Jump to content

Your unpopular music opinions


Topper13

Recommended Posts

On 9/4/2020 at 12:26 AM, Hate said:

I genuinely feel sorry for anyone that isn't a fan of the Grateful Dead.  I can understand why you aren't a fan, but I feel sorry that you didn't get it.  I'm sure there were some people that didn't like Beethoven, Mozart, or Hayden so I can understand how it happens.

Too many people insisting “dude, if you just hear this hissy, conversation-filled Tandy hand-held microcassette recording of the 53-minute drum solo in the transition between Franklin’s Tower to Stagger Lee from the 3rd Alpine Valley show in 1976, you’ll be hooked for life!”. I became a fan in spite of that.

And don’t even get me started on listening to recordings of Space. The saying is true - there’s nothing like a Grateful Dead concert. There are, however, many, many, many things like a Grateful Dead tape collection....

Edited by Ignatius
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've found that most people have strong preconceived notions about the grateful dead and their music. If you play a song and don't tell them who it is, they're surprised to learn that it's the GD. The fan base is so cult like and off putting that most people dismiss the music before they've ever heard a note. I don't blame them. Phish has the same problem except they're legitimately a terrible band, deserving of the bad rap they receive. 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Ignatius said:

Too many people insisting “dude, if you just hear this hissy, conversation-filled Tandy hand-held microcassette recording of the 53-minute drum solo in the transition between Franklin’s Tower to Stagger Lee from the 3rd Alpine Valley show in 1976, you’ll be hooked for life!”. I became a fan in spite of that.

And don’t even get me started on listening to recordings of Space. The saying is true - there’s nothing like a Grateful Dead concert. There are, however, many, many, many things like a Grateful Dead tape collection....

Yeah, being way too young to have ever seen the Dead, I came to by a fine via the oft maligned "Skeletons From The Closet" comp.  I was in high school and borrowed it from a buddy who stole it from his folks' CD collection.  I remember listening to it on a brilliant fall Sunday driving somewhere to get tractor parts and thinking "I know this song, and had no idea it was the Dead!" on multiple occasions.  Every time I try to dig into some random show, I just can't do it.

I spend way more time with their studio stuff, because so much of the endless live stuff available sounds like shit to me.  Other than Europe '72, which I've always loved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, being way too young to have ever seen the Dead, I came to by a fine via the oft maligned "Skeletons From The Closet" comp.  I was in high school and borrowed it from a buddy who stole it from his folks' CD collection.  I remember listening to it on a brilliant fall Sunday driving somewhere to get tractor parts and thinking "I know this song, and had no idea it was the Dead!" on multiple occasions.  Every time I try to dig into some random show, I just can't do it.

I spend way more time with their studio stuff, because so much of the endless live stuff available sounds like shit to me.  Other than Europe '72, which I've always loved.

You need to step into the GD thread and poke around then. I get the really spacey and jamming dislike. Some of it I’m not a huge fan of. I like their early bluesy stuff, but some of the really psychedelic stuff I’ve never really gotten into because I don’t do acid. Now their 70’s and 80’s years where they were just a pure rock and roll jam band?? That’s great fucking stuff and the scene at shows is what really converts you. It’s the most accepting and positive vibe I’ve ever been around. At any rate, search out “Trucking up to Buffalo” on YouTube. It’s from 7/4/89 and is a fantastic show. Or you could check out their most revered show, 5/8/77 and see how you feel after listening to it. It might change your mind...or not, but you will at least have your kind changed a little bit about any preconceived notions you might have about them.

 

Mostly agree with the Phish dislike though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Hate said:

You need to step into the GD thread and poke around then. I get the really spacey and jamming dislike. Some of it I’m not a huge fan of. I like their early bluesy stuff, but some of the really psychedelic stuff I’ve never really gotten into because I don’t do acid. Now their 70’s and 80’s years where they were just a pure rock and roll jam band?? That’s great fucking stuff and the scene at shows is what really converts you. It’s the most accepting and positive vibe I’ve ever been around. At any rate, search out “Trucking up to Buffalo” on YouTube. It’s from 7/4/89 and is a fantastic show. Or you could check out their most revered show, 5/8/77 and see how you feel after listening to it. It might change your mind...or not, but you will at least have your kind changed a little bit about any preconceived notions you might have about them.

 

Mostly agree with the Phish dislike though.

I would have loved to actually see them live.  I'm just saying it's hard for me to listen to the majority of the live recordings floating around and really getting it from this view point.

I think they have a lot of great songs that stand up to the test of time, and I love quite a few of their albums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, noharleyyet said:

Never aquired a taste for the Dead but I really really like licorice. 

Whatever, Reagan. 

I finally had my coming to Jesus moment the other night.  I realized why I loved seeing the Grateful Dead live (24 shows if you include their other incarnations like The Other Ones, Furthur, and Dead & Co.), but don't really have all that much fun listening to them live at home.  I mean, I have about 2 or 3 versions of each of my 40 or 50 favorite songs carefully cultivated from their 50+ years of playing those songs.  But I can't just sit and listen to a 4 hour show, save for maybe 2-3x year on vinyl.  It's because I don't do drugs.  You can't sit and drink through a Dead show for 4 hours these days.  It's really, really hard.  When I was there live, a few drinks and a toke off a joint that was getting passed down the row.  That was all I needed.  There just aren't enough drugs for me to sit and listen to a 4 hour/2-set show at home.  

I really, really wish there were though...

Unpopular music opinion......every year I try to give Aerosmith a chance because in my old age, I appreciate longevity.  They are fucking horrible and you're a fucking child if you still like them.  They have almost zero redeeming qualities.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And that’s the difference for a lot of people. I can easily listen to a 3 or 4 hour show with our without drugs. Sometimes I’ll listen to a show I’ve hear a hundred times and notice something I didn’t notice before. But I truly get those that don’t feel that way and don’t necessarily hold it against them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Unpopular music opinion......every year I try to give Aerosmith a chance because in my old age, I appreciate longevity.  They are fucking horrible and you're a fucking child if you still like them.  They have almost zero redeeming qualities.  

Three of their albums are among my favorites ever (Get your Wings, Rocks and Toys) . They should have stayed on drugs because the drivel they put out past 1979 was embarrassing and shat on their legacy.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Unpopular music opinion......every year I try to give Aerosmith a chance because in my old age, I appreciate longevity.  They are fucking horrible and you're a fucking child if you still like them.  They have almost zero redeeming qualities.  

Yeah Aerosmith fucking sucks. They're like a really shitty version of Led Zeppelin. I'm not sure I enjoy listening to anything of theirs past Dream On and Sweet Emotion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^

No shit.  That's a fun drinking game or another thread idea.  Who got sober/got religion and actually became a better songwriter/performer?  I mean, there are plenty of musicians who eventually went sober and still play their old hits really well, but they're drawing from a catalog soaked in drugs and alcohol.  But yeah, who was already on the big stage, then goes sober, and who continues to put out stuff just as good or better?  Eric Clapton, Elton John, Trey Anatasio, Joe Walsh, Tom Waits, Izzy Stradlin, Steven Tyler, et. al.  Nope, I would strongly contend that all of them have one thing in common-----their new songs are nowhere near as good nowadays. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those with young children will probably strongly disagree, but the Blippi songs are quite well constructed. They’re way move sophisticated than they let on. The band isn’t the tightest, but the songs are well thought out.
 

The train song cleverly mimics the Doppler effect of a passing train and the switch to a swing/shuffle feel at the end is a really nice musical moment.

The fire truck song effectively and subtly switches back and forth between the major mode and Lydian mode.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/17/2020 at 12:05 PM, Lobo said:

Whatever, Reagan. 

I finally had my coming to Jesus moment the other night.  I realized why I loved seeing the Grateful Dead live (24 shows if you include their other incarnations like The Other Ones, Furthur, and Dead & Co.), but don't really have all that much fun listening to them live at home.  I mean, I have about 2 or 3 versions of each of my 40 or 50 favorite songs carefully cultivated from their 50+ years of playing those songs.  But I can't just sit and listen to a 4 hour show, save for maybe 2-3x year on vinyl.  It's because I don't do drugs.  You can't sit and drink through a Dead show for 4 hours these days.  It's really, really hard.  When I was there live, a few drinks and a toke off a joint that was getting passed down the row.  That was all I needed.  There just aren't enough drugs for me to sit and listen to a 4 hour/2-set show at home.  

I really, really wish there were though...

Unpopular music opinion......every year I try to give Aerosmith a chance because in my old age, I appreciate longevity.  They are fucking horrible and you're a fucking child if you still like them.  They have almost zero redeeming qualities.  

Aerosmith owes their career to heroin.  They've been shit since they've all been clean.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tbone_ said:

There are more than 5 good songs just on Joshua Tree. But your point still stands.

Good point and good points made by Patricio Swayze.  However, let's all be honest and perhaps wildly unpopular...U2 hasn't needed to exist as a band for the last 25 years.  

We'd be totally fine without their last quarter century of work.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good point and good points made by Patricio Swayze.  However, let's all be honest and perhaps wildly unpopular...U2 hasn't needed to exist as a band for the last 25 years.  
We'd be totally fine without their last quarter century of work.  

Same could be said for Metallica. They were a good band for only the first 1/4 of their existence. Nothing but shit for 30 years.
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Same could be said for Metallica. They were a good band for only the first 1/4 of their existence. Nothing but shit for 30 years.

It’s true of most bands. You get a period of 5-10 (if you are lucky) where you kick all kinds of relevant ass. Then, if that period was good enough you get to coast on it forever.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tbone_ said:


It’s true of most bands. You get a period of 5-10 (if you are lucky) where you kick all kinds of relevant ass. Then, if that period was good enough you get to coast on it forever.

That’s an interesting phenomenon. Most musicians tend to become better (more proficient, more sophisticated, better at clearly performing their ideas, more nuanced ideas, etc.) as they age, at least to a point where the body breaks down. At the same time, groups that play together longer tend to get better at playing together. Metallica in 2006 should be “better” than Metallica in 1986 (except for the Cliff issue).

Yet that doesn’t often seem  to be the case in rock. Musicians in other genres are able to continue to innovate and grow — Miles Davis reinvented jazz throughout his life, both mostly sober and not even close to sober, for example. It must be something about the genre, maybe. So perhaps:

1. Part of the rock aesthetic is that of ideas exceeding the grasp both compositionally and technically. Once those ideas are well formed and well performed, maybe they become less compelling. Part of what made the Replacements so exciting was their drunken attempts at making music within their own musical limitations. Better, more sober players and writers working with the same musical ideas might not move us the same way.
 

2. Part of the rock aesthetic is youth challenging the culture and status quo. Once the challenger becomes the status quo, it loses some of that appeal, even if it hasn’t really changed. Metallica trying to recreate their early days after they found commercial success doesn’t hit the same way when so many groups had copied Metallica. The newness is exciting. One more metal band that sounds like Metallica isn’t all that interesting even if it’s Metallica.

3. It’s really hard to write good music and is kind of a crap shoot. Extended success is very unlikely unless you really know what you’re doing.

4. They don’t actually get “worse,” we just feel that way due to nostalgia.


I’m not sure what to think,  but it happens enough that there must be something going on.

Edited by Mole
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/21/2020 at 3:57 PM, Patricio Swayze said:

Jimmy Buffet should be set on fire.  Just awful. - Good

Oasis is fucking is fucking terrible. - No No No

U2 has about 5 good songs, the rest suck and Bono is a massive douche. - less than 5. 3

Foo Fighters are extremely boring. - other than 1 song yes

DJ Screw is way overrated and boring. - Very Good

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/22/2020 at 8:40 PM, Deej said:

Good music doesn't come from a place of wealth and comfort. Become rich, famous, and comfortable, the music will suffer. You've become out of touch with the masses that made you.

When was the last time an artist or band debuted over age 30 with great music? 

Great music comes from a mixture of the brash confusion, naive mindset, and raw energy of youth finding it's way into talented individuals. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^
Good point.  Only one I can think of off the top of my head is Sheryl Crow.  There's a bunch of jazz and blues musicians who didn't have big debut albums until well into their 30's and 40's, but that was mostly due to rampant discrimination.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never cared for Comfortably Numb (or anything off The Wall for that matter), and I never liked anything from Pink Floyd until I listened to it stoned.  Dark Side and Wish You Were Here are the only albums of theirs I really enjoy.  I think the Syd Barret era is mostly trash, and people have fetishized his severe mental illness in an unfortunate way.

So basically I'm posting this in the right thread.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/22/2020 at 8:40 PM, Deej said:

Good music doesn't come from a place of wealth and comfort. Become rich, famous, and comfortable, the music will suffer. You've become out of touch with the masses that made you.

Exactly.  Great art tends to come from discomfort and suffering, or shortly after those things pass.  If Bob Dylan doesn't get divorced, we don't get "Blood On The Tracks".  If Fleetwood Mac weren't all coked out and banging each other and hating each other we don't get "Rumors".  If Keith Richards' idea of a good time was a hot cup of tea before bed, we don't get "Exile".

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never cared for Comfortably Numb (or anything off The Wall for that matter), and I never liked anything from Pink Floyd until I listened to it stoned.  Dark Side and Wish You Were Here are the only albums of theirs I really enjoy.  I think the Syd Barret era is mostly trash, and people have fetishized his severe mental illness in an unfortunate way.
So basically I'm posting this in the right thread.

Wow. The Wall is petty much my all time favorite album.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, tbone_ said:


Wow. The Wall is petty much my all time favorite album.

I don't know if it was just over played on classic rock radio when I was a kid or what.  I don't care much for the production, and the whole thing seems too self-serious for me, I guess.  It just never struck me at all, and pretty much everyone else raves about it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anybody remember that sketch on "The State" years back.  It was Michael Showalter and one other guy and they heard about a house party but it turns to be a kid's birthday party.  And they've got the kids all stoned and drunk and Showalter starts going on about Pink Floyd.  "By record 2, side 1...Water is in his own world...behind is own...Wall."  And the kids nodingly agree.  I think about when I hear Pink Floyd lamentations.  A lot of their shit is over-romanticized and we forget how young and naive we were.  

But "Dark Side of the Moon" continues to stand up over time and it is just a throughly excellent album in almost every way.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, ztejas said:

 

But The Wall is better.

Whatever, Trump.  /noCR  ;)

If you take out "The Final Cut", which is really just a Waters solo album with some Pink Floyd personnel playing on some songs and having no writing/producing input.  Their run from Meddle in '71 to Momentary Lapse of Reason in '87...that's maybe the best 7 consecutive album run in rock history.  That's probably gonna be unpopular with many on here, and I know it's an arbitrary number, 7 records in a row. 

But to me, that run is probably the best of anyone.  Zeppelin suffers a bit because "Presence" (while a good album) drops them off a cliff after I-IV, HofH, and Physical Graffiti.  I think the Beatles run from "Help" to "Let it Be" would be on that list at 10 albums on the run, if it were not for "Magical Mystery Tour" stuck in the middle there of that historic run, just waiting to suck and so I give my capricious award to Pink Floyd.  Honorable Mention to the Black Keys from "The Big Come Up" thru "El Camino" for a cool 7-straighter

Edited by Lobo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Lobo said:

If you take out "The Final Cut", which is really just a Waters solo album with some Pink Floyd personnel playing on some songs and having no writing/producing input.  Their run from Meddle in '71 to Momentary Lapse of Reason in '87...that's maybe the best 7 consecutive album run in rock history.  That's probably gonna be unpopular with many on here, and I know it's an arbitrary number, 7 records in a row.

I assume by "best" we are talking about other than Aftermath through Exile. And I'm not some mega Stones fan. But I'm down to discuss 2nd place. 

If we bump it up to 8 album run then it's hard to deny Freewheelin' Bob Dylan through Nashville Skyline - even though Nashville Skyline might not be considered a rock album.

 

Edited by ztejas
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I should have added "Aftermath" to "Exile" in my little Mount Rushmore of 7-record runs.  I was waivering on it, but you're right.  It belongs up there, near the top.  

I wouldn't put Dylan in the rock category, at least for most of his career.  That's another debate for another time.  But yeah---now that I see somebody else typing it out, the run from "Out of Our Heads" to "Exile" or even "Goats Head Soup" very much deserves to be in the mix.  Though one could very legit argue that "Between the Buttons" very much sticks out like a sore thumb in the middle of that run...that's still 9 outta 10 as superior albums. And what's more, and I didn't realize this when I was contemplating it earlier, they did that 10-record decathlon of rock excellence in just 8+ years.  I gotta give them extra points for that feat alone.  A few weak links follow, and then "Some Girls" puts them back on top, but it's been 40 years of crap (save for portions of "Steel Wheels."  I forget how many great albums they had in such a short time, helped a great deal by "borrowing generously" from several blues artists.  Zeppelin gets shit for that all the time, but Stones somehow get a pass.  But, I digest.  "Out of Our Heads" to "Exile/Goats Head Soup"...absolute brilliance with nary a weak spot.  I just plain forget sometimes how powerful and brilliant they were from '65 to '80.  Only group that did that era better was Zeppelin and only because they didn't handle their drugs well enough to head into the studio to keep putting out volume...Stones did that and then some. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Though one could very legit argue that "Between the Buttons" very much sticks out like a sore thumb in the middle of that run...that's still 9 outta 10 as superior albums.

It sticks out but it still has Ruby Tuesday and Let's Spend the Night Together on it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...