For me : Trippie Redd’s “!” Is actually a great album
Pink Floyd is the most mediocre group in the prog rock scene (also works if you remove everything after ‘group’)
I ain’t gonna call them mediocre myself, and The Wall means a lot to me personally with my own life journey, but there’s absolutely better, more musically interesting prog rock groups out there than Pink Floyd.
deleted by creator
The Beatles are pretty lowbrow compared to the hype given to them which is based mostly on charisma instead. If they made their song debuts on The Masked Singer, not nearly as many people would be particularly drawn to them.
I say that if you want to appreciate the Beatles for the first time in 2024, spend a solid month listening to nothing but popular music from the 1950’s (and earlier), then put on one of their albums.
The older music is fine and enjoyable, but you’ll hear why, the Beatles still get regular airplay today, and e.g. Pat Boone does not.
If that’s the reason, where does the idolization come from? Even as human individuals, the Beatles members are worshipped to the point they can save a dying business by talking about it. It’s suggestive of the fact there’s some unspoken gimmick at play.
My take is that people value music both for the music itself, and for the social identity that comes from how we relate to it. The Beatles benefited from Beatlemania back in the day, which was the same as the Swifties phenomenon today: a social-identity group of fans. There might have been better bands in the early '60s, but the music of the Beatles was really quite good, and still holds its own today. Tons of great music has come along since then, so the Beatles catalogue no longer stands out, but they still benefit from the social-identity hype of Beatlemania, and are still revered because they were (lucky enough to get to be) pop-music pioneers.
Taylor Swift is fine, her music is enjoyable, but ultimately kind of forgettable. Her popularity comes from the social-cohesion function of popular music.
deleted by creator
Satriani is a great guitarist, but a mediocre song writer. He suffers feom what I like to call The Solo Syndrome (not a reference to guitar solos). A song tends to be better when multiple musicians have had input, otherwise there’s too much focus on only one instrument.
Take for example Satrianis “Made of Tears”. How much better wouldn’t the song have been if an actual basist had written a cool bass riff to go along with it?
Or another example from Satriani: “Searching”. Excelent guitar hook in the beginning and the end, but I would’ve loved it more if there were other bandmembers who could tell him that the middle section is long and boring and would be better spent playing WITH other instruments instead of TO other instruments.
I fund that Steve Vai is a better (and comparable) songwriter (although a lot of his songs aren’t to my taste)
Satriani is a great guitarist (among the best)
That’s very far from true. The last decades have brought forth countless young talents. Every single one of them smokes satriani in a pipe. Easily.
deleted by creator
100% technique, no soul
That’s how I describe his music
For me, that description fits Yngwie more than Satriani. Satch had at least 1%, maybe even a whopping 2% soul. Vai is probably sneaking up on double digits.
I really hate the “soul” accusation. It’s so arrogant and pretentious. Look, I get it, their music doesn’t tell you anything, it’s not your thing, it’s OK. It’s about you, it’s not about them. Not saying there’s anything wrong with you because of it. There’s a lot of great music I simply don’t like. It’s normal.
You don’t feel anything with their music. I do. Lots of people do. Is our “soul” bone defective? Are you the judge of musical taste? Can’t you see we laugh and cry with their music just as easily has you do with what you consider “music with soul”?
My experience is that the same people who accuse them of being 100% technical and souless are precisely the ones so fixated on the technique they can’t actually just see past it and just listen to the music itself. Do you think we get goosebumps because of how fast we see the dude fingers move?
Regarding the actual musicians. I can’t say much about Malmsteen because it’s not my taste but the dude singlehandedly created a new genre. I can’t put him down just because his music is not my preference.
Satriani is certainly the most melodic of them. The guy launched multiple great albums. Until the early 00s. Every album until then was simply amazing. Vai could only launch 2 or 3 with the same quality. But after Super Colossal he lost his edge. He still makes good stuff but never like what he made between 1984 and 2006. It was out of this world (wink, wink).
That’s a big reaction for a tongue-in-cheek comment on an unpopular opinion post! Joe, is that you? I’m sorry they used Steve in Crossroads instead of you, but you gotta let it go! Sometimes the student becomes the teacher!
Joking aside, the whole “soul” thing can be seen as somewhat of a compliment in a sense. Blackmore, Yngwie, Satch, Petrucci, Vai, Johnson, and other neoclassical players strove for technical perfection. The bits and bobs of music that are generally lumped into the idea of “soul” are the mistakes, the imperfections, the unintended, the miniscule fuckups. As an off the top example, think of Merry Clayton’s voice cracking as she belted out a vocal masterwork in her pajamas and curlers after being dragged out of bed at midnight to back up Mick Jagger. It’s imperfect, it’s unrepeatable, and it’s amazing.
Contrast that with what the technical shredders were intending to do: they wanted to hit every note with exacting precision every time they played. It’s no less impressive than those one-off moments like Gimme Shelter, but it’s markedly different. Listeners who don’t identify with the sound sometimes perceive a sort of sterility in the style, whether deserved or not. The degree of technicality alone can almost come across as machine-like. That doesn’t mean that it has no merit, or that anyone who feels it deeply is in some way “defective”. These guys wouldn’t have had 40+ year careers if nobody was feeling what they were doing.
Enjoy what you enjoy, groove to what grooves you, and above all else, be secure enough in your own taste that a bit of banter about a genre doesn’t seem like a personal attack. Remember: Barry Manilow has sold over 85 million albums, so there really is a market for everything!
Satch for sure is an extremely talented guitarist and understands that the key to a good song is a melody (or “hook”) that is simple, memorable, and catchy. Almost every song he wrote has this at its core. The problem is simply that this is insanely difficult to do and he struggles with it, especially on his later albums
Baroque music sounds absolutely shit. Composers try to mix in so many different voices that it’s the musical equivalent of a TV panel show where everyone is shouting over one another.
On that note: harpsichords in ensembles are background noise at best and very few people would notice their absence.
We’re in the best time to listen to music. There’s amazing stuff out there. It just doesn’t come to you automatically, you’ve got to seek it out.
Now, it’s a pretty bad time to be an artist trying to make a living. But it’s also the easiest time to DIY music.
SRV is the Steven Segal of guitar.
I generally don’t have any interest in music… I mean, is fine some of the time, but I certainly wouldn’t go out of my way for it. I also don’t think it should be allowed as “background noise” in public places. It can have profound effects on your mood without you even realizing it’s happening.
I can’t even remember how many times the wrong music as background noise has screwed with my mood for no reason
Separating the artist from the art is fine.
You can like music by someone who doesn’t share your social, political, or religious beliefs with.I’ll go a step further:
You have to separate the art from the artist because there is not a single artist I’ve ever encountered who wasn’t some kind of fucking trashhole of a person.
Artists spent their lives on being artists, not developing good interpersonal skills or understanding politics or philosophy.
Beleiving an artist is a “good person” is just setting yourself up for disappointment. Start out assuming they suck dogshit and you usually end up being right.
I think it’s reasonable to draw some lines that, when crossed, you’ll choose to disengage from their art.
The musician doesn’t have to be a saint. But if I find out they, I don’t know, love eating live puppies, I’m going to prefer spending my time and attention elsewhere.
I agree, but I like to start from a position of “this person probably sucks” because then I’m never disappointed.
This is a fair position to take.
I tend to avoid listening to interviews with bands I like in case they’re terrible.
Though weirdly I’ll chat with folks at merch tables.
Agreed. Show me a flawless human being, and I’ll show you someone who doesn’t have anything interesting to share with the world.
Sam from Future Islands is a pretty dope guy.
Upvoted because this is the one I most strongly disagree with.
Hitlers art but ignore the holocaust?
Lost Prophets but ignore the lead singers horrifying SA of children?
Kanye West and his anti semitism insanity?
Chris Brown and beating the shit out of women?
R. Kelly and SA a child?
Rowling and her hatred of trans children?
Michael Jackson and his … weird child obsession?
Gary Glitter and his SA?
The Pianist is one of the best war movies I’ve ever seen… even though Polanski.
Separating the artist from the art is fine for me as long as you don’t support them. There is nothing inherently wrong with consuming media you like from a controversial figure.
Of course it’s hard to separate the artist and the art if you actively give them money for it.
I like some of Kanye West’s music but I would never spend a single cent on one of his albums, watch an ad on Youtube for his music videos or listen to his songs on streaming services.
I cant stand listening to someone singing, knowing full well they rape children 🤷♀️
each to their own I suppose
the examples you gave
Yes, that’s what separating the art from the artist means.
Well aware. I am listing examples of why I cant separate. Hence my “disagree” comment
🤨
I’m alright with this as long as you pirate it lol
This is actually really popular among my music students. I completely disagree on most case. X raped 300 kids but hey, he makes pretty good beats so let’s pay 200$ for a concert.
I guess it’s the same as buying Nestle Hot Chocolate knowing full well child labor was involved. It’s ok as long as your sweet tooth is satisfied.
You got downvotes by someone who didn’t understand sarcasm so I evened it back out.
My mind is telling me nooooo
But my body
My bodyyyyy is telling me yesss
Bomfunk MC’s Freestyler is the peak of musical creation. (Ok, prolly no but I love coming back to it.)
(Fwiw, initially I read “triple !” (i.e. !!! or ChkChkChk) in your op comment and thought why?, that’s a great band.)
The vast majority of music without lyrics sucks.
Classical music would like a word with you.
Or do you mean removing voices from songs ?
Either way, there are music with absolutely legendary instrumentals that I would be bangers with or without voices.
Nah, classical music is one example. Another big one is techno/electronic stuff.
Contemplate Clair de Lune from Debussy, take a gander at Gwyn, Lord of Cinder’s theme from the Dark souls OST, let your mind wander at Time from the Inception OST. And that’s only the most mainstream I could think of.
Beautiful music is everywhere, from every media, in every genre, you just just have to listen.
I kind of agree with you, there is a lot of great soundtracks. However, for me a soundtrack is part of a larger medium, which it underscores or sublements. Most of them make medicore songs at best when listend to in isolation.
Can’t you say that of everything though ? Take rap for example, doesn’t it fit in a larger medium that is the rapper’s life ? You cant have a piece of art existing in a vacuum. If I listen to Gwyn’s theme, am I liking it because I played the game or because it’s intrinsically beautiful ? Does it make it less beautiful to me ? Does it matter ?
Take rap for example, doesn’t it fit in a larger medium that is the rapper’s life ?
Maybe. I don’t really care about artists and usually know nothing about them, so that aspect is usually irrelevant to me.
I didn’t mean that the life of the artist is relevant, but lyrics are the reflection of an artist’s existence, so even if you don’t care about the artist themselves you’re still listening to their lyrics.
That’s why I say pieces don’t just exist in a vacuum.
Imo it depend what the instrumental is.If it’s some aggresive guitar riffs that bands like Mayhem or Siculicidium could drop, i will love it. It’s just some weird noises made by a computer i will find it boring.
There is definitely exceptions. Though guitar instrumentals don’t do it for me, even though I generally listen to the rock/metal genre.
But for example I really like violin covers by this one artist/youtuber of movie and game soundtracks (especially the Zelda games). But that’s some of the only instrumental music I listen to and only when I’m in a specific mood.
And even there I think nostalgia is doing most of the heavy lifting for me enjoying the songs.
What about some post rock? I find it very nice relaxing music and being without lyrics is also part of that. Bands like God Is an Astronaut, Explosions in the Sky, Mono, Mogwai, etc. Even Sigur Ros which technically include singing, but it’s just gibberish to have “another instrument”.
I’ll save this comment, because I’m not going to check those suggestions out right now.
Maybe in a few weeks you’ll get a random reply to this comment. I’ve done it before, but no promise.
For me it’s the opposite. The song start and the music is a banger but as soon as the lyrics comes, it’s ruined.
I’m with you on this one. There are lyrics on almost every single track for crying out loud. Throw us instrumental lovers a bone won’t you? Songs that are lyrically driven but are otherwise super-repetitive instrumentally tend to put me to sleep.
What I love about concerts is when the band goes off script and just starts jamming. Even a 5-minute drum solo will have me grinning ear to ear, and that’s what I’ll be remembering on the way home.
Repetitive instrumental pattern is my #1 skip reason xD that “Aight I’m bored” moment when you realize the song has nothing more to give is a sad waste of time.
I love 21 pilots and Foo fighters for their great instrumental + vocal balance
Trash lyrics fucking up an otherwise good song. It happens far too often.
That’s why I’m just a bit of a fan of Thom Yorke’s whole “using my voice as an instrument, the words don’t mean anything” vibe because at least he purposefully isn’t trying to make meaningful lyrics and instead is just trying to add another instrument to the music.
The beatles are vastly overrated. They may have been trailblazers at the time but their music really doesn’t hold up
Decade or two ago I would agree with you.
Nowadays not that much. Ofc those radio songs you’ve heard more than billion times are awful and helps nobody to appreciate Beatles. But if you dig a bit deeper into songs that are ignored by radios, there are quite some good songs.
For one, I can’t believe Helter Skelter was made by the same Beatles as e.g. Help. Or whole Sgt. Pepper album is nice too.
Maybe I should specify, I don’t like typical radio music.
Metal head etc etc.
Go listen Helter Skelter then. That’s some Beatles I can appreciate.
All music without lyrics/singing is background music.
I don’t care for Dylan or the Beatles. At least I understand the ground-breaking work of the Beatles, but Dylan is incomprehensible.
and largely always was
I don’t understand Dylan but I believe he was lauded because of other musicians looking for anything new. Dylan pioneered the 3 minute song as a short story. So if you are a pop artist struggling to write a new song, it opened up lots of new ideas.
Dylan called his technique his crutch in writing “4th Time Around” to Lennon about Norwegian Wood copying Dylan’s style.
