This Week's Top 10 Chart

No, there is NO bad music. Only one's perception of it may be that it is bad. If YOU don't like something, you can bet that there is someone out there that does like it, and that does not mean that your taste is superior.

 

My point exactly. In saying that there is bad music I am merely giving my personal opinion or "perception" as you say.

 

And you have just made my point. Without qualifying your statement with an "IMO", or something to that effect, your words could be taken as a statement of truth. But it is not true because it cannot be conclusively proven.

A newbie or a very impressionable person here may not understand that this is just a personal opinion.

It's just another reason I don't like professional rock critics. Impressionable people take their rantings to heart and don't think for themselves.

 

Let me see if I understand you. If one doesn't add "IMO" then the words could be taken as a statement of fact. But they *cannot* be taken as a statement of fact because they cannot be proven. Ergo such statements are opinion.

If the above is correct, then adding the disclaimer "IMO" is unnecessary as by definition any statement regarding good/bad music [statements that cannot be proven] would obviously be opinion. Which has been my point all along.

Look. Steve prefers that IMO be used and that's fine by me. Linguistically, however, I don't believe it's necessary.

 

IMO,
We should drop this before Mr Lovely or HZ have a coronary!

 

Dave IMHO I'm ROTFLMAO because what you have stated could be true. YIKES then we'd be down ond or two gorts and we couldn't have the 12 gorts of Christmas this year.

 

Well, I think they're all still sleeping, and the last thing we need is a gort fresh out of bed, scratching his hairy belly, reading this thread.....his head will explode!

 

Yeah I'd go take a leak first before my head exploded too before reading anything

 

Miss Manners would say the using IMO is courteous and proper. It not only gives the reader an excuse to continue the debate without becoming inflammatory, it shows that the writer is, at the very least, aware that his statement is likely to be challenged, and prevents the necessity of defending it.

That said, I used to think that 2525 was a B- back in '69, but I agree that time has made it a D-. As for Tommy Roe - I can't think of anything better that a C.

IMHO.

 

As you know, I normally stay out of these frays but I feel I need to step in here. My purpose in posting each week is to remind folks of what was popular this same week at some point in the past and stimulate conversation. It has always been my assumption that ratings or comments posted by other members was the opinion of the writer. When those opinions are similar to mine I'm surprised at the brilliance of our members. When they disagree with my opinion I'm shocked at the ignorance. But, either way, I don't consider it a threat to my opinion.
Music, like most art, works on several levels. Some of these can be quantified and evaluated but many things are purely objective. One man's trash is another man's treasure. This often has nothing to do with musicianship, lyrical content or even sound quality. It's more often how the music effected you when it was first popular or it's imprint on your memory. This can't be explained or critiqued. It explains why there are so many songs that taken on a technical level would not be rated very high yet on a personal level have deep impact for people.

I greatly appreciate the regular posters such as Ed, Grant, Mike and Bob for bringing this thread to life with their opinions and facts about the songs, artists and times. I'm sure that when they or any of us post an opinion the intent is not to insult the reader but to simply express what we feel about a song. I also expect that there will be disagreements. This is fine and healthy as long as we stay on a level that does not get personal. If I read "This song sucks" I can simply dismiss your opinion as being misinformed. However, if I see "Dave is an idiot for liking this song", I can't help but take offense. I still see both of these statements as the author's opinion but I think the difference is obvious.

I encourage everyone to continue to post freely their opinions and memories of these songs. Likewise, I ask that we all respect each other's feelings and our right to like music that sucks.

- Dave

 

Beatle Terr: Take as many leeks as you need. They're good for ya!

Jim W.

 

My point is that NO music sucks. It is what it is, and we can choose what we like and what we don't. But if someone continually states that something I, or another person likes is trash, say, late 70s music, it's like saying that everything I hold dear and is part of my life is trash and that the opinion of the music my generation grew up with is worthless. So, like Steve says, it is very insulting.

Again, Ron, an opinion may or may not be implied, but it is the way in which one states that opinion that makes the difference. Saying IMO may be silly to you but it helps assure that everyone understands the difference. A newbie to the forum could come in here, see those "--------- sucks." statements, and get offended and not bother to come back. Yes, many people are hyper-sensitive about music. If someone came in here and said the Beatles suck, it would be that writer's opinion, but the whole forum would go into attack mode!

Anyway, Steve said it all best earlier with his example of the first love and all that.

I'm moving on. Till next week's chart...

 

Friends,

It looks as though I am a little late into the fray here!

I was 18 and just about to enter college when this chart was popular. I had decided to break up with my girlfriend because I was going away to school and she was still in high school. I was excited to meet all those 'wild' college girls (Remember, this was 1969, after all!). Ah, I remember those days - going back to college and all those pretty young Women away from the clutches of Mommy and Daddy for the first time. It was like going into a record store and finding more gems than you have money to spend on.

#1 was recently extensively discussed here in a separate thread and I found the discussion to be very enlightening and informative. My faves from this group include #'s 2, 3, 4 and 9 but, I have special memories of the other tracks as well. Certainly, these tracks are a good snapshot of August 1969 but where is 'Dizzy' by Tommy Roe?

Track # 5 was a great resurgence for Johnny Cash who was then cool, again. # 7 is more revealing of the times then you might think. Remember, this was the time of the real struggle of the Vietnam War and 'Ruby' told the story was the lonely young Woman left behind only to have her Man return as as incapable of satisfying her sexually. This was an all too often reality in 1969. Perhaps, this why we rarely hear the track today. It does not evoke pleasant memories. Of the tracks on this chart, # 10 was more aimed at the pre-Teen and Teen market.

Dave - another interesting chart and great recent post in this thread.

Bob

 

Well, after reading Bob's post, i'll comment here again.

I was six years old going on seven when this chart came out and was entering the second grade that very next week! We were just moving into our new house that month and it was a very fun time for me, although I was upset that we were moving away from my friends who lived next door. Hell, that summer was just plain fun! I watched the supposed Apollo 11 moon landing on my friend's TV because they had color and we didn't. He even got a scaled model of the lunar module and we both got a 45 RPM record of the "First Man On The Moon" by Hugh Downs on MGM Records. I was just discovering the Archies and songs like "Dizzy" for the first time, even though the song was months old. We also got cable TV at this time, and were one of the first people in town to do so. It was so cool to get clear TV reception without "rabbit-ears"!

My take on the chart is that it did reflect a very divided country, but there is still something for everyone here. All the bases seem to be covered here for the teenyboppers, the hippies/college age types, R&B fans, and the older folks. For me, it's always a treat to hear "Put A Little Love In Your Heart" by Jackie DeShannon. I recall that Leslie Uggams used to sing it at the end of every one of her weekly TV shows.

 

Re: Re: This Week's Top 10 Chart

Bob, you mean they had colleges way back then?



mud-

 

Re: Re: Re: This Week's Top 10 Chart

We had indoor toilets as well Mud!

Grant,

I remember when Leslie Uggams would sing that song - you triggered my memory. I agree that the chart has something for everyone...

Bob

 

Depite the fact that feathers occassionally get ruffled, i've never thought it necessary that someone actually states "in my opinion" when making a post about the artistic merits of music (or art, movies, etc.). If you're talking about such subjective things, it's *always* just one's opinion.

 

Ray,

Of course it is but, here, where we cannot see each other's faces, expressions and body language, such an expression sets a tone of politeness and humility - both highly redeeming personal qualities. I do not think anybody really gives 'a damn' about my opinions of a track but, they may be interested in my observations, insights, factual knowledge or my account of the times when the track was popular. Being polite is a way of life here....in my opinion!

Bob

 

Well, nevermind that last post of mine... I wasn't expecting so much discussion of this issue over the last 12 hours or so. While catching up to the rest of the comments I see that it's already been beaten to death...

IMO of course.

 

To digress a bit: one of the true joys of this forum for me is how the dissing of a song like "2525" can turn into an argument over the merits and sheer pointlessness of "Dizzy," and then evolve into an almost philosophical discussion over whether or not music (and art in general) can be "bad."

cool...

 

Late 70's soul is insipid and soulless.

Late 70's soul is insipid and soulless, IMO.

Grant, so the latter pisses you off less than the former? Really?

 

There's some irony here. I just know it!

 

Can't argue with that!

 

\

Hi Ron,

I work with and around a lot of women, and have for over twenty years. I have learned long ago that it's how you say something that matters. See, using IMO, softens things so it is less aggressive or intimidadting.