Topic: Nevermind was released in 1991

+Svet !jzYkdX7lIw — 12.6 years ago #31,833

I don't know why this blows my mind, I was just sitting here thinking about while drinking. I can't even be bothered to work out how old I was but I guess it blew my mind since I really haven't matured much since then, still feel like a kid in a way. I guess it's like my dad loving the Rolling Stones and me seeing them as a cool rock band older people are into to.

(Edited 6 minutes later.)

+Anonymous B — 12.6 years ago, 2 minutes later[T] [B] #366,407

@OP
As an older person, the stones sucked. Then and now.

+Triptych !IupsXZPnnU — 12.6 years ago, 9 minutes later, 11 minutes after the original post[T] [B] #366,411

that's 5 years before i was born
man

·Anonymous B — 12.6 years ago, 17 minutes later, 29 minutes after the original post[T] [B] #366,414

@previous (Triptych !IupsXZPnnU)
You're only a year older than my oldest grand kid. Now I feel really old lol.

·Triptych !IupsXZPnnU — 12.6 years ago, 9 minutes later, 38 minutes after the original post[T] [B] #366,417

@previous (B)
You probably are! That's okay.

+the psychic !AiQkqOKm/c — 12.6 years ago, 7 minutes later, 46 minutes after the original post[T] [B] #366,418

I also didnt get borned

·Svet !jzYkdX7lIw (OP) — 12.6 years ago, 10 minutes later, 56 minutes after the original post[T] [B] #366,421

I was just listening to Pop Will Eat Itself

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRM1Ky6HBGQ

·Anonymous B — 12.6 years ago, 9 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[T] [B] #366,429

@366,417 (Triptych !IupsXZPnnU)
Lol this is true. It's been a hell of a ride tho.

+FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI — 12.6 years ago, 39 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[T] [B] #366,441

So was the Black Album. And they've been corporate shills ever since.

+Morbid !vbsvhaneDY — 12.6 years ago, 22 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,444

@previous (FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI)

> So was the Black Album. And they've been corporate shills ever since.

Sad but true.

·Svet !jzYkdX7lIw (OP) — 12.6 years ago, 34 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,455

@366,441 (FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI)
I think you missed the point.

Music from ones youth still seems cutting edge and relevant but as time goes on in your own life you realize it's something of the past and anyone still realating to it is doing so out of nostalgia or a younger person just being "into" older music.

+Anonymous G — 12.6 years ago, 4 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,457

In 1991 I had aready graduated high school and served four years in the United States Navy.
I was on top of the world at that point, then things began to rapidly decline for me.

·Anonymous G — 12.6 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,458

@OP

The Rolling Stones are STILL a cool band. They have to be placed in the top five of all time Greats, by anyone with any sense at all.

·Anonymous B — 12.6 years ago, 11 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,461

@previous (G)
Top 5? Ridiculous.

+Anonymous H — 12.6 years ago, 10 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,463

@previous (B)
ORLY?
Name YOUR top five then. This ought to be really really hilarious.

·Triptych !IupsXZPnnU — 12.6 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,464

@366,458 (G)
Music taste is objective, m8.

·FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI — 12.6 years ago, 46 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,469

@previous (Triptych !IupsXZPnnU)
I think you mean subjective.

@366,455 (Svet !jzYkdX7lIw)
Meh. The music that I knew during my youth was either shitty pop or the more family-appropriate music from my parents generation. I know plenty of good stuff that came out during my youth now, but I wasn't exposed to it until many years later.

·Anonymous G — 12.6 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,470

@previous (FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI)
I have a newfound appreciation for you now.
Rock on.

·Triptych !IupsXZPnnU — 12.6 years ago, 1 minute later, 4 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,471

@366,469 (FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI)
oh
yeah
i'm fuckin' tired

·Anonymous G — 12.6 years ago, 5 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,474

@previous (Triptych !IupsXZPnnU)
Because you are not getting proper nutition.
You better shape up.

·Anonymous B — 12.6 years ago, 1 hour later, 5 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,490

@366,463 (H)
70's
Pink Floyd
Led Zeppelin
Eagles
Santana
Eric Clapton

+Anonymous I — 12.6 years ago, 6 hours later, 12 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,517

@previous (B)

> 70's
> Pink Floyd
> Led Zeppelin
> Eagles
> Santana
> Eric Clapton

Meh. Zeppelin is ok. Floyd is ok. Stones are better than any of the others on that list. None of those bands have a magazine named after them. The Stones are better than the Beatles. But it's music and everyone has different taste.

·Anonymous G — 12.6 years ago, 56 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,519

@previous (I)
@previous (I)

> > 70's
> > Pink Floyd
> > Led Zeppelin
> > Eagles
> > Santana
> > Eric Clapton
>
> Meh. Zeppelin is ok. Floyd is ok. Stones are better than any of the others on that list. None of those bands have a magazine named after them. The Stones are better than the Beatles.

This

+quack — 12.6 years ago, 12 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,520

@366,490 (B)

> 70's
> Pink Floyd
> Led Zeppelin
> Eagles
> Santana
> Eric Clapton

Allbetter than the stones? you're mental

·Anonymous B — 12.6 years ago, 4 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,522

@366,517 (I)
> implying Rolling Stone magazine was named after the band, lol.

I do agree the Stones are better than the Beatles.

·Anonymous I — 12.6 years ago, 13 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,529

@previous (B)
Thank you. I always thought that Electric Light Orchestra did Beatles music better than the Beatles.

·Anonymous I — 12.6 years ago, 30 seconds later, 13 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,530

@366,522 (B)
Where do you stand on The Who?

·Anonymous B — 12.6 years ago, 12 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,538

@366,529 (I)
I love ELO, I got to see them for my 18th birthday. The light show was incredible.

@previous (I)
I've not been a big fan, for me I put them in the Stones category.

But it is subjective, I know people whose all-time favorite band is Rush for crying out loud.

·Anonymous B — 12.6 years ago, 1 minute later, 14 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,539

@366,520 (quack )
All. Every single one.

Clapton and Santana got brilliant guitar work, then you have the incredible harmonies of the Eagles...I leave pink Floyd and Led Zep to stand on their own, how can the Stones possibly compare?

(Edited 4 minutes later.)

·quack — 12.6 years ago, 7 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,542

@previous (B)
nice try, almost had me going for a while.

·Anonymous B — 12.6 years ago, 3 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,546

@previous (quack )
The Stones and the Who both were more for that campy style rock. No great musical abilities, but they could play a crowd and write entertaining lyrics. I could just never take them seriously.

·Anonymous I — 12.6 years ago, 8 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,547

@366,538 (B)
I love ELO too. I have never been able to take too much Rush. I don't hate them but I just don't care for much of their stuff.

@previous (B)
They might not be technically sound musically but neither is Jack White but it still sounds good. But music is different for everyone.

·quack — 12.6 years ago, 3 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,549

@366,546 (B)
No great musical ability...

Keith moon, roger daltrey, charlie entwistle, Pete Townshend
Jagger, richards, Wyman and watts

no great musical ability. You are talking enormous amounts of bullshit.

Unless you're admitting to preferring wanky, self indulgent bilge that is more concerned with impressing musos and sound engineers than connecting with and rocking an audience.

·Anonymous B — 12.6 years ago, 4 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,552

@366,547 (I)
Hell, I'd take Jack White over the Stones, that boy can shred. I love his music.

·Anonymous B — 12.6 years ago, 55 seconds later, 14 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,553

@366,549 (quack )
Hey, that's great! You know their names!!

AC/DC puts on a good show "connecting with and rocking an audience". Would you say they are brilliant musicians?

(Edited 3 minutes later.)

·quack — 12.6 years ago, 1 minute later, 14 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,554

@previous (B)
nice rebuttal

·Anonymous B — 12.6 years ago, 2 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,555

@previous (quack )
About as good as yours.

Read my edit.

And that Entwistle sure can wiggle his ass!

(Edited 2 minutes later.)

·Anonymous B — 12.6 years ago, 1 minute later, 14 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,556

@366,547 (I)
I think Rush was just too pretentious for me, with not much to back it up.

·Morbid !vbsvhaneDY — 12.6 years ago, 4 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,558

@previous (B)
Geddy Lee needs to shoot himself in the vocal cord and Niel Peart is overrated.

·quack — 12.6 years ago, 2 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,559

@366,555 (B)
Your rebuttal was regarding a previously unmentioned band, though.
.
Your assertion that, in particular, the two bands mentioned werent musically talented is straight up bullshit. tbh, you've been made to like a fucking moron at worst, a shit tier troll at best.

·Anonymous B — 12.6 years ago, 5 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,560

@366,554 (quack )
How about Kiss (lolol)?
They connect with and rock an audience, are they in your top 5?
They became a pariah after their debut album died down around '75...I was horrified to find out they'd made a comeback and the Kiss army is still alive and well.

@366,558 (Morbid !vbsvhaneDY)
Lol

·Anonymous B — 12.6 years ago, 32 seconds later, 14 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,561

@366,559 (quack )
So where's your rebuttal?

See @366,539 (B) and @366,546 (B)

(Edited 2 minutes later.)

·quack — 12.6 years ago, 4 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,562

@366,560 (B)
You still haven't provided a rebuttal. You just brought up yet another previously unmentioned bands.

A few of your assertions in this thread ---

Rolling stones can't play their instruments
the who can't play their instruments
elo are better than the Beatles
Eric Clapton's solo stuff is better than his stuff in cream

I stop there as I can't be bothered reading anymore of your retarded posts, and your response to this will just be to mention another band.

·Anonymous B — 12.6 years ago, 2 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,563

@previous (quack )
I just gave you two posts that require your rebuttal. All you've come up with is they are great showmen who connect to their audience (which I agreed with) and personal attacks against me. I'd say you're looking like the chump here.

·quack — 12.6 years ago, 4 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,564

@previous (B)
You mentioned ac/DC and kiss, I don't know why you did that. I never mentioned them at all. FYI, I think kiss are terrible and I've barely listened to ac/DC. Does that help you at all?!

Now, how about responding to my posts now? Preferably without another strawman.

·Anonymous B — 12.6 years ago, 9 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,566

@previous (quack )

You'd like me to reply to this?@366,549 (quack )
Ok. Yes, those are their names. No, I don't believe I am preferring "wanky, self indulgent bilge".

@366,562 (quack )
I didn't say the stones couldn't play their instruments.
I agree Cream is better than Clapton solo, however I assumed we were talking about the 70's.
I never said the Who couldn't play their instruments.
I said the Stones were better than the Beatles, you got your posts confused.

It's hard to argue against hysteria, dude. Get your shit together.

Now how about answering my AC/DC and Kiss questions since you think connecting and rocking an audience equates to fine musicianship?

(Edited 2 minutes later.)

·quack — 12.6 years ago, 6 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,567

@previous (B)
I already did. You still haven't explained why you bought them up.

You're a mess in this thread. You may have a subscription to total guitar magazine and think yngwie malmsteen is the greatest guitarist on the planet, but stop pretending you know anytyhingv about music. This thread is testament to that.

·Anonymous B — 12.6 years ago, 2 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,568

@previous (quack )
I explained why I brought them up, using your own words. That's what the quotes signify.
Can you now answer the question?

·Anonymous B — 12.6 years ago, 1 minute later, 15 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,569

@366,567 (quack )

"AC/DC puts on a good show "connecting with and rocking an audience". Would you say they are brilliant musicians?"

Simple question.

You said: "Unless you're admitting to preferring wanky, self indulgent bilge that is more concerned with impressing musos and sound engineers than connecting with and rocking an audience."

"Unless you're admitting to preferring wanky, self indulgent bilge that is more concerned with impressing musos and sound engineers than connecting with and rocking an audience.
Isn't that what all famous musicians do (else no fame)?

That was your rebuttal, I believe. So, I would like you to explain how your measure of "connecting with and rocking an audience" applies to mediocre bands like Kiss and AC/DC. It's called furthering the argument.

(Edited 7 minutes later.)

·quack — 12.6 years ago, 2 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,570

@366,568 (B)
Another straw man.

You said the stones and the who were shit musically, were successful due to camp lyrical appeal. Anybody with any sense knows this is wrong, so I said so.

Your response was to ask my opinion on kiss and as/DC. You seem to be stuck in a logical loop, so I'll leave it there.

·Anonymous B — 12.6 years ago, 8 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,571

@previous (quack )

> Another straw man.
>
> You said the stones and the who were shit musically, were successful due to camp lyrical appeal. Anybody with any sense knows this is wrong, so I said so.

I pointed out the guitar work of Santana and Clapton, and the harmonies of the Eagles. You gave me "connecting with and rocking an audience."

"Anybody with sense knows this is wrong" is a ridiculous statement.

> Your response was to ask my opinion on kiss and as/DC. You seem to be stuck in a logical loop, so I'll leave it there.

Furthering the argument. All you have to do is answer.

Ps-look up straw man, then re-read your posts. I suspect you've just learnt this in a philosophy class, kudos.

(Edited 2 minutes later.)

·Anonymous B — 12.6 years ago, 5 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,572

@366,570 (quack )
I meant to ask, is this really Quack?

·Bruce — 12.6 years ago, 32 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,578

ELO as good as the Stones? Don't get me down, with that nonsense.

(Edited 20 seconds later.)

·Anonymous B — 12.6 years ago, 6 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,579

@previous (Bruce )
No, better.
Is that you, Angie? :)

·lol — 12.6 years ago, 4 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,580

@previous (B)

No, I am not some honky tonk woman like Angie.

·quack — 12.6 years ago, 3 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,582

@366,572 (B)

> I meant to ask, is this really Quack?

Yes, please unblock my phone so I can call you every few days for a few minutes.

·Anonymous B — 12.6 years ago, 30 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,584

@366,580 (lol )
Ok, I will concede that ELO is not better...but I can't get no satisfaction and I'd be a fool to cry.

@previous (quack )
Unblocked! I look forward to your mental illness!

·lol — 12.6 years ago, 28 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,588

@previous (B)

Hey, it's only rock 'n' roll
but I like it.

·lol — 12.6 years ago, 1 minute later, 17 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,589

@366,584 (B)
yeah rock often gives me mixed emotions.

·lol — 12.6 years ago, 2 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,591

@366,584 (B)
careful, or you might go nuts and a few months from now you might be having your nineteenth nervous breakdown.

·FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI — 12.6 years ago, 30 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,596

How's about not being dicks to each other? We've established that musical preference is subjective, let's keep the debate civil.

@366,547 (I)
To me, the Stones sound like a garage band whenever I hear their songs. And I don't know, maybe they did that on purpose. Maybe they knew they were at their best on stage.

·lol — 12.6 years ago, 4 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,598

@previous (FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI)
The last few posts have contained references to Stones songs. Take a chill pill and stop taking good natured content and trying to paint it black.

·FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI — 12.6 years ago, 3 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,602

@previous (lol )
10/10, but I was referring more to the go-between of B and quack a ways up there. I can only have so much sympathy for the devil's advocate.

·lol — 12.6 years ago, 3 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,605

@366,596 (FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI)
I am shattered by your assertion that the Stones are over rated. Don't expect me to come to your emotional rescue if you do not get it, I will just tell you to get off of my cloud.
(again, several Stones songs references)

Just saying.

·lol — 12.6 years ago, 3 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,607

@366,602 (FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI)
I want you to be a female because I dig you.
Why won't you confirm your sex?

·FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI — 12.6 years ago, 4 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,610

@366,605 (lol )
That's was a bit hamfisted I'll admit. It's the only song I could think of that hadn't already been used.

I don't mean to say they are over-rated, I'm just puzzled by the relatively low fidelity of their recordings compared to others from that time.

Edit: Oops, thought you were replying to my most recent post. Should've checked the cite link.

(Edited 1 minute later.)

·Anonymous B — 12.6 years ago, 29 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[T] [B] #366,615

Start a new topic to continue this conversation.
Or browse the latest topics.

TinyChan