CLB1110 Posted March 16, 2005 Share Posted March 16, 2005 Saves the Day and Haste the Day are great. Peregrine if you like musical talent listen to Dragonforce. They are incredible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark0ne Posted March 16, 2005 Share Posted March 16, 2005 To be honest I find Led Zeppelin extremely bland and boring. And what's the deal with the ghost impressions in songs like Achilles Last Stand and The Immigrant Song? All to their own, I suppose. Music doesn't have to be talented to be good to listen to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted March 16, 2005 Share Posted March 16, 2005 look peregrine, if u cant even get limp bizkit and linkin park as 2 differents artists, then dont even do the "i now all about linkin park thing". As I said, I've tried to erase the horror of that memory from my mind. But every other point I made there is true. u are right about the marketing talent, but that doesnt mean they dont make good music. Yes it does. When a band is popular because of a corporation's talent for marketing them to a mindless audience eagerly awaiting the next generic "best band ever", and not because of their musical talent, it means they don't make good music.the music they make now, like numb and faint, arent the best songs of them, u probably piss them of cause u only now these songs.but did u ever heard of the song: nobody's listening or forgotten??probably not, so dont act like u now em!and if u wanna now, they just made an album with jay-z, named collateral course, and believe me, mtv didnt say it was "the best mash up ever"! I don't need to have heard every song they've done to know they have no talent. What I have heard is hopelessly generic, no different than any other modern "rock" band. -------------------Peregrines hate for linkin park is just the same as any other modern band here I agree with peregrine (In my opinion) that good music died in the 80`s exept for supertramps live 88 before they disappeared. Well, besides the fact that the rule isn't entirely serious, there's an exception for bands that got their fame/style before 1980. But the general point is true, music as a whole has gone nowhere but down since 1980. -------------------- To be honest I find Led Zeppelin extremely bland and boring Err, bland and boring? Have you listened to the wide range of styles they've done? As well as pretty much defining a style of music. And what's the deal with the ghost impressions in songs like Achilles Last Stand and The Immigrant Song? Ghost impressions? Music doesn't have to be talented to be good to listen to. Yes it does. By definition, if something is good to listen to, its creator is talented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark0ne Posted March 16, 2005 Share Posted March 16, 2005 Yes it does. By definition, if something is good to listen to, its creator is talented. Not at all. I've made a few riffs of my own on my guitar that I find both appealing to play and listen to. I'd hardly call myself talented though. The two don't relate completely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishystick Posted March 16, 2005 Share Posted March 16, 2005 Yes it does. By definition, if something is good to listen to, its creator is talented. Not at all. I've made a few riffs of my own on my guitar that I find both appealing to play and listen to. I'd hardly call myself talented though. The two don't relate completely.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> First, I agree that someone who makes something sound good doesn't have to be talented. If someone who's never even seen a guitar plays a few tunes for fun and it sounds good, does that make him talented? Second, I think I can play something that sounds good, and I am by no standard talented in any way.. then again, I play punk-like bass which is like the easiest thing on this earth.. bah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thoompie Posted March 18, 2005 Share Posted March 18, 2005 anybody nows hammerfall? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted March 18, 2005 Share Posted March 18, 2005 Yes it does. By definition, if something is good to listen to, its creator is talented. Not at all. I've made a few riffs of my own on my guitar that I find both appealing to play and listen to. I'd hardly call myself talented though. The two don't relate completely. Can you put them together into music? Can you make something that you would want to listen to for its musical value, not because you're the one playing it? If yes, then you're talented. If not, then it's not good to listen to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark0ne Posted March 18, 2005 Share Posted March 18, 2005 Can you put them together into music? Can you make something that you would want to listen to for its musical value, not because you're the one playing it? If yes, then you're talented. If not, then it's not good to listen to. Then by your definition Linkin Park, Limp Bizkit and all the other bands you despise from this millenium are talented to their fans irrespective of what you think. You concede that the bands are actually talented since they make music that a large quanitity of people listen to for it's musical value? What I'm trying to imply most is that, just because modern music isn't your cup of tea it doesn't mean it's not talented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted March 18, 2005 Share Posted March 18, 2005 Can you put them together into music? Can you make something that you would want to listen to for its musical value, not because you're the one playing it? If yes, then you're talented. If not, then it's not good to listen to. Then by your definition Linkin Park, Limp Bizkit and all the other bands you despise from this millenium are talented to their fans irrespective of what you think. You concede that the bands are actually talented since they make music that a large quanitity of people listen to for it's musical value? People listen to them for their musical talent? Maybe if they're deaf I guess, but most of their fans are fans just because it's what their culture has said they should like. Just take a look at how fast most of those bands fade into distant memories, outside of a few devoted fans. I've heard far too many stories from people who have "liked" them out of habit, then switched to older music (saying like I do, that the new stuff is garbage) to think that those new bands are going to have any lasting impact. Compare that to all the older music, with zero marketing effort they're still picking up new fans, most of them after they've rejected modern music in disgust. What I'm trying to imply most is that, just because modern music isn't your cup of tea it doesn't mean it's not talented. I try to be open-minded, and I'll concede there's some decent stuff out there (though sadly it never gets widespread popularity), but the majority of modern bands are much more talented with marketing than music. Try listening to a modern "rock" song and finding the distinct notes in the wall of noise. Can you even tell the difference between two songs by the same artist? Or even between two different bands? Because I sure can't, without the pause between songs on the radio, I'd have a hard time telling where one song ends and the next begins. But you'll notice the answers to those questions are "absolutely yes" for older music. Not only did each band make a wide variety of music, but each band had a different style. Maybe some were similar, but there was an incredible range of styles popular at the same time. Probably the worst problem with calling them "talented" is the wall of noise effect covering up any talent they might have. If they're good, why do they need to blend all their notes together into one solid wall of noise? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark0ne Posted March 18, 2005 Share Posted March 18, 2005 Yet the solid wall of noise, as you call it, is what's so appealing to many people. It's also the reason why I find tracks like Achilles Last Stand bland, there isn't enough going on. Yes, the tune is more defined since there isn't much going on, but it doesn't necessarily make it more talented in my opinion. Similarly I find Stairway to Heaven boring until the last two minutes which I'll confess are great -- I'll often just skip the first 5 minutes of the track to get to the good part. I like Linkin Park, Limp Bizkit, Eminem, Killswitch Engage, Slipknot, Marilyn Manson etc. but I also like Bach, Chopin, Beethoven and Elgar, and often find I work much better, especially at night, listening to these vintage composers than the wall of noise. I'd hardly categorise myself as liking any particular genre and try hard to not stereotype against a genre simply because of the types of people that listen to it, hence why I like Hip-Hop and Heavy Metal. My playlist has over 2,500 tracks in it, and you won't be able to place me into any genre from what's in there. At the end of the day it's a matter of what YOU like when you hear it. The amount of bands I listen to and say "yeah, I like that"...end up listening to the rest of their album and it's absolute wang is ridiculous. It doesn't make me hate the track that I did like though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.