I was tempted before seeing this post to comment on Tull too (as long as we’re slaying sacred cows here). They are plagued by the same syndrome that has claimed so many prog acts: they try to fit too many musical ideas in a given interval, no matter whether such is warranted by the broader context or theme they are trying to evoke. Closely related to making a chord/tempo/time signature/key change just for the sake of the change, without again any reference to the overall motif or the previous or next elements. As a result I just find that style offputting and exhausting if not exasperating to listen to.
Some of my top artists are indeed prog acts, but they are the ones which invariably avoid these kinds of boredom-inducing extravagances and traps, at least at their creative peaks (Yes, Renaissance, Floyd), and thus (during said peaks) they manage to build something cohesive and powerful without all the annoying distractions. Echoes is definitely the best example of that-even the weird underwater screeches in the middle section are still in the thematic key of the cut and contribute to its thematic richness. Some of my most-disliked bands tho are indeed proggers, for the above reasons, and for that matter some of my most-disliked albums are those outside those very same artists’ peaks. [contrast Echoes with say Yes’ The Gates of Delerium for example]
I like Nirvana but what I really hated was MTV and media over pushing them(and particularly Kurt Cobain) as the voice of a New Generation. Cobain hated it to and the pressure of it probably contributed to his mental issues and suicide.
Yes is another example. On their 1972 album Close to the Edge, the song of that same name took up the entire first side. Their 1973 Tales from Topographic Oceans was a double album, and consisted of four songs, each of which occupied an entire album side.
As for Radiohead, when they’re good, they’re spectacular, and when they aren’t, well, they aren’t. I saw them twice, opening for R.E.M. on consecutive nights, and one night was meh and the other was terrific.
I also saw the Pixies (got a free ticket in exchange for driving an hour away) and don’t “get” them either, but I had a good time at the show.
Also “Supper’s Ready” on Genesis’ “Foxtrot” which is over 23 minutes long and one of the most astounding musical pieces ever IMHO.
And Floyd had done it a year/album before “Echoes” on “Meddle” with the title track of “Atom Heart Mother”. “Shine On You Crazy Diamond” is also an album side long, but split up into two parts that open side one and close side two of “Wish You Were Here”, respectively.
I’ve always been mildly unenthusiastic about The Eagles until The Big Lebowski gave me permission to actively despise them (and fall in love with The Gipsy Kings).
I can respect this perspective. The ones that get my eyes rolling are some form of, “The Beatles’ music absolutely sucks! It’s all hype and bullshit.”
If someone just doesn’t dig The Beatles, that’s their opinion. “The Beatles are shit musically” just shows someone’s ignorance. BTW, I don’t think anyone went that overboard in the thread.
Yes, kudos to those who recognize the difference between “I don’t like this band” and “this band sucks.”
A band that is well-regarded almost by definition can’t be all bad. But it may be that the things it does well are things that you don’t appreciate, or that the things that you find annoying about it are things that don’t particularly bother other people.
You’re right, I stand corrected. Though I suspect (may be wrong, I’ve only ever owned the album either taped off of vinyl or on CD) that the regular cassette may have split Pigs into two parts. Cassettes seem to be making an ironic comeback, maybe Sony will reissue it and I’ll find out.
I’m definitely in the “I can do without the art-rock” camp. Though I do love Pink Floyd, if only because they seemed harsher lyrically than some of the others. What little I’ve heard of Yes bores the piss out of me, I struggled but couldn’t get into Tull, and early Genesis sails right by me.
Black Sabbath and Ozzy Osbourne. I find Ozzy’s vocals to be grating and annoying. And most of Ozzy’s solo work is very underwhelming compared to other metal bands of the 1980s.
I don’t mind Gordon Lightfoot, but you reminded me of a band that was loved and revered here in Canada: the Tragically Hip.
They’re on my list of bands that I don’t like. Their music was fine, but their lead singer, Gordon Downie, had a voice that was like nails on a chalkboard. I’m not sure he actually sang; he more or less just yelled. If the Tragically Hip came on the radio, it was time to switch to another station. Even if I landed on the Farm Report, it was easier on the ears than the Tragically Hip.
I can easily dismiss anyone who says the Beatles suck. You might not like them. You might be sick of them. They certainly don’t suck. To get an appreciation of them you have to look at them in context. See what music was like before them and see what music was like in less than ten years with them. Yes they got inspiration from others around them but not nearly as much as everyone got from them. When they come on I usually skip over but that’s because I’ve heard it too much not because they suck.
It’s very similar to those who say Citizen Kane sucks. It may seem slow and boring to 2024 eyes but to get a true appreciation you have to look at movies before and after it.
