::Grill 13 Restaurant:: NEW Pictures on the Menu!

[Biohazard EXTREME]

Chase Me To The End

There's a lot I can say, but I don't have the patience (The irony) to engage in an epic rock conversation. So I'll just say this: Album sales dictate greatness (Which is that which appeals to the fabled "masses"). If you want to use the argument that classic rock bands have sold more albums because they have been around longer than newer bands, shove it up your arse. Yes, shi* like Nickleback have sold over 30 million albums in their 15 year existence. But The Beatles sold over 300 million units of it's discography in only 6 years since their debut.

There's more I want to say, but like I said, I have no patience. You may have patience Bio, but I don't. So don't give me flak.

Well, then I can't take your, "My music tastes are better than most peoples" comment seriously. Cause you're saying that great music is defined by the masses, which means MOST people, which makes you one of them, which means your music tastes are the same as most other peoples'. And as far as I'm concerned, that doesn't say much.  

[King of Paradise]

Biohazard EXTREME

Chase Me To The End

There's a lot I can say, but I don't have the patience (The irony) to engage in an epic rock conversation. So I'll just say this: Album sales dictate greatness (Which is that which appeals to the fabled "masses"). If you want to use the argument that classic rock bands have sold more albums because they have been around longer than newer bands, shove it up your arse. Yes, shi* like Nickleback have sold over 30 million albums in their 15 year existence. But The Beatles sold over 300 million units of it's discography in only 6 years since their debut.

There's more I want to say, but like I said, I have no patience. You may have patience Bio, but I don't. So don't give me flak.

Well, then I can't take your, "My music tastes are better than most peoples" comment seriously. Cause you're saying that great music is defined by the masses, which means MOST people, which makes you one of them, which means your music tastes are the same as most other peoples'. And as far as I'm concerned, that doesn't say much.

Bio, those 300 million + units of Beatles discography were sold by 1969. I am a part of the classic rock masses, not the modern masses who get off on Nickleback and Lady Gaga.

p.s. I'm sorry, I forgot which subforums I'm supposed to be typing the rules and regulations for lol. Can you refresh my memory? I promise to get it done by Thursday. I've just been extremely busy as of late. Hell, this is my third night closing at work. And I have to close again tomorrow night. I'm exhausted. Where has my life gone this past week?  

[King of Paradise]

Thee Stranger

@ Bio: I disagree. Yes, there is filler and crap songs on the first one, but the same could be said for the second. I can't remember the names of the tracks off the top of my head, 'cause I ditched it a long time ago. But ******** Way I am an Real Slim Shady for starters (same for my name is). Point being, I disagree. And my three favorite tracks of his are on his first album. But I think the mass majority would agree with you. So what does that say? Since people with 'good' taste don't listen to modern mainstream music, apparently.

Butter on a soggy biscuit, eh? Harsh. xD Well, I like it. And that's just the thing, it's all taste. As for yours, hah, I know that song. I used to listen to The Cramps back in the day. Now... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mqkVqjp_yc I don't expect anyone to approve of this one. But this is my s**t right here.

@ Chase: Yes, I beat it. Still on Special World, though. Like I said.

Oh, that comment on Special World alongside MGS2 confused me. I didn't know exactly what the f you were talking about lol.

I stopped playing the game a month ago with 4 stars yet to be collected. Yes, the last planet in Special World drove me effing bonkers. The others were conquered with a steady dose of trial and error.  

[The King of Misery]

[x]

Tell me this song isn't meaningful...I dare you!Only kidding.Really though,tell me what comes to mind when you hear it.  

[ElenaMason]

Just when I think you guys would be stuck on pg.218 for a while......WABAM!!! debate.... xD and you guys got on a music debate before.... OOOOH you deja vu. blaugh  

[Biohazard EXTREME]

Chase Me To The End

Bio, those 300 million + units of Beatles discography were sold by 1969. I am a part of the classic rock masses, not the modern masses who get off on Nickleback and Lady Gaga.

But still.
As far as I can see, it's just a meme. The Beatles were revolutionary for their time, but since then, plenty of better acts came out. So why are the Beatles still the best? Because that's what the masses are being told. "Rolling Stones magazine top 10 bands" or whatever, will tell you which bands are 'The best' and the masses will listen and imprint it into themselves that they are.
And like I said, even among those bands, those who are still around and making music, their music TODAY is better than their music back then, but that's not what they get recognized for. No.
You yourself said, "Screw new music, I just listen to the old stuff." But that's such a closed minded way of thinking. Yes, todays Mainstream music sucks. But I'm not just saying that. I know it sucks because I listened to it. The fact that it sucks is still a generalization. There's still the odd good band or singer that slips onto the charts every once in a while.
And there's still plenty of great acts that DON'T see the mainstream light. My point is, you gotta LISTEN and make up your own mind, not just stick with where the "Masses" are, modern or otherwise. If you're gonna use the masses to back up your opinion, then how am I supposed to believe that it's even your opinion, and not just something that you were taught to believe?

Chase Me To The End

p.s. I'm sorry, I forgot which subforums I'm supposed to be typing the rules and regulations for lol. Can you refresh my memory? I promise to get it done by Thursday. I've just been extremely busy as of late. Hell, this is my third night closing at work. And I have to close again tomorrow night. I'm exhausted. Where has my life gone this past week?

Well, when you have time, you said:

"I guess I'll take Movies/TV Shows, Video Games, Literature, Fun and Games, and Art/Fiction/Fan Art/Fan Fiction subforums, if that's ok with you." So those are yours. I can take one off your hands if you want.

Thee Stranger

@ Bio: I disagree. Yes, there is filler and crap songs on the first one, but the same could be said for the second. I can't remember the names of the tracks off the top of my head, 'cause I ditched it a long time ago. But ******** Way I am an Real Slim Shady for starters (same for my name is). Point being, I disagree. And my three favorite tracks of his are on his first album. But I think the mass majority would agree with you. So what does that say? Since people with 'good' taste don't listen to modern mainstream music, apparently.

Yeah, well, I'm not basing my judgement on what the masses think. I'm not saying, "MMLP is better because it sold 9 million copies in like two weeks and other people will agree with me" or whatever the statistics are. I'm basing it on my personal taste. And yes, Eminem was a phenomenon, and I do believe that at the time when he first came out, he deserved to be. But that's rarely the case today. The vast majority of true artists don't get recognition until they change their style to something a lot more cookie cutter. And then they get recognized for something that's not even that good. Meanwhile those who want to retain their integrity are stuck in the "Underground" movement and their highest career achievment is their album going Gold.

Thee Stranger

Butter on a soggy biscuit, eh? Harsh. xD Well, I like it. And that's just the thing, it's all taste. As for yours, hah, I know that song. I used to listen to The Cramps back in the day. Now... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mqkVqjp_yc I don't expect anyone to approve of this one. But this is my s**t right here.

Well, Butter is a very good thing in that analogy.

Awww yeah! Approve big time! Man, I haven't listened to rap in so long. This is like a fresh glass of water. Wow, my analogy for music is food, huh?

Anyway, here's mine: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuqFFpt3g_s&feature=related

So many people did this song, but this is one of the best ones, I think.  

[The King of Misery]

Thee Stranger

@ King: That was pretty cool, actually. I approve. Is it meaningful? Sure. You into Bluegrass then? Ever heard Smoothie Song by Nicklecreek?

Bluegrass is all dependent on how the artists carry-out the music,an also the mood I'm in.But I'm not bias,and am open to new things.Haven't heard of Nicklecreek.  

[King of Paradise]

Biohazard EXTREME

Chase Me To The End

Bio, those 300 million + units of Beatles discography were sold by 1969. I am a part of the classic rock masses, not the modern masses who get off on Nickleback and Lady Gaga.

But still.
As far as I can see, it's just a meme. The Beatles were revolutionary for their time, but since then, plenty of better acts came out. So why are the Beatles still the best? Because that's what the masses are being told. "Rolling Stones magazine top 10 bands" or whatever, will tell you which bands are 'The best' and the masses will listen and imprint it into themselves that they are.
And like I said, even among those bands, those who are still around and making music, their music TODAY is better than their music back then, but that's not what they get recognized for. No.
You yourself said, "Screw new music, I just listen to the old stuff." But that's such a closed minded way of thinking. Yes, todays Mainstream music sucks. But I'm not just saying that. I know it sucks because I listened to it. The fact that it sucks is still a generalization. There's still the odd good band or singer that slips onto the charts every once in a while.
And there's still plenty of great acts that DON'T see the mainstream light. My point is, you gotta LISTEN and make up your own mind, not just stick with where the "Masses" are, modern or otherwise. If you're gonna use the masses to back up your opinion, then how am I supposed to believe that it's even your opinion, and not just something that you were taught to believe?

Chase Me To The End

p.s. I'm sorry, I forgot which subforums I'm supposed to be typing the rules and regulations for lol. Can you refresh my memory? I promise to get it done by Thursday. I've just been extremely busy as of late. Hell, this is my third night closing at work. And I have to close again tomorrow night. I'm exhausted. Where has my life gone this past week?

Well, when you have time, you said:

"I guess I'll take Movies/TV Shows, Video Games, Literature, Fun and Games, and Art/Fiction/Fan Art/Fan Fiction subforums, if that's ok with you." So those are yours. I can take one off your hands if you want.

Thee Stranger

@ Bio: I disagree. Yes, there is filler and crap songs on the first one, but the same could be said for the second. I can't remember the names of the tracks off the top of my head, 'cause I ditched it a long time ago. But ******** Way I am an Real Slim Shady for starters (same for my name is). Point being, I disagree. And my three favorite tracks of his are on his first album. But I think the mass majority would agree with you. So what does that say? Since people with 'good' taste don't listen to modern mainstream music, apparently.

Yeah, well, I'm not basing my judgement on what the masses think. I'm not saying, "MMLP is better because it sold 9 million copies in like two weeks and other people will agree with me" or whatever the statistics are. I'm basing it on my personal taste. And yes, Eminem was a phenomenon, and I do believe that at the time when he first came out, he deserved to be. But that's rarely the case today. The vast majority of true artists don't get recognition until they change their style to something a lot more cookie cutter. And then they get recognized for something that's not even that good. Meanwhile those who want to retain their integrity are stuck in the "Underground" movement and their highest career achievment is their album going Gold.

Thee Stranger

Butter on a soggy biscuit, eh? Harsh. xD Well, I like it. And that's just the thing, it's all taste. As for yours, hah, I know that song. I used to listen to The Cramps back in the day. Now... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mqkVqjp_yc I don't expect anyone to approve of this one. But this is my s**t right here.

Well, Butter is a very good thing in that analogy.

Awww yeah! Approve big time! Man, I haven't listened to rap in so long. This is like a fresh glass of water. Wow, my analogy for music is food, huh?

Anyway, here's mine: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuqFFpt3g_s&feature=related

So many people did this song, but this is one of the best ones, I think.

You wanna know why the masses imprint the opinions of magazines such as Rolling Stones, Guitar Magazine, etc. into their heads? Because those magazines know what the f they are talking about. They know how to discern what is good and what we may think is good subjectively. They are professional critics, we are not. Simple as that. And I value the critique of a professional more than your's or anyone else's, becuase they are the ones who hold more knowledge (And know how to apply it in their critiquing, for that matter) in their respective fields than anyone else. It's why they are professionals.

When you say a statement such as "And like I said, even among those bands, those who are still around and making music, their music TODAY is better than their music back then, but that's not what they get recognized for", you probably don't realize how ridiculously absurd you sound, like you're under the false impression that bands age like fine wine, which hasn't been the case at all for Lynrd Skynrd, Rush, Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, The Rolling Stones, Guns N' Roses, ACDC, Aerosmith, David Bowie, all the classic bands who have released contemporary (Or later) albums that pale in comparison to their earlier stuff.

Have you ever just considered that I happen to agree with the masses, and I just happen to share the same opinion as them, it still being my own?

EDIT:

Oh, and quickly. In music, how do YOU determine an act to be better?  

[The King of Misery]

@Chase You're one of those dudes that goes crazy over tabloids aren't you?Because a bunch of wise-guys that sit around all day talking about whats better then what,and why most people are wrong are superior in this arguement.HA.By the way you sort of contradicted yourself at the end there.How is it determined whether some music is better than other music?Don't know,why don't you ask the Rolling Stone Magizene.You implied that the Famous music magizenes knew everything about whats good and what isn't then you tried to end the debate by saying there is no way to say one thing is better than the others,just after saying you agree with Critics because they know whats better than what.

If I have been mislead,someone please tell me,but otherwise that addition to the arguement didn't make a lot of sense.  

[Biohazard EXTREME]

Chase Me To The End

You wanna know why the masses imprint the opinions of magazines such as Rolling Stones, Guitar Magazine, etc. into their heads? Because those magazines know what the f they are talking about. They know how to discern what is good and what we may think is good subjectively. They are professional critics, we are not. Simple as that. And I value the critique of a professional more than your's or anyone else's, becuase they are the ones who hold more knowledge (And know how to apply it in their critiquing, for that matter) in their respective fields than anyone else. It's why they are professionals.

When you say a statement such as "And like I said, even among those bands, those who are still around and making music, their music TODAY is better than their music back then, but that's not what they get recognized for", you probably don't realize how ridiculously absurd you sound, like you're under the false impression that bands age like fine wine, which hasn't been the case at all for Lynrd Skynrd, Rush, Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, The Rolling Stones, Guns N' Roses, ACDC, Aerosmith, David Bowie, all the classic bands who have released contemporary (Or later) albums that pale in comparison to their earlier stuff.

Have you ever just considered that I happen to agree with the masses, and I just happen to share the same opinion as them, it still being my own?

Well, then your claim of, "My music tastes are better than most people's" doesn't hold as far as I'm concerned.
Even in Rock circles, that whole, "Top 10 Rock bands" or "Rock songs" of all time bullshit doesn't mean anything. Any list will tell you that Metallica is the best Metal Band in the world, seeing as how they're the most popular. But Metallica is so overrated that it's not even cool.
And quite frankly, so are bands like The Who, AC/DC, and the Beatles. I'm not saying they're not worth listening to, I'm just saying their music ranges from kinda catchy to nothing special.

Chase Me To The End

EDIT:

Oh, and quickly. In music, how do YOU determine an act to be better?

Well, let's start by listening to it. Do all the instruments have their own specific parts to play? Or are the drums just playing a weak little beat to make sure the guitars have rhythm? Does the bass work to connect the drums and guitar? Or is it just supplementing the guitar? Are the keyboards there JUST for atmosphere, or do they pay their own melody? How melodically diverse is the guitar solo (in terms of rock and metal)? Is it just a tasteless sequence of face melting notes? Or is there an actual melody there?
Things like that. Time changes are also a factor.

Look, here's the thing. I don't hold Dream Theater in such high regards because some magazine told me about them. I discovered them almost accidentally, and listening to them is like listening to Beethoven or Mozart. They do insane things with their music and take it into unpredictable directions. Queen did too, and like I said before, I actually prefer Queen's LATER works over their earlier stuff. "We Will Rock You," and "We Are The Champions" are weak compared to songs like "The Show Must Go On" or "I Want It All," but do you think anyone notices? And if Freddie Mercury hadn't passed away, and they continued to make music into this Millennium, I have no doubt they could've come up with stuff even better than that.

And if that's not the case for Lynyrd Skynyrd, Rush, and all those other bands you mentioned, then maybe they aren't as great as the world makes them out to be. Not saying that they weren't great in their prime, just saying that I guess they couldn't keep up. And quit frankly, like I said, listening to most of those bands, I hear nothing extraordinarily special in their music. It's enjoyable, but it's not something I'd just sit and listen to and absorb over and over and over. And sure, I guess that could be a matter of personal preference, but still, Jazz isn't exactly my favorite genre either, but I can still recognize and really enjoy a really good Jazz song. Same with country. I generally don't like country, but I'll gladly listen to Johnny Cash.

So I dunno where Rock and Roll or Classic Rock come in. But I still enjoy bands like Styx, Cansas, Uriah Heep, or Deep Purple, and I can still listen to their music and dissect it, and hear those factors that I consider to be aspects of truly great bands. Not because a magazine said so, but because I listen and make my own judgement. And as you can see, I can still enjoy classic rock bands that existed in the 60's, 70's and 80's.

And still, you look at bands like Iron Maiden or Judas Priest. Quite frankly, Iron Maiden's newer songs like Fear of the Dark, Blood Brothers or A Brave New World are probably among my favorite songs by the band, and they easily rival if not beat songs like Run To The Hills, or Ace's High, or The Number of the Beast.
Same with Judas Priest, their 2008's Nostradamus album... Their music is so much more mature and sophisticated compared to their 'Biggest hits' like "Breaking The Law" or "You Got Another Thing Coming."

And sure, maybe your basis for judging good music differs from mine. But still... You seem to get your basis from critics and magazines. As in, they tell you what qualifies as good music, and you say, "Okay." And yeah, you can say that you genuinely agree with them and thare their opinions, but I still don't see why.
"I think The Beatels is one of the best bands in history. Why? Because the masses have spoken." That's not a reason to consider a band the greatest. Because they were revolutionary at the time? Okay, but you weren't even a dirty thought back then. You weren't there during those revolutionary times. So the Beatles don't have the same political or cultural meaning to you as they would have to your parents or anyone else who listened to them when they first came out.
Today's mainstream music might generally suck, but the fact that it's so successful is a reflection on the state of our masses today. And twenty years from now, some girl is gonna say, "Classic artists like Lady Gaga are the best, and always will be. Why? Because that's what I grew up listening to, because my parents were fans back when Lady Gaga still performed, before she died of that infection resulting from the nose job."  

[King of Paradise]

@TheKingofMisery:

Reread what I wrote. I didn't contradict myself.

@Bio:

That's f***ing bullshit Bio, that my stance of having a better taste than most people can't hold because I love what the masses love. You seem to keep on forgetting that I'm talking about the masses of the 1960s and 1970s, when they had actual taste. I am a 20 year who goes against the Nickleback/Lady Gaga masses of today, and for that, I have better taste than most people. Because yes, Nickleback/Lady Gaga is s**t. And what I think has gotten you in a sour mood to be able to say my word can't hold is that you might think I'm implying I have better taste than YOU. I don't. You love Dream Theater and enjoy Styx and Kansas and Deep Purple. In my opinion, you have better taste than most too.

But I'm sorry Bio, you're just gonna have to accept that these bands you consider overrated aren't. You don't sell scores and hundreds of millions of albums by being overrated. You just don't.

The rest of what you have to say is all opinionated, so I can't really argue against it, so...

I just want you to know a couple of things.

I do not like The Beatles or The Rolling Stones. But why do I insist that these bands (Among others, of course) are the best of all time? Because unlike you, I DON'T argue with the album sales and the masses of the 60s and 70s. I believe in popular opinion. You may not see the logic of that, but going against popular opinion makes YOUR opinion inconsequential. You may say that because of that I don't have my own voice, but I actually love the among other bands such as Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd; and that doesn't mean that just because of that I fall in with the masses and that I don't have my own voice. The "masses" as we so call them isn't just one giant voice that drowns out your own. It's millions of seperate voices in agreeance with eachother. I can have my voice and side with the masses at the same time, dammit.

And I'm not agreeing that Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd are among the best bands because their music is revolutionary. I'm saying so because their music is absolutely to behold. Something that others band can't match, and album sales tend to agree with me. Remember, the masses of the 60s and 70s actually had taste, so...  

[The King of Misery]

Somebody else tell me if I've been mislead.