You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Topic
November 23 2024 5.11pm

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Crime DOES pay (LOCKED)

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 2 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >

Topic Locked

Stuk Flag Top half 27 Dec 15 2.57pm Send a Private Message to Stuk Add Stuk as a friend

Quote Cucking Funt at 24 Dec 2015 10.05am

The criminals continue to coin it for the musical crimes they've committed. Even that excrescence by Macca makes over a quarter of a million a year.

[Link]


In a willoesque style, he's a friend of a friend.

 

Optimistic as ever
Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post
Jimenez Flag SELHURSTPARKCHESTER,DA BRONX 27 Dec 15 3.09pm Send a Private Message to Jimenez Add Jimenez as a friend

Quote Stuk at 27 Dec 2015 2.57pm

Quote Cucking Funt at 24 Dec 2015 10.05am

The criminals continue to coin it for the musical crimes they've committed. Even that excrescence by Macca makes over a quarter of a million a year.

[Link]


In a willoesque style, he's a friend of a friend.

Stuk I do believe Willo was involved with Showaddywaddy's 1970s Xmas Hit 'It'll be lonely this Christmas".....

 

Pro USA & Israel
Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards Hrolf The Ganger Flag 28 Dec 15 5.38pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Quote jamiemartin721 at 26 Dec 2015 5.48pm

Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 24 Dec 2015 3.38pm

Really Cucking ?

This is a rather pretentious position to take. Music is subjective as we all know,

None of the songs on that list are especially offensive and have sold millions. That means that in the cha ching sense these songs are very good indeed.

It has come to my notice that we always have the annual musical snobbery where by all the usual popular hits are trashed and some awful obscure never heard of, never want to hear again "alternative" Christmas song about vomiting or killing yourself is heralded as the best thing since Christmas pud.

Do me a favour.

If you want a less well know gem try "Christmas all over Again" by Tom Petty with Jeff Lynne producing. That is a proper song.

To an extent, its subjective as to whether you like it or not (I quite like the first B*witched album but it is s**te) - But there is definitely a difference between music as art and music as entertainment. The likes of the Velvet Underground will always be better than say 1 Direction.

My favourite Christmas song is Just Like Christmas by Low. [Link] Captures the spirit of Christmas lyrically and musically, without having to stoop to using clichés.

Perfect.



Funny because I thought they were utter crap.

Musical taste should not be confused with snobbery.

I'm not sure by what measure you could say that Velvet Underground were good beyond the emperors new clothes effect whereby a lot of so called experts claimed they were great, and then later, influential.
I thought their music was mostly dreadful and most people seem to agree because they sold sod all records.
One Direction by contrast have sold loads of copy but it is equally hard to equate that with musical quality since most of their songs are likely bought by ten year olds.
Clearly some musicianship or singing is technically better than another and it could be argued that some song/tune writing is also technically better than another, but aside from that, musical taste is totally subjective and technical brilliance does not necessarily make for enjoyable. Neither does someone else telling you you should like it.

 
Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards Hrolf The Ganger Flag 28 Dec 15 5.42pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Quote Jimenez at 27 Dec 2015 3.09pm

Quote Stuk at 27 Dec 2015 2.57pm

Quote Cucking Funt at 24 Dec 2015 10.05am

The criminals continue to coin it for the musical crimes they've committed. Even that excrescence by Macca makes over a quarter of a million a year.

[Link]


In a willoesque style, he's a friend of a friend.

Stuk I do believe Willo was involved with Showaddywaddy's 1970s Xmas Hit 'It'll be lonely this Christmas".....

Unlikely since it was by MUD.

PS My stepmum is related to Rob Davis somehow.

 
Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 28 Dec 15 9.47pm

Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 28 Dec 2015 5.38pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 26 Dec 2015 5.48pm

Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 24 Dec 2015 3.38pm

Really Cucking ?

This is a rather pretentious position to take. Music is subjective as we all know,

None of the songs on that list are especially offensive and have sold millions. That means that in the cha ching sense these songs are very good indeed.

It has come to my notice that we always have the annual musical snobbery where by all the usual popular hits are trashed and some awful obscure never heard of, never want to hear again "alternative" Christmas song about vomiting or killing yourself is heralded as the best thing since Christmas pud.

Do me a favour.

If you want a less well know gem try "Christmas all over Again" by Tom Petty with Jeff Lynne producing. That is a proper song.

To an extent, its subjective as to whether you like it or not (I quite like the first B*witched album but it is s**te) - But there is definitely a difference between music as art and music as entertainment. The likes of the Velvet Underground will always be better than say 1 Direction.

My favourite Christmas song is Just Like Christmas by Low. [Link] Captures the spirit of Christmas lyrically and musically, without having to stoop to using clichés.

Perfect.



Funny because I thought they were utter crap.

Musical taste should not be confused with snobbery.

I'm not sure by what measure you could say that Velvet Underground were good beyond the emperors new clothes effect whereby a lot of so called experts claimed they were great, and then later, influential.
I thought their music was mostly dreadful and most people seem to agree because they sold sod all records.
One Direction by contrast have sold loads of copy but it is equally hard to equate that with musical quality since most of their songs are likely bought by ten year olds.
Clearly some musicianship or singing is technically better than another and it could be argued that some song/tune writing is also technically better than another, but aside from that, musical taste is totally subjective and technical brilliance does not necessarily make for enjoyable. Neither does someone else telling you you should like it.

Well lots of experts claimed they were great, entire genres of bands claim them as their primary inspiration, regularly make the top 20 bands of all time, they had John Cale and Lou Reed as members who both have massive regard in the music industry and despite having little commercial success at the time.

I think taste is subjective, but that artistic ability transcends taste. A great example of this is Bowie and Roxy Music, both bands I never really liked but still regard as being exceptional.

Pop music is what it is, a disposable form of enjoyment kind of like an action flick. Good fun, but nothing more.


 

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]
Alert Alert a moderator to this post
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards Hrolf The Ganger Flag 28 Dec 15 10.22pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Quote jamiemartin721 at 28 Dec 2015 9.47pm

Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 28 Dec 2015 5.38pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 26 Dec 2015 5.48pm

Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 24 Dec 2015 3.38pm

Really Cucking ?

This is a rather pretentious position to take. Music is subjective as we all know,

None of the songs on that list are especially offensive and have sold millions. That means that in the cha ching sense these songs are very good indeed.

It has come to my notice that we always have the annual musical snobbery where by all the usual popular hits are trashed and some awful obscure never heard of, never want to hear again "alternative" Christmas song about vomiting or killing yourself is heralded as the best thing since Christmas pud.

Do me a favour.

If you want a less well know gem try "Christmas all over Again" by Tom Petty with Jeff Lynne producing. That is a proper song.

To an extent, its subjective as to whether you like it or not (I quite like the first B*witched album but it is s**te) - But there is definitely a difference between music as art and music as entertainment. The likes of the Velvet Underground will always be better than say 1 Direction.

My favourite Christmas song is Just Like Christmas by Low. [Link] Captures the spirit of Christmas lyrically and musically, without having to stoop to using clichés.

Perfect.



Funny because I thought they were utter crap.

Musical taste should not be confused with snobbery.

I'm not sure by what measure you could say that Velvet Underground were good beyond the emperors new clothes effect whereby a lot of so called experts claimed they were great, and then later, influential.
I thought their music was mostly dreadful and most people seem to agree because they sold sod all records.
One Direction by contrast have sold loads of copy but it is equally hard to equate that with musical quality since most of their songs are likely bought by ten year olds.
Clearly some musicianship or singing is technically better than another and it could be argued that some song/tune writing is also technically better than another, but aside from that, musical taste is totally subjective and technical brilliance does not necessarily make for enjoyable. Neither does someone else telling you you should like it.

Well lots of experts claimed they were great, entire genres of bands claim them as their primary inspiration, regularly make the top 20 bands of all time, they had John Cale and Lou Reed as members who both have massive regard in the music industry and despite having little commercial success at the time.

I think taste is subjective, but that artistic ability transcends taste. A great example of this is Bowie and Roxy Music, both bands I never really liked but still regard as being exceptional.

Pop music is what it is, a disposable form of enjoyment kind of like an action flick. Good fun, but nothing more.



Perhaps, but an advocate of classical music would probably say that, with some justification, about Velvet Underground or indeed any other acclaimed contemporary music.

It is the same as when people claim that Eric Clapton or Jimmi Hendrix are the greatest ever guitarists when their talents pale compared to many other relative unknowns.
It is just people who are totally unqualified, or following the herd to avoid appearing stupid, expressing an opinion.

 
Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post
Kermit8 Flag Hevon 28 Dec 15 10.28pm Send a Private Message to Kermit8 Add Kermit8 as a friend

Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 28 Dec 2015 5.42pm

Quote Jimenez at 27 Dec 2015 3.09pm

Quote Stuk at 27 Dec 2015 2.57pm

Quote Cucking Funt at 24 Dec 2015 10.05am

The criminals continue to coin it for the musical crimes they've committed. Even that excrescence by Macca makes over a quarter of a million a year.

[Link]


In a willoesque style, he's a friend of a friend.

Stuk I do believe Willo was involved with Showaddywaddy's 1970s Xmas Hit 'It'll be lonely this Christmas".....

Unlikely since it was by MUD.

PS My stepmum is related to Rob Davis somehow.


He wrote some damned good tunes decades later.

 

Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]
Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post
Pussay Patrol Flag 28 Dec 15 10.38pm

Did Velvet Underground do a Christmas song then?

 

Paua oouaarancì Irà chiyeah Ishé galé ma ba oo ah
Alert Alert a moderator to this post
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 29 Dec 15 9.40am

Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 28 Dec 2015 10.22pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 28 Dec 2015 9.47pm

Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 28 Dec 2015 5.38pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 26 Dec 2015 5.48pm

Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 24 Dec 2015 3.38pm

Really Cucking ?

This is a rather pretentious position to take. Music is subjective as we all know,

None of the songs on that list are especially offensive and have sold millions. That means that in the cha ching sense these songs are very good indeed.

It has come to my notice that we always have the annual musical snobbery where by all the usual popular hits are trashed and some awful obscure never heard of, never want to hear again "alternative" Christmas song about vomiting or killing yourself is heralded as the best thing since Christmas pud.

Do me a favour.

If you want a less well know gem try "Christmas all over Again" by Tom Petty with Jeff Lynne producing. That is a proper song.

To an extent, its subjective as to whether you like it or not (I quite like the first B*witched album but it is s**te) - But there is definitely a difference between music as art and music as entertainment. The likes of the Velvet Underground will always be better than say 1 Direction.

My favourite Christmas song is Just Like Christmas by Low. [Link] Captures the spirit of Christmas lyrically and musically, without having to stoop to using clichés.

Perfect.



Funny because I thought they were utter crap.

Musical taste should not be confused with snobbery.

I'm not sure by what measure you could say that Velvet Underground were good beyond the emperors new clothes effect whereby a lot of so called experts claimed they were great, and then later, influential.
I thought their music was mostly dreadful and most people seem to agree because they sold sod all records.
One Direction by contrast have sold loads of copy but it is equally hard to equate that with musical quality since most of their songs are likely bought by ten year olds.
Clearly some musicianship or singing is technically better than another and it could be argued that some song/tune writing is also technically better than another, but aside from that, musical taste is totally subjective and technical brilliance does not necessarily make for enjoyable. Neither does someone else telling you you should like it.

Well lots of experts claimed they were great, entire genres of bands claim them as their primary inspiration, regularly make the top 20 bands of all time, they had John Cale and Lou Reed as members who both have massive regard in the music industry and despite having little commercial success at the time.

I think taste is subjective, but that artistic ability transcends taste. A great example of this is Bowie and Roxy Music, both bands I never really liked but still regard as being exceptional.

Pop music is what it is, a disposable form of enjoyment kind of like an action flick. Good fun, but nothing more.



Perhaps, but an advocate of classical music would probably say that, with some justification, about Velvet Underground or indeed any other acclaimed contemporary music.

It is the same as when people claim that Eric Clapton or Jimmi Hendrix are the greatest ever guitarists when their talents pale compared to many other relative unknowns.
It is just people who are totally unqualified, or following the herd to avoid appearing stupid, expressing an opinion.

I wouldn't say I could comment on classical music - I don't really get it. I can only say I know what I like. I get what your saying

Maybe, but then when other guitarists renown for their ability say the same thing, you probably should pay attention. I don't particularly enjoy Clapton's output but that guy can certainly play the guitar.

As for Hendrix, anyone who thinks he is overated should watch live footage of him playing the guitar - its almost transcendental. Whether he's the greatest guitarist of all time, I don't know, but he's probably one of the greatest rock guitarist of all time. Just watching him play live (admittedly on video) is about the most rock guitar experience you can ever witness - Its like watching someone make love to the guitar.

I get that people don't like the sound of the Velvet Underground but their legacy speaks for itself.


 

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]
Alert Alert a moderator to this post
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards Hrolf The Ganger Flag 29 Dec 15 11.36am Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Quote jamiemartin721 at 29 Dec 2015 9.40am

Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 28 Dec 2015 10.22pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 28 Dec 2015 9.47pm

Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 28 Dec 2015 5.38pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 26 Dec 2015 5.48pm

Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 24 Dec 2015 3.38pm

Really Cucking ?

This is a rather pretentious position to take. Music is subjective as we all know,

None of the songs on that list are especially offensive and have sold millions. That means that in the cha ching sense these songs are very good indeed.

It has come to my notice that we always have the annual musical snobbery where by all the usual popular hits are trashed and some awful obscure never heard of, never want to hear again "alternative" Christmas song about vomiting or killing yourself is heralded as the best thing since Christmas pud.

Do me a favour.

If you want a less well know gem try "Christmas all over Again" by Tom Petty with Jeff Lynne producing. That is a proper song.

To an extent, its subjective as to whether you like it or not (I quite like the first B*witched album but it is s**te) - But there is definitely a difference between music as art and music as entertainment. The likes of the Velvet Underground will always be better than say 1 Direction.

My favourite Christmas song is Just Like Christmas by Low. [Link] Captures the spirit of Christmas lyrically and musically, without having to stoop to using clichés.

Perfect.



Funny because I thought they were utter crap.

Musical taste should not be confused with snobbery.

I'm not sure by what measure you could say that Velvet Underground were good beyond the emperors new clothes effect whereby a lot of so called experts claimed they were great, and then later, influential.
I thought their music was mostly dreadful and most people seem to agree because they sold sod all records.
One Direction by contrast have sold loads of copy but it is equally hard to equate that with musical quality since most of their songs are likely bought by ten year olds.
Clearly some musicianship or singing is technically better than another and it could be argued that some song/tune writing is also technically better than another, but aside from that, musical taste is totally subjective and technical brilliance does not necessarily make for enjoyable. Neither does someone else telling you you should like it.

Well lots of experts claimed they were great, entire genres of bands claim them as their primary inspiration, regularly make the top 20 bands of all time, they had John Cale and Lou Reed as members who both have massive regard in the music industry and despite having little commercial success at the time.

I think taste is subjective, but that artistic ability transcends taste. A great example of this is Bowie and Roxy Music, both bands I never really liked but still regard as being exceptional.

Pop music is what it is, a disposable form of enjoyment kind of like an action flick. Good fun, but nothing more.



Perhaps, but an advocate of classical music would probably say that, with some justification, about Velvet Underground or indeed any other acclaimed contemporary music.

It is the same as when people claim that Eric Clapton or Jimmi Hendrix are the greatest ever guitarists when their talents pale compared to many other relative unknowns.
It is just people who are totally unqualified, or following the herd to avoid appearing stupid, expressing an opinion.

I wouldn't say I could comment on classical music - I don't really get it. I can only say I know what I like. I get what your saying

Maybe, but then when other guitarists renown for their ability say the same thing, you probably should pay attention. I don't particularly enjoy Clapton's output but that guy can certainly play the guitar.

As for Hendrix, anyone who thinks he is overated should watch live footage of him playing the guitar - its almost transcendental. Whether he's the greatest guitarist of all time, I don't know, but he's probably one of the greatest rock guitarist of all time. Just watching him play live (admittedly on video) is about the most rock guitar experience you can ever witness - Its like watching someone make love to the guitar.

I get that people don't like the sound of the Velvet Underground but their legacy speaks for itself.



All these things are more about opinion and the manipulation of said more than reality.
Hendrix was not technically good but obviously inspired and impressed people with his idiosyncratic style. But I can tell you with some authority that his talent is greatly exaggerated. Clapton is a good blues guitarist but blues is really not that difficult in the grand scheme of guitar playing. That does not mean it is not enjoyable to many of course including myself but talent and ability are rarely related to popularity. That is usually about promotion, trend and who you know.

 
Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post
Hoof Hearted 29 Dec 15 12.14pm

Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 29 Dec 2015 11.36am

Quote jamiemartin721 at 29 Dec 2015 9.40am

Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 28 Dec 2015 10.22pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 28 Dec 2015 9.47pm

Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 28 Dec 2015 5.38pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 26 Dec 2015 5.48pm

Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 24 Dec 2015 3.38pm

Really Cucking ?

This is a rather pretentious position to take. Music is subjective as we all know,

None of the songs on that list are especially offensive and have sold millions. That means that in the cha ching sense these songs are very good indeed.

It has come to my notice that we always have the annual musical snobbery where by all the usual popular hits are trashed and some awful obscure never heard of, never want to hear again "alternative" Christmas song about vomiting or killing yourself is heralded as the best thing since Christmas pud.

Do me a favour.

If you want a less well know gem try "Christmas all over Again" by Tom Petty with Jeff Lynne producing. That is a proper song.

To an extent, its subjective as to whether you like it or not (I quite like the first B*witched album but it is s**te) - But there is definitely a difference between music as art and music as entertainment. The likes of the Velvet Underground will always be better than say 1 Direction.

My favourite Christmas song is Just Like Christmas by Low. [Link] Captures the spirit of Christmas lyrically and musically, without having to stoop to using clichés.

Perfect.



Funny because I thought they were utter crap.

Musical taste should not be confused with snobbery.

I'm not sure by what measure you could say that Velvet Underground were good beyond the emperors new clothes effect whereby a lot of so called experts claimed they were great, and then later, influential.
I thought their music was mostly dreadful and most people seem to agree because they sold sod all records.
One Direction by contrast have sold loads of copy but it is equally hard to equate that with musical quality since most of their songs are likely bought by ten year olds.
Clearly some musicianship or singing is technically better than another and it could be argued that some song/tune writing is also technically better than another, but aside from that, musical taste is totally subjective and technical brilliance does not necessarily make for enjoyable. Neither does someone else telling you you should like it.

Well lots of experts claimed they were great, entire genres of bands claim them as their primary inspiration, regularly make the top 20 bands of all time, they had John Cale and Lou Reed as members who both have massive regard in the music industry and despite having little commercial success at the time.

I think taste is subjective, but that artistic ability transcends taste. A great example of this is Bowie and Roxy Music, both bands I never really liked but still regard as being exceptional.

Pop music is what it is, a disposable form of enjoyment kind of like an action flick. Good fun, but nothing more.



Perhaps, but an advocate of classical music would probably say that, with some justification, about Velvet Underground or indeed any other acclaimed contemporary music.

It is the same as when people claim that Eric Clapton or Jimmi Hendrix are the greatest ever guitarists when their talents pale compared to many other relative unknowns.
It is just people who are totally unqualified, or following the herd to avoid appearing stupid, expressing an opinion.

I wouldn't say I could comment on classical music - I don't really get it. I can only say I know what I like. I get what your saying

Maybe, but then when other guitarists renown for their ability say the same thing, you probably should pay attention. I don't particularly enjoy Clapton's output but that guy can certainly play the guitar.

As for Hendrix, anyone who thinks he is overated should watch live footage of him playing the guitar - its almost transcendental. Whether he's the greatest guitarist of all time, I don't know, but he's probably one of the greatest rock guitarist of all time. Just watching him play live (admittedly on video) is about the most rock guitar experience you can ever witness - Its like watching someone make love to the guitar.

I get that people don't like the sound of the Velvet Underground but their legacy speaks for itself.



All these things are more about opinion and the manipulation of said more than reality.
Hendrix was not technically good but obviously inspired and impressed people with his idiosyncratic style. But I can tell you with some authority that his talent is greatly exaggerated. Clapton is a good blues guitarist but blues is really not that difficult in the grand scheme of guitar playing. That does not mean it is not enjoyable to many of course including myself but talent and ability are rarely related to popularity. That is usually about promotion, trend and who you know.


C'mon Hrolf.... that's not true!

He was self taught and played a right handed guitar upside down to cater for being left handed because when he started he couldn't afford a bespoke left handed guitar.

The fact that he overcame these difficulties adds to his genius. He never used a "whammy bar" because he could get more vibrato from his fingers on the frets.

I've seen some rock and heavy metal lead guitarists and Hendrix was right up there with the best.

I've not heard one leading guitarist not acknowledge Hendrix as a superb technician that could literally get a tune out of anything.

 
Alert Alert a moderator to this post
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards Hrolf The Ganger Flag 29 Dec 15 12.46pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Quote Hoof Hearted at 29 Dec 2015 12.14pm

Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 29 Dec 2015 11.36am

Quote jamiemartin721 at 29 Dec 2015 9.40am

Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 28 Dec 2015 10.22pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 28 Dec 2015 9.47pm

Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 28 Dec 2015 5.38pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 26 Dec 2015 5.48pm

Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 24 Dec 2015 3.38pm

Really Cucking ?

This is a rather pretentious position to take. Music is subjective as we all know,

None of the songs on that list are especially offensive and have sold millions. That means that in the cha ching sense these songs are very good indeed.

It has come to my notice that we always have the annual musical snobbery where by all the usual popular hits are trashed and some awful obscure never heard of, never want to hear again "alternative" Christmas song about vomiting or killing yourself is heralded as the best thing since Christmas pud.

Do me a favour.

If you want a less well know gem try "Christmas all over Again" by Tom Petty with Jeff Lynne producing. That is a proper song.

To an extent, its subjective as to whether you like it or not (I quite like the first B*witched album but it is s**te) - But there is definitely a difference between music as art and music as entertainment. The likes of the Velvet Underground will always be better than say 1 Direction.

My favourite Christmas song is Just Like Christmas by Low. [Link] Captures the spirit of Christmas lyrically and musically, without having to stoop to using clichés.

Perfect.



Funny because I thought they were utter crap.

Musical taste should not be confused with snobbery.

I'm not sure by what measure you could say that Velvet Underground were good beyond the emperors new clothes effect whereby a lot of so called experts claimed they were great, and then later, influential.
I thought their music was mostly dreadful and most people seem to agree because they sold sod all records.
One Direction by contrast have sold loads of copy but it is equally hard to equate that with musical quality since most of their songs are likely bought by ten year olds.
Clearly some musicianship or singing is technically better than another and it could be argued that some song/tune writing is also technically better than another, but aside from that, musical taste is totally subjective and technical brilliance does not necessarily make for enjoyable. Neither does someone else telling you you should like it.

Well lots of experts claimed they were great, entire genres of bands claim them as their primary inspiration, regularly make the top 20 bands of all time, they had John Cale and Lou Reed as members who both have massive regard in the music industry and despite having little commercial success at the time.

I think taste is subjective, but that artistic ability transcends taste. A great example of this is Bowie and Roxy Music, both bands I never really liked but still regard as being exceptional.

Pop music is what it is, a disposable form of enjoyment kind of like an action flick. Good fun, but nothing more.



Perhaps, but an advocate of classical music would probably say that, with some justification, about Velvet Underground or indeed any other acclaimed contemporary music.

It is the same as when people claim that Eric Clapton or Jimmi Hendrix are the greatest ever guitarists when their talents pale compared to many other relative unknowns.
It is just people who are totally unqualified, or following the herd to avoid appearing stupid, expressing an opinion.

I wouldn't say I could comment on classical music - I don't really get it. I can only say I know what I like. I get what your saying

Maybe, but then when other guitarists renown for their ability say the same thing, you probably should pay attention. I don't particularly enjoy Clapton's output but that guy can certainly play the guitar.

As for Hendrix, anyone who thinks he is overated should watch live footage of him playing the guitar - its almost transcendental. Whether he's the greatest guitarist of all time, I don't know, but he's probably one of the greatest rock guitarist of all time. Just watching him play live (admittedly on video) is about the most rock guitar experience you can ever witness - Its like watching someone make love to the guitar.

I get that people don't like the sound of the Velvet Underground but their legacy speaks for itself.



All these things are more about opinion and the manipulation of said more than reality.
Hendrix was not technically good but obviously inspired and impressed people with his idiosyncratic style. But I can tell you with some authority that his talent is greatly exaggerated. Clapton is a good blues guitarist but blues is really not that difficult in the grand scheme of guitar playing. That does not mean it is not enjoyable to many of course including myself but talent and ability are rarely related to popularity. That is usually about promotion, trend and who you know.


C'mon Hrolf.... that's not true!

He was self taught and played a right handed guitar upside down to cater for being left handed because when he started he couldn't afford a bespoke left handed guitar.

The fact that he overcame these difficulties adds to his genius. He never used a "whammy bar" because he could get more vibrato from his fingers on the frets.

I've seen some rock and heavy metal lead guitarists and Hendrix was right up there with the best.

I've not heard one leading guitarist not acknowledge Hendrix as a superb technician that could literally get a tune out of anything.

Hmmm,where to begin.

There are session guitarists, who no one has heard of, who could play Hendrix stuff in their sleep.
Also rock guitar is really not that technically difficult in comparison to some other styles. I don't say you can't appreciate Hendrix or far lesser guitarists for what they do and I would rather listen to rock than classical or finger style but I acknowledge that those styles are far more challenging technically. They are just not as glamorous.

 
Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post

Topic Locked

Page 2 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Topic