Oh, later, sure. It’s easy to point out the differences later. JaMC had moved on too by then.
Now pop on Ecstacy and Wine right after listening to *Psychocandy *and it’s plain as day. I mean, have you listened to Sunny Sundae Smile? Very different sound early on.
If you cite any band as the worst ever than you have lost all credibility unless you agree with me that it was my son’s first band “Nihilism” but they only did one show when he was a sophomore in high school so most of you probably missed it.
Ironically, his current band, while not making a lot of money is on the compliation CD in the current (summer 2011) issue of “Classic Rock”.
Yes, and thank you. 
Because people who listened to mainstream radio hated it, that’s why. In high school, I’d make mixtapes of the “alternative” bands at the time, and people reacted violently to that stuff - The Cure, The Smiths, Husker Du, The Replacements, even R.E.M. were labeled “total shit” and “noise” by most of the people in my school. I think it was mostly that Southern rock, hair rock, hard rock, progressive rock and heavy metal (as well as top 40, to a large extent) were mainly embraced by people with a more conservative mindset. Yeah, most of those albums are considered classics today, but they definitely weren’t embraced by the masses at the time - shit, pretty much everyone in my circle got beat up at some point because we dressed “punk” or “goth” or “mod” or whatever.
I’d argue that the guitar sound/style on the earlier MBV stuff isn’t what people think of when they think of Shields’ guitar work. They think of whammy bar usage to mask chord changes, building tents in studios and whatnot.
[QUOTE=elmwood]
Classic rock stations existed as far back as the 1970s, when the format was called “album-oriented rock”. Every city of some size had one or two, if not more AOR stations, playing whatever topped the Billboard rock charts along with the iconic and popular rock songs of the recent past. However, the playlists of classic rock stations began to ossify in the mid- to late-1980s, about the time “alternative rock” became fashionable. AOR stations in the US embraced Southern heartland rock, hair rock, hard rock, progressive rock and heavy metal, but they drew the line at alternative rock. Why?
[/QUOTE]
Actually, the dislike of AOR audiences toward anything “alternative” goes back a little further than the 80s. During the late 70s, most AOR stations resisted adding punk and new wave acts to their playlists (and those that didn’t often only played them in the early hours of the morning). Supposedly, this was because AOR listeners hated hearing the Ramones, Sex Pistols, Elvis Costello, and others of their ilk mixed among their Led Zeppelin, Stones, Aerosmith, and Van Halen. As a result, punk and new wave groups were usually only heard on low-wattage college radio stations during the late 70s and early 80s thereby leading to the designation of “college music” (the predecessor term for “alternative”).
Oh, for sure. I was just addressing the claim that classic rock radio in the '80s didn’t include alternative rock.
Rancid Sucks, and the Clash Sucked Too
There so isn’t anyone here who will get that reference.
looks at credit card Eeeek!
Heh, I may well regret this, and I will blame you! 
Obviously your brain has been melted by listening to other types of music. I forgive you.
How does one define “good” music? Personally, I look primarily for an authentic communication of emotional contact, and I have found that it exists in a variety if styles? The truth is that classic rock sucks?
Well, just now I listened to “The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down” by the Band, “Helpless” by Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young, “Bell-Bottom Blues” by Derek and the Dominos, “Who’ll Stop the Rain?” by C. C. R., and “Ooh, La-La” by the Faces and each of those songs struck me powerfully and I think every one of them was originally recorded before I was born, certainly before I was old enough to be aware ofusic consciously. By what “objective” measure are these recordings crap?
The guys where I work keep the radio on the classic rock station day in and day out. If you get in their car it’s tuned to classic rock. A beer at their house after work…classic rock. These guys are in their 40’s and 50’s…how many times have they heard this shit?
Our town has a great jazz station…too uppity.
Contempo tunes…too gay.
Alternate…too unfamiliar. (their opinion, not mine)
I don’t get it either…I could live the rest of my life without hearing tired 70’s classic rock crap
again. YUCK!
RIP Seth Putnam
Do you have two turntables and a microphone?
There’s a good chance that someday someone will say this about you. For the majority of people, once they reach a certain age, what’s most important in music is not the music itself but the feelings and memories that the music is associated with. Music that is entirely new doesn’t hold any of those associations, so it feels thin and shallow.
I’m not the OP, but I PERSONALLY think they both suck donkey balls. But that’s just like, my opinion, man.
says she who’s currently listening to the Bee Gees
Wow, you guys have really let me have it!
See, this is the double standard I don’t understand. No one’s calling this guy out for making objective statements about music, and “everyone who wants to pretend they like music has a hard on for Slint” is blatantly judgmental of Slint fans, but why is no one jumping down his throat?
Look, it’s stupid to take everything I said at face value, or to assume that just because I didn’t use such-and-such qualifiers before stating my opinion that I think I have the last word on anything, that I’m trying to change anyone’s minds, that I’m a troll, etc. I’ve been arguing my point at least semi-coherently and trying to stay on track - many of you have tried to made assumptions about everything from my taste in music to my economic background, all while repeating each other’s statements against me without actually paying any attention to what I’ve been saying in reply.
For the last fucking time, there IS no objective way to measure music, and I never claimed to have one, or to be any kind of authority on the subject. Someone pointed out before that a lack of “I think” language serves as a rhetorical intensifier, and that’s all I meant by it. Also, I’m not 12 years old, I’m not gay, I don’t listen to Buckethead, I don’t have a rich family, I don’t wear box-frame glasses, and I don’t speak for anyone other than myself. I also don’t need to be patronized by a bunch of insecure dumbasses who don’t hold themselves to the same standards as they have for people who disagree with them.
I also feel the need to repeat that whether something is influential or not DOES NOT have any effect on my opinion of the music’s quality. You can try and convince me that I’ve been influenced by Hendrix somehow (I haven’t), or make the valid point that the Who influenced plenty of punk bands, but that doesn’t mean I need to appreciate them in any other way than maybe historical.
And don’t tell me you can “talk me through appreciating the Beatles,” because that has to be the most condescending bullshit I’ve ever heard.
Oh boo hoo, you delicate flower. You opened with a haymaker. Turns out you have a glass jaw.
I’m anything but delicate, pal. But these folks came to this boxing match ready to wrestle. Hey-o!