Hate the "Greats"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Toker41
  • Start date Start date
Some people have way to much sucking going on in their lists :p. For those giant list kinda peeps, going to a bar and listening to whatevers playing on the jukebox must be real hell :p.
 
Cyrokk said:
What panel of experts got together and decided what constitutes good music? Is there a scientific basis on what good means? Of course not.

I didn't mention any possible scientific analysis, arse.


In fact, if you take a look at history, there was a period when the use of diminished and augmented chords were considered a breach of "good" music. The result was an era of music were everything just fit so nicely together.. Too nicely. Much of the music of that time lacked depth because dissonance was frowned upon.

Which showcases the subjective side of what constitutes good music. I said "good music" is subjective, just not entirely.



There IS no universal qualities that makes music good, because it is completely relative to the listener

You should have said, "There ARE no universal qualities..." You would be wrong anyway, but whatever.

Art is not scientific, therefore these universal qualities that I speak of cannot be identified. They are just there.

Oh and by the way, "writing off" does not technically mean "dismissing without second thought". To the rest of us, writing off is to dismiss something AFTER giving it a chance. Thus, to write off a bad debt is to dismiss it after the assumption of collection has not proven fruitful.

Gee, since I was dissecting MY post, wouldn't it make sense that I was describing the connotion in which I used the phrase?

Oh, and btw. I didn't jump into this thread because my favorite rockstars were getting bashed. I really don't give a damn whether or not somebody likes Led Zeppelin.
 
OK, I gotta throw in the rarely mentioned Morrison sucks. Pretty much with most of ya, sept I do like Ted, BS&T, EVH and Randy Rhodes.


bd
 
TheGuitarMan said:
Art is not scientific, therefore these universal qualities that I speak of cannot be identified. They are just there.


So, you say art is not scientific, yet insist that universal qualities of goodness exist. Wow. Didn't realize opinion and fact were so closely intertwined. :rolleyes:



TheGuitarMan said:
Gee, since I was dissecting MY post, wouldn't it make sense that I was describing the connotion in which I used the phrase?


Wouldn't it make more sense to use the right terminology to begin with so that you wouldn't have to explain yourself at a later time?
 
You know, Suckage is in the era that you grew up with. Early rock was people "inventing" the sound. At least 70s rock was an ATTEMPT to be creative. The 80s, 90s and now is not even that. Like the White stripes. I think they said "Look, we suck, sound bad AND have no talent, so lets just use an old 8-track and throw it down in one take."They do an album in a day and "tour" to take the kid's money. Great work if you can get it.
 
bdbdbuck said:
OK, I gotta throw in the rarely mentioned Morrison sucks. Pretty much with most of ya, sept I do like Ted, BS&T, EVH and Randy Rhodes.


bd

I covered The Doors as a whole in my post. The whole band suk'd!!! Whats up with that damn organ???
 
King Elvis said:
I covered The Doors as a whole in my post. The whole band suk'd!!! Whats up with that damn organ???

The Doors DID NOT SUCK! I think that Jim Morrison was an over rated lyricist but the band as a whole was different and very creative.
 
You mean you actually LIKE the organ?? The problem is that I cannot separate Jim Morrison from The Doors. He made them what they are. Nobody ever talks about the other 3 members and their musical contributions. To me, without Morrison they are nothing and so...since he sucks, it only follows that they swallow as well!!!
 
Give me one band that sounded even remotely like the Doors in their time.
 
scottboyher said:
Give me one band that sounded even remotely like the Doors in their time.

OK OK, I see your point. They did sound pretty unique for their time. Ok, so I retract The Doors off of my suck list, but Jim has gotta stay. :D
 
Back with more (note that the Doors are not on either list)

Alabama
Slayer
Patti LaBelle
Shania Twain
Black Oak Arkansas
George Thorogood
Culture Club
Irene Cara
Buddy Rich
Linda Ronstadt
Crash Test Dummies
Howard Jones
Lou Rawls
Tiny Tim
Bananarama
Abba
John Mayall (except Room to Move - I loved that)
Mark-Almond
Pablo Cruise
Grand Funk Railroad
Slim Whitman
Hall and Oates (except their first album, and "Is It A Star?" from album 2)
Ginger Baker's Air Force
Leapy Lee
Bon Jovi
Kool and the Gang (the JT years only)
Huey "Cocksucker" Lewis (except "Working For a Living" and "Heart of R&R" are kinda fun)
Freddie Jackson
Freddie and the Dreamers
Gerry and the Pacemakers
Wayne and the Mindbenders
Phil Collins
KC and the Sunshine Band
Dan Hill
Rupert Holmes
The Hughes Corporation
Starland Vocal Band
Alice Coltrane
Silver Convention
Ozzy (solo)
Sabbath (post-Ozzy)
Rainbow
Pam Tillis
Bruce Willis
Eddie Murphy
Village People
Eric Carmen (solo - I loved the Raspberries)
Eric Clapton (solo - I loved most of his bands)

Daf (who finds jukeboxes entertaining, even when they play crap he doesn't like)
 
King Elvis said:
OK OK, I see your point. They did sound pretty unique for their time. Ok, so I retract The Doors off of my suck list, but Jim has gotta stay. :D

The Doors are still on my list. They SUCKED. That fu*king organ!
 
Ya' know..............when you really think about it....
it's music that sucks. I think I'll quit! :p
 
That's a shame, Bob, because I've heard your stuff....and you DON'T suck.
 
Cyrokk said:


So, you say art is not scientific, yet insist that universal qualities of goodness exist. Wow. Didn't realize opinion and fact were so closely intertwined. :rolleyes:
[/B]

What is it about abstract thinking that illudes you?

Wouldn't it make more sense to use the right terminology to begin with so that you wouldn't have to explain yourself at a later time?

So, I checked the dictionary, JUST FOR YOU. It turns out that nowhere under the definition of "write-off" does it say anything about first giving a thorough examination.
 
Toker41 said:
That's a shame, Bob, because I've heard your stuff....and you DON'T suck.
OK then.....I'm staying! :D






Oh and you know who sucks?
Aaron Neville! I freakin' HATE his voice. And being from down here....everyone lionizes him but I think he SUCKS!
 
If you have someone on your list, but you have to exclude certain things about them that maybe dont suck, then I dont think they should be on your list. I you have to say "yeah, they suck except for their 3rd album" then they dont COMPLETELY suck to you and thus should not be included on your list. This is a list of TOTAL SUCKAGE in your eyes. NO PARTIAL SUCKAGE ALOWED!!!:cool:
 
Mebbe you're taking that "King" thing a bit too seriously.:p

some of these are for clarification purposes:

Clapton solo albums suck. All of them. Carmen solo albums suck. All of them. Only their collabs were any good.

some of these have to do with periods:

Hall and Oates started off okay, but got way too full of themselves way too fast. They had, what? 10 albums? 15? Album one was excellent, album 2 was weird (Rundgren produced it) but had one brilliant song. Then - nothing. Pop stardom and complete suckage arrived at the same time.
Same deal with Kool and the Gang - kindo of a cool little funk band, then JT shows up and turns them into pop disco lightweights. They were great before. They sucked after. It was really a different band.

And some major suckage DOES have notable exceptions:

John Mayall, whatever his influence on the music world, sucked. Surrounded himself with great musicians, but couldn't hide his suckiness. In 40 years of recordings, ONE damn song was really good. He still sucks. He just had one good song.
Huey Lewis is evil. Just plain evil. Keeps recycxling old songs, sucks the life out of them, and gets adult contemporary airplay. But he came up with two songs that don't suck. HIS EVIL MUST BE DENOUNCED. but those two songs aren't too bad...

Daf
 
Back
Top