Fun Stuff > BAND
Overrated Bands
Thrillho:
--- Quote from: KeepACoolin on 07 Feb 2009, 13:23 ---1. Because I place value on someone being good at what they do. If you are a guitarist, I am interested in you being a good guitarist. It's like sports: the best players on a team are usually the most popular. I want bands to be good at what they do.
--- End quote ---
A band can be good at what they do without being technically proficient. All the technical proficiency in the world doesn't mean you make a great album or hold a crowd's attention.
--- Quote from: KeepACoolin on 07 Feb 2009, 13:23 ---2. I define skill as technical proficiency at an instrument. This is easiest for me to define in terms of drums, because that is what I play. If a drummer is capable of maintaining rhythm in a variety of time signatures and at a variety of speeds while playing complex material, especially syncopation, and has technically difficult fills, I am inclined to like that drummer. However, as I said, this is not the ONLY factor I consider, but it is the first. Of course, I'm not wholly consistent, and sometimes I allow one musician's skill to make up for the failures of the others (a la The Doors: John Densmore is a technically skilled drummer, the other guitar and organ are not at the same level).
--- End quote ---
Meh, here we just disagree. Skill isn't everything. Sometimes the greatest skill is knowing that fancy frills aren't needed, quite apart from which skill is not totally quantifiable.
--- Quote from: KeepACoolin on 07 Feb 2009, 13:23 ---3. While I appreciate multi-talentedness, I am more concerned with proficiency at one instrument. For instance, a friend and I argued the merits of Eric Clapton vs. Jimmy Page. My friend argued that Clapton should be considered better for, among other reasons, the fact that he often sang while playing. I disagree. I think skill or talent should be judged primarily within one field or at one instrument/position in the band (i.e., no bonus points for singing guitarists).
--- End quote ---
Isn't that just closing yourself off a bit? Multi-instrumentalism is a skill in and of itself, and anyone who can play more than one instrument I consider to be a slightly better musician than I would if they just play one instrument well. Playing multiple instruments means you need subtlety, nuance and knowing what is needed for each instrument you play.
--- Quote from: KeepACoolin on 07 Feb 2009, 13:23 ---Also, I don't know if you can say the Sex Pistols were not bad musically when they featured Sid "I Have No Idea What I'm Doing, So I Will Pluck Some Strings Very Fast" Vicious.
--- End quote ---
If you'd read the very next sentence you'd do well. Quite apart from which, I consider the Pistols to be Jones, Cook, Rotten and Matlock. Vicious never played anything on record as far as I know and I think they muted his bass at gigs.
A Shoggoth on the Roof:
am I the only one that gets the sense that this dude's trolling? I mean, there's just too many good bands that an opinion like that would ignore for it to be real. Even if he is serious, does it matter that much?
and yea, Vicious was totally just that guy who goes to gigs to get drunk and try to start fights. except he was on stage instead of in the crowd.
KeepACoolin:
Not trolling. Just expressing my honest opinions. And, as I mentioned, I think Dream Theater is a good band.
Also: I mean "good at what they do" in terms of the individual musicians, not the band as a whole. If the musicians are good individually (or at least SOMEONE in the band), I will give them a shot. Then, if the band gells, I will like the band.
And I don't like the Rolling Stones.
ImRonBurgundy?:
Is there such a thing as musical asperger's because I think you have it.
KharBevNor:
This is objectively better than any Dream Theater song ever. There can be no argument.
Also, stop wanking on about Jones, Matlock wrote most of the Sex Pistols music. Fun music fact for the day: Glen Matlock came up with the riff for Pretty Vacant by accident whilst trying to nail 'Fernando' by Abba.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version