Amy Winehouse DEAD!

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Better overall? Not interested in trying to make that argument.

But Back to Black is a fantastic album that I would rather listen to than any Doors album.
 
that's about the same as saying Britney Spears' debut is better than any album from Billie Holiday

inexcusably ... something
 
So now The Doors are such a sacred cow that we mustn't say anything negative about them either? High times.
 
The Doors sort of suck, but that debut is pretty good, maybe on par with Back To Black. I just find their albums so filler-laden I can't listen to them in full. 3 or 4 great tracks an album though.
 
So now The Doors are such a sacred cow that we mustn't say anything negative about them either? High times.
no, it's more that Back to Black is a set of decent to good songs, very well sung (by a somewhat one-dimensional singer) and very well produced (by a somewhat one-dimensional producer)

I don't give a toss what you make of The Doors
they're not one of my top 10 favourite bands
but they're better than Back to Black by just about all the standards I apply to music
 
Poor Amy, then. Back to Black is better than any Doors album.

Nah rubbish. She ain't in Jim Morrisons league. And to put her in the same sentence as Hendrix is just fucking criminal. Let me think now I wonder if she'll still be talked about and played as often in 41 years time like Hendrix? Mmm I seriously doubt it! She probably belongs in the same sentence as Wacko though hehehe
 
The Doors sort of suck, but that debut is pretty good, maybe on par with Back To Black. I just find their albums so filler-laden I can't listen to them in full. 3 or 4 great tracks an album though.

The Doors were unique and influential, can we agree on that? Morrison was a charismatic and "possessed" frontman that paved the way for guys like Boner (Patti smith ain't his only forebearer).

Now I agree with El Mel that the albums aren't very consistent, and that the band is difficult to listen to for a long period of time. But man, some of those songs are pretty fucking amazing, and they're more deserving of notoriety than generic cockrockers like Aerosmith.

Winehouse was nowhere near putting out something as good as L.A. Woman. Apples and oranges here, obv, but she wasn't on the Janis Joplin level yet, either.
 
The Doors sort of suck


Thankfully, or no thanks, that is your opinion. :down:



Amy was barely a blip on the musical radar. If she had done more work in her short life, maybe an argument could me made to the contrary.


10 years from now, we'll remember the drugs, the beehive hairdo, the tattoos and that whopping one great album that she recorded.
 
So now The Doors are such a sacred cow that we mustn't say anything negative about them either? High times.

The consensus on The Doors around here seems to be overwhelmingly negative. Of the B&C regulars, Lazarus and I seem to be the only fans, and I really cannot understand for the life of me why that is.
 
The consensus on The Doors around here seems to be overwhelmingly negative. Of the B&C regulars, Lazarus and I seem to be the only fans, and I really cannot understand for the life of me why that is.

Count me in as a Doors fan too. For a band that wasn't together too long in the grand scheme of things, they certainly put out a wealth of material. Hell from 1967-1971, they put out 6 albums. And they did that despite Jim being an asshole alcoholic.
 
Uh oh, looks like someone's on his period...

I had just added that I'm a Doors fan and was perplexed why IY would think otherwise...but then I realized I've never really talked about the band before, so he had no reason to really assume one way or the other.....amongst other potential reasons.

That being said, I don't really lose much sleep if people want to bash The Doors. Different strokes....
 
The reason that I cannot understand the claim that The Doors are overrated is that they are not rated all that highly in the first place. Most reviews that I have read are lukewarm toward everything but the debut and perhaps LA Woman, while others, like Pitchfork, exert a considerable amount of energy trying to present Jim as a laughing-stock. Perhaps the local classic rock station rates them highly, but the critics in general do not see them as anything more than a decent singles band, or so it seems to me.
 
It seems like a lot of people here who would rip into the bullshit martyrdom that makes others think Cobain was more important than he was (and rightfully so) are too far removed from earlier musicians who have been elevated to those heights for the very same reason to be completely objective.

And to compare Winehouse to Britney Spears shows you have little knowledge about what constitutes real talent and songwriting
 
Winehouse and Morrison definately belong in the same sentence. Not just in the similarities ie inspiring a whole new set of similar artists, but also in how much a shell of their former selves they were at their ends. At his best, Morrison was poetic and charismatic onstage. At her best, Winehouse had an amazing voice and a ton of talent.

By the end, however, Morrison was dull as anything live and barely present. Winehouse wasnt much good for anything.

Its possible to recognize both of their relative importance to their musical genrration without necessarily sacrificing ones soul, Id imagine.

Cobain? Massively overrated, far more than anyone mentioned in this thread. Grohl was and is far far a superior talent.

Rjhbonovox I guess you didnt hear the instruction to leave Jackson out of it. Doesnt matter, you lost all credibility with your ridiculous assertion that everything after his first album was shit, period.
 
MrPryck2U said:
Thankfully, or no thanks, that is your opinion. :down:

Damn straight it is. Don't take it to mean any more than that.

I just really hate the sound of the organ in a rock band context, and their music is steeped in it. Couple that with Morrison's numerous instances in which he would go a mile up his own ass every record and the fact that classic Doors songs are in the minority on every one of their releases and I simply cannot rank them amongst the likes of The Who, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, etc.
 
I would argue that both the debut and Strange Days are genuinely great albums. The debut may be among my top ten favorite albums ever. It is at once dirty and soulful, and even "Alabama Song" contributes to the rollicking, irreverent attitude of the whole thing. On top of that, "Break on Through" and "Crystal Ship" each accomplish in two minutes what a lot of bands try to do in their whole careers. The albums after Strange Days are definitely spotty at best, but those first two are deserving of more credit around here, I think.
 
Grohl was and is far far a superior talent.

Far, far superior! :rolleyes:

Everything after the second Foo Fighters album has been pretty fucking generic. While the guy was certainly too talented to simply be a drummer behind someone's else's songs, he probably should have been at a George Harrison level, a couple of his own cuts per (hypothetical) future Nirvana album.

Kurt isn't the be-all, end-all of alternative music, but he was a gifted writer and melodicist, and his vocal delivery is a lot more memorable than Grohl's.


No spoken words said:
Well, hell, I'll agree with this. I enjoy The Doors and all, but, no, they're not in the same league as these bands.....

I'm not going to argue with it either.
 
Well, hell, I'll agree with this. I enjoy The Doors and all, but, no, they're not in the same league as these bands.....

:up:



I guess to get back to the crux of the thread, obviously its very sad that a performer like Amy passed away at the age of 27. She definitely brought something unique to the music world. We just didn't get too much of a chance to hear her work. Obviously, we haven't heard the last of her. It's just a question of how long they'll wait until they release any new material.
 
Back
Top Bottom