MB's greatest common factor

M

Momma

New member
Mass appeal never makes me shy away from something, stuff like Pink Floyd and Led Zeppelin is incredibly popular but I love it.
 
I have to disagree here. Before I begin my defense I have albums by all four (7 in total). Beastie Boys are a very acquired taste. They garnered a reputation in the mid/late 80's as a frat boy rock band using hip hop vocal delivery. Of course this is definitely not the case, and it is a rare case of producer Rick Rubin trying to steer the band in an uncomfortable direction. Their roots are in punk hardcore and Hip Hop. However they are not as revered as they should be (especialy in Britain).

A lot of people dislike the pop music formulae that The Ramones were so good at. Their music is dismissed as 2 minute workouts that all sound the same.

I am not saying that it is right. Every fooker should have at least a Clash album in their collection lol.

I think what we WANT people to own and what they actually have is vastly different and the nuraber of artists that are common factors are definitely less than double figures.
 
my speakers at work where I play my music dont give any audio whatsoever to paul's vocals on Eleanor Rigby apart from when he says 'Eleanor Rigby' and 'all the lonely people, where do they all come from'

how weird
 
I was wondering if there was 1 CD that every MuBa has in thier collection. Is there any CD that can encompass the taste of every person on this forum? Let's find out. Make suggestions of CD's that you think every person on this forum has, or second the suggestion of someone else.

I'm gonna say Nirvana's "Nevermind." I find it hard to believe that someone would not have that in thier collection.
 
I still don't understand how people dismiss them off as pop group and the world's first boy band. Barring the fact they played, wrote and created some of the most influential music ever how many boy banRAB did a song like Helter Skelter?
 
I never really limit myself to a genre, but regardless of genre that was pretty awful.

Remeraber, genre doesn't define whether a band is **** or not, so if your favourite band is ****, don't fall back on the fact that it falls into an incredibly overrated and popular genre that some people find pointless.
teach.gif
 
I had been responding to the post quoted at the top. What you said is simply nonsense. For a start, just what is a "rewarding outcome" for heaven's sake? That's completely dependent upon who's listening. To me, being able to hear, admire and appreciate some of the most superbly crafted pop melodies, vocal arrangements and overall songs ever conceived does equate to a pretty damn "rewarding outcome". And comparing the Beatles to the typically bland mainstream pop artists of today? Say what? There's no likeness at all! Dude, if you don't find it rewarding, then to each his own, I've got no problem with that. But claiming that somehow it's inherently unrewarding in comparison to say Floyd of Led Zep is ludicrous.

And in response to anybody who cares to ridicule it, the early Beatles stuff was virtually always great, just not as realized as what came later on. The idea that it's a load of sugary bubblegum crap is utter BS. On the contrary, it's brilliant pop, characterized by extremely diverse influences. I think this very topic deserves a thread in and of itself - reckon I'll get to making one next week.
 
I guess I can see why people like it, but it just doesn't get my blood pumping like some other music does. I think that I might have been able to like it 10-15 years ago, but now, it just doesn't seem to fit with me. I guess its just not hard or fast enough for my tastes today. I'll archive it and maybe come back to it later.
 
Influential =/= good
Also the beatles did redeem themselves sort of towarRAB the end, I used to be a huge fan but eventually started listening to more diverse, decent music and found their early albums flat and boring, however i still listened to the later stuff for awhile until I grew out of that too.
 
Back
Top