what's the most critically acclaimed band...

The one and only.

Moderators: Antoine, niwi

user_30

Post by user_30 »

flaming lips, just cause i can't stand wayne coyne's voice. didn't like lightning bolt at first because i felt there wasn't enough dynamic variation on wonderful rainbow for the most part, but i like them now, even though i still think the transition from hello morning to assassins is by far the best part of the album.

user_60

Post by user_60 »

.:.impossible. wrote:Guided By Voices has never really clicked with me. The album I have listened to most is Bee Thousand. Over time, a few of the tunes have really caught my ear, but everything always seems half-assed, or unfinished. Then of course, there's Do The Collapse, which is overdone! Very critically acclaimed band, only scratching the surface for me.
Now this sentiment, I can get behind.

But "Hot Freaks" is a great song.

I've actually been thinking that that best-of they just released might be the best thing for me.

user_125

Post by user_125 »

the rolling stones.

i fucking hate them. completely. for every reason. fuck them to hell.



theres others too but i'll agree what michael said about pavement. i used to love them, but now they seem like the epitome of "bland, overrated boring indie rock band that is beloved by boring indie rock dorks worldwide" to me, and i just can't deal with that.

User avatar
jon abbey
Posts: 19017
Joined: Sat May 10, 2008 4:26 pm
Contact:

Post by jon abbey »

polyphonic wrote:You mentioned JD/New Order: is there anything particular about that band? Do you like any similar bands of that era? Is it more an issue with that entire genre or set of genres, or is it something specific about that band, or even particular musicians within that band?
who are similar bands of that era? I think the first Gang of Four record is brilliant, but I don't really think that's too relevant. I had a record or two, they did nothing for me, I moved on to some of the other tens of thousands of records that are out there. sorry if that offends you, I'm really enjoying this thread just as it is.
Also, why would you "intentionally ignore" a band? I mean, what's the point? This kind of willful closemindedness seems completely contrary to the whole ethos of this little community.
it's not "willful closemindedness" exactly, there's more out there than anyone can ever listen to, and nothing I've read about Radiohead has ever made me think I'd care. no one can hear everything. maybe I phrased it wrong, it's not like Radiohead almost ever crosses my mind, and if my friend were to hand me a CD of theirs and say "this is amazing, I really think you'd enjoy it", I would give it a shot. but this hasn't happened, and I doubt it ever will (unless it does specifically from this post).

The Fall and Pavement also make my list.

Tom Waits-Bone Machine=one of the best records of the nineties.

user_29

Post by user_29 »

WAY too may to list.

I will say Pavement (aside from CRCR), The Flaming Lips, Yo La Tengo, and Belle and Sebastian, and pretty much anything that sounds like any of those three bands. I just find all of them, and most "indie rock" for that matter, incredibly bland/boring.

user_43

Post by user_43 »

acid mothers temple
bob dylan
nas
big star

user_72

Post by user_72 »

I could name alot, but I can't give reasons why.

user_37

Post by user_37 »

Shellac, if only because they don't hold a candle to Big Black.

user_197

Post by user_197 »

R.E.M. zzzzzzz

mshiflet
Posts: 934
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 9:57 am

Post by mshiflet »

Big Black, if only because they don't hold a candle to Shellac.

user_57

Post by user_57 »

some of you people make me want to cry.


as for me i can probably one up you all and say the beatles. only actually listened to one of their albums recently and didn't feel it.

also david bowie. i supposed if i spent more time with his stuff, but when there's so much stuff out there why should i bother to force myself to like something.

user_37

Post by user_37 »

gmby wrote:Big Black, if only because they don't hold a candle to Shellac.
:)

user_20

Post by user_20 »

Sevenarts saying that he couldn't get into 'Substance' makes sense to me. That was probably the last JD I got and I never really listened to it much at all. The songs feel too rough and punky in general. You have to start with 'Unknown Pleasures' and then get 'Closer', both of which are more cohesive and have better production (and I suppose are more similar to "Love Will Tear Us Apart").

I haven't listened to Pavement in a while, but I don't think they're "generic" or "boring" or whatever. They pretty much defined that indie sound. And 'CRCR' is a great album, the first two songs in particular. Nobody else could touch the sound in 'Silent Kid' and 'Elevate Me Later'.

I kinda agree about GBV, at least in regards to 'Bee Thousand'. I almost prefer 'Isolation Drills'. I haven't heard 'Alien Lanes' or 'Mag Earwhig', which are two I probably should.

I agree with Christiaan about Big Star--I was going to name them. I don't know, maybe they wrote good songs, but it sounds like standard classic rock to me. Nothing to hold my interest; I'm a lot more concerned with sound than songs.

user_20

Post by user_20 »

samtem wrote: also david bowie. i supposed if i spent more time with his stuff, but when there's so much stuff out there why should i bother to force myself to like something.
Just randomly choose an album from '76-'80 and pretend it's the only album he released.

user_10

Post by user_10 »

i can name a few groups off the top of my head which i know i probably should listen to (as i imagine i'd end up liking them) - the fall, bjork, pink floyd, tom waits come to mind.
for me in these cases its probably less me intentionally ignoring them, and more me just never getting around to hearing anything. as jon said, there's just way too much out there for one to be able to hear everything... i usually put a record on because i feel like hearing a particular type of music... thus i dont always go back and listen to some rock record that i know i should listen to, just because its supposed to be a classic, if only because at this point in my life i don't listen to very much straight up rock music

michael
Posts: 1732
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 6:51 am
Contact:

Post by michael »

recently, tv on the radio

zzzzzzzzz

maybe indie rock isnt my thing anymore

user_53

Post by user_53 »

one would be Elvis Costello - I don't hate his stuff, but I never really want to listen to it. I picked up "My Aim Is True" again when it was reissued for the 100th time 2 years ago, and: eh. I don't think the Attractions are all that special, and the combo of bitter and smugly clever is just too much for me - I could take either trait by themselves and like them, but the combo w/ his whiney delivery is lethal.

another, that I've mentioned before: Beefheart. 1st, the whole arty avantgarde school has never really appealed to me (ie, Zappa), and musically, the jazz/blues/garage rock gone bananas just feels way too gimmicky for me to appreciate. never been a fan of novelties, and that's really how i hear it.

finally, and I don't think I'm alone on this, the whole prog jazz rock genre which includes Soft Machine, Henry Cow, Gong, etc., I could just never appreciate - all the avant gardisms, the ridiculous humor...I just don't like the way it all comes together.

user_125

Post by user_125 »

oh yeah, costello. i find absolutely nothing interesting about him

user_43

Post by user_43 »

You know I think I could have posted any of the people/bands mentioned here.

I ignore a lot of things.

bombinthebeehive
Posts: 327
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 1:18 am

Post by bombinthebeehive »

christiaan wrote:You know I think I could have posted any of the people/bands mentioned here.

I ignore a lot of things.
I let the pavement-hating slide
that just breaks my heart :(