Unpopular Music Opinions

I highly disagree with this post. First of all, you have to be pretending to hate the Beatles, or think they were terrible. I don't know of anyone who can't warm up to a Beatles song, at least one. Just because they've reached cult status or are mainstream doesn't make them awful, nor do their douchey fanbases negate their talents. and wtf@ Mozart and Beethoven? Falco is smirking in derision at your pretentiousness
 
And that's why you're a floyd fan. You have Roger who is all about the lyrics, and Gilmore who's all about the melody...put them together, and you can't lose. Except that putting them together ultimately tore them apart.
 
I got some more,

The Angry Samoans are the most underrated punk band of all time.

Dinosaur Jr. is heavily overrated. (Yet I still love them)

Flipper was definitely an asset to the punk scene in the late 70s - early 80s

Melvins suck.

The Mighty Mighty Bosstones vocalist is awful.

Mudhoney is twice as good as Pearl Jam.
 
That makes sense, too. I was joking about it being the best...I actually reserve Parklife as my favorite Blur album. But it is definitely top 3...the only song that really bothers me is Crazy Beat. This is one album where I will not be swayed...I will defend it always.
 
And I doubt Bellamy could hit high notes outside of falsetto, a la songs like Creep... I'm not going to argue vocal range though, because it's stupid. Their voices aren't exactly the same, but relatively speaking, they're quite close.
 
Huge innovations in the studio, especially on Abbey Road/Sgt. Peppers, they set the table for both metal and psychedelia to explode with Tomorrow Never Knows and Helter Skelter, and they basically inspired many a musician for generations afterward. Still are in fact.
 
I own Queen albums
I own Radiohead albums

As far as i'm concerned that makes Muse's entire existence totally pointless.



What utter rubbish.
Is it too much to ask to want a bit of originality with my 'technical prowess' ?
 
I'm not saying they have hi fi production or anything, but they have a full and fleshed out sound, they may be noisy and messy recorRAB, but it all sounRAB wonderful.

Fun House just sounRAB empty to me, the acoustics don't sound right, like the band are playing behind a wall or something.

Don't get me wrong, the songs are still pretty good. Except Dirt is way too wanky and LA Blues is like a 5 minute ear rape.

I just like Raw Power a lot more, there's more energy and the guitar has a thick and full sound and doesn't sound undermixed like on Fun House.
 
That's my big beef with Techno and Dance music.

My only "incorrect" musical opinion is I don't really like Country music.

Now mind you, I live in the Southern United States. The Deep South.

This opinion is generally frowned upon by all resident inbred rednecks.
 
Rock n' Roll in the long run has done more harm than help to music. Disco/Pop is just doing what a lot of early Rock did to other genres to rock. Jazz was the more interesting bastard child of blues, and classical always ****ing ruled.
 
Popularity/influence doesn't make them not lame, and GoRABmack's lack of relative influence compared to the Beatles doesn't make them 'lame'

This isn't a popularity contest, we all know how goddamned popular the Beatles were but's irrelevent.



I'm not the one who brought GoRABmack up in this thread, the ones who are trying to defend the Beatles brought up GoRABmack to change the subject and distract everyone from the painfully obvious fact that the Beatles, regardless of how popular they were, were a lame, fruity pop band.
 
Back
Top