|
Why is TA full of wankers? (pg. 10)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| RebeL9 |
| quote: | Originally posted by osterzone
Red herring, red herring, red herring. |
I'm sure that you and that other idiot neo95 could get along pretty well. You both seem to draw the same kind of conclusions. |
|
|
| Palladium |
| quote: | Originally posted by osterzone
Registered: July 2009
|
you tried to make your point, you failed.
Now, could you just get the out please, thanks. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
If you want some current examples of popular stuff, you can look on the Billboard Top 10 and Top 11-50 songs.
You can point out which songs on there you think are "more complex, more creative, and clearly better than anything in the past." Personally, I'm not seeing those qualities in any of those tracks that I've heard. |
|
|
|
| SMC |
| quote: | Originally posted by osterzone
You posted a red herring. There's no beating around the bush- that's what you did. Stop dodging the subject. |
Did you take your pills today? |
|
|
| osterzone |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
|
Jive you say they aren't better....they aren't better for you than what? |
|
|
| DJ_Lord |
| it's not that TA is full of wankers, but the level of discussion on this forum, specifically, music discussion is very low. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| I dunno, just take the two albums I recently downloaded, Pale Blue Dot and Soundtrack to a Vacant Life by Benn Jordan. I don't think anything on those charts tops those two albums, although admittedly I haven't heard every single track on those charts, so I could be wrong. To take stuff that's older and closer in terms of genre (pop-rock axis), I don't think those tracks are better than stuff by Velvet Underground, or My Bloody Valentine. It's not hard to think of examples. |
|
|
| RebeL9 |
| quote: | Originally posted by osterzone
You posted a red herring. There's no beating around the bush- that's what you did. Stop dodging the subject. |
I'm not from the states so could you please skip the fish riddles. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by osterzone
Jive you say they aren't better....they aren't better for you than what? |
And now I'll ask you, which of those tracks stand out for you as "more complex, more creative, and clearly better than anything in the past." I'm assuming you don't think every last one of them is excellent and innovative, so can you pick out a few examples that you think are? Whose quality is clearly superior to all of the so-called "underground" music that many people around here tend to like? |
|
|
| woscar |
| quote: | Originally posted by osterzone
I've seen this happen on every music forum on the internet.
People list their favorite unknown, no-name, underground artists, and think they're better than the mainstream stuff.
But in reality, the artists they list suck. Most mainstream artists are popular you know...because they are good?
I've listened to most of that "old school, it kills this new poppy stuff" reccommendations from some of the dweebs in the other thread and they just flat out suck. It's called evolution- music today is more complex, more creative, and clearly better than anything in the past. It's just they don't want to accept it and stick to listening to the no-namers and acting like elitist snobs. |
:stongue: |
|
|
| SMC |
| We haven't even established what this so-called underground music is! There is no direction whatsoever in this debate. Can't all these tranceaddict in training clowns with 10 posts just the hell off? Or maybe it's just some alt f u c k e r that got us sitting here like morons writing replies. I don't know if i wanna believe people can actually be this stupid, and that they all end up here for some reason. :stongue: |
|
|
| SMC |
| quote: | Originally posted by osterzone
Hmm...how about NO?
If someone wants to come in and post, it's perfectly fine. Don't be upset because I'm ruining your circle jerk with the rest of the dweebs. |
What circle jerk? |
|
|
|
|
