Lyrics: Check my sig
Musicianship: ****ing amazing
Songwriting: One of the biggest sounds ever, also very diverse using everything froms distortion to flutes
Pretentiousness: Not at all, except for the last 9 minutes of Moonchild.

Good lyrics and good music doesn't mean much if it can't be applied properly. They're not good.

Err, the arrangements are brilliant.

Ok...This weekend I'm going off to listen to In Utero and Pet Sounds...and I'm jumping into this...

I've listened to pet sounds and I like it well enough, but I don't see how it's anything but overrated.

How many people do you hear listening to the Beach Boys these days anyhow?

Aren't they really just a less clever version of the Beatles with sillier lyrics and less of a penchant for innovation?

I'm not sure, but I'm going to find out.

No they're not, they're repetitive no variation.

The Beach Boys were a huge influence on the Beatles, Paul McCartney says without Pet Sounds there wouldn't have been on Sgt. Peppers. Brian Wilsons pop arraignments are beautiful, and the recording techniques he introduced were very innovative. Its not just some overrated album thats placed high because it came out in the 60s.

What is that supposed to mean?

If it's good, it's good.

I think what you're trying to say is that technical aptitude doesn't necessarily equate to highly listenable music. Just because it's hard to play/write doesn't mean it sounds good. Is that your point?

Actually i'm leading up to making him see that just because you don't like something doesn't mean its bad. I figured the best route to achieve this point is using his favorite band, instead of one of mine.

What recording techniques are you referring to?

Not true at all! 21st Century has 3 lyricals stanza's seperated by an instrumental, while Moonchild is 3 minutes of dark lyrics an music, followed by a 9 minute instrumental with everything from freeform Jazz guitar to ambient bleeeping. Repetetive it is not.