THE BORE

General => The Superdeep Borehole => Topic started by: Diunx on February 15, 2010, 11:45:24 PM

Title: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Diunx on February 15, 2010, 11:45:24 PM: Why is this so fucking hard for people to understand ???
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Eric P on February 15, 2010, 11:46:01 PM: i will probably lose cred in the eyes of some people, but i don't really like bowie's music
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Robo on February 15, 2010, 11:47:51 PM: de-icon eric p
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Robo on February 15, 2010, 11:50:35 PM: [youtube=560,345]rIzE3j84kKU[/youtube]

:bow

spoiler (click to show/hide)
:bow brel :bow2
[close]
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: tehjaybo on February 15, 2010, 11:53:44 PM: I've never liked David Bowie.

:bow The Beatles :bow2
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Himu on February 15, 2010, 11:54:57 PM: [youtube=560,345]iZTkqNiVfTc[/youtube]
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Eric P on February 16, 2010, 12:00:11 AM: boooooooooring
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Eric P on February 16, 2010, 12:02:08 AM: i like that one song that was used to sell swatch pager watches
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Diunx on February 16, 2010, 12:11:42 AM: [youtube=560,345]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHAjV7npClc[/youtube]

:bow
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Great Rumbler on February 16, 2010, 12:13:07 AM: Greatest Collaboration in Music History:

[youtube=560,345]xtrEN-YKLBM[/youtube]

Also awesome:

[youtube=560,345]YWX_MFNOL_Y[/youtube]
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Howard Alan Treesong on February 16, 2010, 12:16:11 AM: Bowie is my single favorite artist, with the possible exception of the Talking Heads. You are dead to me, Eric P! ...okay, you're alive again.

But thanks for the opportunity to repost this song:

[youtube=560,345]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3bbsyXyNJk&feature=related[/youtube]
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Stoney Mason on February 16, 2010, 12:17:31 AM: [youtube=560,345]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPGud5z_SHE[/youtube]
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: cool breeze on February 16, 2010, 12:20:58 AM: Quote from: Great Rumbler on February 16, 2010, 12:13:07 AM
Greatest Collaboration in Music History:

[youtube=560,345]xtrEN-YKLBM[/youtube]

Indeed!

Queen is the best. Queen + Bowie is spectacular.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Great Rumbler on February 16, 2010, 12:25:24 AM: Quote from: Stoney Mason on February 16, 2010, 12:17:31 AM
[youtube=560,345]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPGud5z_SHE[/youtube]

David Bowie is so awesome. :rofl
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Diunx on February 16, 2010, 12:30:17 AM: Quote from: Stoney Mason on February 16, 2010, 12:17:31 AM
[youtube=560,345]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPGud5z_SHE[/youtube]

I love that scene :rofl
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Human Snorenado on February 16, 2010, 12:33:05 AM: Little fat man who sold his soul... little fat man...
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: BlueTsunami on February 16, 2010, 12:43:11 AM: The use of Cat People in Inglorious Basterds was so good. So good.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Raban on February 16, 2010, 12:48:40 AM: While we're at it...
The Beach Boys > The Beatles
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Great Rumbler on February 16, 2010, 12:53:49 AM: Quote from: Вiff Кoммiёslaуer on February 16, 2010, 12:33:05 AM
Little fat man who sold his soul... little fat man...

The clown that no one laughs at...they all just wish he'd die...

:rofl
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Mr. Gundam on February 16, 2010, 01:11:03 AM: Shit. If this thread can't bring Malek back, nothing can!
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Diunx on February 16, 2010, 01:11:59 AM: Malek's gone?
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Phoenix Dark on February 16, 2010, 01:14:59 AM: Low is one of the most boring, overrated albums I've heard. I just hate synthesizers man
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: BlueTsunami on February 16, 2010, 01:31:17 AM: Quote from: Phoenix Dark on February 16, 2010, 01:14:59 AM
I just hate synthesizers man

:punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch
:punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch
:punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch
:punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch
:punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch
:punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch
:punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch
:punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch :punch
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Human Snorenado on February 16, 2010, 01:35:58 AM: Quote from: Phoenix Dark on February 16, 2010, 01:14:59 AM
Low is one of the most boring, overrated albums I've heard. I just hate synthesizers man

This is not the "Cher had some hits" thread. This is a thread for people of musical taste to enjoy David Bowie's superiority to anything you've ever illegally downloaded or listened to. Get out.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Phoenix Dark on February 16, 2010, 01:43:01 AM: [youtube=560,345]TOSZwEwl_1Q[/youtube]
>>>Low

Seriously, I illegally downloaded it to see why Pitchfork held it in such high regard. I really like Hunky Dory, Ziggy Stardust, and Alladin Sane. But Low is just...eh. The instrumental tracks are boring, and overall it's just forgettable. I'll give it another try but eh, it didn't impress me. From what I've read it was a rather innovative and influential record at the time.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: BobbyRobby on February 16, 2010, 01:46:16 AM: i love late 60s-70s Bowie, not more than the Beatles though
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Stoney Mason on February 16, 2010, 01:52:59 AM: I was a rather late in life convert to Bowie but yes he is brilliant and his late 60's through the 70's work is some of the best music ever created.

It's a personal taste thing but I would rather listen to Bowie over the Beatles any day of the week which is not to say the Beatles weren't great themselves.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Howard Alan Treesong on February 16, 2010, 02:07:36 AM: Quote from: Phoenix Dark on February 16, 2010, 01:14:59 AM
I just hate synthesizers man

:o

:maf
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: OptimoPeach on February 16, 2010, 05:13:22 AM: edit: woops
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: pilonv1 on February 16, 2010, 07:45:42 AM: Quote from: tehjaybo on February 15, 2010, 11:53:44 PM
I've never liked David Bowie.

:bow The Beatles :bow2
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Mupepe on February 16, 2010, 09:29:14 AM: There are tons of artists better than the Beatles.

I'm going to go ahead and say how I really feel...

The Beatles are mediocre... at best. Woo. Got that off my chest. I understand why they were important and some of their songs are great. But listening to their music is like playing battleship and trying to get that last little ship that takes up one square. Near fucking impossible to find something listenable out of so many songs.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: BobFromPikeCreek on February 16, 2010, 09:41:01 AM: Quote from: Phoenix Dark on February 16, 2010, 01:43:01 AM
Seriously, I illegally downloaded it to see why Pitchfork held it in such high regard. I really like Hunky Dory, Ziggy Stardust, and Alladin Sane. But Low is just...eh. The instrumental tracks are boring, and overall it's just forgettable. I'll give it another try but eh, it didn't impress me. From what I've read it was a rather innovative and influential record at the time.

Listen to Station to Station or Lodger first. They're both more accessible, but will make you more comfortable with the style of the other two Berlin Trilogy albums.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Robo on February 16, 2010, 10:28:02 AM: Scary Monsters would probably work too.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Dickie Dee on February 16, 2010, 10:29:43 AM: The Beatles > *

the truth hurts :'(
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Mupepe on February 16, 2010, 10:45:18 AM: Quote from: Mamacint on February 16, 2010, 10:29:43 AM
The Beatles > *

the truth hurts :'(
Is that star supposed to be a little butthole? because then i'd say they're about even.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Dickie Dee on February 16, 2010, 10:48:56 AM: that's the highest praise EB is capable of
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Mupepe on February 16, 2010, 10:53:43 AM: :o You got me there ;)
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Tauntaun on February 16, 2010, 11:38:09 AM: Nirvana > Bowie

[youtube=560,345]fregObNcHC8[/youtube]
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: M3wThr33 on February 16, 2010, 12:34:44 PM: Good music, but holy fuck Novoselic and Grohl were ugly fuckers back then.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: BobFromPikeCreek on February 16, 2010, 12:43:59 PM: The Nirvana version of that song is definitely better than Bowie's studio version, but I think my favourite performance of it is from when Bowie was on SNL with Klaus Nomi singing backup.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Mupepe on February 16, 2010, 04:30:46 PM: I want in on some Nirvana hate.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: CajoleJuice on February 16, 2010, 04:31:06 PM: Quote from: Wrath2X on February 16, 2010, 04:28:16 PM
As much as I love Nirvana, they are pretty fucking overrated. They're not even the best grunge band, Pearl Jam are better. So are Alice In Chains.

Soundgarden > all of them
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Mupepe on February 16, 2010, 04:31:31 PM: Boobies > all of them
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: TEEEPO on February 16, 2010, 04:32:26 PM: i'd like to just mention that in utero is one of the greatest records of all time.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Phoenix Dark on February 16, 2010, 04:32:43 PM: Pearl Jam has one good album, gtfo

Soundgarden>Nirvana>AiC>*
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Phoenix Dark on February 16, 2010, 04:46:49 PM: Quote from: Wrath2X on February 16, 2010, 04:39:05 PM
Eddie Vedder>Chris Cornell

No

Quote from: Wrath2X on February 16, 2010, 04:39:05 PM
Ten>Every grunge album ever.

Yes
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Eric P on February 16, 2010, 04:48:22 PM: Quote from: Phoenix Dark on February 16, 2010, 04:32:43 PM
Pearl Jam has one good album, gtfo

Soundgarden>Nirvana>AiC>*

mudhoney and the melvins uber alles you mtv milkfed reprobates
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Robo on February 16, 2010, 04:49:38 PM: If The Pixies qualify, there isn't any room for further discussion.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Diunx on February 16, 2010, 04:51:40 PM: The shit I just took >>>>>> Pearl Jam.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Eric P on February 16, 2010, 04:51:48 PM: the pixies do not otherwise the stooges, late black flag and government issue would qualify and then it's all over for the pixies
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Raban on February 16, 2010, 04:53:28 PM: I classify Nirvana in the same place I put the Beatles. They are remembered more for what they started than what they actually did.

Nirvana isn't crap, but everything that came after in its wake was much better.

Same with the Beatles.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Robo on February 16, 2010, 04:54:15 PM: Quote from: Eric P on February 16, 2010, 04:51:48 PM
the pixies do not otherwise the stooges, late black flag and government issue would qualify and then it's all over for the pixies

FINE
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: OptimoPeach on February 16, 2010, 04:56:01 PM: Quote from: Phoenix Dark on February 16, 2010, 04:32:43 PM
Pearl Jam has one good album, gtfo

Soundgarden>Nirvana>AiC>*

You seem to have confused your greater than and less than symbols
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Mupepe on February 16, 2010, 04:57:34 PM: List of ">" bands for the last 45 years...

Tool/A Perfect Circle = Matchbox 20 > *
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: CajoleJuice on February 16, 2010, 04:59:00 PM: Drinky agrees.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Phoenix Dark on February 16, 2010, 05:21:24 PM: Quote from: Eric P on February 16, 2010, 04:48:22 PM
Quote from: Phoenix Dark on February 16, 2010, 04:32:43 PM
Pearl Jam has one good album, gtfo

Soundgarden>Nirvana>AiC>*

mudhoney and the melvins uber alles you mtv milkfed reprobates

who? :smug
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Dickie Dee on February 16, 2010, 05:23:29 PM: If it'll only be a wankfest trollpit of how great bands aren't that great (The Monkeys > The Beatles, huh yuk yuk) forget about it
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Raban on February 16, 2010, 05:29:15 PM: Quote from: Wrath2X on February 16, 2010, 05:28:06 PM
But the monkeys don't even play their instruments.

Anyway I'd love to discuss albums, songs, solos, riffs, bands and musicians with you guys. I don't have any other outlet anyway.

What? How? Everyone listens to music, how can you not talk about it with friends?
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: The Fake Shemp on February 16, 2010, 05:29:57 PM: Creativity is banned in Saudi Arabia. Ever see the film 1984? Imagine an entire country like that, but they wear turbans!
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Mupepe on February 16, 2010, 05:32:40 PM: Thank you! Come again!
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Phoenix Dark on February 16, 2010, 05:35:02 PM: for eric p

Radiohead>Soundgarden>David Bowie>Nirvana>Pearl Jam>Melvins
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Robo on February 16, 2010, 05:36:08 PM: Quote from: Wrath2X on February 16, 2010, 05:19:44 PM
I think we should start an official rock thread for everything rock related.

This is enough: http://www.evilbore.com/forum/index.php?topic=29843.0
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Human Snorenado on February 16, 2010, 05:38:36 PM: Quote from: Eric P on February 16, 2010, 04:48:22 PM
Quote from: Phoenix Dark on February 16, 2010, 04:32:43 PM
Pearl Jam has one good album, gtfo

Soundgarden>Nirvana>AiC>*

mudhoney and the melvins uber alles you mtv milkfed reprobates

mother love bone > mudhoney and the melvins hyuck hyuck SEE WHAT I DID THAR

spoiler (click to show/hide)
...I'm actually a huge mudhoney fan from back in the day
[close]
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Mupepe on February 16, 2010, 05:40:24 PM: I've never listend to half these people. :(
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: BlueTsunami on February 16, 2010, 05:41:17 PM: Quote from: Diunx on February 16, 2010, 04:51:40 PM
The shit I just took >>>>>> Pearl Jam.

Yeah, I can't stand Pearl Jam. They are better live though where Vedder is more emotional / frantic sounding. Also, yes Soundgarden >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pearl Jam.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: CajoleJuice on February 16, 2010, 05:43:43 PM: I can always count on you, BT. :-*
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Eric P on February 16, 2010, 05:50:02 PM: Quote from: Вiff Кoммiёslaуer on February 16, 2010, 05:38:36 PM
Quote from: Eric P on February 16, 2010, 04:48:22 PM
Quote from: Phoenix Dark on February 16, 2010, 04:32:43 PM
Pearl Jam has one good album, gtfo

Soundgarden>Nirvana>AiC>*

mudhoney and the melvins uber alles you mtv milkfed reprobates

mother love bone > mudhoney and the melvins hyuck hyuck SEE WHAT I DID THAR

spoiler (click to show/hide)
...I'm actually a huge mudhoney fan from back in the day
[close]

i saw you once more be incredibly wrong on the internet
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Raban on February 16, 2010, 05:50:56 PM: Quote from: Wrath2X on February 16, 2010, 05:48:15 PM
Also Nine Inch Nails>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Radiohead

The Downward Spiral>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Kid A

:-\
I can't agree with this. Despite their pig-headedness, Radiohead can make a fucking album.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: chronovore on February 16, 2010, 06:02:35 PM: Quote from: BlueTsunami on February 16, 2010, 12:43:11 AM
The use of Cat People in Inglorious Basterds was so good. So good.
My man. What it is. I practically got wood during that scene, with that song. So. Good.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Raban on February 16, 2010, 06:04:05 PM: [youtube=560,345]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4zV4pJ8MwM[/youtube]
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: TEEEPO on February 16, 2010, 06:50:27 PM: velvet underground > the beatles

truth.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: pilonv1 on February 16, 2010, 06:50:50 PM: :bow sebadoh :bow2
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: TEEEPO on February 16, 2010, 06:52:55 PM: j mascis > lou barlow
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: pilonv1 on February 16, 2010, 07:00:24 PM: j mascis is awesome but I'm from the church of Lou so I can't agree.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Dickie Dee on February 16, 2010, 07:05:02 PM: > > >

deal with it
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Human Snorenado on February 16, 2010, 07:29:51 PM: Quote from: Eric P on February 16, 2010, 05:50:02 PM
Quote from: Вiff Кoммiёslaуer on February 16, 2010, 05:38:36 PM
Quote from: Eric P on February 16, 2010, 04:48:22 PM
Quote from: Phoenix Dark on February 16, 2010, 04:32:43 PM
Pearl Jam has one good album, gtfo

Soundgarden>Nirvana>AiC>*

mudhoney and the melvins uber alles you mtv milkfed reprobates

mother love bone > mudhoney and the melvins hyuck hyuck SEE WHAT I DID THAR

spoiler (click to show/hide)
...I'm actually a huge mudhoney fan from back in the day
[close]

i saw you once more be incredibly wrong on the internet

:duh I wasn't being serious!

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Speed Racer still sucks
[close]
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Robo on February 16, 2010, 07:35:16 PM: Quote from: TEEEPO on February 16, 2010, 06:50:27 PM
velvet underground > the beatles

truth.

Quote from: TEEEPO on February 16, 2010, 06:52:55 PM
j mascis > lou barlow

teepo keepin' it real :bow
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Eric P on February 16, 2010, 09:40:57 PM: Quote from: Вiff Кoммiёslaуer on February 16, 2010, 07:29:51 PM
Quote from: Eric P on February 16, 2010, 05:50:02 PM
Quote from: Вiff Кoммiёslaуer on February 16, 2010, 05:38:36 PM
Quote from: Eric P on February 16, 2010, 04:48:22 PM
Quote from: Phoenix Dark on February 16, 2010, 04:32:43 PM
Pearl Jam has one good album, gtfo

Soundgarden>Nirvana>AiC>*

mudhoney and the melvins uber alles you mtv milkfed reprobates

mother love bone > mudhoney and the melvins hyuck hyuck SEE WHAT I DID THAR

spoiler (click to show/hide)
...I'm actually a huge mudhoney fan from back in the day
[close]

i saw you once more be incredibly wrong on the internet

:duh I wasn't being serious!

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Speed Racer still sucks
[close]

:smug
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Human Snorenado on February 16, 2010, 09:57:34 PM: Quote from: Green Shinobi on February 16, 2010, 07:54:10 PM
NiN peaked with Pretty Hate Machine. Real talk.

Broken, actually. After that he didn't have legitimate reasons to be pissed anymore, and it showed in his music.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Robo on February 16, 2010, 09:59:52 PM: Except being a junkie and all.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: whocares on February 16, 2010, 10:01:18 PM: I barely like The Beatles and I can't stand David Bowie.
Sue me :'(
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Howard Alan Treesong on February 16, 2010, 10:14:26 PM: Quote from: whocares on February 16, 2010, 10:01:18 PM
I barely like The Beatles and I can't stand David Bowie.
Sue me :'(

whocares
Junior Member
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Human Snorenado on February 16, 2010, 10:38:01 PM: Time for more Real Talk: Lou Reed > David Bowie. And Leonard Cohen > Lou Reed. This is all true.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Human Snorenado on February 16, 2010, 10:40:04 PM: [youtube=560,345]WgUs7yWnDJ8[/youtube]

[youtube=560,345]AEzRXjg1rYE[/youtube]
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Human Snorenado on February 16, 2010, 10:43:26 PM: That's probably because he's not really a musician. In fact, I genuinely dislike a lot of the arrangements that end up paired with his lyrics. But that voice! And those lyrics! Craziness, man.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Phoenix Dark on February 16, 2010, 10:45:13 PM: NiN=Linkin Park for old people
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Human Snorenado on February 16, 2010, 10:49:17 PM: Quote from: Phoenix Dark on February 16, 2010, 10:45:13 PM
NiN=Linkin Park for old people

Fuck no, they're not comparable at all. When the hell did Trent ever do a bunch of lame rap-rock fusion shit? Sure his voice sucks, but compared to the lead whiner in Linkin Park Trent sounds great.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Robo on February 16, 2010, 10:53:14 PM: Reznor had a pretty good voice back in the day, but he's totally one note and writes really terrible lyrics.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Phoenix Dark on February 16, 2010, 10:56:01 PM: Quote from: Вiff Кoммiёslaуer on February 16, 2010, 10:49:17 PM
Quote from: Phoenix Dark on February 16, 2010, 10:45:13 PM
NiN=Linkin Park for old people

Fuck no, they're not comparable at all. When the hell did Trent ever do a bunch of lame rap-rock fusion shit? Sure his voice sucks, but compared to the lead whiner in Linkin Park Trent sounds great.

not talking about the voice. lyrically there isn't much of a difference homeslice

whiny bullshit. they've got a few good songs, but then again so does linkin park
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Powerslave on February 16, 2010, 10:56:38 PM: can you guys name 3 nin songs I should check out ?
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Robo on February 16, 2010, 11:00:47 PM: Closer, Head Like a Hole, and Mer Hayrenik.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Raban on February 16, 2010, 11:07:54 PM: Quote from: Phoenix Dark on February 16, 2010, 10:56:01 PM
Quote from: Вiff Кoммiёslaуer on February 16, 2010, 10:49:17 PM
Quote from: Phoenix Dark on February 16, 2010, 10:45:13 PM
NiN=Linkin Park for old people

Fuck no, they're not comparable at all. When the hell did Trent ever do a bunch of lame rap-rock fusion shit? Sure his voice sucks, but compared to the lead whiner in Linkin Park Trent sounds great.

not talking about the voice. lyrically there isn't much of a difference homeslice

whiny bullshit. they've got a few good songs, but then again so does linkin park

:bow :bow2
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Powerslave on February 16, 2010, 11:11:47 PM: Closer is sexy (http://i41.tinypic.com/20avx8w.jpg)
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Phoenix Dark on February 16, 2010, 11:13:41 PM: Quote from: Green Shinobi on February 16, 2010, 11:06:23 PM
Sin, Something I Can Never Have, We're In This Together.

And PD, Trent Reznor has more musicianship in his smegma than all of Linkin Park combined. The only good musician in Linkin Park is the DJ. Real talk.

Musicianship is irrelevant when you make shitty music. see: Muse
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: OptimoPeach on February 16, 2010, 11:35:10 PM: NIN was amazing when I saw them last year. I was WAY beyond fucked up so now it's kinda just one three hour blur of brootal anthemic angst and sweaty badassery, but I still remember being especially blown by the light show.

Luckily for me someone uploaded the entire concert to YouTube:

[youtube=560,345]1OBjgu1Nwso[/youtube]

[youtube=560,345]OQYBdOulHcY[/youtube]

[youtube=560,345]lDORj2q8g3A[/youtube]

:rock :rock :rock

Also, stop falling for PD's weak-ass trolling, you plebes
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: CajoleJuice on February 17, 2010, 01:48:18 AM: :rock
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Phoenix Dark on February 17, 2010, 02:02:04 AM: Cornell :rock

[youtube=560,345]cZaglHQOgt8[/youtube]
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Diunx on February 27, 2010, 12:13:56 AM: [youtube=560,345]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQPJgu75I7c[/youtube]

So awesome :bow2

[youtube=560,345]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zDgCyTVhDE[/youtube]

Man I would still fuck Lulu until my dick bleeds.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Himu on February 27, 2010, 02:07:18 AM: Grunge is overrated.

The Beatles made some good music.

And I agree, I like Bowie more.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Himu on February 27, 2010, 02:09:30 AM: Quote from: Wrath2X on February 16, 2010, 05:48:15 PM
Also Nine Inch Nails>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Radiohead

The Downward Spiral>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Kid A

I just said "no fucking way" out loud when I read that "downward spiral > kid a"

No fucking way.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Phoenix Dark on February 27, 2010, 02:14:08 AM: Kid A is overrated
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Himu on February 27, 2010, 02:18:02 AM: nico > whitney houston

[youtube=560,345]m8IV6lJSm1c[/youtube]
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Himu on February 27, 2010, 02:18:21 AM: Quote from: Phoenix Dark on February 27, 2010, 02:14:08 AM
Kid A is overrated

mm...food is overrated.
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Phoenix Dark on February 27, 2010, 02:19:14 AM: I agree. Try again :lol
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Himu on February 27, 2010, 02:21:03 AM: The Carter II > 36 Chambers
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Phoenix Dark on February 27, 2010, 02:24:11 AM: Ok, now you've gone too far :'( :'( :maf :maf :-\ :-\
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: Himu on February 27, 2010, 02:31:20 AM: :rofl :rofl :rofl
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: brob on February 27, 2010, 01:52:51 PM: What the hell did Thayil do after Soundgarden anyway? Did he just fall off the map?
Title: Re: David Bowie > The Beatles.
Post by: brob on February 27, 2010, 02:27:51 PM: Quote from: Wrath2X on February 27, 2010, 02:06:54 PM

From Wikipedia.
depressing. hopefully this reunion gets us some fresh stuff even if Cornell is washed up.