steely daniel or whatever
Is it just me or was Oasis a little bit shyte?
steely daniel or whatever
Bon Jovi... you can't go to any bar here without hearing Livin on a Prayer at least once (and having half the bar sing along).
Bon Jovi... you can't go to any bar here without hearing Livin on a Prayer at least once (and having half the bar sing along).
Yeah, you can't go to a bar without hearing Livin On A Prayer, but it's ultimately basic ass rock music just done really well. It just ticks all the boxes. But it's not like transcendent or anything. It's just a good song.
Bon Jovi... you can't go to any bar here without hearing Livin on a Prayer at least once (and having half the bar sing along).
Yeah, you can't go to a bar without hearing Livin On A Prayer, but it's ultimately basic ass rock music just done really well. It just ticks all the boxes. But it's not like transcendent or anything. It's just a good song.
I wonder if some of that is just the era it was made vs. the age of the listener, it can be hard to find something transcendent when you're not being exposed to it in a contemporary way
And I know if course there will be plenty of examples to the contrary, which is fine
I don't really like the Beatles but Eleanor Rigby clicks with me for some reason
I guess what I mean is, I bet there are some people who heard it for the first time as a brand new song, brand new album they just bought and at the time they were like
(https://i.imgur.com/hcTkgIT.gif)
Bon Jovi's Slippery When Wet is a legit classic and was almost as impactful on 80s hard rock as Appetite for Destruction.
Everything else is meh, I'll agree with you there.
I literally only like juice box from them lawl2000s rock the thread.
Linkin Park
Evanescence
Hoobastank
3 Doors Down
The Calling
The Killers
Whatever the fuck Green Day became
Kings of Leon
Paramore
Keane
Train
Hinder
Lifehouse
Thirty Seconds to Mars
The Strokes
Fall out Boy
Simple Plan
Jimmy Eat World
Good Charlotte
Maroon5
Travis
etc etc
Most of these guys were never even "good enough"; they were just mediocre to shit from the beginning.
The Strokes and Jimmy Eat World were solid B+ bands. Juice Box :lawd
2000's rock is the definition of flabby and sick.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JphZtpafdKY
(https://i.imgur.com/hADEdcN.png)
APC isn't on the "good enough" tier. Mer de Noms and Thirteenth Step are two of the best albums of that decade. Billy Howerdel is pretty much a genius. Plus you get peak Maynard vocals.And Paz Ortega before she became a complete weirdo :rejoice
I’m trying to decide if The Chemical Brothers are in this tier. They might just make it into the “great” tier. Not sure.
Examples of the great tier in that broader genre would be like Daft Punk or Aphex Twin, IMO.
I think the problem with the question is the delineation of good v great.
Steely Daniel: Bad
Tom Petty: Pretty good
Bruce Springsteen: Bad
Villa-Lobos?Every classical guitar composer. Ever. :fbm
Even the dude who busted out his own shit that his virtuoso friend said was impossible?
not necessarily. I'd argue there's no such a thing as an artist with 5+ albums where the average is high than 50% of it being worth your time. Like David Bowie you can say had a good-great album every decade but there's meddling to putrid shit in between. Nobody cares much for Prince 90's on. Metallica are everybody's go to Metal band yet everyone agrees the first four albums are the only ones anybody should listen to.
Hip Hop I do legit think has a lesser average per artist, but in music as a whole it's how long you were great and what you were able to do when you're great as opposed to how consistent you are. Think of it like a batting average or field goal percentage, as wonky as that may sound.
Radiohead: The Thread
Radiohead: The Thread
I....can see why people think this and yet I still love them and one of my favorite bands.
Taste is subjective, so that's obvious. A lot of people love them. I think their output past OK Computer ranged from decent to downright awful.
Well if you want to define what a 'great' musician is, I'd say influence is a huge portion of it. So yeah, Hendrix would make it on that list.
Well if you want to define what a 'great' musician is, I'd say influence is a huge portion of it. So yeah, Hendrix would make it on that list.
Do you not remember that small stretch where everyone tried copying bullshit 'KID A' flavor Radiohead? I would say they had influence, but Thom Yorke navel gazed their relevance away. It's been around 15-20 years since anyone has really cared what they're coming out with, at least as far as mass market or whatever.
Subjective, but I would def put Radiohead in the 'great' category, just based on them putting out arguably two of the best albums of all time back to back. Also, the next few albums had at least 2-3 great tunes, just a ton of filler. The last two albums never grabbed me, maybe will give another shake today.
People def cared about In Rainbows but that was like ten years ago. It's also one of my favorite Radiohead LPs.
The Bends -> OK Computer -> KidA is one of the best runs in modern rock, if not the best, as far as mainstream rock is concerned. All three have completely different flair and tone too with varying degree of style and subject matter. Hell, they made their own subset of electronic rock. I might be speaking with bias but I feel Radio is more than good - they're great.
Drake.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9rO2keJBzo
Drake.
frauds like Aerosmith