Dave Grohl " I feel so bad for the Dream Theater guys"

[Dark Castle]

Say it ain't so DC?!

It resonates with my extreme metal tendancies 

[skydivingninja]

White Limo resonates with extreme metal tendencies?

Lol.

But really, its just a grammy.  They've been accepted to be garbage by everyone except the people putting on the show in the first place. XD

[TheGreatPretender]

I'm really surprised there are so many Foo Fighters fans here. They're not that good.

[KevShmev]

  What is ANOTHER Grammy or award gonna do for those who already have lots?  Nothing.  They should put a cap on how many you can earn in one year and/or over a career.

Why?

I'm really surprised there are so many Foo Fighters fans here. They're not that good.

Except that they are.  They don't do anything crazy or innovative; they just crank out some good old-fashioned hard rock.  And they bring it live like very few do. 

[slycordinator]

I'm really surprised there are so many Foo Fighters fans here. They're not that good.

I need you to run your opinion of the band by me again. I haven't quite gotten how you feel about them.

[Orbert]

If he felt that "bad" for DT, he would have said at the awards show, "sorry, we can't take this award.  DT had a metal song and we didn't.  We think they deserve it instead of us."  Saying it after the fact means nothing. 

Don't be absurd.  He didn't say he felt so bad that he couldn't live with himself if he accepted the award.  He just felt bad because he actually likes Dream Theater and thought that they had a great song, but he understood the reality of the situation, which is that most of the time, the big-name popular act is gonna take home the award.

What he said wasn't meaningless.  If anything, it was a compliment.  He wanted to let DT know that he actually liked their song and/or let people know that there's this other band out there that they've probably never heard of that are worth a listen.

[SnakeEyes]

I know he didn't mean to be condescending, but it comes out like that.  It's kind of like two people trying to get the same job.... the person who GETS the job goes out and says.... "I feel sooooo bad for you, you're really the better person for that job!" 

Okay.... and....?

[TheGreatPretender]

Except that they are.  They don't do anything crazy or innovative; they just crank out some good old-fashioned hard rock.  And they bring it live like very few do. 

You could also say the same thing about Nickelback. I haven't seen them live, so I can't comment on the latter statement, but that could very well apply too, for all I know. So I really don't see why Nickelback are the poster boys for getting flak from every Rock and Metal fan, but Foo Fighters suddenly make better albums than DT.

[KevShmev]

Because Nickelback sucks.  And the Foo Fighters do not.

I know the idea of anyone making a better album than even Dream Theater's worst album makes your head want to explode, but if you are gonna keep going down this road every time someone likes a song or album better than one of Dream Theater's, you are gonna have an awful lot of disagreements in the future.

[SnakeEyes]

Saying the Foo Fighters suck is insane.... they're awesome.  They still shouldn't have won, though.... I will definitely stick by that.  But, they're still great. 

[theseoafs]

Except that they are.  They don't do anything crazy or innovative; they just crank out some good old-fashioned hard rock.  And they bring it live like very few do. 

You could also say the same thing about Nickelback.

You couldn't! Nickelback is very bland, very modern, radio-friendly, pandering nonsense.  The Foo Fighters, meanwhile, are an excellent group that deserve every bit of recognition that they've gotten.

[TheGreatPretender]

Because Nickelback sucks.  And the Foo Fighters do not.

Subjective opinion. I disagree.

I know the idea of anyone making a better album than even Dream Theater's worst album makes your head want to explode, but if you are gonna keep going down this road every time someone likes a song or album better than one of Dream Theater's, you are gonna have an awful lot of disagreements in the future.

First of all, ADTOE is not Dream Theater's worst album, I think most DT fans would even say it's one of their best. In the top half, anyway. Second, if someone argued that Megadeth should've won the Grammy, I wouldn't even disagree all that much. This isn't about DT. I just really don't think Foo Fighters music is that good. And yes, quite frankly, I would say I'd even prefer Nickelback. I mean, I wouldn't collect either band's discography or anything, but I'll listen to Nickelback's better songs over Foo Fighters' best songs.
And like I said, it's not even the fact that I don't like their post-grunge alternative rock style, which I don't, but I just think they're very bland. Of course, if you consider the fact that The Grammys often reward blandness, yes, the Foo Fighters were ringers.

[KevShmev]

I never said ADTOE was their worst album.  That was alluding to your comment last week in another thread that DT's worst albums are better than most bands' best albums.

[Dark Castle]

Bland   
I don't even.  Saying Foo Fighters is bland but Nickelback isn't blows my mind.

[theseoafs]

This thread is now the "What's your favorite Foo Fighters song?" thread.

Mine's Come Alive.

[TheGreatPretender]

I never said ADTOE was their worst album.  That was alluding to your comment last week in another thread that DT's worst albums are better than most bands' best albums.

Well, like I said, that's my opinion. If I prefer the way Petrucci composes and plays music more than other guitarists, and the guitar is the main component of rock/metal, what can I do?

Bland   
I don't even.  Saying Foo Fighters is bland but Nickelback isn't blows my mind.

I'm not trying to say that Nickelback is some awesome hard rock band, they're not. But I'd put them on about the same level as Foo Fighters. The only reason I'd pick Nickelback is because I prefer their overall sound, even if that sound is present in every song they do, making half their songs sound the same. But again, I'd say the same thing about Foo Fighters.

[KevShmev]

Yeah, the Foo Fighters are one of the few modern rock bands that is actually deserving of the praise and recognition they get (along with Radiohead, Muse, etc.). 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Py2-RXhfBo8

[Pols Voice]

I don't like the Foo Fighters. come at me bro etc.

[TheGreatPretender]

Look, all I said was, they're not that good. That's my opinion, and I'm entitled to it. And it honestly surprised me how many people on DTF like them, I honestly didn't think they were that popular on here, that's all. When I said that DT deserved the grammy way more, I expected a few more people to back me, but just because they didn't doesn't mean I'm gonna backpedal on my word.

[theseoafs]

And yes, DT is Progressive Metal and not 'hard rock', but that pretty much makes it better by default.

  Come on, dude.  Come on.

[TheGreatPretender]

And yes, DT is Progressive Metal and not 'hard rock', but that pretty much makes it better by default.

  Come on, dude.  Come on.

What? A key element of progressive music is the structure of it. The time and riff changes, extended instrumental sections, long songs... It's like taking a rock/metal song and building it into something bigger and more interesting. Do you prefer 4 minute pop songs?

[KevShmev]

I don't like the Foo Fighters. come at me bro etc.

I'll send Dave Grohl after you.  He'll obliterate you.

And yes, DT is Progressive Metal and not 'hard rock', but that pretty much makes it better by default.

  Come on, dude.  Come on.

There really are no words for that.

And DT does deserve more recognition, but On the Backs of Angels wasn't that good of a song to deserve an award (even one as useless as a Grammy).  Granted, bands rarely win Grammys for their best work, but still.  Like I said back then, DT getting nominated at all was a huge victory for them as a band. 

[theseoafs]

And yes, DT is Progressive Metal and not 'hard rock', but that pretty much makes it better by default.

  Come on, dude.  Come on.

What? A key element of progressive music is the structure of it. The time and riff changes, extended instrumental sections, long songs... It's like taking a rock/metal song and building it into something bigger and more interesting. Do you prefer 4 minute pop songs?

I prefer music that I think is better.  I determine that bands are better than other bands by listening to them and judging them, not by making sweeping judgments about them based on their genre.

[KevShmev]

And yes, DT is Progressive Metal and not 'hard rock', but that pretty much makes it better by default.

  Come on, dude.  Come on.

What? A key element of progressive music is the structure of it. The time and riff changes, extended instrumental sections, long songs... It's like taking a rock/metal song and building it into something bigger and more interesting. Do you prefer 4 minute pop songs?

You aren't making sense.  Saying, "DT is Progressive Metal and not 'hard rock', but that pretty much makes it better by default," is implying that anything progressive metal is better than anything hard rock, so I guess Vanden Plas and Circus Maximus are now better than Led Zeppelin and Rush, right?

[KevShmev]

I prefer music that I think is better.  I determine that bands are better than other bands by listening to them and judging them, not by making sweeping judgments about them based on their genre.

Exactly.  Good music comes in all shapes and forms.  I am so glad I am not the prog snob I was back in the late 90s/early 00s!

[PetFish]

  What is ANOTHER Grammy or award gonna do for those who already have lots?  Nothing.  They should put a cap on how many you can earn in one year and/or over a career.

Why?

Why not?  What's wrong with limiting an artist to 3 awards per year?  To give others a chance to reap the rewards.  Is 5 Grammy's going to make you more successful than 3?  Doubtful.  But give those 2 extras to other artists and it could give them a great career instead of possibly hitting the bread line.

Just like Olympic swimming.  Oooh, you got 8 medals?  Big deal, they're mostly the same thing, make each athlete only allowed to qualify for a certain amount of events so other athletes can continue their careers instead of going home to wash cars.  If I could put a number on it I'd say one medal in hockey is 87x more difficult than 8 medals in swimming.

[Perpetual Change]

Look, all I said was, they're not that good. That's my opinion, and I'm entitled to it. And it honestly surprised me how many people on DTF like them, I honestly didn't think they were that popular on here, that's all. When I said that DT deserved the grammy way more, I expected a few more people to back me, but just because they didn't doesn't mean I'm gonna backpedal on my word.

I think you shot yourself in the foot based on how you said it:

"they actually had a metal performance. We didn't," while that may be true, I think the bigger issue isn't whether the song was hard rock or metal. It's that it was far superior to anything Foo Fighters ever did.

That's simply not a legitimate grievance. I DO think that DT deserved that award, but the thing is, The Foo Fighters song wasn't even metal. They won so many other awards, was it really necessary to pile on more by giving them stuff out of a category they don't even belong in? You made marginalizing the real issue here in favor for genre-ism (I just made that up lol) a prerequisite to agreeing with you. And I just can't back you up with that 

[KevShmev]

  What is ANOTHER Grammy or award gonna do for those who already have lots?  Nothing.  They should put a cap on how many you can earn in one year and/or over a career.

Why?

Why not?  What's wrong with limiting an artist to 3 awards per year?  To give others a chance to reap the rewards.  Is 5 Grammy's going to make you more successful than 3?  Doubtful.  But give those 2 extras to other artists and it could give them a great career instead of possibly hitting the bread line.

Just like Olympic swimming.  Oooh, you got 8 medals?  Big deal, they're mostly the same thing, make each athlete only allowed to qualify for a certain amount of events so other athletes can continue their careers instead of going home to wash cars.  If I could put a number on it I'd say one medal in hockey is 87x more difficult than 8 medals in swimming.

Well, in the case of something like the Grammys, those boneheads like giving awards over and over to their favorites to boost their resumes; I will never deny that.  But I disagree with your line of thinking in general.  That is like - if Peyton Manning returns to form this year, leads the Broncos to the playoffs and breaks the record for TD passes in a season - saying, "He's already won 4 MVP awards, so give it to someone else."  It ain't always fair, but being second best often doesn't get you a thing; just ask the Buffalo Bills.

[Perpetual Change]

Eh, not really a fair comparison Kev. The Foo Fighters getting a metal award was more like Barack Obama getting the Nobel Peace Prize.

[theseoafs]

The award was hard rock/metal performance, was it not?

[KevShmev]

Eh, not really a fair comparison Kev. The Foo Fighters getting a metal award was more like Barack Obama getting the Nobel Peace Prize.

Okay, but it was hard rock/metal, so you could easily say, "Why was a progressive metal band like Dream Theater nominated for a hard rock award?"  Leaving out one of them to fit your narrative is ignoring the fact that the award could go to a song that was hard rock OR metal.  Unfair to lump them in together, sure, but it is what it is.

[TheGreatPretender]

I prefer music that I think is better.  I determine that bands are better than other bands by listening to them and judging them, not by making sweeping judgments about them based on their genre.

Alright fair enough. I'm not saying that there are no crappy Prog Metal bands out there, of course in every genre, there will be some no good musicians, or generic copy cats, or whatever. But structurally speaking, Progressive Rock/Metal is automatically more interesting than non-Prog Rock/Metal.
Like, if Foo Fighters took their style and had more complex song structures, extended solos, longer songs, etc. They'd be more interesting than what they're playing now.
But you're right. It is about the music.

That's simply not a legitimate grievance. I DO think that DT deserved that award, but the thing is, The Foo Fighters song wasn't even metal. They won so many other awards, was it really necessary to pile on more by giving them stuff out of a category they don't even belong in? You made marginalizing the real issue here in favor for genre-ism (I just made that up lol) a prerequisite to agreeing with you. And I just can't back you up with that 

Well, to be fair, in my initial statement, I don't think there was any 'genre-ism'. I just said that DT is better than Foo Fighters. If DT changed their genre to non-progressive Metal, or even rock, just based on how they write music and their level of musicianship, they'd still be better than Foo Fighters. I mean, it's not like all of DT's songs are balls to the wall Metal, like some Prog-Metal bands. DT hops around the whole spectrum of rock music, and even when they're taking sounds inspired by bands like Coldplay or Muse, I'd still take their songs over those actual artists. I'm sure if DT said, "Yeah, we were inspired by Foo Fighters when we wrote such and such song," that song would still be better than the actual Foo Fighters.

[theseoafs]

But structurally speaking, Progressive Rock/Metal is automatically more interesting than non-Prog Rock/Metal.

  I can't even continue this conversation.  Never mind.  Nevermind, of course, being an album that is in principle worse than anything Symphony X has ever done.

[Adami]

I dunno, when I'm in my car I'd rather listen to Stone Sour, Lady Gaga, Alterbridge, or something rather than Systematic Chaos or Black Clouds, or Train of Thought or Octavarium.


I'm more impressed by good song writing than long solo sections. In fact I generally prefer songs without long solo sections.

[Perpetual Change]

The award was hard rock/metal performance, was it not?

I don't know. I'm just going by his own comment, which seems to express the same confusion.

Eh, not really a fair comparison Kev. The Foo Fighters getting a metal award was more like Barack Obama getting the Nobel Peace Prize.

Okay, but it was hard rock/metal, so you could easily say, "Why was a progressive metal band like Dream Theater nominated for a hard rock award?"  Leaving out one of them to fit your narrative is ignoring the fact that the award could go to a song that was hard rock OR metal.  Unfair to lump them in together, sure, but it is what it is.

Why'd he even mention the thing about Dream Theater then? Maybe it's just the Grammy's not  knowing how to categorizing things. I'm looking now at the list of bands in the Best Rock Performance, Best Hard Rock/Metal Performance, and Best Alternative Performance and it's all really silly. I mean, Sum 41 is Hard Rock/Metal? Bon Iver is alt rock? Okay...