DVD Talk Forum

DVD Talk Forum (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/)
-   Music Talk (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/music-talk-28/)
-   -   Music snobbism. (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/music-talk/545377-music-snobbism.html)

RagingBull80 10-07-09 03:22 AM

Re: Music snobbism.
 
I just read through this entire thread and would like to get it up and running again...

As for me...

I don't like Radiohead. I think they are a good band but highly overrated.

I do think that anyone who listens to Paris Hilton is a moran. Sorry GatorDeb.

I think that there is little to no art in rap music. I think it just plain sucks. Kanye West is not a genius.

I also think everyone has a right to listen to whatever they want, however wrong it may be.

I think music is music and you like what you like but some stuff is more valuable.

I like a lot of music but the old music I listen to outweighs the new.


Originally Posted by Hokeyboy (Post 9133229)
I postulate that there is more skill and craftsmanship in Cheap Trick's "I Want You To Want Me" than in Nine Inch Nail's *entire* ouvre. My opinion, of course, but who else's would I be talking about here?

Cheap Trick are good at what they do. They were my very first concert! But this statement is ridiculous. I'm betting you haven't listened to much more than what's been played on the radio. There is so much more there than people give Trent credit for. And honestly I can't blame you for feeling this way. Just take a look at most NIN fans and the other shit they listen to.


Originally Posted by Hokeyboy (Post 9134612)
Understood, but the end result is the end result. You can appreciate the songwriting, performing, and production efforts of a song or album to all ends of the Earth, but I'd rather saw my own legs off than listen to "Pet Sounds" again, no matter how much genius Brian Wilson poured into it. (It's one of those albums, again, I appreciate the effort but the end result doesn't do anything for me. I'd rather listen to anything by The Left Banke).

I don't share this opinion as I think "Pet Sounds" is one of the greatest albums ever. But I can see why people don't like the Beach Boys.


Yngwie Malmsteen is admittedly an amazing guitarist and I can appreciate his talent, but jeepers his performances leave me incredibly indifferent.
I will agree with this to a certain extent. He has the technical ability but who gives a shit, he sucks.


Duane Allman, on the other hand, just had that perfect combination of artistry and melody that almost anyone could groove to.
I fully agree with this. Duane was an amazing talent.

Supermallet 10-07-09 03:08 PM

Re: Music snobbism.
 

Originally Posted by The Bus (Post 9141929)
Spin Dec. 1993: Pearl Jam, KRS-One, Breeders, Iggy Pop

Various Rolling Stone covers and bylines, 1993:
Sting
Ice-T*
Neil Young
David Bowie
Liz Phair
Steely Dan
Smashing Pumpkins
U2
Def Leppard*
The Cure
Prince
Jerry Garcia
Whitney Houston*
Dwight Yoakam*
Naughty by Nature*
Midnight Oil*
Urge Overkill*
Steve Miller
Blues Traveler*
Lenny Kravitz*
Eric Clapton
INXS*
Guns 'n' Roses
White Zombie
Run DMC
En Vogue*
Garth Brooks
Jeff Beck*
Goo Goo Dolls*
Meatloaf*
Depeche Mode
Bad Religion(?)

It's roughly about 50/50. I marked the artists that, in my opinion, are either currently artistically, culturally, or commercially irrelevant or haven't left a lasting legacy. Again, my opinion and you can mark or unmark a number of them. The fact is, if you make the cover of a music magazine, you will probably be, at the very least, remembered.

Can you tell me in what way Steve Miller is currently artistically, culturally, or commercially relevant? In fact, could you ever name a time Steve Miller was artistically relevant? As far as I can tell, he's churned out the same milquetoast, uninteresting, white bread "rock" since his career started. I would say that Meatloaf, who can boast one of the top 5 best selling albums of all time, certainly has more of a lasting legacy than Steve Miller.

The Bus 10-07-09 03:37 PM

Re: Music snobbism.
 

Originally Posted by Suprmallet (Post 9757981)
Can you tell me in what way Steve Miller is currently artistically, culturally, or commercially relevant? In fact, could you ever name a time Steve Miller was artistically relevant? As far as I can tell, he's churned out the same milquetoast, uninteresting, white bread "rock" since his career started. I would say that Meatloaf, who can boast one of the top 5 best selling albums of all time, certainly has more of a lasting legacy than Steve Miller.

I'm going to guess that Steve Miller's "Best of" currently outsells any of Meatloaf's albums. But it's a guess.

Hokeyboy 10-07-09 03:47 PM

Re: Music snobbism.
 

Originally Posted by Suprmallet (Post 9757981)
Can you tell me in what way Steve Miller is currently artistically, culturally, or commercially relevant? In fact, could you ever name a time Steve Miller was artistically relevant? As far as I can tell, he's churned out the same milquetoast, uninteresting, white bread "rock" since his career started. I would say that Meatloaf, who can boast one of the top 5 best selling albums of all time, certainly has more of a lasting legacy than Steve Miller.

Steve Miller's artistic "relevance" is in his blues and jazz work, which almost nobody over the past 30 years has really listened to. I'm not a big fan, but some of his earlier stuff is really interesting.

I'd rather eat my own face than ever listen to anything off of his greatest hits or that hasn't been overplayed by commercialized testicular radio.

But there's a lot more to the man and his career than just "The Joker" or "Wet Vaginer".

Supermallet 10-07-09 03:52 PM

Re: Music snobbism.
 

Originally Posted by The Bus (Post 9758065)
I'm going to guess that Steve Miller's "Best of" currently outsells any of Meatloaf's albums. But it's a guess.

Steve Miller's Greatest Hits has sold 13 million copies. Bat Out of Hell has sold 43 million copies.

Hokey: I didn't know he did any blues or jazz. Does he sing in those, as well? And, if so, does he actually emote?

FatTony 10-07-09 04:01 PM

Re: Music snobbism.
 

Originally Posted by RagingBull80 (Post 9756802)
I think that there is little to no art in rap music. I think it just plain sucks. Kanye West is not a genius.

This is an argument that I see all too often against rap and hip-hop, and it's completely unfounded. I'm willing to bet that your exposure to rap is limited almost entirely to what hits the mainstream. But if you look at what hits the mainstream for any genre, you'll see that it most often appeals to the lowest common denominator and should not be used to gauge an entire genre. Contrary to what you believe, there is good rap and hip-hop out there, and it takes talent and skill to create just like any other kind of music. You don't like it? Fine. But don't dismiss it entirely as an art form.

The Bus 10-07-09 04:12 PM

Re: Music snobbism.
 

Originally Posted by Suprmallet (Post 9758104)
Steve Miller's Greatest Hits has sold 13 million copies. Bat Out of Hell has sold 43 million copies.

Hokey: I didn't know he did any blues or jazz. Does he sing in those, as well? And, if so, does he actually emote?

Currently.

The Bus 10-07-09 04:14 PM

Re: Music snobbism.
 
I might still be wrong. :shrug:

Gerry P. 10-07-09 04:18 PM

Re: Music snobbism.
 

Originally Posted by The Bus (Post 9757981)
Jeff Beck*

Check out the recent Live at Ronnie Scott's and then say he's irrelevant. True talent is timeless.

Hokeyboy 10-07-09 04:21 PM

Re: Music snobbism.
 
Wait... someone proclaimed Jeff Beck as irrelevant? REALLY??? Wow...


Ask that same question to anyone who's ever picked up a guitar.

Gerry P. 10-07-09 04:24 PM

Re: Music snobbism.
 

Originally Posted by Hokeyboy (Post 9758166)
Wait... someone proclaimed Jeff Beck as irrelevant? REALLY??? Wow...


Ask that same question to anyone who's ever picked up a guitar.

What's really funny that he is claiming that Jeff Beck is any more or less relevant than he was 15 years ago.

Supermallet 10-07-09 04:29 PM

Re: Music snobbism.
 

Originally Posted by The Bus (Post 9758144)
Currently.

I went to see if I could find 2009 sales numbers for both albums, but didn't see much. Still, I would think a 30 million copy disparity would suggest that Bat Out of Hell has consistently sold better than Steve Miller's Greatest Hits, especially given that the albums came out within two years of each other.

rw2516 10-07-09 06:03 PM

Re: Music snobbism.
 

Originally Posted by Suprmallet (Post 9757981)
Can you tell me in what way Steve Miller is currently artistically, culturally, or commercially relevant? In fact, could you ever name a time Steve Miller was artistically relevant? As far as I can tell, he's churned out the same milquetoast, uninteresting, white bread "rock" since his career started. I would say that Meatloaf, who can boast one of the top 5 best selling albums of all time, certainly has more of a lasting legacy than Steve Miller.

On a few years out of a 40+ year career is the pop stuff. The stuff from '73-77 is what 90% of people have heard and are familiar with. It's kinda like people pigeon-holeing Fleetwood Mac for their soft/pop rock because most people are unaware of the early blues stuff with Peter Green

goodwill 10-07-09 07:39 PM

Re: Music snobbism.
 

Originally Posted by Suprmallet (Post 9758189)
I went to see if I could find 2009 sales numbers for both albums, but didn't see much. Still, I would think a 30 million copy disparity would suggest that Bat Out of Hell has consistently sold better than Steve Miller's Greatest Hits, especially given that the albums came out within two years of each other.

I don't know if this helps or not, but Amazon's got Steve Miller's greatest hits ranked at #2,074 and Meat Loaf's Bat Out of Hell at #847 in sales. Not a scientific measure by any means, but should be good enough for this argument.

RagingBull80 10-07-09 08:26 PM

Re: Music snobbism.
 

Originally Posted by FatTony (Post 9758122)
This is an argument that I see all too often against rap and hip-hop, and it's completely unfounded. I'm willing to bet that your exposure to rap is limited almost entirely to what hits the mainstream.

It's not entirely all I have heard but I will agree that I haven't dug very deep.

And let me rephrase my original argument. I have no problem with what rap started out as. I would actually go as far as saying that I enjoy a lot of the early rap I have heard. A lot of that was inventive and took some skill to produce. The rap that I'm referring to as awful shit, is pretty much anything after the early '90s. It's just all about bling now.


But if you look at what hits the mainstream for any genre, you'll see that it most often appeals to the lowest common denominator and should not be used to gauge an entire genre.
I agree with this statement 100%.


Contrary to what you believe, there is good rap and hip-hop out there, and it takes talent and skill to create just like any other kind of music.
There is good rap out there. But I don't think it takes a fourth of the talent to create. Speaking rhythmically is not a talent in my book. And again this mainly applies to rap after the early '90s.

fargreg 10-07-09 09:24 PM

Re: Music snobbism.
 

Originally Posted by RagingBull80 (Post 9758631)
It's not entirely all I have heard but I will agree that I haven't dug very deep.

And let me rephrase my original argument. I have no problem with what rap started out as. I would actually go as far as saying that I enjoy a lot of the early rap I have heard. A lot of that was inventive and took some skill to produce. The rap that I'm referring to as awful shit, is pretty much anything after the early '90s. It's just all about bling now.


I agree with this statement 100%.


There is good rap out there. But I don't think it takes a fourth of the talent to create. Speaking rhythmically is not a talent in my book. And again this mainly applies to rap after the early '90s.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvPnM...eature=related

No bling here and a shitload of talent...

Travis McClain 10-07-09 09:31 PM

Re: Music snobbism.
 

Originally Posted by RagingBull80 (Post 9758631)
Speaking rhythmically is not a talent in my book. And again this mainly applies to rap after the early '90s.

Then you must not be as rhythmically disinclined as I am. I can't even clap in rhythm at concerts!

FatTony 10-08-09 06:02 PM

Re: Music snobbism.
 

Originally Posted by RagingBull80 (Post 9758631)
It's just all about bling now.

Again, you're using your own limited exposure to gauge an entire genre. This and this are far removed from the "bling" culture and are currently two of the biggest hip-hop acts in the Seattle area right now. I can almost guarantee there's a burgeoning rap and hip-hop scene in the nearest metropolitan area to you and it has much more to offer substance-wise than bling.


There is good rap out there. But I don't think it takes a fourth of the talent to create. Speaking rhythmically is not a talent in my book. And again this mainly applies to rap after the early '90s.
To each their own. I won't argue that rapping requires a comparable level of talent to singing, but musical proficiency does not always equate to good songwriting. Just as an example, I find Dream Theater's music to be some of the most boring, unlistenable shit I've ever heard in spite of the fact that they are arguably masters of their instruments while a band like Strike Anywhere, who make totally simple punk music with politically-charged lyrics, inspires me to no end. I'll take simplistic music with substance over any technical-but-empty crap any day of the week.

xmiyux 10-08-09 07:08 PM

Re: Music snobbism.
 

Originally Posted by FatTony (Post 9760846)
Again, you're using your own limited exposure to gauge an entire genre. This and this are far removed from the "bling" culture and are currently two of the biggest hip-hop acts in the Seattle area right now. I can almost guarantee there's a burgeoning rap and hip-hop scene in the nearest metropolitan area to you and it has much more to offer substance-wise than bling.



To each their own. I won't argue that rapping requires a comparable level of talent to singing, but musical proficiency does not always equate to good songwriting. Just as an example, I find Dream Theater's music to be some of the most boring, unlistenable shit I've ever heard in spite of the fact that they are arguably masters of their instruments while a band like Strike Anywhere, who make totally simple punk music with politically-charged lyrics, inspires me to no end. I'll take simplistic music with substance over any technical-but-empty empty crap any day of the week.

I'm in total agreement.

I will take something like Solliquists of Sound or Brother Ali even over most other music out there.

edit: Lyrics make music for me. That is why people like Tom Waits hit me so hard. Hell, even Captain Beefheart is awesome for the absurdity.

RagingBull80 10-08-09 08:55 PM

Re: Music snobbism.
 

Originally Posted by fargreg (Post 9758761)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvPnM...eature=related

No bling here and a shitload of talent...

That's not as bad as some that I've heard. It's actually quite good for what it is. That being said I'm still not a fan of rap.


Originally Posted by FatTony (Post 9760846)
Again, you're using your own limited exposure to gauge an entire genre. This and this are far removed from the "bling" culture and are currently two of the biggest hip-hop acts in the Seattle area right now. I can almost guarantee there's a burgeoning rap and hip-hop scene in the nearest metropolitan area to you and it has much more to offer substance-wise than bling.

I feel about the music in the first link as I stated above. Just a first impression but I would equate that artist to a singer/songwriter like James Taylor or such.

However, the second is atrocious.


Originally Posted by xmiyux (Post 9760990)
edit: Lyrics make music for me. That is why people like Tom Waits hit me so hard. Hell, even Captain Beefheart is awesome for the absurdity.

I'm a fan of both.

Hokeyboy 10-09-09 08:51 AM

Re: Music snobbism.
 
I'm still :lol: :lol: :lol: at the basic thought process that would lump Jeff Beck with Lenny Kravitz, Urge Overkill, Naughty by Nature, En Vogue, and Blues Traveler in terms of "artistic relevance".

That's some serious :jawdrop: right there.

GenPion 10-09-09 10:04 AM

Re: Music snobbism.
 
I am not a music snob. That said, I rarely if ever listen to musicians found on most radio stations. I have enjoyed many different artists found on College Radio stations however. I generally just listen to what I like regardless of what others think. However, I tend to agree with the likes of critics on Pitchfork - not always, but my music taste, for instance, fit pretty well with their recent "Best of 2000" list. I love music of all styles, but I listen to very little Country or Rap (though there are notable exceptions).

The Bus 10-09-09 11:58 AM

Re: Music snobbism.
 

Originally Posted by Hokeyboy (Post 9761917)
I'm still :lol: :lol: :lol: at the basic thought process that would lump Jeff Beck with Lenny Kravitz, Urge Overkill, Naughty by Nature, En Vogue, and Blues Traveler in terms of "artistic relevance".

That's some serious :jawdrop: right there.

I don't know anyone under 30 who listens to Jeff Beck (by himself, not with the Yardbirds). Honestly in this whole conversation I kept thinking of him in his solo career, not as a member of the Yardbirds.

I think one of the things happening here is that some people overestimate the value/acclaim of music from the time when they were heavily into music. As someone else here said, we're talking late high school to college, maybe some post-college.

So someone my age who is convinced that Catherine Wheel or Charlatans UK will be remembered in twenty years may be completely wrong. And people who are in their late 30s may still think that such-and-such a band is relevant to the general population.

The only true test is time.

GenPion 10-09-09 12:25 PM

Re: Music snobbism.
 

Originally Posted by The Bus (Post 9762381)
I don't know anyone under 30 who listens to Jeff Beck (by himself, not with the Yardbirds). Honestly in this whole conversation I kept thinking of him in his solo career, not as a member of the Yardbirds.

I think one of the things happening here is that some people overestimate the value/acclaim of music from the time when they were heavily into music. As someone else here said, we're talking late high school to college, maybe some post-college.

So someone my age who is convinced that Catherine Wheel or Charlatans UK will be remembered in twenty years may be completely wrong. And people who are in their late 30s may still think that such-and-such a band is relevant to the general population.

The only true test is time.

I have a friend (aged 20) who loves Jeff Beck. I've yet to even listen to him.

Supermallet 10-09-09 12:49 PM

Re: Music snobbism.
 

Originally Posted by The Bus (Post 9762381)
I don't know anyone under 30 who listens to Jeff Beck (by himself, not with the Yardbirds). Honestly in this whole conversation I kept thinking of him in his solo career, not as a member of the Yardbirds.

I think one of the things happening here is that some people overestimate the value/acclaim of music from the time when they were heavily into music. As someone else here said, we're talking late high school to college, maybe some post-college.

So someone my age who is convinced that Catherine Wheel or Charlatans UK will be remembered in twenty years may be completely wrong. And people who are in their late 30s may still think that such-and-such a band is relevant to the general population.

The only true test is time.

I've listened to Jeff Beck since I was 14. Solo, with the Yardbirds, with the Jeff Beck Group, and so on.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:23 PM.


Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.