Radiohead vs Muse poll

mr_cellotape

Premiership Player
Dec 24, 2005
3,927
103
Brisbane
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

hahahaha

i'm laughing so hard i think i'm crying

hahah what a moron

i assume you're extremely proficient with samplers then?
How predictable that the "oh the genres of music that I listen to use samplers so of course they require talent to use" idiots would decend upon that comment.
 

Carlos

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 2, 2001
8,029
11
Beneath the blue & white
AFL Club
North Melbourne
I just searched for posts containing 'Muse' by 'Carlos' and found 132.
So then surely it shouldn't be too hard for you to find one (aside from the aforementioned silverchair thread) where i have done what you've accused me of doing then?

Or did you make that up? Because wouldn't that be the work of someone guilty of
a fair chunk of deceit
???
That indeed would be a
Disappointing aspect in your character
Surely it has to go both ways doesnt it big guy?

You're completely full of sh*t.
When you explain what 'you value' and it includes 'their musicianship, songwriting, production and ideas and the seemingly dying art of putting on a great live show', which is pretty much everything in a band, then it's a classic underhanded, indirect insult to everyone who doesn't think Muse are great -after all, if you claim Muse have those characteristics, by implication anyone who doesn't like Muse mustn't like those characteristics in a band. It is very simple.

Or are 'indirect' and 'implication' difficult concepts for you?
Well at least you havent got a chip on your shoulder. I was almost worried about you for a minute there... :rolleyes:

Do you ever actually listen to yourself? I've never known anyone so completely pre-occupied and effected by someone else's opinions or views on something as what you are with me.

Are you going to let this go any time soon?
Of course you have. As below.
Clutching again.

Someone who rates his own intelligence as highly as you clearly do surely should understand the difference between someone hanging sh*t on you for your taste in music and in particular your opinion of a band (such as you've done to me for the last couple of months) as opposed to laughing at the notion that a band (U2) with such obvious playing limitations that even they admit to, could pull off music requiring musicianship that is beyond them.

Not that difficult i would have thought, but as long as you dont have a chip on your shoulder...
See here it is. 'Ignorantly'. 'Giggling'. The obsession and condescension is shining through again. Why exactly could U2 not play any of those songs. Are you questioning their musicianship? On what basis?
F*cken oath i am. U2 have written some incredible songs over their career, but incredible musicians they are not. As stated, they'd be the first to admit that.

Surely you're not trying to contend that they are? Oh hang on, you've already done that.

Funny how this "fanboyism" crap you sprout on about doesnt work both ways isn't it?

I am far from a comprehensive expert on musicianship, but it is something that has occupied been the major occupation of a fair chunk of my life, both playing, absorbing and learning. But regardless, my eyes and ears and particularly what i've seen of U2 live make it extremely obvious that they are limited, average musicians. Yes, they're very good at what they do, but it doesnt take great musicianship to do that. That doesnt make it any less valid, but thats not what we're talking about here.
See, this is the point. You sick obsession with Muse
Again, do you ever listen to yourself?

Why is it "sick" to be into a band?

Christ you have some demented views on things.
I'll bet you know absolutely nothing about the musical abilities of any member of U2, and so the only way you could make a claim like that is borne out of your sick obsession with Muse.
No, i make this claim because U2 have been around for nearly 30 years, i've seen them live in the flesh as well as on a few different releases and the evidence is pretty clear.

But somehow i think that your lofty opinion of U2 may distort your ability to admit this.

Again, this "fanboyism" notion is an interesting one isn't it mate?
You're stretching the truth again. Muse aren't a particularly popular band. Mid-ranks.
Compared to who?

U2? Yep, they are mid-ranks then. But bar maybe 3 or 4 bands on the planet, everyone is f*cking mid-ranks compared to U2.

But i dont get your problem admitting that a band who has achieved number 1 albums in as many countries and played to as many people as what Muse have aren't now a big player on the international music scene. That aint fanboyism, thats just the facts.
My concern relates purely to you bringing Muse into irrelevant threads and then denying you're obsessed. Poor form.
Firstly, thanks for your concern.

But secondly, despite all the accusations and obsession like behaviour in which you've contended that i've posted "132" times regarding Muse, you still cant find one thread where i've brought them up out of context except for the silverchair thread.

In fact, the only attempt you made was by accusing me of doing it in "the U2 thread" which, as proven, was actually a Muse thread.

Hmmm, revealing indeed. Almost fanboyish even?
Such poor language and disappointing vitriol. You write a long post attacking my perceptions, and expect me not to respond?

Please, try harder next time. This has been a disappointing effort.
I swear its like i'm talking crap with this guy sometimes:
 

just maybe

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 28, 2005
15,983
7
Other Teams
Adelaide
So then surely it shouldn't be too hard for you to find one (aside from the aforementioned silverchair thread) where i have done what you've accused me of doing then?

Or did you make that up? Because wouldn't that be the work of someone guilty of

???
That indeed would be a

Surely it has to go both ways doesnt it big guy?

You're completely full of sh*t.
Such disgusting abuse. you really have some awful, vindictive aspects to your character. It is no deceit whatsoever, I shall simply link the search to embarrass you: http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/search.php?searchid=1569303

Well at least you havent got a chip on your shoulder. I was almost worried about you for a minute there... :rolleyes:

Do you ever actually listen to yourself? I've never known anyone so completely pre-occupied and effected by someone else's opinions or views on something as what you are with me.

Are you going to let this go any time soon?
Unfortunately, you created this issue by going ******* when I pointed out your Muse obsession.

This is all your own pitiable fault.

F*cken oath i am. U2 have written some incredible songs over their career, but incredible musicians they are not. As stated, they'd be the first to admit that.

Surely you're not trying to contend that they are? Oh hang on, you've already done that.

Funny how this "fanboyism" crap you sprout on about doesnt work both ways isn't it?
Not funny at all. I make no comment on U2's musicianship because I don't consider I know enough about their training or talents. You seem to, yet can't stump up a single non-subjective piece of information.

Really makes your attempt to claim their musical talent is low really spurious. Deceitful, even.

I am far from a comprehensive expert on musicianship, but it is something that has occupied been the major occupation of a fair chunk of my life, both playing, absorbing and learning. But regardless, my eyes and ears and particularly what i've seen of U2 live make it extremely obvious that they are limited, average musicians. Yes, they're very good at what they do, but it doesnt take great musicianship to do that. That doesnt make it any less valid, but thats not what we're talking about here.
The highlighted point, plus your lack of ability to attack U2 on anything but a subjective basis, suggests you should probably quit while you're behind.

Claiming they are 'limited, average musicians' without any basis but 'I think they are' is so stupid, vindictive and silly you simply continue to make yourself look like the blind, dribbling, gormless Muse fanboy that you are.


Again, do you ever listen to yourself?

Why is it "sick" to be into a band?

Christ you have some demented views on things.
Not at all. Quite normal to be concerned about a person so bosessed with a band he raises them in irrelevant threads and viciously attacks other bands when Muse is criticised.


No, i make this claim because U2 have been around for nearly 30 years, i've seen them live in the flesh as well as on a few different releases and the evidence is pretty clear.

But somehow i think that your lofty opinion of U2 may distort your ability to admit this.

Again, this "fanboyism" notion is an interesting one isn't it mate?
Again, you seem to have comprehension problems. There is no fanboyism on my behalf. I am not making any claim about U2's level of musicianship.

You are.

You claim 'the evidence is pretty clear', yet that statement is obviously gorssly deceitful given your glaring and embarrassing inability to proffer up anything but severely biased spiteful personal opinion.

Oopsie daisie.


Compared to who?

U2? Yep, they are mid-ranks then. But bar maybe 3 or 4 bands on the planet, everyone is f*cking mid-ranks compared to U2.

But i dont get your problem admitting that a band who has achieved number 1 albums in as many countries and played to as many people as what Muse have aren't now a big player on the international music scene. That aint fanboyism, thats just the facts.
Not at all. Muse are mid-ranks. There are so many bigger bands than them in the world it's not funny. They are in no way whatsoever a big player, again that is your strange, angry and ridiculous obsession with them speaking. No one but you thinks they are a big player (except maybe fellow obsessives like Coughlan and Dice Man).

Firstly, thanks for your concern.

But secondly, despite all the accusations and obsession like behaviour in which you've contended that i've posted "132" times regarding Muse, you still cant find one thread where i've brought them up out of context except for the silverchair thread.
I linked the 132 (now 133) posts. A bit red-faced now eh, you cheap troll?

In fact, the only attempt you made was by accusing me of doing it in "the U2 thread" which, as proven, was actually a Muse thread.

Hmmm, revealing indeed. Almost fanboyish even?
Not at all. I've shown no fanboyism. U2 aren't even relevant. You are making issue of them.

I swear its like i'm talking crap with this guy sometimes:
You're the Comic Book Guy?

Fits.
 

Heisenberg_

17🏆19🏆20🏆
Sep 4, 2004
36,628
45,524
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
You don't headline the Reading festival if you aren't a big player, you don't win countless awards, sell millions of records and sell out concerts all over the world;), also sold out Wembley, in a very short time
You also don't have guys like Sir Paul McArtney give out recognition to you on a broadcast seen by millions like he did at Live 8, or even have another band win an award and say, thanks for this award, but this award belongs to Muse.
If their is so many bigger bands in the world, hows about you name 10 of their contempararies who are better, not using bands that were already established when Muse started out.
If you think I'm an obsessed fan boy, so be it, couldn't give a sh*t what some guy on the internet thinks, but if you think Muse aren't a big player, only a deluded moron who knows nothing would think that.
 

jimmy.h

Club Legend
Dec 1, 2005
2,432
711
The Mighty Boosh
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Storm, Arsenal
Not at all. Muse are mid-ranks. There are so many bigger bands than them in the world it's not funny. They are in no way whatsoever a big player, again that is your strange, angry and ridiculous obsession with them speaking. No one but you thinks they are a big player
I'm sorry but a mid ranked band do not get to headline Glastonbury, T in the Park/Oxygen, Leeds, Reading, V Festival, BDO, Isle of Wight Festival, Eurockéennes, Rock am Ring and Roskilde.
 

jimmy.h

Club Legend
Dec 1, 2005
2,432
711
The Mighty Boosh
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Storm, Arsenal
Like yours?
Yes, hence me using other people opinions to support mine. I'd thought that was fairly obvious

Well I'm not going to convince elitist Radiohead fans anyway
My goodness, calling something you don't personally like "elitist" what an intelligent, convincing argument.

because they've got their heads too far up Thom 'Gimpy-Eye' Yorke's arse.
Wow, primary school insults, your debating prowess is frightening

Remember, your supporting arguments were a Rolling Stone list,
Your argument is that because the Rolling Stone list put Morello at 26 he was in the top 10? and that because you personally don't like Radiohead they are elitist?

and their ability to use samplers
That's strange I remember listing samplers along with a variety of other instruments and technology including MIDI controllers, synths, string arrangements, guitar, piano, ondes martenot and audio programs, however feel free to just pick one and run with it.

I notice you pick the one you believe to me the most simple, wouldn't be trying to distort the argument would you?

I mean really, that's all you've got?
Well it wasn't but if you want to ignore the rest feel free.
 

G.O.B

Club Legend
Apr 28, 2006
1,505
174
northern suburbs
AFL Club
Collingwood
Obviously, just maybe has been banned from the society board and transferred his obsessive style of posting onto the music board.
You've proven nothing in this thread except for what an idiot you are.
Carlos, for all our sakes, put him on ignore.

This does not apply to any other posters who have expressed anti Muse sentiments on this, or any other thread on this board.
Music debates can be both enjoyable and enlightening. Things that Carlos has contibuted to this board in the past. Things that just maybe has most definetely not.

As for the debate at hand, although I think that Radiohead's top 2-3 songs are better than anything Muse has to offer, on sheer weight of material that I enjoy I would have to vote for Muse.
I have immensely enjoyed all 4 Muse albums with the last 2 in amongst my favourites of all time. As for Radiohead, I much prefer The Bends over Ok Computer but dont find myself being able to listen to either album from start to finish. As for their other "efforts'......meh. Dont quite do it for me.
FWIW, Radiohead's top 3 would consist of:
Karma Police
Street Spirit
Let Down

Muse' top 3:
Stockholm Syndrome
Citizen Erased
Butterflies and Hurricanes
 

Shmoses

Club Legend
Jul 10, 2006
1,857
16
AFL Club
Geelong
How predictable that the "oh the genres of music that I listen to use samplers so of course they require talent to use" idiots would decend upon that comment.
Mate there's almost no genre of music I won't listen to, so you can shove this comment up your ass. Answer my question: are you extremely proficient with a sampler? Can you use one? Do you honestly have any idea what you're talking about? Cause it seems pretty much that you don't.
 

Carlos

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 2, 2001
8,029
11
Beneath the blue & white
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Such disgusting abuse. you really have some awful, vindictive aspects to your character. It is no deceit whatsoever, I shall simply link the search to embarrass you: http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/search.php?searchid=1569303
Anyone else having trouble with that link?

All i get is a message saying "Sorry - no matches. Please try some different terms."

So i'm still waiting big guy.

And disgusting abuse? How thin is your skin? Christ, i'm a MUCH bigger c**t in real life than what i've shown you in this thread champ! I could unload alot heavier than that, but then i'm scared your obsession with me might actually intensify!!

"Vindictive aspects"?

Hmmm, i wonder if making up lies (you still havent provided a single effective link to one thread where i've done what you're trying to pin on me) about someone and then going on an obsessive crusade to perpetuate those lies could fall under that same umbrella?
Unfortunately, you created this issue by going ******* when I pointed out your Muse obsession.

This is all your own pitiable fault.
Can you link me to when i went "*******" too while you're at it?

You're throwing around some pretty hefty accusations here champ, but really coming up thin on the whole proof thing.
Not funny at all. I make no comment on U2's musicianship because I don't consider I know enough about their training or talents. You seem to, yet can't stump up a single non-subjective piece of information.

Really makes your attempt to claim their musical talent is low really spurious. Deceitful, even.

The highlighted point, plus your lack of ability to attack U2 on anything but a subjective basis, suggests you should probably quit while you're behind.

Claiming they are 'limited, average musicians' without any basis but 'I think they are' is so stupid, vindictive and silly you simply continue to make yourself look like the blind, dribbling, gormless Muse fanboy that you are.
Yeah, i'm a massive Muse fan, but i try to limit my dribbling to when i'm behind my drums bro!!

Gormless? Wicked word dude. Might snake that one if you dont mind. But why would someone who once posted Carlos, seriously. I like some of what you write - alot in fact then turn so viciously?

Oh, thats right, because I dont share your blind love of U2 and rate other bands, particularly Muse, higher. Thats when sh*t went pair shaped...

Anyway, you mentioned "training". Surely you've read many times that they taught themselves how to play? Most U2 fans know that. And have you never read an interview with them openly admitting their limited ability?

But heres a specific for you: Larry Mullens Jnr openly admits he cannot do a 4 stroke roll. In fact, he doesnt even understand the basic mechanics of it. Write to the editors of "Drum!" magazine, which is a UK publication and request the interview with him which was featured roughly 2 years ago. He's on the cover behind a set of Yamaha Absolute Birch drums in marine white surrounded by Paiste cymbals. Gorgeous drums they are. Got a similar set myself.

In fact, in that interview he openly admits he has had no training and attributes this as to why his parts are so basic. Put simply, he isnt capable of much else. Certainly knows how to "play for the song" which is one of the biggest cliche's in drumming and is certainly the perfect drummer for U2, but he openly admits that much more than that is beyond him.

The Muse song "Assassin" features some wonderfully applied and rather tricky 4 stroke rolls which add extra teeth to what is already a killer pattern he is playing between hand and feet including a really cool double kick pattern (Larry has never played double kicks in his life...) during the intro and bridge parts as well as a killer triplet roll which finishes the section in wicked fashion before going into the versus, and finishing the section with a smoking variation of the 4 stroke again. And all, as i found out when i was lucky to chat with him during their Melbourne tour, he does to a click track live.

Simply put, they, along with a number of Dom's parts in numerous Muse songs, are beyond Larry, at any age. Larry has come up with some great drum parts over his career, no doubt. But over that career he has never shown any ability like what Dom does in Assassin.

I know you adore U2 and i dont really see the point in nor would i attack you for this like you have done me with in regards to an apparent obsession with Muse. If you dispute that, you must link me to where i have. If you cant, then you simply must start shutting your mouth because its getting old, annoying and embarrassing.

But while Bono has strengths as a vocalist, i fail to see how you or anyone could contend that he was capable of coming close to pulling off a vocal line like what Matt does in Micro Cuts, especially when they used to do it live. In fact i'll risk your further wrath by saying that few mainstream vocalists could. Sure, its possible not many would want to and yeah, its probably a bit over th e top anyway. But the fact is, you're trying to contend that Bono (or Edge) has the ability to.

But somehow i think all this will fall on deaf ears because you're blinded by your adoration of U2, which is cool. Its comforting to know that something, anything in this life might possibly make you happy, because by crikey you come across as a miserable bastard on here!

Not at all. Quite normal to be concerned about a person so bosessed with a band he raises them in irrelevant threads and viciously attacks other bands when Muse is criticised.
Again, i'm waiting for the links champ. If they dont come, then you're just looking like a bullsh*t artist.

Surely, amongst all those posts you're trying to hang on me it shouldn't be hard to find just ONE?

And "quite normal"? You must live an interesting life to think any of this is "normal". Which law firm do you work for or which counsel are you a member of? Because apart from Lawyers and Politicians, i dont think its possible for anyone to be this vehemently argumentative and produce such absolute lies to bolster their assertions.
Again, you seem to have comprehension problems. There is no fanboyism on my behalf. I am not making any claim about U2's level of musicianship.

You are.

You claim 'the evidence is pretty clear', yet that statement is obviously gorssly deceitful given your glaring and embarrassing inability to proffer up anything but severely biased spiteful personal opinion.

Oopsie daisie.
Are you capable of anything other than this childish crap? You're calling me spiteful amongst a sea of other delights yet all you've done is make up sh*t and proven none of it. And when challenged, you've come out with the classic teenager-like "I know you are but what am i" line of argument.

Step it up big guy.
Not at all. Muse are mid-ranks. There are so many bigger bands than them in the world it's not funny. They are in no way whatsoever a big player, again that is your strange, angry and ridiculous obsession with them speaking. No one but you thinks they are a big player (except maybe fellow obsessives like Coughlan and Dice Man).
Firstly, define "big" because its pretty clear you've got some seriously grand notions on the matter.

And then please name 20 of those "so many" bands that apparently are unfunnily "that" much bigger than Muse.

And "angry" and "strange"? I loved that bit.

Lets just recap: i've lost count of the number of posts you've thrown my way about my apparent "obsession" with Muse, with each one the tone becoming darker and darker and in no danger of letting go.

Lets just repeat, you're posting time after time about someone else's view, correctly interpreted or not, of a band you claim to be not all that fussed with, and are becoming disturbingly obsessed with asserting without out once single link of proof that i spoil "every ****ing thread" with my apparent blind love of them. Yeah, you've thrown a number at me, but not one link to one thread where i've done what you're accusing, yet you've become more personal and more disturbed with each post.

But, yeah, i'm the strange, angry f*cker...
I linked the 132 (now 133) posts. A bit red-faced now eh, you cheap troll?
Ooooh, nice one bro! That was a corker! :thumbsu: But as long as you're not angry...

And no, you linked me to a message that read: Sorry - no matches. Please try some different terms.

C'mon champ. Just one. Thats all i'm asking.
Not at all. I've shown no fanboyism. U2 aren't even relevant. You are making issue of them.
Hehe, thats gorgeous.

Can i remind you how you mentioned something i apparently did in what you claimed was a "U2 thread", which was actually a Muse thread?

And can i remind you how upset you got when i gave my opinion on your Irish boys? No, i didnt cast judgement on anyone about their opinion of U2 because that'd be kinda f*cked IMO. Always said, each to their own. I just stated my opinion of them. Yet then just maybe a "fanboy" got a bit upset and came out with:

but to compare them (Muse) to U2 is simply amateur and Stadium rock aside, go and look at some of U2's performances from the 80s, where they built their reputation as a live act. Blows anything Muse have ever done well away, and a good reason they are rated as one of the great live acts. Go and watch Red Rocks and Yes, comparing Muse to U2 is sickening or Hahaha, Muse don't even hold a candle to U2. One of the all-time great rock bands vs a rocked-up Radiohead rip-off.

But dont ever call the boy a big U2 fan!! Thats completely different isnt it?

But you know what, i actually couldnt care less if you're into them. In fact i'd admire you for it, regardless of my opinion of them. You claim i strut around on here casting judgement on everyone's tastes in music yet have failed to provide one piece of evidence, but the fact is i got no problem with anyone liking anything. Again, provide evidence to the contrary or shut up.

Then you completely obsess over me apparently "fanboying" Muse in irrelevant threads or "every ****ing thread" as you put it (before delightfully accusing me of foul language - geez you're adorable) and again, fail to raise one example.

I really dig Muse. No problem admitting. "Fanboy"? Whatever that is supposed to mean, then yeah, i'll cop it. Dont actually see what is wrong with digging a band alot but each to their own. Yeah, if i blabbed on about Muse in every thread like your old mate Lions Then Daylight used to with Oasis for example would be bloody annoying. And for some stupid reason you're obsessively trying to pin that kind of sh*t on me and really starting to get quite deranged about it.

Why are you so into this anyway?

Whatever the case, i really hope you're gonna move on from this. You're never going to admit you may have got me a tickle bit wrong, and to be honest, i really couldnt give a rat's arse what you think of me either way. But making things up about me and providing zero evidence to satisfy some bazaar obsession or agenda you have with me is really not cool. In fact, its getting kind of sick.
 

Carlos

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 2, 2001
8,029
11
Beneath the blue & white
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Obviously, just maybe has been banned from the society board and transferred his obsessive style of posting onto the music board.
You've proven nothing in this thread except for what an idiot you are.
Carlos, for all our sakes, put him on ignore.
I'd like the opportunity to put the c*** out of his own misery!!

But yeah, the ignore thing is looking like a more viable option with every word i post, because this has gone way beyond normal.

I'm actually as sorry for doing this because of the vibe it brings to this board as i am for the buggery it causes my head!!

I really hate myself when i get involved in this sh*t. Its just a stupid freakin internet forum...

I blame Binxy. :thumbsdown:
 

Adz

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 17, 2003
16,073
8,117
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
Muse :thumbsdown:

This has to be a joke. Muse are just another alternative band, where as Radiohead will be remembered forever.
Muse are a watered down version of Radiohead.
Where as Radiohead are evolving, Muse aren't.
There last cd was dire apart from about 3 songs.
Heard of a melody Matt?
 

mr_cellotape

Premiership Player
Dec 24, 2005
3,927
103
Brisbane
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Mate there's almost no genre of music I won't listen to, so you can shove this comment up your ass. Answer my question: are you extremely proficient with a sampler? Can you use one? Do you honestly have any idea what you're talking about? Cause it seems pretty much that you don't.
My knowledge of samplers, and my ability to use samplers is good enough to know that being able to play any _real_ musical instrument with any degree of proficiency requires a lot more talent than to use a sampler. (I used Roland setups to create projects in music class at school; no doubt they were used to offset the inability of many of the students to actually play a proper musical instrument with any degree of skill).

Why? Sampler requires prior preparation and setting-up to emit the desired sound. And when performed, require next to no talent _what so ever_.

Real instruments (from guitars and violins to percussion to wind or brass instruments), in the hands of talented musicians, do not require hours of programming sounds and other b.s.. And when it's time to play, the musician must be able to replicate their performance on the spot, not just press a few buttons at the appropriate moment.
 

Suspense

AOC + 3
Mar 28, 2006
7,093
2,337
POLICE STATE
AFL Club
Collingwood
I just searched for posts containing 'Muse' by 'Carlos' and found 132.
I don't think that means much at all.

'Bono' by 'just maybe' found 331 results... :eek:
(To be fair, most of them are outside of the Music forum, but still...)


Radiohead for me. As much as I loved Absolution, I don't think Muse have come close to making anything as good as OK COMPUTER or KID A.

Edit: Yay, I put Radiohead into the lead!
 

jimmy.h

Club Legend
Dec 1, 2005
2,432
711
The Mighty Boosh
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Storm, Arsenal
Why? Sampler requires prior preparation and setting-up to emit the desired sound. And when performed, require next to no talent _what so ever_.

Real instruments (from guitars and violins to percussion to wind or brass instruments), in the hands of talented musicians, do not require hours of programming sounds and other b.s.. And when it's time to play, the musician must be able to replicate their performance on the spot, not just press a few buttons at the appropriate moment.
Which would perhaps explain why, rather than focus on Radiohead's use of guitars, piano, key boards, the ondes martenot, music software, MIDI controllers, percussion, toucpads, synths and string arrangements, you focused on samplers as evidence of their lack of talent.
 

Shmoses

Club Legend
Jul 10, 2006
1,857
16
AFL Club
Geelong
My knowledge of samplers, and my ability to use samplers is good enough to know that being able to play any _real_ musical instrument with any degree of proficiency requires a lot more talent than to use a sampler. (I used Roland setups to create projects in music class at school; no doubt they were used to offset the inability of many of the students to actually play a proper musical instrument with any degree of skill).

Why? Sampler requires prior preparation and setting-up to emit the desired sound. And when performed, require next to no talent _what so ever_.

Real instruments (from guitars and violins to percussion to wind or brass instruments), in the hands of talented musicians, do not require hours of programming sounds and other b.s.. And when it's time to play, the musician must be able to replicate their performance on the spot, not just press a few buttons at the appropriate moment.
Ha. Thought so. You don't have a clue what you're talking about. I know how much talent it takes to play musical instruments mate, I'm a guitarist myself and have been for years and years. What I'm saying is that you really don't have any idea what kind of work goes into samples. You don't simply press a button and all these magical musical notes fly all over the joint, there's work involved in creating and manipulating the sounds you hear. It's not simple point n click. You're being astonishingly ignorant here.
 

Heisenberg_

17🏆19🏆20🏆
Sep 4, 2004
36,628
45,524
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Muse :thumbsdown:

This has to be a joke. Muse are just another alternative band, where as Radiohead will be remembered forever.
Muse are a watered down version of Radiohead.
Where as Radiohead are evolving, Muse aren't.
There last cd was dire apart from about 3 songs.
Heard of a melody Matt?
You obviously haven't listened to one Muse album in you're life, each one is completly different, Radiohead has evolved to sh*t IMO, their first few albums were awsome, but Kid A and Hail to the Thief were terrible, just hope to god they get back to a more guitar based sound rather then the electronic sh*t they served up
 

jimmy.h

Club Legend
Dec 1, 2005
2,432
711
The Mighty Boosh
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Storm, Arsenal
You obviously haven't listened to one Muse album in you're life, each one is completly different, Radiohead has evolved to sh*t IMO, their first few albums were awsome, but Kid A and Hail to the Thief were terrible, just hope to god they get back to a more guitar based sound rather then the electronic sh*t they served up
Kid A, Amnesiac and HTTT are all far superior albums to Pablo Honey, and at the very least comparable to The Bends in terms of complete Albums. As good as the better songs on The Bends are, songs such as Black Star, Bones and Nice Dream probably prevent it from reaching the greatness of OK Computer or maybe even Kid A. As for Pablo Honey, take out You and Creep and it's pretty much a shithouse album.

Essentially it is Radiohead's continuing progression which makes them the band they are. If they had never made the branch away from their guitar based rock (firstly with Street Spirit and FPT, then with Climbing Up the Walls, No Surprises etc and finally with KID A/Amnesiac) they would essentially be a reasonably well regard guitar band, noted only for Ed's array of effects and Thom's falsetto.
 

mr_cellotape

Premiership Player
Dec 24, 2005
3,927
103
Brisbane
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
You don't have a clue what you're talking about.
I'm so sorry that my opinion differs from yours :rolleyes: Doesn't mean that I don't know what I'm talking about.

What I'm saying is that you really don't have any idea what kind of work goes into samples. You don't simply press a button and all these magical musical notes fly all over the joint, there's work involved in creating and manipulating the sounds you hear.
Umm.. you didn't even read what I wrote did you? Because if you had, you'd know that I've already addressed this point. Work doesn't equal talent.

You're being astonishingly ignorant here.
Getting people riled up, though. :D
 

just maybe

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 28, 2005
15,983
7
Other Teams
Adelaide
Obviously, just maybe has been banned from the society board and transferred his obsessive style of posting onto the music board.
You've proven nothing in this thread except for what an idiot you are.
Carlos, for all our sakes, put him on ignore.
Wow, you're a tool.

I'm neither banned from the SRP Board nor trying to 'prove' anything.

You, however, are a cheap troll.
 

Remove this Banner Ad