you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3 points 11 months ago (19 children)

God The Ramones are such a weak band. I've never understood people's fanaticism.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    I saw them live twice and they were great shows.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (2 children)

    I'm not debating that they bring the hype, people love them and yes they have their influential place in the history of rock.

    I'm just saying in this era, I am lost as to why anybody would seek that music out. It had its place and it had its time, but that was like 50+ years ago.

    I don't need to hear these boots are made for walkin', and I don't need to hear I wanna be sedated. They're anthems from an ancient time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 child)

    You're missing my point.

    These are dried up, shallow pieces of music that had their place. Once you've heard one of their 2 minutes songs, you've heard their entire discography!

    There's actually great music you could spend your time on, which is what I do. There's 20 new albums every day, there's amazing jazz, amazing punk, amazing growth in various forms of music. In a way, listening to primitive music like Ramones is depriving oneself of what's out there now, which makes it sound like children's jingles in comparison.

    I realize I may be coming off harsh, but that is my personal perspective, I think it's weak and one dimensional. Then again, that statement could be applied to many popular acts.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 3 points 11 months ago* (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago

    Krudler is coming at it like music is a zero sum game, which is silly. I love the Ramones. I also love more innovative, complex music, as well as plenty of vapid garbage. I'm happy jumping from Art Pepper to Guatafán. None of it is a waste of time if it's what I'm in the mood for.

    The Ramones were a fresh slap in the face back in the day, and without them punk & new wave wouldn't be what they are. In the meantime, other artists have built on the Ramones' foundation. Similarly, Jimi Hendrix revolutionised how people used the electeic guitar as an instrument, but other artists ran with it to the point that his stuff is archaic (I can't listen to Hendrix for the same reason K dismissed the Ramones, but to each their own).

    I guess what I'm saying is that even if you personally don't like an influential band, you have to acknowledge that they might be exactly what resonates with someone else. That's why we have so much music in the world. To the original topic though, Ramones music does all sound the same. Why mess with perfection?

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago* (11 children)

    That's how I feel about Michael Jackson. Except he wasn't a band. He was just 1 person who whispered like a shy little girl & flailed around onstage like a noodle and he kept grabbing his crotch and nobody asked him to grab his crotch. I've never understood people's fanaticism.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    That was my fault. I asked him to do it ONCE, and he just wouldn't quit after that!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (1 child)

    Mystery solved. The rhinoplasty was the reason MJ couldn't stop grabbing his own crotch onstage.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago

    You ever start trimming something and one side is longer than the other so, you try to even it up, but you go a little too far, so you have cut the other side some more, and it's still not quite right, so you just keep cutting until nothing's left?

    Let's just say Michael got that one on the house.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    All your personal issues with the man are yours and not in dispute. I think a big difference here is that MJ was a musical virtuoso, not just a singer and showman.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (4 children)

    Was he virtuoso though? I feel like his best work was with Quincy Jones and Rod Temperton and without them he was just meh.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (3 children)

    Yes, look into the man. He composed a shitload of his music.

    I personally don't even like the man's musical output. That said, I can recognize genius. The man was nothing short of a musical genius with very few I could even list next to him, perhaps with the exceptions of Stevie, Herbie, Prince, Eno, and other brilliant minds. The guy was out of his tree, but on a level of musicality most people can't even grasp.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Only two and one co-written on Off the Wall and three and one co-written on Thriller (although they are bangers). He did write most of Bad but anything outside of that is imo sub-par. I'm not denying he had a lot of talent but I think he's far from a virtuoso.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Lol right. Give me a god damned break! You can't be serious, you're trolling, or genuinley know nothing of music.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment