"classic" bands

dean_r_koontz · 01:12 PM

beatles, beach boys, rolling stones, the kinks, the byrds, led zeppelin.

i dislike all of them, and i'm very often "right" when it comes to the music i like in terms of what the critics prefer. why listen to the byrds when you have rem and the smiths? why listen to rolling stones wimpy rock and roll when the stooges and replacements exist? smart british pop ? i'd go for blur instead of the kinks any day. people say the beach boys make beautiful music. there is nothing on pet sounds that gives me even close to the same satisfaction as let down on ok computer or nice dream from the bends.

what is wrong with me?

dean_r_koontz · 08-09-2005, 01:11 PM

and when it comes to depressing and beautiful music, there are billions of 80's and 90's bands i'd rather listen to.

Quiet · 08-09-2005, 01:19 PM

I agree with you.

I can listen to these bands and enjoy their music just fine, but I really have no desire to hear any of them. When I'm listening to what I want to listen to, there are bands I prefer over all of those you listed. I would add the Eagles to that list as well. If I want country tinged pop rock, I'll take Wilco over them anyday.

What is wrong with us?

homechicago · 08-09-2005, 01:21 PM

i think it's more about what was big at the time. the bands you listed from the 60's and such were the first of the rock variety that really stuck with people on a large commercial scale, and they get carried into each decade.

you like r.e.m. now, but 20 years from now some kid will say "what's the big deal with r.e.m.?"

but i somewhat agree with your general statement. personally, i like all those bands except for the beatles. their songs irritate my ears.

"love love me do, you know i love you......hey jude blah blah blah blah....." - it doesn't connect to me in any way.

dean_r_koontz · 08-09-2005, 01:22 PM

maybe we're too emotionally imbalanced to like artists that are a bit more middle of the road. i'd rather hear mark kozelek whine about his 500th crashed relationship than a religious dork like brian wilson sing about how hard it is to miss your home.

dean_r_koontz · 08-09-2005, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by homechicago

you like r.e.m. now, but 20 years from now some kid will say "what's the big deal with r.e.m.?"

well i've just recently started to listen to early r.e.m, and i find it really good. but maybe you're right.

schaadow · 08-09-2005, 01:26 PM

You're forgetting that there would be no Replacements without bands like the Rolling Stones, and especially Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers. And Blur over the Kinks, well that's just absurd. So I guess we all have a different definition of "Right"
and I hope for the majority, it is not what most critics say.

schaadow · 08-09-2005, 01:26 PM

but I'll agree the Beach Boys suck.

Quiet · 08-09-2005, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by schaadow
You're forgetting that there would be no Replacements without bands like the Rolling Stones, and especially Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers. And Blur over the Kinks, well that's just absurd. So I guess we all have a different definition of "Right"
and I hope for the majority, it is not what most critics say.

Well, I don't think it's so much a lack of respect as it is a difference in preferences. Like I said, I can listen to those bands and enjoy them, and I do have respect for them... I just don't really want to listen to them when there's better stuff out there.

dean_r_koontz · 08-09-2005, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by schaadow
You're forgetting that there would be no Replacements without bands like the Rolling Stones, and especially Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers. And Blur over the Kinks, well that's just absurd. So I guess we all have a different definition of "Right"
and I hope for the majority, it is not what most critics say.

nope, were did i write that the replacement wasn't influenced by those bands? anyway, this is a pretty weird way of reasoning i think. sure, there might not have been a saab 95 if it didn't have older saab models as a template, but i'd still rather ride the new car than the old ones.

schaadow · 01:38 PM

schaadow · 08-09-2005, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dean_r_koontz

. sure, there might not have been a saab 95 if it didn't have older saab models as a template, but i'd still rather ride the new car than the old ones.

thats a good point, but we're not talking about cars. I love the Mats, Paul Westerberg is the quite possibly the greatest songwriter ever, but to me The Rolling Stones are Rock n Roll. and besides I'd rather drive a classic Corvette over a new one.

dean_r_koontz · 08-09-2005, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by schaadow
thats a good point, but we're not talking about cars. I love the Mats, Paul Westerberg is the quite possibly the greatest songwriter ever, but to me The Rolling Stones are Rock n Roll. and besides I'd rather drive a classic Corvette over a new one.

yeah, well i can appricate the fact that the other bands have something musically that i'm missing, but i will continue to disagree if you say something like "these bands are goodor better than other bands just because they did this first".

schaadow · 08-09-2005, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dean_r_koontz

but i will continue to disagree if you say something like "these bands are goodor better than other bands just because they did this first".

well it's a good thing I never said that.

dean_r_koontz · 08-09-2005, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by schaadow
well it's a good thing I never said that.

"You're forgetting that there would be no Replacements without bands like the Rolling Stones, and especially Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers"

why did you mention this then?

schaadow · 08-09-2005, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dean_r_koontz

"You're forgetting that there would be no Replacements without bands like the Rolling Stones, and especially Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers"

why did you mention this then?

I never said any was better than the other.

dean_r_koontz · 08-09-2005, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by schaadow
I never said any was better than the other.

"You're forgetting that there would be no Replacements without bands like the Rolling Stones, and especially Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers"

ok, but if you didn't mean that, why did you mention it?

schaadow · 08-09-2005, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dean_r_koontz

"You're forgetting that there would be no Replacements without bands like the Rolling Stones, and especially Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers"

ok, but if you didn't mean that, why did you mention it?

keep quoting it maybe eventually you'll actually read it. I simply said without the Stones to pave the way, The Replacements would be a different band if a band at all. I never said one was superior to the other.

dean_r_koontz · 08-09-2005, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by schaadow
keep quoting it maybe eventually you'll actually read it. I simply said without the Stones to pave the way, The Replacements would be a different band if a band at all. I never said one was superior to the other.

"You're forgetting that there would be no Replacements without bands like the Rolling Stones, and especially Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers"

but why did you mention it at all if i didn't say anything about weather the replacements was influenced by those bands or not?

it's like i suddenly would write : slavery is wrong. and you'd go "yeah, but i've never said i like slavery, so it's pretty irrelevant".

schaadow · 02:13 PM

I began with"You're forgetting..." so I did recognize the subject was not in you're initial post, I just thought it needed to be said. I love the Mats, I love the Stones, this discussions going nowhere.

dean_r_koontz · 08-09-2005, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by schaadow
I began with"You're forgetting..." so I did recognize the subject was not in you're initial post, I just thought it needed to be said.

but how could you assume that i forgot this?

schaadow · 08-09-2005, 02:19 PM

just thought it needed to be said. Apparently you are always "right"

dean_r_koontz · 08-09-2005, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by schaadow
just thought it needed to be said. Apparently you are always "right"

slavery is wrong (just thought it needed to be said)

schaadow · 08-09-2005, 02:24 PM

You proved your point I was wrong, but Dean Koontz writes crappy novels (just thought it needed to be said)

dean_r_koontz · 08-09-2005, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by schaadow
You proved your point I was wrong, but Dean Koontz writes crappy novels (just thought it needed to be said)

he's the greates writer since dostojevskij

schaadow · 08-09-2005, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dean_r_koontz

he's the greates writer since dostojevskij

Yeah and Billy Corgan's the best poet since Keats

dean_r_koontz · 08-09-2005, 02:33 PM

that's true, good we agree on something

Fathoms (unadored) · 08-09-2005, 02:59 PM

I'm pretty down with most of the classic bands. Especially Sabbath, Zeppelin, and Floyd! But 90's and 00's resonates more emotionally with me.

RockLobster · 08-09-2005, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dean_r_koontz

what is wrong with me?

you have bad taste

dean_r_koontz · 08-09-2005, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RockLobster

you have bad taste

you can't possibly know that.

08-09-2005, 01:10 PM	#1
dean_r_koontz Apocalyptic Poster Posts: 12,629	"classic" bands beatles, beach boys, rolling stones, the kinks, the byrds, led zeppelin. i dislike all of them, and i'm very often "right" when it comes to the music i like in terms of what the critics prefer. why listen to the byrds when you have rem and the smiths? why listen to rolling stones wimpy rock and roll when the stooges and replacements exist? smart british pop ? i'd go for blur instead of the kinks any day. people say the beach boys make beautiful music. there is nothing on pet sounds that gives me even close to the same satisfaction as let down on ok computer or nice dream from the bends. what is wrong with me? Last edited by dean_r_koontz : 08-09-2005 at 01:12 PM.

08-09-2005, 01:19 PM	#3
Quiet Apocalyptic Poster Location: The Port City Posts: 1,836	I agree with you. I can listen to these bands and enjoy their music just fine, but I really have no desire to hear any of them. When I'm listening to what I want to listen to, there are bands I prefer over all of those you listed. I would add the Eagles to that list as well. If I want country tinged pop rock, I'll take Wilco over them anyday. What is wrong with us? __________________ "I bring positive comments towards the band and I fight all the dumb negativity. I guess I am the William Wallace of this board." - Corgan Rules

08-09-2005, 01:33 PM	#11
schaadow Apocalyptic Poster Location: Villa Incognito Posts: 1,150	. Last edited by schaadow : 08-09-2005 at 01:38 PM.

08-09-2005, 02:11 PM	#20
schaadow Apocalyptic Poster Location: Villa Incognito Posts: 1,150	I began with"You're forgetting..." so I did recognize the subject was not in you're initial post, I just thought it needed to be said. I love the Mats, I love the Stones, this discussions going nowhere. Last edited by schaadow : 08-09-2005 at 02:13 PM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

08-09-2005, 01:11 PM	#2
dean_r_koontz Apocalyptic Poster Posts: 12,629	and when it comes to depressing and beautiful music, there are billions of 80's and 90's bands i'd rather listen to.

08-09-2005, 01:21 PM	#4
homechicago Apocalyptic Poster Location: THIS IS IT! Posts: 2,921	i think it's more about what was big at the time. the bands you listed from the 60's and such were the first of the rock variety that really stuck with people on a large commercial scale, and they get carried into each decade. you like r.e.m. now, but 20 years from now some kid will say "what's the big deal with r.e.m.?" but i somewhat agree with your general statement. personally, i like all those bands except for the beatles. their songs irritate my ears. "love love me do, you know i love you......hey jude blah blah blah blah....." - it doesn't connect to me in any way.

08-09-2005, 01:22 PM	#5
dean_r_koontz Apocalyptic Poster Posts: 12,629	maybe we're too emotionally imbalanced to like artists that are a bit more middle of the road. i'd rather hear mark kozelek whine about his 500th crashed relationship than a religious dork like brian wilson sing about how hard it is to miss your home.

08-09-2005, 01:26 PM	#7
schaadow Apocalyptic Poster Location: Villa Incognito Posts: 1,150	You're forgetting that there would be no Replacements without bands like the Rolling Stones, and especially Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers. And Blur over the Kinks, well that's just absurd. So I guess we all have a different definition of "Right" and I hope for the majority, it is not what most critics say.

08-09-2005, 02:19 PM	#22
schaadow Apocalyptic Poster Location: Villa Incognito Posts: 1,150	just thought it needed to be said. Apparently you are always "right"

08-09-2005, 02:24 PM	#24
schaadow Apocalyptic Poster Location: Villa Incognito Posts: 1,150	You proved your point I was wrong, but Dean Koontz writes crappy novels (just thought it needed to be said)

08-09-2005, 02:33 PM	#27
dean_r_koontz Apocalyptic Poster Posts: 12,629	that's true, good we agree on something

08-09-2005, 02:59 PM	#28
Fathoms (unadored) Apocalyptic Poster Location: Iceland Posts: 4,664	I'm pretty down with most of the classic bands. Especially Sabbath, Zeppelin, and Floyd! But 90's and 00's resonates more emotionally with me.