Unpopular Musical Opinions

Remove this Banner Ad

even though i disagreed with this forever, I now think 70s disco music has dated a lot better than punk music and much much better than most 80s music especially the synth stuff
Synth film scores have dated well, that style is back in vogue again.

Sent from my Nokia 7.2 using Tapatalk
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I just realised that ST ANGER is an anagram of STRANGE.
latest
 
Cover versions of fast-paced, poppy or heavy songs that are stripped down into an acoustic or moody version are lame. Very rarely do they work - Chris Cornell and Billy Jean one of the few exceptions. They get a response because the lyrics are familiar and are "interesting", but interesting does not mean good.
 
Cover versions of fast-paced, poppy or heavy songs that are stripped down into an acoustic or moody version are lame. Very rarely do they work - Chris Cornell and Billy Jean one of the few exceptions. They get a response because the lyrics are familiar and are "interesting", but interesting does not mean good.

Agree with this for 99% of cases.

Case in point:
 
Cover versions of fast-paced, poppy or heavy songs that are stripped down into an acoustic or moody version are lame. Very rarely do they work - Chris Cornell and Billy Jean one of the few exceptions. They get a response because the lyrics are familiar and are "interesting", but interesting does not mean good.
Definitely disagree with this.

Love when covers are in a different arrangement for the most part.
 
Definitely disagree with this.

Love when covers are in a different arrangement for the most part.
Does the re-arranged cover stand up on its own as a song or do you only love it because it is a familiar song done a new way that gets your attention?

It can be done well - and re-arranged can also mean sped up with more energy. 'Whiskey in the Jar' by Metallica is a good example. They took an old folk song and made a genuine Metallica song out of it.
 
Does the re-arranged cover stand up on its own as a song or do you only love it because it is a familiar song done a new way that gets your attention?

It can be done well - and re-arranged can also mean sped up with more energy. 'Whiskey in the Jar' by Metallica is a good example. They took an old folk song and made a genuine Metallica song out of it.
Covers that end up sounding like originals are great but there's not that many that can do that.

Depends on the artist doing the cover.
 
Does the re-arranged cover stand up on its own as a song or do you only love it because it is a familiar song done a new way that gets your attention?

It can be done well - and re-arranged can also mean sped up with more energy. 'Whiskey in the Jar' by Metallica is a good example. They took an old folk song and made a genuine Metallica song out of it.
It stands up on its own. If it was a familiar song but a bland cover, I wouldn't like it.

For example - this is one of the GOAT covers IMO. I love the original, but this is nothing like it in the slightest, and it completely transformed the song into something else.

 
Does the re-arranged cover stand up on its own as a song or do you only love it because it is a familiar song done a new way that gets your attention?

It can be done well - and re-arranged can also mean sped up with more energy. 'Whiskey in the Jar' by Metallica is a good example. They took an old folk song and made a genuine Metallica song out of it.

Metallica’s Whiskey in a Jar really ain’t that much different from Thin Lizzys. Still great though. Metallica love a cover and do them well. I like their version of Nick Caves ‘Loverman’
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I'm collecting vinyl and anytime the Beatles, and Bob Dylan feature in a lot at auction, people go ******* stupid. Both are so uninspiring with the exception of one or two songs.

Bob Dylan's folksy style and nasal voice don't do much for me personally, but I assume that his fans are attracted to his lyricism above anything else.

I have a complex relationship with The Beatles: I appreciate their influence on popular music, and I loved them as a 5-year old, but I associate them with my childhood and start becoming uncomfortable when I listen to them. I guess it has something to do with the nature of my childhood (which was pretty turbulent), and maybe a feeling that I shouldn't be listening to 'children's music'.

Prince shits all over Michael Jackson

Probably not that unpopular an opinion when you consider the quality of the output of both. RE Wacko Jacko, I always thought Thriller was a bit overrated (though still good), Bad/Off the Wall were just good, and there's not much beyond that I like outside of the odd song or two (Black and White).

Wacko Jacko is more famous, but I reckon that has more to do with his legendary stage presence and a private life that made Prince's look sane by comparison.
 
Bob Dylan's folksy style and nasal voice don't do much for me personally, but I assume that his fans are attracted to his lyricism above anything else.

I have a complex relationship with The Beatles: I appreciate their influence on popular music, and I loved them as a 5-year old, but I associate them with my childhood and start becoming uncomfortable when I listen to them. I guess it has something to do with the nature of my childhood (which was pretty turbulent), and maybe a feeling that I shouldn't be listening to 'children's music'.



Probably not that unpopular an opinion when you consider the quality of the output of both. RE Wacko Jacko, I always thought Thriller was a bit overrated (though still good), Bad/Off the Wall were just good, and there's not much beyond that I like outside of the odd song or two (Black and White).

Wacko Jacko is more famous, but I reckon that has more to do with his legendary stage presence and a private life that made Prince's look sane by comparison.
I quite like here comes the sun but not much else.

Not sure if unpopular but Pat Benatar is one of the greatest female rockers. listening to her albums she has so much talent beyond the hits.
 
Bob Dylan's folksy style and nasal voice don't do much for me personally, but I assume that his fans are attracted to his lyricism above anything else.
I personally love his distinctive voice and his phrasing, but it's the lyricism, and to a lesser extent, the music, that does it for me. His voice has gone through a few changes over the years too. The nasal whine has been replaced by a gravelly growl over the last few years and it fits him like a glove.

From his remarkable new album:


I have a complex relationship with The Beatles: I appreciate their influence on popular music, and I loved them as a 5-year old, but I associate them with my childhood and start becoming uncomfortable when I listen to them.
They're not my favourite act but I do admire and respect what they created. You might be surprised if you give some of their albums a fresh listen. To my ears, there's no children's music when I hear Revolver, Rubber Soul, The White Album or Abbey Road.
 
They're not my favourite act but I do admire and respect what they created. You might be surprised if you give some of their albums a fresh listen. To my ears, there's no children's music when I hear Revolver, Rubber Soul, The White Album or Abbey Road.

Oh, the 'children's music' thing was a personal associative thing, not an objective description of their music.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top