|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 11:30 am
 |
|
|
 |
Chase Me To The End Yes, and since we're going on opinions here, how does one general rock enthusiast determine whether Pink Floyd of Dream Theater, in which he thinks their music is of equal quality, is better? Album sales. You may not think album sales mean didly squat at all, Bio, that they don't speak about the music what-so-ever, but they show just how many people like the music, and in saying that, I have to consider "Hmm, I may not like The Beatles, but their album sales show that they got something I just can't see but a billion others can, so maybe they're are great even if I don't think so, because in the land of practical sense, the opinion of the many outweigh the opinion of the few."
Yes, but people don't always want BETTER music. The thing about Dream Theater that might turn some people off is:
A. There have a lot of variety. And while that sounds like a good thing, there are people out there who want to buy a metal album and hear 1+ hour of balls. Of equally heavy and often same sounding songs. And to use Fear Factory as an example, they might love the whole album EXCEPT for that token ballad they usually have. And they'll say, "Well, all those heavy songs are awesome, but I don't like that soft s**t they have at the end." And quite frankly, you yourself said you don't like Dream Theater's ballads and slower acoustic stuff.
And even Dream Theater's heavy songs usually go into unpredictable directions like taking a really heavy and menacing song and then putting in a few seconds of a happier sounding piano interlude into it, and people don't want that, because they want one sound.
Then there's the fact that most DT songs range from 7 minutes to 25 minutes, averaging in 10 - 15 minutes. And people don't want songs that long. They want little 3 - 5 minute "verse, chorus, verse, chorus, small solo, chorus" songs. And yes, if you judge music by what people want, then Dream Theater isn't that good of a band I guess.
But ******** that. Their music has some of the most brilliant compositions I've heard in the 20th and 21st century. And that's just how it's written. I won't even mention how they PLAY it. I'm sorry, but musically, DT is better than any Rock & Roll band you can name. And if you disagree with that because the masses disagree with that, then I don't know what else to tell you.
But no, the masses don't dictate to me what the best music is.
Chase Me To The End Show me your Lady Gaga research. I did research of my own, and yours vastly differs from mine. p.s. There are at least 100 million more people living in the u.s. today than there were 40 years ago. And there are 4 more billion of people on the planet today than there were in 1960. Not only does she have a population edge, but if my research is right, Lady Gaga doesn't have jack shi* on The Beatles. And if you're research is right, Lady Gaga still doesn't have jack shi* on the Beatles.
Honestly, I don't think that'll happen, because today's music industry is fickle. But still, 80 million in 2 years is damn impressive.
Chase Me To The End Classical musical enthusiasts/critics have no voice in the world of rock, and that works vice-versa, so...I don't know what point you're trying to make compared to what I said that you're responding to...
Chase Me To The End At one point you said, and I quote "Here's how I see the situation. This was not always the case. The masses very good music tastes back in the 60's and 70's. But slowly starting with 1980's and progressively through the 1990's that went away. In other words, yes, back in the 60's and 70's, all the bands that made truly great music really got the recognition they deserve. But as time went on, the masses started preferring the generic and soulless crap. Like most new wave rock, or Nu Metal, and it's only getting progressively worse." Which means you agree with me that that masses have bad taste. And masses with bad taste have the voices that smell of s**t. So it's rather easy to be able to say they do have bad taste and I have good taste, because I am not a part of that massive collective, but the one you described as being good.
I'm not saying that 1980's hard rock music is better because it had a larger following and cultural impact. I'm saying it because I listen to the music, and I dissect it, and I love the way it sounds. It could just as easily have been a minor pebble in musical history with no sales at all, that doesn't make that music any less good. It just means that's not what the masses want, and like I said, what the masses want doesn't define good music.
Uriah Heep only sold 30 million albums in their entire career since 1969. That's 22 studio albums spanning 40 years. And as far as I know, they didn't have very high of a social impact. And still, I think they're just as good and just as talented as Deep Purple.
Because even if you look at the music of the times. I mean, I could compare those older bands just amongst themselves. I still wouldn't say the Beatles were that great. I mean, the very same Pink Floyd, who I'm not that crazy about... I would still say they were musically better than the Beatles. The fact that the Beatles became as big as they were honestly does perplex me. And their cultural impact is undeniable. But musically, I wouldn't say they're that great. The drums were weak, the guitars while playing good melodies, were weak sounding. And maybe that's what people wanted at the time. But the Beatles' music is incredibly simple. They're simple, catchy melodies. There's no virtuosity in it. It was the Pop music of its time, basically.
And yes, the masses loved it, but I keep saying it time and again, screw the masses.
Okay, so you love Pink Floyd and millions of people out there love(d) Pink Floyd. And you genuinely agree with them. That's fine.
But you yourself said you don't like the Beatles or the Rolling Stones. But you'll still say, "They're the best because they sold a lot." And that's bullshit. They're the best selling. But to claim those figures... I could easily say, "Avatar is the best film ever created because it made the most money." Does that make it so? No, I wouldn't say so. I could name plenty of films at the top of my head that had a better plot, better characters and better acting than Avatar.
It's not about the figures. It's about the content. If you don't like the Beatles, why not? Is it because it's not the right "sound"? Or is it because you honestly don't see what was so special and ingenious about their music? And if the latter is true, then why are you still saying they're the best?
Let's take the members apart. Does that make Ringo Star the best drummer? Cause I've met people who drummed for less than a year who played better drum beats than Ringo. I'm not saying that he couldn't, I'm just saying that he didn't.
Same with the guitars, and hell, I'm not saying they couldn't sing, but I could name plenty of singers better.
So then what is it that makes them the best? Nothing. It's the kind of music that the masses wanted at the time. That makes it the most commercially successful, but certainly doesn't make it the best.
And that might be a matter of opinion, but I'm basing that opinion on more than just figures. I'm basing it on actually examining the music. And hey, I might not be an expert musical critic. But here's the thing, who are all these critics that can dictate to me what the best is? Do you KNOW that they're experts? Or are they just people who liked music at the time, and then went to college for a journalism degree? Do they know anything about writing music? Or do they just listen to a lot of it?
Another thing is, what I said was, back then great bands got the recognition that they deserved. But that does not mean that every band that got racognition is necessarily a great band. It just means that there was more good music in the mainstream to choose from. But as far as I'm concerned, there were still plenty of bands who got ridiculously too much recognition. And The Beatles is one of them.
And even if you examine those bands discographies closely. Look at Pink Floyd. What is Pink Floyd generally known for? The Wall! The Wall! But you yourself said that's not their best song.
So here's the other part of it. The singles, the songs that everyone heard on the radio back then, they were rarely the band's best, and most ingenious songs. They were just the ones with the most powerful message, ("We don't need no education"), or the catchiest chorus, ("We will, we will rock you!") And that's what the people at the time wanted. They wanted the simpler, more generic songs. And once they bought the album, some of them might've recognized the true ingenuity of that particular band. And others would just listen to those very same horribly overplayed singles.
And this is where the music industry make kind of a turnaround. Back then, it's the less technically brilliant songs that became more popular.
Now, Lady Gaga might not be the greatest artist in history, but from her album, she'll have the best, catchiest and most unique songs as her lead singles, and the rest might just be filler. I can't really speak for her in particular because I haven't really listened to her albums. But that's the case with some of the newer mainstream artists I've heard. If you listen to Theory Of A Deadman, "Santa Monica" is a really good song, but if you listen to the whole album, it is the best song ON that album. And the rest are kinda good, and oftentimes, not even.
Whereas back in the day, if you look at Queen's "Sheer Heart Attack" album for example... Now, Queen is a consistently great band altogether. So I'm not denying that their lead single from that album, "Killer Queen" is an awesome song. But if you look at some of their less known songs, like Tenement Funster, Flick of the Wrist, and Lilly of the Valley which come together as one long, progressive suite, altogether it's 8 minutes of sheer brilliance. And Killer Queen pales in comparison to those three songs. But nobody I've ever spoken to has ever heard those songs before. And that's a damn shame. So even back then, even among the greatest bands, their best stuff did not get the recognition it deserved.
And hey, maybe that's the case with the Beatles, too. I haven't extensively listened to the Beatles. I just heard their most popular songs, and they're not impressive. Maybe if I dug deeper and listened to their lesser known songs, I'd discover something brillaint... But that doesn't change the fact that what people wanted at the time, stuff that got radio play, and became imprinted into our culture as "timeless classics" wasn't even that great. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2010 4:38 pm
|
|
|
|
Biohazard EXTREME Chase Me To The End Yes, and since we're going on opinions here, how does one general rock enthusiast determine whether Pink Floyd of Dream Theater, in which he thinks their music is of equal quality, is better? Album sales. You may not think album sales mean didly squat at all, Bio, that they don't speak about the music what-so-ever, but they show just how many people like the music, and in saying that, I have to consider "Hmm, I may not like The Beatles, but their album sales show that they got something I just can't see but a billion others can, so maybe they're are great even if I don't think so, because in the land of practical sense, the opinion of the many outweigh the opinion of the few." Yes, but people don't always want BETTER music. The thing about Dream Theater that might turn some people off is: A. There have a lot of variety. And while that sounds like a good thing, there are people out there who want to buy a metal album and hear 1+ hour of balls. Of equally heavy and often same sounding songs. And to use Fear Factory as an example, they might love the whole album EXCEPT for that token ballad they usually have. And they'll say, "Well, all those heavy songs are awesome, but I don't like that soft s**t they have at the end." And quite frankly, you yourself said you don't like Dream Theater's ballads and slower acoustic stuff. And even Dream Theater's heavy songs usually go into unpredictable directions like taking a really heavy and menacing song and then putting in a few seconds of a happier sounding piano interlude into it, and people don't want that, because they want one sound. Then there's the fact that most DT songs range from 7 minutes to 25 minutes, averaging in 10 - 15 minutes. And people don't want songs that long. They want little 3 - 5 minute "verse, chorus, verse, chorus, small solo, chorus" songs. And yes, if you judge music by what people want, then Dream Theater isn't that good of a band I guess. But ******** that. Their music has some of the most brilliant compositions I've heard in the 20th and 21st century. And that's just how it's written. I won't even mention how they PLAY it. I'm sorry, but musically, DT is better than any Rock & Roll band you can name. And if you disagree with that because the masses disagree with that, then I don't know what else to tell you. But no, the masses don't dictate to me what the best music is. Chase Me To The End Show me your Lady Gaga research. I did research of my own, and yours vastly differs from mine. p.s. There are at least 100 million more people living in the u.s. today than there were 40 years ago. And there are 4 more billion of people on the planet today than there were in 1960. Not only does she have a population edge, but if my research is right, Lady Gaga doesn't have jack shi* on The Beatles. And if you're research is right, Lady Gaga still doesn't have jack shi* on the Beatles. Well, we'll see in 4 years then. By then she'll have been out for 6 years, and honestly, if she keeps going at the rate she's going now, she could have those 300 million albums sold. Honestly, I don't think that'll happen, because today's music industry is fickle. But still, 80 million in 2 years is damn impressive. Chase Me To The End Classical musical enthusiasts/critics have no voice in the world of rock, and that works vice-versa, so...I don't know what point you're trying to make compared to what I said that you're responding to... Well, rock enthusiasts and critics have no voice in the world of pop music, so who's to say that their opinion on Madonna, or Lady Gaga, or Kanye West matter? Chase Me To The End At one point you said, and I quote "Here's how I see the situation. This was not always the case. The masses very good music tastes back in the 60's and 70's. But slowly starting with 1980's and progressively through the 1990's that went away. In other words, yes, back in the 60's and 70's, all the bands that made truly great music really got the recognition they deserve. But as time went on, the masses started preferring the generic and soulless crap. Like most new wave rock, or Nu Metal, and it's only getting progressively worse." Which means you agree with me that that masses have bad taste. And masses with bad taste have the voices that smell of s**t. So it's rather easy to be able to say they do have bad taste and I have good taste, because I am not a part of that massive collective, but the one you described as being good. But I honestly don't care about numbers. I'm not saying that 1980's hard rock music is better because it had a larger following and cultural impact. I'm saying it because I listen to the music, and I dissect it, and I love the way it sounds. It could just as easily have been a minor pebble in musical history with no sales at all, that doesn't make that music any less good. It just means that's not what the masses want, and like I said, what the masses want doesn't define good music. Uriah Heep only sold 30 million albums in their entire career since 1969. That's 22 studio albums spanning 40 years. And as far as I know, they didn't have very high of a social impact. And still, I think they're just as good and just as talented as Deep Purple. Because even if you look at the music of the times. I mean, I could compare those older bands just amongst themselves. I still wouldn't say the Beatles were that great. I mean, the very same Pink Floyd, who I'm not that crazy about... I would still say they were musically better than the Beatles. The fact that the Beatles became as big as they were honestly does perplex me. And their cultural impact is undeniable. But musically, I wouldn't say they're that great. The drums were weak, the guitars while playing good melodies, were weak sounding. And maybe that's what people wanted at the time. But the Beatles' music is incredibly simple. They're simple, catchy melodies. There's no virtuosity in it. It was the Pop music of its time, basically. And yes, the masses loved it, but I keep saying it time and again, screw the masses. Okay, so you love Pink Floyd and millions of people out there love(d) Pink Floyd. And you genuinely agree with them. That's fine. But you yourself said you don't like the Beatles or the Rolling Stones. But you'll still say, "They're the best because they sold a lot." And that's bullshit. They're the best selling. But to claim those figures... I could easily say, "Avatar is the best film ever created because it made the most money." Does that make it so? No, I wouldn't say so. I could name plenty of films at the top of my head that had a better plot, better characters and better acting than Avatar. It's not about the figures. It's about the content. If you don't like the Beatles, why not? Is it because it's not the right "sound"? Or is it because you honestly don't see what was so special and ingenious about their music? And if the latter is true, then why are you still saying they're the best? Let's take the members apart. Does that make Ringo Star the best drummer? Cause I've met people who drummed for less than a year who played better drum beats than Ringo. I'm not saying that he couldn't, I'm just saying that he didn't. Same with the guitars, and hell, I'm not saying they couldn't sing, but I could name plenty of singers better. So then what is it that makes them the best? Nothing. It's the kind of music that the masses wanted at the time. That makes it the most commercially successful, but certainly doesn't make it the best. And that might be a matter of opinion, but I'm basing that opinion on more than just figures. I'm basing it on actually examining the music. And hey, I might not be an expert musical critic. But here's the thing, who are all these critics that can dictate to me what the best is? Do you KNOW that they're experts? Or are they just people who liked music at the time, and then went to college for a journalism degree? Do they know anything about writing music? Or do they just listen to a lot of it? Another thing is, what I said was, back then great bands got the recognition that they deserved. But that does not mean that every band that got racognition is necessarily a great band. It just means that there was more good music in the mainstream to choose from. But as far as I'm concerned, there were still plenty of bands who got ridiculously too much recognition. And The Beatles is one of them. And even if you examine those bands discographies closely. Look at Pink Floyd. What is Pink Floyd generally known for? The Wall! The Wall! But you yourself said that's not their best song. So here's the other part of it. The singles, the songs that everyone heard on the radio back then, they were rarely the band's best, and most ingenious songs. They were just the ones with the most powerful message, ("We don't need no education"), or the catchiest chorus, ("We will, we will rock you!") And that's what the people at the time wanted. They wanted the simpler, more generic songs. And once they bought the album, some of them might've recognized the true ingenuity of that particular band. And others would just listen to those very same horribly overplayed singles. And this is where the music industry make kind of a turnaround. Back then, it's the less technically brilliant songs that became more popular. Now, Lady Gaga might not be the greatest artist in history, but from her album, she'll have the best, catchiest and most unique songs as her lead singles, and the rest might just be filler. I can't really speak for her in particular because I haven't really listened to her albums. But that's the case with some of the newer mainstream artists I've heard. If you listen to Theory Of A Deadman, "Santa Monica" is a really good song, but if you listen to the whole album, it is the best song ON that album. And the rest are kinda good, and oftentimes, not even. Whereas back in the day, if you look at Queen's "Sheer Heart Attack" album for example... Now, Queen is a consistently great band altogether. So I'm not denying that their lead single from that album, "Killer Queen" is an awesome song. But if you look at some of their less known songs, like Tenement Funster, Flick of the Wrist, and Lilly of the Valley which come together as one long, progressive suite, altogether it's 8 minutes of sheer brilliance. And Killer Queen pales in comparison to those three songs. But nobody I've ever spoken to has ever heard those songs before. And that's a damn shame. So even back then, even among the greatest bands, their best stuff did not get the recognition it deserved. And hey, maybe that's the case with the Beatles, too. I haven't extensively listened to the Beatles. I just heard their most popular songs, and they're not impressive. Maybe if I dug deeper and listened to their lesser known songs, I'd discover something brillaint... But that doesn't change the fact that what people wanted at the time, stuff that got radio play, and became imprinted into our culture as "timeless classics" wasn't even that great.
Ok, I'm going to try to make my point as clear as possible now.
In order to do that, first I must say this:
F*** what the masses think, then. I say both Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd are easily, easily better bands than Dream Theater. That variety you say Dream Theater has, Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd both have more. The only thing Dream Theater does better than LZ and PF is playing faster. Unpredictability matters not, because once you listen to their music at least once, they stop becoming so damn unpredictable, now don't they? Oh, and I want to love all of Dream Theaters music. It's just too bad that their slower/soft stuff Sucks (With a bold, capital S, mind you).
Ahhhh, now we are at a standstill. How do we decide which is the better band? Well, can one really say for sure which is the better band? Probably not. But for the sake and reason that we are even having this debate, we must amuse ourselves. But how do we do that? It's obvious we can't trust eachother's opinions. I mean, how the hell do I know YOU know what good music is, and vice-versa? Well, since we can't know, the absolute best alternative is to trust a professional critic (p.s. Get your head out of you as*. Critics don't have to do everything you want to be considered a professional. Has Roger Ebert ever made a movie? No. But not only is he a professional, everyone in the universe, except people you may have paid, would value his opinion on a movie incredibly more so then yours...Or mine too. And critics are paid for being critics because they, like I said, know what the f they are talking about.)
But I realize now that the only reason (Probably; please correct me if I'm wrong) you wouldn't want to trust a critic is because they don't agree with your outlook of Dream Theater being a better band than Led Zeppelin or Pink Floyd.
Well, boo hoo. You don't see my getting in a sour mood because Nine Inch Nails isn't considered a better band than all three of those (Because I'm pretty sure general rock enthusiasts think that Dream Theater is better than Nine Inch Nails).
Now, there is a second alternative to possibly determining which is the best band ever. And that is called, as I said before, popular mother f***ing opinion (i.e. The opinions of the many outweigh the opinions of the few). And I'm effing positive album sales dictate popular opinion.
Now, if you don't think those two method of determining which is the best band (For the sake of amusement, of course) to be justifiable methods, then I am sorry I wasted your time. If you can think of a better method, tell me.
~
Once again, show me your research, or else I call bullshi* on your Gaga point. But like I said, it's still not as impressive seeing as how the population of the world has nearly doubled since 1969.
~
And when did I ever say rock enthusiasts and critics DO have a voice in the world of pop music? I've only been saying Lady Gaga sucks as a dance enthusiast.
~
Don't brings movies in a music debate. I don't want to go through the process of determining which is the best movie ever, seeing as how it is a different process.
~
Actually, Pink Floyd is mostly known for Dark Side of the Moon, which does arguably feature their best work. Just sayin'.
~
I'm just gonna go out on a limb here and say that just like Mario games, you will never understand the preferred technical brilliance of simplicity; and that just because a song is longer, or maybe does more things with itself doesn't automatically make it better. |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2010 5:29 pm
|
|
|
|
Chase Me To The End Ok, I'm going to try to make my point as clear as possible now. In order to do that, first I must say this: F*** what the masses think, then. I say both Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd are easily, easily better bands than Dream Theater. That variety you say Dream Theater has, Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd both have more. The only thing Dream Theater does better than LZ and PF is playing faster. Unpredictability matters not, because once you listen to their music at least once, they stop becoming so damn unpredictable, now don't they? Oh, and I want to love all of Dream Theaters music. It's just too bad that their slower/soft stuff Sucks (With a bold, capital S, mind you).
Chase Me To The End Ahhhh, now we are at a standstill. How do we decide which is the better band? Well, can one really say for sure which is the better band? Probably not. But for the sake and reason that we are even having this debate, we must amuse ourselves. But how do we do that? It's obvious we can't trust eachother's opinions. I mean, how the hell do I know YOU know what good music is, and vice-versa? Well, since we can't know, the absolute best alternative is to trust a professional critic (p.s. Get your head out of you as*. Critics don't have to do everything you want to be considered a professional. Has Roger Ebert ever made a movie? No. But not only is he a professional, everyone in the universe, except people you may have paid, would value his opinion on a movie incredibly more so then yours...Or mine too. And critics are paid for being critics because they, like I said, know what the f they are talking about.)
I went to video game school, and I write reviews every once in a while, do I think it's something I deserve to get paid for? No.
Roger Ebert had his TV Show with Gene Siskel, and the reason it was so popular was because it was ENTERTAINING, not because it was oh so informative. And keep in mind that Siskel and Ebert often disagreed with each other, which is what made it so entertaining. So does that mean that Siskel was the inferior critic whose opinion doesn't matter compared to Roger Ebert? No, but still, they felt differently about a LOT of movies.
Either way, a critic might say how awesome Transformers was, and how Resident Evil: Extinction sucked, but you think I give a crap? No.
Just the same, we can talk about Pink Floyd and Dream Theater and constantly disagree, but here's the thing... I have my standards for what I think great music is, and Pink Floyd doesn't meet those standards. And yes, it's opinion. But it's also my opinion that I have better music tastes than most people. Just like it's your opinion that people today have crappy taste in music and that's why they like Lady Gaga and Nickelback.
And you wanna involve sales? How about the fact that the majority of people today either buy individual songs off iTunes, or download them illegally altogether. So of course nobody's gonna sell 300 million units in six years. Today's music sales are measured by how many people bought that one individual song off iTunes, and how many ringtones have been downloaded. It's a sad time for the music industry in general, but it easily justifies lack of sales. So sales don't mean s**t.
Chase Me To The End But I realize now that the only reason (Probably; please correct me if I'm wrong) you wouldn't want to trust a critic is because they don't agree with your outlook of Dream Theater being a better band than Led Zeppelin or Pink Floyd.Well, boo hoo. You don't see my getting in a sour mood because Nine Inch Nails isn't considered a better band than all three of those (Because I'm pretty sure general rock enthusiasts think that Dream Theater is better than Nine Inch Nails).
They might say something like, AC/DC is one of the best Hard Rock bands in history. But I disagree with that. And they might have their sales, they might have their professional critics, but why should that affect me?
Why should I be a tool and say, "Oh, well, I personally don't like them, but since they have such a large fanbase and sold so many albums, they must be the best"? That's bullshit. Once you like something less than something else, it's automatically not the best. Not in your eyes. So why are you being such a tool and listening to what OTHER people have to say?
It's not about Dream Theater. It's about YOU being too afraid to genuinely express your opinion unless it's something that you have hard proof the majority agrees with. If you don't like The Beatles, don't concur that they're the best.
Chase Me To The End Now, there is a second alternative to possibly determining which is the best band ever. And that is called, as I said before, popular mother f***ing opinion (i.e. The opinions of the many outweigh the opinions of the few). And I'm effing positive album sales dictate popular opinion.
Chase Me To The End Once again, show me your research, or else I call bullshi* on your Gaga point. But like I said, it's still not as impressive seeing as how the population of the world has nearly doubled since 1969.
And like I said, in this day and age, the majority doesn't "buy albums" anymore. They download the singles off iTunes, or illegally. That doesn't change the fact that Lady Gaga has a ridiculously large fanbase. Way bigger than the 50+ million people who bought the actual album.
Chase Me To The End And when did I ever say rock enthusiasts and critics DO have a voice in the world of pop music? I've only been saying Lady Gaga sucks as a dance enthusiast.
Chase Me To The End Actually, Pink Floyd is mostly known for Dark Side of the Moon, which does arguably feature their best work. Just sayin'.
Chase Me To The End I'm just gonna go out on a limb here and say that just like Mario games, you will never understand the preferred technical brilliance of simplicity; and that just because a song is longer, or maybe does more things with itself doesn't automatically make it better.
Everything about music is subjective. EVERYTHING. I believe that Dream Theater and Queen are two greatest bands in history. You might disagree and that's fine. But just because you got the majority of people agreeing with you, doesn't make THAT any more valid of an opinion. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2010 6:09 pm
|
|
|
|
Biohazard EXTREME Chase Me To The End Ok, I'm going to try to make my point as clear as possible now. In order to do that, first I must say this: F*** what the masses think, then. I say both Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd are easily, easily better bands than Dream Theater. That variety you say Dream Theater has, Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd both have more. The only thing Dream Theater does better than LZ and PF is playing faster. Unpredictability matters not, because once you listen to their music at least once, they stop becoming so damn unpredictable, now don't they? Oh, and I want to love all of Dream Theaters music. It's just too bad that their slower/soft stuff Sucks (With a bold, capital S, mind you). And then you say things like, "You of all people know I have better music tastes than most people," and expect me to agree. Chase Me To The End Ahhhh, now we are at a standstill. How do we decide which is the better band? Well, can one really say for sure which is the better band? Probably not. But for the sake and reason that we are even having this debate, we must amuse ourselves. But how do we do that? It's obvious we can't trust eachother's opinions. I mean, how the hell do I know YOU know what good music is, and vice-versa? Well, since we can't know, the absolute best alternative is to trust a professional critic (p.s. Get your head out of you as*. Critics don't have to do everything you want to be considered a professional. Has Roger Ebert ever made a movie? No. But not only is he a professional, everyone in the universe, except people you may have paid, would value his opinion on a movie incredibly more so then yours...Or mine too. And critics are paid for being critics because they, like I said, know what the f they are talking about.) Do they though? Critics get paid to comment on other peoples' hard work. I went to video game school, and I write reviews every once in a while, do I think it's something I deserve to get paid for? No. Roger Ebert had his TV Show with Gene Siskel, and the reason it was so popular was because it was ENTERTAINING, not because it was oh so informative. And keep in mind that Siskel and Ebert often disagreed with each other, which is what made it so entertaining. So does that mean that Siskel was the inferior critic whose opinion doesn't matter compared to Roger Ebert? No, but still, they felt differently about a LOT of movies. Either way, a critic might say how awesome Transformers was, and how Resident Evil: Extinction sucked, but you think I give a crap? No. Just the same, we can talk about Pink Floyd and Dream Theater and constantly disagree, but here's the thing... I have my standards for what I think great music is, and Pink Floyd doesn't meet those standards. And yes, it's opinion. But it's also my opinion that I have better music tastes than most people. Just like it's your opinion that people today have crappy taste in music and that's why they like Lady Gaga and Nickelback. And you wanna involve sales? How about the fact that the majority of people today either buy individual songs off iTunes, or download them illegally altogether. So of course nobody's gonna sell 300 million units in six years. Today's music sales are measured by how many people bought that one individual song off iTunes, and how many ringtones have been downloaded. It's a sad time for the music industry in general, but it easily justifies lack of sales. So sales don't mean s**t. Chase Me To The End But I realize now that the only reason (Probably; please correct me if I'm wrong) you wouldn't want to trust a critic is because they don't agree with your outlook of Dream Theater being a better band than Led Zeppelin or Pink Floyd.Well, boo hoo. You don't see my getting in a sour mood because Nine Inch Nails isn't considered a better band than all three of those (Because I'm pretty sure general rock enthusiasts think that Dream Theater is better than Nine Inch Nails). It's not about critics disagreeing with ME. It's about ME disagreeing with THEM. They might say something like, AC/DC is one of the best Hard Rock bands in history. But I disagree with that. And they might have their sales, they might have their professional critics, but why should that affect me? Why should I be a tool and say, "Oh, well, I personally don't like them, but since they have such a large fanbase and sold so many albums, they must be the best"? That's bullshit. Once you like something less than something else, it's automatically not the best. Not in your eyes. So why are you being such a tool and listening to what OTHER people have to say? It's not about Dream Theater. It's about YOU being too afraid to genuinely express your opinion unless it's something that you have hard proof the majority agrees with. If you don't like The Beatles, don't concur that they're the best. Chase Me To The End Now, there is a second alternative to possibly determining which is the best band ever. And that is called, as I said before, popular mother f***ing opinion (i.e. The opinions of the many outweigh the opinions of the few). And I'm effing positive album sales dictate popular opinion. And like I said, you're just concuring with the popular opinion, not willing to use your own damn brain cells to form an OPINION. Chase Me To The End Once again, show me your research, or else I call bullshi* on your Gaga point. But like I said, it's still not as impressive seeing as how the population of the world has nearly doubled since 1969. It's called Wikipedia. Look it up. And like I said, in this day and age, the majority doesn't "buy albums" anymore. They download the singles off iTunes, or illegally. That doesn't change the fact that Lady Gaga has a ridiculously large fanbase. Way bigger than the 50+ million people who bought the actual album. Chase Me To The End And when did I ever say rock enthusiasts and critics DO have a voice in the world of pop music? I've only been saying Lady Gaga sucks as a dance enthusiast. Lady Gaga's music is still better than pretty much any other Dance music being made today. I don't really like her, but there's no denying that she's far from generic. Chase Me To The End Actually, Pink Floyd is mostly known for Dark Side of the Moon, which does arguably feature their best work. Just sayin'. By Pink Floyd fans, maybe. But you ask any person of the current generation who isn't a Rock fan, and they'll be like, "Who's Pink Floyd" and then you mention, "We don't need no education" and they'll be like, "Oh yeah! That song! It's awesome." They made a freakin movie based on The Wall, so if that's not hardcore promotion, I don't know what is. Chase Me To The End I'm just gonna go out on a limb here and say that just like Mario games, you will never understand the preferred technical brilliance of simplicity; and that just because a song is longer, or maybe does more things with itself doesn't automatically make it better. Maybe not, but in the case of Dream Theater it does. A Change Of Seasons is probably one of the greatest Rock/Metal songs created in history. It might only be my opinion, but I firmly believe in it, and I'm not gonna be a tool and say, "Well, it doesn't get that much recognition, so it's not that great." Everything about music is subjective. EVERYTHING. I believe that Dream Theater and Queen are two greatest bands in history. You might disagree and that's fine. But just because you got the majority of people agreeing with you, doesn't make THAT any more valid of an opinion.
Lol. This one was a funny one. I'll be back with a full response whenever.
"And like I said, you're just concuring with the popular opinion, not willing to use your own damn brain cells to form an OPINION."
I already expressed my opinion that LZ and PF are better bands than DT. I'm just using professional critics opinion's and popular opinion to back it up, not concur with it. Way to use those damn brain cells to figure that one out. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2010 8:12 pm
|
|
|
|
Well, that's what you say. But you still told me that you don't like the Beatles, but they're the best for selling so many albums. That's concurring with the majority, even if deep down inside you disagree with it. And for what? So that the millions of Beatlemaniacs won't get all offended and start throwing a fit at you?
And even if you use those stats to "Back it up" you're still ignoring the fact that you yourself said that the MAJORITY of people have inferior tastes in music. But if the majority is always right, then wouldn't YOU have the worse tastes in music?
So I could just as easily say, "My tastes in music are simply more sophisticated than the majority who prefer Pink Floyd to Dream Theater."
And then you're gonna call me an elitist a**, but it's a statement not too far from your own. I know plenty of Lady Gaga fans who, if you said, "Today's music like Lady Gaga sucks. People just have bad taste in music," would call YOU an elitist a**. And I mean, sure, I happen to agree with you on that one aspect, but I don't need your approval on it, as I'm sure you don't need mine.
So then why should I need the approval of those many people when I say, "Dream Theater is better than any Classic Rock band."? It might be opinion, but it's as much of an opinion as the opposite. And who that opinion belongs to doesn't really matter. It could be the Rolling Stones Magazine, it could be millions of fans, it could be Mike Portnoy himself. There's a reason why I like Dream Theater and not so much Pink Floyd, and it's not because they play faster. It's because their music is more complex and more interesting, much like classical music, only with modern instruments. Metal in general is the closest thing we have to classical music and opera right now based on how it's typically structured, and the levels of epicness it reaches. So based on that fact alone, I'd consider Metal as a genre to be better than Classic Rock.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2010 8:32 pm
|
|
|
|
Alrighty then.
"And then you say things like, "You of all people know I have better music tastes than most people," and expect me to agree."
Hmm.
Let me just point this out. I love Nine Inch Nails. I love Led Zeppelin. I love Pink Floyd. And even though I called it out on it's flaws, I love Dream Theater. But hey, I'll admit that NIN, LZ, and PF has it's flaws too. But your love of Dream Theater is so ridiculously biased (And I quote, "Their music has some of the most brilliant compositions I've heard in the 20th and 21st century. And that's just how it's written. I won't even mention how they PLAY it. I'm sorry, but musically, DT is better than any Rock & Roll band you can name."), how the hell am I supposed to agree with, let alone take anything you say seriously?
And what I find especially funny about your statement is that I have pointed out time and time again that since I have the tastes of the masses of the 1960s and 1970s, which not only you said was better than today's masses and their tastes, but is also a very small collective compared to today's masses, that yes, I do have better tastes than most people, and yes, you should agree with me. Lol.
~
"Do they though? Critics get paid to comment on other peoples' hard work.
I went to video game school, and I write reviews every once in a while, do I think it's something I deserve to get paid for? No.
Roger Ebert had his TV Show with Gene Siskel, and the reason it was so popular was because it was ENTERTAINING, not because it was oh so informative. And keep in mind that Siskel and Ebert often disagreed with each other, which is what made it so entertaining. So does that mean that Siskel was the inferior critic whose opinion doesn't matter compared to Roger Ebert? No, but still, they felt differently about a LOT of movies.
Either way, a critic might say how awesome Transformers was, and how Resident Evil: Extinction sucked, but you think I give a crap? No."
Well, when two professional critics disagree with eachother, then you have to go with the popular professioanl critics opinion to find out which one is "right" in the sense of "The opinions of the many outweigh the opinions of the few". Jeez, Bio, I'd thought you could figure this one out by yourself.
~
"And you wanna involve sales? How about the fact that the majority of people today either buy individual songs off iTunes, or download them illegally altogether. So of course nobody's gonna sell 300 million units in six years. Today's music sales are measured by how many people bought that one individual song off iTunes, and how many ringtones have been downloaded. It's a sad time for the music industry in general, but it easily justifies lack of sales. So sales don't mean s**t."
Hey man, you know what single songs bought on iTunes are called? Singles. And those were sold in the days of The Beatles too. So both are equally counted.
Counter the fact that people steal music with the fact, as I said before, that the world has nearly doubled in population since 1969, and the amount of album sales sold and silmultaneously pirated still isn't that damn impressive.
~
"It's not about critics disagreeing with ME. It's about ME disagreeing with THEM.
They might say something like, AC/DC is one of the best Hard Rock bands in history. But I disagree with that. And they might have their sales, they might have their professional critics, but why should that affect me?
Why should I be a tool and say, "Oh, well, I personally don't like them, but since they have such a large fanbase and sold so many albums, they must be the best"? That's bullshit. Once you like something less than something else, it's automatically not the best. Not in your eyes. So why are you being such a tool and listening to what OTHER people have to say?
It's not about Dream Theater. It's about YOU being too afraid to genuinely express your opinion unless it's something that you have hard proof the majority agrees with. If you don't like The Beatles, don't concur that they're the best."
Because I'm not being a tool, I'm being logical. Or if being logical is considered being a tool, I rather be that than an idjit.
I agreed before that determining which is the best band of all time IS subjective, but for effing amusements sake, the only LOGICAL way to determe which band is the best between debaters such as us is through professional critics popular opinion and just general popular opinion. Does it mean it's necessarily right? No, because of subjectivity, of course. But dammit, it's logical. I don't have to be afraid of jack shi*, seeing as how Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd ARE considered two of the best bands of all time.
Like I said before, if you don't agree with those two methods being justifiable methods, I am sorry and I ask of thee to give me a more logical method.
~
"It's called Wikipedia. Look it up.
And like I said, in this day and age, the majority doesn't "buy albums" anymore. They download the singles off iTunes, or illegally. That doesn't change the fact that Lady Gaga has a ridiculously large fanbase. Way bigger than the 50+ million people who bought the actual album."
50 million+ people who bought the actual album? Bio, Wikipedia says her first album only sold over 10 million...
Bwahahaha, thanks for the laugh.
And refer to my population point to stuff you mouth about the pirating aspect.
~
"Lady Gaga's music is still better than pretty much any other Dance music being made today. I don't really like her, but there's no denying that she's far from generic."
...
~
"By Pink Floyd fans, maybe. But you ask any person of the current generation who isn't a Rock fan, and they'll be like, "Who's Pink Floyd" and then you mention, "We don't need no education" and they'll be like, "Oh yeah! That song! It's awesome." They made a freakin movie based on The Wall, so if that's not hardcore promotion, I don't know what is."
Bio, just because they made a movie for The Wall doesn't mean the album is more well known than Dark Side of the Moon.
~
"Maybe not, but in the case of Dream Theater it does. A Change Of Seasons is probably one of the greatest Rock/Metal songs created in history. It might only be my opinion, but I firmly believe in it, and I'm not gonna be a tool and say, "Well, it doesn't get that much recognition, so it's not that great."
Subjectively, yes, just because a song isn't popular doesn't mean it's not good. Sadly, though, thats not how it works in the realm I laid out in logic for amusement's sake. And when I say for amusement's sake, I mean STOP TAKING IT SO GOD DAMN TO HEART...God damn.
~
"But just because you got the majority of people agreeing with you, doesn't make THAT any more valid of an opinion."
Lmao. How many more times do I have to frikkin' repeat myself. The opinions of the many outweigh the opinions of the few. If that doesn't make a statement more valid in the long run, then I don't know what does!
EDIT: I'm going to not respond to your last comment because a lot of what I say here responds to it adequately.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2010 10:14 pm
|
|
|
|
Chase Me To The End Let me just point this out. I love Nine Inch Nails. I love Led Zeppelin. I love Pink Floyd. And even though I called it out on it's flaws, I love Dream Theater. But hey, I'll admit that NIN, LZ, and PF has it's flaws too. But your love of Dream Theater is so ridiculously biased (And I quote, "Their music has some of the most brilliant compositions I've heard in the 20th and 21st century. And that's just how it's written. I won't even mention how they PLAY it. I'm sorry, but musically, DT is better than any Rock & Roll band you can name."), how the hell am I supposed to agree with, let alone take anything you say seriously?
And their Falling Into Infinity album I would call a great Progressive Hard Rock album, but it's not brilliant. When I talk about how brilliant they are, I'm talking about albums like Images and Words (which you don't seem to like), Scenes From A Memory and Systematic Chaos. And songs like A Change of Seasons, The Glass Prison and The Count of Tuscany.
Chase Me To The End And what I find especially funny about your statement is that I have pointed out time and time again that since I have the tastes of the masses of the 1960s and 1970s, which not only you said was better than today's masses and their tastes, but is also a very small collective compared to today's masses, that yes, I do have better tastes than most people, and yes, you should agree with me. Lol.
Well, maybe that's just Canada... Nevertheless, they're out there.
Chase Me To The End Well, when two professional critics disagree with eachother, then you have to go with the popular professioanl critics opinion to find out which one is "right" in the sense of "The opinions of the many outweigh the opinions of the few". Jeez, Bio, I'd thought you could figure this one out by yourself.
Chase Me To The End Hey man, you know what single songs bought on iTunes are called? Singles. And those were sold in the days of The Beatles too. So both are equally counted.
Chase Me To The End Counter the fact that people steal music with the fact, as I said before, that the world has nearly doubled in population since 1969, and the amount of album sales sold and silmultaneously pirated still isn't that damn impressive.
Chase Me To The End Because I'm not being a tool, I'm being logical. Or if being logical is considered being a tool, I rather be that than an idjit.
Being Successful and being The Best are NOT one and the same. They do not correlate with one another.
Hell, even the critics, when they talk about the Beatels albums will say things like, "This is the most important album, because of how it changed the genre" etc. etc. etc., not, "This album is musically the most brilliant we've ever heard."
That's what success amounts to. The relevance in society, and the relevance to the times. Not musical ability, or creativity. Socially relevant music CAN be brilliant, but that's not why people buy it. They buy it because that's what they need to relate to at that given era in history.
I don't think Lady Gaga is that great of an artist, but I'll tell you one thing, she's far from generic. She's definitely got her own style, unique image, and unique sound. And I honestly think that's why she's so successful, because people needed the change from the typical Pop, Rap and R&B stuff that's been sounding the same since the beginning of the century. It's probably also why Autotune has become such a populat effect to use in modern music, despite how stupid of a tool it may be.
Chase Me To The End I agreed before that determining which is the best band of all time IS subjective, but for effing amusements sake, the only LOGICAL way to determe which band is the best between debaters such as us is through professional critics popular opinion and just general popular opinion. Does it mean it's necessarily right? No, because of subjectivity, of course. But dammit, it's logical. I don't have to be afraid of jack shi*, seeing as how Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd ARE considered two of the best bands of all time.
In fact, I'm not gonna deny the fact that Pink Floyd is highly acclaimed, but I have NEVER heard anyone refer to them as one of the two best bands of all time, aside from you, of course.
Chase Me To The End Like I said before, if you don't agree with those two methods being justifiable methods, I am sorry and I ask of thee to give me a more logical method.
I'll tell you an interesting fact. Some of my favorite Dream Theater songs are the ones that had to grow on me. Songs like Home, I wasn't too crazy about it at first. It actually took listening to it a good amount of times, before I started picking out those intricacies that made the song so awesome. And now it's one of my favorites. Why? Because little by little, my ears analyzed the finer parts of it, the way the guitar transitions from the verse to the chorus. The power of the riffs.
And this is true for several DT songs. It's the ones that take a while to fully appreciate, that I end up appreciating that much more in the end.
Chase Me To The End 50 million+ people who bought the actual album? Bio, Wikipedia says her first album only sold over 10 million... Bwahahaha, thanks for the laugh.
That still doesn't prove your point. Because you youself just said, "Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd are considered two of the greatest bands of all time," but according to sales, Beatles and Queen are the top 2 best selling bands of all time.
So even if you disagree with the fact that Dream Theater is as great as I say they are, my second favorite band is still Queen, and look! I got sales to prove that Queen is better than Pink Floyd OR Led Zeppelin! Now I'm playing by YOUR rules.
Don't get me wrong. Dance music in general sucks. The stuff from the 90's at least had some cool melodies and even then, I'm mainly referring to Ace of Base, Boney-M and stuff like that.
But today's dance music is s**t.
Chase Me To The End Bio, just because they made a movie for The Wall doesn't mean the album is more well known than Dark Side of the Moon.
Chase Me To The End Subjectively, yes, just because a song isn't popular doesn't mean it's not good. Sadly, though, thats not how it works in the realm I laid out in logic for amusement's sake. And when I say for amusement's sake, I mean STOP TAKING IT SO GOD DAMN TO HEART...God damn.
As much as I love movies, as much as I love Video Games. I think it's music that helps me get through day to day life more than anything else. If some a*****e... Umm... Deity, I guess... Told me that for the rest of my life I can either have movies, music or games, I'd choose music.
It's funny you should say, "Stop taking it to heart" since that's exactly what you're supposed to do with music. It's supposed to reach your heart.
One of my best friends, he doesn't listen to music. He's got plenty of music on his iPod, but it's pretty much just "background" for him, while he does OTHER stuff. And when I told him, "You just gotta sit down and listen to music sometimes, and absorb it," and he didn't want to... You better believe it pissed me off.
Chase Me To The End Lmao. How many more times to have to frikkin' repeat myself. The opinions of the many outweigh the opinions of the few. If that doesn't make a statement more valid in the long run, then I don't know what does!
And like you said, The Beatles sold 300 million records 6 years after they came out. Now, that was in the 60's, and MOST of those people were probably hippies and big stoners. Afterall, we all know what "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds" is actually talking about. So, am I supposed to value the opinions of a bunch of junkies that much? Screw that. You know who else liked the Beatles? Charles Manson. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2010 10:56 pm
|
|
|
|
"Well, I'm sorry if I believe that statement. If you disagree, then that's fine. And no, it's not ridiculously biased. It's my honest opinion. I never said DT didn't have flaws. When I talk about how awesome their music is, I do mean the best OF their music. Quite frankly, I was very disappointed with "Awake". It had like 3 or 4 great songs on it, and the rest were filler. Stuff like Innocence Faded, Caught in a Web and Scarred... Well, I don't like them.
And their Falling Into Infinity album I would call a great Progressive Hard Rock album, but it's not brilliant. When I talk about how brilliant they are, I'm talking about albums like Images and Words (which you don't seem to like), Scenes From A Memory and Systematic Chaos. And songs like A Change of Seasons, The Glass Prison and The Count of Tuscany."
Well, I'm glad you admit that even Dream Theater has its flaws, because you were really coming off as this person saying that they were perfection defined, or something along the line of that.
~
"It's not a very small collective. It's a relatively decent collective. A minority of our generation, maybe, but still big enough that, if you put on "Thunderstruck" by AC/DC in a single classrom in a high school, you'll still get at least 5 people in that class of 20, who'll go, "Yeah!"
Well, maybe that's just Canada... Nevertheless, they're out there."
I don't doubt that the majority of today's masses do know of, well, the majority of famous classic rock songs. I'm just saying that the majority of today's masses don't listen to 'em, at least not nearly as much as Lady Gaga or Nickleback and such, if at all.
~
"Are you kidding me!? The opinions of many outweigh the opinions of the few? Dude... I don't even know what to say to that... You know, black people are a minority, and before Rosa Parks, the "Majority opinion" was that all black people should sit at the back of the bus and drink from separate water fountains... But hey, I guess they were right because they were in a majority at the time."
It's just a common and upheld principle, that's all.
~
"Except when I say singles on iTunes, I don't mean CD singles, or whatever. I mean one song. You got someone who likes "Poker Face" by Lady Gaga. They're gonna click on the ALBUM, and choose to download ONE song, being Poker face. That doesn't count as a "Single" sold, nor does it count as an "Album" sold. It's gonna count as one song. And to be honest, I'm not exactly sure where I can find the statistics for stuff like that. Considering that iTunes isn't the only site out there to provide paid downloads, it's probably impossible to find out exactly. But you still have to account for that."
And you still have to account for the population factor. Seeing as how we both don't know how to accommodate both factors into the situation, I think we should drop this aspect all together.
~
"You have these statistics, of how many people pirated instead of buying Lady Gaga's albums and individual songs?"
No. Do you? If so, show me. If not, I guess this point is null and void.
~
"That's not logic, dude. That's being a tool. And I hate to use this term, but that's being a blind conformist.
Being Successful and being The Best are NOT one and the same. They do not correlate with one another.
Hell, even the critics, when they talk about the Beatels albums will say things like, "This is the most important album, because of how it changed the genre" etc. etc. etc., not, "This album is musically the most brilliant we've ever heard."
That's what success amounts to. The relevance in society, and the relevance to the times. Not musical ability, or creativity. Socially relevant music CAN be brilliant, but that's not why people buy it. They buy it because that's what they need to relate to at that given era in history.
I don't think Lady Gaga is that great of an artist, but I'll tell you one thing, she's far from generic. She's definitely got her own style, unique image, and unique sound. And I honestly think that's why she's so successful, because people needed the change from the typical Pop, Rap and R&B stuff that's been sounding the same since the beginning of the century. It's probably also why Autotune has become such a populat effect to use in modern music, despite how stupid of a tool it may be."
Yes, it's logic. For situations of amusement only, though, which this has been.
~
"Really? Well, most Beatlemaniacs will disagree with you. And The Beatles ARE the best selling band of all time. Elvis being the best selling Solo Artist. And Queen is still above Pink Floyd or Led Zeppelin.
In fact, I'm not gonna deny the fact that Pink Floyd is highly acclaimed, but I have NEVER heard anyone refer to them as one of the two best bands of all time, aside from you, of course."
I never said Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd were the two best bands of all time. I said they were two OF THE best bands of all time. That means they are included with the best.
~
"Like I said. It's about examining the music itself. Seeing how they play their instruments, how the instruments sound together. Whether anything clashes. How the composition is written, how it's arranged.
I'll tell you an interesting fact. Some of my favorite Dream Theater songs are the ones that had to grow on me. Songs like Home, I wasn't too crazy about it at first. It actually took listening to it a good amount of times, before I started picking out those intricacies that made the song so awesome. And now it's one of my favorites. Why? Because little by little, my ears analyzed the finer parts of it, the way the guitar transitions from the verse to the chorus. The power of the riffs.
And this is true for several DT songs. It's the ones that take a while to fully appreciate, that I end up appreciating that much more in the end."
That's just like me with Nine Inch Nails. A lot of their music I didn't like at first, but once I noticed how intricate they were as well, I come to fully appreciate them more, just like you with Dream Theater.
~
"Well, then the facts don't really add up. Cause I thought all those Platinum, 2x Platinum, 4x Platinum from all those countries added up to 1 million units sold per each "Platinum". Guess I'm wrong.
That still doesn't prove your point. Because you youself just said, "Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd are considered two of the greatest bands of all time," but according to sales, Beatles and Queen are the top 2 best selling bands of all time.
So even if you disagree with the fact that Dream Theater is as great as I say they are, my second favorite band is still Queen, and look! I got sales to prove that Queen is better than Pink Floyd OR Led Zeppelin! Now I'm playing by YOUR rules."
I thought about that myself. So I went and did some further research and found out that the amount of records needed to be sold to get a Platinum award varies for different countries around the globe. It was just a simple misinterpretation on your part, so I won't give you flak for it.
Hey, I am totally ecstatic that Queen is considered so highly! I love Queen myself, and would consider them somewhere in my top 10 favorite bands of all time, so more power to 'em! Haha, did I crush your hope of crushing me?
~
"Don't get me wrong. Dance music in general sucks. The stuff from the 90's at least had some cool melodies and even then, I'm mainly referring to Ace of Base, Boney-M and stuff like that.
But today's dance music is s**t."
Well, I'm not gonna boast about dance music, and say you're missing out or something. But...Just to say, acts like Justice and Deadmau5 is where today's dance music is at. If you know 'em and think they suck, oh well...
~
"Dude, it's music we're talking about.
As much as I love movies, as much as I love Video Games. I think it's music that helps me get through day to day life more than anything else. If some a*****e... Umm... Deity, I guess... Told me that for the rest of my life I can either have movies, music or games, I'd choose music.
It's funny you should say, "Stop taking it to heart" since that's exactly what you're supposed to do with music. It's supposed to reach your heart.
One of my best friends, he doesn't listen to music. He's got plenty of music on his iPod, but it's pretty much just "background" for him, while he does OTHER stuff. And when I told him, "You just gotta sit down and listen to music sometimes, and absorb it," and he didn't want to... You better believe it pissed me off."
Well, I'm sorry you took it too much to heart. I'd just figure that this was one of those debates in which no matter what we tried to convince eachother of, it didn't matter, because we still had the music we loved to listen to afterwords still.
~
"And like you said, The Beatles sold 300 million records 6 years after they came out. Now, that was in the 60's, and MOST of those people were probably hippies and big stoners. Afterall, we all know what "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds" is actually talking about. So, am I supposed to value the opinions of a bunch of junkies that much? Screw that. You know who else liked the Beatles? Charles Manson."
This cracks me up. You know who like the Beatles? Charles Manson. It's like saying, "When you drive alone, you ride with Hitler. Join a carpool." Funny shi*.
~
Ok, I'm pretty sure this is the end of the debate and what not, so...
We come out of it as usual, agreeing to disagree lol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2010 1:30 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2010 6:37 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
