to affect people, but it seems for me he is overrated musically and lyrically. But who knows, usually cheap trick are the ones that work most greatly

So. Bruce is good lyricist, not as good as Dylan or others and though I don't personally like his style.

galt54

Hey, Taxman - you and I have something in common! I am a big sucker for melodies too. And there is not much metal-style music which I like much. Even mean and loud music is only fun to listen to if it has good or great melody. The only metal band which I love is Blue Öyster Cult (their first three studio albums, their three live albums and plus Imaginos). I also like some songs by Led Zeppelin, Budgie, AC/DC and Kiss (the fact that they are clowns is irrelevant here). I also love three mean and loud punk bands: The Ramones, The Queers and The Punkles.

I presented my esthetics of music in the thread I started titled "My tastes in music - an essay on my esthetics of music". Have you seen that thread, Taxman? Any thoughts?

That thread is located in the section "General Music".

Maybe your esthetics of music is similar to mine?

galt54

Hey, Taxman - you and I seem to have a lot in common when it comes to taste in music!

I also go for melody and diversity in music. Also - even in regard to mean and loud music, such as metal - I only enjoy listening to hard rock, metal and punk songs which have good or great melodies. The only mean and loud groups which I love are Blue Öyster Cult (their first three studio albums, their three live albums plus Imaginos, that is to say - most of the rest of their output bores me), The Ramones, The Queers and The Punkles. I also like some of the output (the stuff with the best melodies, that is) of Led Zeppelin, Budgie, AC/DC and Kiss (the fact that Kiss acted like clowns when on stage is irrelevant here).

Taxman, have you noticed the thread which I started a few days ago in the "General Music" section? I mean the thread with the title "My tastes in music - my esthetics of music"? I present my criteria for liking or not liking music in that thread. I suspect that you would agree with most of my ideas, Taxman.

Maybe you could check out my thread and share whatever thoughts you have with me?

Taxman

I have read your thread. I agree with lot of things you said. But still, I guess there's melodic metal out there. I just have not found it yet cos I have not made any acquaintance with it.

I actually like AC/DC and Zeppelin, especially Zeppelin's third is great. And Ramones are great. They have melodies, I dare say?
Your thoughts of music were good, and I enjoyed to read it. If your able and you have a will write like that, you could found a journal. Then you could write what you what you like. I promise I would read it. For sure.

Anyway, tomorrow (or maybe tonight) I'll share some of my favorite sixties albums that may are not that much popular nowadays, but they should be.

__________________
...

Trollheart

Nah. I live in Ireland and have no problem relating to his lyrics, and any time he plays London, Paris, Berlin or a hundred other venues they're sold out in minutes. Anyway, if you were to tag every American act as "too American" where would you be? Bruce can play Giants Stadium or Times Square, or some little coffee shop in Seattle, and still exude the same charm, honesty, workingman ethic and connectedness (is that a word?) that he does in the stadia, so it's nothing to do with arena-rock. I saw both Steve Earle and BB King in a small venue here called the Stadium --- holds about two thousand people I think --- and had as good a time there as I would have had in the O2, Millennium Dome or whatever. You can't categorise artistes as "arena-rock acts" unless that's all or most of what they do, and when someone gets famous and popular, well of course they're going to play arenas, as the most people possible want to see them. It's what you do in the arena, and whether it changes in a smaller, more intimate venue, in my opinion that defines the artist.

__________________
Trollheart: Signature-free since April 2018

Taxman

Could be so. Maybe I was too nasty for Bruce. I dunno. I have seen him playing live and it was a blast, so maybe I should respect him a bit more.

So this is my final statement about The Boss:.

He is a good artist. He is great when he plays live. He surely knows how to connect with people, no matter where he plays. He has performed with guys like John Fogerty, Roy Orbison and Paul McCartney so he probably is very nice man as a person.
I just personally don't like him as much as other people do, but I have tried. And I do not hate him. The world needs someone like him. So I'm afraid I failed when I tried to explain why I am not his fan, cos it seemed like I was just insulting him?

Anyway that's enough about Bruce. I should not be so radical.

__________________
...

galt54

Even though the 60s is my favorite decade where pop and rock music is concerned - there were so many albums released during that decade that I am only familiar with a small fraction of that decade´s output (mostly I only know about the albums put out by the famous groups).

Taxman

GEORGE HARRISON

So this maybe a pretty boring subject, but because sixties rock ( and especially The Beatles) is probably the only genre I know something about, though I'm looking for a change. My music taste is too narrow, and I know it. I should do something for it and I will. Maybe I'll write something about my journeys to the undiscovered world of unknown music later. I hope so.

However, I just relistened George Harrison's first (Electric Sound and Wonderwall Music don't count) solo album All Things Must Pass. And it reminded me why George Harrison has always been my favourite Beatle.

I admit that Paul and John were musically more talented. I would be a fool if I did not admit that. But as a person, I have always found George to be the most interesting.
Oh maybe that was a wrong word. You know, rather I have found him to be the most unpretentious and lovely.

You know, John changed his opinions as usually as most of us change our boxers, you know, once or twice in a year, or so. (When the smell gets annoying, that is a sign.)
John was a paradox that ended all the other paradox. And that was what made him so interesting, both as a musician and as a person.

Paul, on the other hand, has always been Paul. Always wanting to be popular, always on the spotlight, always lurking around and trying to find whatever is going on. But to me, this is hardly a crime. I admit that his ego is too big, and he probably watches his mirror image every night and masturbates, but that is not illegal, after all. He believes in his highly melodic silly love songs and so do I. I admit that I secretly love most of his most sappy stuff, but my taste is bad, I know.

Ringo, well, pretty average as a songwriter, but on the other hand, he has penned one timeless classic and not everyone can do it. Not Phil Collins, at least. Ringo is always drunk, telling ****ty jokes and fooling around and singing out of tune (which he, actually, seldom did on the Beatles records, contrary to rumors.) I guess Paul did not allow him to, Paul would have crucified him and filled his mouth with poison apples, so luckily he stayed in tune.

So, lets discuss the original topic. George was boring. He liked dump Indian religion, he was just a gardener and loved trees. He never smiled. Such a bore.

That is not true. Of course he was not a lost genius either, like some people might say, oh no, as it usually is when it comes to things like these (and also things unlike these ), the truth lies somewhere in between.

Actually, George was cool. He was religious, of course, but I won't accuse him for that. Being a religious ain't a crime, as long as you don't **** choir boys or something. Also he never changed his religious beliefs which is something I respect.
Those people who believe that he was a bore, are wrong. He was actually the funniest among them. It is just that you might not realize it. He wrote a song like It's Only A Northern Song which I find to be perfectly hilarious. Also his sense of humor was pretty great. You just have to get it.
Oh, I forgot. He also produced the most hilarious film ever: LIFE OF BRIAN BY THE MAGNIFICENT MONTY PYTHON. That's something special, ain't it?

When it comes to his person, it is hard to believe anyone could do any harm to a man like him. John was provocative and occasionally annoying, Paul is, you know, PAUL MCCARTNEY, and Ringo was (and is) too drunk to notice anything but George...he was...well, himself. Pretty humble, pretty lovely, pretty funny.
Also it seems like everyone in the business was his friend. And why not? Ukuleles are something everyone needs.

When it comes to his musical talents, I admit I'm not as much fan. But let's concentrate on the good sides, shall we?

He created three absolute masterpieces on his own. First, All Things Must Pass is maybe the best Beatle solo album ever. Period. I love it. Those jams are boring, though. But it is equal to other Beatles solo album and I love it more than most of the Beatles albums, I guess.

Second, Cloud Nine is the best Beatles solo album from the eighties. (Paul fooled around with crappy electronic, John was dead and Ringo was drunken, as usual.)

Third, his last solo album, Brainwashed, is one of the greatest farewell records ever. It is not even sad. It is a record by a dying man, who still enjoyed everyday of his life and was ready go. No sadness, bp desperation. Pure joy of playing and pure fun instead. And great songs with his trademark sense of humor.

Also as a huge Bob Dylan fan, as a huge Electric Light Orchestra fan (I know...it is kind of guilty pleasure...), as a huge Roy Orbison Fan, and as a average Tom Petty fan, I pretty much love Travelling Wellbores. It is funny how even Bob seemed to have fun, and he wasn't as introverted and shy as he usually is. Especially Volume 1 is one of the most relaxed records ever.

So, nobody cannot live without hearing those four abovementioned records.

Also he organized the first charity concert ever. How cool is that?

__________________
...

Taxman

Yep, I'm not expert either, but I hope I can share some more obscure albums. I'm not pretending I know pretty much but I'll do what I can. But there were so many great album released during the sixties so I'll never get enough. And it is great.

__________________
...

Taxman

THE LEFT BANKE

So I'm not expert. There is a lot of album considered as a classics that I haven't heard. I would like to, but I have not enough time to listen to everything.

Anyway, I haven't yet met anyone who likes this album. Or has even heard about it. So there it is. Walk Away Renee/Pretty Ballerina by The Left Banke. That name is crappy, though. They just took the names of two singles, you see.

That album is baroque pop as it's finest. I would like to say it is nearly equal to Pet Sounds, so everyone who likes Pet Sounds, should check this one out too. It is one of the greatest lost masterpieces, at least I think so.
I'm not good at describing how music sounds and I'm too tired to write more now, so I'll just throw one link to good review about this album: The Left Banke

And then to actual album: The Left Banke - Pretty Ballerina/Walk Away Renee FULL ALBUM - YouTube

I know I'm not good at writing but if someone checks that album out and likes it, I'm satisfied because it is in my opinion nearly equal to Pet Sounds, and that is a HUGE compliment.

__________________
...