930 Forums

Musicological banter

hutch
Joined: Unknown
Posts: 0
Re: Musicological banter October 25, 2013 at 07:10 PM UTC #
James wrote:
My name is not James Ford. Is your name really Hutch? I though we both got our names from tv characters.

I don't really get the appeal of Muse. But then again, I'm not really a rock kind of guy to begin with.

Though I do agree with your assessments of pitchfork, and I do think that 99% of indie rock is total garbage.

Don't get angry, it's just music.

hutch wrote:
James wrote:
And if Muse is any good, then I'm James Ford.

hutch wrote:
atomic wrote:
hutch wrote:
killsaly wrote:
http://pitchforkreviewgenerator.com/




pitchfork is so awful..they don't get it..they don't get ROCK AND ROLL. ..they just dont… all you have to do is read their reviews of the hellacopters to see they don't get it.


Or their reviews of Coldplay and Muse. 


if coldplay is rock and roll i'm sherlock holmes..




but you're not, right?

i mean your name is not james ford.. is that what you're saying dude? i want to be in on your joke mahn..can you help me?



i wasn't angry..  i thought i was being clever

i have no idea what pitchfork thinks of muse.. i think they totally suck..

its not rock and roll

this is the problem with pitchfork: if anyone actually creates rock and roll they call it a fake and the shit they call rock and roll isn't rock and roll..

that makes me mad. .not you man.
chaz
Joined: December 09, 2002 at 06:01 AM UTC
Posts: 5111
Re: Musicological banter October 25, 2013 at 07:25 PM UTC #
at least they gave the new motorhead record a 7.6
hutch
Joined: Unknown
Posts: 0
Re: Musicological banter October 25, 2013 at 07:29 PM UTC #
chaz wrote:
at least they gave the new motorhead record a 7.6



yeah..well they have to do that, no…its motorhead… this is what places like pitchfork do..they talk favorably about bands from yesteryear but if a new band tries to do something like that its like FUCK NO you are a POSEUR… they didn't even review high visibility i tell ya!

atomic
Joined: August 27, 2013 at 01:49 PM UTC
Posts: 2093
Re: Musicological banter October 25, 2013 at 07:37 PM UTC #
hutch wrote:
atomic wrote:
hutch wrote:
killsaly wrote:
http://pitchforkreviewgenerator.com/




pitchfork is so awful..they don't get it..they don't get ROCK AND ROLL. ..they just dont… all you have to do is read their reviews of the hellacopters to see they don't get it.


Or their reviews of Coldplay and Muse. 


if coldplay is rock and roll i'm sherlock holmes..



What are they then Ska?  Geez.
James Ford
Joined: July 22, 2009 at 09:02 PM UTC
Posts: 5620
Re: Musicological banter October 25, 2013 at 07:42 PM UTC #
Musical theater. Like Muse. And Glee.

atomic wrote:
hutch wrote:
atomic wrote:
hutch wrote:
killsaly wrote:
http://pitchforkreviewgenerator.com/




pitchfork is so awful..they don't get it..they don't get ROCK AND ROLL. ..they just dont… all you have to do is read their reviews of the hellacopters to see they don't get it.


Or their reviews of Coldplay and Muse. 


if coldplay is rock and roll i'm sherlock holmes..



What are they then Ska?  Geez.
atomic
Joined: August 27, 2013 at 01:49 PM UTC
Posts: 2093
Re: Musicological banter October 25, 2013 at 07:45 PM UTC #
James wrote:
Musical theater. Like Muse. And Glee.

atomic wrote:
hutch wrote:
atomic wrote:
hutch wrote:
killsaly wrote:
http://pitchforkreviewgenerator.com/




pitchfork is so awful..they don't get it..they don't get ROCK AND ROLL. ..they just dont… all you have to do is read their reviews of the hellacopters to see they don't get it.


Or their reviews of Coldplay and Muse. 


if coldplay is rock and roll i'm sherlock holmes..



What are they then Ska?  Geez.



Musical theater is cool.  A lot better than Motorhead that is for sure.
atomic
Joined: August 27, 2013 at 01:49 PM UTC
Posts: 2093
Re: Musicological banter October 25, 2013 at 07:46 PM UTC #
hutch wrote:
chaz wrote:
at least they gave the new motorhead record a 7.6



yeah..well they have to do that, no…its motorhead… this is what places like pitchfork do..they talk favorably about bands from yesteryear but if a new band tries to do something like that its like FUCK NO you are a POSEUR… they didn't even review high visibility i tell ya!




Let me tell you the only review of a  band I need is the  number of hot woman at the show.  Motorhead none.  Coldplay quite a lot.  Tori Amos the whole crowd.
hutch
Joined: Unknown
Posts: 0
Re: Musicological banter October 25, 2013 at 07:48 PM UTC #
atomic wrote:
hutch wrote:
chaz wrote:
at least they gave the new motorhead record a 7.6



yeah..well they have to do that, no…its motorhead… this is what places like pitchfork do..they talk favorably about bands from yesteryear but if a new band tries to do something like that its like FUCK NO you are a POSEUR… they didn't even review high visibility i tell ya!




Let me tell you the only review of a  band I need is the  number of hot woman at the show.  Motorhead none.  Coldplay quite a lot.  Tori Amos the whole crowd.


yeah but the kind of women at tori amos show are all psychos dude (or lesbians)…stay away…
James Ford
Joined: July 22, 2009 at 09:02 PM UTC
Posts: 5620
Re: Musicological banter October 25, 2013 at 07:50 PM UTC #
Would your wife agree with this statement?

atomic wrote:
hutch wrote:
chaz wrote:
at least they gave the new motorhead record a 7.6



yeah..well they have to do that, no…its motorhead… this is what places like pitchfork do..they talk favorably about bands from yesteryear but if a new band tries to do something like that its like FUCK NO you are a POSEUR… they didn't even review high visibility i tell ya!




Let me tell you the only review of a  band I need is the  number of hot woman at the show.  Motorhead none.  Coldplay quite a lot.  Tori Amos the whole crowd.
chaz
Joined: December 09, 2002 at 06:01 AM UTC
Posts: 5111
Re: Musicological banter October 25, 2013 at 08:14 PM UTC #
atomic wrote:
James wrote:
Musical theater. Like Muse. And Glee.

atomic wrote:
hutch wrote:
atomic wrote:
hutch wrote:
killsaly wrote:
http://pitchforkreviewgenerator.com/




pitchfork is so awful..they don't get it..they don't get ROCK AND ROLL. ..they just dont… all you have to do is read their reviews of the hellacopters to see they don't get it.


Or their reviews of Coldplay and Muse. 


if coldplay is rock and roll i'm sherlock holmes..



What are they then Ska?  Geez.



Musical theater is cool.  A lot better than Motorhead that is for sure.

you are so lame
atomic
Joined: August 27, 2013 at 01:49 PM UTC
Posts: 2093
Re: Musicological banter October 25, 2013 at 08:18 PM UTC #
James wrote:
Would your wife agree with this statement?

atomic wrote:
hutch wrote:
chaz wrote:
at least they gave the new motorhead record a 7.6



yeah..well they have to do that, no…its motorhead… this is what places like pitchfork do..they talk favorably about bands from yesteryear but if a new band tries to do something like that its like FUCK NO you are a POSEUR… they didn't even review high visibility i tell ya!




Let me tell you the only review of a  band I need is the  number of hot woman at the show.  Motorhead none.  Coldplay quite a lot.  Tori Amos the whole crowd.



She hasn't seen Coldplay or Motorhead. 
atomic
Joined: August 27, 2013 at 01:49 PM UTC
Posts: 2093
Re: Musicological banter October 25, 2013 at 08:19 PM UTC #
That would bother  me except you think Motorhead is better than Musicals.  So you opinion is pretty meaningless


chaz wrote:
atomic wrote:
James wrote:
Musical theater. Like Muse. And Glee.

atomic wrote:
hutch wrote:
atomic wrote:
hutch wrote:
killsaly wrote:
http://pitchforkreviewgenerator.com/




pitchfork is so awful..they don't get it..they don't get ROCK AND ROLL. ..they just dont… all you have to do is read their reviews of the hellacopters to see they don't get it.


Or their reviews of Coldplay and Muse. 


if coldplay is rock and roll i'm sherlock holmes..



What are they then Ska?  Geez.



Musical theater is cool.  A lot better than Motorhead that is for sure.

you are so lame
chaz
Joined: December 09, 2002 at 06:01 AM UTC
Posts: 5111
Re: Musicological banter October 25, 2013 at 08:28 PM UTC #
atomic wrote:
That would bother  me except you think Motorhead is better than Musicals.   



comedy gold
atomic
Joined: August 27, 2013 at 01:49 PM UTC
Posts: 2093
Re: Musicological banter October 25, 2013 at 08:36 PM UTC #
chaz wrote:
atomic wrote:
That would bother  me except you think Motorhead is better than Musicals.   



comedy gold



The comedy is that you like Motorhead.  They have one song that is even mediocre in quality ("Ace of Spades").  Are you trying to tell me you think their music is better than  Rodgers and Hammerstein?  No one could have that bad taste, could they?
hutch
Joined: Unknown
Posts: 0
Re: Musicological banter October 25, 2013 at 08:47 PM UTC #
finally some good old fashioned action on this board..it has been S L O W lately..

thank you Atomic, thank you Chaz.
chaz
Joined: December 09, 2002 at 06:01 AM UTC
Posts: 5111
Re: Musicological banter October 25, 2013 at 08:52 PM UTC #
I'm just enjoying the absurdity of the Rogers and Hammerstein vs Motorhead comment.

Who the hell would even compare Motorhead to "Musicals"?
Yada
Joined: February 05, 2003 at 06:01 AM UTC
Posts: 12418
Re: Musicological banter October 25, 2013 at 09:01 PM UTC #
hutch wrote:
finally some good old fashioned action on this board..it has been S L O W lately..

thank you Atomic, thank you Chaz.


← Back to board