Band I don't like that other people do

[XenoMorph]

(04-13-2017, 07:49 PM)McC Wrote: People will say Elvis sucks.  It only means they have no understanding of him or the times in which he lived. 

Doesn't matter....    I can say I don't like elvis music  doesn't mean I don't understand the impact he had on music.  I cant listen to his music its just not good to me.  

[BengalHawk62]

Nirvana-  without Dave Grohl, they suck.  Cobain sucked (God rest his soul)

Avett Brothers-  Other than a few songs here and there......ya, I just can't get into these guys.  My friends are die hards though so everytime we get together, they have an Avett cd on.  ugh. 

now for the obvious ones.....

Florida/Georgia Line-  Ya, I stopped there to piss once.  I dont' need to listen to their music. 

Jason Aldean/Luke Bryan/etc......bro country. 












And for all you guys knocking Pearl Jam......get some musical taste.    

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(04-14-2017, 10:25 AM)BengalHawk62 Wrote: Florida/Georgia Line-  Ya, I stopped there to piss once.  I dont' need to listen to their music. 

Jason Aldean/Luke Bryan/etc......bro country. 

.....as Sheriff Buford T. Justice of Texarkana, Texas says......."Now listen you stupid sumbitch.....that tractor rap shit ain't country!"

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(04-14-2017, 10:16 AM)samhain Wrote: U2 isn't my favorite band or even one I listen to regularly, but I think at one point they managed to put together a couple of pretty good albums.  Unfortunately, I think that success and fan adoration inflated their egos to a point where virtually everything they've put out since Rattle and Hum has been self-indulgent trash.  It's almost unlistenable to me.

Yup.....and I love their collaboration with BB King.....since then, not so much.

[xxlt]

(04-13-2017, 07:12 PM)BengalsRocker Wrote: He really learned how to play after being in the Beatles?

You should take that comedy act on the road.

I'm no huge Beatles fan but I'm pretty sure he was a great player while in the band as well.

Not some hack.

I do have to agree that he is the most underrated among the group. 

I have to admit not deeply familiar with their catalogue, but never saw anything that made me go wow from any of them - most of what I heard growing up was their "old stuff" with teen girls screaming over shitty playing, lol. I will yield to your superior knowledge on this one. Harrison could always play, when he left the Beatles it became much more evident. How's that sound?

[xxlt]

(04-14-2017, 10:11 AM)Wyche Wrote: Without Carl Perkins (a MUCH better musician), there is no Elvis.....without John Lee Hooker, there is no boogie beat to base rock n roll on......and so the story goes....

You can get an AMEN on that!

BTW, Carl Perkins is missing in the underrated thread! Man could that guy flat play!

[McC]

(04-14-2017, 10:11 AM)Wyche Wrote: Without Carl Perkins (a MUCH better musician), there is no Elvis.....without John Lee Hooker, there is no boogie beat to base rock n roll on......and so the story goes....

For one thing, Elvis was not really even a musician.   And he took that music to a place Carl Perkins would never go.  Elvis was a way better singer and a way better showman.  Elvis is on Mt. Rushmore.  Perkins is much farther down the hill. 

Elvis was weird and got weirder as he got older and there was nobody who could say to him, leading to him dying on the throne at 44, but there is no diminishing his place in the pantheon.

[BengalsRocker]

(04-14-2017, 07:27 PM)McC Wrote: For one thing, Elvis was not really even a musician.   And he took that music to a place Carl Perkins would never go.  Elvis was a way better singer and a way better showman.  Elvis is on Mt. Rushmore.  Perkins is much farther down the hill. 

Elvis was weird and got weirder as he got older and there was nobody who could say to him, leading to him dying on the throne at 44, but there is no diminishing his place in the pantheon.

Yeah but those delicious Fool's Gold Loaf sandwiches sure helped him get there quicker too!  8,000 calories a sando.

Fool's Gold Loaf is a sandwich made by the Colorado Mine Company, a restaurant in Denver, Colorado. The sandwich consists of a single warmed, hollowed-out loaf of bread filled with the contents of one jar of creamy peanut butter and one jar of grape jelly, and a pound of bacon. The sandwich's connection to Elvis Presley is the source of its legend and prolonged interest. According to The Life and Cuisine of Elvis Presley, it was the focus of a midnight sandwich run by Elvis Presley and his friends. Taking his private jet from Graceland, Presley and his friends purchased 30 of the sandwiches and spent two hours eating them and drinking Perrier and champagne before flying home. The story became legend and the sandwich became the subject of continued media interest and part of numerous cookbooks, typically focused around Presley's love of food.

[Tiger Teeth]

(04-14-2017, 07:29 AM)Bengalzona Wrote: I like this thread. It shows how people expect and get different things out of the music they listen to.

I like this thread as well.  It also shows the different age ranges of our membership.  And it's stayed civil.  

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(04-14-2017, 07:27 PM)McC Wrote: For one thing, Elvis was not really even a musician.   And he took that music to a place Carl Perkins would never go.  Elvis was a way better singer and a way better showman.  Elvis is on Mt. Rushmore.  Perkins is much farther down the hill. 

Elvis was weird and got weirder as he got older and there was nobody who could say to him, leading to him dying on the throne at 44, but there is no diminishing his place in the pantheon.

Meh.....he was a pretty boy....and chicks dug his gyrating hips.  

Look at it like this.....my parents grew up in this era.  My mom had Beatles and Elvis shit.....my pop brought me up on Chuck Berry (the REAL king of rock n roll )...Perkins....Jerry Lee Lewis....Little Richard....Fats Domino....Creedence....and others.  These days....I turn him onto the shit he missed.

I understand what you're saying....and agree....but for me....Elvis and The Beatles are akin to modern pop country....all fluff and record sales because of their moves and looks. Not a lot of substance.....and yes....I own some Elvis albums and even some memorabilia....cause.....he was a pimp.....lol.  Musically though....outside of Heartbreak Hotel....That's Alright Mama.....Suspicious Minds (Jennings/Coulter and Yoakum had superior versions IMO ).....and Jailhouse Rock....he just never did much for me.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(04-14-2017, 10:22 PM)Tiger Teeth Wrote: I like this thread as well.  It also shows the different age ranges of our membership.  And it's stayed civil.  

Then you have weirdos like me....who go back as far as Bob Wills and His Texas Playboys....Earnest Tubb....Jimmie Rodgers.....Robert Johnson....Sleepy John Estes to Rage Against the Machine.....Chris Stapleton....The Royal Hounds....The Wu Tang Clan....and The Record Company.  Ain't a whole lot I don't dig if it's worth a shit.

[CageTheBengal]

KISS
Guns and Roses (I've got respect for Slash though.)
System of A Down
Fallout Boy
Tool
The Ramones
Poison
The Doors
Aerosmith

and last but not least

Loverboy. I Had a 20 year old co-worker who insisted on playing Loverboy his favorite band at work. I swore he was just torturing us at first.

[CageTheBengal]

(04-14-2017, 11:28 PM)Wyche Wrote: Then you have weirdos like me....who go back as far as Bob Wills and His Texas Playboys....Earnest Tubb....Jimmie Rodgers.....Robert Johnson....Sleepy John Estes to Rage Against the Machine.....Chris Stapleton....The Royal Hounds....The Wu Tang Clan....and The Record Company.  Ain't a whole lot I don't dig if it's worth a shit.

Just curious who do you like better Rage or Audioslave? I think I saw in another thread you are a Chris Cornell fan.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(04-15-2017, 03:37 AM)CageTheBengal Wrote: Just curious who do you like better Rage or Audioslave? I think I saw in another thread you are a Chris Cornell fan.

I do love me some Cornell and early Soundgarden.  Badmotorfinger is one of my favorite albums.  I dig Audioslave as well....but Rage is just so powerful man....I have every one of their albums.  That first album was an instant classic.....jam out from track 1 to the end.  I'm also somewhat a fan of music with a message.....and they are very political.  So.....obviously....it's Rage.  Also...Tom Morello was doing some rather inventive stuff on the axe to come up with an innovative sound.  They just come out and kick you right in the junk  

Can't believe you don't like the Guns man.....Appetite for Destruction is one of the best hard rock albums of all time.  Shame on you.....this aggression will not stand man.....   

[xxlt]

(04-14-2017, 07:27 PM)McC Wrote: For one thing, Elvis was not really even a musician.   And he took that music to a place Carl Perkins would never go.  Elvis was a way better singer and a way better showman.  Elvis is on Mt. Rushmore.  Perkins is much farther down the hill. 

Elvis was weird and got weirder as he got older and there was nobody who could say to him, leading to him dying on the throne at 44, but there is no diminishing his place in the pantheon.

Well yeah, Elvis wasn't really a musician he was a singer and entertainer. So does he even belong in this thread?

And, since he is in it, are you saying you revere entertainers more than musicians? So you would put Madonna or Britney Spears above (fill in the name of your favorite band) on "the hill?" I mean, if that is how you see it fine. That just seems odd to me. Hey, Stephen Colbert and Seth McFarland are great entertainers, and I have heard them both sing, but I wouldn't put either in any music hall of fame or say they were better than The Band or The Stones or The Beatles. But they are both arguably better entertainers and showmen than those bands or many others. Kiss - great showmen, but most seem to agree a pretty mediocre band. So I wouldn't put them up on Rushmore, but if entertaining throngs is the standard then they might be breathing fire down Elvis' neck up on the mountain top.

[CageTheBengal]

(04-15-2017, 07:29 AM)Wyche Wrote: I do love me some Cornell and early Soundgarden.  Badmotorfinger is one of my favorite albums.  I dig Audioslave as well....but Rage is just so powerful man....I have every one of their albums.  That first album was an instant classic.....jam out from track 1 to the end.  I'm also somewhat a fan of music with a message.....and they are very political.  So.....obviously....it's Rage.  Also...Tom Morello was doing some rather inventive stuff on the axe to come up with an innovative sound.  They just come out and kick you right in the junk  

Can't believe you don't like the Guns man.....Appetite for Destruction is one of the best hard rock albums of all time.  Shame on you.....this aggression will not stand man.....   

I've been meaning to get more into Rage but haven't yet I'll have to start with their first then. I know and like all of their radio stuff (Sleep Now In The Fire. Doesn't get any better than that.) and the sound Morello makes with his guitar are unreal. I don't care what band he's playing for I'd pay to watch him jam.

When Audioslave was started I was ecstatic to hear Cornell and basically Rage mesh together. Their first album is probably one of my favorite albums of all time and easily the best Audioslave album. The other 2 really took a nosedive imo and sounded less like the guys from Rage.

Well I guess we're even then as far as GnR because I''m a fan on The Offspring.

[McC]

(04-15-2017, 12:22 PM)xxlt Wrote: Well yeah, Elvis wasn't really a musician he was a singer and entertainer. So does he even belong in this thread?

And, since he is in it, are you saying you revere entertainers more than musicians? So you would put Madonna or Britney Spears above (fill in the name of your favorite band) on "the hill?" I mean, if that is how you see it fine. That just seems odd to me. Hey, Stephen Colbert and Seth McFarland are great entertainers, and I have heard them both sing, but I wouldn't put either in any music hall of fame or say they were better than The Band or The Stones or The Beatles. But they are both arguably better entertainers and showmen than those bands or many others. Kiss - great showmen, but most seem to agree a pretty mediocre band. So I wouldn't put them up on Rushmore, but if entertaining throngs is the standard then they might be breathing fire down Elvis' neck up on the mountain top.

Where did you come up with all that?  I didn't say anything of the kind.

Does the title of the thread say musician anywhere in it?  Could we please just stick to the facts?

This is the problem with zeroing in on one single word of a comment.  You either ignore or miss the point of the comment.  Please go back and read the things I said and stop making shit up.

[samhain]

(04-15-2017, 07:29 AM)Wyche Wrote: I do love me some Cornell and early Soundgarden.  Badmotorfinger is one of my favorite albums.  I dig Audioslave as well....but Rage is just so powerful man....I have every one of their albums.  That first album was an instant classic.....jam out from track 1 to the end.  I'm also somewhat a fan of music with a message.....and they are very political.  So.....obviously....it's Rage.  Also...Tom Morello was doing some rather inventive stuff on the axe to come up with an innovative sound.  They just come out and kick you right in the junk  

Can't believe you don't like the Guns man.....Appetite for Destruction is one of the best hard rock albums of all time.  Shame on you.....this aggression will not stand man.....   

I'm a big Soundgarden fan.  They were my first arena show.  Saw them at Hara Arena in 94, the same month that Superunknown came out.  I'll never forget them opening with Jesus Christ Pose.  It was nuts.  Seen them twice since.  Also seen Rage twice, once in 96 with Wu-Tang in Indy and once in 2008.  The 08 show was really intense and it was probably the least safe crowd I've ever been in for a show.  They were taking people out in ambulances after they initial push toward the stage when they came out.  People were knocking down the perimeter chain-link fence and coming in off the street.  Really poor security for such a large show.  They band killed it.  They played Freedom for the encore.

 

[xxlt]

(04-15-2017, 01:43 PM)McC Wrote: Where did you come up with all that?  I didn't say anything of the kind.

Does the title of the thread say musician anywhere in it?  Could we please just stick to the facts?

This is the problem with zeroing in on one single word of a comment.  You either ignore or miss the point of the comment.  Please go back and read the things I said and stop making shit up.

The thread title says, "Band."

Here is the definition of band:
noun

1.
a company of persons or, sometimes, animals or things, joined, acting, or functioning together; aggregation; party; troop:
a band of protesters.
2.
Music.

1. a group of instrumentalists playing music of a specialized type:
   rock band; calypso band; mariachi band.
2. a musical group, usually employing brass, percussion, and often woodwind instruments, that plays especially for marching or open-air performances.
3. big band.
4. dance band.
   

So I agreed with you that a singer is not a band, and therefore not really germane to the conversation. You said precisely that - that Elvis was really "not even a musician" (ergo not even a member of a band, and certainly not an entire band unto himself) and you clarified that he was "a singer" and "an entertainer." You were and are correct to note this.


But also you said a singer - who is by definition not a band - that same singer named Elvis, belonged on "Mt Rushmore" - presumably the Mt Rushmore of bands, or perhaps more broadly the Mt Rushmore of music. So, I was trying to understand your point, which seemed to be that while not a band Elvis was greater than most if not all bands.


Again, I simply agreed that Elvis really shouldn't be discussed as "a band" but since you went ahead and said he was worthy of higher honor (being on Mt Rushmore generally being considered an honor and not an insult)
than numerous other bands I was just trying to follow the logic. Are entertainers a "class" or "caste" or "strata" of the entertainment industry or more broadly the human race that have intrinsic value greater than than that of any band or group?

Perhaps. This would explain Wayne Newton, Sinatra, Cher, Elvis and others so often headlining clubs in Vegas for extended periods of time rather than bands headlining them. I was just trying to understand how you could in the same post acknowledge the simple fact "Elvis is not a band" but then say Elvis was greater than many if not all bands. If saying he belonged on Mt Rushmore and influenced music greatly was not meant as praise but rather as some sort of dig or insult of Elvis, I apologize for missing the point. Or maybe you meant actual Mt Rushmore and you were not speaking metaphorically but literally? Like - blast Jefferson off Mt Rushmore and put Elvis up there! Again, if that was the point and I missed it I do apologize.

If you didn't realize what you said, or don't know what you meant either, that is all good. But I wasn't making shit up. I was trying to understand shit you actually said.

[xxlt]

(04-14-2017, 07:27 PM)McC Wrote: For one thing, Elvis was not really even a musician.   And he took that music to a place Carl Perkins would never go.  Elvis was a way better singer and a way better showman.  Elvis is on Mt. Rushmore.  Perkins is much farther down the hill. 

Elvis was weird and got weirder as he got older and there was nobody who could say to him, leading to him dying on the throne at 44, but there is no diminishing his place in the pantheon.

See, this is the post where you said those things I inquired about and referenced again in post 79. You did use the word "showman" for which I substituted "entertainer." I think they are synonymous but prefer entertainer in part because it is more inclusive. But that is the kind of dick I am, focusing on little things all the while I try to learn more and understand the worldviews of those around me.