I was in college during most of the 60s, and it was impossible to live through those years without being exposed to a whole lot of music. I remember the challenge of buying every Beatles album the day it came out . . . and a couple of decades later, doing the same thing with their CDs.
Well, lately I was doing an inventory of my couple thousand CDs, and I noticed (not really surprised) that I didn’t have a single CD or even a track by the Stones. In fact I couldn’t even remember more than a few of their songs. So I bought the “40 Licks” set.
A few of the songs actually sounded familiar (you know, the ones EVERYBODY knows). But by and large I cannot stand them. I loathe every song, and can’t wait for each song to be over, so I can say I listened to it exactly once and never again. Actually I set my player on “random” and played it for 2-3 days. I can honestly say they were among the most painful days of my life, only exceeded by a ruptured appendix. Their “music” is little more than noise, and not even listenable noise.
So I gave them a chance. Oh, I’ll hear them again, among my 28,000-track random play, but not too often.
Back to the Beatles. Or Simon & Garfunkel. Or the Mamas and the Papas.
That’s how I feel about Rush. I absolutely can’t stand Rush. I think what’s his name is a a great drummer and Geddy is an amazing bassist, but listening to him shriek through every song. Sorry, he can stay in Canada for all I care. What’s weird is that no one mentions it, it’s like I’m the only person hearing it. I feel like I’m missing something.
I remember a few times back when I first started driving and I’d turn on the radio and think 'wow, this is an amazing solo…wait, why is he singing like that?" and end up changing it. (Working Man maybe).
Then people think it’s funny that I like Styx and Supertramp as much as I do.
I can’t stand Rush either, and don’t understand how anybody likes them. Today my clock radio woke me up to a Rush song. What a horrible way to start a Monday. :mad:
Really? I thought Rush hate was pretty common. I think they’re okay. It’s not my usual cup of tea, but it’s fun from time to time, and I like Geddy’s oddball vocals, but I tend to like oddball vocals.
Perhaps you don’t really like rock music. I see the examples you mention are rather soft and pop-rocky. I posit that unless you dislike all guitar rock, it’s not possible to dislike the solo at the end of Sympathy for the Devil.
I’m not quite as old as the OP (:D), but I’m also not really a Stones fan. I prefer their mid-‘60s stuff: “Mother’s Little Helper,” "Jumpin’ Jack Flash," Paint It Black," etc. I love the Beatles, and a lot of other guitar-based rock – hell, I even got into metal in high school – but much of the Stones stuff just doesn’t do it for me.
Yes, from today’s perspective they can be “soft and pop-rocky,” but they certainly weren’t back in the 60s. They created sounds and content that had never been heard before.
I can appreciate the technique, but it does nothing for me musically.
That’s true. The entire song is a masterpiece; a stroke of absolute musical genius from the first “WAW!” to the last “woo,” and the guitar solo is always too short–it’s one of the most starkly “honest” and gut-wrenchingly emotional guitar bits ever etched into vinyl. But how many grooves did the Stones have to cut before and since to get that? An infinite number of monkeys banging at random on typewriters will eventually pump out Gravity’s Rainbow if given enough time.
Pink Floyd is the opposite of that. The Final Cut should have been a Waters solo, everything else they did, even with sylly Syd: perfection. The Cure can suck it.
I hate The Pretenders overall, but I LOVE her voice.