|
|
Post by ste on Feb 26, 2008 20:55:27 GMT
We need a section for venting, complaining and bullying Campbell etc  |
|
|
|
Post by dontask on Aug 17, 2009 17:12:48 GMT
is this that section?
ian brown should die.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fergal on Aug 17, 2009 17:57:26 GMT
Why?
|
|
|
|
Post by dontask on Aug 17, 2009 18:38:09 GMT
lmao you have a detector dont you i was messing  |
|
|
|
Post by sirmavers on Aug 17, 2009 21:50:36 GMT
Great jibe dontask, great jibe. If this is the section for letting it out and pointless rants then I'd love to moan forever and ever, but I won't bother anyone  |
|
|
|
Post by Fergal on Aug 17, 2009 21:53:26 GMT
Once anyone slags off Ian Brown, Morrissey, Paul Weller, Noel Gallagher or any associated acts the scar on my forehead burns and I rush home to my computar to yield abuse at them, before regaining my normal life. Some people call it a curse but I see it as a calling
|
|
|
|
Post by dontask on Aug 17, 2009 21:55:21 GMT
yep and god knows that happens alot, purveyors of dull music as they are.
|
|
|
|
Post by sirmavers on Aug 17, 2009 22:45:39 GMT
Sorry, have to get involved. I'm all for having opinions, but Morrissey a 'purveyor of dull music', the smiths dull, ian brown dull (talking stone roses terms). Ouch that was a low blow for the average britpop fan that is myself, real low.
|
|
|
|
Post by dontask on Aug 17, 2009 23:45:23 GMT
=p i know ...i actually enjoyed fools gold for the first time ever last night, and i do like some of the smiths work, but overall, stand by what i said. the decline of britpop is ideal for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fergal on Aug 18, 2009 12:52:05 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by sirmavers on Aug 18, 2009 13:24:27 GMT
Thanks fergal, really happy you posted them, really cheered me up a bit, nice one. That '...Resurrection' performance is amazing, see what an important part Reni always had to play, amazing drumming (though his backing vocals weren't leaving much to be admired). You posted 2 of my most relatable Smiths tunes, love them both, and as not a huge Oasis fan you picked again 2 amazing tunes, particularly 'The Masterplan'. Had goosebumps through '...Resurrection' and 'The Masterplan', both phenomenal. Glad you posted them, and you're right, not one of them are dull, you can have every reason for not liking them, musically, lyrically, but dull is ironically the 'dullest' description that you could give these songs, they are magic. In a nutshell like Fergal said, the 2 Smiths songs are a soundtrack to my life at the moment, songs by these bands and the sorts have saved my life along with many others I am sure. Well done Ferg, not only did you pick probably the perfect 6 videos to show us, but that last paragraph that you write was amazing, you summed it up perfectly, can add little else to it myself. Top post |
|
|
|
Post by dontask on Aug 18, 2009 15:29:24 GMT
no. while i accept that the roses tunes you put up were quite good and a good example of what good i see among the roses tunes. the smiths tunes however left me bored as did acquiesce, the masterplan is a fave of mine but as on stage performers oasis could be matched by anyone, you might aswell run a backing track and have them mime. despite best efforts i still cant love the smiths but i do respect everything they did for music and its immediately noticeable the talent that johnny marr has with his impact on the cribs, his playing is immediately noticeable in cheat on me. i can understand the liking of the roses, cus there is actually some geniune brilliance and waterfalls riff is a good example, its just not my style im afraid. but oasis. with their refusal to progress anywhere as a band, inconsistency, having to rely on the early stuff at their live shows (yes, falling down is the exception), the plaguerism (though most bands are guilty of that) and general "meh"ness of the tunes. i look around n i see the arctics third effort being criticised but at least theyve gone somewhere new so of course itl split the room, kasabian have been touted as successors to their throne but in west ryder lunatic pauper asylum they have passed oasis. and in a time when oasis released their tragedy of a third album, radiohead released ok computer, an album so brimming with tunes and yet they dont even have to dip into to much nowadays cus they actually have the ability to top themselves. any songs can save your life its just were you choose to look for it. i hope you see my point of view now, i havent set out to dislike these bands, especially the smiths, i made a conscious effort to like them, but i just think they are unworthy of the pedastal you give them. i was harsh, britpop isnt that bad, i just think too many people are constrained by it.
|
|
|
|
Post by ste on Aug 18, 2009 15:59:28 GMT
I don't see the point in a band trying to change, why would you want to mess with a formula that works? If you change in your own time then fair enough, but setting out to record your 3rd album with the intention of trying something new will just sound shite (Look at Humbug).
|
|
|
|
Post by ste on Aug 18, 2009 16:00:52 GMT
I just realised I started this topic over a year ago... Strange, I don't remember...
|
|
|
|
Post by dontask on Aug 18, 2009 16:26:52 GMT
i only picked up on it like, day before last. the point of a band trying to change is that they will churn out their best tunes of a certain style in the first two albums and then yes maybe there will be the odd tune on later albums but it will inevitably disapoint and its that pattern which is declans reaosning behind him thinknig the arctic monkeys should have split up i guess.
examples of bands that have evolved successfully are muse and radiohead. arctic monkeys i believe will be slotted under that, i have only heard crying lightning and pretty visitors but both sound promising to me. change inevitably alienates some fans who loved your first ablum or whatever but id rather that from a band than staleness. some bands just dont have the versatility to change and thats fair enough but not for me.
|
|
