Jump to content

Unpopular Opinions Thread

tokamak

By tokamak
in Lulz

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

nnm
nnm
Player
Player
mooseoutfront
mooseoutfront

A man drinks whatever the fuck he wants.

Posted Images

Helobious

Helobious 9755

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, tbone_ said:

I can understand not liking the Beatles. It’s wrong, but I can understand it.

Not liking the stones though? Does not fucking compute at all.

 I’m not from that time so it has no nostalgic value to me at all and I just listen objectively. I don’t think they suck but they don’t do it for me, or I guess more accurately their genre just doesn’t do it for me. I’m more into the Smiths, The Cure, Joy Division/New Order, Misfits as far as that time goes. And yes I know the stones are older than all those bands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, ztejas said:

One of their best. "Amazing" isn't one of my go to descriptors for music but it's a phenomenal song. 

Written when Mick Jagger was somewhere around 25 years old. 

I drove a Saturn at 25.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lateshow

lateshow 1318

Posted
Posted
On 2/18/2022 at 3:24 PM, Helobious said:

 I’m not from that time so it has no nostalgic value to me at all and I just listen objectively. I don’t think they suck but they don’t do it for me, or I guess more accurately their genre just doesn’t do it for me. 

I'm 40 and I feel that way about The Beatles. I acknowledge their importance, but their music just doesn't do it for me. However, I love me some Stones. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28904

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, elfenix said:

one shining moment is the lamest college sports tradition outside of college station.

I’ve never seen it. I didn’t even watch the championship game this year because I couldn’t care less. But when I do watch the game, I tune out as soon as the game is over. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
nnm

nnm 37737

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

I’ve never seen it. I didn’t even watch the championship game this year because I couldn’t care less. But when I do watch the game, I tune out as soon as the game is over. 

Repped for proper use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Al_4_ISU

Al_4_ISU 12612

Posted
Posted
On 2/18/2022 at 2:39 PM, tbone_ said:

I can understand not liking the Beatles. It’s wrong, but I can understand it.

Not liking the stones though? Does not fucking compute at all.

Yeah, I like the Beatles, but it's more of a recognition that they're really fucking good at what they did.  Their music rarely truly moves me, and a lot of feels like pastiche showing off.  Lots of brilliant songs, the ability to play multiple genres really well, and undeniable influence on everyone, but there's a brittle ness to it, for lack of a better word.

The Stones on the other hand - that shit feels real.  The Stones are everything rock and roll is supposed to be.  And the interesting part is that they didn't become that band until the Beatles retired and they quit trying to be the Bad Beatles.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cheeseweasel

Cheeseweasel 26439

Posted
Posted
53 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

The Stones on the other hand - that shit feels real.  The Stones are everything rock and roll is supposed to be.  And the interesting part is that they didn't become that band until the Beatles retired and they quit trying to be the Bad Beatles.

This. No clue how you can listen to a song like "Tumbling Dice" or "Gimme Shelter" and say, meh, just your average bar band.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
burntorangebongos

burntorangebongos 10809

Posted
Posted

The Stones. Each of the band mates had a tremendous respect and love for their work. And those fuckers worked. Sympathy for the Devil was supposed to be fast but they slowed it down and each of them came to the conclusion that Mick almost speaking the lyrics was fucking badass. They knew instinctively the way to their best sound. That is their contribution... they blazed the way by following their sound. I don't know but that is a convergence of luck and timing that they found each other and created some great fucking work together during that era of time when blues needed to be heard by a wider audience and then evolve into where they took it. Imagine Rock and Roll without them and tell me that it would be as big a genre as it became. Their work was not only foundational but seminal throughout R&R. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ztejas

ztejas 44114

Posted
Posted

Beatles don't age well. And I'm tired of the "they did so much for music and I really appreciate them and understand how important and influential they were BUT..."

You mean... BUT you don't enjoy their music? I mean for me that's sort of the barometer for appreciating an artist's contribution. Guess I'm sort of sick of pretending like the Beatles are some unassailable force of popular music and rock and roll when 2 or 3 generations now have let everyone know that they were kind of overrated and didn't really generate much that still persists today. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom

Tom 2960

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, ztejas said:

Beatles don't age well. And I'm tired of the "they did so much for music and I really appreciate them and understand how important and influential they were BUT..."

You mean... BUT you don't enjoy their music? I mean for me that's sort of the barometer for appreciating an artist's contribution. Guess I'm sort of sick of pretending like the Beatles are some unassailable force of popular music and rock and roll when 2 or 3 generations now have let everyone know that they were kind of overrated and didn't really generate much that still persists today. 

 

The Beatles aged perfectly fine outside of maybe their earliest few albums.  Not sure which generations are calling them overrated either because I'm a millennial and my generation for the most part loves them.  If anything, not liking the Beatles is a contrarian opinion regardless of which generation you're in.  

And I like the Stones.  I just like the Beatles better.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Al_4_ISU

Al_4_ISU 12612

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, ztejas said:

I mean... let's go real deep while we're at it... Who's Next is a better album than anything the Beatles or Stones ever put together. 

I love The Who, and I love Who's Next, but Beggar's Banquet>Let It Bleed>Sticky Fingers>Exile on Main Street is the best rock and roll music ever made by anyone.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28904

Posted
Posted
58 minutes ago, Tom said:

The Beatles aged perfectly fine outside of maybe their earliest few albums.  Not sure which generations are calling them overrated either because I'm a millennial and my generation for the most part loves them.  If anything, not liking the Beatles is a contrarian opinion regardless of which generation you're in.  

And I like the Stones.  I just like the Beatles better.

The Beatles didn’t make a bad album. Their first albums were great. Hell, Twist & Shout was on their first album Please Please Me. That’s a rock ‘n’ roll classic. Are you telling me you don’t like that song, didn’t enjoy it in the parade scene in Ferris Bueller’s Day Off? You know the construction workers dancing along to it? Those weren’t actors. Those were actual construction workers who were dancing along during the shooting of the scene and they filmed them.

A lot of people judge them unfavorably because they grew up in a world of music influenced by later Beatles albums. The early Beatles had influences like Elvis and the Everly Brothers and Buddy Holly and Buck Owens and a host of R&B acts. They did covers but they also synthesized and came up with something new and unique when they wrote a bunch of their own songs.

The Stones wouldn’t exist if not for the Beatles. They were Beatles fans. They were copycats while the Beatles were around. The Beatles wrote I Wanna Be Your Man for the Stones and that inspired the Stones to start writing their own music too. (It appeared on With the Beatles, their fourth album.)

You won’t find many artists who’ll cite the Stones as an influence and not the Beatles too. Nothing is 100% so you can’t expect everyone to love the Beatles. But they have so much diversity in their music that it’s hard to imagine that anyone who likes rock music can’t find songs in their catalog that they like. If not, then it makes me wonder if they’re just being obstinate and contrarian and only want to find individuality by not going along with the pack. (I know a guy who doesn’t like Seinfeld for that reason.) Or maybe they think I Wanna Hold Your Hand is representative of their entire catalog. Maybe they never heard Savoy Truffle or The Ballad Of John And Yoko or Everybody’s Got Something To Hide Except For Me And My Monkey. (What a great song title.)

The Stones are a good band. So are The Who. So was Led Zeppelin. So was Pink Floyd who put out arguably the greatest rock album of all time without any influence from the Stones and who have influenced a lot of other artists too. The Who played Woodstock. The Stones didn’t so they answered with the disaster at Altamont. And while the Stones played a lot of great music, they also played some total crap and I haven’t met a Stones fan yet who won’t admit that.

Beatles ftw.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28904

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, NeverMarryAStripper said:

If I’m in my car, and my daughter is with me, I’ll be listening to The Eagle. It’s Houston’s only classic rock station.  They play the Stones all the time and I can’t remember the last time I heard the playa Beatles song. That suits me just fine.

Child abuser. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NeverMarryAStripper

NeverMarryAStripper 22241

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, NeverMarryAStripper said:

If I’m in my car, and my daughter is with me, I’ll be listening to The Eagle. It’s Houston’s only classic rock station.  They play the Stones all the time and I can’t remember the last time I heard the playa Beatles song. That suits me just fine.

 

3 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Child abuser. 

Ha ha, meant to type Isn’t.  If she’s in the car we’re listening to K-POP, which qualifies as elder abuse

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom

Tom 2960

Posted
Posted (edited)
34 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

The Beatles didn’t make a bad album. Their first albums were great. Hell, Twist & Shout was on their first album Please Please Me. That’s a rock ‘n’ roll classic. Are you telling me you don’t like that song, didn’t enjoy it in the parade scene in Ferris Bueller’s Day Off? You know the construction workers dancing along to it? Those weren’t actors. Those were actual construction workers who were dancing along during the shooting of the scene and they filmed them.

A lot of people judge them unfavorably because they grew up in a world of music influenced by later Beatles albums. The early Beatles had influences like Elvis and the Everly Brothers and Buddy Holly and Buck Owens and a host of R&B acts. They did covers but they also synthesized and came up with something new and unique when they wrote a bunch of their own songs.

The Stones wouldn’t exist if not for the Beatles. They were Beatles fans. They were copycats while the Beatles were around. The Beatles wrote I Wanna Be Your Man for the Stones and that inspired the Stones to start writing their own music too. (It appeared on With the Beatles, their fourth album.)

You won’t find many artists who’ll cite the Stones as an influence and not the Beatles too. Nothing is 100% so you can’t expect everyone to love the Beatles. But they have so much diversity in their music that it’s hard to imagine that anyone who likes rock music can’t find songs in their catalog that they like. If not, then it makes me wonder if they’re just being obstinate and contrarian and only want to find individuality by not going along with the pack. (I know a guy who doesn’t like Seinfeld for that reason.) Or maybe they think I Wanna Hold Your Hand is representative of their entire catalog. Maybe they never heard Savoy Truffle or The Ballad Of John And Yoko or Everybody’s Got Something To Hide Except For Me And My Monkey. (What a great song title.)

The Stones are a good band. So are The Who. So was Led Zeppelin. So was Pink Floyd who put out arguably the greatest rock album of all time without any influence from the Stones and who have influenced a lot of other artists too. The Who played Woodstock. The Stones didn’t so they answered with the disaster at Altamont. And while the Stones played a lot of great music, they also played some total crap and I haven’t met a Stones fan yet who won’t admit that.

Beatles ftw.

 

 

I don't disagree with any of that.  When I say the earliest albums didn't age as well I'm talking specifically about the production.  Nothing wrong with the songs themselves or Twist and Shout, I like them all, but some of the recordings or the mixing or whatever you call it sounds dated to my ears.  I still enjoy the songs, but they sound "old" whereas the later albums almost feel like they could have been recorded much more recently then the 1960s.

Edited by Tom
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28904

Posted
Posted
42 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

this is surly EVERYTHING is black and white; no greys allowed 

It’s not an opinion that the Stones stood on the shoulders of the Beatles. It’s fine if you like the Stones better than you like the Beatles. Everyone has the right to their own opinion. But you don’t have the right to your own facts. History is what it is.

There were a lot of influential artists who came both before and after the Beatles and there’s no way to say what the musical world would be like if the Stones had never existed. They were the “bad boy” version of the Beatles after Brian Epstein got the Fab Four to ditch their leather jackets and don matching suits. The Stones marketed themselves as a gritty alternative. But as long as the Beatles existed the Stones were always in their rear view mirror.

It’s weird when fans of one band are threatened by the popularity of another band. They’re not sports teams where there are winners and losers. Music is a collaborative art and everyone can win. It’s weird when fans of one band dislike a band who the band they love respects and admires. If you hate band A but love band B while band B loves band A, what does that say? Maybe it says you should loosen up and expand your musical horizons. It’s not a competition.

Sgt. Pepper’s was to rock music what Citizen Kane was to cinema. Listen to what people were playing before Sgt. Pepper’s and then to what people were playing after. (The Stones answered with Their Satanic Majesties Request — answer for that one, Stones fans.) The same thing happened before and after Kane in cinema. There was a sea change. They changed perspective and the notion of what was possible. It’s great if you love the Stones but they didn’t introduce the blues to rock music anymore than Rush introduced syncopation (an opinion my brother seems to hold).

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...