|
Post by countjohn on Jul 23, 2017 20:52:46 GMT
T. Rex's Electric Warrior and The Slider are better listens cut for cut than any Bowie record. Strongly agree.
|
|
|
Post by countjohn on Jul 23, 2017 20:54:07 GMT
White Light/White Heat >>> Self Titled Self titled 67 or self titled 69? Agree in the case of their 69 self titled album, which I don't like much, but very little beats Velvet Underground & Nico.
|
|
|
Post by countjohn on Jul 23, 2017 20:56:05 GMT
Not really a big fan of Pink Floyd, Zeppelin, Bowie, Bob Dylan, or The Who. Rock didn't fully flower until punk in the late 70's.
|
|
oneflyr
Full Member
Posts: 566
Likes: 255
|
Post by oneflyr on Jul 23, 2017 21:09:28 GMT
White Light/White Heat >>> Self Titled Self titled 67 or self titled 69? Agree in the case of their 69 self titled album, which I don't like much, but very little beats Velvet Underground & Nico. 69. VU & Nico is their opus, agreed.
|
|
oneflyr
Full Member
Posts: 566
Likes: 255
|
Post by oneflyr on Jul 23, 2017 22:38:33 GMT
-Beach House? Mehest indie band. They're sort of a reallly watered down syrupy vision of the whole shoegaze/dream pop scene that bands like Cocteau Twins, My Bloody Valentine and Slowdive perfected back in the 80s and 90s but I find them tolerable and even enjoyable in small amounts, with usually a couple of standout tracks on each album.
|
|
urbanpatrician
Based
"I just wanna go back, back to 1999. back to hit me baby one more time" - Charli XCX
Posts: 4,828
Likes: 2,355
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Jul 23, 2017 23:27:00 GMT
pacinoyes -Lol, I could apply "blow goats" to The Rolling Stones. But seriously, Led Zeppelin is the only old rock band I like. They're so frivolous and fun....unlike *cough *cough *beep* Pixies - who's a total fail at that. -Whoa... is this like a new thing to say American punk > UK? I need to listen to some American punk now. -I don't hate Morrissey as much as some people do, but I don't exactly love him either. I think he's just good. He can write some decent singles (only a few absolutely amazing.... This Charming Man, Heaven Knows I'm Miserable), but I wouldn't succumb to the idea that he somehow stands out as a poetic songwriter or something. -Fusing politics never works in anything. -He can certainly reach levels of mom-rock and dad-pop ala Celine Dion, Mariah, and Whitney. oneflyr I don't think they (Beach House) are like those guys you named much. I think their mood often brings up the image of a Mexican summer, which ideally is my type of serenity. It's a band soundwise and on paper I should love, but I find them kinda wussy and saccharine. I have 170 plays of them, and no song has really stood out for me. They sound all nice and pleasant and all, but I don't get the mass appeal. Whenever you see something listened to by a common 20 year old girl, you begin to wonder where the mass indie appeal comes from. And as I don't see it, I just wonder about all those automatic critics baits. However, they're not horrible, just decent and alright - like you said. DeepArcher I think the 90s kind of continued the trend of the 80s, but enhanced it in certain areas, increased the variety but they did also hit some severe lows the 80s didn't have as bad. The 90s really made it accessible to everyone - the sappiness was at an all-time high - which is good and bad in certain ways. But I never got the hate for 90s popular music, I always valued a lot of things about it. From the 00s and on though..... I agree.
|
|
|
Post by moonman157 on Jul 23, 2017 23:34:56 GMT
Muse is one of the best rock bands active today. (Though their most recent song is godawful and they've had their share of weak albums.) I'd say the same about Cage the Elephant, The Black Keys, and Arctic Monkeys with little hesitation, though I'm not sure if those are as unpopular. This is a hate crime
|
|
|
Post by DeepArcher on Jul 24, 2017 0:30:52 GMT
Maybe so, but the OP asked for it.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jul 25, 2017 22:22:24 GMT
This is my 3rd post in this thread because I have a lot of unpopular music opinions to share, lol:
It is a golden age to be purchasing CDs used believe it or not, with everybody buying vinyl. It may be unhip but you can find fantastic stuff if you're into physical media on CD.
The 1950s Chicago blues era (Muddy Waters, Howlin' Wolf, Sonny Boy Williamson, etc.) was comprised of more dangerous and subversive artists than all of 1960s rock (aside from the big 6 Who/Beatles/Stones/Kinks/Dylan/Velvets).
There is no exact precedent for what Dave Grohl has done going from drummer of a big band to ..............something else in a bigger band
I'm not a big Pink Floyd fan but Animals by Pink Floyd has more in common with post-punk music released a decade later than anything "classic Rock"
The movie The Runaways disguises that the actual band weren't that special
|
|
|
Post by DaleCooper on Jul 27, 2017 18:43:02 GMT
In the Aeroplane Over the Sea (and by extension`Neutral Milk Hotel) is mediocre.
The Division Bell is better than The Wall.
The Bends is better than Kid A.
John Mayer is one of the best guitarists in the world.
Metallica's best album is The Black Album and their first four albums are sort of overrated.
Pearl Jam is the best of four big grunge bands.
Iron Maiden's Hallowed Be Thy Name might just be the best song ever.
|
|
|
Post by notacrook on Aug 14, 2017 22:48:46 GMT
"Purple Rain" is boring and utterly forgettable.
|
|
|
Post by taranofprydain on Aug 19, 2017 23:58:57 GMT
80s music is much more alive on the whole than most modern music which is listless.
|
|
wendy
New Member
Posts: 231
Likes: 145
|
Post by wendy on Aug 20, 2017 14:05:41 GMT
Janet > Michael.
|
|
morton
Based
Posts: 2,811
Likes: 2,954
|
Post by morton on Aug 20, 2017 17:07:55 GMT
Ooh, I don't know because I don't feel I know enough about the technical aspects of music. I just like what I like. From that basis though, I agree that Janet is very underrated to me, and Michael is overrated. I mean I do love a lot of his songs and albums, but I think that all of his albums reach very low peaks despite hitting some very high peaks whereas like with some of The Beatles most praised albums, I find that they don't hit any low points. I do think he was a groundbreaking artist up to a point, but I think he became very lazy around "Bad". I mean I think it's a great album, but the video for the titular song is just a rehash of "Billie Jean". Then, "The Way You Make Me Feel's" video is basically a continuation of that in many ways, or basically just a rehash of what sister Janet was doing already for "What Have You Done for Me Lately" or "When I Think of You". As an album, I do like to listen to many of the songs now, but I don't know if he broke new ground on it the way he did with "Off the Wall" or "Thriller". Then, there's a big drop-off, imo. "Dangerous" like "Bad" also had some great songs in it, but I feel that there's even more lows than ever. The video for "Black or White" is visually interesting, but it rips off Godley & Creme's "Cry" at the end. Plus, there's the whole icky factor of Macaulay Culkin being in it, even if you don't believe the charges against Michael Jackson, why he ever thought that having the introduction of "Black or White" set up as a white suburban kid rebelling against his father who won't let him listen to Michael Jackson past a certain time because it's a school night, was ever a good idea. Then, you throw in the unedited video with Michael Jackson smashing up things at the end, and it's just one big mess. "Jam" and "In the Closet" were good concepts; although, I think that Janet did "In the Closet" better with "Love Will Never Do Without You". "Remember the Time" could have been good, but I feel like everything about the video except Iman felt dated even Michael Jackson. Then, there was the greatest hits compilation with "HIStory" mixed in with newer and unreleased songs. I don't know what he was on at that time to think that the anti-Semitic parts of "They Don't Care About Us" was a good idea. Even if you ignore the allegations against Jackson, he did enough damage to his legacy with just this one song which totally went against what the rest of his career was supposed to be about. I just think by that time he was on auto pilot and was so jaded, cynical, and possibly suffering from mental illness and drug addiction that he didn't want the checks to stop rolling in, but didn't really care about his legacy at that point. Finally, there was "Invincible". It was okay, but basically just a rehash of his other songs. Even the video for "You Rock My World" was just a rehash of stuff that he was doing with "Thriller" and "Bad". Of course, Janet has hit some lows, but for me she's been more consistent and innovative in many ways even though she never got credit for them the way that her brother or other artists did. He was a great dancer until he started going on auto pilot, but I think she's got to be the best singer/dancer or at least in a battle for first place with Madonna. That's why I always got annoyed with Britney Spears because people would say that she was a great dancer, and while she was okay before her injuries, I don't think she ever got close to reaching the heights that Janet did, and Janet's been doing it for years and years not the short time frame that Spears did, yet I rarely see Janet get praise for her dancing. He had high budget video spectacles like "Thriller," "Smooth Criminal," and "Scream", but she could do a lot with only just herself like in "The Pleasure Principle". Or she could do high energy spectacles with classic choreography too like "Rhythm Nation," "Alright", or "If". Not to say that she was the better video artist, but again for me I just don't think she ever got the credit that she deserved especially in comparison to Michael who I thought got too much credit. Musical wise again I don't really know much about the technical aspect, but for me Janet was more into reinventing and doing new things more than Michael was. Not to say that it always worked for her, but for me Michael stayed mostly the same after "Bad" and some may say even after "Thriller". ETA: I just have to add in a rant since I mentioned Britney briefly above, and then just a short while later I saw she was trending on Twitter for singing live. Are you fucking kidding me with this shit? I mean I love her songs, and I feel bad about her situation. I really don't know if she wants to perform anymore and is being made to because of those who are in charge of her life now, or since she can't control of her own life anymore, if putting her on a regular schedule of performing and dancing, is actually the best thing for her since if she's left to her own devices again, sadly she'll probably run amok again. But really has the bar been set so low for music that she's being praised for singing live? Even when she "danced" instead of what she does now, I didn't understand all the "well she can't sing live because of her choreography" defenses because people on Broadway and other singers like Janet, Madonna, Beyonce, etc. have been doing it for years.
|
|
wendy
New Member
Posts: 231
Likes: 145
|
Post by wendy on Aug 23, 2017 16:01:08 GMT
Ooh, I don't know because I don't feel I know enough about the technical aspects of music. I just like what I like. From that basis though, I agree that Janet is very underrated to me, and Michael is overrated. I mean I do love a lot of his songs and albums, but I think that all of his albums reach very low peaks despite hitting some very high peaks whereas like with some of The Beatles most praised albums, I find that they don't hit any low points. I do think he was a groundbreaking artist up to a point, but I think he became very lazy around "Bad". I mean I think it's a great album, but the video for the titular song is just a rehash of "Billie Jean". Then, "The Way You Make Me Feel's" video is basically a continuation of that in many ways, or basically just a rehash of what sister Janet was doing already for "What Have You Done for Me Lately" or "When I Think of You". As an album, I do like to listen to many of the songs now, but I don't know if he broke new ground on it the way he did with "Off the Wall" or "Thriller". Then, there's a big drop-off, imo. "Dangerous" like "Bad" also had some great songs in it, but I feel that there's even more lows than ever. The video for "Black or White" is visually interesting, but it rips off Godley & Creme's "Cry" at the end. Plus, there's the whole icky factor of Macaulay Culkin being in it, even if you don't believe the charges against Michael Jackson, why he ever thought that having the introduction of "Black or White" set up as a white suburban kid rebelling against his father who won't let him listen to Michael Jackson past a certain time because it's a school night, was ever a good idea. Then, you throw in the unedited video with Michael Jackson smashing up things at the end, and it's just one big mess. "Jam" and "In the Closet" were good concepts; although, I think that Janet did "In the Closet" better with "Love Will Never Do Without You". "Remember the Time" could have been good, but I feel like everything about the video except Iman felt dated even Michael Jackson. Then, there was the greatest hits compilation with "HIStory" mixed in with newer and unreleased songs. I don't know what he was on at that time to think that the anti-Semitic parts of "They Don't Care About Us" was a good idea. Even if you ignore the allegations against Jackson, he did enough damage to his legacy with just this one song which totally went against what the rest of his career was supposed to be about. I just think by that time he was on auto pilot and was so jaded, cynical, and possibly suffering from mental illness and drug addiction that he didn't want the checks to stop rolling in, but didn't really care about his legacy at that point. Finally, there was "Invincible". It was okay, but basically just a rehash of his other songs. Even the video for "You Rock My World" was just a rehash of stuff that he was doing with "Thriller" and "Bad". Of course, Janet has hit some lows, but for me she's been more consistent and innovative in many ways even though she never got credit for them the way that her brother or other artists did. He was a great dancer until he started going on auto pilot, but I think she's got to be the best singer/dancer or at least in a battle for first place with Madonna. That's why I always got annoyed with Britney Spears because people would say that she was a great dancer, and while she was okay before her injuries, I don't think she ever got close to reaching the heights that Janet did, and Janet's been doing it for years and years not the short time frame that Spears did, yet I rarely see Janet get praise for her dancing. He had high budget video spectacles like "Thriller," "Smooth Criminal," and "Scream", but she could do a lot with only just herself like in "The Pleasure Principle". Or she could do high energy spectacles with classic choreography too like "Rhythm Nation," "Alright", or "If". Not to say that she was the better video artist, but again for me I just don't think she ever got the credit that she deserved especially in comparison to Michael who I thought got too much credit. Musical wise again I don't really know much about the technical aspect, but for me Janet was more into reinventing and doing new things more than Michael was. Not to say that it always worked for her, but for me Michael stayed mostly the same after "Bad" and some may say even after "Thriller". ETA: I just have to add in a rant since I mentioned Britney briefly above, and then just a short while later I saw she was trending on Twitter for singing live. Are you fucking kidding me with this shit? I mean I love her songs, and I feel bad about her situation. I really don't know if she wants to perform anymore and is being made to because of those who are in charge of her life now, or since she can't control of her own life anymore, if putting her on a regular schedule of performing and dancing, is actually the best thing for her since if she's left to her own devices again, sadly she'll probably run amok again. But really has the bar been set so low for music that she's being praised for singing live? Even when she "danced" instead of what she does now, I didn't understand all the "well she can't sing live because of her choreography" defenses because people on Broadway and other singers like Janet, Madonna, Beyonce, etc. have been doing it for years. Well there’s not a HUGE amount between them, but for a few reasons I prefer her (especially catalogue-wise). - Musically, her CV is far more diverse and versatile than his (I mean, she was the first person nominated for Grammys in 5 different genres). Looking back a lot of MJ’s songs are in that dated pop/rock style, when her discography covers soul, house, electronica, hard rock, R&B, jazz, funk, disco, folk, techno, alternative, spoken word, fusion, hip hop, ballads, dance, Island-style music, and pure pop. She can cover Joni Mitchell, get played in the NYC gay clubs, and top the rock charts. You have to give her credit for ambition and experimentation.He never quite made it past ‘1990’ in terms of sound but her production style moves well into the current decade effortlessly. - Lyrically too, they’ve both done scores of political and topical songs but she’s been more introspective and detailed (less blanket statement “Heal The World” or “Man in the Mirror”), talking directly about depression, homosexuality, school shootings, masturbation, drug abuse…. she can also pull off “sexy” or “sultry” in a song, which, cute as Michael was in his day, he was never able to do the way his contemporaries (Janet, Prince, Madonna, George Michael) were. - Video wise, they’re both absolute groundbreakers. As you say, for every “Thriller” there’s an “If”. For every “Smooth Criminal” there’s a “Pleasure Principle”. But hers have lasted longer IMO, all his videos even from the 90s have dated, whereas she could drop something like “Twenty Foreplay” or even “Got til it’s Gone” in 2017 with the fascinating apartheid theme and STUNNING photography and it would still be acclaimed and modern. There’s something to be said for her longevity, when he had a peak of about 10 years, hers has been much longer (and pop music changed more drastically at the turn of the millennium - when he stopped releasing albums, she still kept up and competed). - I agree with you that he became lazy around “Bad” and derivative of other artists. He even borrowed heavily from Janet herself and the military theme around the “HIStory” album. She was generous to do “Scream” with him during the height of the allegations (at the time he was a pariah and she was the biggest artist in the business). Songs like “They Don’t Care About Us” are preachy and didactic, and his cheesier love songs ie “You Are Not Alone” became horrible. I think you're right, he did lose his ambition a bit. Which is understandable when you've already accomplished everything and have actually been given credit for it. I'm sounding more critical of him and more fanatic of her, but I guess at the end of the day when you both have such ASTOUNDINGLY high peaks, it simply comes down to her being a more interesting artist, with more exploration in her body of work and greater longevity.
|
|
morton
Based
Posts: 2,811
Likes: 2,954
|
Post by morton on Aug 23, 2017 16:42:17 GMT
Well there’s not a HUGE amount between them, but for a few reasons I prefer her (especially catalogue-wise). - Musically, her CV is far more diverse and versatile than his (I mean, she was the first person nominated for Grammys in 5 different genres). Looking back a lot of MJ’s songs are in that dated pop/rock style, when her discography covers soul, house, electronica, hard rock, R&B, jazz, funk, disco, folk, techno, alternative, spoken word, fusion, hip hop, ballads, dance, Island-style music, and pure pop. She can cover Joni Mitchell, get played in the NYC gay clubs, and top the rock charts. You have to give her credit for ambition and experimentation.He never quite made it past ‘1990’ in terms of sound but her production style moves well into the current decade effortlessly. - Lyrically too, they’ve both done scores of political and topical songs but she’s been more introspective and detailed (less blanket statement “Heal The World” or “Man in the Mirror”), talking directly about depression, homosexuality, school shootings, masturbation, drug abuse…. she can also pull off “sexy” or “sultry” in a song, which, cute as Michael was in his day, he was never able to do the way his contemporaries (Janet, Prince, Madonna, George Michael) were. - Video wise, they’re both absolute groundbreakers. As you say, for every “Thriller” there’s an “If”. For every “Smooth Criminal” there’s a “Pleasure Principle”. But hers have lasted longer IMO, all his videos even from the 90s have dated, whereas she could drop something like “Twenty Foreplay” or even “Got til it’s Gone” in 2017 with the fascinating apartheid theme and STUNNING photography and it would still be acclaimed and modern. There’s something to be said for her longevity, when he had a peak of about 10 years, hers has been much longer (and pop music changed more drastically at the turn of the millennium - when he stopped releasing albums, she still kept up and competed). - I agree with you that he became lazy around “Bad” and derivative of other artists. He even borrowed heavily from Janet herself and the military theme around the “HIStory” album. She was generous to do “Scream” with him during the height of the allegations (at the time he was a pariah and she was the biggest artist in the business). Songs like “They Don’t Care About Us” are preachy and didactic, and his cheesier love songs ie “You Are Not Alone” became horrible. I think you're right, he did lose his ambition a bit. Which is understandable when you've already accomplished everything and have actually been given credit for it. I'm sounding more critical of him and more fanatic of her, but I guess at the end of the day when you both have such ASTOUNDINGLY high peaks, it simply comes down to her being a more interesting artist, with more exploration in her body of work and greater longevity. As always you put it more articulately than I could. I just wanted to add that for some reason I wrote "Billie Jean", and later I realized that I meant "Beat It" because of the whole gang imagery being similar, imo to "Bad".
|
|
wendy
New Member
Posts: 231
Likes: 145
|
Post by wendy on Aug 23, 2017 18:14:20 GMT
Well there’s not a HUGE amount between them, but for a few reasons I prefer her (especially catalogue-wise). - Musically, her CV is far more diverse and versatile than his (I mean, she was the first person nominated for Grammys in 5 different genres). Looking back a lot of MJ’s songs are in that dated pop/rock style, when her discography covers soul, house, electronica, hard rock, R&B, jazz, funk, disco, folk, techno, alternative, spoken word, fusion, hip hop, ballads, dance, Island-style music, and pure pop. She can cover Joni Mitchell, get played in the NYC gay clubs, and top the rock charts. You have to give her credit for ambition and experimentation.He never quite made it past ‘1990’ in terms of sound but her production style moves well into the current decade effortlessly. - Lyrically too, they’ve both done scores of political and topical songs but she’s been more introspective and detailed (less blanket statement “Heal The World” or “Man in the Mirror”), talking directly about depression, homosexuality, school shootings, masturbation, drug abuse…. she can also pull off “sexy” or “sultry” in a song, which, cute as Michael was in his day, he was never able to do the way his contemporaries (Janet, Prince, Madonna, George Michael) were. - Video wise, they’re both absolute groundbreakers. As you say, for every “Thriller” there’s an “If”. For every “Smooth Criminal” there’s a “Pleasure Principle”. But hers have lasted longer IMO, all his videos even from the 90s have dated, whereas she could drop something like “Twenty Foreplay” or even “Got til it’s Gone” in 2017 with the fascinating apartheid theme and STUNNING photography and it would still be acclaimed and modern. There’s something to be said for her longevity, when he had a peak of about 10 years, hers has been much longer (and pop music changed more drastically at the turn of the millennium - when he stopped releasing albums, she still kept up and competed). - I agree with you that he became lazy around “Bad” and derivative of other artists. He even borrowed heavily from Janet herself and the military theme around the “HIStory” album. She was generous to do “Scream” with him during the height of the allegations (at the time he was a pariah and she was the biggest artist in the business). Songs like “They Don’t Care About Us” are preachy and didactic, and his cheesier love songs ie “You Are Not Alone” became horrible. I think you're right, he did lose his ambition a bit. Which is understandable when you've already accomplished everything and have actually been given credit for it. I'm sounding more critical of him and more fanatic of her, but I guess at the end of the day when you both have such ASTOUNDINGLY high peaks, it simply comes down to her being a more interesting artist, with more exploration in her body of work and greater longevity. As always you put it more articulately than I could. I just wanted to add that for some reason I wrote "Billie Jean", and later I realized that I meant "Beat It" because of the whole gang imagery being similar, imo to "Bad". Also how weird, I was thinking "Beat It" when I read it too! :/ Also because it's sonically quite similar to "Bad" ("Billie Jean" is a bit more individual and distinct), as well as lyrically and thematically.
|
|
|
Post by PromNightCarrie on Aug 24, 2017 0:39:42 GMT
Elvis was not that great. And most of Michael Jackson's music was not great.
|
|
|
Post by eyebrowmorroco on Sept 12, 2017 4:28:20 GMT
- Beefheart > Dylan - Dylan lost it when he found God... and The Band before that - Beefheart is more influential than The Velvet Underground - The Velvet Underground as a collective are refuse. They are marginally less so individually. - Zappa is the most intricate guitarist. - the most dated genres are Prog and Psych. The least? Post-Punk - 1977 to 1981 is the greatest five year period - UK punks dwarf their US counterparts in quality - politics and music mesh like prophylactics and prostitutes - The Clash, the most meh punk band ever. London Calling? No, it isn't. - The Ramones know one song. Sad Lovers and Giants also know only one song, but it's a good one. - Gang of Four, the original, pound for pound, member for member, may be the best band of all. Or is it The Fall? - Pavement/Stephen Malkmus = crap - Hip hop ain't music
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Sept 12, 2017 8:32:01 GMT
@ eyebrowmorroco - Why do you hurt me? Below I have listed the ones that are like knife wounds to my chest. These will be entered in the court record and you will be arrested and charged. The ones in bold are to differentiate the level of the assault. May God have mercy on your soul.
- Beefheart > Dylan - Dylan lost it when he found God... and The Band before that - Beefheart is more influential than The Velvet Underground - The Velvet Underground as a collective are refuse. They are marginally less so individually. - UK punks dwarf their US counterparts in quality - The Clash, the most meh punk band ever. London Calling? No, it isn't. - The Ramones know one song. Sad Lovers and Giants also know only one song, but it's a good one. - Gang of Four, the original, pound for pound, member for member, may be the best band of all. Or is it The Fall? - Pavement/Stephen Malkmus = crap - Hip hop ain't music
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2017 13:45:33 GMT
Why is Bob Dylan a thing?
|
|
Zeb31
Based
Bernardo is not believing que vous êtes come to bing bing avec nous
Posts: 2,557
Likes: 3,794
|
Post by Zeb31 on Sept 23, 2017 14:14:52 GMT
I don't know if it's unpopular or what, but I really hate it when songs don't end, but just fade out instead of giving the song an actual climax. Yeah, that's all I got. Not really well versed in music. This reminded me of you:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2017 21:06:04 GMT
Why is Bob Dylan a thing? Great songwriter, but his vocals .
|
|
forksforest
Junior Member
Quit your shit-spitting
Posts: 491
Likes: 212
|
Post by forksforest on Oct 13, 2017 19:32:15 GMT
Why is Bob Dylan a thing? Great songwriter, but his vocals . I think this is why I much prefer the covers to the original
|
|
forksforest
Junior Member
Quit your shit-spitting
Posts: 491
Likes: 212
|
Post by forksforest on Oct 13, 2017 19:35:10 GMT
Oh, and as is an unpopular opinion in this thread: RADIOHEAD IS THE BEST FUCKING BAND OF ALL-TIME. THEY CHANGE THEIR SOUND WITH EVERY FUCKING ALBUM AND THEY'RE ALL BASICALLY AMONG THE BEST I'VE EVER HEARD. THERE ARE VERY FEW BORING TRACKS AMONG THEIR DISCOGRAPHY. MOSTLY EVERYTHING THEY'VE DONE IS INCREDIBLE, ABSOLUTELY DYNAMIC MUSIC THAT I NEVER TIRE LISTENING TO. THOM YORKE'S VOICE IS ONE OF THE FEW THINGS IN LIFE THAT HAS MADE ME CONSIDER THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. JONNY GREENWOOD IS ONE OF THE BEST MUSICIANS ALIVE. THEY ALL ARE. FUCK ALL OF YOU. I've sort of been off Radiohead for the past couple years, but I generally agree with this
|
|