walksalone
Heisman Trophy Winner
you guys are makin' me run outta +1's
oh, and I forgot "Oasis"
oh, and I forgot "Oasis"
My beef with Nirvana is how they overshadow the rest of the 90's Seattle scene. While they have some good stuff, the albums are very hit and miss. Soundgarden, Alice in Chains and Pearl Jam (from that time anyway) put out better albums. Maybe in Layne Staley would have gone out with a gun instead of a needle a decade later AiC would be idolized like Nirvana.Ok, I'll risk the ridicule. I like some of Nirvanas stuff now, not when it was new though. And the Beatles- it's easy to say they were too big because they were huge. I like some of their stuff but really think it has more to do with familiarity rather than being musically impressed. If forced to choose between them and the three blues legends mentioned, I'd have to go with the blues no question.
Exactly, and they weren't even close to being the best band to come out of Seattle. Soundgarden and AIC are miles ahead of Nirvana, but what bothers me is that the Seattle bands that don't get mentioned ahead of Nirvana like Mudhoney, Green River, Skinyard, and most importantly, Tad.My beef with Nirvana is how they overshadow the rest of the 90's Seattle scene. While they have some good stuff, the albums are very hit and miss. Soundgarden, Alice in Chains and Pearl Jam (from that time anyway) put out better albums. Maybe in Layne Staley would have gone out with a gun instead of a needle a decade later AiC would be idolized like Nirvana.Ok, I'll risk the ridicule. I like some of Nirvanas stuff now, not when it was new though. And the Beatles- it's easy to say they were too big because they were huge. I like some of their stuff but really think it has more to do with familiarity rather than being musically impressed. If forced to choose between them and the three blues legends mentioned, I'd have to go with the blues no question.
I have heard a lot of the Beetles, and I am never impressed. And I just might donkey punch the next fool who sits and makes the argument that rock music would not exist without them. There were plenty of contemporaries who made music that was as god or better, and more influential, but since they were not as 'cute' and radio friendly with the lovey dovey songs. The Beetles are pop, not rock.
Thanks to you bozo's and this thread, I think i've burned through my allotment of +1's for the day...Ok, I'll risk the ridicule. I like some of Nirvanas stuff now, not when it was new though. And the Beatles- it's easy to say they were too big because they were huge. I like some of their stuff but really think it has more to do with familiarity rather than being musically impressed. If forced to choose between them and the three blues legends mentioned, I'd have to go with the blues no question.
Same here..Thanks to you bozo's and this thread, I think i've burned through my allotment of +1's for the day...Ok, I'll risk the ridicule. I like some of Nirvanas stuff now, not when it was new though. And the Beatles- it's easy to say they were too big because they were huge. I like some of their stuff but really think it has more to do with familiarity rather than being musically impressed. If forced to choose between them and the three blues legends mentioned, I'd have to go with the blues no question.
The thing I liked about the Beatles..Besides their catchy tunes for my gradeschool sensibilities, was their constant attempt to try something different..And different genera(s)..I can name about 4 different albums that were my fav, by them..Lately it's been "Rubber Soul"There are way too many to name. 95% of what's on the radio (well, the "80s, 90s, and Today" stations at least).
SO TRUE!!!
and walks... you weren't paying attention when listening to the last 8 Beatles albums (if you've even done that). Just because they were popular and people screamed at them, doesn't mean they weren't great. Even their early albums were great when compared to other bands of that time.
Anyhoo... I have to agree with Nirvana. A huge part of their appeal was that they weren't a hair band.
The Beatles were one of Ozzy Osbourne's biggest influences.I have listened to the Beatles records, then I heard Led Zepplin and Sabbath, and realized how garbage the Beatles really were...and walks... you weren't paying attention when listening to the last 8 Beatles albums (if you've even done that). Just because they were popular and people screamed at them, doesn't mean they weren't great. Even their early albums were great when compared to other bands of that time
edit: Not too mention, the Beatles aren't even on the same field as Muddy Waters, John Lee Hooker, Howlin' Wolf
Ya. Right after you threw these:Threw your panties on the stage didn't ya.There are way too many to name. 95% of what's on the radio (well, the "80s, 90s, and Today" stations at least).
and walks... you weren't paying attention when listening to the last 8 Beatles albums (if you've even done that). Just because they were popular and people screamed at them, doesn't mean they weren't great. Even their early albums were great when compared to other bands of that time.
Anyhoo... I have to agree with Nirvana. A huge part of their appeal was that they weren't a hair band.
And this is the case in point for the phrase, "nobody's perfect"The Beatles were one of Ozzy Osbourne's biggest influences.
To let you know, "Magnet and Steel was done by Walter Egan. Even less to like Fleetwood Mac for.Same here..Thanks to you bozo's and this thread, I think i've burned through my allotment of +1's for the day...Ok, I'll risk the ridicule. I like some of Nirvanas stuff now, not when it was new though. And the Beatles- it's easy to say they were too big because they were huge. I like some of their stuff but really think it has more to do with familiarity rather than being musically impressed. If forced to choose between them and the three blues legends mentioned, I'd have to go with the blues no question.
I know we all tend to take music tastes personally, so I'll try to disreguard those of you dissing Floyd, Nirvana, Beatles (I started listening to them when I was 3 and were my favourite band until my oldest Brother introduced me to Zeppelin and Yes)..Not sure why I like Oasis, but I do.
Doors...Most of their music seemed amaturic? if that's a word...But I do still like "Crystal Ship" and maybe a couple of their other songs I can't remember at the moment.
Never liked the "Big Hair Bands" unless you count Nugent and Van Halen, but I started liking the Scorpions a decade ago for some odd reason..or not.
When it's my boss's turn to pick the radio station, I usually try to ignore the awfull "Wimp Rock/ Pop" stuff unless the song is so bad, I try to learn the name of the band so I can send them hate mail, (I'm talking to YOU Maroon 5!!!!).
I'm still gonna have to say bands/individuals like Lady Gag-me, Culture Club, Faith No More, Living Colour, Volbeat, Nickelsback and any band that sounds like them, Foxy Shazam, and all HIPty Hop in general..Oh..And Pakistani/India music.
And just to piss off my best friend in the whole world...Fleetwood Mack (Except "Ebony Eyes", "Magnet & Steel" and the Peter Green years, of course)