Blazin' Squad - The worst 'musical' act of today?

[shanks]

Shanks speaks the truth! Except maybe...


I disagree, they just experimented with much different sounds on Amnesiac and Kid A, which a lot of people disliked. Problem with making brilliant albums like OK Computer, how do you consistently follow them up? I think they've started to move back to the guitar style of OK computer in hail to the theif, but havn't totally left all the new ideas totally behind, and as such, a lot of people only really appreciate half of the album.

I have not listened that much to radiohead after OK computer, found the singles dull so have'nt bothered. Your right about OK computer being a hard album to top. Think ill check the latest out when I have time and money for it.

 

[shanks]

They are the best british rock band, and have been since Origin of Symmetry. They may be FotM slightly, but then again, they're FotM every time they bring an album out, which must tell you something.

Yes, cus clearly sales = musical talent. How silly of me to disagree.




uke:

 

[Deadmanwalking]

Edit button is your friend.

Oh and Hi maxi.

 

[Bodhi]

Yes, cus clearly sales = musical talent. How silly of me to disagree.




uke:

Er, where did I once say that Muse rocked cos of the amount of records they had sold? Read a person's post before replying to it, fuckwit.

I still find it curious you seem to think Muse are incapable of reproducing live what they do on a CD - any live tracks I have heard of theirs sounded much like the CD version - only louder, more abrasive, more visceral. Like proper live rock music should.

 

[Scooba da Bass]

I want em to be able to play what I hear on the cd live. Which muse is by far not able to do once all the layers of production are lifted. And who said I want them to play exactly in the order of the cd which you make it sound like I was meaning. Live, there's sloppy playing(on easy ass riffs I might add), untight drumming and that damn "I breath out my lyrics" vocal style just totally put's me off. Just goes to show what production and a catchy video on tv can do. Muse are and probably will remain a bad overenergetic radiohead copy with a nasal singer. That's my opinion, live with it.

And if you walk out on a band just because they sound just like the cd, shouldnt that make you wonder how the cd sounds in the first place? If the material is a total drag and the songs are bland chances are they will do the same live or try and hide it by running around like a mad man and calling it passion or rawness or whatever you wanna call it. Passion is nothing without preciscion. I wont accuse Muse of being unenergetic live, there not, there just uninteresting and unfocused.

Heh, remember what I first said about Muse in my first comment, that I would not go into detail about it. Well here you have the reason, all the mtv watching UK folks would directly come to there defense with more or less thought thru comments. Lets just face it, there just filling the void after radiohead whilst above mentioned are making more and more experimental records. And on that note im done on this subject in this thread. Happy bashing kiddos!

You are so wrong it's painful.

Live shows are not about a sterile performance of a cd in a live setting. Nor about a drummer banging out a 3/4 rhythm beat perfectly. A live show should be a different reinterpretation of a song that has been recorded and produced in a studio. Both have the same starting point, but should end up very different, otherwise there is absolutely no point being there.

You seem to equate musical precision with musical talent, when frankly it is nothing but a bonus. Do you imagine that Hendrix would be generally recognised as one of the most talented guitarists to have ever lived if he came out on stage and played Castles made of Sand exactly 2:45 every time?

Remember this; Precision is nothing without passion, otherwise you end up with wankers like Dream Theatre or Malmsteen.

 

[Damini]

And if you walk out on a band just because they sound just like the cd, shouldnt that make you wonder how the cd sounds in the first place? If the material is a total drag and the songs are bland chances are they will do the same live or try and hide it by running around like a mad man and calling it passion or rawness or whatever you wanna call it. Passion is nothing without preciscion. I wont accuse Muse of being unenergetic live, there not, there just uninteresting and unfocused.

If I see a band live, I want something to differentiate it from a pre-recorded set. I want some rawness, some energy, some sense of it existing in the moment. Smashing Pumpkins walked on stage, played, walked off. No interaction, no hello, no deviation, not even introducing songs. It sounded identical, note for note, lyric for lyric, to album material, which certainly illustrates the quality of their musicianship, but not the quality of their showmanship. You can get away with hiccups and flaws in a live set, you can't get away with a lack of conviction, it taints everything lack lustre.

All, of course, IMO.

 

[shanks]

You seem to equate musical precision with musical talent, when frankly it is nothing but a bonus. Do you imagine that Hendrix would be generally recognised as one of the most talented guitarists to have ever lived if he came out on stage and played Castles made of Sand exactly 2:45 every time?

Your actually comparing Muse with what Hendrix did live?

Hail to the art of improvisation but...

And no need to call me fuckwit just because I recognize the fact that they make highly commercial music Bodhi. That's neither my fault nor untrue. What I meant by that comment is that clearly not everything that sells good/has alot of fans at the time is infact good music. I mean just watch a chart and tell me how much is there for the music and how many of the bands are there because of image or whatever outside factor. It can be exposure, like all these tv-docusoaps(dunno if anyone outside sweden uses that phrase) where you essemble popgroups and you get to follow it from the start on tv, they assemble a few pretty faces, release a album, sell decent then vanish.
It can also be shock factor, like a certain artist called Marilyn Manson who is a great example of a smart man being able to use the media very well to keep himself exposed thus selling records of his pretty simplistic music, although it works better in the american religious right regions then say Europe. Earlier mentioned slipknot is another example of shock value.

Im not saying that Muse is out whoreing themselves to the media, im just saying that the methode of measuring music by fans often does'nt apply. And seeing as the general public is only being exposed to the most labelendorced music it's no wonder that some bands gain alot of popularity since there's simply no other labelendorced alternative (it's generally bands from the same labels that get playtime on MTV and commercial radio, atleast that's how it's with the radio here in Sweden, dont know about UK radiostations, making the competition for certain kind of bands very small). Like I said earlier I think that muse merely are filling the radiohead "void", nothing revolutionary or unique about there music except maybe the vocals which I already mentioned doesn't find me well. That is a matter of opinion though.

One thing to keep in mind is though that music lies in the eye(or rather ear?) of the beholder, what you think is wonderful the next person might find horrible. What the next person thinks bares absolutely no importance to what you like, no need to get worked up about it. Glad I can express my opinion on the matter atleast.

Heh, noticed when I read thru some of my posts and the response that I got I came of as a pretty technic focused guy. I guess it's partly true, been looking for inspiration for my drumming lately so have been listening to alot of bands just for technicality. And like Scoobda said, I agree that it can go overboard sometimes, as in the case of Dream Theater. And Yngwie only did one good album until his ego swelled to such proportions that he now spends his days harassing airplane travelers and scaring japanese people with his f%#&ing fury! as he so elegantly puts it. It's a balance between being able to make it enjoyable for the listener and personally I like to go "wow, how did he do that?" and go home and try it myself. Guess that's not for everyone but atleast you know how my point of view looks.

Wonder if I can keep myself from writing again, as I said I was going to stop last time, had to respond to the flame though. See ya next year.

 

[Scooba da Bass]

Im not saying that Muse is out whoreing themselves to the media, im just saying that the methode of measuring music by fans often does'nt apply. And seeing as the general public is only being exposed to the most labelendorced music it's no wonder that some bands gain alot of popularity since there's simply no other labelendorced alternative (it's generally bands from the same labels that get playtime on MTV and commercial radio, atleast that's how it's with the radio here in Sweden, dont know about UK radiostations, making the competition for certain kind of bands very small).

How is that a criticism of the band though?

There's a very large difference between making commercial music (bands sold on image) and making music that has commercial success. Muse are handled by Mushroom Records in the UK, an offshoot of an Australian independent label and by Maverick in the US, again another independent label, hardly the bastions of commerciality as you've painted them.

It's really sad that there's this instant backlash against any band that gains any kind of commercial success from those that consider their music 'underground'

What's worse is that I'm not even a big Muse fan, yet the claims you are throwing their way demonstrate a lack of understanding about the way the industry as a whole works.

 

[Clown]

DJ THE APOLLO CREED! As underground as they get!

 

[shanks]

It's actually East/West Recordings that handle them, a part of the not so small and comfy family company called Warner Music UK, which is a part of Time Warner which have the following divisions: CNN, AOL, Warner Bros and HBO. They basically share label with Madonna, The Darkness, Missy Elliot, R.E.M. and David Gray to name a few.

But I ofcourse have no idea of how the music industry works. Im just a sad missinformed fool bashing bands cus they sell records. Right?

http://www.eastwest.co.uk/

 

[Scooba da Bass]

It's actually East/West Recordings that handle them, a part of the not so small and comfy family company called Warner Music UK, which is a part of Time Warner which have the following divisions: CNN, AOL, Warner Bros and HBO. They basically share label with Madonna, The Darkness, Missy Elliot, R.E.M. and David Gray to name a few.

But I ofcourse have no idea of how the music industry works. Im just a sad missinformed fool bashing bands cus they sell records. Right?

East/West took over for Absolution after Mushroom pulled back to Australia.

Again though, how is ending up on a feeder label a criticism of a band? Something you've still not addressed.

 

[Bodhi]

Your actually comparing Muse with what Hendrix did live?

Hail to the art of improvisation but...

And no need to call me fuckwit just because I recognize the fact that they make highly commercial music Bodhi. That's neither my fault nor untrue. What I meant by that comment is that clearly not everything that sells good/has alot of fans at the time is infact good music. I mean just watch a chart and tell me how much is there for the music and how many of the bands are there because of image or whatever outside factor. It can be exposure, like all these tv-docusoaps(dunno if anyone outside sweden uses that phrase) where you essemble popgroups and you get to follow it from the start on tv, they assemble a few pretty faces, release a album, sell decent then vanish.
It can also be shock factor, like a certain artist called Marilyn Manson who is a great example of a smart man being able to use the media very well to keep himself exposed thus selling records of his pretty simplistic music, although it works better in the american religious right regions then say Europe. Earlier mentioned slipknot is another example of shock value.

Im not saying that Muse is out whoreing themselves to the media, im just saying that the methode of measuring music by fans often does'nt apply. And seeing as the general public is only being exposed to the most labelendorced music it's no wonder that some bands gain alot of popularity since there's simply no other labelendorced alternative (it's generally bands from the same labels that get playtime on MTV and commercial radio, atleast that's how it's with the radio here in Sweden, dont know about UK radiostations, making the competition for certain kind of bands very small). Like I said earlier I think that muse merely are filling the radiohead "void", nothing revolutionary or unique about there music except maybe the vocals which I already mentioned doesn't find me well. That is a matter of opinion though.

One thing to keep in mind is though that music lies in the eye(or rather ear?) of the beholder, what you think is wonderful the next person might find horrible. What the next person thinks bares absolutely no importance to what you like, no need to get worked up about it. Glad I can express my opinion on the matter atleast.

Heh, noticed when I read thru some of my posts and the response that I got I came of as a pretty technic focused guy. I guess it's partly true, been looking for inspiration for my drumming lately so have been listening to alot of bands just for technicality. And like Scoobda said, I agree that it can go overboard sometimes, as in the case of Dream Theater. And Yngwie only did one good album until his ego swelled to such proportions that he now spends his days harassing airplane travelers and scaring japanese people with his f%#&ing fury! as he so elegantly puts it. It's a balance between being able to make it enjoyable for the listener and personally I like to go "wow, how did he do that?" and go home and try it myself. Guess that's not for everyone but atleast you know how my point of view looks.

Wonder if I can keep myself from writing again, as I said I was going to stop last time, had to respond to the flame though. See ya next year.

A very eloquent post, however you are still misguided. I never said they were good cos the sold loads of albums and were on a major label. I said they were good because they create a buzz every time they bring something out, normally because its awesome (of course I am in no way biased). Hence me calling you a fuckwit for not being able to read. Which you clearly still can't do.

 

[Meatballs]

They are the best british rock band, and have been since Origin of Symmetry. They may be FotM slightly, but then again, they're FotM every time they bring an album out, which must tell you something.

Pfft showbiz > symmetry!

 

[maxi]

I'm maxi you tard.

anyway

The Red Hot Chilli Peppers are FUCKING terrible. They are musicians see, not like The Fats Food Rockers or anything, I can ignore that shit, but RHCP have delusions of talent, its sad.

 

[stubbyrulz]

basist is good in rhcp

 

[Aoami]

I'm maxi you tard.

anyway

The Red Hot Chilli Peppers are FUCKING terrible. They are musicians see, not like The Fats Food Rockers or anything, I can ignore that shit, but RHCP have delusions of talent, its sad.

Nah. RHCP are a fantastic band. All 3 of the musicians can play their instruments very well, Flea being one of the best bassists around atm. Anthony isn't the best vocalist but has penned some fantastic lyrics. They're good live an' all.

 

[maxi]

Nah. RHCP are a fantastic band. All 3 of the musicians can play their instruments very well, Flea being one of the best bassists around atm. Anthony isn't the best vocalist but has penned some fantastic lyrics. They're good live an' all.

one good song, Under The Bridge..the rest falls into the category of MOR rock, like Coldplay, Turin Brakes...just with a 'funky' bass line. Terrible.

 

[shanks]

Cant say I have any high hopes RHCP's latest effort judging by there single. Though I still consider "Blood Sex Sugar Magik" a very good album and "Carlifornication" was in itself a nice surprise considering most of what they had done since "blood sex sugar..." was boring and frankly uninteresting. Think we'll have to thank John's return for that, his guitar really was what made it worthwhile.

And the only thing that I can find lacking on the above mentioned albums would be Anthony's pretty monotone vocals. If you can look passed that it's a nice ride all the way thru.

Im sure you can find worse musical acts Maxi.

 

[maxi]

Well i dont count the novelty acts, because I don't REALLY consider them to be musical artists...just performers. So Cheeky Girls, et al, are out.

You're left with a lot of shitty mall punk, nu metal and MOR rock the list of awful bands include

blink 182
RHCP
Coldplay
Stereophonics (i hate these most of all)
Turin Brakes
Starsailor
Mull Historical Society
Cooper Temple Clause
Dido
Linkin Park
Good Charlotte (i think Busted deserve more credit than these cocks, Honestly..)
Daniel Bedingfield
All American Rejects



more to be added probably
Evenescene (sp?)

 

[mank!]

shitty mall punk

Fantastic, you just summed up a whole genre of collective sonic crime in one fell swoop.

bloody marvellous

 

[shanks]

Well i dont count the novelty acts, because I don't REALLY consider them to be musical artists...just performers. So Cheeky Girls, et al, are out.

You're left with a lot of shitty mall punk, nu metal and MOR rock the list of awful bands include

blink 182
RHCP
Coldplay
Stereophonics (i hate these most of all)
Turin Brakes
Starsailor
Mull Historical Society
Cooper Temple Clause
Dido
Linkin Park
Good Charlotte (i think Busted deserve more credit than these cocks, Honestly..)
Daniel Bedingfield
All American Rejects



more to be added probably
Evenescene (sp?)

I would'nt throw RHCP in there but I agree with alot on that list.


It's Evanescence I belive, hard word that. Laughed my ass of when a hostess on a swedish tv-show tried to pronounce it. Eviinesceene or something was her interpretation of the name.

 

[maxi]

I think part of my hatred of RHCP stems from their fans, who are totally convinced RHCP are THE best band about today. It's not true AT all. I automatically raise my hatred up a notch.

Same with Bodhi and Radiohead i suppose



RHCP = The Doors for my generation.

The Doors were very shit.

 

[00dave]

As many people have listed crappy bands that don't deserve stardom (some I agree with some I don't) don't you just hate those lying greedy bastards in the record companies that start saying "piracy is destroying the music industry as the money isn't allowing us to find and fund new talent to bring to the charts" when in actual fact the music industry is being ruined by pop idol, fame academy, biased radio playlists, and them pumping money into manufactured dancing eye candy that cannot even sing let alone play an instrument.

My favourite band is probably Jimmy eat world (who did a cover of last christmas by wham this year that was spot on) now they never had a big record company to shoot them to stardom but they made it and I'm glad to see that they're not on anybodies list of crap bands. The point is that if a band are good enough they will get noticed and they will make it. I'm not saying piracy is the answer I'm just pointing out that these lying bastards piss me off whenever they claim money is being put into finding new "talent".

 

[Meatballs]

Well i dont count the novelty acts, because I don't REALLY consider them to be musical artists...just performers. So Cheeky Girls, et al, are out.

You're left with a lot of shitty mall punk, nu metal and MOR rock the list of awful bands include

blink 182
RHCP
Coldplay
Stereophonics (i hate these most of all)
Turin Brakes
Starsailor
Mull Historical Society
Cooper Temple Clause
Dido
Linkin Park
Good Charlotte (i think Busted deserve more credit than these cocks, Honestly..)
Daniel Bedingfield
All American Rejects



more to be added probably
Evenescene (sp?)

public class Maxi {
	 public boolean DislikesBand(Record r1){
		 if(r1.getSales()>10000)
				 return true;
		 else
				 return false;
	 }
}

I dont really see how you can throw in a lot of those bands as bad acts, apart for indie political reasons

 

[Nibbler]

Well i dont count the novelty acts, because I don't REALLY consider them to be musical artists...just performers. So Cheeky Girls, et al, are out.

You're left with a lot of shitty mall punk, nu metal and MOR rock the list of awful bands include

blink 182
RHCP
Coldplay
Stereophonics (i hate these most of all)
Turin Brakes
Starsailor
Mull Historical Society
Cooper Temple Clause
Dido
Linkin Park
Good Charlotte (i think Busted deserve more credit than these cocks, Honestly..)
Daniel Bedingfield
All American Rejects



more to be added probably
Evenescene (sp?)

I agree with nearly all of them, except for the Cooper Temple Clause. They are brilliant. Blink 182, RHCPs and Coldplay are tolerable, and ok in small doses.

I'ld add the Darkness to the list, btw

 

[Aoami]

one good song, Under The Bridge..the rest falls into the category of MOR rock, like Coldplay, Turin Brakes...just with a 'funky' bass line. Terrible.

Imo the Chilli's biggest problem is thier choices of singles. I don't think the singles they release best represent their music, and this is a big problem because in some cases (maybe yours) this is all that people here. Take the Californication album for instance; I don't think the album really gets any good untill you get to the last few album tracks, which are probably some of my favourite RHCP songs. The same for By the Way really.

 

[maxi]

I dont really see how you can throw in a lot of those bands as bad acts, apart for indie political reasons :p[/QUOTE]



Sorry, you're wrong...there are plenty of big selling bands I didn't include, and MHS lost their record deal last year because of poor second album sales. TCTC don't sell that many and aren't that big (unless you read NME) ditto all those bands. Quite a few people have agreed with most of the list...and most of them clearly aren't 'indie' kids.  

Also, there are a lot of terrible bands that I've never heard because they haven't had the press coverage or record sales. Unlike the above bands.

I bought Californication, and for a while I quite liked it...it sounded melancholly and uplifting in places...but after a while I realised it just SOUNDED that way, lyrically it was pretty laughable.

 

[throdgrain]

Cant stand Red Hot Chilli Peppers myself either.

 

[Meatballs]

You liked the sound but realised the lyrics are stupid? and that makes them a bad musical act?

Seems petty to me! Most lyrics on songs arn't that intelligent/important.

p.s. I've never actually heard of MHS, and I've flicked through nme twice in my life.

 

[Scooba da Bass]

You liked the sound but realised the lyrics are stupid? and that makes them a bad musical act?

Seems petty to me! Most lyrics on songs arn't that intelligent/important.

p.s. I've never actually heard of MHS, and I've flicked through nme twice in my life.

Brrrrrrr, how are lyrics not important? If a band is going to include them they should have a reason, not just because it's the 'done' thing.