Fun Stuff > BAND

Negative opinions on bands

<< < (4/17) > >>

ASturge:

--- Quote from: KharBevNor ---People, people.

If you'd all just stop listening to shite music, this kind of thread wouldn't be necessary.
OMG SARCASM
--- End quote ---


It wasn't though......

WAS IT!!!?

KharBevNor:
It stands as it stands.

Hatebunny:
Hmm, My theory is that if someone makes a thread expressing their like of a band, that thread should be used for agreement and general discussion of positive qualities of that band. I'd consider it a thread derailment to come in and say 'I don't like this band: here's why all your reasons for liking them are stupid.' which, though you may deny it, is the way people around here do it.

Anyway, I'd suggest that if you dislike the band, make your own thread about why you dislike them so that people who dislike them can go and post about why they dislike them. This way, people with similar likes and tastes can communicate well about something they agree upon, and no one is annoyed or offended beyond milder disagreements in 'this guy says the band sucks slightly more than I think it sucks, but I still think it sucks.' Or 'this gal thinks the band is better than I do....but I still like it.' y'see? Much easier to reconcile THOSE differences than it is 'I love this band' and 'are you fucking stupid? The only sound their guitars make is the sound of one hand clapping.'  Or somesuch argument.

Really, If you can find nothing positive to say about a band, say your negative comment somewhere else, so that people who enjoy the band can have their posts read and appreciated before the 'I hate this band' crowd comes in and throws the thread off until it dies.

sp2:
You gave your opinion, but....no argument.

There are plenty of ways to make constructive criticism that involves negative comments.  If someone is ranting and raving about, oh, say, I dunno, Green Day, and I make some snarky comments and suggest half a dozen good punk bands that have a similar style but don't, you know, suck, How is that not in the spirit of music discussion?  If people are talking about how Modest Mouse are the most innovative band out there right now, and I suggest they try listening to anything besides, you know, Modest Mouse, because calling Modest Mouse "innovative" suggests a seriously limited listening experience.

There are plenty of myths about current bands that people perpetuate by parroting things they hear from each other and from Pitchfork.  If you believe the indie scene and pitchfork, Interpol are one of the most talented, energetic, and innovative bands out there.  I got news for you; that sort of opinion is based on a limited sphere of experience and is emphatically not true.  If you believe indie scenesters, Win Butler (Arcade Fire)'s scene antics are "energetic" and "a great show" while Cedric Bixler (The Mars Volta)'s are "pretentious" and "a put-off."  I got news for you.  Climbing around on the frames of a stage or jumping out into the crowd halfway through a show is no different than throwing around the mic stand or jumping off the drum set.

If everyone is just talking amongst themselves saying the same shit they heard from another scenester, and no one calls them on that, what's the point in a music forum?  I mean, you're better off just reading Pitchfork; they normally at least have decent writing and spelling, although reviews like this suggest to me that Pitchfork are still, at heart, a bunch of fucking wankers.  I also honestly believe that many pitchfork reviews really only focus on one or two solid songs, but that's another story entirely.

My point, and the point of this thread, is that negative comments make such discussions more relevant, because they provide a check on the rampant parroting that has pretty much infected the current scene.  Without such checks, people will believe completely ludicrous things, like Milli Vanilli really DID sing all their songs, or that Interpol are actually good.

Hatebunny:

--- Quote from: sp2 ---You gave your opinion, but....no argument.

...or that Interpol are actually good.
--- End quote ---


The point is to avoid pointless arguments, and increase conversation.

Also, that interpol comment, joke or not is exactly the kind of nonchalant 'My Criticism = 'they suck!'' comment that everyone's talking about when they disagree with you about your negative comments actually providing criticism.

I don't like interpol, some people do. 'sucks' is subjective. So, here's a subjective 'you suck' to you too. Try not to mistake it for an objective comment, like you do your own negative criticisms, and you should survive.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page