Who's music do you hate? (meta discussion)

FWIW, I didn't even notice that there were any negative threads. It never crossed my mind.I am surprised that a few of you noticed it at all.

It's really rough when you deal with so many strong personalities in one place.

 

I think for the most part, the members hare have been able to forget, or put aside any animostites that have developed in past situations. That is a plus that you don't even get in regular life!

 

Who's music do you hate?

Getting back on topic, I'll tell you who's music I hate:

JIMBO'S

He's got EVERYTHING and I don't!

Sorry for the personal attack, but (Ort'sgay ebay amnedday), sometimes the truth has to be spoken.



Craig will come back and edit this post later after he cools down.

 

Negativity slowly found it's way into the Blue Note board and finally prevailed. That is why they are in the shape that they are today. There's nothing wrong with showing a dislike of a certain artist, song or album but it's another thing to initiate a thread devoted to negativity.

Just 2 more cents...

 

We all can't like the same thing and that makes this place cool...Maybe a softer Title...Hate is a strong emotion..."Don't Appreciate" sounds better...And I don't feel calling an artist a "Creep" is a good thing...

 

Hey Michael, I don't really think that's the point. Of course we can't/don't all like the same thing, and that comes up all the time in the normal course of a discussion.

What's being referred to here are the threads that are solely devoted to negativity - the "who/what do you dislike" threads.

I personally feel they are in bad taste, and as stated above - do nothing but bring the whole place down.

 

I agree with ya...

 

Thanks for everyone's opinion.

I would just like to reiterate a point.
A person that gives you 100 reasons why you shouldn't like (say) "O Brother Where Art Thou", isn't giving you one bit of info you can use for listening. A person that gives you 2 reasons why they like it, is giving you totally useful info. That doesn't mean you have to like it, but you'll get more accurate info from fans that have listened to it 100 times, than the detractors that won't listen to it.
Would you like to know (say) Pat Metheny's best lps?
One of his rabid fans can tell you all about it. His detractors are clueless in that area.

I don't think anyone spoke of not allowing the threads, just pointing out that if you don't like something, what is the good in trying to warn someone off of it?

I've jammed with some real musicians, and we had a blast.
No one thought, "Man that guy stinks", we were all just having fun banging away. I'll always remember it that way. If anyone was bad it was me, so I'm not going to point any fingers.

Not at Celine Dion or Babs, who can sing 10 times better than I can,
or at Kenny G, who can play 10 times better than I can.
Maybe Kenny G comes off like an ******* (can I say that?) in his interviews because so many terrible things have been said about him by so many different people, and printed by so many different magazines.

I think you enjoy music more when you don't think about extenuating facts or prejudices. (against certain musicians)

If (say) Grant (or anyone else) tells us what music he (or she) is passionate about, that is valuable information.

Spreading the word is noble.
Sometimes those 2 things get a little mixed up. (Spreading the word, and sharing dislikes)

Thanks,
dennis

 

Look, I hate all of you because I only have a dozen DCC's, and you have them ALL!!! It's so unfair!!!

 

First of all no one is listing anything here. All they are doing is complaining about how PC this thread is, so maybe I'll break the trend.

1) What singer makes you sick?

Eddie Vedder
Scott Stapp
Sinnead O'Conner
Dave Matthews

2) Overrated hits in music history.

It's easier to list artists than songs beacuse there are so many crappy hit songs, especially from the '80's and '90's.

3) What's the worst sounding cd in your collection?

This one is tough because recording quality varies from studio to studio. I love a lot of garage stuff which is recorded very primitvely, but it works for the song and I hate a lot of digitally pristine recordings that suck the life of the song. As far as bad remastering goes, I would have to say Seals & Crofts and The Thirteenth Floor Elevators.

 

Very well-stated. IMO.

 

Now that I have been made aware of the "negative" nature of these threads, it seems to me that the forum wishes to engage in them. The forum wants to vent!

Consider these latest threads currently running:
WORST thing about SACD
WORST thing about DVD-A
WORST packaging...

It doesn't bother me but it seems to me the forum collectively is trying to keep a balance, not in the way the Gorts would like, i'm sure.

Gorts, any further comment on the continuing trend?

 

I can tell you that you'd be better off checking out the real thing rather than the soundtrack for O Brother...For example, don't waste your time with that soudtrack; check out the Stanley's version of Man of Constant Sorrow. While you're at it, check out all of the Stanley Brother's late 1940's & 50's music. Or if you want even more authenticity, check out Juanita & Lee Moore's version of Man of Constant Sorrow from the WPAQ: Voice of the Blueridge Mountains CD. Angel Band (from the OBWAT soundtrack) alone, is NOT enough Stanley Brothers to suit anyone, IMO.

I was under the impression that a great deal of the information exchanged on this site was info regarding albums to avoid because of the poor mastering/poor performances, etc...how is this not useful?

 

Grant & Friends,

Very good points....

I dislike these purely negative themes. From my perspective they are just senseless negativity without a real productive purpose. If I do not like something, I do not listen to it and I consider that simply my personal taste. From a Gort perspective, I do not feel that these "negative threads" are in the best interests of the Forum or our Community.

Poorly executed mastering? Yeah, let's talk about it! Your personal dislikes - I do not need to really know - that is your personal business and the mere expression of a "dislike" is more self-indulgence than posting with a genuine purpose.

Respectfully, these are my thoughts on this matter!

As I stated earlier, there is a big difference between dissenting opinion and gratuitous negativity...

Bob

 

Well, all else aside, O BROTHER did bring millions of listeners a style and era of music most had never heard, I would guess. At best, I've been just a mild dabbler in bluegrass, nothing more. And while it isn't 'purely authentic' and filled with actual recordings from the time, that wasn't the intent. Yet the album does its job, and services the film. Can you find 'real bluegrass'? Well, I would argue much of this IS real bluegrass; but yeah, the old bluegrass material is out there, a lot of it on CD and so available for those who wish to do a little searching, as not many stores devote a lot of space to the genre.

Hell, I liked the album so much I bought the recent vinyl edition. Could've been pressed on heavier plastic, but other than that....in a way, where it belongs.

And while, as noted above, I can't claim to know much about the music, I don't hear any 'poor performances' here, and the talent sure looks to be top flight to me. This is an Lp that became a launching pad for investigation; not intended to be the last word on anything. Again, it services the movie the way the Coen brothers saw fit. Had they wanted original vintage recordings, they knew where to find them, I'm sure.

I think that's the kind of overview that's wanted here. It's certainly the kind I would prefer to read. In other words, if you really, really love something: SELL IT TO ME!!

ED

 

And of course one of the very best things about the OBWAT phenomenon is the massive reality check it gave to radio programmers and music marketers. What do you know: you can make money on quality music even when some of it's unfamiliar. Think of that!

I get a kick out of imagining all those heads being scratched in unison: "Bluegrass? We don't even play that on the radio anymore. Millions of copies? Are you sure there's not a misprint here somewhere?"

 

Gardo,

Not only that, but a rare(nowadays)reminder of how there is no way to predict success. For the most part, the label execs have lost their nerve to try anything new--only the familiar, they figure, will assure their future employment and bottom line. Granted, this soundtrack was a left-field phenomenon, but then, so was one single--"Convoy"-- which was single-handedly responsible for selling millions of CB radios, a hobby hardly new before 1975.

To make its success even more shocking, the album was issued on a subsidiary, almost boutique label where big sales weren't expected anyway. Which is why I can't understand why anyone would give it a knock. It may not be the creme de la creme of bluegrass, but as an introduction(reminder?)to millions, perfect. Anyone who cares enough can investigate further; it's all out there to buy.

I think it plays well, too. When nobody else is around, lights dimmed a bit, a very pleasant listening experience. Then, afterwards, out comes the Alison Krauss and Bill Monroe...of course!

ED

 

Such warnings about masterings *can* be very useful (although you need to get a wide sampling of opinions, I've found, before you can be even more or less certain about what's in store for you). The above warning about "O Brother...", on the other hand, seems to me an example of a less useful (although not useless) form of negative evaluation. The useful part of it is the set of positive recommendations of some damn good music. The useless part is the idea that buying and listening to the "O Brother..." soundtrack would be somehow a waste of time. I can understand--and benefit from--the suggestion that I check out a bunch of stuff, but why say I'd be wasting my time with the other?

I think jligon's taste is very good taste indeed, as his postive recommendations show, but his remark makes something of considerable intrinsic value seem of no value at all. If what your after is a deep selection of some great traditional, Old Time, or Bluegrass music, then you might want to look elsewhere than at the soundtrack, and jligon's advice about some things to check out is very good advice. But the "O Brother" soundtrack does have things to offer that are all its own and of considerable value. It offers a few wonderful older recordings (not enough to consititute an overview, and nothing not available elsewhere, but at least they're there), then it offers a bunch beautiful renditions by some contemporary players who work in traditional styles. Some of these are better than others, some are more "authentic" than others, some are merely footnotes to older, classic versions, some stand on their own just fine. The main thing is that some are just plain lovely, whatever else they are. Welch, Krauss & Harris's play on "Didn't Leave Nobody But The Baby" is, for example, a strange and beautiful thing, not *quite* like anything I've ever heard in an older recording, and I wouldn't want to have missed out on hearing it. And having spent time with it certainly leaves me with more than enough time to explore earlier recordings--not to mention all kinds of other music. Whatever my experience of it has been, it has not been a waste of time.

So why not try and make fair and fine distinctions while offering an opinion? Why be dismissive?

L.

 

That's precisely it, Louis. And while there may be a place in the world for Fun With Dismissiveness, and I won't even entirely dismiss the idea that at times there may be value in dismissiveness, I don't think this forum is the place or time. Dissent, opinions, even strong and conflicting opinions, yes. But not dismissal. Or at least not very often.

 

One of the things I've always liked about this board, as opposed to some others, has been the relative seriousness of the topics and discussions. Outside of the occaisional, intentionally humorous "IGNORE THIS THREAD" type of post, I've always figured there would be something of interest in almost ANY thread posted on this board. One of the things that has driven me off the few other message boards I've ever visited is the fact that eventually, most good boards seem to become cluttered up with posts from people who it seems to me must be very bored, and do nothing but sit around and try to think of hypothetical questions that address meaningless situations. I think of these as "What would you do if a large fish fell out of the sky and landed on your head?" threads, or "fish" questions for short.

For example, "What do you think Steve's next project should be?" is an irrelevant question, unless the poster has the funds to hire Steve and has access to LOTS of master tapes, and is conducting a survey. To me, this kind of question is often just seems like an attempt to start a conversation about nothing just so there is something to talk about.

This type of question is FUN once in a while, and may even lead to some interesting discussions, but when a large percentage of the threads start to become "fish" questions it clutters up the board with a lot of junk, and often just leads to a lot of meaningless speculation about how wonderful it would be if Steve could get his hands on The Beatles catalog.

I am also uninterested in topics like "Which DCC would you pay a lot of money for just to get the music even if it was all scratched up?" or "Which famous saxophonist playes the meanest violin? or "Which speakers sound better - rosewood or birch?"

The truth is, I really don't CARE what anyone would do if a large fish fell out of the sky and landed on their head, and unless I'm in a real good mood, it is kind of irritatating to have to cull through a bunch of this junk to find the kind of meaningful discussion I come here for.

Another kind of thread that can become bothersome is the kind of thread that leads to a bunch of meaningless lists, like when someone posts "What is your favorite DCC?" and everyone answers "Iron Maiden" or "ZZ Top's Greatest Hits" or when someone posts a question like "Which rock singer has the ugliest nose?" The "What is your favorite DCC?" type threads would be a LOT more interesting if the question were phrased in a way that let everyone know they were expected to post some kind of rationale for their selections. At least whenever someone posts a poll it prompts a lot of discussion (about the choice selection, if nothing else) - but "Which rock singer has the ugliest nose?"threads that lead to a bunch of meaningless lists and NO real discussion just take up server space. All this stuff is ARCHIVED. Server space isn't free. And what is the point?

"Who or what do you hate" threads fall into the "meaningless list" category, IMO. They serve no useful purpose whatsoever. I don't LEARN anything from these threads. I can't even tell what type of performer/music/food/movie/etc. the posters DO like. For all I know, someone may hate Nat King Cole because they had a traumatic diaper-wetting experience at the movies watching "Cat Ballou."

I'm not saying ANY of these types of threads are bad in and of themselves, but when there starts to be a large NUMBER of them relative to the number of serious threads, I think it becomes a problem, and detracts from the user's experience of the board as a whole. If I was a newbie and opened the forum to a bunch of questions like "Which DCC gold has the prettiest slipcase?" or "Which bands give you diareaha?" I probably wouldn't return. And how will we EVER influence the industry lurkers if half of what we talk about here seems like it would only be of interest to people who are probably too young to actually PURCHASE anything?


My $0.02

 

Flatt & Scrugg were making Bluegrass from the 1940's...Bear Family records has 3 Boxsets on them and a Lester Flatt Box set that adds a few missing pieces from the F & S Boxes...Doc Watson as been Bluegrassing since the 1960's...those are the true pioneers and of course Bill Monroe the King... Tons of stuff is out on Cee Dee. RR Series stuff Steve did and countless others...

 

Well dwmann,

Everyone has their own preferences of what they like and don't like on this board. If I don't care for something, I can skip over it. You can too. I like the hypothetical questions and the lists. I am not an all-business kind of guy all the time. For me, it would be a boring place if everyone was all serious business on a message board.

 

Grant,

It WOULD be a boring place if everyone was all serious business on a message board, and as I thought I made clear in my post, I don't have a problem with the hypothetical questions and the lists as long as they appear in moderation. However, when a larger and larger percentage of the posts are of this type, the board becomes less and less about information and comunication and more and more about just filling up time.

In point of fact, I seldom if ever skip over YOUR threads, because even those threads of yours that lead to a lot of lists at least seem to result in constructive lists with some kind of redeeming value, and a lot of your threads (AND lists) lead to interesting discussions. They are not necessarily "all-business" discussions, but at least there seems to be some kind of POINT to them, which is all I really ask for. However, there seem to be a lot of threads recently where I can't find any redeeming value at ALL.

True, I CAN skip over these posts, but it seems there are becoming progressively more and more of these posts for me to skip over.

If YOU list the top 10 from a paricular week, or someone else lists great singles from a particular year and people respond, I can learn something from that - if only to get a better idea of various members tastes
- and perhaps I recall a song I'd forgotten. However, if someone starts a discussion about which female vocalist has the fattest behind, I don't benefit at all, and I don't see how anyone else does either.

If I encounter one or two of these threads a week, that were obviously posted with tonge-in-cheek, that's ONE thing - it CAN result in some great humor. When I start encountering a LOT of these things that it seems I am supposed to take SERIOUSLY, and OTHERS must think THEY are supposed to take seriously also, and there become so MANY of them that someone starts a metadiscussion about negative threads, THEN I begin to worry.

I've seen other boards degenerate to the point where almost anyone with anything meaningful to say decided to abandon ship, because they got TIRED of skipping over school-yard posts, and I'd hate to see that happen HERE.

 

Yeah, but wre're having FUN! I know some people may not have time for these posts, and don't come here ten times a day like some of us, but you have to admit, even in these seemingly useless posts, there is always something worthwhile to take from them.

The other problem is that everyone has their own idea of what is moderate. Someone long ago complained that I post too much. All Steve could say to him was to post MORE! I guess he didn't like that because I haven't seen him since.