User Tag List

First 12202122232432 Last

Results 211 to 220 of 388

  1. #211
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    Every post is just "ZOMG THIS ARTIST DOESN'T MEET MY PERSONAL EXPECTATIONS FOR WHAT GOOD MUSIC SHOULD BE LOL"
    for the record, i said nothing about radiohead myself... umm, or whatever you're upset about.


    but i can't believe you're expecting objectivity(?) here.

    so what. people are biased.. ain't no thing

    edit: for record, i like the first album and the bends. why? probably cuz i'm biased too. i'm a guitar player/tend to gravitate towards that.. i think they rocked out more on those two...and were more guitar centric. maybe a little more condensed/anthemic/pop oriented as well.

  2. #212

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    Radiohead is empirically awesome, so if you say they're overrated, then your opinion is objectively wrong. In an effort to prove this, I've worked out a theory that can make you wrong regarding a matter of opinion.
    Fixed.
    Everybody have fun tonight. Everybody Wang Chung tonight.

    Johari
    /Nohari

  3. #213
    Ruler of the Stars Asterion's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5 sp/sx
    Posts
    2,334

    Default

    The best test of a bands true goodness is to see if they stand the test of time. I really don't care though, I prefer to keep the popularity of music and the quality of music separate.
    5 3 9

  4. #214

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    I'm starting to recognize how pointless this thread is. Every post is just "ZOMG THIS ARTIST DOESN'T MEET MY PERSONAL EXPECTATIONS FOR WHAT GOOD MUSIC SHOULD BE LOL"

    which is pretty meaningless. If you're going to critique music, do it as objectively as you can by comparing the artist to other artists in a similar genre during a similar time period.

    Frankly, most of you have a very parochial mold for what characteristics you expect "good music" to have and so you end up dismissing the vast majority of music by judging it in terms of some other genre that you like better. If you assume that all good music is supposed to sound like Lynyrd Skynyrd, of course Radiohead doesn't interest you. That doesn't make them bad; it makes you ignorant for saying so.

    If you simply don't enjoy an entire genre, your opinion that x prominent artist from that genre is "overrated" or "bad" is just utterly meaningless, because you don't like that genre in the first place and so you have no idea how to evaluate the performance in meaningful terms.

    It's like hearing 15 year old metalheads ramble on about how much the Beatles suck because when they listen to music they're looking for one very specific set of characteristics (in this case, fast, technically difficult, aggressive playing, chunky modern production EQd toward drums and guitars, and dark/menacing lyrics) and everything else just gets labeled "bad" because they don't understand how to judge a piece of music in the context of its own genre.

    Not fitting your genre preferences doesn't make music bad. Stacking up poorly next to other artists in the same genre from the same time period in terms of objective critique does...if I hear another ISFP whine that "Radiohead sucks" for reasons that boil down to "they don't sound like AC/DC", I'm going to stab someone in the fucking eye.

    "I listened to the whole Radiohead record, but I couldn't find one rockin' pentatonic blues riff, super cranked reverb-soaked arena drum beat, rippin' 128th note shred solo or lyric about gettin' drunk and lovin' my girl in my new '68 Chevy! This band SUCKS!" fucking

    /rant
    The reason I think Radiohead is overrated is not that they are not talented. Nor that they compare unfavourably with my personal favourites. It is the emotional attachment the fans have with the band, the emotional reaction of the fans. It seems out of whack.

  5. #215
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EffEmDoubleyou View Post
    Fixed.
    You sure about that INTJ label? This is a pretty sad misinterpretation of my post. There are criteria for mostly objective evaluation of music. When it comes to what you enjoy, that's all personal opinion...when it comes to what's skillfully made, that's much less subjective.


    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    for the record, i said nothing about radiohead myself... umm, or whatever you're upset about.
    For the record, I don't recall mentioning your name or indicating in any way that I was talking to you personally.


    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    but i can't believe you're expecting objectivity(?) here.

    so what. people are biased.. ain't no thing

    edit: for record, i like the first album and the bends. why? probably cuz i'm biased too. i'm a guitar player/tend to gravitate towards that.. i think they rocked out more on those two...and were more guitar centric. maybe a little more condensed/anthemic/pop oriented as well.
    k
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  6. #216
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,909

    Default

    I was thinking about this the other day, and honestly... John Lennon.

    I love the the Beatles, and they collectively probably are among 10 greatest musicians of the 20th century. Now, some say that the Beatles themselves are over-rated, and with the almost religious status they have, I can see why someone would say that. But they really are awesome, and incredibly influential. Over-rated perhaps, but not the most over-rated...

    But let's look at their solo work.

    They all had successful solo careers. I can't think of any other band where that happened. Of course everyone wants to scoff about Ringo, and I'll just let that go, and say that yeah, aside from the quality of his music, the fact that he didn't write much of his work is a major strike against him in terms of ranking him... so we'll put him in fourth.

    But I may be one of the few people that would then put Lennon's career in third. In the 10 years he got to live after the Beatles, Lennon was the least prolific, and as far as I'm concerned, did lower quality work than George or Paul.

    Wonderful Christmastime was in that span... and it's hard to forgive Paul for that, but it was about at the end, '79, so I'll let it slide. More often it's when I listen to much of Lennon's work, it sounds like he just phoned it in. The form too simple, the instrumentation too sparse, the lyrics often sound like an idea which was then never re-polished for musical format. A good example of that is his contraversial song, Woman Is the Nigger of the World. Yeah, I get the idea, but it sounds like he's sort of cramming the lyrics in there, like he never made the effort to turn prose into something melodic.

    And that, of course, is relatively conventional. Then there's all of that garbage that he did thanks to the influence of Yoko Ono. Some people (and they are rare) insist that the stuff Ono did was genius. I never get this avante-garde, performance art stuff, myself. The problem is that it's often so alien that I don't even know what to rate it on, so I'm only left with my visceral response, and that tells me that it sounds like shit.

    As far as technical skill, it's plain to see that George and Paul are both better musicians. They both could play more instruments than John, and they mastered some particular instruments better than John did with any. Ringo is also sadly underappreciated for what a good drummer he actually was.

    Anyhow, what I think is the fact that John earned himself more social and political prominence post-Beatles than the others did, the fact that he seemed so experimental and innovative (even if it was all garbage), and of course the fact that he got shot, are the main reasons he's praised so much now. He is loved as a persona in a way that actually over-shadows his music.

    Again, the Beatles are great, and being the third best of them still makes you a very good musician, so I'm not saying Lennon is bad, and I certainly love what he contributed to that band. But I really don't think he is the genius or the master that it has become so common to say he is.
    Last edited by Magic Poriferan; 05-08-2010 at 01:46 PM.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  7. #217
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    I'm starting to recognize how pointless this thread is. Every post is just "ZOMG THIS ARTIST DOESN'T MEET MY PERSONAL EXPECTATIONS FOR WHAT GOOD MUSIC SHOULD BE LOL"

    which is pretty meaningless. If you're going to critique music, do it as objectively as you can by comparing the artist to other artists in a similar genre during a similar time period.
    Can you cry any louder? I don't think the people in New York heard you.

  8. #218
    not to be trusted miss fortune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Enneagram
    827 sp/so
    Posts
    20,126

    Default

    I heard him in Indiana!
    “Oh, we're always alright. You remember that. We happen to other people.” -Terry Pratchett

  9. #219
    Minister of Propagandhi ajblaise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    7,917

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jaguar View Post
    Can you cry any louder? I don't think the people in New York heard you.
    No... I definitely heard it.

  10. #220
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    xkcd
    Enneagram
    9w1 sx/sp
    Socionics
    INT_
    Posts
    10,733

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wolfy View Post
    There were a lot of intuitives in the thread that also said Radiohead is overrated. I thought playing the sensing card was a cheap shot. That kind of thing gets on my nerves.
    Cheap shot? Not if Radiohead is actually overrated.

    EDIT: I'm actually listening to Radiohead right now, and their '00s output is superior to their '90s output with the exception of OK Computer.

Similar Threads

  1. The Most Difficult Video Games of All Time Sort By Category
    By Mal12345 in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-21-2015, 12:49 AM
  2. Replies: 36
    Last Post: 10-18-2013, 02:24 AM
  3. Worst Music Video Of All Time
    By highlander in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 10-20-2012, 09:07 AM
  4. Most underrated musical act of all time?
    By r0wo1 in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 09-10-2009, 08:17 AM
  5. The 5 Most Bad Ass Presidents of All-Time
    By swordpath in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 06-05-2008, 03:51 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO