DreamTheaterForums.org Dream Theater Fan Site
General => General Music Discussion => Topic started by: cygnusx1jg on February 23, 2019, 09:19:34 PM
-
Large thread on this about DT, figured it's applicable to other music as well. How about a no-judge zone on this--feel free to admit your deepest and darkest without repercussions (can't actually guarantee that, but...). Here goes:
I not only prefer Hagar Van Halen over Roth Van Halen, I prefer it by a wide margin.
House of Cards by Saga is in my top ten albums of all time.
I've been to probably close to 100 concerts so far, and the March 1993 show of Saigon Kick/Extreme is in my top 3, and may very well be #1.
-
Judas Priest is not only better than Iron Maiden, but it's not even close.
-
justin beiber baby is the WORST SONG EVAR!!!!11!1!!11!!1111
-
justin beiber baby is the WORST SONG EVAR!!!!11!1!!11!!1111
how dARE U say DAT >:( >:( >:( >:( hes the cutest rawr x3
-
justin beiber baby is the WORST SONG EVAR!!!!11!1!!11!!1111
I'd rather hear that Beiber song on an endless loop for an hour than the Sheryl Crow version of Sweet Child O' Mine EVER again.
-
Disco is awesome, a truly underrated art form, and an amazing albeit brief period of music history.
-
Judas Priest is not only better than Iron Maiden, but it's not even close.
hwat
-
justin beiber baby is the WORST SONG EVAR!!!!11!1!!11!!1111
how dARE U say DAT >:( >:( >:( >:( hes the cutest rawr x3
NOOOO@@@!
i only listen to REAL music, like BROKENCYDE :metal :metal :metal so emotional :'( :'( :'( :'(
-
Many of Metallica's best songs are on Load and Reload. If it had been released as a double album with a total runtime of ~110 minutes, with the weakest songs from both cut out, it would be their best album.
Also, the first four songs of St. Anger are legitimately good songs, irrespective of what you may think of Lars's bizarre snare decision.
-
I am getting tired of reading the same old crap you see on sites like Ultimate-Guitar, Loudwire, and Blabbermouth where everyone just sh**talks about the state of rock music and how it's dying and all of that crap and sh**talks about basically anything. It's like do these people in the comment sections or in the articles get excited about anything in the present day? I saw Of Mice and Men and Nothing More, yesterday, in LA. 1,000 people there and it was the most intense crowd of a show that I have ever been to and everyone there was genuinely excited to be there and isn't that what music is supposed to be about. Getting excited about what's to come while building off the past rather than reliving it? Also, that band, Nothing More? They are going to go places in the Active Rock world.
Also, I guess I might as well take the time to say it. I'm honestly not a rock music fan and I'm especially not a heavy metal fan as I thought I was going to be back in 2012. I'm just a guy that likes honest music that prefers various metal bands and various rock bands that I would hear on Active Rock radio. Doesn't mean I have to like them all because of genre. I need to see what else is out there that I can enjoy whether it can be something like Electronica, country, classical crossover, etc..
-
This thread has great potential!
I think Guns ‘n Roses is an annoying band and I would be very content with never hearing Sweet Child of Mine in particular ever again.
Rosanno by Toto is one of the grooviest songs ever and it’s so underrated for that feat. I love it and I can’t fathom why Africa or Hold the Line are seemingly infinitely more popular.
By the way, Toto is stupidly underrated anyway.
Lots of heavy metal music is very boring and similar.
-
for serious tho
meshuggah and gojira both consistently make rather dull music and i don't understand the cult following either has
-
As singers, concentrating solely on the pure singing factor, Ozzy Osbourne and Axl Rose are both pretty bad and, in case of Axl, borderline annoying. Charisma and the historical circumstances brought them where they are, but as singers they kinda blow.
-
As singers, concentrating solely on the pure singing factor, Ozzy Osbourne and Axl Rose are both pretty bad and, in case of Axl, borderline annoying. Charisma and the historical circumstances brought them where they are, but as singers they kinda blow.
Hear hear. Let’s add the AC/DC ‘singers’ to this.
(Then agsin, a case could be made for every growl/scream vocalist. Are they good ‘singers’ from a purely technical standpoint? Probably not, but their role in the music isn’t to ‘sing’ well, just like a jazz drummer doesn’t need to be able to do blast-beats. Different approaches to the same instrument don’t mean one is better than the other.)
-
AC/DC sucks.
-
AC/DC sucks.
Well, yeah. That too :lol
-
Judas Priest is not only better than Iron Maiden, but it's not even close.
Bruce Dickinson is the REAL metal god.
-
Nostradamus is better than most of the stuff Judas Priest has released, perhaps actually their best album save Sad Wings of Destiny.
Stranger in Us All is way better than any JLT-fronted material Rainbow has released.
Imaginaerum is the best Nightwish album, and while the Tarja material is great (especially Century Child) and Anette sucked live, this is where Tuomas peaked with his songwriting, the whole album is outstanding and Anneke's voice is a fantastic fit for that one.
-
Nostradamus is better than most of the stuff Judas Priest has released, perhaps actually their best album save Sad Wings of Destiny.
I wouldn't go so far but it's indeed a wonderful album.
Stranger in Us All is way better than any JLT-fronted material Rainbow has released.
Is it controversial? it's not that hard to beat all that commercial "Hey please USA market look at me" crap Blackmore put out after firing Dio.
Imaginaerum is the best Nightwish album, and while the Tarja material is great (especially Century Child) and Anneke sucked live, this is where Tuomas peaked with his songwriting, the whole album is outstanding and Anneke's voice is a fantastic fit for that one.
Annette, not Anneke. Having said that, yes, Imaginaerum is the best Nightwish album. Floor is by far their best singer but Imaginaerum slays Endless Forms Most Beautiful and as bad of a fit Annette was, she's perfect for that record.
-
Annette, not Anneke.
:facepalm:
I've no idea why I wrote Anneke.
-
Annette, not Anneke.
:facepalm:
I've no idea why I wrote Anneke.
Because the wonderful and amazing Anneke Van Giersbergen is always on your mind.
As she should be.
-
Modern music production sounds like absolute shit. I appreciate the fact that the ability for more people to make an album for much less money is due to the advances in technology, but most albums made in recent years sounds very dead and sterile. It's rare to find a good sounding record these days.
-
I only use Metallica albums as frisbees.
-
Somehow, Dream Theater is really the only prog-metal band that excites me anymore. I know a lot of people give them shit and hate their new stuff, crap on Mangini, say JLB can't sing live (I agree but don't care), but I listen to other new prog-metal and none of it clicks. It's just the same djenty-influenced bullshit over and over again. My tastes generally linger in the prog-rock, extreme metal, pop, or indie realm but Dream Theater is ultimately the only one I desire to listen to in prog-metal.
-
Somehow, Dream Theater is really the only prog-metal band that excites me anymore. I know a lot of people give them shit and hate their new stuff, crap on Mangini, say JLB can't sing live (I agree but don't care), but I listen to other new prog-metal and none of it clicks. It's just the same djenty-influenced bullshit over and over again. My tastes generally linger in the prog-rock, extreme metal, pop, or indie realm but Dream Theater is ultimately the only one I desire to listen to in prog-metal.
Same here. I'm more into classic metal and folk influenced stuff, sure, the occasional prog act like Symphony X here and there is fine, but I have really no urge the explore the prog metal scene. Dream Theater satisfy alone 99% of my needs in that kind of music.
-
Somehow, Dream Theater is really the only prog-metal band that excites me anymore. I know a lot of people give them shit and hate their new stuff, crap on Mangini, say JLB can't sing live (I agree but don't care), but I listen to other new prog-metal and none of it clicks. It's just the same djenty-influenced bullshit over and over again. My tastes generally linger in the prog-rock, extreme metal, pop, or indie realm but Dream Theater is ultimately the only one I desire to listen to in prog-metal.
How about Opeth?
-
IMO Use Your Illusion 1 and 2 by Gunners are great and underappreciated rocks albums!
Back in Black is a very generic rock album and Brian Johnson's singing sucks.
-
Somehow, Dream Theater is really the only prog-metal band that excites me anymore. I know a lot of people give them shit and hate their new stuff, crap on Mangini, say JLB can't sing live (I agree but don't care), but I listen to other new prog-metal and none of it clicks. It's just the same djenty-influenced bullshit over and over again. My tastes generally linger in the prog-rock, extreme metal, pop, or indie realm but Dream Theater is ultimately the only one I desire to listen to in prog-metal.
How about Opeth?
I liked them until Heritage and then completely lost interest with their new direction. It has nothing to do with lack of growling, they just got extremely boring without the heavy/clean aspect of their music.
-
Blondie's Eat To The Beat is a GREAT album. Made Honorable Mention on my Top 50.
-
Somehow, Dream Theater is really the only prog-metal band that excites me anymore. I know a lot of people give them shit and hate their new stuff, crap on Mangini, say JLB can't sing live (I agree but don't care), but I listen to other new prog-metal and none of it clicks. It's just the same djenty-influenced bullshit over and over again. My tastes generally linger in the prog-rock, extreme metal, pop, or indie realm but Dream Theater is ultimately the only one I desire to listen to in prog-metal.
Same here. I'm more into classic metal and folk influenced stuff, sure, the occasional prog act like Symphony X here and there is fine, but I have really no urge the explore the prog metal scene. Dream Theater satisfy alone 99% of my needs in that kind of music.
Even Symphony X never really did it for me even though they tick off most of the same boxes as DT. The only other prog-metal album I've heard recently that really blew me away is Legends Of The Shires by Threshold. Fantastic album with really catchy melodies.
-
Somehow, Dream Theater is really the only prog-metal band that excites me anymore. I know a lot of people give them shit and hate their new stuff, crap on Mangini, say JLB can't sing live (I agree but don't care), but I listen to other new prog-metal and none of it clicks. It's just the same djenty-influenced bullshit over and over again. My tastes generally linger in the prog-rock, extreme metal, pop, or indie realm but Dream Theater is ultimately the only one I desire to listen to in prog-metal.
Yeah, I honestly agree with most of this. The only prog-metal bands I listen to frequently nowadays are Dream Theater, Haken, Ne Obliviscaris, TesseracT, and Ayreon (with a little bit of older Opeth, Meshuggah, Porcupine Tree, Tool, and Symphony X). Even then, two of them border on extreme metal. I've checked out a lot of newer albums, but most of them don't stick in my listening outside of one or two songs because even if they're good, they just sound like a fusion of a bunch of other different prog-metal bands instead of having their own original sound.
My unpopular opinions:
* Pop isn't as bad as people say it is
* Mozart is literally some of the most boring music ever written (his last two symphonies, Don Giovanni, and requiem being exceptions)
* Brahms too
* Disco is actually fantastic. Don't @ me.
* Bands randomly quoting pieces of classical music without any sensible reason (usually prog-metal bands) is beyond annoying
* I still think Slayer's Reign in Blood is unlistenable, though I respect its impact
* Ditto for Bitches Brew
* Sometimes it feels like there's only 10 metal riffs in existence and bands just keep reusing them constantly
* Muse's recent albums (Drones excepted) are all really good
* Audio Video Disco is Justice's best album
* Modern prog in general is really boring
* I don't actually like The Wall (mostly for the extremely cynical lyrics, I have no problems with the music)
* All three Nightwish lead singers were very good
* Solos tend to be my least favorite part about rock and metal songs
* Hans Zimmer is also really boring most of the time
-
* Pop isn't as bad as people say it is
What sucks about pop is the arrangements, the production and the instruments used to play the songs, especially when it's not even an instrument but something electronic made with a computer. There's nothing wrong with a good, memorable hook and there are gazillion of rock and metal covers out there who shows that, when you use real instruments and sometimes real singers and not autotuned ones, a song changes completely face.
-
* Pop isn't as bad as people say it is
What sucks about pop is the arrangements, the production and the instruments used to play the songs, especially when it's not even an instrument but something electronic made with a computer. There's nothing wrong with a good, memorable hook and there are gazillion of rock and metal covers out there who shows that, when you use real instruments and sometimes real singers and not autotuned ones, a song changes completely face.
Eh, idk if I agree with that. Most of the metal and rock covers I've heard of pop songs tend to fall flat because the melody/lyrics and accompaniment are trying to do two different things (the melody is bright, happy, and energetic, and the acc. is more aggressive).
Autotune and Melodyne get a looooot more flack than they deserve imo, because even for a trained musician it's hard to detect autotuning unless it's done really poorly. I will, however, concede that the mixing and mastering on pop songs tends to leave a lot to be desired.
-
Yeah, of course it depends and sometimes many bands overblow it and make an unintended parody of the song trying to force it at all costs into the genre they play (I still shudder at the memory of a power metal cover from can'tremember of Moonlight Shadow...), but if done right, it improves the song.
One example that comes into my mind is Bad Romance - I respect Lady Gaga as a singer and songwriter but her style simply isn't mine. But the cover Halestorm made of that song gave it a completely new feel, almost as if they were the actual songwriters, and it's simply awesome.
-
AC/DC sucks.
is this controversial though
-
* Pop isn't as bad as people say it is
What sucks about pop is the arrangements, the production and the instruments used to play the songs, especially when it's not even an instrument but something electronic made with a computer. There's nothing wrong with a good, memorable hook and there are gazillion of rock and metal covers out there who shows that, when you use real instruments and sometimes real singers and not autotuned ones, a song changes completely face.
Bad Romance is probably the best song ever made ngl
I think saying music can't be good without real instruments is pretty narrow-minded though
-
I guess it's not that controversial as others have already brought up similar feelings but:
For a music genre that was basically based around the idea of pushing boundaries and doing new innovative things, progressive rock & metal has become incredibly stale and lackluster. It's been quite a few years since a new prog band really blew me away and it seems at best what we get is a pretty good re-packaging of already familiar ideas when someone like Steven Wilson puts out a new album. I will still check out new albums by the bands I like and any new bands that get some hype but the genre has just become very safe. If you want to find new exciting music, progressive rock/metal isn't the place for it currently.
-
My unpopular opinions:
* Pop isn't as bad as people say it is
It depends on what pop we are talking about. If we're talking about some 80's pop stuff, esp. an artist such as Prince, that's fine, there are quality stuff that we can find. But today's pop is just commerce without artistic substance and lacks a musical quality.
-
So much negativity in these threads. Turns largely into who can we say sucks that other people might like.
- Lady Gaga is one of my favorite artists and I absolutely love all of her albums (some more than others)
- Halestorm is an insanely good rock band (minus that one album)
- Muse is extremely creative and a lot of fun to listen to
- Flying Colors' 2nd album is really good (minus the first track)
- Stadler isn't ALWAYS wrong (but don't tell him I said that)
- Annete was a good Nightwish singer, and needs a great solo act.
-
Music is not 100% purely subjective. But neither is it 100% purely objective either.
There is a blurry line that moves around alot (and is different for each person) where objectivity fades into subjectivity and vice versa. You can't define where the line is, but neither can you deny the line exists. Unless you lack the capacity of abstract thought. :angel: :angel: :angel: ;D
-
Music is not 100% purely subjective. But neither is it 100% purely objective either.
There is a blurry line that moves around alot (and is different for each person) where objectivity fades into subjectivity and vice versa. You can't define where the line is, but neither can you deny the line exists. Unless you lack the capacity of abstract thought. :angel: :angel: :angel: ;D
Yes and no.
Music can be objective, but you CAN find the line. Length, number of notes, speed, etc. Anything objectively measurable. Anything else is 100% subjective. You're going to have to give up this fight. And saying it's all about abstract though is also wrong.
For instance, I can't say that sometimes air is dirt and sometimes mountains are pigeons, but it takes an abstract mind to see it. I'd just be wrong.
-
So much negativity in these threads. Turns largely into who can we say sucks that other people might like.
- Lady Gaga is one of my favorite artists and I absolutely love all of her albums (some more than others)
- Halestorm is an insanely good rock band (minus that one album)
- Muse is extremely creative and a lot of fun to listen to
- Flying Colors' 2nd album is really good (minus the first track)
- Stadler isn't ALWAYS wrong (but don't tell him I said that)
- Annete was a good Nightwish singer, and needs a great solo act.
You forgot to add your one negative, controversial opinion that you've said before on one of my threads: "Pachelbel's Canon in D sucks". If you were serious. ;D
-
So much negativity in these threads. Turns largely into who can we say sucks that other people might like.
- Lady Gaga is one of my favorite artists and I absolutely love all of her albums (some more than others)
- Halestorm is an insanely good rock band (minus that one album)
- Muse is extremely creative and a lot of fun to listen to
- Flying Colors' 2nd album is really good (minus the first track)
- Stadler isn't ALWAYS wrong (but don't tell him I said that)
- Annete was a good Nightwish singer, and needs a great solo act.
You forgot to add your one negative, controversial opinion that you've said before on one of my threads: "Pachelbel's Canon in D sucks". If you were serious. ;D
100% serious. Hate that song. Was just trying to keep it mostly positive to outweigh the largely negative thread. I have plenty of negative opinions, but meh.
-
So much negativity in these threads. Turns largely into who can we say sucks that other people might like.
- Lady Gaga is one of my favorite artists and I absolutely love all of her albums (some more than others)
- Halestorm is an insanely good rock band (minus that one album)
- Muse is extremely creative and a lot of fun to listen to
- Flying Colors' 2nd album is really good (minus the first track)
- Stadler isn't ALWAYS wrong (but don't tell him I said that)
- Annete was a good Nightwish singer, and needs a great solo act.
You forgot to add your one negative, controversial opinion that you've said before on one of my threads: "Pachelbel's Canon in D sucks". If you were serious. ;D
100% serious. Hate that song. Was just trying to keep it mostly positive to outweigh the largely negative thread. I have plenty of negative opinions, but meh.
I'm guessing you play cello or used to play it?
My unpopular opinions:
* Pop isn't as bad as people say it is
It depends on what pop we are talking about. If we're talking about some 80's pop stuff, esp. an artist such as Prince, that's fine, there are quality stuff that we can find. But today's pop is just commerce without artistic substance and lacks a musical quality.
How would you define "artistic substance" and "a musical quality"? How would modern pop differ from 80s pop in terms of commercialization? Or classic rock? Or prog-metal? Isn't every form of popular music just commerce, technically? It's specifically targeted towards a certain demographic in order to sell units and make money so that the artist doesn't starve to death.
-
Would love to play Cello, and I see exactly why you'd ask me, but no I don't know how to play cello. But I assume I hate it for similar reasons.
-
For a music genre that was basically based around the idea of pushing boundaries and doing new innovative things, progressive rock & metal has become incredibly stale and lackluster. It's been quite a few years since a new prog band really blew me away and it seems at best what we get is a pretty good re-packaging of already familiar ideas when someone like Steven Wilson puts out a new album. I will still check out new albums by the bands I like and any new bands that get some hype but the genre has just become very safe. If you want to find new exciting music, progressive rock/metal isn't the place for it currently.
Definitely this. Although I have some hope for Bent Knee, as a whole prog has become very stagnant and I don't listen to it anymore outside the artists I already know.
My unpopular opinions:
* Pop isn't as bad as people say it is
It depends on what pop we are talking about. If we're talking about some 80's pop stuff, esp. an artist such as Prince, that's fine, there are quality stuff that we can find. But today's pop is just commerce without artistic substance and lacks a musical quality.
How would you define "artistic substance" and "a musical quality"? How would modern pop differ from 80s pop in terms of commercialization? Or classic rock? Or prog-metal? Isn't every form of popular music just commerce, technically? It's specifically targeted towards a certain demographic in order to sell units and make money so that the artist doesn't starve to death.
I think that in the 80s just there were plenty of very successful pop artists that were very interested in pushing the limits of what pop music could be and ended up with very creative music that also sold like crazy, like Kate Bush and Talk Talk for instance. Although there's quality pop these days, it's not really as successful and prominent as it used to be.
-
Tears For Fears
XTC
Simple Minds
Big Country
The Fixx
Ect.....
-
You forgot to add your one negative, controversial opinion that you've said before on one of my threads: "Pachelbel's Canon in D sucks". If you were serious. ;D
100% serious. Hate that song. Was just trying to keep it mostly positive to outweigh the largely negative thread. I have plenty of negative opinions, but meh.
I'm guessing you play cello or used to play it?
:clap:
-
For a music genre that was basically based around the idea of pushing boundaries and doing new innovative things, progressive rock & metal has become incredibly stale and lackluster. It's been quite a few years since a new prog band really blew me away and it seems at best what we get is a pretty good re-packaging of already familiar ideas when someone like Steven Wilson puts out a new album. I will still check out new albums by the bands I like and any new bands that get some hype but the genre has just become very safe. If you want to find new exciting music, progressive rock/metal isn't the place for it currently.
Definitely this. Although I have some hope for Bent Knee, as a whole prog has become very stagnant and I don't listen to it anymore outside the artists I already know.
My unpopular opinions:
* Pop isn't as bad as people say it is
It depends on what pop we are talking about. If we're talking about some 80's pop stuff, esp. an artist such as Prince, that's fine, there are quality stuff that we can find. But today's pop is just commerce without artistic substance and lacks a musical quality.
How would you define "artistic substance" and "a musical quality"? How would modern pop differ from 80s pop in terms of commercialization? Or classic rock? Or prog-metal? Isn't every form of popular music just commerce, technically? It's specifically targeted towards a certain demographic in order to sell units and make money so that the artist doesn't starve to death.
I think that in the 80s just there were plenty of very successful pop artists that were very interested in pushing the limits of what pop music could be and ended up with very creative music that also sold like crazy, like Kate Bush and Talk Talk for instance. Although there's quality pop these days, it's not really as successful and prominent as it used to be.
Except, "Contrary to current theories of musical evolution, then, we find no evidence for the progressive homogenization of music in the charts and little sign of diversity cycles within the 50 year time frame of our study. Instead, the evolution of chart diversity is dominated by historically unique events: the rise and fall of particular ways of making music." (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4453253/) and the 1980s were one of the most musically and lyrically homogeneous period of music in the past half-century, with the 00s being one of the most diverse. For comparison, here's (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izGwDsrQ1eQ) what was #1 in the US this week 1985 and here's (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2SDInk6voA)what was #1 in the UK. Aaaand here's (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NDjt4FzFWY) what was #1 in the US in 1986 this week. It wouldn't be hard to find a couple hundred dozen songs that sound eerily similar to these three.
Kate Bush herself only had 1 #1 hit in the UK and 1 on the US Modern Rock chart. Nowadays you also have loads of musically innovative pop artists like Lorde, Sufjan Stevens, Marina and the Diamonds, Frank Ocean, etc. They tend to have similar histories on the charts. When looking back at history, we tend to only see the good stuff that survived and forget all the mediocre stuff that was around those times. It's true of the 1980s, the 1870s, the 1760s, and the 1650s.
Would love to play Cello, and I see exactly why you'd ask me, but no I don't know how to play cello. But I assume I hate it for similar reasons.
That's fair, the bassline for Canon in D is infamous as being one of the most boring in the history of classical music and the harmony could be ripped straight from a freshman music student's chorale. But that violin theme is straight up fire_emoji.png I ain't gonna lie
-
Would love to play Cello, and I see exactly why you'd ask me, but no I don't know how to play cello. But I assume I hate it for similar reasons.
Maybe you never listen and generally don't care for classical music at all? Are there any classical pieces that you dig?
I rarely listen to classical music, but Canon in D is one of the few classical pieces that I love to listen, and it's shorter than most other famous pieces.
-
I love classical music. I am not as up on the composers and their works, but Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms, Bach, Wagner, Holst, even older music like Tallis. Love it all. When I'm in the car and don't have my Ipod, I usually have it on a classical station.
Just hate Cannon in D.
-
This thread has great potential!
I think Guns ‘n Roses is an annoying band and I would be very content with never hearing Sweet Child of Mine in particular ever again.
Rosanno by Toto is one of the grooviest songs ever and it’s so underrated for that feat. I love it and I can’t fathom why Africa or Hold the Line are seemingly infinitely more popular.
By the way, Toto is stupidly underrated anyway.
Lots of heavy metal music is very boring and similar.
Can You Hear What I'm Saying by Toto gives me goosebumps every time I hear it. Their instrumentation was fabulous.
-
I'll add something else. I don't think Nickelback and Creed deserved the hatred on the internet they received during their heydays. They are no worst than the stuff I hear on Sirius XM Octane or Turbo on a regular basis. Those bands actually have some pretty decent-to-great songs. Heck, I would rather hear Nickelback or Creed on Octane or Turbo rather than the Godsmack, Korn, Rob Zombie, or Marilyn Manson stuff that those stations feel like they need to play all the friken time.
-
I'll add something else. I don't think Nickelback and Creed deserved the hatred on the internet they received during their heydays. They are no worst than the stuff I hear on Sirus XM Octane or Turbo on a regular basis. Those bands actually have some pretty decent-to-great songs. Heck, I would rather hear Nickelback or Creed on Octane or Turbo rather than the Godsmack, Korn, Rob Zombie, or Marilyn Manson stuff that those stations feel like they need to play all the friken time.
I haven't listened to much Nickelback, but I love Creed. Not all of their stuff, mind you, but every album has good songs, and some albums are pretty awesome straight through.
-
I guess it's not that controversial as others have already brought up similar feelings but:
For a music genre that was basically based around the idea of pushing boundaries and doing new innovative things, progressive rock & metal has become incredibly stale and lackluster. It's been quite a few years since a new prog band really blew me away and it seems at best what we get is a pretty good re-packaging of already familiar ideas when someone like Steven Wilson puts out a new album. I will still check out new albums by the bands I like and any new bands that get some hype but the genre has just become very safe. If you want to find new exciting music, progressive rock/metal isn't the place for it currently.
I think there is merit to this view, but I also have the following potentially controversial opinion that might push back on an aspect of this, although I'm not ascribing to you the view I'm criticizing below:
I think the idea of "new ideas" is too often treated as an automatic good. Like, any "new, innovative" idea is automatically good because it is new. But, very often, when I hear the newer artists who are praised for having "new, innovative ideas," I do not enjoy it because I do not think the ideas are good. I react something like "yeah, there's a reason no one did this before!" In particular, I'm thinking here of atonal, amelodic stuff that is sometimes thrown into music and treated as some great new innovation. Yeah, it's new, but it's bad. I'd vastly prefer to have a prog album with good but unoriginal melodies over that sort of "novelty."
This is part of what informs my take on SDOIT, which is widely praised as being "experimental" and "innovative," but where most of the "experimental" stuff I hear is stuff like the Misunderstood outro.
-
Music is not 100% purely subjective. But neither is it 100% purely objective either.
There is a blurry line that moves around alot (and is different for each person) where objectivity fades into subjectivity and vice versa. You can't define where the line is, but neither can you deny the line exists. Unless you lack the capacity of abstract thought. :angel: :angel: :angel: ;D
A blurry line that moves around and is different for each person is like, definitionally subjective. You're just describing subjectivity.
-
I guess it's not that controversial as others have already brought up similar feelings but:
For a music genre that was basically based around the idea of pushing boundaries and doing new innovative things, progressive rock & metal has become incredibly stale and lackluster. It's been quite a few years since a new prog band really blew me away and it seems at best what we get is a pretty good re-packaging of already familiar ideas when someone like Steven Wilson puts out a new album. I will still check out new albums by the bands I like and any new bands that get some hype but the genre has just become very safe. If you want to find new exciting music, progressive rock/metal isn't the place for it currently.
I think there is merit to this view, but I also have the following potentially controversial opinion that might push back on an aspect of this, although I'm not ascribing to you the view I'm criticizing below:
I think the idea of "new ideas" is too often treated as an automatic good. Like, any "new, innovative" idea is automatically good because it is new. But, very often, when I hear the newer artists who are praised for having "new, innovative ideas," I do not enjoy it because I do not think the ideas are good. I react something like "yeah, there's a reason no one did this before!" In particular, I'm thinking here of atonal, amelodic stuff that is sometimes thrown into music and treated as some great new innovation. Yeah, it's new, but it's bad. I'd vastly prefer to have a prog album with good but unoriginal melodies over that sort of "novelty."
This is part of what informs my take on SDOIT, which is widely praised as being "experimental" and "innovative," but where most of the "experimental" stuff I hear is stuff like the Misunderstood outro.
New ideas doesn't have to be good indeed. I guess for me I'm the type of person always on the lookout for new sounds, new ideas and as soon as I hear "this band sounds like band X and Y" it makes me a bit skeptic right away. But I know people who are the opposite who prefers their music a certain way and that's fine too. When it comes to a band following their formula that made them successful I'm perfectly fine with that as long as they deliver quality, when it comes to new discoveries I do want some uniqueness to go with it though. And that's kinda the issue I have with prog is many of the newer bands sound very similar to other bands.
-
Except, "Contrary to current theories of musical evolution, then, we find no evidence for the progressive homogenization of music in the charts and little sign of diversity cycles within the 50 year time frame of our study. Instead, the evolution of chart diversity is dominated by historically unique events: the rise and fall of particular ways of making music." (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4453253/) and the 1980s were one of the most musically and lyrically homogeneous period of music in the past half-century, with the 00s being one of the most diverse. For comparison, here's (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izGwDsrQ1eQ) what was #1 in the US this week 1985 and here's (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2SDInk6voA)what was #1 in the UK. Aaaand here's (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NDjt4FzFWY) what was #1 in the US in 1986 this week. It wouldn't be hard to find a couple hundred dozen songs that sound eerily similar to these three.
Kate Bush herself only had 1 #1 hit in the UK and 1 on the US Modern Rock chart. Nowadays you also have loads of musically innovative pop artists like Lorde, Sufjan Stevens, Marina and the Diamonds, Frank Ocean, etc. They tend to have similar histories on the charts. When looking back at history, we tend to only see the good stuff that survived and forget all the mediocre stuff that was around those times. It's true of the 1980s, the 1870s, the 1760s, and the 1650s.
That's a pretty interesting study that I'll read closer, but I'm afraid it's only covering until the 2000s, which I'd agree was very diverse in terms of popular music (damn I get nostalgic for those days). Rather, my point wasn't that all 80s pop music was amazing - there was much trash we've forgotten, and we've done the same for every decade.
Yet I feel that it wasn't hard to find pop music that was very creative and sold like crazy back, that's why I mentioned Kate Bush - her most iconic album, Hounds of Love, has both sides, one being a pretty good collection of simple pop songs while the other one a conceptual, almost operatic album about a woman drowning. It's a wonderful album featuring cello, guitar, piano, a choir, traditional Irish instruments, but also sampling, synths, and drum machines.
I'm not arguing that Sufjan Stevens (I love his work), or Frank Ocean aren't making innovative pop, but rather that they're not massive and never will fill stadiums and get much radio time, and I'm fine with that. I just don't really like most big pop music these days, like Lana del Rey, Taylor Swift, Adele, Lorde, CHVRCHES, Muse, etc :P. I also think it's interesting to see the big rise in hip-hop and trap these days, and in a way I'm not interested in seeing rock making a comeback at all.
-
Yeah, unfortunately there aren't more studies of and dissertations based on pop music. Academia is usually a bit slow on figuring out that "oh wait there's a new genre of music" (jazz didn't start entering into academia until the late 60s/early 70s, iirc). Clercq and Temperley's "A Corpus Analysis of Rock Harmony" (https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f740/94060afe718a7304c0bf69496ddbb8dfbf67.pdf) is another good one; it focuses on using statistical analysis to determine what's actually going on in pop and rock harmony. It's a hugely influential essay for me as a music theorist, and it helped me appreciate what's going on in a lot of pop music much more once I understood that the rules were different from what I was used to lol. As far as edutainment lighter stuff, Todd in the Shadows (https://www.youtube.com/user/carlos10009) is a good critic to watch and Holistic Songwriting (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLdJiGmD0fTvt3JLduOjR0lvoQ82ek461u) does a fantastic job on using some theory and industry knowledge for breaking down pop and rock artists. Understanding breeds familiarity, familiarity breeds enjoyment, and enjoyment breeds more understanding!
Back to your main point, tho, I think it's important to remember that there was overall less music being produced and released then. The last 20 years or so have democratized music and boosted the population to such an extreme degree that there's an absurd amount of music being produced nowadays. It's not that there's less good experimental and left-field music pop music being made (there's a lot more of it now), it's just that there's a lot more stuff out there that's competing for your attention. And, as usual, most of it is mediocre.
Even arguing for popularity, a lot of these more experimental outings are incredibly popular. Radiohead's last album was massive on social media when its first single was released, FO's Blonde hit #1 and has spent 116 weeks on the chart, Kendrick Lamar/Kanye/Tool are pretty much household names, etc. etc. Heck, Snarky Puppy and Joey Alexander have gotten a lot of attention and Dream Theater hit the Top 10 with The freaking Astonishing. Even major artists like Katy Perry are having trouble putting butts in seats because it's 2019 and everyone is still poor and honestly pop is in a temporary slump outside of Taylor Swift (because of sad rap becoming the "musical embodiment of the zeitgeist" of the last 5 years).
-
Trying to get off the nerdy analysis an dback on track....
Regarding Ayreon:
* Into the Electric Castle is one of Aryeon's worst releases. The male vocal parts bring it down immensely, especially the Roman and the Barbarian.
* The Human Equation is hampered by too many medicore vocal parts and disparate musical sections.
-
On the G n'R front:
Chinese Democracy is actually a rather good album. If they'd have released it in the 90s, everyone would have loved it and ranted about how great it was. It's only the fact it took 16 years and infinity-squillion dollars to make that turn it into a joke. The music itself is excellent.
-
Yeah, unfortunately there aren't more studies of and dissertations based on pop music. Academia is usually a bit slow on figuring out that "oh wait there's a new genre of music" (jazz didn't start entering into academia until the late 60s/early 70s, iirc). Clercq and Temperley's "A Corpus Analysis of Rock Harmony" (https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f740/94060afe718a7304c0bf69496ddbb8dfbf67.pdf) is another good one; it focuses on using statistical analysis to determine what's actually going on in pop and rock harmony. It's a hugely influential essay for me as a music theorist, and it helped me appreciate what's going on in a lot of pop music much more once I understood that the rules were different from what I was used to lol. As far as edutainment lighter stuff, Todd in the Shadows (https://www.youtube.com/user/carlos10009) is a good critic to watch and Holistic Songwriting (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLdJiGmD0fTvt3JLduOjR0lvoQ82ek461u) does a fantastic job on using some theory and industry knowledge for breaking down pop and rock artists. Understanding breeds familiarity, familiarity breeds enjoyment, and enjoyment breeds more understanding!
Back to your main point, tho, I think it's important to remember that there was overall less music being produced and released then. The last 20 years or so have democratized music and boosted the population to such an extreme degree that there's an absurd amount of music being produced nowadays. It's not that there's less good experimental and left-field music pop music being made (there's a lot more of it now), it's just that there's a lot more stuff out there that's competing for your attention. And, as usual, most of it is mediocre.
Even arguing for popularity, a lot of these more experimental outings are incredibly popular. Radiohead's last album was massive on social media when its first single was released, FO's Blonde hit #1 and has spent 116 weeks on the chart, Kendrick Lamar/Kanye/Tool are pretty much household names, etc. etc. Heck, Snarky Puppy and Joey Alexander have gotten a lot of attention and Dream Theater hit the Top 10 with The freaking Astonishing. Even major artists like Katy Perry are having trouble putting butts in seats because it's 2019 and everyone is still poor and honestly pop is in a temporary slump outside of Taylor Swift (because of sad rap becoming the "musical embodiment of the zeitgeist" of the last 5 years).
Ed Sheeran's popularity today vexes me.
-
Rather, my point wasn't that all 80s pop music was amazing - there was much trash we've forgotten, and we've done the same for every decade.
I'm not arguing that Sufjan Stevens (I love his work), or Frank Ocean aren't making innovative pop, but rather that they're not massive and never will fill stadiums and get much radio time, and I'm fine with that. I just don't really like most big pop music these days, like Lana del Rey, Taylor Swift, Adele, Lorde, CHVRCHES, Muse, etc :P.
In the 21st century there is no mainstream, commercial pop album that is the same league with 80's pop classics as Thriller and Purple Rain.
-
In the 21st century there is no mainstream, commercial pop album that is the same league with 80's pop classics as Thriller and Purple Rain.
(https://media.giphy.com/media/K0AnEB2t2EM/giphy.gif)
-
Slow songs are boring.
-
The Haken vocalist sounds like Shikira.. I find him unbearable and the sole reason why I do not listen to them!
-
Rather, my point wasn't that all 80s pop music was amazing - there was much trash we've forgotten, and we've done the same for every decade.
I'm not arguing that Sufjan Stevens (I love his work), or Frank Ocean aren't making innovative pop, but rather that they're not massive and never will fill stadiums and get much radio time, and I'm fine with that. I just don't really like most big pop music these days, like Lana del Rey, Taylor Swift, Adele, Lorde, CHVRCHES, Muse, etc :P.
In the 21st century there is no mainstream, commercial pop album that is the same league with 80's pop classics as Thriller and Purple Rain.
Pishaw on that. "1989" by Taylor Swift will absolutely be remembered in that group, ten years from now.
-
Music is not 100% purely subjective. But neither is it 100% purely objective either.
There is a blurry line that moves around alot (and is different for each person) where objectivity fades into subjectivity and vice versa. You can't define where the line is, but neither can you deny the line exists. Unless you lack the capacity of abstract thought. :angel: :angel: :angel: ;D
With total respect, I agree with the first sentence, but not the second paragraph. The line may be fuzzy, and we may not agree on the line, but it's not moving and it's not different. The only difference between "objectivity" and "subjectivity" is a third party standard.
If we ask "what is the best album of all time?" and leave it open to interpretation, it's subjective. If we say "what is the best album of all time?" and say "best, as defined by albums sold", it's objective. Now, we can argue about whether "albums sold" is the right standard, and we can propose other standards, but as long as we are weighing in on a third party standard, it is objective.
This is the difference between opinion and criticism (in the classical sense). Good critics, in their work, lay out the standards they are using, and how they weight a work against that standard. Bad critics (and 99% of the internet) simply spew opinions ("It's awesome, because I got a boner while listening to it!"), which, in my view, are useless.
-
Stranger in Us All is way better than any JLT-fronted material Rainbow has released.
Is it controversial? it's not that hard to beat all that commercial "Hey please USA market look at me" crap Blackmore put out after firing Dio.
My controversial opinion? "Bent Out Of Shape" is Rainbow's second best studio album (of course behind Rising) and "Fire Dance" is better than any Dio Rainbow song not named "Stargazer". I think the problem with JLT Rainbow is that few people bothered with the deeper tracks after hearing "Stone Cold" and "Street of Dreams".
-
I hate Greta Van Fleet, even though i've never heard them.
-
If we ask "what is the best album of all time?" and leave it open to interpretation, it's subjective. If we say "what is the best album of all time?" and say "best, as defined by albums sold", it's objective. Now, we can argue about whether "albums sold" is the right standard, and we can propose other standards, but as long as we are weighing in on a third party standard, it is objective.
Impact is a much better standard than album sales. Pet Sounds is not a big seller, but it's one of the most impactful albums ever. That's probably a main reason why that album is featured on most "Greatest albums of all time" lists.
-
I don't think sales would ever be a good measuring stone for quality because with that reasoning something like the cheeseburger at mcdonalds would be the best burger in the world. Then again I don't subscribe to the idea that opinions can be twisted and turned into right or wrong. There's so many different types of music out there and people get different things from it. To me I have no issues with a person who listens to the exact opposite music as me, but I do take offense with the person trying to tell me that there's music "objectively" better than what I enjoy. Whether it's band popularity or sales or album ratings on RYM/Sputnikmusic or something else, there's a lot of factors that played into why some bands got a big break and some didn't that go beyond just quality. Right place right time, so on.
Worst thing that comes to mind are those often shared FB pictures like "it took this effort to make this prog song VS look how simple this pop song is" which is always shared and liked by people who are biased to begin with which makes it pointless. In the end music is about making us feel something (happiness, sadness, anger, whatever it may be) and if you get that out of a 20 minute song with complex time changes and long solos OR a 3 minute pop song with a catchy chorus you end up singing in the shower, it makes the discussion "whats objectively the best" just a waste of time.
-
I wouldn't argue with either of the previous two posts (especially the second one), but the point is, you've set the standard, so it's no longer "subjective". We CAN measure impact, we CAN measure record sales, even if it's next to impossible to do so to a sufficient accuracy.
-
For me in the 70's a lot of the popular music was written by the artist. Now, it's written buy someone else and that always irked me. I'm not saying every decade didn't have someone who had songs written for them but the percentages were a lot lower.
In the 80's that changed when bands were forced to use outside writers more.
-
Lots of pop have been written by outside writers.
I get that it can be annoying, but let's not forget classical music. Orchestras don't write their own material either. Though I guess a big difference is we're celebrating the composer, and with pop we rarely have any idea who writes what and we only celebrate the performer. Hm.
But even going with people like Frank Sinatra, I'm pretty sure they rarely, if ever, wrote their own stuff.
-
Most of the 50's had outside writers for sure and hell, had musicians play their music.
-
Most of the 50's had outside writers for sure and hell, had musicians play their music.
Elvis comes to mind regarding this stuff right? He didn't write any of the music or lyrics, or did he?
-
Pop artists have generally had more outside writers doing their stuff, at least through what I've observed over the years. What was really nice about hard rock and metal acts was that they, for the most part, particularly while they were establishing themselves, they wrote it all themselves.
Take Aerosmith. Throughout the 70s, they wrote that stuff themselves. And then in the mid-80s, they started employing outside writers to help polish up their stuff and make it more appealing to a broad audience. It worked. Bon Jovi, sorta the same deal. But they have done it ever since their third album, Slippery When Wet (and the first one was pretty much a Jon solo record).
But metal bands, are at least heavy bands, rarely did it. You might see a co-write with someone here and there, but generally speaking at least for me personally, the fact those bands wrote their own stuff was why I gravitated to them.
Here's a big disappointment. Take Revolution Saints, the band fronted by Deen Castronovo, who put out a couple records on Frontiers. I bought the first one, and then saw the band didn't write the songs. I got rid of it (the physical version). It just takes all the steam out of it for me.
-
Yeah, but the thing most people forget is that these songs are specifically written for the artist most of the time. Like, usually the songwriter and producer have a certain person in mind when they're writing that song. There are some exceptions, ofc, but it's not like they produce a whole bunch of beats and hock them on pop star eBay. How would that be different from the band making and performing a song that was just written by the drummer or guitarist? Or by a former member?
And for group songwriters, I fail to see how that's different from how bands approach writing. You usually have a bunch of songwriters and friends sitting around at a table (including the named artist) throwing out ideas and being like "yeah I like that, but let's try x instead of y". A band would do the same thing. Again, you have exceptions. Taylor Swift and Adele write their own lyrics solo, and Carly Rae Jepsen works with only one other songwriter iirc.
-
I swear there was 1 or more previous topics more or less doing the same thing. But I suspect a Mod deleted them :\
-
Yeah, but the thing most people forget is that these songs are specifically written for the artist most of the time. Like, usually the songwriter and producer have a certain person in mind when they're writing that song. There are some exceptions, ofc, but it's not like they produce a whole bunch of beats and hock them on pop star eBay. How would that be different from the band making and performing a song that was just written by the drummer or guitarist? Or by a former member?
And for group songwriters, I fail to see how that's different from how bands approach writing. You usually have a bunch of songwriters and friends sitting around at a table (including the named artist) throwing out ideas and being like "yeah I like that, but let's try x instead of y". A band would do the same thing. Again, you have exceptions. Taylor Swift and Adele write their own lyrics solo, and Carly Rae Jepsen works with only one other songwriter iirc.
I'm talking about a specific decade where bands and singer songwriters became the popular music. If you look at the Billboard charts in the 70's, that decade had a high % of bands and singer songwriters that were popular music. Every decade has pop start that have music written for them and other like Lady Gaga who write the majority of her much or collaborates with other writers.
I just brought up that specific decade. In the 80's when band's popularity waned record companies forced bands like Cheap Trick, Heart and Areosmith to use outside writers.
-
Yeah, but the thing most people forget is that these songs are specifically written for the artist most of the time. Like, usually the songwriter and producer have a certain person in mind when they're writing that song. There are some exceptions, ofc, but it's not like they produce a whole bunch of beats and hock them on pop star eBay. How would that be different from the band making and performing a song that was just written by the drummer or guitarist? Or by a former member?
And for group songwriters, I fail to see how that's different from how bands approach writing. You usually have a bunch of songwriters and friends sitting around at a table (including the named artist) throwing out ideas and being like "yeah I like that, but let's try x instead of y". A band would do the same thing. Again, you have exceptions. Taylor Swift and Adele write their own lyrics solo, and Carly Rae Jepsen works with only one other songwriter iirc.
Then you have guys like Arjen and Tobias writing their own songs and knowing which singer would suit the song. Example being Mystery of A Blood Red Rose, intended for Meat Loaf which somehow he declined.
Then producers and songwriters have to compromise.
Or, if you want to go hardcore, their is The Monkees.
-
Album Rumours (and Nicks/Buckingham era Fleetwood Mac in general) sucks.
-
Album Rumours (and Nicks/Buckingham era Fleetwood Mac in general) sucks.
I question everything about your though process.
-
i've got a thread-ending opinion:
all music ever made is objectively bad
-
i've got a thread-ending opinion:
all music ever made is objectively bad
Haha...thats more of a thread starting opinion.
Here's one...
Korn is an excellent band. They have a style that is amazing. See You On The Otherside is great record. Since then their albums were iffy, all due to Bryan "Head" Welch leaving. Since he's back, they're back to their older sound which also incorporates newer stuff they learned. Black is The Soul has that old school sound of Issues, Untvouchables and Take a Look in The Mirror, the best 3 run album ever for Korn.
-
I've seen Korn twice, in a club in '95, and an arena in '96, and they have to be one of the worst bands I've ever seen.
-
i've got a thread-ending opinion:
all music ever made is objectively bad
It’s also objectively good. Such is the nature of art.
-
i've got a thread-ending opinion:
all music ever made is objectively bad
It’s also objectively good. Such is the nature of art.
"My mother said I sound like Luther Vandross" - tone deaf loser trying out for American Idol
Some opinions are just wrong.
-
I've seen Korn twice, in a club in '95, and an arena in '96, and they have to be one of the worst bands I've ever seen.
I saw them open for... Ozzy I think it was, and they sucked. In totality, that was one of the worst concerts I've ever seen (at least with big name acts). Ozzy had Joe Holmes with him and it was just... I expected better. And I'm not even talking about Ozzy's singing; I'm used to that at this point. It was short, it was an average set, it was... boring. And Korn was worse than Ozzy, if that's possible.
Other points:
Rumours is as good - or better - than the hype. That's damn close to a perfect record.
Elvis: Double check me, but I believe Elvis had about 10 writing credits, and actually wrote like one or two. Famously, he came up with the phrase "All Shook Up", and another guy wrote the song to that. For the title, Presley got a credit. There are a couple songs he "wrote" with a woman named "Vera Mattox" or "Matson" or something like that, and the songs were actually written by a guy. Elvis wouldn't sing those without getting a 50% writing credit, so the guy added his wife to the song too, because "she didn't write it either".
-
Speaking of Korn, here's another one (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEI3N9kIyP4):
Nu metal and metalcore aren't usually as bad as metalheads say they are. Linkin Park, Korn, Disturbed, etc. all have some pretty bangin' tunes
-
Speaking of Korn, here's another one (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEI3N9kIyP4):
Nu metal and metalcore aren't usually as bad as metalheads say they are. Linkin Park, Korn, Disturbed, etc. all have some pretty bangin' tunes
Adding to that, after seeing Disturbed in January, they put on a great show with decent production values for an arena show and have a good amount of solid songs that people do not give them enough credit for. People only know them due to Down with the Sickness, but Stupify is a solid staple on rock radio as is Voices, The Game, Prayer, their cover of Land of Confusion, Stricken, Ten Thousand Fists, etc. Heck, they were still able to create hits even after the peak of the Nu-metal period ended (Inside the Fire, Indestructible, and their Sound of Silence cover to name a few).
-
Speaking of Korn, here's another one (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEI3N9kIyP4):
Nu metal and metalcore aren't usually as bad as metalheads say they are. Linkin Park, Korn, Disturbed, etc. all have some pretty bangin' tunes
Adding to that, after seeing Disturbed in January, they put on a great show with decent production values for an arena show and have a good amount of solid songs that people do not give them enough credit for. People only know them due to Down with the Sickness, but Stupify is a solid staple on rock radio as is Voices, The Game, Prayer, their cover of Land of Confusion, Stricken, Ten Thousand Fists, etc. Heck, they were still able to create hits even after the peak of the Nu-metal period ended (Inside the Fire, Indestructible, and their Sound of Silence cover to name a few).
I'm no Disturbed fan at all, but I have to say that cover of Sound of Silence is killer.
-
It might be controversial but I absolutely hate the Disturbed cover of Sound of Silence. The original is great because it's so subdued and quiet and the level of emotion in it is so great and then the cover is just this big bombastic power ballad with vocals overdoing it to the top. But I know some people love it so maybe it's just me.
-
It might be controversial but I absolutely hate the Disturbed cover of Sound of Silence. The original is great because it's so subdued and quiet and the level of emotion in it is so great and then the cover is just this big bombastic power ballad with vocals overdoing it to the top. But I know some people love it so maybe it's just me.
I get both perspectives. I'm not super attached to the original, so I don't care if they change it, but it definitely feels SO overproduced to the point of sounding manufactured.
I probably feel the way you do about this, with Space Dye Vest. I really did not like when DT played it recently. Not at all. For similar reasons as you not liking SoS.
-
It might be controversial but I absolutely hate the Disturbed cover of Sound of Silence. The original is great because it's so subdued and quiet and the level of emotion in it is so great and then the cover is just this big bombastic power ballad with vocals overdoing it to the top. But I know some people love it so maybe it's just me.
Believe it or not, I totally get that opinion. Totally. But for some reason it clicked with me.
-
I swear there was 1 or more previous topics more or less doing the same thing. But I suspect a Mod deleted them :\
correction.
It was not deleted
https://www.dreamtheaterforums.org/boards/index.php?topic=48430.0
-
The Rolling Stones are the most over rated band in popular musical history. Arse. They have an albums worth of ok stuff, I guess, but I'm being generous. Jagger's an unbelievably annoying baffoon and Richards seems to love himself for some reason. It dumbfounds me how so many quote one of their albums as the best of all time.
ABBA on the other hand are amazing, and better than either the Stones or Beatles.
-
In one facebook rock fans group someone posted this question: "Name a better 3 musician band than Rush, if you can" and one man responded with a big list of trio bands including Blink 182 and Green Day.
Even if someone is a big Rush hater I don't get how he can have an opinion that Blink 182 and Green Day are a 'better 3 musician bands' than Rush.
His statement was extremely controversial and objectively wrong.
-
Well what do you expect, the only Rush song he ever heard is probably Tom Sawyer.
-
God dammit no more objectivity vs subjectivity stuff!
Can this be a rule on the forum? Anytime someone states that art (or anything else) can be objectively good or bad, it's just deleted.
-
I started to get interested in music thanks to Green Day's American Idiot and then became fan of Blink-182 and other pop-punk bands. And to be honest, while I don't listen to much of those bands anymore and I do enjoy some Rush (I think A Farewell To King, Permanent Waves and Grace Under Pressure are great), if you were to ask me to make a top 50 of my favorite albums I can say that American Idiot and Blink-182 self-titled album would rank above any Rush album (I guess that's pretty controversial :)) Part of it might just be nostalagia, but this person might come from a similar place than me.
-
I started to get interested in music thanks to Green Day's American Idiot and then became fan of Blink-182 and other pop-punk bands. And to be honest, while I don't listen to much of those bands anymore and I do enjoy some Rush (I think A Farewell To King, Permanent Waves and Grace Under Pressure are great), if you were to ask me to make a top 50 of my favorite albums I can say that American Idiot and Blink-182 self-titled album would rank above any Rush album (I guess that's pretty controversial :)) Part of it might just be nostalagia, but this person might come from a similar place than me.
It's unbelievable to me. And yeah, words can't describe how controversial it is. ;D
-
Well what do you expect, the only Rush song he ever heard is probably Tom Sawyer.
Plus, people who are not fans of Rush often really hate them, so they will take any opportunity to demean them. This is not new. :lol :lol
-
I started to get interested in music thanks to Green Day's American Idiot and then became fan of Blink-182 and other pop-punk bands. And to be honest, while I don't listen to much of those bands anymore and I do enjoy some Rush (I think A Farewell To King, Permanent Waves and Grace Under Pressure are great), if you were to ask me to make a top 50 of my favorite albums I can say that American Idiot and Blink-182 self-titled album would rank above any Rush album (I guess that's pretty controversial :)) Part of it might just be nostalagia, but this person might come from a similar place than me.
It's unbelievable to me. And yeah, words can't describe how controversial it is. ;D
I also think that the moment you discover a band plays a big role into that. As I said I didn't really like music music until 2004 when American Idiot came out and it juts blew my mind when I heard it. I got into Blink-182 around the same time. So while I don't listen to them has much now, I still have an emotional connection with those band (especially those two albums I mentionned) that I don't really have with Rush. And I'm saying that with respect to Rush and all they've accomplished as musicians.
-
In one facebook rock fans group someone posted this question: "Name a better 3 musician band than Rush, if you can" and one man responded with a big list of trio bands including Blink 182 and Green Day.
Even if someone is a big Rush hater I don't get how he can have an opinion that Blink 182 and Green Day are a 'better 3 musician bands' than Rush.
His statement was extremely controversial and objectively wrong.
Depends what your standard is.
- Dookie sold 10 million records; Rush does not, to my understanding, have a diamond record. Boom.
- Green Day were first (or second) ballot inductees into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. It took Rush 37 tries. Boom.
-
In one facebook rock fans group someone posted this question: "Name a better 3 musician band than Rush, if you can" and one man responded with a big list of trio bands including Blink 182 and Green Day.
Even if someone is a big Rush hater I don't get how he can have an opinion that Blink 182 and Green Day are a 'better 3 musician bands' than Rush.
His statement was extremely controversial and objectively wrong.
Depends what your standard is.
- Dookie sold 10 million records; Rush does not, to my understanding, have a diamond record. Boom.
- Green Day were first (or second) ballot inductees into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. It took Rush 37 tries. Boom.
1. (Big) Talent
2. Musicianship
3. Songwriting quality
I think these 3 things are much more important than album sales and RnRHoF(does that institution have any credibility?) induction.
For example, one Ed Sheeran album has sold way more copies than Bowie's Blackstar? So what? Does it make it greater than Blackstar? I think not.
-
For example, one Ed Sheeran album has sold way more copies than Bowie's Blackstar? So what? Does it make it greater than Blackstar? I think not.
Actually, to me, it does. I listened to Blackstar and I listened to Ed Sheeran's Divide. I like Divide better. I pegged it as my album of the year for 2017 (although 2017 was not a strong year for me in terms of listening to albums. Also, if I had known better, I would have listened to Nothing More's The Stories We Tell Ourselves when it came out, since that would have been my album of the year for 2017).
-
I'm totally with you; for my money, "influence" is the biggest variable, but that's me. I'm just saying, in all these discussions, you can't assume.
-
In one facebook rock fans group someone posted this question: "Name a better 3 musician band than Rush, if you can" and one man responded with a big list of trio bands including Blink 182 and Green Day.
Even if someone is a big Rush hater I don't get how he can have an opinion that Blink 182 and Green Day are a 'better 3 musician bands' than Rush.
His statement was extremely controversial and objectively wrong.
Depends what your standard is.
- Dookie sold 10 million records; Rush does not, to my understanding, have a diamond record. Boom.
- Green Day were first (or second) ballot inductees into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. It took Rush 37 tries. Boom.
Just take a look at the list of the albums that have gone Diamond, and ask yourself what it really means other than hordes of lemmings buying 1 album for style over substance.
https://www.billboard.com/articles/news/billboard-lists/7526410/diamond-certified-album-riaa-ranked
sorry, but in 50 or even 25 years, nobody is going to be talking about the importance or influence of Dookie, or frankly Green Day.
Green Day are like the Rabbit Maranville of the Rock Hall. Pretty much a flash-in-the-pan for their window of time.
-
you act as if green day only had one really popular/successful album
As someone who isn't really a fan even I know that's not true
-
In one facebook rock fans group someone posted this question: "Name a better 3 musician band than Rush, if you can" and one man responded with a big list of trio bands including Blink 182 and Green Day.
Even if someone is a big Rush hater I don't get how he can have an opinion that Blink 182 and Green Day are a 'better 3 musician bands' than Rush.
His statement was extremely controversial and objectively wrong.
Depends what your standard is.
- Dookie sold 10 million records; Rush does not, to my understanding, have a diamond record. Boom.
- Green Day were first (or second) ballot inductees into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. It took Rush 37 tries. Boom.
Just take a look at the list of the albums that have gone Diamond, and ask yourself what it really means other than hordes of lemmings buying 1 album for style over substance.
https://www.billboard.com/articles/news/billboard-lists/7526410/diamond-certified-album-riaa-ranked
sorry, but in 50 or even 25 years, nobody is going to be talking about the importance or influence of Dookie, or frankly Green Day.
Green Day are like the Rabbit Maranville of the Rock Hall. Pretty much a flash-in-the-pan for their window of time.
Look, preaching to the choir on that one, believe me. Jon Lord and Chris Squire each had to DIE before they were considered (seriously) for the hall, and to this day, Keith Emerson, Greg Lake and Carl Palmer (another trio) are outside looking in. Don't even get me started on Bob Fripp and Phil Collins. I think the crop of "first ballots (or close to its)" - Greed Day, Red Hot Chili Peppers, Radiohead, even REM, who I love - is embarrassing.
But I don't think Green Day is a fluke; American Idiot is an essential record, and the live version of "Jesus Of Suburbia" almost single-handedly render them the real deal. The thing is, they (like Blink-182, though it took Tom DeLonge leaving and forming Angels and Airwaves) have both shown they are more than adolescent boy/masturbation songs.
-
In one facebook rock fans group someone posted this question: "Name a better 3 musician band than Rush, if you can" and one man responded with a big list of trio bands including Blink 182 and Green Day.
Even if someone is a big Rush hater I don't get how he can have an opinion that Blink 182 and Green Day are a 'better 3 musician bands' than Rush.
His statement was extremely controversial and objectively wrong.
Depends what your standard is.
- Dookie sold 10 million records; Rush does not, to my understanding, have a diamond record. Boom.
- Green Day were first (or second) ballot inductees into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. It took Rush 37 tries. Boom.
Just take a look at the list of the albums that have gone Diamond, and ask yourself what it really means other than hordes of lemmings buying 1 album for style over substance.
https://www.billboard.com/articles/news/billboard-lists/7526410/diamond-certified-album-riaa-ranked
sorry, but in 50 or even 25 years, nobody is going to be talking about the importance or influence of Dookie, or frankly Green Day.
Green Day are like the Rabbit Maranville of the Rock Hall. Pretty much a flash-in-the-pan for their window of time.
Look, preaching to the choir on that one, believe me. Jon Lord and Chris Squire each had to DIE before they were considered (seriously) for the hall, and to this day, Keith Emerson, Greg Lake and Carl Palmer (another trio) are outside looking in. Don't even get me started on Bob Fripp and Phil Collins. I think the crop of "first ballots (or close to its)" - Greed Day, Red Hot Chili Peppers, Radiohead, even REM, who I love - is embarrassing.
King Crimson and ELP deserve the place in the HOF. Also these bands: Thin Lizzy, Judas Priest, Iron Maiden, T. Rex and Jethro Tull (and I'm not their fan).
-
For example, one Ed Sheeran album has sold way more copies than Bowie's Blackstar? So what? Does it make it greater than Blackstar? I think not.
Actually, to me, it does. I listened to Blackstar and I listened to Ed Sheeran's Divide. I like Divide better. I pegged it as my album of the year for 2017 (although 2017 was not a strong year for me in terms of listening to albums. Also, if I had known better, I would have listened to Nothing More's The Stories We Tell Ourselves when it came out, since that would have been my album of the year for 2017).
Besides having wrong opinions, you liked that album better because you enjoyed it more, not because it sold more (at least I hope that's not the case). I think what WildRanger is getting at is "more sales =/= better art".
-
The thing is, and this goes for Linkin Park as well, everyone in my age bracket (18-34) has to know at least one Green Day or Linkin Park song, somehow, or at least, know the song In the End or Boulevard of Broken Dreams. Heck, I know that if I ever go out to karaoke with a group of workers or friends. My go-to song to sing would have to be Boulevard of Broken Dreams since it's a song that everyone would know. You just sing this opening line, "I walk a lonely road, the only one that I have ever known," and everyone knows what song that is. You can see the live performance of that song at the Reading Festival on Youtube and you can see an entire field of people singing along to that. A 15 year old song could have that power.
Besides having wrong opinions, you liked that album better because you enjoyed it more, not because it sold more (at least I hope that's not the case). I think what WildRanger is getting at is "more sales =/= better art".
Oh yeah, I liked the album because I enjoyed it better than Blackstar and it just so happens to sell more. Other people may think the same as well. Doesn't make it a wrong opinion. Like I stated before, if I heard Nothing More's The Stories We Tell Ourselves when it came out, that would have been my album of the year, and it sold way less than Blackstar and Divide.
-
The musical quality of an album is actually 100% based on how many copies it sells. That's why dark side of the moon is the best album EVAR
-
But let's not lose the point: no one - or at least not I - ever said that "most albums sold" automatically means "great". BUT, if there is a person that uses that as a scale - and it's not unreasonable to do so, as the list of bands whose most highly regarded record is also their best selling is as long as my penis - then so be it. My only point was, whether art is subjective or obkective depends totally on the standard being used (and whether that standard is objective or not). That's all.
-
Are we still using green text for sarcasm around these parts? :lol
But I understand, it's just hard for me not to strongly disagree, as I think Balckstar is one of the best albums this decade so far, and I don't really care for Ed Sheeran at all. I get why he has mass appeal, but it's not for me.
I've also always been the kind of person who, if I see art that has mass appeal and a large audience, then I concede it must have some kind of merit to it. Things don't become popular if it's hated by nearly everyone who sees/hears it, which is the closest something can get for me to call it "objectively bad".
-
In one facebook rock fans group someone posted this question: "Name a better 3 musician band than Rush, if you can" and one man responded with a big list of trio bands including Blink 182 and Green Day.
Even if someone is a big Rush hater I don't get how he can have an opinion that Blink 182 and Green Day are a 'better 3 musician bands' than Rush.
His statement was extremely controversial and objectively wrong.
The next time you describe in any manner someone's opinion on music to be "objectively" right or wrong, you will be banned from the forum. Last warning on the subject.
-
I started to get interested in music thanks to Green Day's American Idiot and then became fan of Blink-182 and other pop-punk bands. And to be honest, while I don't listen to much of those bands anymore and I do enjoy some Rush (I think A Farewell To King, Permanent Waves and Grace Under Pressure are great), if you were to ask me to make a top 50 of my favorite albums I can say that American Idiot and Blink-182 self-titled album would rank above any Rush album (I guess that's pretty controversial :)) Part of it might just be nostalagia, but this person might come from a similar place than me.
It's unbelievable to me. And yeah, words can't describe how controversial it is. ;D
Between me and all my friends this is not controversial at all. Blink-182 and Green Day were monumental to me and I have little to no interest in Rush. The music those two bands wrote will always be a big deal to me and my musical journey. I am able to understand that some people are in agreement with me and some aren't, this is down to personal tastes and experiences. It's really very simple.
-
I've not been impressed with a lot of music released in the 2010s, outside of a very few examples. This spans many genres. I think it's one reason I've gravitated to non-Western music, aboriginal music, or just other music I haven't yet really explored from decades past, it seems like "it's all been done" or "no one is stepping up like they did in the 50s, 60s, 70s, and 80s, developing new styles, sounds and entire genres" but it's really that everyone is just doing the same thing, everything sounds dystopian, depressing, and/or fake/plastic; or plain trash with no musicality to it whatsoever, or just re-exploring old sounds that have been done a million times before, maybe adding a twist, or just experimental for the sake of it instead of finding something new. I thought it was just me, but as this decade is soon coming to a close, I realize it's not. I still like a lot of different sounds and styles, and still try to remain open-minded , but I look at all the releases the last 9 years and I don't have any connection to any of them, rarely care to put any of them on, again, aside from a very few exceptions. I think the last great piece of music released as of this moment is The Whirlwind by Transatlantic, and the only good songs that have come out in the mainstream, at least in the US, I can count on one hand, and half of them are rip offs of some kind, or weren't even that popular looking back.
-
On the other hand, I think the 2010s are my second favorite decade of music, so I'm curious what those exceptions you liked are.
-
As a guy turning 51next week I think you are not searching hard enough. There is awesome music out there this past decade.
-
like the vast majority of my music comes from the late 2000's and the 2010's and i have a ton of great albums
-
I started to get interested in music thanks to Green Day's American Idiot and then became fan of Blink-182 and other pop-punk bands. And to be honest, while I don't listen to much of those bands anymore and I do enjoy some Rush (I think A Farewell To King, Permanent Waves and Grace Under Pressure are great), if you were to ask me to make a top 50 of my favorite albums I can say that American Idiot and Blink-182 self-titled album would rank above any Rush album (I guess that's pretty controversial :)) Part of it might just be nostalagia, but this person might come from a similar place than me.
It's unbelievable to me. And yeah, words can't describe how controversial it is. ;D
Between me and all my friends this is not controversial at all. Blink-182 and Green Day were monumental to me and I have little to no interest in Rush. The music those two bands wrote will always be a big deal to me and my musical journey. I am able to understand that some people are in agreement with me and some aren't, this is down to personal tastes and experiences. It's really very simple.
I think the point of a lot of posts here is just that there is context, and that can't be ignored. My favorite album of all-time is "Going For The One" by Yes. I love it. It is the perfect album by my standards and though I've heard it 500 times if I've heard it once, I still put it on and get both a physical and emotional lift from it. It is a spiritual record for me.
But I have to be real. In the context of the world/planet/listening community, it's a polarizing record. It's not even - likely - the consensus "best" Yes album (Close To The Edge), it's not the best selling - and therefore presumably most popular - Yes album (that's probably 90210), and it's not an album that contains any of the top ten most played "Yes" songs in concert (according to Setlist.fm https://www.setlist.fm/stats/yes-63d6bef7.html).
There are other songs/albums that play a formative role in my life - Billy Joel's The Stranger; Genesis "Evidence Of Autumn"; Black Sabbath Sabbath Bloody Sabbath - but again, there should be some context to the larger musical world. "Evidence of Autumn" is just not at the level of "Good Vibrations" or "Let It Be" or "All Along The Watchtower".
-
Metal and Rap fans are the most stubborn music fans, or fans of music. Prog fans are among the most critical music fans.
Which leads me to me classifying myself as a Fan of Music. Meaning I enjoy muaic regardless of Genre. I may not own lots of albums from the vast array of Genres, doesn't mean I don't enjoy listening to said Genre.
-
Metal and Rap fans are the most stubborn music fans, or fans of music. Prog fans are among the most critical music fans.
Which leads me to me classifying myself as a Fan of Music. Meaning I enjoy muaic regardless of Genre. I may not own lots of albums from the vast array of Genres, doesn't mean I don't enjoy listening to said Genre.
Agreed. While a lot of my favorite is prog, I don't like identifying myself strictly as a prog fan. There was a debate last week about sitting vs standing at concerts on the Neal Morse FB forum, and there were a few comments about how prog fans prefer to sit down because they like to focus on the music more, which to me was code for "listen intently for any mistake that they can then bitch about on the internet the next day" :lol :lol , at the expense of, ya know, having fun and enjoying themselves. I had just as much fun seeing Tears for Fears two years ago than I did seeing Haken four months ago. Diversity is a music fan's friend. :coolio
-
Metal and Rap fans are the most stubborn music fans, or fans of music. Prog fans are among the most critical music fans.
Which leads me to me classifying myself as a Fan of Music. Meaning I enjoy muaic regardless of Genre. I may not own lots of albums from the vast array of Genres, doesn't mean I don't enjoy listening to said Genre.
Agreed. While a lot of my favorite is prog, I don't like identifying myself strictly as a prog fan. There was a debate last week about sitting vs standing at concerts on the Neal Morse FB forum, and there were a few comments about how prog fans prefer to sit down because they like to focus on the music more, which to me was code for "listen intently for any mistake that they can then bitch about on the internet the next day" :lol :lol , at the expense of, ya know, having fun and enjoying themselves. I had just as much fun seeing Tears for Fears two years ago than I did seeing Haken four months ago. Diversity is a music fan's friend. :coolio
Being diverse is great. I've been to many different styles of shows and have enjoyed myself at mostly every one. I do like the looks I get when I wear a certain band shirt that is completely different from the show. I don't care, it's just the shirt and I like the music thats gonna be playing live on stage.
-
God dammit no more objectivity vs subjectivity stuff!
Can this be a rule on the forum? Anytime someone states that art (or anything else) can be objectively good or bad, it's just deleted.
This post is objectively true.
-
Megadeth is a better band BECAUSE they keep changing their lead guitarists and drummers. Lineup changes make them better. I don’t think they should keep either for more than two albums, because that’s when they tend to slip and suck. Just imagine if Metallica did the same and had a new guitarist every 2 albums? Wow :eek
Musicals/Broadway is amazing. And Les Misérables alone is better than most Rock/Metal albums.
Slayer sucks, and I don’t think they were every as influential as everyone likes to say.
Van Halen with Sammy Hagar was the best lineup, unfortunately the first 2 albums 5150/OU812 sucked in the production/mix. FUCK is single handedly the best album by any band, period, save for Savatage Edge of Thorns. On that note, I love Jon Oliva, but Edge of Thorns is still the best album Savatage ever released :metal
Nickelback is amazing, and everyone knows it. Get off the bandwagon of hate, because we all know you…yes YOU, collect all of their albums.
You either love Rush or hate them…there is no “casual Rush fan”, and if you disagree, I don’t believe you ;D
-
Megadeth is a better band BECAUSE they keep changing their lead guitarists and drummers. Lineup changes make them better. I don’t think they should keep either for more than two albums, because that’s when they tend to slip and suck. Just imagine if Metallica did the same and had a new guitarist every 2 albums? Wow :eek
That's just silly. Changing lead guitarists and drummers does not make any band better. And Megadeth was at its best for the long string of albums when they had Marty and Nick.
Musicals/Broadway is amazing. And Les Misérables alone is better than most Rock/Metal albums.
Eh, tastes. :dunno: Les Misérables is pretty good. If you love it, good for you.
Slayer sucks, and I don’t think they were every as influential as everyone likes to say.
"Everyone" doesn't. They do suck.
Van Halen with Sammy Hagar was the best lineup
Yes.
FUCK is single handedly the best album by any band, period, save for Savatage Edge of Thorns.
No.
Well, I was mainly responding to the Van Halen part, not the Savatage part. Regarding the Savatage part, no comment because nobody cares about Savatage.
Nickelback is amazing, and everyone knows it. Get off the bandwagon of hate, because we all know you…yes YOU, collect all of their albums.
I don't think I've ever heard a Nickleback song. If I have, it did not make an impression.
You either love Rush or hate them…there is no “casual Rush fan”, and if you disagree, I don’t believe you ;D
I don't hate them, but I'm not a fan either. I owned a greatest hits album a long time ago and probably listened to it twice. I can casually enjoy the odd song here or there. But large doses of Rush bore me. And I don't care whether you believe me.
-
Megadeth is a better band BECAUSE they keep changing their lead guitarists and drummers. Lineup changes make them better. I don’t think they should keep either for more than two albums, because that’s when they tend to slip and suck. Just imagine if Metallica did the same and had a new guitarist every 2 albums? Wow :eek
That's just silly. Changing lead guitarists and drummers does not make any band better. And Megadeth was at its best for the long string of albums when they had Marty and Nick.
Your response to my controversial opinion is itself a funny controversial opinion. I believe, in Megadeth specifically, the changing lineups have made them better and not stale, but only after no more than 2 albums. The only exception was Marty, he had a good run of 3 albums...and maybe 4. :)
-
I'll jump on the "slayer sucks" train because ugh they're awful
Is it controversial to say Devin Townsend's best album is Casualties of Cool and I feel it's unlikely to be topped?
-
Is it controversial to say Devin Townsend's best album is Casualties of Cool and I feel it's unlikely to be topped?
I could not disagree with you if I wanted to.
-
I disagree about Casulaties, but it is a great album, and if that speaks to you most, then it's no different than any other album of his speaking to someone else most.
Except the masses that worship Terria. They're wrong. Objectively. I object to their opinions, subjectively.
-
You either love Rush or hate them…there is no “casual Rush fan”, and if you disagree, I don’t believe you ;D
I'm a casual Rush fan. I really like a lot of their music, but there is a certain cold quality to it that limits how often I listen to them. Also, I do not really think Geddy has a good full-album vocal performance pre-Signals, and even then, he's just fine most of the time. His vocal performances are uniformly bad pre-Farewell to Kings.
-
- Madonna is the most overrated musician in music history. Neither her singing or composing abilities are outstanding compared with artists of her decade, (None of her songs particularly stand out compared to songs from, say, Cyndi Lauper or Whitney Houston) and most of her success came from pure sex selling schticks. To compare her with Michael Jackson as Queen of pop is asinine; MJ is lightyears away.
- Gary Cherone WAS a good choice, at least vocally, to replace Sammy Hagar in Van Halen; listen to Extreme's debut and Pornograffitti and many of those songs could be straight taken out from a VH album; the dude really had the talent. The problem came when they gave EVH complete songwriting freedom without someone to guide or filter his ideas to actual songs, man even told Gary how to sing and it came out as complete shouting nonsense, far below what he could actually pull off. He was dealt a shit hand.
- Heaven and Hell is the best Black Sabbath album. I don't know how controversial this is in the forum community but everytime I say this among my metal-loving friends they react as if I just spat in Ozzy's name :lol
It might be controversial but I absolutely hate the Disturbed cover of Sound of Silence. The original is great because it's so subdued and quiet and the level of emotion in it is so great and then the cover is just this big bombastic power ballad with vocals overdoing it to the top. But I know some people love it so maybe it's just me.
If they had kept the style they began the song with the cover would have been perfect. I thought they were going to take it up to ballstothewall-ville from the beginning, so I was pleasantly surprised when the song actually started. Theeeen they did what I expected them to do with the song and I stopped caring
-
Except the masses that worship Terria. They're wrong. Objectively. I object to their opinions, subjectively.
How dare you.
To add to this thread: The Antlers' Hospice is one of the more overrated albums of the 2000's. It's a good record, but in hindsight is perhaps a bit too overdramatic for it's own sake.
-
While I would say their music is decent, I would consider Ghost to be possibly the most overrated band of the last decade. If they didn't have the visual element of the ghouls and Papa and the whole "mythos" surrounding the band, just on the music alone they would be touring small venues and barely anyone would care about them. Then again I have to give them props because while being a pretty average band musically, they have elevated themselves to one of the most popular rock bands today and it's all thanks to the marketing. There's a lot of bands who make much better music who won't get as far as them.
And on the topic of overrated I would also add Death Grips. They started off good and I think they have put out a few decent albums (Money Store is great) but it's become really apparent to me in the last few years that they ran out of ideas quite some time ago and their whole thing has gotten pretty stale.
-
While I would say their music is decent, I would consider Ghost to be possibly the most overrated band of the last decade. If they didn't have the visual element of the ghouls and Papa and the whole "mythos" surrounding the band, just on the music alone they would be touring small venues and barely anyone would care about them. Then again I have to give them props because while being a pretty average band musically, they have elevated themselves to one of the most popular rock bands today and it's all thanks to the marketing. There's a lot of bands who make much better music who won't get as far as them.
But that begs the question: is the whole image a gimmick, or something smart that actually helps them? the music would be the same even if they'd show up in jeans and t-shirt, should the whole Pope image be consider something negative if it actually puts them on the map? the notes are only seven in the end, you have to come up with something on top to present a show and to make yourself recognizable.
You say that the music is decent at best, and that many bands make better music; I daresay that anyone would agree that Iron Maiden has better music than mostly everything in metal, do they need with such strong songs Eddie? of course not .But they DO have Eddie, and it made them even more popular, and it's something unique to see Eddie during their show, can you blame them for it?
-
While I would say their music is decent, I would consider Ghost to be possibly the most overrated band of the last decade. If they didn't have the visual element of the ghouls and Papa and the whole "mythos" surrounding the band, just on the music alone they would be touring small venues and barely anyone would care about them. Then again I have to give them props because while being a pretty average band musically, they have elevated themselves to one of the most popular rock bands today and it's all thanks to the marketing. There's a lot of bands who make much better music who won't get as far as them.
And on the topic of overrated I would also add Death Grips. They started off good and I think they have put out a few decent albums (Money Store is great) but it's become really apparent to me in the last few years that they ran out of ideas quite some time ago and their whole thing has gotten pretty stale.
I think you hit the nail on the head with marketing. Ghost and Greta Van Fleet are two of the most controversial rock bands right now and its because they have become successful with big time marketing. However, I think both bands are fantastic and DO write great songs, but both have their odd looks which gets lots of criticism ontop of their marketing that gets many people to dislike them immediately because they feel they aren't worthy.
Speaking of that marketing, it does make me wonder if these bands are paying someone to get those grammy wins/nominations. Like how does Ghost actually win a Grammy? (I think Cirice is a great song, but since when did the Grammys actually find small bands with interesting music and give them awards?) And being nominated gets you lots of positive press, marketing.
-
While I would say their music is decent, I would consider Ghost to be possibly the most overrated band of the last decade. If they didn't have the visual element of the ghouls and Papa and the whole "mythos" surrounding the band, just on the music alone they would be touring small venues and barely anyone would care about them. Then again I have to give them props because while being a pretty average band musically, they have elevated themselves to one of the most popular rock bands today and it's all thanks to the marketing. There's a lot of bands who make much better music who won't get as far as them.
But that begs the question: is the whole image a gimmick, or something smart that actually helps them? the music would be the same even if they'd show up in jeans and t-shirt, should the whole Pope image be consider something negative if it actually puts them on the map? the notes are only seven in the end, you have to come up with something on top to present a show and to make yourself recognizable.
You say that the music is decent at best, and that many bands make better music; I daresay that anyone would agree that Iron Maiden has better music than mostly everything in metal, do they need with such strong songs Eddie? of course not .But they DO have Eddie, and it made them even more popular, and it's something unique to see Eddie during their show, can you blame them for it?
From the band's perspective I can't fault them and if anything (like I did) I will say that Tobias Forge has been clever with Ghost and how that added element has made the band more popular. Instead of being just another band that take the stage in every day clothes and have normal stage lightning, Ghost has created something different and it works as a way to get people interested. I think many of us first checked them out because of that element, and then most people stuck around because the music is pretty decent. My only issue really is I think the music (while being decent) really doesn't measure up to them filling out big venues.
As for Iron Maiden I think what separates them from Ghost for me is they have been on top of their game and have been a stand out in the heavy metal community since the start. I think Ghost has put out a few decent albums but Iron Maiden has put out some really great ones, classics that will be remembered and treasured for decades to come. I think Eddie is a cool gimmick and keeping him as a mascot through the years was a smart decision but it also doesn't take away anything.
-
While I would say their music is decent, I would consider Ghost to be possibly the most overrated band of the last decade. If they didn't have the visual element of the ghouls and Papa and the whole "mythos" surrounding the band, just on the music alone they would be touring small venues and barely anyone would care about them. Then again I have to give them props because while being a pretty average band musically, they have elevated themselves to one of the most popular rock bands today and it's all thanks to the marketing. There's a lot of bands who make much better music who won't get as far as them.
But that begs the question: is the whole image a gimmick, or something smart that actually helps them? the music would be the same even if they'd show up in jeans and t-shirt, should the whole Pope image be consider something negative if it actually puts them on the map? the notes are only seven in the end, you have to come up with something on top to present a show and to make yourself recognizable.
You say that the music is decent at best, and that many bands make better music; I daresay that anyone would agree that Iron Maiden has better music than mostly everything in metal, do they need with such strong songs Eddie? of course not .But they DO have Eddie, and it made them even more popular, and it's something unique to see Eddie during their show, can you blame them for it?
Look, I'm a Kiss fan, so I know from gimmick and image. But I know for me, the whole "Papa" thing is more of a turn off than turn on. I saw them open for Maiden, and while I was prepared to hate them, the music was better than I expected*(by a significant amount). But it was just too... schlocky for me. Plus the stage "banter" about female orgasms was, shall we say, unexpected (if you can call any reference to "female orgasms" "banter").
To me there's a difference between elevating a stage show with accoutrements - Eddie; Halford's Harley, various bands' light shows - and having the whole package, from start to finish, be part of the gimmick.
-
I've never cared for Ghost's gimmick, the music is what matters to me and they are pretty solid there. I do find the Papa changing to be intriguing and gives the band a changing character as the music evolves. It adds a nice twist to the whole band image, but I don't care about ghouls or satanic rituals. Thats more of a turn off... but the songs are just too good to ignore the band as a whole. They'll never be a favorite band of mine though as long as they have a gimmick, I can enjoy that stuff for what it is but I can never take it to another level where you truly connect with a band like Iron Maiden or Dream Theater.
-
It's funny because at first I sort of dismissed Ghost as a gimmick band without having really heard them, but then one day Cirice was played on the radio and I thought "Hmm... this sounds pretty good, I wonder what band this is"... and it turned out to be Ghost. :lol So at least in my case it was purely the music that drew me in, though I'm still more of a casual fan than a diehard.
-
Madonna is the most overrated musician in music history. Neither her singing or composing abilities are outstanding compared with artists of her decade, (None of her songs particularly stand out compared to songs from, say, Cyndi Lauper or Whitney Houston) and most of her success came from pure sex selling schticks. To compare her with Michael Jackson as Queen of pop is asinine; MJ is lightyears away.
I cannot agree with this. I cannot think of a single by either Lauper or Houston that compares to the best 10 or so songs that Madonna did. Madonna has never been the best singer, and while she always has a vision for the kind of songs and album she wants to do, she obviously needs help to make that vision come to fruition. That said, she has always been a marketing genius and that is why she has always been front and center, but without the songs, she never would have made it this long, and she really does have a lot of good songs. Sure, it's pop music, but who says pop music can't be good when done well? :)
-
Madonna is the most overrated musician in music history. Neither her singing or composing abilities are outstanding compared with artists of her decade, (None of her songs particularly stand out compared to songs from, say, Cyndi Lauper or Whitney Houston) and most of her success came from pure sex selling schticks. To compare her with Michael Jackson as Queen of pop is asinine; MJ is lightyears away.
I cannot agree with this. I cannot think of a single by either Lauper or Houston that compares to the best 10 or so songs that Madonna did. Madonna has never been the best singer, and while she always has a vision for the kind of songs and album she wants to do, she obviously needs help to make that vision come to fruition. That said, she has always been a marketing genius and that is why she has always been front and center, but without the songs, she never would have made it this long, and she really does have a lot of good songs. Sure, it's pop music, but who says pop music can't be good when done well? :)
I guess it comes down to taste. I do listen to some Pop but I really haven't found any of her songs particularly good or memorable in any manner. I'm not saying her songs are bad-after all you're right in the sense that without the songs she wouldn't have made it this far; but I don't really think they stand out as having a particular style or relevance: to my ears, they could have been made by just any other artist of the time.
She is unique, don't get me wrong, But The uniqueness in my opinion only came from the visuals of her videos and appearances, and the marketing built around it which... Actually Coincides with the discussion the other folks are having about Ghost :lol
-
I guess it comes down to taste. I do listen to some Pop but I really haven't found any of her songs particularly good or memorable in any manner. I'm not saying her songs are bad-after all you're right in the sense that without the songs she wouldn't have made it this far; but I don't really think they stand out as having a particular style or relevance: to my ears, they could have been made by just any other artist of the time.
Okay, but sometimes a good song is just that: a good song.
Borderline, Live to Tell and Like a Prayer are her 80's hits that I think are her best, and I have noticed that even a lot of rock fans seem to like some or all of those particular songs.
And the Ray of Light album from the later 90's is fantastic from start to finish.
-
My parents had a Madonna tape they would play in the car often as a kid and I loved it for whatever reason, and to this day I still kind of dig those songs. Funny cause in another thread I mentioned how my parents also loved the Beatles and yet that never clicked for me, but Madonna did :lol
-
Sure, it's pop music, but who says pop music can't be good when done well? :)
Yep. There are quality stuff in pop music. Dismissing the entire genre of pop music is just not right. Prince is a pop artist who is held in very high regard by many rock fans, mostly due to his huge talent.
Little Red Corvette, 1999, When Doves Cry - great pop tunes
-
I've never cared for Ghost's gimmick, the music is what matters to me and they are pretty solid there. I do find the Papa changing to be intriguing and gives the band a changing character as the music evolves. It adds a nice twist to the whole band image, but I don't care about ghouls or satanic rituals. Thats more of a turn off... but the songs are just too good to ignore the band as a whole. They'll never be a favorite band of mine though as long as they have a gimmick, I can enjoy that stuff for what it is but I can never take it to another level where you truly connect with a band like Iron Maiden or Dream Theater.
Any Satanic stuff/imagery/lyrical themes in rock and metal music - it's automatically a turn off for me.
-
I guess it comes down to taste. I do listen to some Pop but I really haven't found any of her songs particularly good or memorable in any manner. I'm not saying her songs are bad-after all you're right in the sense that without the songs she wouldn't have made it this far; but I don't really think they stand out as having a particular style or relevance: to my ears, they could have been made by just any other artist of the time.
Okay, but sometimes a good song is just that: a good song.
Borderline, Live to Tell and Like a Prayer are her 80's hits that I think are her best, and I have noticed that even a lot of rock fans seem to like some or all of those particular songs.
And the Ray of Light album from the later 90's is fantastic from start to finish.
Live To Tell, Like A Prayer, Ray Of Light (the song), Beautiful Stranger (from the Austin Powers soundtrack)... all great songs.
I get Prince and have no doubt about his talent, but I struggle to connect with his music. I try - I have the 3-CD greatest hits, the "black" album, and Diamonds And Pearls (and have heard Purple Rain too many times to count) - but I can't name a song by him that I just put on because it's "awesome". Everything by him is highly regarded only because of a clinical admiration for his talent.
-
My parents had a Madonna tape they would play in the car often as a kid and I loved it for whatever reason, and to this day I still kind of dig those songs. Funny cause in another thread I mentioned how my parents also loved the Beatles and yet that never clicked for me, but Madonna did :lol
Some of her hits from the 80's are a bit too bubblegum pop for me, but she actually has quite a few good songs from this century. Confessions on a Dance Floor had a handful of really good songs, and her last album, Rebel Heart, had a few really good songs (the title track, Joan of Arc, Ghosttown). On the flip side, she did that Bitch I'm Madonna song that is one of the worst things I've ever heard. :lol :lol
I get Prince and have no doubt about his talent, but I struggle to connect with his music. I try - I have the 3-CD greatest hits, the "black" album, and Diamonds And Pearls (and have heard Purple Rain too many times to count) - but I can't name a song by him that I just put on because it's "awesome". Everything by him is highly regarded only because of a clinical admiration for his talent.
I mostly agree. I do think Purple Rain is outstanding from start to finish, and he has a few other songs I dig, but a lot of what else I have heard I simply do not connect with. His early album Dirty Mind, which is highly-regarded, I finally checked it out recently, and it was okay, but I can't imagine going out of my way to hear it again. It's not bad, and I see the appeal for others, but it's not for me. Same with Sign o' the Times, which many ejaculate over, but aside from the title track, U Got the Look and a couple other tunes, it is a hard pass for me.
-
I started to get interested in music thanks to Green Day's American Idiot and then became fan of Blink-182 and other pop-punk bands. And to be honest, while I don't listen to much of those bands anymore and I do enjoy some Rush (I think A Farewell To King, Permanent Waves and Grace Under Pressure are great), if you were to ask me to make a top 50 of my favorite albums I can say that American Idiot and Blink-182 self-titled album would rank above any Rush album (I guess that's pretty controversial :)) Part of it might just be nostalagia, but this person might come from a similar place than me.
It's unbelievable to me. And yeah, words can't describe how controversial it is. ;D
Between me and all my friends this is not controversial at all. Blink-182 and Green Day were monumental to me and I have little to no interest in Rush. The music those two bands wrote will always be a big deal to me and my musical journey. I am able to understand that some people are in agreement with me and some aren't, this is down to personal tastes and experiences. It's really very simple.
One is to assume that you are a member of a Dream Theater board because you are at least somewhat a fan of Dream Theater.
Using that logic, I just cannot comprehend how even a casual fan of Dream Theater would "have little to no interest in Rush". Oh, well.
-
Rush just bores me as well :P
-
70's/80's hard rock and progressive metal are two different genres?
-
The Offspring circa 1989 - 2003 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Green Day and Blink 182
After that, all three suck equally.
-
I get Prince and have no doubt about his talent, but I struggle to connect with his music.
I have never cared for anything Prince has ever done. But I am not even sure of this immense talent I keep hearing about. And that whole name change thing to that sign was just dumb (I get the statement he was trying to make. It was still dumb).
-
I started to get interested in music thanks to Green Day's American Idiot and then became fan of Blink-182 and other pop-punk bands. And to be honest, while I don't listen to much of those bands anymore and I do enjoy some Rush (I think A Farewell To King, Permanent Waves and Grace Under Pressure are great), if you were to ask me to make a top 50 of my favorite albums I can say that American Idiot and Blink-182 self-titled album would rank above any Rush album (I guess that's pretty controversial :)) Part of it might just be nostalagia, but this person might come from a similar place than me.
It's unbelievable to me. And yeah, words can't describe how controversial it is. ;D
Between me and all my friends this is not controversial at all. Blink-182 and Green Day were monumental to me and I have little to no interest in Rush. The music those two bands wrote will always be a big deal to me and my musical journey. I am able to understand that some people are in agreement with me and some aren't, this is down to personal tastes and experiences. It's really very simple.
One is to assume that you are a member of a Dream Theater board because you are at least somewhat a fan of Dream Theater.
Using that logic, I just cannot comprehend how even a casual fan of Dream Theater would "have little to no interest in Rush". Oh, well.
tbh I'm not a huge fan of classic Rush and the reason is 100% Geddy Lee's singing
I like their instrumentals quite a bit though, and the last two albums are fine now that his voice has mellowed out quite a bit
-
I started to get interested in music thanks to Green Day's American Idiot and then became fan of Blink-182 and other pop-punk bands. And to be honest, while I don't listen to much of those bands anymore and I do enjoy some Rush (I think A Farewell To King, Permanent Waves and Grace Under Pressure are great), if you were to ask me to make a top 50 of my favorite albums I can say that American Idiot and Blink-182 self-titled album would rank above any Rush album (I guess that's pretty controversial :)) Part of it might just be nostalagia, but this person might come from a similar place than me.
It's unbelievable to me. And yeah, words can't describe how controversial it is. ;D
Between me and all my friends this is not controversial at all. Blink-182 and Green Day were monumental to me and I have little to no interest in Rush. The music those two bands wrote will always be a big deal to me and my musical journey. I am able to understand that some people are in agreement with me and some aren't, this is down to personal tastes and experiences. It's really very simple.
One is to assume that you are a member of a Dream Theater board because you are at least somewhat a fan of Dream Theater.
Using that logic, I just cannot comprehend how even a casual fan of Dream Theater would "have little to no interest in Rush". Oh, well.
tbh I'm not a huge fan of classic Rush and the reason is 100% Geddy Lee's singing
I like their instrumentals quite a bit though, and the last two albums are fine now that his voice has mellowed out quite a bit
I think Geddy's singing was way better on Permanent Waves and Moving Pictures than Clockwork Angels. His voice on CA seems shot to me.
-
When some pages ago I said something like "Pop music can have actual nice songs but the music is crappy", because often it's plastified with autotune and dance-y rhytms, of course I didn't refer to all of pop music, but just to bring an example of how to ruin a potentially good song...
This was one of the major "summer hits" last year in Italy. At least I believe I guess, I'm not exactly following the scene. Here's an acoustic version sang by a random YouTuber:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJ7Qh5uYy4w
Ok, nothing out of this world but it's a nice melody and of course it has a catchy chorus, right? something one can live with...
Now listen, if you can resist, to the actual song that dominated the radio for all summer:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4pqF-hwFM4
I mean, I get that it's a genre that works for many people, but COME ON... that plastic voice, basically everything "played" through electronic means, the random rap in the middle of the song and a video with boobs and asses because summer. There's a nice song in there and it's completely ruined by a horrible arrangement. Is that really all it takes to be listened by everyone on the radio?
-
Kylie Minogue is better than Madonna.
-
I started to get interested in music thanks to Green Day's American Idiot and then became fan of Blink-182 and other pop-punk bands. And to be honest, while I don't listen to much of those bands anymore and I do enjoy some Rush (I think A Farewell To King, Permanent Waves and Grace Under Pressure are great), if you were to ask me to make a top 50 of my favorite albums I can say that American Idiot and Blink-182 self-titled album would rank above any Rush album (I guess that's pretty controversial :)) Part of it might just be nostalagia, but this person might come from a similar place than me.
It's unbelievable to me. And yeah, words can't describe how controversial it is. ;D
Between me and all my friends this is not controversial at all. Blink-182 and Green Day were monumental to me and I have little to no interest in Rush. The music those two bands wrote will always be a big deal to me and my musical journey. I am able to understand that some people are in agreement with me and some aren't, this is down to personal tastes and experiences. It's really very simple.
One is to assume that you are a member of a Dream Theater board because you are at least somewhat a fan of Dream Theater.
Using that logic, I just cannot comprehend how even a casual fan of Dream Theater would "have little to no interest in Rush". Oh, well.
Yes, I am a fan of Dream Theater. They don't rate as high for me (as a band) as they do for most people on here. I went through a big DT phase about 5 years ago, somehow wound up here and stayed for all the awesome music that was being discussed in the GMD.
I love all different types of music but from what I have listened to of Rush (3 or 4 of their popular albums) just didn't interest me. I haven't listened to everything they have to offer but from what I have heard, I'd take pop punk over them any day :lol
-
Another one:
The 4Kids Yugioh, Pokemon, and One Piece themes are straight up fire, don't @ me
-
^^ I actually had a soft spot for the One Piece Rap theme song. It's like 12-year old me thought this seemed like a theme song that best fitted a pirate anime (and this was before I knew anything deeply about music and anime/manga). It's the "Ya-yo," that makes it for me. 26-year old me still liked it though after listening to it again right now.
-
Honestly yeah, I still bop to that shit
-
Meatloaf ROCKS!!! :metal
-
Meatloaf ROCKS!!! :metal
What's controversial about that? :hat
-
Another one:
The 4Kids Yugioh, Pokemon, and One Piece themes are straight up fire, don't @ me
All those old 90's shows had amazing themes. Monster Rancher, Beetleborgs, Power Rangers, The Magic School Bus, The Puzzle Place.
-
Another one:
The 4Kids Yugioh, Pokemon, and One Piece themes are straight up fire, don't @ me
All those old 90's shows had amazing themes. Monster Rancher, Beetleborgs, Power Rangers, The Magic School Bus, The Puzzle Place.
The Power Rangers theme is so dope that I have two friends who have each burned the Power Rangers soundtracks to CDs and hid them in their cars so their girlfriends wouldn't find them. When my best friend comes over, sometimes we have too many drinks and play the Power Rangers theme a bit too loudly. :lol
On the subject of anime, I still get down to a lot of anime music. There's some really good stuff out there. Although I'm not into anime much anymore, I like almost all of Inuyasha's opening and ending credits music (Fukai Mori, Dearest, and Every Heart especially). Yu Yu Hakusho has my favorite opening song ever, though. And Cowboy Bebop... awesome all around.
-
tbh I'm not a huge fan of classic Rush and the reason is 100% Geddy Lee's singing
I like their instrumentals quite a bit though, and the last two albums are fine now that his voice has mellowed out quite a bit
I think Geddy's singing was way better on Permanent Waves and Moving Pictures than Clockwork Angels. His voice on CA seems shot to me.
IMO, Geddy’s best vocal album is Grace Under Pressure, which is also one of Rush’s best albums.
-
And Cowboy Bebop... awesome all around.
So good that I have it as my ringtone :heart
-
tbh I'm not a huge fan of classic Rush and the reason is 100% Geddy Lee's singing
I like their instrumentals quite a bit though, and the last two albums are fine now that his voice has mellowed out quite a bit
I think Geddy's singing was way better on Permanent Waves and Moving Pictures than Clockwork Angels. His voice on CA seems shot to me.
IMO, Geddy’s best vocal album is Grace Under Pressure, which is also one of Rush’s best albums.
I despise p/g - it's in their bottom tier for me - but I would vote "Signals" for his best vocal album, so I think we're in general agreement on the basic point.
-
I can’t stand Geddy’s warbling on recent a,bums. Classic Geddy is fine by me.
P/g is a favourite of mine but the second side wasn’t as good as the first
-
IMO, Geddy’s best vocal album is Grace Under Pressure, which is also one of Rush’s best albums.
I despise p/g - it's in their bottom tier for me - but I would vote "Signals" for his best vocal album, so I think we're in general agreement on the basic point.
Yeah, vocally they're pretty similar performances in terms of style and quality. I give slight the edge to p/g mainly because I think the music is a little better suited to his style on that album—and also because I like that album a little better.
-
Meatloaf ROCKS!!! :metal
What's controversial about that? :hat
Exactly! :coolio
-
IMO, Geddy’s best vocal album is Grace Under Pressure, which is also one of Rush’s best albums.
I think Presto and Roll The Bones contain Geddy’s best vocals. It was after Test For Echo that he lost it.
-
I don't know how any album not called Power Windows can even be considered for Geddy's best vocal album.
-
I don't know how any album not called Power Windows can even be considered for Geddy's best vocal album.
Amen.
-
IMO, Geddy’s best vocal album is Grace Under Pressure, which is also one of Rush’s best albums.
I think Presto and Roll The Bones contain Geddy’s best vocals. It was after Test For Echo that he lost it.
Some of his warbling starts creeping in on Counterpoints. but yeah it really started to go with Test For Echo. Roll The Bones is the last unassailable vocal performance by Geddy.
-
You guys are all wrong. It was around 2004 where Geddy started to lose his voice.
-
Hard to remember exactly, but I know that the S&A tour was the last one where he sounded good live (even though they had declined). I literally cannot watch the Time Machine, Clockwork Angles Live and R40 live DVD's because his vocals are too brutal to handle.
-
I don't know how any album not called Power Windows can even be considered for Geddy's best vocal album.
Amen.
+1
-
Wrong PW.
-
As much as I love Permanent Waves, Geddy's best singing is on Power Windows.
-
I love Permanent Waves, but I don't see how it even comes close to Power Windows vocally.
-
(https://i.imgflip.com/28n5ln.jpg) (https://imgflip.com/i/28n5ln)
-
Only for the misguided. Or Tim. :lol
-
Only a 6 minute response time!
Nice. Must be clear skies for the Bat Signal. :lol
-
I was pissed I had to put my drink down to type that out. :lol
-
(https://i.makeagif.com/media/5-12-2015/P7Yq72.gif)
-
(https://www.dreamtheaterforums.org/boards/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fl.wigflip.com%2FH21Ckf4F%2Froflbot.jpg&hash=cf456937f4d831a2c678e88cf7be11ea6e0b5589)
-
The Dark Knight soon. Lol
-
Jeez Kev, it's bad enough you copy WildRanger.
-
Jeez Kev, it's bad enough you copy WildRanger.
:lol :lol
-
:lol
Oh Tim you fail and win here. So confusing.
-
Reminds me of another recent thread..What Side Of TAC do you prefer?
-The winning one that fails some of the time, or
-The failing one who wins some of the time.
;D
-
That's like asking if you want a baloney sandwich with or without processed cheese. Both are just wrong.
-
(https://media.giphy.com/media/bEjLIhTDqJRaE/giphy.gif)
-
There is no other band where I love a stretch of albums (2112-Moving Pictures) as much as a dislike a stretch (whatever is after MP up to Presto) as much as I am ambivalent about the rest (everything before 2112, everything after Presto).
-
Steven Wilson has produced many great albums, and his remastering of old prog albums are stellar. I just wish he'd stick to that since his songwriting and vocals are some of the dullest in prog.
-
Songwriting? Lol
-
There is no other band where I love a stretch of albums (2112-Moving Pictures) as much as a dislike a stretch (whatever is after MP up to Presto) as much as I am ambivalent about the rest (everything before 2112, everything after Presto).
I think the general consensus is that the best period of Rush discography is from 2112 to Moving Pictures, those 5 are their highest-rated albums. Pre-2112 and post-Pictures stuff are more or less polarizing.
Personally I dig every Rush album from Fly by Night to Power Windows, plus Counterparts and Clockwork Angels, the rest is really meh to me.
-
I've been listening to the Sector box sets again - I'd love to revisit that thread where the relative merits of each of the releases was discussed, because I think the Sector boxes sound really good on my system - and I'm consistently surprised at how good Fly By Night is even to this day. I know it's a form of conditioning, but there's something to the idea of 20 minutes, sequenced, with a break and twenty more sequenced minutes, forming a concise musical statement. The only song I really don't care for is "Best I Can", and even then, it's not horrid (well, the lyrics are, but oh well, I like Kiss and Van Halen too, so I can live).
-
I'm not in love with Fly By Night, but I think it is probably the best album pre-AFTK.
-
I've been listening to the Sector box sets again - I'd love to revisit that thread where the relative merits of each of the releases was discussed, because I think the Sector boxes sound really good on my system - and I'm consistently surprised at how good Fly By Night is even to this day. I know it's a form of conditioning, but there's something to the idea of 20 minutes, sequenced, with a break and twenty more sequenced minutes, forming a concise musical statement. The only song I really don't care for is "Best I Can", and even then, it's not horrid (well, the lyrics are, but oh well, I like Kiss and Van Halen too, so I can live).
In The End is one of my favorite Rush tunes. Especially the ATWAS version.
-
Opeth is way way way better without the growls. See: my post in the favorite Opeth album thread. Blackwater's a good album but Watershed has the perfect balance of light and heavy. Pale Communion is one of the best things they've ever done. I like Axenrot more than Lopez. Every growly album prior to Watershed other than Blackwater is a dud. I'll give everyone time to clutch their pearls.
-
Opeth is way way way better without the growls. See: my post in the favorite Opeth album thread. Blackwater's a good album but Watershed has the perfect balance of light and heavy. Pale Communion is one of the best things they've ever done. I like Axenrot more than Lopez. Every growly album prior to Watershed other than Blackwater is a dud. I'll give everyone time to clutch their pearls.
This, except, for me, replace Pale Communion with Heritage.
-
Opeth is way way way better without the growls. See: my post in the favorite Opeth album thread. Blackwater's a good album but Watershed has the perfect balance of light and heavy. Pale Communion is one of the best things they've ever done. I like Axenrot more than Lopez. Every growly album prior to Watershed other than Blackwater is a dud. I'll give everyone time to clutch their pearls.
This, except, for me, replace Pale Communion with Heritage.
I thank you for taking some of the heat off my back with the hottest Opeth take. My man. :tup
-
No problem! :lol Always happy to lend a hand (and talk up Heritage).
-
Opeth is way way way better without the growls. See: my post in the favorite Opeth album thread. Blackwater's a good album but Watershed has the perfect balance of light and heavy. Pale Communion is one of the best things they've ever done. I like Axenrot more than Lopez. Every growly album prior to Watershed other than Blackwater is a dud. I'll give everyone time to clutch their pearls.
The thing about Opeth is that while I'm not crazy about the growls, the clean vocals are so much worse.
-
Opeth is way way way better without the growls. See: my post in the favorite Opeth album thread. Blackwater's a good album but Watershed has the perfect balance of light and heavy. Pale Communion is one of the best things they've ever done. I like Axenrot more than Lopez. Every growly album prior to Watershed other than Blackwater is a dud. I'll give everyone time to clutch their pearls.
The thing about Opeth is that while I'm not crazy about the growls, the clean vocals are so much worse.
(https://i.imgur.com/RbUaWrH.gif)
-
Seriously Tim.
WTF?! :lol
-
They suck. What do you want me to say?
-
Just out of curiosity, how much of their music have you listened to? :lol
-
They suck. What do you want me to say?
Dude. Dude. NOT cool. My heart rate just increased reading that.
-
Dude, they write ballads. How CNN Tim listen to them?
-
Just out of curiosity, how much of their music have you listened to? :lol
Actually, I have Ghost Reveries and I like it a lot. I have a copy of Watershed and I think I've listened to it a couple of times. I have also listened to Heritage.
I have also listened to My Arms Your Hearse.
So I have listened completely to four of their albums in my life, and Ghost Reveries multiple times. I think they are a great band.
But vocally, I think they are terrible. I'm not a huge fan of growls, but can definitely tolerate them if the music is good enough. But Akerfeldt's clean vocals are terrible in my opinion. There's nothing to them.
-
Dude, they write ballads. How CNN Tim listen to them?
(https://www.peacenaturals.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/cnn-logo.jpg)
-
I think Damnation is by far the best they've done.
-
Just out of curiosity, how much of their music have you listened to? :lol
Actually, I have Ghost Reveries and I like it a lot. I have a copy of Watershed and I think I've listened to it a couple of times. I have also listened to Heritage.
I have also listened to My Arms Your Hearse.
So I have listened completely to four of their albums in my life, and Ghost Reveries multiple times. I think they are a great band.
But vocally, I think they are terrible. I'm not a huge fan of growls, but can definitely tolerate them if the music is good enough. But Akerfeldt's clean vocals are terrible in my opinion. There's nothing to them.
That's cool then, at least you've given them a chance. I know some people that dismissed the band as soon as they heard the growls. Personally, I'm a huge fan of Akerfeldt's clean vocals - I prefer him over any other prog/metal vocalist I can think of. His clean vocals seem to get better with age to me.
-
Mother bleeper. Lol.
-
Mother bleeper. Lol.
+1 :lol
-
Just out of curiosity, how much of their music have you listened to? :lol
Actually, I have Ghost Reveries and I like it a lot. I have a copy of Watershed and I think I've listened to it a couple of times. I have also listened to Heritage.
I have also listened to My Arms Your Hearse.
So I have listened completely to four of their albums in my life, and Ghost Reveries multiple times. I think they are a great band.
But vocally, I think they are terrible. I'm not a huge fan of growls, but can definitely tolerate them if the music is good enough. But Akerfeldt's clean vocals are terrible in my opinion. There's nothing to them.
That's cool then, at least you've given them a chance. I know some people that dismissed the band as soon as they heard the growls. Personally, I'm a huge fan of Akerfeldt's clean vocals - I prefer him over any other prog/metal vocalist I can think of. His clean vocals seem to get better with age to me.
I'm an old guy, and it's taken me a long time to come around to growls.
About 10-12 years ago, one of the kids that worked for me, upon learning that I was a huge Dream Theater fan, made me a copy of Ghost Reveries. I held my nose to the growls, but found I really liked the album. Especially Harlequin Forest.
I ended up buying it. But I've kind of shelved them. I think musically, they are amazing. I just think that Akerfeldt's cleans lack so much in dynamics.
All good bro!
-
Just out of curiosity, how much of their music have you listened to? :lol
Actually, I have Ghost Reveries and I like it a lot. I have a copy of Watershed and I think I've listened to it a couple of times. I have also listened to Heritage.
I have also listened to My Arms Your Hearse.
So I have listened completely to four of their albums in my life, and Ghost Reveries multiple times. I think they are a great band.
But vocally, I think they are terrible. I'm not a huge fan of growls, but can definitely tolerate them if the music is good enough. But Akerfeldt's clean vocals are terrible in my opinion. There's nothing to them.
That's cool then, at least you've given them a chance. I know some people that dismissed the band as soon as they heard the growls. Personally, I'm a huge fan of Akerfeldt's clean vocals - I prefer him over any other prog/metal vocalist I can think of. His clean vocals seem to get better with age to me.
I just think that Akerfeldt's cleans lack so much in dynamics.
Actually this is kind of a fair point. He doesn't do a ton with his range, he doesn't go super high or low. For me though, what he lacks in range he more than makes up for in tone and how he uses his voice to fit the song. Personally I love his vocals. I think his tone on his cleans is beautiful. Mixed together with the style of harsh vocals he does is just perfect for all pre retro 70's prog trash they've been putting out lately (shots fire at Kattelox and 425 :biggrin: )
-
Yeah, unfortunately there aren't more studies of and dissertations based on pop music. Academia is usually a bit slow on figuring out that "oh wait there's a new genre of music" (jazz didn't start entering into academia until the late 60s/early 70s, iirc). Clercq and Temperley's "A Corpus Analysis of Rock Harmony" (https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f740/94060afe718a7304c0bf69496ddbb8dfbf67.pdf) is another good one; it focuses on using statistical analysis to determine what's actually going on in pop and rock harmony. It's a hugely influential essay for me as a music theorist, and it helped me appreciate what's going on in a lot of pop music much more once I understood that the rules were different from what I was used to lol. As far as edutainment lighter stuff, Todd in the Shadows (https://www.youtube.com/user/carlos10009) is a good critic to watch and Holistic Songwriting (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLdJiGmD0fTvt3JLduOjR0lvoQ82ek461u) does a fantastic job on using some theory and industry knowledge for breaking down pop and rock artists. Understanding breeds familiarity, familiarity breeds enjoyment, and enjoyment breeds more understanding!
Back to your main point, tho, I think it's important to remember that there was overall less music being produced and released then. The last 20 years or so have democratized music and boosted the population to such an extreme degree that there's an absurd amount of music being produced nowadays. It's not that there's less good experimental and left-field music pop music being made (there's a lot more of it now), it's just that there's a lot more stuff out there that's competing for your attention. And, as usual, most of it is mediocre.
Even arguing for popularity, a lot of these more experimental outings are incredibly popular. Radiohead's last album was massive on social media when its first single was released, FO's Blonde hit #1 and has spent 116 weeks on the chart, Kendrick Lamar/Kanye/Tool are pretty much household names, etc. etc. Heck, Snarky Puppy and Joey Alexander have gotten a lot of attention and Dream Theater hit the Top 10 with The freaking Astonishing. Even major artists like Katy Perry are having trouble putting butts in seats because it's 2019 and everyone is still poor and honestly pop is in a temporary slump outside of Taylor Swift (because of sad rap becoming the "musical embodiment of the zeitgeist" of the last 5 years).
Ed Sheeran's popularity today vexes me.
He is a fantastic songwriter and if you see him live he is a phenomenal guitar player, it's not too tough to see why he is popular.
-
Just out of curiosity, how much of their music have you listened to? :lol
Actually, I have Ghost Reveries and I like it a lot. I have a copy of Watershed and I think I've listened to it a couple of times. I have also listened to Heritage.
I have also listened to My Arms Your Hearse.
So I have listened completely to four of their albums in my life, and Ghost Reveries multiple times. I think they are a great band.
But vocally, I think they are terrible. I'm not a huge fan of growls, but can definitely tolerate them if the music is good enough. But Akerfeldt's clean vocals are terrible in my opinion. There's nothing to them.
That's cool then, at least you've given them a chance. I know some people that dismissed the band as soon as they heard the growls. Personally, I'm a huge fan of Akerfeldt's clean vocals - I prefer him over any other prog/metal vocalist I can think of. His clean vocals seem to get better with age to me.
I just think that Akerfeldt's cleans lack so much in dynamics.
Actually this is kind of a fair point. He doesn't do a ton with his range, he doesn't go super high or low. For me though, what he lacks in range he more than makes up for in tone and how he uses his voice to fit the song. Personally I love his vocals. I think his tone on his cleans is beautiful. Mixed together with the style of harsh vocals he does is just perfect for all pre retro 70's prog trash they've been putting out lately (shots fire at Kattelox and 425 :biggrin: )
I'm totally with TAC on all this - obviously a good band, super talented. But I have never been able to get real into them because I'm not a fan of the vocals.
-
I am totally with TAC on this point, by the way. I can't say I know every song, but since Mike started pimping Akerfeldt, I've been reminded how "great" they are, and I'm sure they're very talented. Just not my cup of tea.
-
I've never been able to get into Opeth either.... mostly due to the vocals. I don't think I've given them a fair shot though, haven't listened to anything with the clean vocals. I saw them open for DT twice and felt they were solid musically, but vocally not my thing. I never really had a desire to get an album after seeing them, but my friends all love them and think I would. I was going to see them a couple years ago with Gojira and Devin Townsend but I got super sick that day, maybe I'd have enjoyed their headline show.
-
Well, I come out of the Opeth closet too at this point, I never ever managed to find anything to like in them.
They play extreme metal with harsh vocals, I don't like them.
"But they made an acoustic album!" oh cool......... I found it boring.
"Now they're more proggish" well, why not, let's listen... nope. Can't relate.
Of course it's me, it's not that everyone else who likes them is wrong, but there was a time when Opeth seemed to be this super ultra cool kickass band that all my friends loved, and I was the very only one who could never, ever liked them. Even saw them live at a festival, lost interested two songs in or maybe earlier.
-
Damnation holds a special place in my heart for being the album that made me want to play guitar. I still play Death Whispered A Lullaby and Windowpane quite a bit on my acoustic.
-
Opeth is way way way better without the growls. See: my post in the favorite Opeth album thread. Blackwater's a good album but Watershed has the perfect balance of light and heavy. Pale Communion is one of the best things they've ever done. I like Axenrot more than Lopez. Every growly album prior to Watershed other than Blackwater is a dud. I'll give everyone time to clutch their pearls.
The thing about Opeth is that while I'm not crazy about the growls, the clean vocals are so much worse.
They suck. What do you want me to say?
But Akerfeldt's clean vocals are terrible in my opinion. There's nothing to them.
The only response that seems fitting is simply:
:facepalm:
And by :facepalm: I don't mean that TAC's opinion is :facepalm: worthy. I mean :facepalm: because I simply cannot believe that TAC posted something about music that I agree with so wholeheartedly. So, yeah, :facepalm:
tl;dnr: :facepalm:
-
:lol
-
I think Damnation is by far the best they've done.
I... am not a fan of Damnation.
The only pre-GR Opeth album I've much enjoyed is BWP, and even then... only in very infrequent doses.
-
Maybe this is one controversial opinion, maybe it's not but:
Vocals aside, I don't think Death's Symbolic is musically any more aggressive than Metallica's And Justice for All.
-
Ghost Reveries is by far the best Opeth album tbh
-
I shall strangle the next person who calls Damnation an acoustic record because IT IS NOT AN ACOUSTIC RECORD.
-
I shall strangle the next person who calls Damnation an acoustic record because IT IS NOT AN ACOUSTIC RECORD.
:lol
-
Opeth is way way way better without the growls. See: my post in the favorite Opeth album thread. Blackwater's a good album but Watershed has the perfect balance of light and heavy. Pale Communion is one of the best things they've ever done. I like Axenrot more than Lopez. Every growly album prior to Watershed other than Blackwater is a dud. I'll give everyone time to clutch their pearls.
The thing about Opeth is that while I'm not crazy about the growls, the clean vocals are so much worse.
They suck. What do you want me to say?
But Akerfeldt's clean vocals are terrible in my opinion. There's nothing to them.
The only response that seems fitting is simply:
:facepalm:
And by :facepalm: I don't mean that TAC's opinion is :facepalm: worthy. I mean :facepalm: because I simply cannot believe that TAC posted something about music that I agree with so wholeheartedly. So, yeah, :facepalm:
tl;dnr: :facepalm:
Let's go in on a Powerball ticket! :lol
-
I don't find it controversial to not like Opeth - outside of forums, I can count the amount of Opeth fans I've met on one hand.
-
I have quite limited knowledge of Judas Priest, but I have pretty much liked every Ripper Owens era songs I've heard. I never was interested in them when I was teenager, because Breaking the Law was pretty much the only song by them I knew (I thought it was lame then and I still think so, it sounds more like they put a piece of chewed up gum on their teacher's chair instead of doing something criminal) and I straight up dismissed them. Now I know they have songs that are much better, but I still feel the Owens era is unfairly judged.
-
Damnation holds a special place in my heart for being the album that made me want to play guitar. I still play Death Whispered A Lullaby and Windowpane quite a bit on my acoustic.
I was really getting into playing guitar when I discovered Damnation and I spent hours trying to learn the songs off the album.
-
Also, I adore everything Sepultura did between Schizophrenia and Chaos A.D., but Roots is probably the worst album I've ever heard and Roots Bloody Roots is one of the worst metal songs ever. Why did one of the most badass metal bands ever decide to turn into Korn-light? :censored
-
I shall strangle the next person who calls Damnation an acoustic record because IT IS NOT AN ACOUSTIC RECORD.
No, it is not. But the songs sound fucking amazing on an acoustic. Better, I think.
-
Not sure if controversial, but this is way, way too many posts devoted to Opeth.
-
I have quite limited knowledge of Judas Priest, but I have pretty much liked every Ripper Owens era songs I've heard. I never was interested in them when I was teenager, because Breaking the Law was pretty much the only song by them I knew (I thought it was lame then and I still think so, it sounds more like they put a piece of chewed up gum on their teacher's chair instead of doing something criminal) and I straight up dismissed them. Now I know they have songs that are much better, but I still feel the Owens era is unfairly judged.
I feel the Ripper era has some parallels with the Load / ReLoad albums, and the two albums Blaze Bayley made with Iron Maiden. In all three cases, the first record was a shock, and people loathed it, but even if not perfect, they were actually kinda good in retrospect. The second yeah, it actually sucked. :D
-
Ghost Reveries is by far the best Opeth album tbh
Ghost Reveries is by far the most OVERRATED Opeth album tbh.
-
Randy Rhoads is OVER-LOVED. I just don't get such a huge, blind love, hype and worship for this guy and his guitar playing. I know he unfortunately died young and it was loss for rock, but anyway I don't get it, although he was undoubtedly a very talented player.
-
Randy Rhoads is OVER-LOVED. I just don't get such a huge, blind love, hype and worship for this guy and his guitar playing. I know he unfortunately died young and it was loss for rock, but anyway I don't get it, although he was undoubtedly a very talented player.
Kinda feel the same honestly. Good guitarist, wasn't around long... played for Quiet Riot... and Ozzy. Meh.
-
Randy Rhoads is OVER-LOVED. I just don't get such a huge, blind love, hype and worship for this guy and his guitar playing. I know he unfortunately died young and it was loss for rock, but anyway I don't get it, although he was undoubtedly a very talented player.
Kinda feel the same honestly. Good guitarist, wasn't around long... played for Quiet Riot... and Ozzy. Meh.
The thing is, even as it was happening, and shortly after his death, he was being recognized as one of the great young guitarists. His playing was inspiring...in real time.
Sure, as a musician that died young, his legend grows... But for those of us that were around as it was happening, it's important to keep his influence and memory alive.
The other thing is that by all accounts, he was a very nice kid. I think that plays into it.
-
Randy Rhoads is OVER-LOVED. I just don't get such a huge, blind love, hype and worship for this guy and his guitar playing. I know he unfortunately died young and it was loss for rock, but anyway I don't get it, although he was undoubtedly a very talented player.
Kinda feel the same honestly. Good guitarist, wasn't around long... played for Quiet Riot... and Ozzy. Meh.
The thing is, even as it was happening, and shortly after his death, he was being recognized as one of the great young guitarists. His playing was inspiring...in real time.
Sure, as a musician that died young, his legend grows... But for those of us that were around as it was happening, it's important to keep his influence and memory alive.
The other thing is that by all accounts, he was a very nice kid. I think that plays into it.
Boom. This.
It's hard to unlisten to everything you've heard since (including the 1,000's of Eddie/Randy clones that hit in the 80's), but I have about four or five (no more) "WHOA!" moments from listening to music, and one of them was listening to Blizzard Of Ozz. I make no apologies for flying the Randy flag.
-
I mean, I kinda get that. I hear it about Jimi Hendrix all the time. But I think Hendrix is legitimately badass. Rhoads... okay, a few good solos. Couple nice riffs. But... yeah. Just don't get it. Too much hype in my opinion, 30 years gone by, I just don't think he's in the pantheon anymore. Of course, you guys would know better than me (I haven't listened to everything he's done).
-
I mean, I kinda get that. I hear it about Jimi Hendrix all the time. But I think Hendrix is legitimately badass. Rhoads... okay, a few good solos. Couple nice riffs. But... yeah. Just don't get it. Too much hype in my opinion, 30 years gone by, I just don't think he's in the pantheon anymore. Of course, you guys would know better than me (I haven't listened to everything he's done).
The "you had to be there" crowd will always elevate Rhoads higher than those of us who weren't there. Don't get me wrong, Rhoads' work on both of those Ozzy albums was terrific, and I am a big fan of both of those records, but he is not even close to being one of my favorite players. Too many other great ones out there.
-
My opinion on Rhaods is that his playing and songwriting are great, but honestly, I think his tone sucked.
-
I mean, I kinda get that. I hear it about Jimi Hendrix all the time. But I think Hendrix is legitimately badass. Rhoads... okay, a few good solos. Couple nice riffs. But... yeah. Just don't get it. Too much hype in my opinion, 30 years gone by, I just don't think he's in the pantheon anymore. Of course, you guys would know better than me (I haven't listened to everything he's done).
The "you had to be there" crowd will always elevate Rhoads higher than those of us who weren't there. Don't get me wrong, Rhoads' work on both of those Ozzy albums was terrific, and I am a big fan of both of those records, but he is not even close to being one of my favorite players. Too many other great ones out there.
First, not comparing Rhoads and Hendrix. Hendrix is, in my view, the second most influential figure in rock and roll (behind the Beatles; I suppose you could argue Elvis was up there too). Listen now to those first three Hendrix records, and every two minutes it's "Oh, so THAT'S where so-and-so got that from!". He influenced everyone, including the greats (Blackmore, Van Halen).
Second, what Kev wrote doesn't have to be mutually exclusive. I DO rate Rhoads pretty highly, but I also recognize that he has four albums, two of them average at best, one one that, in my view, is legendary. His was a promise as much as anything. I often cite "Tonight" as his greatest moment, and it's largely symbolic, since the essence of that song is the epic solo at the end that is (tragically) faded before it finishes. He IS one of my favorite players, but I'm able to recognize that something like Blackmore's catalogue (for sheer variance) or Gilmour's is probably overall a greater accomplishment.
-
The older I get, the more I am tuned into what I really like and what I... adjacent-like. Idk how to explain it? I semi-like it? I listen to it because sometimes it has some of the characteristics of what I really, REALLY like? I used to listen to music because it was good - well made, original, competently produced and well performed. But there's so many objectively great albums that I don't feel drawn to more than some mid 2000's pop rock gothy junk.
Second opinion: there's so many artists whose fans believe all of their catalog is more or less on the same level of quality, but it isn't and perpetuating that belief only keeps people from getting into the artist. Devin Townsend, for instance. You have to invest like a month of your time to start getting into Devy, and fans will say that if you like heavy music, and melodic music, and cooky music, and poppy music, there's something to be had on each of his albums, and none are considered so much better than others (besides Ocean Machine and Terria). And they are right, and those albums are objectively good, the vast majority of them. But my god, you need a flowchart for all of that. And most of us will only find four or five albums that really, really resonate with us in the pile. Same with Steven Wilson.
-
That's funny you wrote that first paragraph. I'm a musical whore, in that I tend to like a little bit of everything - AC/DC to Zappa, with some Taylor Swift and Harry Styles thrown in for good measure. But in recent months I've sort of resolved myself to the idea that I don't like things that I either should or that I used to. Most of the Seattle bands (except for Soundgarden and Mother Love Bone) fall into this. I got a copy of the newest Pearl Jam for like $1.00 on line and I was listening and I'm like "wow this is vintage Pearl Jam... but it's doing absolutely nothing for me."
-
Taste change over the years for all except for Tim. :lol
-
Taste change over the years for all except for Tim. :lol
Hahaha.
And yet, sometimes they don't. I say this to you because you'll get it, not because I want to argue with you: I put on Fly By Night out of the blue this weekend on my home system, and I was blown away by how good that record is for a young band barely above water and with a brand new drummer. It's almost a perfect record, really.
-
Even with bands I love, albums I used to play never get touched anymore. Rush is a good example. I never reach for the self titled or COS. I love Rush, I just don't play them anymore. Now FBN, I do spin once in a while.
-
Even with bands I love, albums I used to play never get touched anymore. Rush is a good example. I never reach for the self titled or COS. I love Rush, I just don't play them anymore. Now FBN, I do spin once in a while.
I call albums like that "retired favorites."
-
I think Zappa and Devin Townsend are overrated. And I think the Coverdale/Hughes Deep Purple lineup was better than Gillan/Glover.
-
Even with bands I love, albums I used to play never get touched anymore. Rush is a good example. I never reach for the self titled or COS. I love Rush, I just don't play them anymore. Now FBN, I do spin once in a while.
I call albums like that "retired favorites."
As great as Led Zep IV is. I just can't listen to it anymore. I played it too damn much. That is definitely a retired favorite.
-
Even with bands I love, albums I used to play never get touched anymore. Rush is a good example. I never reach for the self titled or COS. I love Rush, I just don't play them anymore. Now FBN, I do spin once in a while.
I call albums like that "retired favorites."
Well, there's only so much time to listen over and over the same song.
The quantity of music avalaible is ever growing, be it new albums from bands you know, and new bands you discover, and the time to listen to said music is always decreasing, or at the very best not increasing. There must be a time when an album falls out of your daily playlist, then weekly, and then monthly.
I will always call Iron Maiden my favorite band, but I don't feel the need to listen to The Trooper for thr 57595474373th time. Scenes from a Memory is my favorite record of all time, I can't even remember the last time I heard it. Wait, I suddenly remembered, I put it on while I was dozing off once some months ago, the time before that.... hell if I know.
-
As great as Led Zep IV is. I just can't listen to it anymore. I played it too damn much. That is definitely a retired favorite.
That is me with The Wall. I spun it a few months ago, first time I had listened to it from start to finish in years, and was reminded of how amazing it is and why it still might be my personal number 1 album ever, but it is definitely a retired favorite that I will reach for once a leap year (although certain tracks I reach for when doing the random play thing, like Mother).
Well, there's only so much time to listen over and over the same song.
The quantity of music avalaible is ever growing, be it new albums from bands you know, and new bands you discover, and the time to listen to said music is always decreasing, or at the very best not increasing. There must be a time when an album falls out of your daily playlist, then weekly, and then monthly.
I will always call Iron Maiden my favorite band, but I don't feel the need to listen to The Trooper for thr 57595474373th time. Scenes from a Memory is my favorite record of all time, I can't even remember the last time I heard it. Wait, I suddenly remembered, I put it on while I was dozing off once some months ago, the time before that.... hell if I know.
This is a big part of it as well. My album collection is so massive now, and I simply don't have the time to listen to most of it nearly as much as I want to.
-
THat's a real thing, though. Back in the day, you'd save your money for an album, and then finally get it, and unless it sucked balls for lunch, you would listen to it, and play it, and put in the time. Now, even with really good albums - the new Slash, the new Rival Sons - I just can't/won't put in the same amount of time.
There are albums that to this day, I can sing the lyrics of the entire album from top to bottom (the first couple Kiss records, Paranoid, Vol. 4, couple AC/DC records, the first Asia record) just from hearing them so many times. Now? I will occassionally hear a song somewhere - TV, bar, whatever - and "Shazam" it and find that I own it and don't even know it. That makes me sad.
-
THat's a real thing, though. Back in the day, you'd save your money for an album, and then finally get it, and unless it sucked balls for lunch, you would listen to it, and play it, and put in the time. Now, even with really good albums - the new Slash, the new Rival Sons - I just can't/won't put in the same amount of time.
There are albums that to this day, I can sing the lyrics of the entire album from top to bottom (the first couple Kiss records, Paranoid, Vol. 4, couple AC/DC records, the first Asia record) just from hearing them so many times. Now? I will occassionally hear a song somewhere - TV, bar, whatever - and "Shazam" it and find that I own it and don't even know it. That makes me sad.
Hmmmm....:P
-
I love Rush, Dream Theater, Queensryche, Iron Maiden and Fates Warning, among others in that similar genre.
But I also love the first four records of.......Pet Shop Boys.
-
I love Rush, Dream Theater, Queensryche, Iron Maiden and Fates Warning, among others in that similar genre.
But I also love the first four records of.......Pet Shop Boys.
I bought Iron Maiden, Piece Of Mind and Duran Duran, Rio on the same day.
Brotha from another....
-
Is this the new Fogey thread??
-
the only good band is brokencyde
-
Is this the new Fogey thread??
Since you posted....
-
I don't like Bruce Dickinson's voice.
-
Is this the new Fogey thread??
Since you posted....
(https://media.tenor.com/images/9abd4289f8bc984075bda689d7f5ada7/tenor.gif)
-
the only good band is six roaming owls
damn right :metal
-
I love Rush, Dream Theater, Queensryche, Iron Maiden and Fates Warning, among others in that similar genre.
But I also love the first four records of.......Pet Shop Boys.
I bought Iron Maiden, Piece Of Mind and Duran Duran, Rio on the same day.
Brotha from another....
Duran Duran Rio is a legendary album.
-
It's a weird thing to remember but I rode my bicycle to my cousin's house and he saw both cassettes and thought what an odd combo. Now he loves both albums as well.
-
I love Rush, Dream Theater, Queensryche, Iron Maiden and Fates Warning, among others in that similar genre.
But I also love the first four records of.......Pet Shop Boys.
I've got your back on this one. Pet Shop Boys have tons of good songs over the years. Their early stuff seems to be the most consistent, but later albums like Fundamental and Electric are really good from start to finish, and Yes had some of their best and catchiest songs ever. Good band.
-
I never really got into them, but I had plenty of friends who did back in the day, and I always liked what I heard. It's pretty widely acknowledged that they put out solid music. I'm not sure it's "controversial."
-
I love Rush, Dream Theater, Queensryche, Iron Maiden and Fates Warning, among others in that similar genre.
But I also love the first four records of.......Pet Shop Boys.
I've got your back on this one. Pet Shop Boys have tons of good songs over the years. Their early stuff seems to be the most consistent, but later albums like Fundamental and Electric are really good from start to finish, and Yes had some of their best and catchiest songs ever. Good band.
Do you dig Depeche Mode?
-
My best memory of Depeche Mode was going to the Florida State Fair when I was about 15 or 16 and riding the Himilaya. They played People are People loud as hell and they sped the ride up once the repeated "I can't understand what makes a man hate another man" part near the end of the song. So much innocent fun!
-
Korn...their best album is....
Take A Look In The Mirror...
Linkin Park.....
Meteora
-
Is it even controversial to say Meteora is the best LP album? Even though Hybrid Theory was a instant classic, as a 12 year old getting Meteora on release day after years of hype, I always felt it was a more mature and well rounded album. Not necessarily better, but not worse. Two good albums that were kinda neck and neck.
Controversially for me however is that I like Minutes to Midnight quite a lot in the LP discography. Maybe even my favorite. The Little Things You Give Away is my favorite LP song and the album also has some other bangers like Given Up, No More Sorrow and Bleed it Out. I also don't mind the ballads even though I know some people find them cheesy.
-
As a big Rush fan I think that their debut is awful and Working Man is not better than most Greta Van Fleet tunes.
-
As a big Rush fan I think that their debut is awful and Working Man is not better than most Greta Van Fleet tunes.
cleaner vocal lines by Geddy though IMHO
-
As a big Rush fan I think that their debut is awful and Working Man is not better than most Greta Van Fleet tunes.
cleaner vocal lines by Geddy though IMHO
.I have no idea what this means. :lol
-
It's as if you wrote it yourself! :lol
-
It's as if you wrote it yourself! :lol
At least I understand my madness. :lol
-
Is it even controversial to say Meteora is the best LP album? Even though Hybrid Theory was a instant classic, as a 12 year old getting Meteora on release day after years of hype, I always felt it was a more mature and well rounded album. Not necessarily better, but not worse. Two good albums that were kinda neck and neck.
Controversially for me however is that I like Minutes to Midnight quite a lot in the LP discography. Maybe even my favorite. The Little Things You Give Away is my favorite LP song and the album also has some other bangers like Given Up, No More Sorrow and Bleed it Out. I also don't mind the ballads even though I know some people find them cheesy.
I would still put Hybrid Theory at the top. Nostalgia has a lot to do with it. I remember listening to it right after the release, before it was huge. Meteora I would put second, followed by Minutes. Everything else is about on the same level. Songs I love and songs I don’t really care for. But those first three are solid albums.
-
Judas Priest is not only better than Iron Maiden, but it's not even close.
:lol Kev, sometimes your posts just crack me up.
-
Controversial opinion: rock and metal rule, but there's a ton of other music out there in the world that is way better than almost all rock and metal music.
-
Controversial opinion: rock and metal rule, but there's a ton of other music out there in the world that is way better than almost all rock and metal music.
I can agree with this. I end up buying those cds as well and now I'm finding myself listening to those more than I do Rock and Metal.
-
Controversial opinion: rock and metal rule, but there's a ton of other music out there in the world that is way better than almost all rock and metal music.
:lol Kev, sometimes your posts just crack me up.
-
Opinion: metal is the only genre of music ever and anything not classified as metal isn't real music
-
Country is the most blandest/boring music out there. Just about every Male vocalist sounds the same. I do, but at the same time don't understand it's huge popularity. Of course, i'm just talking about in the States. There are some people I know who were heavily into Classic Rock back in the day (Mid ages folks, like 40 years and older) but now are big Country/Pop music fans because it's what they're supposed to gravitate to since they're older now, or atleast that's what I think.
There may be better, interesting Country music that is more unknown, but from what I have heard, it's all very samey.
-
Controversial opinion: rock and metal rule, but there's a ton of other music out there in the world that is way better than almost all rock and metal music.
:lol Kev, sometimes your posts just crack me up.
:)
I'll quote (or paraphrase) - MP on this one - there are no bests, only favorites.
Metal is the best for me, because it's my favorite. For others it's different, and that's cool.
-
Controversial opinion: rock and metal rule, but there's a ton of other music out there in the world that is way better than almost all rock and metal music.
:lol Kev, sometimes your posts just crack me up.
:)
I'll quote (or paraphrase) - MP on this one - there are no bests, only favorites.
Metal is the best for me, because it's my favorite. For others it's different, and that's cool.
I actually like to get into the weeds on this subject, especially with "best vs. favorite" - for me, I'll take great metal (what I think is great, anyway) over almost anything else. Nothing resonates with me quite like that. So it's definitely my favorite. At the same time, however, I think there's a lot of other music that offers so much that metal/rock/prog just doesn't offer. And above all that, the best artists - in my opinion - are not bound to one genre or play in only one style, they're the ones that can do a variety of things and blend styles together.
-
I'm just a music whore. I like most except for country and rap.
I like when a touch of one style of music is mixed with another. Example is when PT went heavy. it was like a mix of Pink Floyd & Tool.
-
Controversial opinion: rock and metal rule, but there's a ton of other music out there in the world that is way better than almost all rock and metal music.
:lol Kev, sometimes your posts just crack me up.
:)
I'll quote (or paraphrase) - MP on this one - there are no bests, only favorites.
Metal is the best for me, because it's my favorite. For others it's different, and that's cool.
I actually like to get into the weeds on this subject, especially with "best vs. favorite" - for me, I'll take great metal (what I think is great, anyway) over almost anything else. Nothing resonates with me quite like that. So it's definitely my favorite. At the same time, however, I think there's a lot of other music that offers so much that metal/rock/prog just doesn't offer. And above all that, the best artists - in my opinion - are not bound to one genre or play in only one style, they're the ones that can do a variety of things and blend styles together.
I don't really agree with that. Most of my favorite artists do indeed blend things together, and I think that's what makes them so interesting for me. But that experience may be different for others.
-
Controversial opinion: rock and metal rule, but there's a ton of other music out there in the world that is way better than almost all rock and metal music.
:lol Kev, sometimes your posts just crack me up.
:)
I'll quote (or paraphrase) - MP on this one - there are no bests, only favorites.
Metal is the best for me, because it's my favorite. For others it's different, and that's cool.
I actually like to get into the weeds on this subject, especially with "best vs. favorite" - for me, I'll take great metal (what I think is great, anyway) over almost anything else. Nothing resonates with me quite like that. So it's definitely my favorite. At the same time, however, I think there's a lot of other music that offers so much that metal/rock/prog just doesn't offer. And above all that, the best artists - in my opinion - are not bound to one genre or play in only one style, they're the ones that can do a variety of things and blend styles together.
It's probably just the weed, actually. :D
-
:rollin Honestly you're not wrong. I got into that around the time several pretty bad events in my life happened, all within a short period of time, so about 7-8 years ago my musical taste very rapidly changed from "metal, metal, and nothing but metal" into exploring a ton of other styles of music. Now my listening habits have changed; metal is reserved for car rides and working or exercising, it's too loud and too much for home listening most of the time. Home is for pretty much everything else.
-
Yeah, I hear you. I mostly just reserve listening to metal to ALL THE TIME.
-
It's probably just the weed, actually. :D
:lol
And above all that, the best artists - in my opinion - are not bound to one genre or play in only one style, they're the ones that can do a variety of things and blend styles together.
One reason why 311 is one of my all time favorite bands, I don't talk much about them here since their relevance in prog metal is none, but they encompass a large and varied sound and manage to pull it off all so well and have consistently made original music. Maybe the weed has something to do with that too.
Either way, I think I generally like metal music more than other genres but there's certainly reasons to think other genres have more to offer.
-
The thing I like most about genres other than metal is that, when I am listening to them, they make me realize how much I miss listening to metal, so I end up going back and listening to metal again.
-
And above all that, the best artists - in my opinion - are not bound to one genre or play in only one style, they're the ones that can do a variety of things and blend styles together.
That could be true, but to my ears this more often than not translates to the equivalent of "Jack of all trades, master of none." I'd usually rather a band do one thing and excel at it than a band do lots of different things to varying degrees of quality. There are exceptions of course.
-
And above all that, the best artists - in my opinion - are not bound to one genre or play in only one style, they're the ones that can do a variety of things and blend styles together.
That could be true, but to my ears this more often than not translates to the equivalent of "Jack of all trades, master of none." I'd usually rather a band do one thing and excel at it than a band do lots of different things to varying degrees of quality. There are exceptions of course.
Oh yeah, don't get me wrong. Just 'cause a band throws the kitchen sink in doesn't mean it's automatically going to be good, BUT! for example, Toto. I freaking love them, one of my all time favorite acts, why? 'cause no two albums sound alike and they've always done something different and new and they're damn good at it. I suppose I should rephrase that; musicians who can do a variety of things are usually ones I prefer, as opposed to a band just trying everything under the sun whether they're good at it or not.
And yeah I usually always come back to metal, like I said there are things metal gives me that I just can't get in every other genre. I think this whole train of thought was kickstarted by seeing one of my arrogant metalhead friends bash pop music and I became a grumpy young old man about it :lol
-
I think there are few people who actually listen to *nothing* but metal. There are some, but I bet the vast majority like, even love, at least one song that's not metal. Even those who might make negative comments about "pop" in general probably like something. But if you think metal fans are bad - well, we're far from the worst. And, we generally don't think fans of other genres of music are degenerates of some sort.
-
Personally, I think ya'll are really close minded with how few genres you listen to.
Me? I listen to both.
Country AND Western.
-
Personally, I think ya'll are really close minded with how few genres you listen to.
Me? I listen to both.
Country AND Western.
Defriended. :lol
-
I think there are few people who actually listen to *nothing* but metal. There are some, but I bet the vast majority like, even love, at least one song that's not metal. Even those who might make negative comments about "pop" in general probably like something. But if you think metal fans are bad - well, we're far from the worst. And, we generally don't think fans of other genres of music are degenerates of some sort.
Well, I didn't mean that literally - most metalheads I know at least like some rock and maybe even some blues, sure. But you wouldn't catch them dead listening to classical, funk, jazz, etc. and they would never pay for an album outside of their wheelhouse. Out here in the boonies that's how it is, anyway. They'd recognize Billy Joel's name, maybe, but not one song, if you know what I'm saying. If I found a genie in a bottle I would wish for everyone to have a very high thirst for musical variety in their lives :)
-
Judas Priest is not only better than Iron Maiden, but it's not even close.
:lol Kev, sometimes your posts just crack me up.
I bring the comedy, unintentional or not. :P
-
No, I know you didn't mean it literally, but I just meant that because most like at least a little something else, that they can understand others might as well. I think making fun of especially pop music is just kind of a way to bond - even though there's probably plenty of pop songs they like. And you mention classical - it's been my experience that metal fans are wayyy more likely to like and appreciate classical music than vice versa.
I actually know way more metal fans who pride themselves on how varied their tastes are and who say things like "people would be shocked if they knew how much different music I listen to." No, I'm not shocked. Seems like someone is saying that every other day.
-
Of course we can't categorize a vast number of people based solely on what kind of music they listen to, but I think that in some cases being accepting of the metal genre (and therefore being "mentally prepared" for long songs, unconventional structures, themes that aren't all about love or lost love or getting laid or being on the beach) prepares to dive into other genres which are not immediately accessible.
At Lorena McKennitt's concerts I attended there were quite some metalheads, and I wasn't surprised in the least; I would have been more surprised to find a K-Pop fan seeing a folkish / world-ish / celtic-ish musician.
-
I don't really agree with that. Most of my favorite artists do indeed blend things together, and I think that's what makes them so interesting for me. But that experience may be different for others.
I have a theory that the very best bands are the ones that STRADDLE genres (or at least bring other genres into their "preferred" one) and rarely are the top tier bands PURELY in one genre, unless they virtually created it (ala Metallica). Genesis wasn't just prog, they were pop songwriters from the get-go. Zeppelin wasn't just "blues", they had a very deep folk streak (even in the electric material).
-
I don't really agree with that. Most of my favorite artists do indeed blend things together, and I think that's what makes them so interesting for me. But that experience may be different for others.
I have a theory that the very best bands are the ones that STRADDLE genres (or at least bring other genres into their "preferred" one) and rarely are the top tier bands PURELY in one genre, unless they virtually created it (ala Metallica). Genesis wasn't just prog, they were pop songwriters from the get-go. Zeppelin wasn't just "blues", they had a very deep folk streak (even in the electric material).
Thank you, beautifully put. Perfect adherence to a genre makes an act, well, generic to me. I love DT, prog metal bores me, and I could mention a dozen similar instances.
-
I don't really agree with that. Most of my favorite artists do indeed blend things together, and I think that's what makes them so interesting for me. But that experience may be different for others.
I have a theory that the very best bands are the ones that STRADDLE genres (or at least bring other genres into their "preferred" one) and rarely are the top tier bands PURELY in one genre, unless they virtually created it (ala Metallica). Genesis wasn't just prog, they were pop songwriters from the get-go. Zeppelin wasn't just "blues", they had a very deep folk streak (even in the electric material).
Thank you, beautifully put. Perfect adherence to a genre makes an act, well, generic to me. I love DT, prog metal bores me, and I could mention a dozen similar instances.
I pretty much agree with that in terms of my own tastes as well. (Although, I love a lot of prog metal). But I'm sure there are exceptions of artists that are more "straight" in one genre that are great, or that appeal to others if not to me.
-
I dunno. I like what I like. If it happens to be a band that fits squarely into a single genre, that's fine. If it happens to be a band that incorporates others genres or styles into their music, that's fine too. If it sounds good and someone likes it, who cares? :dunno:
-
I dunno. I like what I like. If it happens to be a band that fits squarely into a single genre, that's fine. If it happens to be a band that incorporates others genres or styles into their music, that's fine too. If it sounds good and someone likes it, who cares? :dunno:
:tup
Agreed.
-
I think there are few people who actually listen to *nothing* but metal. There are some, but I bet the vast majority like, even love, at least one song that's not metal. Even those who might make negative comments about "pop" in general probably like something. But if you think metal fans are bad - well, we're far from the worst. And, we generally don't think fans of other genres of music are degenerates of some sort.
One thing is for sure. Most metalheads are hostile towards hip hop. Anything rap is crap to them, they just tend to dismiss the entire genre of that music.
-
Opinion: metal is the only genre of music ever and anything not classified as metal isn't real music
Classical music >>>>> metal
And I'm saying this as someone who listens metal way more than classical.
Wagner's "Ride Of The Valkyries" blows (widely considered) the best songs in metal away.
-
Opinion: metal is the only genre of music ever and anything not classified as metal isn't real music
Classical music >>>>> metal
And I'm saying this as someone who listens metal way more than classical.
Wagner's "Ride Of The Valkyries" blows (widely considered) the best songs in metal away.
Elmur Fudd singing "Kill duh wabbit..." >>>>>>>>>>>>> Ride of the Valkyries.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yxiv3CBMS4M
-
Ride of the Valkyries as used in Apocalypse Now >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Ride of the Valkyries in any other context
-
Opinion: metal is the only genre of music ever and anything not classified as metal isn't real music
Classical music >>>>> metal
And I'm saying this as someone who listens metal way more than classical.
Wagner's "Ride Of The Valkyries" blows (widely considered) the best songs in metal away.
Elmur Fudd singing "Kill duh wabbit..." >>>>>>>>>>>>> Ride of the Valkyries.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yxiv3CBMS4M
Finally! Someone gets my love of Elmer’s singing.
-
Maybe not really "controversial", and I'll say it as an hyperbole catered to my selfish desires and tastes, but.... Lady Gaga should totally ditch her techno / pop style and go full on rock - metal. At the very least, she should do an acoustic album, piano and voice only, of her best known (or more fitting) songs of her catalogue, I'd buy it in an heartbeat.
Not a fan of her actual style at all, but she can sing and she can obviously can compose and on YouTube you can find piano versions of stuff like Bad Romance, Diamond Heart, The Edge of Glory which are phenomenal. I want a full album of that!
-
The Black Album is better than ...And Justice for All.
In the Court of the Crimson King is not as great as most prog fans think it is.
Gavin Harrison overplays way too much in a live setting.
-
The Black Album is better than ...And Justice for All.
Completely agree
-
Maybe not really "controversial", and I'll say it as an hyperbole catered to my selfish desires and tastes, but.... Lady Gaga should totally ditch her techno / pop style and go full on rock - metal. At the very least, she should do an acoustic album, piano and voice only, of her best known (or more fitting) songs of her catalogue, I'd buy it in an heartbeat.
Not a fan of her actual style at all, but she can sing and she can obviously can compose and on YouTube you can find piano versions of stuff like Bad Romance, Diamond Heart, The Edge of Glory which are phenomenal. I want a full album of that!
I'm the total opposite, maybe that's more of a controversial opinion? :P I think her electro-pop style is what gave her identity and makes a fun, artsy package of melodic weirdness, while her whole broadway / movie persona just seems like something that is retro for the sake of it.
Electronic elements in production don't make the music any less "real" or musical.
-
AJFA > Black Album easily. Heck I'd say my controversial opinion would be Load > Black Album.
-
In the Court of the Crimson King is not as great as most prog fans think it is.
King Crimson is not as great as most prog fans think it is.
-
In the Court of the Crimson King is not as great as most prog fans think it is.
King Crimson is not as great as most prog fans think it is.
Seriously: Are DT as great as everyone thinks they are? I don't think there is any one prog band absolutely every prog fan will love. I may be wrong of course.
-
In the Court of the Crimson King is not as great as most prog fans think it is.
King Crimson is not as great as most prog fans think it is.
Seriously: Are DT as great as everyone thinks they are? I don't think there is any one prog band absolutely every prog fan will love. I may be wrong of course.
Definitely not. I mean they've made some great albums but in the bigger scope of albums standing the test of time I feel like there's a reason some bands (mostly the 70s prog bands) have albums that transcend the genre and a lot of people like those albums, whereas DT doesn't really have an album like any of those. And even if some would argue the importance of Images & Words I would still say that it's a very niche market.
-
The Black Album is better than ...And Justice for All.
In the Court of the Crimson King is not as great as most prog fans think it is.
Gavin Harrison overplays way too much in a live setting.
Agree with all of these except: Load > every other Metallica album
-
Cathedral Spires is a top 10 Judas Priest song. Tends to be overlooked because of the whole Jugulator / Demolition era (Jugulator isn't even that bad), but it's outstanding. Tim is a King among men in that song.
-
In the Court of the Crimson King is not as great as most prog fans think it is.
King Crimson is not as great as most prog fans think it is.
Seriously: Are DT as great as everyone thinks they are? I don't think there is any one prog band absolutely every prog fan will love. I may be wrong of course.
Genesis is probably the closest, in my opinion.
-
In the Court of the Crimson King is not as great as most prog fans think it is.
King Crimson is not as great as most prog fans think it is.
Seriously: Are DT as great as everyone thinks they are? I don't think there is any one prog band absolutely every prog fan will love. I may be wrong of course.
Genesis is probably the closest, in my opinion.
I can't stand Genesis.
-
Maybe Pink Floyd? I've yet to meet someone who actually hates Pink Floyd
-
This will come across as a serious nitpicking, but hey, if this isn't the forum for any kind of musical pet peeves, I don't know where else to go ;D
While I'm not against a click track per se, I think it robs us of something so little but yet that I find exciting - the drummer actually counting the song in. It's something that pumps you up, that comes handful in many situations, such as:
- They're making the "end of the song noise" holding a note to lead directly into the next song, and hearing the next song being counted in prepares you for what's about to start;
- If you know the set, and they're in the above situation, with the song being counted in you can prepare for the exact moment when you can start to sing the initial chorus or hum along to the riff or whatever;
- It's a nice anticipation and buildup, when you're near the end of an Iron Maiden show for example you know that 4 slow counts mean Fear of the Dark is about to start and you can either rejoice, or be annoyed that once again you have to hear Fear of the Dark.
I accept the click track as help, but it should be hidden and masked away. The song "magically" starting out of nowhere makes for a dramatic surprise, but it's also a dead giveaway that they're all synchronized with a click track.
-
In the Court of the Crimson King is not as great as most prog fans think it is.
King Crimson is not as great as most prog fans think it is.
:lol
So true!
-
Genesis is really bad and I don't understand how they ever had much success.
-
Yes Genesis is terrible, though I can see why 80s pop Genesis was big. That 70s stuff though....
-
You all are whack. :)
(Full disclosure, I'm burning my CDs and DVDs to a network drive, and I literally finished with the "Genesis" material last night. So for the past week I've had nothing but Genesis, from Trespass (twice) through to burning the audio from the "When In Rome" DVD (it's different than the "Live Over Europe" CD from the same tour) and I have to say, they're better than I remember. More than ever I believe Phil is one of the greatest drummers in rock, Tony Banks is on par with Rick Wakeman, and Steve Harris was not drunk when he said that Mike Rutherford is one of the best and most underrated bassists in rock.)
-
Yeah, I think I'll have to agree with Genesis being really bad as well. I've tried many times to see what folks like Stadler see and always end up confused and frustrated. Take their definitive epic "Supper's Ready", I've probably heard it 100 times and it still sounds like a cobbled up mess.
In other words, I'm with TAC on this one. :'(
-
I just don't really care much for any classic prog, so how about that for controversial :P
-
I just don't really care much for any classic prog, so how about that for controversial :P
Rush considered classic prog? Cause other than them, I agree.
-
I just don't really care much for any classic prog, so how about that for controversial :P
I don't know about controversial, but I agree.
-
Yeah, I think I'll have to agree with Genesis being really bad as well. I've tried many times to see what folks like Stadler see and always end up confused and frustrated. Take their definitive epic "Supper's Ready", I've probably heard it 100 times and it still sounds like a cobbled up mess.
In other words, I'm with TAC on this one. :'(
The Cinema Show? No? The live In The Cage Medley from 3SL? No?
-
I just don't really care much for any classic prog, so how about that for controversial :P
Rush considered classic prog? Cause other than them, I agree.
Nah, Rush was a hard rock band that stuck their foot in the deep end of prog for a few years, but at heart was always a hard rock band, first and foremost.
You all are whack. :)
Agreed. Genesis was terrific, no matter what era we are talking.
-
70s Genesis is possibly the greatest music ever you fucks.
-
....and none were given. :lol
-
I bought Selling England By The Pound for $5. Yuck.
-
I bought Selling England By The Pound for $5. Yuck.
Not enough dairy for you? :corn :)
-
....and none were given. :lol
:lol
-
I bought Selling England By The Pound for $5. Yuck.
Not enough dairy for you? :corn :)
:lol TOO much dairy!
-
John Petrucci can play guitar.
Pink Floyd released Dark Side of the Moon.
Justin Bieber is Canadian.
-
I bought Selling England By The Pound for $5. Yuck.
Someone owes you $3.71 change.
-
First Kev, now Podaar...
-
You must have rub n tug videos on them.
-
Yeah, I think I'll have to agree with Genesis being really bad as well. I've tried many times to see what folks like Stadler see and always end up confused and frustrated. Take their definitive epic "Supper's Ready", I've probably heard it 100 times and it still sounds like a cobbled up mess.
In other words, I'm with TAC on this one. :'(
The Cinema Show? No? The live In The Cage Medley from 3SL? No?
Gabriel era Genesis is seriously hit or miss. I haven't heard Supper's Ready 100 times, but it's never connected with me. The instrumental part of The Cinema Show is great; the beginning is fine but nothing great. The Firth of Fifth is great. 20% of The Lamb is great, but most of it is nonsense.
Genesis from and after the self-titled album is 90% schlock.
The five album run from A Trick of the Tail through Abacab (plus side 4 of 3SL) is as good a run as any run by any band. The 3SL In the Cage Medley might be my favorite keyboard song of all time.
That being said, as a whole, Yes >>>>> Genesis.
-
You must have rub n tug videos on them.
They were just "to monitor".
-
A little off topic but if I were to listen to one Genesis album which one should it be?
-
Who's Next is one of the landmark, elite, Mt Rushmore albums of the classic rock era. Quadrophenia is a masterpiece of songwriting and performance, and one of the best concept/story albums ever. And here comes the controversial part... These two albums are miles (I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles.....) above and beyond Tommy in every single way. Tommy has a couple of cool songs and starts off strong, but the whole second half is a bore until the final song. Even Pinball Wizard is in the middle of the pack of all The Who's songs.
I used to listen to the crap out of these three albums (though it took me a while to fully appreciate Quadrophenia). Now it and Who's Next are still as fresh as anything from that era, and Tommy sounds dated, stale, and drab by comparison.
A little off topic but if I were to listen to one Genesis album which one should it be?
The shortest one.
-
A little off topic but if I were to listen to one Genesis album which one should it be?
A Trick Of The Tail is their best imo
-
A little off topic but if I were to listen to one Genesis album which one should it be?
Selling England By The Pound.
-
A little off topic but if I were to listen to one Genesis album which one should it be?
Selling England By The Pound.
that's cool, but I actually like them all and both The Lamb, Foxtrot and Duke are my favourites
-
Please don't listen to SEBTP
-
Please don't listen to Kattleox
FTFY.
In all seriousness, start with anything from the Hackett era (Nursery Cryme through Wind and Wuthering) except Lamb and you should be good. Selling England and Trick of the Tail are probably the best places to start, but any choice from that run would be fine. The Lamb is great, but it's kind of its own thing.
-
Yeah, I think I'll have to agree with Genesis being really bad as well. I've tried many times to see what folks like Stadler see and always end up confused and frustrated. Take their definitive epic "Supper's Ready", I've probably heard it 100 times and it still sounds like a cobbled up mess.
In other words, I'm with TAC on this one. :'(
The Cinema Show? No? The live In The Cage Medley from 3SL? No?
Gabriel era Genesis is seriously hit or miss. I haven't heard Supper's Ready 100 times, but it's never connected with me. The instrumental part of The Cinema Show is great; the beginning is fine but nothing great. The Firth of Fifth is great. 20% of The Lamb is great, but most of it is nonsense.
Genesis from and after the self-titled album is 90% schlock.
The five album run from A Trick of the Tail through Abacab (plus side 4 of 3SL) is as good a run as any run by any band. The 3SL In the Cage Medley might be my favorite keyboard song of all time.
That being said, as a whole, Yes >>>>> Genesis.
I sent that In The Cage Medley (that specific version) to TAC as "my favorite three minutes of recorded music of all time" (it's actually four minutes, but who's counting).
I think I agree on the hit or miss aspect of the Gabriel era, and I would go farther to say that IN EVERY CASE, the Phil versions of the Gabriel era songs are better.
I disagree with the "schlock" comment, though. There are moments - That's All (HATE that song), Land Of Confusion, Hold On My Heart - but the epics are just as good, in my opinion (my beef is with the sound, not the writing or performance).
-
A little off topic but if I were to listen to one Genesis album which one should it be?
Trust me on this: Wind and Wuthering or Duke. Then from there you can decide which direction you want to go. Starting with The Lamb is like getting into Dream Theater and starting with "The Astonishing". Starting with SEBTP is like starting with Falling Into Infinity. I would go with the transition records (the last with Hackett and the second without) to see the essence of the band.
It helps that probably a third of both records are instrumental, so that if the "Phil" voice bugs you you can still have some meat to digest.
-
I think A Trick of the Tail is a great starter. It's still pretty heavy on the prog and has a lot of catchiness to it. As much as I love The Lamb, that kind of double album is pretty daunting as a starter. Selling England is great, and has arguably their two best songs, but I find the flow to be weird. Duke would also be a good starter.
-
A little off topic but if I were to listen to one Genesis album which one should it be?
Honestly, I'd say you should treat the two "eras" almost like different bands and pick two albums to listen to.
For the first proggy Gabriel era, I'd say listen to Selling England by the Pound or Trick of the Tail is the best option. The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway is the worst starter by far.
For the second poppy Collins era (which imo is the better one), tbh just go for a greatest hits album. It gives you a good overview of what they're all about and you can use that as a spring board for checking out their other stuff.
-
Cathedral Spires is a top 10 Judas Priest song. Tends to be overlooked because of the whole Jugulator / Demolition era (Jugulator isn't even that bad), but it's outstanding. Tim is a King among men in that song.
I'm a Priest newb, but yes, that song is amazing!
-
A Trick of the Tail it is, I'm going to check it out tomorrow.
-
A little off topic but if I were to listen to one Genesis album which one should it be?
I'd go with A Trick of the Tail or Duke.
-
I sent that In The Cage Medley (that specific version) to TAC as "my favorite three minutes of recorded music of all time" (it's actually four minutes, but who's counting).
I think I agree on the hit or miss aspect of the Gabriel era, and I would go farther to say that IN EVERY CASE, the Phil versions of the Gabriel era songs are better.
I disagree with the "schlock" comment, though. There are moments - That's All (HATE that song), Land Of Confusion, Hold On My Heart - but the epics are just as good, in my opinion (my beef is with the sound, not the writing or performance).
I did a double take on reading the 3-4 minutes statements. I kinda view side 3 after Misunderstanding as a single medley (although I know it's not). Is the part that's not In the Cage or Afterglow really only 4 minutes? If so, that's one of the most satisfying 4 minutes in the history of rock music.
Your comments about the post-Abacab era and the beef being with the sound rather than the writing/performance reflect how I view Rush's Grace Under Pressure, Power Windows and Hold Your Fire. With better instrumentation and production, many of the songs of that era that I don't like probably could be a lot better.
Starting with The Lamb is like getting into Dream Theater and starting with "The Astonishing". Starting with SEBTP is like starting with Falling Into Infinity.
Those are damn good analogies (although, if TA had 1/4 of the weirdness that's on the Lamb, I think it might have connected with me a lot more).
-
Well, I also consider myself part of the crowd that just doesn't really like most "classic prog." I can appreciate most of it. But it just isn't something I enjoy listening to. I am grateful for the influence it has had on bands I really enjoy, like DT, Neal Morse, and Transatlantic, to name a few. But I don't care for it. Early Genesis definitely falls into that category, at least what I have heard from them.
-
Well, I also consider myself part of the crowd that just doesn't really like most "classic prog." I can appreciate most of it. But it just isn't something I enjoy listening to. I am grateful for the influence it has had on bands I really enjoy, like DT, Neal Morse, and Transatlantic, to name a few. But I don't care for it. Early Genesis definitely falls into that category, at least what I have heard from them.
Count me in as well.
-
i don't like classic prog, contemporary prog, OR neo-prog! i hate everything :metal
i actually just don't like most "prog rock" as a whole tbh. metal is where it's at for me. most modern prog rock is really samey aping of the classic prog sounds with no twist whatsoever so it's just like... if i wanted this at all i'd listen to the classics instead
-
i don't like classic prog, contemporary prog, OR neo-prog! i hate everything :metal
i actually just don't like most "prog rock" as a whole tbh. metal is where it's at for me. most modern prog rock is really samey aping of the classic prog sounds with no twist whatsoever so it's just like... if i wanted this at all i'd listen to the classics instead
Yea, I'm a metalhead. I like my prog infused with metal but when it's just prog I am not that interested, I find it a bit boring for my tastes really. I need the heaviness to get the blood flowing.
-
If I said this before, I apologize, but as much as I love certain prog - Genesis, Yes (I met Jon Anderson a few weeks ago, and I felt like i was in the presence of royalty), ELP, Marillion, Crimson... but when I don't like it, I REALLY don't like it. I don't need to name names, but there is some prog that is just... ugh. Even the bands I love, their moments can be cringe-worthy ("More Fool Me", "Circus Of Heaven", "Arriving UFO", "Benny The Bouncer"...).
-
My favorite band, Iron Maiden, has a song that I find to be one of the worst pieces of music I have ever heard (The Angel and the Gambler) so I find it totally fine to say bands you love can also produce some shitty music (I know your bigger point was about prog but it made me think about the smaller point and this song just immediately comes to mind)
-
i don't like classic prog, contemporary prog, OR neo-prog! i hate everything :metal
i actually just don't like most "prog rock" as a whole tbh. metal is where it's at for me. most modern prog rock is really samey aping of the classic prog sounds with no twist whatsoever so it's just like... if i wanted this at all i'd listen to the classics instead
I like my prog infused with metal but when it's just prog I am not that interested
I feel pretty much the same.
-
I feel almost the opposite. Most prog metal just bores me these days, with some exceptions (DT obviously, BTBAM, and some of Devin's work just to name a few).
I usually get more mileage out of bands that rode just the edge of your "traditional prog" circle. Pink Floyd, King Crimson, Rush, The Mars Volta. Most of these bands have enough prog elements that draw my ears, but not so much that they become a cliche of themselves.
Not to say that bands in that traditional prog circle do. I love me some Yes and Genesis. But it intrigues me more to hear bands who worked the prog blueprint into something their own.
-
Generally to pull off any Gabriel-Genesis off of the shelf except at a very odd moments.
My heavy Genesis listening is post-Gabriel, Gabriel solo, Hackett solo and the first two Collins albums (and his big band album.)
-
One thing I do know for me? I tend to go back to where I came in, in the sense of... I got into Yes by listening to their 70's material, up through Drama. Going For The One is my favorite album of all time. I got into Genesis by getting "Abacab" and "Three Sides Live", as well as seeing the "In Concert" film. My favorite Genesis era is "The Lamb" through "3SL". I got into Rush around the time of Signals and Power Windows, and the run of A Farewell To Kings through Signals is by far my favorite. Maiden, Priest, Kiss, all the same. There are exceptions of course, but those are the records that just resonate.
-
Ooh, I've got a new one: most metal covers of pop and "mainstream" rock songs are usually terrible. I think it's because the original choice of chords, lyrics, and melodies convey a sense of brightness and joy and that doesn't really work well when you slap super distorted guitars, fast drumming, and screamed/growled vocals underneath it. I don't think I've heard a metal cover of a pop song that I would say unquestionably improved on the original. Very few are even on par with the original.
-
Ooh, I've got a new one: most metal covers of pop and "mainstream" rock songs are usually terrible. I think it's because the original choice of chords, lyrics, and melodies convey a sense of brightness and joy and that doesn't really work well when you slap super distorted guitars, fast drumming, and screamed/growled vocals underneath it. I don't think I've heard a metal cover of a pop song that I would say unquestionably improved on the original. Very few are even on par with the original.
I tend to agree with this although there have been a COUPLE that I really like. There's a power metal cover of Katy Perry's I Kissed A Girl that's actually kickass. My local friends know me as a metalhead and also know that Africa by Toto is my favorite song ever, but I get tagged way too often in "Metal cover of Africa by Toto!!!" videos and I have yet to see a good one.
-
The only band I've enjoyed their covers have been Disturbed.
-
Ooh, I've got a new one: most metal covers of pop and "mainstream" rock songs are usually terrible. I think it's because the original choice of chords, lyrics, and melodies convey a sense of brightness and joy and that doesn't really work well when you slap super distorted guitars, fast drumming, and screamed/growled vocals underneath it. I don't think I've heard a metal cover of a pop song that I would say unquestionably improved on the original. Very few are even on par with the original.
I tend to agree with this although there have been a COUPLE that I really like. There's a power metal cover of Katy Perry's I Kissed A Girl that's actually kickass. My local friends know me as a metalhead and also know that Africa by Toto is my favorite song ever, but I get tagged way too often in "Metal cover of Africa by Toto!!!" videos and I have yet to see a good one.
It's funny you mention that, because Metal versions of Africa are exactly what I had in mind when writing that haha.
The only band I've enjoyed their covers have been Disturbed.
Disturbed's cover of Sound of Silence is really good because they actually did something new and different with it and gave a different tone to the same song. A Perfect Circle's cover of John Lennon's Imagine is another one of the few metal covers of pop songs that I think is actually incredible. It COMPLETELY changes the meaning of the song and still works with what's there.
-
Ooh, I've got a new one: most metal covers of pop and "mainstream" rock songs are usually terrible. I think it's because the original choice of chords, lyrics, and melodies convey a sense of brightness and joy and that doesn't really work well when you slap super distorted guitars, fast drumming, and screamed/growled vocals underneath it. I don't think I've heard a metal cover of a pop song that I would say unquestionably improved on the original. Very few are even on par with the original.
I agree with this 99.9%. The one exception is, I like Disturbed's "Sounds Of Silence". I'm not a Disturbed fan - at ALL - but I like that. I don't care for the song much, but Geoff Tate's version of "Scarborough Fair" is a vocal tour de force, but I don't like the song.
-
I've never heard the Disturbed song, but generally these always blow.
Does Quiet Riot's Cum On Feel The Noise count?
And at the risk of being a total geek, Chris Daughtry's version of Walk The Line on American Idol was incredible.
-
That Disturbed cover annoys the shit out of me personally, which I think might be controversial because of how popular it is. Talk about being way too dramatic. "Less is more" doesn't just apply to the quantity of notes played.
-
I've never heard the Disturbed song, but generally these always blow.
Does Quiet Riot's Cum On Feel The Noise count?
And at the risk of being a total geek, Chris Daughtry's version of Walk The Line on American Idol was incredible.
It's all right. I like Daughtry and he sang Shinedown's I Dare You (my favorite Shinedown song from them) during American Idol, so that's a plus for him in my books as well.
As for the Disturbed covers, I enjoy Land of Confusion. Must be the "WHOA"s that gets me.
-
I think that the trick with doing pop songs in metal style is to not overblow it, and just add some more punch and heaviness without destroying the mood of the song.
Halestorm's cover of Bad Romance is a masterpiece for me, and on YouTube there are selected covers of songs who manage to insert some heaviness in the songs without making them a parody. But I agree that some other covers just come out terrible.
-
As a Maiden fan I really don't find The Trooper to be that great or something special, it's just a decent tune to me, nothing more than that. I just don't get why it became one of the most popular Maiden songs.
-
Because it's anthemic, has a chorus that isn't even a chorus but can be sang along to anyway, and it has all the trademarks of Iron Maiden. It's one of their quintessential songs.
-
Anyone familiar with these two covers? Ghostbusters by Xentrix and Eleanor Rigby by Realm. I always think if you're going to cover a tune, do your interpretation of it. For me, both of these covers work very well.
-
Ooh, I've got a new one: most metal covers of pop and "mainstream" rock songs are usually terrible. I think it's because the original choice of chords, lyrics, and melodies convey a sense of brightness and joy and that doesn't really work well when you slap super distorted guitars, fast drumming, and screamed/growled vocals underneath it. I don't think I've heard a metal cover of a pop song that I would say unquestionably improved on the original. Very few are even on par with the original.
I don't know about "most," but you make a good point about why many such songs don't work.
I've heard a couple covers of Toto's "Africa" that I think are great.
Also, last week, a guy at work was talking about Chris DeBurgh's "Don't Pay the Ferryman" and asking if I liked it. I've probably only heard it a couple of times in the last 30 years, but the song was all over MTV when I was a teenager and spent hours a day watching MTV. I said that it was a good song and suggested it might make a good metal song, so we went to YouTube and listened to a half dozen (or so) metal covers. About half were really good and the other half not so much. The half that weren't good tended to overdo the distorted guitar and had Cookie Monster vocals -- i.e., no subtlety at all.
-
It's okay to take influence from another band's style if you're actively improving the sound because that's how genre development works
-
Todd LaTorre is a better drummer than Scott Rockenfield.
-
Um. No.
-
Todd LaTorre is a better drummer than Scott Rockenfield.
That's like saying Tom Petty is a better singer than Bob Dylan.
-
Anyone is a better singer than Bob Dylan.
-
Todd LaTorre is a better drummer than Scott Rockenfield.
That's like saying Tom Petty is a better singer than Bob Dylan.
I read this post as Tom Brady! :lol
-
Anyone is a better singer than Bob Dylan.
AMEN!
-
That Disturbed cover annoys the shit out of me personally, which I think might be controversial because of how popular it is. Talk about being way too dramatic. "Less is more" doesn't just apply to the quantity of notes played.
this is the correct opinion
I think that the trick with doing pop songs in metal style is to not overblow it, and just add some more punch and heaviness without destroying the mood of the song.
Halestorm's cover of Bad Romance is a masterpiece for me, and on YouTube there are selected covers of songs who manage to insert some heaviness in the songs without making them a parody. But I agree that some other covers just come out terrible.
Axxis' cover of My Heart Will Go On does this similarly. I mean it's kind of a joke and it's funny as all hell but it's also the epitome of late 20th-century power ballads. (It probably doesn't hurt that, being born in 1998, I don't remember the song's original massive overplayment.) Or this guy's cover of a track from Donkey Kong Country (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ru59Lwgzl6M).
-
That Disturbed cover annoys the shit out of me personally, which I think might be controversial because of how popular it is. Talk about being way too dramatic. "Less is more" doesn't just apply to the quantity of notes played.
this is the correct opinion
I think that the trick with doing pop songs in metal style is to not overblow it, and just add some more punch and heaviness without destroying the mood of the song.
Halestorm's cover of Bad Romance is a masterpiece for me, and on YouTube there are selected covers of songs who manage to insert some heaviness in the songs without making them a parody. But I agree that some other covers just come out terrible.
Axxis' cover of My Heart Will Go On does this similarly. I mean it's kind of a joke and it's funny as all hell but it's also the epitome of late 20th-century power ballads. (It probably doesn't hurt that, being born in 1998, I don't remember the song's original massive overplayment.) Or this guy's cover of a track from Donkey Kong Country (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ru59Lwgzl6M).
That Donkey Kong Country cover is great. Reminds me of something that would be great on OC Remix, a site dedicated to covers/remixes of video game music. Some great covers that do just what he said.
I'll add Within Temptations cover of Skyfall. They made it sound like a WT song, mainly like their song Jane Doe.
-
Controversial: Tool is bad, Maynard isn't special, the rest of the band is talented but the music is ultra boring
Somewhere in the distance, Puppies_On_Acid just screamed in a rage. :biggrin: :hug:
-
That Donkey Kong Country cover is great. Reminds me of something that would be great on OC Remix, a site dedicated to covers/remixes of video game music. Some great covers that do just what he said.
Dang I forgot about that site, I used to visit that site all the time many years ago.
I'll add Within Temptations cover of Skyfall.
Wait, this exists?! Must check out now.
-
That Donkey Kong Country cover is great. Reminds me of something that would be great on OC Remix, a site dedicated to covers/remixes of video game music. Some great covers that do just what he said.
Dang I forgot about that site, I used to visit that site all the time many years ago.
I'll add Within Temptations cover of Skyfall.
Wait, this exists?! Must check out now.
OC Remix still exists and is still producing remixes. They comprise most of my music storage.
Sadly, I can't find a way to get that cover of Skyfall.
-
Hey Ben... do you know the Tears of Contention remix for the game Chrono Trigger? That piece, and Green Amnesia (also a remix from Chrono Trigger), are my two favorite pieces on that site. I've had Tears of Contention as a phone ringtone for almost 10 years. :metal
-
Hey Ben... do you know the Tears of Contention remix for the game Chrono Trigger? That piece, and Green Amnesia (also a remix from Chrono Trigger), are my two favorite pieces on that site. I've had Tears of Contention as a phone ringtone for almost 10 years. :metal
I'm sure I do. I'll have to look it up and hear it again.
Edit: Just looked it up, and instantly remembered it from the opening piano notes. That is one of my favorites as well. Thanks for that, as I am also trying to find those old ones I liked that were lost in my old laptop crash.
-
Maynard isn't special
I'll second that. I think he plays his audience for suckers and they lap it up. He could have been a highly successful televangelist.
-
Todd LaTorre is a better drummer than Scott Rockenfield.
That's like saying Tom Petty is a better singer than Bob Dylan.
My overweight cat at 5:00 a.m. is a better singer than Bob Dylan.
Todd LaTorre is a better drummer than Scott Rockenfield.
That's like saying Tom Petty is a better singer than Bob Dylan.
I read this post as Tom Brady! :lol
Tom Brady is also a better singer than Bob Dylan, as are/were Tom Cruise, Tom Hanks, Thomas Edison, Thomas Jefferson and Tommy Lee Jones.
-
Controversial: Tool is bad, Maynard isn't special, the rest of the band is talented but the music is ultra boring
Somewhere in the distance, Puppies_On_Acid just screamed in a rage. :biggrin: :hug:
I don't think Maynard is anything special at all. He kind of is uninteresting live from the footage I've seen. Their music isn't that boring though, some is. I do think Tool is overhyped at this point, but they were pretty deserving 20 years ago. Kind of amazed they were able to keep such a big fan base.
-
Maynard's lost a lot of range and power, but at his peak he was a force of nature.
-
Maynard isn't special
I'll second that. I think he plays his audience for suckers and they lap it up. He could have been a highly successful televangelist.
I agree with him playing up to his fans. If you listen to his interviews on Joe Rogan he comes off as just a regular (albeit rich and famous) dude who likes making wine.
-
I am not the same person as I was in my 20's and I'll bet that goes for most people including Rock Stars.
-
Todd LaTorre is a better drummer than Scott Rockenfield.
He's flashier to say the least but better? Probably not.
E: After reading up a little on Todd, I actually think you might be onto something. Of course, TLT was never a full-time drummer but he has been playing drums for longer than I've been alive. While I hold a great respect for ScottRock, I still can't really name one favourite performance by him. He's been doing reliable job in the background but could he be replaced? Probably yes.
-
I think Tool's one of the prog bands that has aged the most gracefully for me. The vocals aren't cheesy and over-the-top, the lyrics are quite decent and in some cases really good and musically I think their style of prog holds up well for me as well. For a band with only 1 drummer 1 bassist 1 guitarist I feel Tool gets a lot of mileage out of a simple setup. The drums are really groovy and stand out, the bass is actually audible compared to many other bands and really stands as the center piece that holds some of their songs together, and when it comes to the guitar you get a lot of variety too. Vicarious for me has one of the best metal riffs and a song like Jambi has some really amazing experimental guitar stuff in it.
-
The band can breath with only one of each instrument.
-
I am not the same person as I was in my 20's and I'll bet that goes for most people including Rock Stars.
That's definitely true and for most part it's about what you do with what you got. If you can't belt it like you used to, tune it down or work with your lower register. I listened to Fates Warning's latest album yesterday and I honestly prefer Ray's current vocals to what he did 30 years ago.
-
Controversial: Tool is bad, Maynard isn't special, the rest of the band is talented but the music is ultra boring
Somewhere in the distance, Puppies_On_Acid just screamed in a rage. :biggrin: :hug:
:splodetard:
:onfire:
-
Feel you brah. :-\
-
Here's a hot-take, music education version:
Music theory and music education focuses WAY too much on harmony, which is comparatively one of the least important aspects of most kinds of music. Especially in comparison to say, melody and form which are two of the most important aspects of music regardless of genre. The only lipservice melody gets in conventional theory texts is a brief description of what a period and sentence are, and maybe a mention of motifs. You cover it for like a week in Music Theory II, and then never again for the next two semesters. I've been focusing my private studies more on melody for the past few months and I've honestly learned so much from it. Like that melodies almost always start on a note of the tonic triad? Or that the "move towards a cadence" part of a sentence is based on liquidating the previous parts of the melody down to a basic motif and sequencing that? Or that the grand, Romantic, lyrical melodies don't follow either of those structure types and have their own structure? That's all GREAT information for a composer, theorist, or performer to have and none of it gets mentioned even once during the basic studies.
And with form, you only get a brief descriptor of what the parts of a Sonata are and that there's Binary, Rondo, and Ternary forms. How are the individual sections created and how are they expanded from a simple 8-bar phrase into a full section? How are effective transitions made? Exactly HOW do the themes in the exposition get developed? Who knows! None of that gets covered in a basic theory course, even though it's going to give everyone a greater understanding of how the overall piece is structure. Also great information for everyone that we miss out on.
You know what we do get instead? 2 weeks devoted to common tone diminished seventh chords (which appear very rarely) and almost an entire semester devoted to frickin' Serialism (which isn't really that popular outside of academia and is pretty much dead even there). Maybe 4 out of the 64 weeks are devoted to conventional structure and melody, everything else is counterpoint (which is admittedly fairly useful) and harmony (mildly useful, but it's overemphasized).
-
^ sounds like a lot of higher education in general, you learn the rare crazy stuff that has little to no application in the real world. I'm guessing knowing that stuff then allows you to learn the rest yourself in practice. I don't know anything about what you wrote just thinking it kind of sounds similar to what I learned in college that wasn't very useful other than getting me to learn in general.
-
Controversial: Tool is bad, Maynard isn't special, the rest of the band is talented but the music is ultra boring
Hey, um... I'm not quite sure how to ask this, and I'm sorry if it's awkward but... are we soul mates? Sorry, that was too forward. Let me try again: Is this what it feels like when doves cry?
-
Controversial: Tool is bad, Maynard isn't special, the rest of the band is talented but the music is ultra boring
Hey, um... I'm not quite sure how to ask this, and I'm sorry if it's awkward but... are we soul mates? Sorry, that was too forward. Let me try again: Is this what it feels like when doves cry?
It's a match made in whatever Hell Tool haters go to.... :flame: :biggrin:
-
Good to hear mention of OC Remixes :heart I've got a few Final Fantasy album compilation remixes they did (the FF6 one, Balance and Ruin, is particularly good).
I've actually been playing through Chrono Trigger on my phone for the first time. I need to get back on OC Remixes and see what's new as it's been at least 4 years since I've been on there.
-
Controversial: Tool is bad, Maynard isn't special, the rest of the band is talented but the music is ultra boring
Hey, um... I'm not quite sure how to ask this, and I'm sorry if it's awkward but... are we soul mates? Sorry, that was too forward. Let me try again: Is this what it feels like when doves cry?
It's a match made in whatever Hell Tool haters go to.... :flame: :biggrin:
:lol
Count, you get it. :lol
-
Here's a hot-take, music education version:
Music theory and music education focuses WAY too much on harmony, which is comparatively one of the least important aspects of most kinds of music. Especially in comparison to say, melody and form which are two of the most important aspects of music regardless of genre. The only lipservice melody gets in conventional theory texts is a brief description of what a period and sentence are, and maybe a mention of motifs. You cover it for like a week in Music Theory II, and then never again for the next two semesters. I've been focusing my private studies more on melody for the past few months and I've honestly learned so much from it. Like that melodies almost always start on a note of the tonic triad? Or that the "move towards a cadence" part of a sentence is based on liquidating the previous parts of the melody down to a basic motif and sequencing that? Or that the grand, Romantic, lyrical melodies don't follow either of those structure types and have their own structure? That's all GREAT information for a composer, theorist, or performer to have and none of it gets mentioned even once during the basic studies.
And with form, you only get a brief descriptor of what the parts of a Sonata are and that there's Binary, Rondo, and Ternary forms. How are the individual sections created and how are they expanded from a simple 8-bar phrase into a full section? How are effective transitions made? Exactly HOW do the themes in the exposition get developed? Who knows! None of that gets covered in a basic theory course, even though it's going to give everyone a greater understanding of how the overall piece is structure. Also great information for everyone that we miss out on.
You know what we do get instead? 2 weeks devoted to common tone diminished seventh chords (which appear very rarely) and almost an entire semester devoted to frickin' Serialism (which isn't really that popular outside of academia and is pretty much dead even there). Maybe 4 out of the 64 weeks are devoted to conventional structure and melody, everything else is counterpoint (which is admittedly fairly useful) and harmony (mildly useful, but it's overemphasized).
Here's how I sum up my experience in music theory when I was in college:
Semesters 1-3: If you don't follow these exact rules, your music sucks!
Semester 4: Remember those rules we told you to follow? Well fuck 'em!
The only part of music theory I thought was fun was when our professor in my third semester did chord analysis to some songs from Abbey Road, like Maxwell's Silver Hammer. Otherwise, it was nothing but old dead white guys.
-
My overweight cat at 5:00 a.m. is a better singer than Bob Dylan.
Tom Brady is also a better singer than Bob Dylan, as are/were Tom Cruise, Tom Hanks, Thomas Edison, Thomas Jefferson and Tommy Lee Jones.
You know who isn't though? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fL6uYfOBx4E)
-
My overweight cat at 5:00 a.m. is a better singer than Bob Dylan.
Tom Brady is also a better singer than Bob Dylan, as are/were Tom Cruise, Tom Hanks, Thomas Edison, Thomas Jefferson and Tommy Lee Jones.
You know who isn't though? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fL6uYfOBx4E)
Oh dear lord.... someone ate Vince Neil!!
-
The comments are killing me. "Only Vince can sing in 7 languages at the same time" :rollin
-
I can sort of - not really, but sort of - understand the verse lyrics but he even butchered the vocal breakdown (the "When we started this band, all we needed, needed was a laugh.. years gone by, I'd say we've kicked some ass" part).
Holy crap.
My buddy sent me this not long ago:
(https://i.imgur.com/dfxr53i.jpg)
-
That's a helluva boiler!
-
Looks like Vince has been seeing Dr. Meal Good.
-
If he keeps that up, someone is going to have to kick start his heart.
-
Looks like Vince has been seeing Dr. Meal Good.
HAHA.
-
Looks like Vince has been seeing Dr. Meal Good.
:rollin :rollin :rollin :rollin :rollin :rollin
Dude, I'm crying laughing!!!! I haven't laughed like that in a long time! LOL! <---- literally!
Oh dear lord.... Vince Neil ate someonel!!
FTFY
-
:biggrin:
-
So you're telling me I need to go as Vince during Halloween? :lol
-
I'm coming to your Halloween party, cowboy. For sure.
I'll go as Mike Reno:
(https://i.imgur.com/un3BppJ.jpg)
Or Alex Lifeson:
(https://i.imgur.com/NvXRLjZ.jpg)
-
(https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/650x400q90/923/MDLtwl.jpg) (https://imageshack.com/i/pnMDLtwlj)
-
Controversial: Tool is bad, Maynard isn't special, the rest of the band is talented but the music is ultra boring
Hah... I remember when the whole golden ratio aspect of Lateralus had been worked out and people were really working themselves up into a lather about its genius (and often being condescending to anyone not "clever" enough to get it) and here was me just thinking "ehm, they're just big nerds and it doesn't make the music not kinda dull".
I wouldn't go as far as to say Tool's bad, though, but I do get tend to get bored around about the midpoint of a typical Tool song and then have to go listen to some soaring, OTT power metal to find my equilibrium.
I typically find the same true of Meshuggah. For the first minute of a song I'm thinking "yeah, this is really gnarly, great stuff" then about 3 minutes later I'm thinking "ok, moving on from that one thing you're doing...".
-
The Great Gig in the Sky has some amazing music that is ruined by the sound of a chick's annoying wailing.
-
The Great Gig in the Sky has some amazing music that is ruined by the sound of a chick's annoying wailing.
Well, that's definitely controversial.
-
The Great Gig in the Sky has some amazing music that is ruined by the sound of a chick's annoying wailing.
So does DT's Home.
*rimshot*
-
The Great Gig in the Sky has some amazing music that is ruined by the sound of a chick's annoying wailing.
So does DT's Home.
*rimshot*
:lol
Seriously though I think the great gig vocal are great and fit the music well.
The moaning in Home is one of the cringest things DT has ever done.
-
I'm really, REALLY fucking bored of the following:
Metal bands with no sense of humour OR artistic competence. It's been 40 years - you need to have one or the other.
Crap songwriting. A riff is just a riff. You need a compelling lyric or a decent structure. Usually both.
Super clean production. Give me some life and feel, ferchrissake.
Long albums. Be self-aware. Seriously.
-
I'm really, REALLY fucking bored of the following:
Long albums. Be self-aware. Seriously.
Yeah this is DEFINITELY where I'm at these days. If your album is over an hour you better be justifying that length. Every year I seem to enjoy shorter records, and at a glance most of my favorite records just happen to be under 50 minutes or just over 50 minutes. I'm starting to think 45-50 is the sweet spot for me. Some bands could reeeeally learn how to trim the fat, especially metal bands.
-
I'm really, REALLY fucking bored of the following:
Long albums. Be self-aware. Seriously.
Yeah this is DEFINITELY where I'm at these days. If your album is over an hour you better be justifying that length. Every year I seem to enjoy shorter records, and at a glance most of my favorite records just happen to be under 50 minutes or just over 50 minutes. I'm starting to think 45-50 is the sweet spot for me. Some bands could reeeeally learn how to trim the fat, especially metal bands.
Is that why no one wanted to listen to my 100 minute long concept album? Or was it the fact that it's about heroin addiction? Or the fact that they didn't recognize anyone on it?
DAMMIT! Why did no one tell me this before?!?
-
I'm sorry Adami, did you say something? :lol
It isn't the length but the quality of songs. A 30 minute album can be mediocre and I lose interest. Same can be said for a long album.
-
can agree, there can be exceptions too but even with albums i like often i wish they had cut down a little to make a really solid 45-55 minute album instead of a 65+ minute one
i say this having one of my favorite discoveries of the year being a 2-hour long album, though
-
The Great Gig in the Sky has some amazing music that is ruined by the sound of a chick's annoying wailing.
So does DT's Home.
*rimshot*
:lol
-
I'm really, REALLY fucking bored of the following:
Long albums. Be self-aware. Seriously.
Yeah this is DEFINITELY where I'm at these days. If your album is over an hour you better be justifying that length. Every year I seem to enjoy shorter records, and at a glance most of my favorite records just happen to be under 50 minutes or just over 50 minutes. I'm starting to think 45-50 is the sweet spot for me. Some bands could reeeeally learn how to trim the fat, especially metal bands.
I agree with this perfectly.
-
There seems to have been a movement over the last couple of years where albums seem to be in the 37-45 min range. It is kind of refreshing, actually.
-
I'm really, REALLY fucking bored of the following:
Long albums. Be self-aware. Seriously.
Yeah this is DEFINITELY where I'm at these days. If your album is over an hour you better be justifying that length. Every year I seem to enjoy shorter records, and at a glance most of my favorite records just happen to be under 50 minutes or just over 50 minutes. I'm starting to think 45-50 is the sweet spot for me. Some bands could reeeeally learn how to trim the fat, especially metal bands.
I agree with this perfectly.
The only problem with this is the fact that there might be something they're trimming that you would like. That's the beauty of longer albums - there's more to like. And if you don't like something, trim it yourself.
Look at the threads and polls that talk about favorite songs off of this album or that - usually, there are fans of every single song. Songs that other fans hate. And vice versa. So I'd rather have a longer album with more options than less.
-
I am fine with it either way. There are some great long albums and some long albums that could have been better overall had there been a little trimming, and there are some great short albums and some short albums that could have been better with more songs.
If it's a band that does longer songs on a regular basis, a short album can be dicey since all it takes is not liking one or two songs and you end up with not a lot of music to latch on to from that album. Take the last Haken album, which had two songs I can do without. Thankfully, they were the two shortest songs (not counting the 2-minute into track), but it still left me with a little less than 35 minutes of new music by them that I liked.
-
And if you don't like something, trim it yourself.
This whole self-editing idea is so odd to me. And to make myself clear, it is a 'me' issue, not that other people do it. It would never occur to me to edit/trim a song or an album any more than it would to FF through part of a movie or skip over a chapter in a book.
-
Well, when I speak of trimming, I mostly mean making your own playlists so that you can remove the songs you don't like, which is not any different from skipping a song on a CD, which I'm sure you've done at some point in your life, as all of us have when listening to an album that we've heard numerous times already. Of course, with sound editing software that is available for everyone these days, it could be argued that you could even trim the sections of songs that you don't like, although that's not what I really meant by my post.
-
Well, when I speak of trimming, I mostly mean making your own playlists so that you can remove the songs you don't like, which is not any different from skipping a song on a CD, which I'm sure you've done at some point in your life
Of course, I just find it so much easier to skip the song than create a playlist.
it could be argued that you could even trim the sections of songs that you don't like, although that's not what I really meant by my post.
That was where my mind went, I read your post too quickly.
-
I basically agree with Kev on this. I do agree with the sentiment that a long album (like, over 70 minutes) needs to justify its length... but with the trend toward shorter albums, there are definitely some that I listen to and think "that was it?" I think an album that's under 40 minutes needs to justify its brevity just as much as one that's over 70 needs to justify its length.
For me, the sweet spot is probably 55-65. Right off the top of my head, Images and Words, Century Child and The Mountain are three of my top favorite albums, all albums where I feel that the perfect pacing is part of what makes them so enjoyable, all fall neatly into that range.
I think that the number of songs can also be a factor in ideal length. I think there can be an overload with too many songs just as much as there can be with too long an overall runtime. I'd say the optimal length for a typical pop album is probably shorter, on average, than a typical prog album. If the average song length is, say, 3:30, then an hour-long album is 17 songs. Whereas if the average length is 6:00, an hour-long album is 10 songs. Personally, I would find that 17-song album more tiring than the 10-song album, other things being equal. 17 is just a lot of little pieces to try to focus on.
-
Well, when I speak of trimming, I mostly mean making your own playlists so that you can remove the songs you don't like, which is not any different from skipping a song on a CD, which I'm sure you've done at some point in your life
Of course, I just find it so much easier to skip the song than create a playlist.
it could be argued that you could even trim the sections of songs that you don't like, although that's not what I really meant by my post.
That was where my mind went, I read your post too quickly.
I edit songs for fun, and for better enjoyment. Sometimes it's a real challenge. I'll increase the tempo, or cut out a section I don't think sounds very good, like the bridge to Nemesea's Caught in the Middle, which I don't think has a very good vocal performance. The Days of Purgatory version of Iced Earth is too slow so I sped it up. I sped up Disturbed's Serpentine as well because it sounds much better that way. I got that idea from a youtube comment. Not sure why they recorded it so slow. I've tried many times to improve A Nightmare to Remember with no luck. There's always something that sounds off. I came close though. I also did a edit of The Great Debate, removing the soundbites. It almost works. Some people think editing songs is some horrible atrocity, but I'm not erasing the original from existence.
I think editing movies is just fine too.
-
I don't think there can be a golden rule for what an album's length should be, it also depends for the genre - 45 minutes for punk is probably long, 45 minutes for prog or doom is short. The only rule should be quality over quantity, I guess.
And I endorse the "trim it yourself" approach, wether it's a different tracklist order or some actual audio editing. Zook made the example of editing DT songs, I did my fair share of fat trimming back in the days, to make an example I have an 8-9 minutes edit of The Ministry of the Lost Souls that completely removes the entire solo section making it a power ballad from beginning to end, and more generally I do a lot of strategic edits for my compilations, maybe to help better the transition from a song to the other or give it a "live setlist" feel, therefore having two songs connected or whatever.
It's all good fun, the tools are there, why not using them?
-
Long albums is definitely a high risk/high reward type of thing for me. There are a few albums in the 2-3 hour region that I absolutely love and would rate 5/5 but then there's 70 minute albums that feel about 20 minutes too long, it definitely depends on the material. But I feel like if you aim high and you pull it off, the result is really satisfying. Then again I also appreciate a fantastic 45 minute album that keeps it simple as well.
-
The only problem with this is the fact that there might be something they're trimming that you would like. That's the beauty of longer albums - there's more to like. And if you don't like something, trim it yourself.
Look at the threads and polls that talk about favorite songs off of this album or that - usually, there are fans of every single song. Songs that other fans hate. And vice versa. So I'd rather have a longer album with more options than less.
No doubt; I'm usually that guy in those threads! But I kind of like the approach that Jerry Cantrell took with Degradation Trip. Or AVA took with Love; put out two CDs of moderate length. I get it, I can do that, and I sometimes do (and I sometimes make edits of the songs themselves, though rarely. I made an instrumental version of Tonight by Ozzy and War Pigs by Sabbath, which sounds like I hate Ozzy but that's not really why I did it. I was trying to learn parts on the guitar and it just ended up sounding really cool.)
I get that I'm not really making sense here, because I know I'm not. I'm a completist, and I want all the songs they have. But sometimes 78 minutes is a long stretch to swim. I remember back to when I got Toys In The Attic - 37:08 - or Number Of The Beast - 39:11 - and they just seemed PERFECT.
-
I don't trim, I add stuff to songs. Sometimes I'll hear songs that are eerily similar (same key, same chord progession). I did it with The Count of Tuscany and an OC Remix of a Doom Song, which oddly the OC remix fits in perfectly within the ambient section of TCOT (I made a thread about it in the DT side). I also, combined both the Gentle and Storm versions of The Storm. I like the Piano in the Gentle version and it adds a lot to the Storm version, which I listen to more.
-
I also, combined both the Gentle and Storm versions of The Storm. I like the Piano in the Gentle version and it adds a lot to the Storm version, which I listen to more.
I made a one album compilation of that, picking either version (Gentle or Storm) that I liked the most, and I merged Cape of Storms - starting Gentle, then from the second chorus kicking in the Storm version.
-
I also, combined both the Gentle and Storm versions of The Storm. I like the Piano in the Gentle version and it adds a lot to the Storm version, which I listen to more.
I made a one album compilation of that, picking either version (Gentle or Storm) that I liked the most, and I merged Cape of Storms - starting Gentle, then from the second chorus kicking in the Storm version.
What song(s) are you guys talking about?
-
This one
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Diary_(The_Gentle_Storm_album)
-
After listening to an album from the band Unprocessed, called Artificial Void, I realized that the djent sub-genre is more about unlocking achievements and leveling up than it is about creating authentic music. I don't see anyone, outside of Meshuggah, making that music because they are compelled to. Rather, it seems like many of these bands do it because they can.
-
This one
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Diary_(The_Gentle_Storm_album)
Huh; that sounds interesting. Is it as good as it sounds like it might be?
-
This one
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Diary_(The_Gentle_Storm_album)
Huh; that sounds interesting. Is it as good as it sounds like it might be?
Not only, it's even better! If you like Ayreon you'll love this. Or maybe even without loving Ayreon.
Suggestion: if you dive into it, check the "Gentle" album first. It's more original and intimate, and the music stands out more. Listening first to the "Storm" album might give the idea of just another prog metal album, while the subtleties stand out more if you listen first to the more intimate version.
-
After listening to an album from the band Unprocessed, called Artificial Void, I realized that the djent sub-genre is more about unlocking achievements and leveling up than it is about creating authentic music. I don't see anyone, outside of Meshuggah, making that music because they are compelled to. Rather, it seems like many of these bands do it because they can.
David Maxim Micic has done some wonderfully creative records that blend djent with plenty of other genres, even pop music and ambient.
-
This one
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Diary_(The_Gentle_Storm_album)
Huh; that sounds interesting. Is it as good as it sounds like it might be?
It's pretty damn good.
-
I have one Ayreon album and love it, and I got a couple Star One songs in a roulette and loved those too. Anneke is also in part how I broke into Devin after thinking I didn't like him for years.
I know it sounds like this would be a no-brainer, but there seems to be a fine line; I've been told "if you'll like this, you'll like that!" before and not so much. But I think I might give this a whack.
-
Obviously my points were all totally subjective. There's no wrong or right length for an album. Whatever works for the individual.
If you're editing your own version of the song then the artist has clearly made a song-writing call you fundamentally disagree with.
6DOIT is probably my favourite double album. No wastage there. Can't think of another i think is worth the time. I like Snow by SB a lot but it's about a third too long.
I feel the same about movies too. 3 hours is the limit really, and most of the time about 2 is enough. And don't get me started on books. Hear of an editor?
Hmm. I'm seeing a pattern...
-
The Great Gig in the Sky has some amazing music that is ruined by the sound of a chick's annoying wailing.
I agree.
-
I should like The Gentle Storm more than I do. I owe myself another listen. Will try and get to this week.
-
Lulu is not as bad as everyone says.
inb4 "It's not--It's worse."
-
Baby Got Back is the dumbest song ever.
-
Baby Got Back is the dumbest song ever.
Oh My God, Becky...
-
Baby Got Back is the dumbest song ever.
Somebody once told me...
-
Baby Got Back is the dumbest song ever.
You mean Barbie Girl.
-
Baby Got Back is the dumbest song ever.
You mean Barbie Girl.
You and me baby ain't nothing but mammals.
-
At least it's funny. There are worse songs (for me, "The Pina Colada Song". WTF. How 70's can you get?)
-
Baby Got Back is the dumbest song ever.
You mean Barbie Girl.
Shutcho mouf. I like that song :lol
-
I'm really, REALLY fucking bored of the following:
Metal bands with no sense of humour OR artistic competence. It's been 40 years - you need to have one or the other.
Crap songwriting. A riff is just a riff. You need a compelling lyric or a decent structure. Usually both.
Super clean production. Give me some life and feel, ferchrissake.
Long albums. Be self-aware. Seriously.
one man's poison is another man's (i.e. my) wine. I find cleanly produced albums easy to listen to, far easier than others. Most of my alltime favourites by bands I love are clean and sterile albums. And I do like long albums too (given that they're structured nicely. In the case of DT, I think long albums are nice, because they can take the time to play everything they want. ADTOE is nice in that regard IMHO, as an example.)
-
Baby Got Back is the dumbest song ever.
You mean Barbie Girl.
Shutcho mouf. I like that song :lol
How dare you! :lol
-
Baby Got Back is the dumbest song ever.
I don't understand how you autocorrected "Shark" into "Got Back"?
-
Baby Got Back is the dumbest song ever.
I don't understand how you autocorrected "Shark" into "Got Back"?
Kids’ songs get a pass since they’re all pointlessly dumb. That being said, “Baby Shark” is one song that’ll be banned from playing in my house as my son grows up. Supremely annoying.
As for actual songs, I’ll take any of those previously mentioned over “My Humps.”
-
Baby Got Back is the dumbest song ever.
I don't understand how you autocorrected "Shark" into "Got Back"?
Oh sweet thanks for letting me know what to send whenever you run your next roulette :metal
-
Baby Got Back is the dumbest song ever.
You mean Barbie Girl.
This. I can't stand this damn song.
-
I didn't know Baby Shark (at all) and didn't think I knew Barbie Girl (but I did, just didn't know the name), so I went and listened to both.
I ought to sue.
-
Baby Shark is, according to billboard, one of the hundred biggest songs of the year (or it will be when they publish the list in December)
Think about it.
-
I didn't know Baby Shark (at all) and didn't think I knew Barbie Girl (but I did, just didn't know the name), so I went and listened to both.
I ought to sue.
Need me to take you to the hospital?
-
I didn't know Baby Shark (at all) and didn't think I knew Barbie Girl (but I did, just didn't know the name), so I went and listened to both.
I ought to sue.
Need me to take you to the hospital?
I'm weak and can barely stand.
-
Come on Stadler let's go party
-
I didn't know Baby Shark (at all) and didn't think I knew Barbie Girl (but I did, just didn't know the name), so I went and listened to both.
I ought to sue.
Need me to take you to the hospital?
I'm weak and can barely stand.
My charisma is too much, I know.
Come on Stadler let's go party
Never though I'd read that sentence. :lol
-
I didn't know Baby Shark (at all) and didn't think I knew Barbie Girl (but I did, just didn't know the name), so I went and listened to both.
I ought to sue.
Barbie Girl resulted in a rather well known lawsuit filed by Mattel against MCA Records, alleging violation of by copyright and trademark rights. MCA counterclaimed for defamation. The 9th Circuit eventually issued an opinion (written by Alex Kozinski) that closes with one of the best lines from an appellate opinion ever: "The parties are advised to chill." Not surprising given the law firm that Mattel hired.
-
I didn't know Baby Shark (at all) and didn't think I knew Barbie Girl (but I did, just didn't know the name), so I went and listened to both.
I ought to sue.
Barbie Girl resulted in a rather well known lawsuit filed by Mattel against MCA Records, alleging violation of by copyright and trademark rights. MCA counterclaimed for defamation. The 9th Circuit eventually issued an opinion (written by Alex Kozinski) that closes with one of the best lines from an appellate opinion ever: "The parties are advised to chill." Not surprising given the law firm that Mattel hired.
Really? That outcome is very Monty Pythonian to me :D
-
Baby Shark is, according to billboard, one of the hundred biggest songs of the year (or it will be when they publish the list in December)
Think about it.
In a shocking development, it turns out that, unlike all (?) parties involved in this conversation, a large amount of people have very small children and have to cater to them with the mindless tune of the day :heart
-
I didn't know Baby Shark (at all) and didn't think I knew Barbie Girl (but I did, just didn't know the name), so I went and listened to both.
I ought to sue.
Barbie Girl resulted in a rather well known lawsuit filed by Mattel against MCA Records, alleging violation of by copyright and trademark rights. MCA counterclaimed for defamation. The 9th Circuit eventually issued an opinion (written by Alex Kozinski) that closes with one of the best lines from an appellate opinion ever: "The parties are advised to chill." Not surprising given the law firm that Mattel hired.
Really? That outcome is very Monty Pythonian to me :D
Well...there was more to it than that, and you can read the full opinion here: https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4174039731032587001
There's a lengthy (and non-Pythonian) analysis of the trademark and other "real" legal issues, and the "parties are advised to chill" comment comes at the end of a two paragraph analysis of MCA's defamation counterclaim. The defamation claim was based on a bunch of "rhetorical hyperbole" spoken by Mattel representatives in the press and was, generously, silly. Knowing and having worked with the lawyers for MCA, I'm a bit surprised the counterclaim was made.
-
I don't mind Baby Shark. But what I do find annoying is that most people seem to think it is a hot, new Internet phenom, when it has been a popular kids' camp song for well over a decade at least (I think I first heard it around 2011-ish).
-
I don't mind Baby Shark. But what I do find annoying is that most people seem to think it is a hot, new Internet phenom, when it has been a popular kids' camp song for well over a decade at least (I think I first heard it around 2011-ish).
Well...it's both. According to the sourced Wikipedia article, it's origins are decades old, but it was first popularized by a 2007 YouTube video. The recent internet sensation began with a video uploaded to YouTube in 2015. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_Shark
-
Wow, I didn't realize it was that old. Totally seemed new to me and I discovered it two years ago through my new born niece who just loved and still loves it. Both my nieces now immediately start dancing when hearing the song. It's catchy but its fine for what it is, just overplayed. I feel bad for my sister who probably hears it 10 times a day, every day. I've got to babysit them on Saturday so I guess I'll be getting my dose of it soon enough.
-
Baby Shark is, according to billboard, one of the hundred biggest songs of the year (or it will be when they publish the list in December)
Think about it.
In a shocking development, it turns out that, unlike all (?) parties involved in this conversation, a large amount of people have very small children and have to cater to them with the mindless tune of the day :heart
Well, I'm past that phase now (she left for college a month and a half ago) but I'm very proud to say I entertained her musical tastes every step of the way. You have to start somewhere, and forgive me for thinking that "King Crimson - The Devil's Triangle, Pts. 1, 2, and 3" is not the right place. I can still, to this day, sing The Wiggles, "Fruit Salad" word for word. I have seen Hannah Montana/Miley Cyrus live once, and the Jonas Bros. twice... and regret none of it. She's now formed a love of music, and almost weekly comes to me with a "hey, do you like x?" that would keep step with most people here. She's not into prog, yet, but certainly understands that people like Freddie Mercury, Neal Schon and Lindsey Buckingham are real players and true artists, and was visibly pissed she had to miss Iron Maiden when they came through in August.
Hell, I started with "Snoopy And The Red Baron" by The Royal Guardsmen and Sha Na Na. (And small world; twice now I've seen Ritchie Blackmore and the song playing as the theater emptied was... Snoopy And The Red Baron!)
Baby Shark still sucks, but if it plays a role in developing a musical taste/appreciation, so be it.
-
You have to start somewhere, and forgive me for thinking that "King Crimson - The Devil's Triangle, Pts. 1, 2, and 3" is not the right place.
My point exactly.
-
Baby Bosk do do do do. :lol
Stuff of nightmares.
-
:bosky:
-
Here's my hot music take:
The Beatles made some good music
-
Here's my hot music take:
The Beatles made some good music
Now there's a hot take if I've ever seen one.
-
I know, I'm a little embarrassed :blush
-
My obligatory Beatles are overrated post. I'd rather listen to anything else from that time period.
-
Revolution 9 tho
-
Come on Stadler let's go party
Ooo woah, ooo woah.
-
There is one guy in the ProgPower community who keeps laughing at my opinions on Facebook and calling them nonsense. I'm not even friends with him but I finally had enough and blocked him.
The prog metal community has a snob problem, I've noticed, and I'm really tired of these dweebs who can't let others have an opinion without mocking them or trying to make them feel like they're wrong.
All this to say that I don't think SFAM is perfect, I don't think it's the best DT album, I don't think it's god's gift to music like some people think it is. Sometimes I wonder if these people even listen to anything outside of the rock and metal musical world.
Rant over. Where's my coffee...
-
There is one guy in the ProgPower community who keeps laughing at my opinions on Facebook and calling them nonsense. I'm not even friends with him but I finally had enough and blocked him.
The prog metal community has a snob problem, I've noticed, and I'm really tired of these dweebs who can't let others have an opinion without mocking them or trying to make them feel like they're wrong.
All this to say that I don't think SFAM is perfect, I don't think it's the best DT album, I don't think it's god's gift to music like some people think it is. Sometimes I wonder if these people even listen to anything outside of the rock and metal musical world.
Rant over. Where's my coffee...
I know, I'm one of them
-
I don't understand the hostility towards others music opinions. I think it's a big reason why metal music won't be "big" anymore, there's way too much hatred within the community towards each other, sometimes because one's opinions aren't "metal enough" which is ridiculous. Like the people in the Progpower community who shit on Night Flight Orchestra... just keep your negative and hateful opinions to yourself. You don't need to like it, but there's no reason to shit on it.
-
There is one guy in the ProgPower community who keeps laughing at my opinions on Facebook and calling them nonsense. I'm not even friends with him but I finally had enough and blocked him.
The prog metal community has a snob problem, I've noticed, and I'm really tired of these dweebs who can't let others have an opinion without mocking them or trying to make them feel like they're wrong.
All this to say that I don't think SFAM is perfect, I don't think it's the best DT album, I don't think it's god's gift to music like some people think it is. Sometimes I wonder if these people even listen to anything outside of the rock and metal musical world.
Rant over. Where's my coffee...
I've found those folks to be pretty shallow and close-minded, not worth your time and energy. You did right in blocking him :tup
I don't understand the hostility towards others music opinions.
They tie their identities quite close to their tastes in music and probably other media. That's how they feel connected to other people or alienated, they've forgotten than consumerism is not identity. Pretty silly thing :P
-
I don't understand the hostility towards others music opinions. I think it's a big reason why metal music won't be "big" anymore, there's way too much hatred within the community towards each other, sometimes because one's opinions aren't "metal enough" which is ridiculous. Like the people in the Progpower community who shit on Night Flight Orchestra... just keep your negative and hateful opinions to yourself. You don't need to like it, but there's no reason to shit on it.
I agree with this 100%. 1000%.
-
I don't understand the hostility towards others music opinions. I think it's a big reason why metal music won't be "big" anymore, there's way too much hatred within the community towards each other, sometimes because one's opinions aren't "metal enough" which is ridiculous. Like the people in the Progpower community who shit on Night Flight Orchestra... just keep your negative and hateful opinions to yourself. You don't need to like it, but there's no reason to shit on it.
I agree with this 100%. 1000%.
I agree with this, but only 50% or less :P yeah, there's a lot of hostility out there. But, there's people who engage in good-natured ribbing of bands other people love. Sometimes, the metal community goes nuts over those few bands that are aggressively marketed as "that cool new band that elitists just love to hate because they hate fun" by Nuclear Blast or whoever (like Sabaton, or Amaranthe, or Ghost, or now TNFO - finally one band I actually love!!), and it's not fun being the curmudgeon that's being told by everyone to shut up about not liking them. When you're in a bad mood, or when you're online, or when you just can't read other people's intentions all that well because you don't know them that well, it's easy to misread someone's opinions and think of them as a dumbass elitist.
I have a friend who pokes fun at my taste in music all the time. His favorite genre is 90's death metal. I imagine he finds new bands to listen to by firing up the advanced search on Metal Archives, selecting "demo", typing in "death" into the search box, limiting the timespan to "1989 - 1999" and looking up the recordings until he finds one that someone actually uploaded to Youtube. Sometimes I wanna poke him right back about how the music he listens to is objectively bad on several different counts, and generally unappealing to me :coolio but if I do that, I lose, because he's just shooting shit and expecting me to take the bait.
Back when metal was big, you could get serious shit thrown at you for just, like, adding keyboards to a few of the songs. Or having your songs played on the radio in the first place, because that is untrveee. Bands with female vocalists were barely considered, there was barely any outside influences in metal - Cynic got so much shit for advancing their genre, Death too. I think nowadays metalheads are much more open minded than they were back when Metallica played stadiums.
-
I feel like I have experienced a lot of elitism among metal fans and prog fans but part of me also thinks it comes with the fact that these are 2 types of music (i know metal is very broad) I listen to a lot so I just encounter these people naturally. I remember the whole Taylor Swift/Tool schism (no pun intended) and getting a glimpse into the pop fans who listen to Taylor Swift, it seems like there's a lot of elitism there as well. I just don't really hang around in many circles for pop music so it's not something I had picked up on before.
But yeah the whole argument for what is metal or not just takes me back to being 14 in school and having these types of discussions with friends whether KoRn or Slipknot were more metal. I honestly can't believe there's grown people who still haven't gotten past this.
-
I guess I should consider myself lucky. I've encountered some negative people (just using that as an umbrella term for elitists/rude people etc), but they're few and far between. My experience with metal fans has been overwhelmingly positive.
-
I don't understand the hostility towards others music opinions. I think it's a big reason why metal music won't be "big" anymore, there's way too much hatred within the community towards each other, sometimes because one's opinions aren't "metal enough" which is ridiculous.
I don't disagree about the snobbiness. But it isn't limited to metal and it certainly isn't new. Heck, on both of those themes, the east coast vs. west coast hip hop feuds of the '80s were legendary. Two of the mellowest dudes you can imagine, Ice-T and L.L. Cool J were savage in calling out each other and the respective rap communities as being weak, sell-outs, not "genuine," not "hard core" enough, etc. And the fans were even more savage. That's just one of an endless number of examples. It exists in all genres.
-
Yeah, that's true. For me it's just so annoying now because I've spent so many years entrenching myself within metal communities but nowadays I don't identify that heavily with any one musical subculture. Diehard metal fans bug me, diehard rap fans bug me, etc. - I'm just open to almost anything these days outside of extreme metal, and can never dabble in one spot for too long before wanting to hear something new and fresh from another style. So for me personally now it's like I have no musical home, except in DTF roulettes :lol
-
My father always quoted some music teacher guy who spoke to him in his formative years.
"There are only two types of music: good music and bad music."
I believe the originator meant that all genres of music are valid. My father, however, has always used it to say that some pieces of music are objectively good or bad.
I've always thought that there are infinite purposes of music, and these are created by individual listeners. I don't like Take That but they completely serve the purpose that the lady in my office that loves to joyfully sing along to them on her morning commute has for them. I love Meshuggah but they won't serve the afore-mentioned purpose at all.
-
"Rap Isn't Music" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79YTe1D5tRQ)
-
CO: Tom Englund and Evergrey are two of the most overrated boring names in prog music
-
CO: Tom Englund and Evergrey are two of the most overrated boring names in prog music
Michael Bolton could replace Tom Englund in Evergrey and I doubt people would notice right away.
-
My father always quoted some music teacher guy who spoke to him in his formative years.
"There are only two types of music: good music and bad music."
I believe the originator meant that all genres of music are valid. My father, however, has always used it to say that some pieces of music are objectively good or bad.
I've always thought that there are infinite purposes of music, and these are created by individual listeners. I don't like Take That but they completely serve the purpose that the lady in my office that loves to joyfully sing along to them on her morning commute has for them. I love Meshuggah but they won't serve the afore-mentioned purpose at all.
I've always put a lot more focus and meaning on the intent of the artist (meaning, only the artist could say whether a piece was "good" or "bad", as in, how close did it come to my vision?) and the reception of the work. I watched my kid for years get SO MUCH JOY from Miley Cyrus and Taylor Swift that I could hardly ever find it in my heart to criticize it as "bad". It just didn't connect with my (like Bob Dylan, who is one of the icons of music for the past 50 years, and a "voice of a generation"). Now she's expanded to liking Fleetwood Mac, Queen, Journey, a TON of 80's rock, and even Kiss and Iron Maiden. I don't know; I just think it's not for any one person to say.
-
Stadler, I totally agree with the last part of your post. But, I also think there's a time and place to express your dislike of something. If someone were to tell your daughter that Miley Cyrus is bad or sucks while she was a kid enjoying it - not the time/place. If people on this forum talk about it amongst themselves - not in response to someone saying they like Miley Cyrus - I generally think it's fine (depending on what they're saying, of course).
I don't know if I'm expressing myself well. Basically - it's not always "elitist" if a group of fans of whatever (metal, prog, "real" country, etc) are talking together about what they don't like. That dislike might be part of what led them to find their common interest music, so it's part of a shared experience.
-
I don't disagree; I talk a lot about what I don't like (Radiohead! Grace Under Pressure!) But I try very hard not to use words like "shit!" and "sucks!" and "horrible", and use words that relate to ME. "Unlistenable", etc. I can express my dislike without disparaging the intelligence, taste, listening skills, etc. of others. Someone here - I forget who it was, I forget what artist we were talking about, but it wasn't that long ago - called into question my listening skills when we were talking about a certain artist. Really?? Is that necessary? I don't think so, especially given the science that is more and more telling us that what I as an individual see, hear, taste, smell, and feel may not be the same as what another sees, hears, tastes, smells and feels, even if the stimulus is the same. Laurel and Yanni.
(And no, I'm not referring to good-natured tomfoolery. I love to bust balls as much as the next guy - maybe more, in person - but there ARE people that believe their listening skills are superior and that their taste in music is superior. I say "billshot" to that.)
-
Hannah Montana was awesome!
-
I used to listen to Aqua when I was small. Mariah Carey, Spice Girls, and many other pop artists whom were big at the time. I only heard those because I lived with lived with girls whom listened to that a lot.
My Dad enjoyed more metal and rock back then, so I would hear those songs as well. My favorite was Tom Sawyer.
For me, I wouldn't tell a kid their music taste sucks or anything of the sort because they're impressionable, even believing their peers when they say something sucks to fit in and not be the outsider. I've experienced this with Coheed and Cambria, I used to deflect them due to Claudios vocals and others laughing and at the time would've laughed at me for liking them. Now, being older, wiser and not giving a shit about what people say about me, I'm enjoying them a lot.
I don't know what it is, but if we didnt have these notions about music, people wouldnt be afraid to enjoy those styles.
Imagine if animals could understand us and we told them their music sucks.
-
(And no, I'm not referring to good-natured tomfoolery. I love to bust balls as much as the next guy - maybe more, in person - but there ARE people that believe their listening skills are superior and that their taste in music is superior. I say "billshot" to that.)
I pretty much agree with you, I will add though that some trained ears can notice things others don't and I think sometimes that's where "prog snob"s can come in. Some of which who are really into music and playing music and will criticize music that is mostly unnoticeable to untrained ears. We see that here quite a bit from my experience and it's something I really haven't seen in other genres of music. For example, the crowd noise in a recent DT live album that gets criticized as being fake and on repeat. I don't think I'd ever notice nor care too much about that, but it gets a lot of criticism because some do have the ears that notice that and it stands out to them.
-
(And no, I'm not referring to good-natured tomfoolery. I love to bust balls as much as the next guy - maybe more, in person - but there ARE people that believe their listening skills are superior and that their taste in music is superior. I say "billshot" to that.)
I pretty much agree with you, I will add though that some trained ears can notice things others don't and I think sometimes that's where "prog snob"s can come in. Some of which who are really into music and playing music and will criticize music that is mostly unnoticeable to untrained ears. We see that here quite a bit from my experience and it's something I really haven't seen in other genres of music. For example, the crowd noise in a recent DT live album that gets criticized as being fake and on repeat. I don't think I'd ever notice nor care too much about that, but it gets a lot of criticism because some do have the ears that notice that and it stands out to them.
I don't have a problem with "noticing", but once pointed out, if I don't care, that's no one's bizniss. That doesn't somehow make their opinion more valid than someone elses. Just gives them more information to sort out.
-
Sure, if it doesn't bother me, who cares, but at the same time, they might actually be right. It's something I've only seen here as my ears are not good enough to pick up on such subtleties. It becomes mental, knowing something is off even if you can't tell, somehow makes me not enjoy it as much. Kind of wish I just never knew about it to begin with in some cases. And sure, most cases it has no impact on me if you hear some clickity clack that I cant. The example of fake crowd noise kind of weirds me out though from the mental side of things and the idea of "live" isn't live, but that's a specific example.
-
Sure, if it doesn't bother me, who cares, but at the same time, they might actually be right. It's something I've only seen here as my ears are not good enough to pick up on such subtleties. It becomes mental, knowing something is off even if you can't tell, somehow makes me not enjoy it as much. Kind of wish I just never knew about it to begin with in some cases. And sure, most cases it has no impact on me if you hear some clickity clack that I cant. The example of fake crowd noise kind of weirds me out though from the mental side of things and the idea of "live" isn't live, but that's a specific example.
I do understand what you're saying. It didn't change my overall impression of the band, but it always bugged me (and still does, in an insignificant way) when I heard that the live "Remember Tomorrow" with Bruce on the b-side of the "The Number of the Beast" single was actually Bruce singing in the studio over the backing track from the Maiden Japan EP. I've never confirmed it one way or the other (though I tried once to get the boots of the five Italian shows - following the sacking of Di-Anno but before ANY songs from "Number" were written or recorded - from whence the track was alleged to have come, but failed.)
-
Yea, same with JLB on Live at the Marquee.
-
I don't understand the hostility towards others music opinions. I think it's a big reason why metal music won't be "big" anymore, there's way too much hatred within the community towards each other, sometimes because one's opinions aren't "metal enough" which is ridiculous. Like the people in the Progpower community who shit on Night Flight Orchestra... just keep your negative and hateful opinions to yourself. You don't need to like it, but there's no reason to shit on it.
Well, I suppose if some metal bands become mainstream and commercial and tend to achieve a bit of mass appeal, the majority of metal community will shit on them for not being metal enough (or real metal) and "selling out". They just think the essence of metal music is to be totally 'underground', anti-commercial and far from radio stations.
For example, I can imagine that most Electric Wizard, Opeth or Enslaved fans would have a hateful opinion about Slipknot (because they think Slipknot is mainstream metal for "dumb masses").
-
I don't understand the hostility towards others music opinions. I think it's a big reason why metal music won't be "big" anymore, there's way too much hatred within the community towards each other, sometimes because one's opinions aren't "metal enough" which is ridiculous. Like the people in the Progpower community who shit on Night Flight Orchestra... just keep your negative and hateful opinions to yourself. You don't need to like it, but there's no reason to shit on it.
Well, I suppose if some metal bands become mainstream and commercial and tend to achieve a bit of mass appeal, the majority of metal community will shit on them for not being metal enough (or real metal) and "selling out". They just think the essence of metal music is to be totally 'underground', anti-commercial and far from radio stations.
For example, I can imagine that most Electric Wizard, Opeth or Enslaved fans would have a hateful opinion about Slipknot (because they think Slipknot is mainstream metal for "dumb masses").
I don't know about Slipknot, but I would think some people would have that opinion regarding Five Finger Death Punch.