cobl04
45:33
Lol. Everyone go look at my first post in this thread, third post on page one.
Unpopular Music Opinions III: Friggin Cobbler Vs. The World
- Thread starter LemonMelon
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
liamcool
Blue Crack Addict
XTC have more memorable melodies in one album than The Beatles had in their whole career.
The Velvet Underground and Nico is good. Not amazing. Couple of really great tracks (Heroin, The Black Angel's Death Song), couple of good songs (There She Goes Again, All Tomorrow's Parties) and a bit of garbage.
The Velvet Underground and Nico is good. Not amazing. Couple of really great tracks (Heroin, The Black Angel's Death Song), couple of good songs (There She Goes Again, All Tomorrow's Parties) and a bit of garbage.
Last edited:
Kieran McConville
ONE love, blood, life
Elton John churned out a ton of fairly memorable melodies for a few years there too, and like him, I find myself seeing a bit of the savant about the Beatles' output. I mean, is hooks really all it's about? What are they there in service of?
OP
OP
LemonMelon
More 5G Than Man
I don't think that's true at all, and you know I'm a big XTC fan.
Drums and Wires, Skylarking and Apple Venus Vol. 1 show their incredible range and are all essential listening, but Revolver exhibits that sort of range and catchiness in 35 minutes.
liamcool
Blue Crack Addict
I think The Big Express is a good exhibition of XTC's range and melodic prowess, actually. I might just be weird because that's one of their critically slammed albums, but the amount of melodic prowess on that album is astounding.
OP
OP
LemonMelon
More 5G Than Man
I'll have to go back to that one. I've heard everything they ever released except for Wasp Star, typically multiple times, but the mid-period albums (Big Express and Mummer) need further exploration before I can comment on them.
At this moment, Skylarking is my favorite album by them for its remarkable thematic coherence and sparkling melodies, but I've been listening to the 1979-1982 records most often as of late.
The Dukes of Stratsophear were also amazing, albeit very indebted to The Beatles, as if Skylarking already wasn't.
Last edited:
I wouldn't say this. Look at some of the Beatles arguments on RYM, and I'd say Beatles fans have the upper hand, responding to the "kids music they're ok" thing with "you philistines can't grasp the greatest music ever". Disliking the Beatles remains seen as a contrarian position most places, I'd say.
As somebody who just lacks an interest in the Beatles, I find these arguments are often tedious and based on ridiculous sweeping assumptions/condescension by both sides. But I will say easily the most frustrating music fans are those who need to find some way to make the Beatles the innovator of anything that ever happened in music. Beatles totally invented drone doom metal, guyz.
OP
OP
LemonMelon
More 5G Than Man
I didn't say that. I said that having the Beatles as a favorite band is unusual or downright Philistine. It's more than OK to have a modest appreciation for the Beatles and what they accomplished, while accepting the occasional John Lennon song as masterful, but to actively listen to their albums? In 2015? Pshaw. We have Animal Collective now.
I think Cobbler's last post about the band is the prototypical "OK" post about the Beatles. Anything more than that and you're a raving fanboy that needs to listen to more music.
That being said, yes, people who outright hate the Beatles are typically seen as elitist and trying too hard to be edgy. That is true and very unfair. Discussing the Beatles on the internet is kind of a pain in the ass all around.
Last edited:
Ah right, sorry I misinterpreted you - but I do still think you're overstating it a bit. If anything you're more liable to being pigeonholed as such as if your favourite band is Pink Floyd or Led Zep. Then you're just some proghead or dad rocker who needs to broaden their horizons and fast.
(I admit that I can't imagine somebody actually sitting down to listen to the Beatles as anything other than a historical curio, but they're hardly alone there in my view and obviously many people rather enjoy doing just that. This perhaps reflects my own tendency to gravitate very strongly towards recent music.)
OP
OP
LemonMelon
More 5G Than Man
This is also true, absolutely. I think your lifestyle as a whole is more likely to be judged for liking those bands than the Beatles, who appeal to a broad enough demographic that there isn't a stereotypical Beatles fan like there is a Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Radiohead or Tool fan.
That being said, I think the reflexive response to someone telling you that The Beatles are their favorite band is to recommend them other bands. Because there's no way they've listened to anyone else. It's like having The Godfather as a favorite movie or The Great Gatsby as a favorite novel.
So the Beatles are my favorite band, even after hearing over 5,000 albums. What does that say about me?
Last edited:
Kieran McConville
ONE love, blood, life
This is a side issue but i'd be a bit leery of relegating stuff to curiosity status merely because it's old. I mean to say, for instance, that the Great Gatsby is not my favourite novel. But if I am honest, my favourite novel was probably written within at most a couple of decades of it.
On some days, not today, but some days, I'd be tempted to put Van Morrison's Astral Weeks as my favourite album. There are Beatles records newer than Astral Weeks.
On some days, not today, but some days, I'd be tempted to put Van Morrison's Astral Weeks as my favourite album. There are Beatles records newer than Astral Weeks.
OP
OP
LemonMelon
More 5G Than Man
I will freely admit that there are certain periods/movements within certain mediums that largely do not appeal to me. 19th century Victorian literature does not appeal to me like 20th century American literature does. I'm not going to cast off an entire century of literature and won't attempt to persuade others to do the same, but I do adjust my own expectations. Similarly, any pop music before the 60s is typically of no interest to me, but if it works for you, I won't say you're living in the past.
Astral Weeks is top 50 all-time for me. Otherworldly stuff.
Astral Weeks is top 50 all-time for me. Otherworldly stuff.
OP
OP
LemonMelon
More 5G Than Man
Trying to gauge whether or not something is an unpopular opinion in B&C or not:
Is there anyone here that thinks Trout Mask Replica doesn't suck and, if so, can you explain why?
It's funny how much I like Captain Beefheart's music (Safe as Milk, Mirror Man, Clear Spot, Shiny Beast, all totally great records), but still hear Trout Mask Replica as only slightly more enjoyable than gravel caught in a garbage disposal.
Is there anyone here that thinks Trout Mask Replica doesn't suck and, if so, can you explain why?
It's funny how much I like Captain Beefheart's music (Safe as Milk, Mirror Man, Clear Spot, Shiny Beast, all totally great records), but still hear Trout Mask Replica as only slightly more enjoyable than gravel caught in a garbage disposal.
Kieran McConville
ONE love, blood, life
Fair cop; I'm unlikely to 'get' popular music made before the 1960s, and I'm unlikely to 'get' much fiction written before the interwar era. It is what it is.
(being unable or unwilling to deal first-hand with certain older literature is not the same thing as having no interest in the past. I read a lot of history and it's the work of people who are temperamentally, by training and instinct able to deal with the primary sources I can't).
(being unable or unwilling to deal first-hand with certain older literature is not the same thing as having no interest in the past. I read a lot of history and it's the work of people who are temperamentally, by training and instinct able to deal with the primary sources I can't).
Last edited:
Unpopular opinion, building on an earlier remark about my interest in recent music: by and large, I'm just not interested in any music pre-1980s. Well, maybe "not interested" is going too far, in that I'll be curious about some stuff and play it once or twice, but it's been a long, long time since something prior to the rise of post-punk has engaged me enough to enter into regular rotation, let alone be established as a personal favourite. My RYM ratings are telling: only four decades enjoy an average above 3 stars, the current one and the three that precede it.
OP
OP
LemonMelon
More 5G Than Man
IMO the distance you go back relates to your tastes and interest in discovering where your favorite genres of the present day originated from. It also has to do with what your parents played for you and how much you could relate to it. My parents had 60s pop of all genres playing and I still love that shit. Much of the music I listen to today has ties to 60s psychedelic pop and folk rock, so I love those old albums too.
However, my dad hates 50s rock and pop, so that never really stuck with me either. It sounds ancient and difficult to relate to.
However, my dad hates 50s rock and pop, so that never really stuck with me either. It sounds ancient and difficult to relate to.
There's possibly something in that. However, my favourite band as a child was The Shadows, via my grandfather. I fucking loved them - still do. Yet they never really opened up the music of that era to me; I've listened to some of their contemporaries and enjoyed them (like The Ventures, Dick Dale, Link Wray), but never on the same level and never enough to explore very widely.
On the other hand, much of the other music I heard as a child was kind of predictive of my favourites and my "recentism". My primary exposure to music other than Shadows cassettes was to nineties radio, or more to the point stations that purported to play "best recent hits of the eighties and nineties", and the music video show/Australian TV institution Rage.
PhilsFan
Blue Crack Addict
Unpopular opinion: most of the Beatles' discography bores me, including Sgt. Pepper and the White Album.
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
Kieran McConville
ONE love, blood, life
The Beatles wrote immaculate, aesthetically excellent tunes that inspire no real emotional response in me of any kind. It's just kinda there.
PhilsFan
Blue Crack Addict
And if you want to talk about emotionless music I'd like to talk about Pink Floyd. Even the emotional ones feel lifeless to me.
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
Kieran McConville
ONE love, blood, life
Ok, it occurred to me that I exaggerated a little; Penny Lane is a lovely, lovely tune.
GirlsAloudFan
Blue Crack Addict
The only person who's made any fucking sense in the last like 40 posts in this thread in LemonMelon.
Kiss my black ass if you don't think the Beatles are the best.
Kiss my black ass if you don't think the Beatles are the best.
namkcuR
ONE love, blood, life
Look, I'm not going to shit on anyone for having a different opinion, but I'll just say that I cannot understand how stuff like In My Life, I'm Only Sleeping, And Your Bird Can Sing, Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds, A Day In The Life, The Fool On The Hill, Penny Lane, Dear Prudence, Blackbird, While My Guitar Gently Weeps, Long Long Long, Hey Jude, I Want You, Here Comes The Sun, Because, the whole AR medley, Across The Universe, and The Long And Winding Road, just to name some, can evoke no emotion in people. Different strokes I guess. 
Also, the thing about Floyd being lifeless...again, I don't understand. Gilmour is one of my top three favorite guitarists ever, and it's largely because of his mournful guitar tone, the way he makes his instrument come to life in a whirlpool of emotion when he plays. His playing takes me to another world.
Sent from my iPad using U2 Interference
Also, the thing about Floyd being lifeless...again, I don't understand. Gilmour is one of my top three favorite guitarists ever, and it's largely because of his mournful guitar tone, the way he makes his instrument come to life in a whirlpool of emotion when he plays. His playing takes me to another world.
Sent from my iPad using U2 Interference
namkcuR
ONE love, blood, life
What, I don't get credit for my pro-Beatles post?
Sent from my iPad using U2 Interference
namkcuR
ONE love, blood, life
This is another thing. Hooks not = melodies. They're not the same thing. A hook has to be catchy. A melody doesn't have to be catchy to be beautiful or pretty. A melody cuts deeper than a hook. To refer to many of the Beatles' melodies just as hooks is to trivialize them, imo.
Sent from my iPad using U2 Interference
lazarus
Blue Crack Supplier
I just can't with this thread.
Can't.
Can't.
IWasBored
Blue Crack Supplier
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2002
- Messages
- 36,783
I'm not reading through 35+ posts about whether the Beatles are whatever. I know they're the best, and that's all I care about.
lazarus
Blue Crack Supplier
Basically it's some people who admit they don't even like older music saying that they're overrated/have no emotion.
And then Beatles fans (i.e., those with good taste) not being nearly harsh enough in response.
And then Beatles fans (i.e., those with good taste) not being nearly harsh enough in response.
iron yuppie
ONE love, blood, life
I don't really see how the artistic, technical, and even philosophical accomplishments of The Beatles can be denied. Trying to do so (not that anyone really is here, but some posters do on occasion) is just contrarianism for the sake of it. But there absolutely is a difference between appreciation and enjoyment. I wouldn't challenge someone who doesn't necessarily enjoy or "get" The Beatles, even though personally I find the back half of their catalogue almost uniformly brilliant.
There's also a distinction between "favorite " and "best" that I think is often lost in these types of discussions. If you asked me my favorite band right now, in terms of a group I am most likely to reach for, it would probably be Beach House, but I would never claim they are the best or most influential band out there right now.
There's also a distinction between "favorite " and "best" that I think is often lost in these types of discussions. If you asked me my favorite band right now, in terms of a group I am most likely to reach for, it would probably be Beach House, but I would never claim they are the best or most influential band out there right now.
Similar threads
