THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)
Fun Stuff => BAND => Topic started by: sp2 on 22 Jul 2005, 00:22
-
This is a rant. Sorry. Hang with me. Or lock it. I don't really care.
There are a few individuals who, whenever someone has something disparaging to say about a band, immediately respond with "why don't you have anything positive to say?" or "keep your opinions to yourself" or something equally inane. This is lame. This is obnoxious. This defeats the purpose of any sort of discussion on music in the first place.
You don't like people critically reviewing music? Well, shit, you probably shouldn't read album or concert reviews in your local paper, alternative or otherwise. I mean, they're going to dislike some of the stuff you love. And damn, you certainly shouldn't read Pitchfork or any other critic website, because they'll just thrash your favorite bands.
You don't like people making clever jabs at your favorite bands? Well, Jeph ought to just keep music out of his strip entirely. And Mitch Clem should stop writing Nothing Nice to Say (http://www.nothingnice.com). And SomethingAwful should just shut Your Band Sucks the fuck down. Because everyone knows making fun of bands other people like, even when it's done in a clever manner, isn't funny. Not at all. Not in the least bit.
People making cracks about music serves multiple purposes. It can be an honest to god criticism of the band. Is that wrong? No, not really, if you take music seriously, especially if you write it yourself, you are constantly looking things that work well and things that don't work well, so you become honed to look for such aspects of various pieces of music. Honest criticism, such as, "man, their lyrics are really cornball. The music itself is fine, but they need to have someone else write their lyrics" helps understand the music better, and for people like me, helps validate other reasons for liking a band, such as style, interplay between instruments, musical skill, etc. It can be a way of taking down a band that takes itself too seriously (and yes, there are tons of these out there. I like quite a few myself. I mean, I love The Mars Volta to pieces, but there are definitely an assload of jokes that can and should be made at their expense.). It can be a way of injecting some humor into an otherwise dull conversation. Hell, it can be a way of telling other people with similar taste to avoid wasting hard-earned money on a particular album (Trail of Dead rocks, but I wouldn't touch Worlds Apart even with Hazmat gloves). At the very least, it might make someone laugh (god forbid).
So seriously, there is nothing wrong with arguing about the merits of a particular band. There is nothing wrong with making a short snarky comment about a particular band. So seriously. Chill out. The world is a better place when people disagree occasionally.
-
See the problem is, you post this clearly well thought out rant, but in your actual criticisms of music, (i.e. Dashboard) all you really did was insult fans of the music. Clever criticism is a far cry from "there is no excuse for this band to be popular"
I am not responding to this thread again, so don't bother coming after me.
-
Tool is a good example of how I criticise music. I go: 1. They're awful talented, I'm sure but 2. It's not my taste in music. but 3. holy crap have I met some bad people that identify themselves as 'tool fans'
ICP: 1. They're having fun doing it, and I'm pretty sure they don't take it seriously but 2. if they don't take their own music seriously, why should I? but 3. I've gotten in a lot of fights with irate Juggalos who are usually "those kind of people"
I shy away from the music forum a lot because I honestly only listen to one kind of music: a specific brand of metal (and it's off-shoots) And there's a whole lot of good music out there that I'm just not interested in and I'm glad you can groove on whatever melody you find appealing but I'd rather remain ignorant.
-
Isn’t it just as easy to discuss a flaw in a record from a neutral or even positive manner?
-
What, something like "I really love the fact that the whole record is shit"? Or maybe "My Goodness! It's so awesome that you listen to terrible music. That's just swell".
-
The point is whether or not the negative comment in question is contributing anything to the thread. There are some people who, whenever a certain band is mentioned, will post a comment with no intention other than to say "That band sucks." We know that's what you think. We heard you the first time, and the second time, and the third, and the fourth . . . ad nauseum. If all you have to contribute is that the band sucks, and not why it sucks, and if you insist on making that comment every single time the band is mentioned, then please just shut up.
If, on the other hand, you feel like making a post explaining that in your opinion the lyrics of said band are banal, or the intruments are played ineptly, or the song-structure is cliched, and if those comments are something new that none of us have heard from you before, then by all means, post and be a constructive member of the forum.
-
Let's just all agree to disagree.
No, really.
-
That is for when things get out of hand and must have an end and I've seen it work here. It was amazing.
-
I thing a big problem of negative comments is that most of the time they aren't about the quality of the music but more about the politics of the band: "They are posers, they sold out, they are just apealing to whinny 13 year olds to sell records".
Music is such a personal thing and means differnt things to differnt people. Just because I can't see the point of Gansta Rap or the what's the big deal about being 'Straight out of Compton' doesn't mean it might actually be very important to someone else. Judging someones values compared to your own makes you a pretty big douche bag.
-
I don't think it should be disallowed to say if you don't like a band, it annoys me when someone starts a discussion along the lines of "what do you think of (band x)?" and then gets all uppity when not everyone worships the ground they walk on. On the other hand there's no point claiming that the band are bad because you don't like them, or personally attacking fans. Unless most of the fans are jackasses, I guess.
Respecting people's right to dislike bands you like is just as important as respecting people right to listen to bands you don't like, I guess, so it annoys me when people get all hypocritical and tell people to shut up unless they have something nice to say.
-
i think that criticism and discussion about the relative merits of a band/artist/whatever is pretty cool, so long as people remember that there is a difference between being critical or funny and being a dick to someone and abusing them.
-
Yeah. Incidentally, what's so hard about that?
-
People, people.
If you'd all just stop listening to shite music, this kind of thread wouldn't be necessary.
OMG SARCASM
-
hey, i dont really want to comment on this, i just get worked up, but fyi quoting the person above you is frowned upon, and kinda pointless.:-)
-
Positive exposition:
I couldn't find substance or cohesion on the record.
Negative exposition:
GAWD HUM R SUCH PHAGS. THEY HAVE NO TALENT!
-
People, people.
If you'd all just stop listening to shite music, this kind of thread wouldn't be necessary.
OMG SARCASM
It wasn't though......
WAS IT!!!?
-
It stands as it stands.
-
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.
-
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 (http://pitchforkmedia.com/record-reviews/a/at-the-drive-in/relationship-of-command.shtml) 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.
-
You gave your opinion, but....no argument.
...or that Interpol are actually good.
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.
-
Interpol are good. Energetic, innovative and supremely talented certainly not, but they're a pretty solid.
Now you're just saying that people who don't agree with you are wrong and haven't listened to enough, which sort defeats the point of your first post and makes you sound like an elitist arse.
Yes, you can agree that certain bands are a complete waste of space and effort and have the musical value typically associated with lift muzak, but once you move beyond the realms of Christina Aguilera, Busted etc It's basically all about your tastes and preferences. Certainly, there are a lot of people running around without a clue because they don't know any better, but you seem to be tarring a hell of lot of people with the same brush just because the happen to disagree with you.
-
If you'll allow me to refer to the music forum rules:
Don't be a dick. If someone creates a thread about x genre of music that is not an invitation for fans of y genre to jump all over x thread because they don't like it, or because x isn't y. Further, don't then go and attempt to make everything about genre y.
requires no further explanation.
Don't be an elitist prick. You're not superior to anyone if your favourite band has a more complex chord structure than your standard pop hook. This is like compensating for a small penis with a sports car.
g'yarr.
Be intelligent. In a thread about a band it's alright to post about why they don't do it for you, so long as your reasoning is intelligent. "I hate The Arcade Fire because they're not metal" is not intelligent reasoning. Also, there is no need to state this more than once. Not talking out of your ass should follow, don't bash bands you've never listened to, or heard one single on the radio.
Having drawn attention to that:
Here's the deal. You can say you don't like something. It is preferred that you explain why, and it is preferred that you do so intelligently, without using simply saying that it's crap for losers. You may NOT derail threads by way of defaming the band that the thread is about.
a-digga.
-
I HATE YOU!
I HATE THE BAND YOU LIKE!
-
Re: Hatebunny
Oops, you're a retard.
Rule 1 refers to genres. You can't say "rap sux up the punx!" Not only because it's a dick move, but it's fucking retarded.
Rule 2 refers to progtentiousness, specifically, the belief that complex makes better. There is a difference between saying "oh man, only the most complex music is good" and saying "such and such band is shit because they can't play their instruments, they even struggle on the most elementary of riffs and don't really have a lot to offer."
Rule 3 is basically saying "if you're going to bash musicians, do it for the right reasons." I don't dislike Interpol because they're not post-hardcore. I dislike Interpol because they are supposed to be fresh, innovative, and energetic, and they're none of the above. They're stale indie cliches. And I'll bash them for THAT reason. Also, it says don't talk about something you have no experience with. This could just as easily be extended to "indie music that's so richly produced or interwoven, such as Interpol"*
If I say in a thread which is talking about how innovative the Killers are that they're really not all that innovative, and are really not above stealing shamelessly from other musicians, and the thread turns from a Killers-fan circle-jerk to an argument over the merits of the band and what really flies when you're biting from other musicians, how is that "derailed?" Doesn't sound derailed to me. It's still about the band. It's probably more about the band than the previous postings were, because the previous postings were about some imaginary entity that is clearly distinct and separate from the actual band.
*real quote from Johhny C
-
Music means different things to different people. "I'm not a fan of this music" goes down a whole lot smoother than "This music is crap". It's not hard, why drag it out into this big convoluted disscussion?
People have differing opinions. Respect that. Simple as that really.
-
There are plenty of bands I respect that I am not a fan of. There are plenty of bands that are crap that I still listen to.
Saying "I'm not a fan of this band/album" is different than saying "this band/album is crap." It's not really as subjective as some folks are making it out to be.
-
I HATE YOU!
I HATE THE BAND YOU LIKE!
RVB <3 <3
Also, What's the problem with saying a band is shit as long as you back it up with something? I mean, it's not like that person's fucking opinion matters at all to you. Also, I take all of SP2's asshole posts completely unseriously, and they're hilarious.[/quote]
-
the problem is, music is subjective.
I listen to alot of weird Glitch and Noise artists, some would call it shit, some would call it interesting. Your opinion (or mine for that matter) is not the barometer on which opinions are based, and trying to fool yourself with that notion is just silly.
Try this, the next time someone on THE INTERNET brings up a band you hate, play a song by a band you REALLY enjoy. You'll be all the happier.
-
Or that person could say what they want to say about the band and both of you could be on your merry way. Music is subjective, and people who take offense at Interpol being called bland need to chill out. That's their opinion, not law.
On an unrelated note, Interpol are really boring.
-
Dr. David Thorpe > You
-
Truer words have never been spoken.
-
On an unrelated note, Interpol are really boring.
Understatement.
-
Or that person could say what they want to say about the band and both of you could be on your merry way. Music is subjective, and people who take offense at Interpol being called bland need to chill out. That's their opinion, not law.
On an unrelated note, Interpol are really boring.
"going on your merry way" is rarely the case, people wll bicker FOREVER about bands.
I dont agree that Interpol is bland, I actually find them interesting, and their songs have alot of depth. But thats just my 2 cents. And, thats the last I'll say about that.*goes on merry way*
-
how did this become a conversation about the merits (or lack thereof) of Interpol?
honestly though, the music forum scares me because of the critics in here. if i wanted someone to express raving opinions (good or bad) of a band then i'd visit a website where this is the central idea. i think an objective outlook needs to be kept in the back of everyones mind when reading about other people's music taste.
so thats my two cents...
-
Lets hear it for the level-headedness of Ontario-ans!
I just think that people need to relax, and realize that this is just music. Sure people like me live music, and take it seriously. However, I can seperate music from real life.
As I said before, your opinion, or anyone else's is not the defining opinion on a specific band.
-
how did this become a conversation about the merits (or lack thereof) of Interpol?
honestly though, the music forum scares me because of the critics in here. if i wanted someone to express raving opinions (good or bad) of a band then i'd visit a website where this is the central idea. i think an objective outlook needs to be kept in the back of everyones mind when reading about other people's music taste.
so thats my two cents...
I'd have paid 4 cents for those 2 cents. Most of the post's I have made in the music forum have lead to someone biting me on the ass.
-
The key to winning, is to
NOT CARE ABOUT THE OPINION OF THE PERSON THAT 'DISSED YO BAND'
If sp2 thinks Modest Mouse are shit..... I don't care!
I Like em' . Doesn't mean i want to go kill sp2 for not liking a band I like. Also, I'm not one of those people who say "everyone gets their own opinion blah blah blah".... that's just annoying. I'm of the opinion that sp2's opinion on Modest Mouse is wrong. But im not going to make an issue of it.
Obviously it now sounds like i am making an issue of it..... but it was only an example!!!!
-
SP2's asshole posts
As opposed to what?
[/pickin']
:-P :)
-
The key to winning, is to
NOT CARE ABOUT THE OPINION OF THE PERSON THAT 'DISSED YO BAND'
If sp2 thinks Modest Mouse are shit..... I don't care!
I Like em' . Doesn't mean i want to go kill sp2 for not liking a band I like. Also, I'm not one of those people who say "everyone gets their own opinion blah blah blah".... that's just annoying. I'm of the opinion that sp2's opinion on Modest Mouse is wrong. But im not going to make an issue of it.
Obviously it now sounds like i am making an issue of it..... but it was only an example!!!!
Look dude, just cos you like modest mouse, doesn't mean we all do. Just shut it yeah?
;)
-
*sighs*
That's what I'm saying. You don't care about my opinion. I don't care about yours. There's no point in making an issue of it. Wait, you just did.
-
i'd say its fine to have and express negative opinions ... constructive ones though not like the kind that most people on blabbermouth seem to express (eg they're gay fags shittyy shitt shit etc).
but i don't think hijacking a "i really like *insertband*" thread with piles of hate is a bit much... i mean i really don't like bands like oasis or counting crows, but il try to let people like them if they want (although when i was younger i would probably write louds of crap about them and argue til my fingers hurt from typing or something similar).
-
how did this become a conversation about the merits (or lack thereof) of Interpol?
I think it's because every conversation involving sp2 becomes one about Interpol.
-
Congratulations people! This is the thread with the single most long messages ever!
That being said, peoples opinions are their opinions. I strongly dislike metal in general, but I have to realise and respect the people who do. The most terrible mistakes that people can make in the musical critisism area is either 1.Personally attacking people who listen to such music. or 2. Taking objective critisism as a personal attack.
-
I'm going to side with sp2.
people saying things like-
Music means different things to different people. "I'm not a fan of this music" goes down a whole lot smoother than "This music is crap". It's not hard, why drag it out into this big convoluted disscussion?
is just a really ridiciulous pansy-waisted approach to it. Having a big convoluted discsussion is what we SHOULD be going for, and sometimes that only stems from saying something is crap. If you say something is crap, then you have to explain why, and that is interesting. If you just say you're not a fan, then we have to wonder why you opened your mouth in the first place.
-
If you say something is crap, then you have to explain why, and that is interesting.
While I can see where you're coming from, this is demonstrably not true, especially on the Internet. Some (too many) people are perfectly happy with just saying "UR BAND SUX," sometimes over and over again. I agree that people shouldn't pussy-foot around if they genuinely dislike something, but being blunt and being interesting are not the same thing.
-
*sighs*
That's what I'm saying. You don't care about my opinion. I don't care about yours. There's no point in making an issue of it. Wait, you just did.
Dude, the little winky --> ;) meant i was yanking your chain. No offence was intended!
-
I don't mind discussing things with people but I'm not going to have another argument like what was in the dance thread. I was told (by sp2) that my opinion was wrong. I just can't argue with that. It's like a little kid telling you he won't eat his spaghetti because it's really worms!
As far as the "this band sucks" I think that if there is to be a mature discussion about anything related to art it has to be understood by both parties that at the heart of the matter there can't be a winner or a looser, but you might just learn something. I was wearing my interpol shirt at a jazz club once and an older woman came over and commented on how that is the only new album she's bought in 8 years. I would love to see someone tell a 70+ year old woman who happens to be a walking talking jazz encyclopedia, that she has no taste in music.
and about all these comments about pitchfork... Will you guys just give it a rest? I mean with all the people who have no idea what underground music is let alone that it exists, do we really have to be such stuck up fuckheads that we can't even read a review from a team of people passionate about the same (if not similar) music that we are?? I mean think about it. If you're reading this right now, chances are music means a whole lot to you. If that’s so can't you just respect the opinions of others and say "I disagree" rather than "OMG PITCHFORK IS GHEY"
I guess what I mean to say is grow up and realize that you don't know everything, and your opinion is worth something only to you.
-
Dude, the little winky --> ;) meant i was yanking your chain. No offence was intended!
Dang...
Should've seen that emoticon.....
pffffft
-
Dr. David Thorpe > You
-
and about all these comments about pitchfork... Will you guys just give it a rest? I mean with all the people who have no idea what underground music is let alone that it exists, do we really have to be such stuck up fuckheads that we can't even read a review from a team of people passionate about the same (if not similar) music that we are?? I mean think about it. If you're reading this right now, chances are music means a whole lot to you. If that’s so can't you just respect the opinions of others and say "I disagree" rather than "OMG PITCHFORK IS GHEY"
Firstoff: Pitchfork does not have same or similar, or even close of a musical taste as me. Just get that out of the way. And I don't think anybody called Pitchfork "Ghey" (dumbest spelling ever), but rather pretentious assholes. Which is pretty much a straight definition of Pitchfork. and that is not something that can be argued against very well.
-
well I've heard that argument before. I just don't see it. I read the reviews and they talk about what they hear in a band. I see more pretentiousness from people that say "oh I'm so above pitchfork" rather than from pitchfork themselves, so maybe they just seem humble in comparison.
And how in the world can you say that they have no similar interests of yours? If that is the dirty truth then why don't you offer to review for them? I'm a big fan of addressing a problem rather than bitching about it.
-
Basically this entire thread is a few people trying to justify being pretentious assholes. I don't see how Pitchfork's pretension is any greater than yours, Kai.
Also, saying that people who don't like a particular band should keep their mouths shut is a bit precious, but I can't see any worth in the Interpol "discussion" that was going on earlier in the tread.
I notice that there's actually not a lot of metal-bashing in this forum, but there are a few metal-heads who take every opportunity to repeat that they think "indie" music in general is boring and unadventurous. I think that this is what everyone is taking offense to - it is really dull to have the same people jump into every conversation with their "criticism" (eg. "Interpol are really boring").
Nobody is saying that you have to like anything, but have some respect, not neccessarily for the bands, but for the people on this board who are generally intelligent and interesting folk with their own valid opinions.
-
Pitchfork consistently downgrades certain genres of music, notably prog, progcore, and avant, and consistently overgrades other genres of music, specifically stuff like Interpol. Because their rating system is based on indie sensibility rather than on the belief that one should assess each album by the standards set for that genre, this makes them a bunch of pretentious assholes.
Additionally, many of their reviews focus on individual songs (one tight song does not make a classic album) and ignore things like album coherence. There is no way, for example, that TV on the Radio's Desperate Youth and Bloodthirsty Babes deserves the rating it received...the album lacked any semblance of coherence, and while some of the songs were really catchy, much of the album was totally unlistenable even for a fan of the genre it attempted to belong to. Finally, the majority of any Pitchfork review is discussing things besides the particular album, and is either comparing a release to other work by that artist, or is an avenue for the author to dangle his big indie dick and talk about things that have really no relevance to the album being reviewed.
And really, why should anyone offer to review for them? I mean, Pitchfork should not be the deciding factor for whether or not an album is well-received by the scene. I don't want to be told that Floss by the Descending Testicles is a classic album by someone who spends the whole review talking about the Canadian indie scene and maybe a paragraph talking about the one single on the album. I don't want to be told that Arcade Fire's Funeral is amazing, I want to listen to it and decide for myself.
The idea that a single review website that doesn't review seriously but rather reviews in such a way to promote specific types of music determines whether or not a large subculture will or will not listen to a particular CD or band is absolutely disgusting to me, especially because this subculture prides itself on being individual.
-
TV on the Radio's Desperate Youth and Bloodthirsty Babes... lacked any semblance of coherence, and while some of the songs were really catchy, much of the album was totally unlistenable even for a fan of the genre it attempted to belong to
Pretensious opinion presented as fact.
the majority of any Pitchfork review is... comparing a release to other work by that artist
Art exists in context. It is reasonable to compare albums to other albums.
I don't want to be told that Arcade Fire's Funeral is amazing, I want to listen to it and decide for myself.
What are you doing reading any reviews then?
-
And how in the world can you say that they have no similar interests of yours? If that is the dirty truth then why don't you offer to review for them? I'm a big fan of addressing a problem rather than bitching about it.
How in te world can I say they have no (or very, very, VERY little) similar musical interests of mine? Easy. Firstoff, unlike you (as far as I can tell) I do not like indie, with the exception of a few bands (maybe, like, 3). Pitchfork's entire world is based around the genre for the most part. That's what it prides itself on. I, myself tend to prefer Prog/Art Rock/Metal, and whatnot. That's the music that interests me. Sure, I'm still listening for other bands, many of which are considered indie, and for a good portion of it, I come out disappointed, as I would with most genres. Where they have a hardon for My Bloody Valentine or whatever band you kids are still mourning the loss of, where I tend to lean more towards Zappa, THe Residents, Beefheart, Nash the Slash, and now the totally awesome DeVotchKa! Also, I, not relaly caring about Pitchfork at all, do not bitch about it unless it happens to come up. I could care less.
Also, if that above is a "pretentious opinion", then every single opinion on the face of the Earth is really pretentious. I mean, how hard is it to assume that it is his opinion talking? what kind of fucking idiot would actually take that as fact? I mean, it's obviously his opinion! He's writing it! 5th grade didn't have two weeks devoted to differentiating between fact and opinion for nothing!
-
As far as the original intention of this thread goes I think that we've actually managed to come round full circle. Even if the guys that review over there don't like something they at least explain why other than just saying it's boring and uninspiring. They often list bands that are doing that the reviewed band is doing but better, and that is key as I see it.
If you want to tell me interpol is boring, list a band that has achieved more in the same vein of music and we can have a discussion. If you claim that ALL music that achieves a certain sound is automatically dismissible then you will have a difficult time explaining how you can define yourself as a music fan.
Baseball fans sometimes hate other teams, but they rarely hate divisions.
I've never met a humanitarian who hates people of a certain color regardless of achievements or successes.
-
BASICALLY YOU WILL NEVER EVER AGREE WITH EACHOTHER EVER! WE WILL ALWAYS THINK WE ARE RIGHT!! THE ONLY SOLOUTION IS
::EATS KIDD O'S BRAINS!!::
-
*is now dead*
-
*is now a zombie and must start a zombie character*
-
Personally I just think it's the way you go about expressing your opinions.
Just as I was reading this thread I noted that you called someone a "retard" just because they interpreted something differently to you, or wrongly, whatever.
I have no problem in expressing opinions, and I think if you actually said "these bands are better" it would be helpful, but maybe in a less hostile manner. Saying "THIS SUCKS" just doesn't make people regard your opinions with credibility.
If someone abused me because of my taste in real-life or the internet, I'd be less likely to listen to the constructive things that they said.
If you went about expressing your opinions more tactfully, then maybe people wouldn't get so pissed off.
Do you really go about in real life telling strangers they are retards, just because they do something wrong?
If you do thats pretty arrogant and sad. Why do you have the right to do it on the internet?
Also, I quite like boring music :) So saying something is boring doesn't validate that noone will like it.
-
*sings*
should i try to hide
the way i feel inside
my heart for you?
would you say that you
would try to love me too?
in your mind could you ever be
really close to me?
i can tell the way you smile
if i feel that i could be certain then
i would say the things
i want to say tonight
but till i can see
that you'd really care for me
i will dream that someday you'll be
really close to me
i can tell the way you smile
if i feel that i could be certain then
i would say the things
i want to say tonight
but till i can see
that you'd really care for me
i'll keep trying to hide
the way i feel inside
-
If you claim that ALL music that achieves a certain sound is automatically dismissible then you will have a difficult time explaining how you can define yourself as a music fan.
Sure, I'm still listening for other bands, many of which are considered indie, and for a good portion of it, I come out disappointed, as I would with most genres.
...
and I want to make a Zombie Character! eat my brains!
-
I DON'T DO REQUESTS.
-
yeah requests are a drag
-
I request that we stop talking about Pitchfork. No use giving them unnecessary attention.
-
Even if the guys that review over there don't like something they at least explain why other than just saying it's boring and uninspiring.
Normally the reason they give is because the band doesn't play indie pop rock.
If you want to tell me interpol is boring, list a band that has achieved more in the same vein of music and we can have a discussion.
Joy Division is the obvious example.
-
dude that was really really ridiculous...
how old are you?
-
DUDE SP2 IS BASICALLY A WANKER. I THINK WE HAVE ALL STARTED TO IGNORE HIM. HE IS LIKE 1 STEP ABOVE A TROLL.
-
I suppose it's no use feeding the troll, if we play our cards right, he might just die of starvation.
-
I appreciate the fact that you are insulting me, but try to respect the fact that I have been here quite a bit longer than you have, and if I want to fuck around and make zombie jokes, well, I will. I do not think you are a bad guy, but ease up.
Unless you were talking to sp2, in which case, I agree.
-
no no, I'm quite convinced that sp2 is basically just a troll...complete with purple hair, standing on end...mmm wasn't that a stupid fad?...
anyway.
Mr. Bateman, I tend to agree with you in most situations.
-
*trying to add to the conversation*
I'm a zombie...
-
Poser. ;)
-
Don't feed the troll, let him voice his opinion then just nod, smile and pretend you care.
I don't think sp2 is a troll, he is too intelligent.
He is more like a Dark Elf (Or Morhedel)
-
i'm just thinkin' like, if every time you've read Pitchfork you've come away thinking that their opinion is different to yours, then why would you care about anything they have to say about any band? their tastes are obviously different to yours, therefore it's pretty much useless to you as a review site.
-
Agreed... I don't read pitchfork and it probably IS my type of music that they review.
Noone's forcing you to look at that site.
-
therefore it's pretty much useless to you as a review site.
Mainly I read it to get an idea of how likely a concert is to sell out, so I know if I should get tickets ahead of time. However, the writing often annoys the shit out of me, and I find that I hear a lot of people parroting Pitchfork reviews, and that pisses me off. It's pretty much just like how all punks or goths pretty much ascribe to the same philosophy regardless of the whole "think for yourself" mantra. It's the same with indie kids...."think for yourself so long as your opinion agrees with Pitchfork."
Moral: Subcultures suck.
-
Wierd, the moral I got out of that was:
The Sisters of Mercy > Radiohead
...
Hey now, hey now now, sing this corrosion to me...
-
Aww, c'mon...I like Sisters of Mercy AND Radiohead...y'just can't compare the two :/
-
Agreed... I don't read pitchfork and it probably IS my type of music that they review.
Noone's forcing you to look at that site.
same here... and it is precisely because you probably have to read each review 3 times to understand it (unless it just says "this is is tiresome and boring" which a lot of their reviews do). Most of the writers at Pitchfork just try really really hard to sound like they are far more sophisticated than they really are. They do spend 2/3 of a review constructing an elaborate and unweildy analogy. They also review things that ARE NOT indie, yet judge them on criteria completely inappropriate for the genre.
I don't really care about Interpol one way or another, but I am simply astounded that they rated the Bloc Party album 8.9.
that said, the news and interviews can be interesting, and occasionally I will find out about someting good, like Black Mountain.
-
Pitchfork aside, I think there are certain circumstances in which you can call music "crap" instead of saying why you don't like it. For example:
I don't like Sigur Ros. I find it boring and uninspired. It's interesting to listen to at first, but that quickly wears off and all you have is "ethereal Icelandic moaning".
Ashlee Simpson's music is crap. It is written and produced by someone who will never get credit (unless it's a cross-promotion), lip-synced on stage, and sold to idiot preteen girls.
-
The Sisters of Mercy > Radiohead
Smartest thing said in this entire thread. Now we can all go home and eat cookies!
-
Cookies...OF DARKNESS.
-
Frank Zappa is borring and over rated.
Wait, that wasn't the point of this thread was it?
-
Frank Zappa is borring and over rated.
agh! It lies! It lies!