Originally posted by thirsty moore:At least my girlfriend has the voice of an angel. I'd prefer taking a dump over listening to the guys in the band jam out too.
Either you have a stereo in your bathroom or you walk around with headphones on all day.
Originally posted by mankie:
That's what the mancunian in me wanted to write….I was just trying to be more diplomatic for Redsock.
Pitchfork writers needed
Originally posted by mankie:but for the record, they are pretty decent musicians.
"Singers with voices of angels singing lame lyrics accompanied by very sub-par musicians. A band at the pinnacle of very mediocre careers."
Originally posted by redsock:See, we kind of agree…your girlfriend is being held back by the band IMHO…
Originally posted by thirsty moore:At least my girlfriend has the voice of an angel. I'd prefer taking a dump over listening to the guys in the band jam out too.
Either you have a stereo in your bathroom or you walk around with headphones on all day.
Originally posted by mankie:
That's what the mancunian in me wanted to write….I was just trying to be more diplomatic for Redsock.
Originally posted by mankie:Well, I would say that some of the styles incorporated by the rest of the band could be better…but she would argue that is what compromise is all about…
Originally posted by redsock:See, we kind of agree…your girlfriend is being held back by the band IMHO…
Originally posted by thirsty moore:At least my girlfriend has the voice of an angel. I'd prefer taking a dump over listening to the guys in the band jam out too.
Either you have a stereo in your bathroom or you walk around with headphones on all day.
Originally posted by mankie:
That's what the mancunian in me wanted to write….I was just trying to be more diplomatic for Redsock.
Besides, we need reviews written about good music. Not sure your tastes (Waterboys, cough, cough) really cut it.You must be very young.
Positive reviews are borrrrrrrring. I for one would love to read Mankie's trashing of various albums, assuming they are well written and offer cogent arguments. Hell, I'd even enjoy him trashing stuff I like if he makes a good argument.
Originally posted by redsock:
Originally posted by mankie:
Originally posted by redsock:Allow me to correct myself…we need reviews written about music that we anticipate might be good, by bands we know to put out good music, with a sound we think has a good chance to be good. Your taste in music makes me think at least half of your CD collection doesn't fit that mold. Which means your reviews might speak highly of shit, while giving no respect to the good stuff.
Besides, we need reviews written about good music.HUH! What's the point in reviewing it if it's all good…isn't that the whole point of reviews???
Originally posted by beetsnotbeats:No, not at all…if you referring to my dislike for everything I've heard from Mike Scott and crew, that has everything to do with my taste, not my age. Mankie's love for the Beautiful South, another band I tried and hated, futhers my feelings on the above issue. Again, nothing to do with my age. I love and appreciate plenty of bands whose careers ended before the Waterboys' began.
Besides, we need reviews written about good music. Not sure your tastes (Waterboys, cough, cough) really cut it.You must be very young.
I agree, negative reviews are necessary. Everything isn't good music, lord knows. What originally started with sarcasm, on his part, apparently has become something more than that. If Mankie really wants to participate, he's more than welcome.
Originally posted by Rhett Miller:
Positive reviews are borrrrrrrring. I for one would love to read Mankie's trashing of various albums, assuming they are well written and offer cogent arguments. Hell, I'd even enjoy him trashing stuff I like if he makes a good argument.
Originally posted by redsock:
Originally posted by mankie:
Originally posted by redsock:Allow me to correct myself…we need reviews written about music that we anticipate might be good, by bands we know to put out good music, with a sound we think has a good chance to be good. Your taste in music makes me think at least half of your CD collection doesn't fit that mold. Which means your reviews might speak highly of shit, while giving no respect to the good stuff.
Besides, we need reviews written about good music.HUH! What's the point in reviewing it if it's all good…isn't that the whole point of reviews???
Originally posted by redsock:
No, not at all…if you referring to my dislike for everything I've heard from Mike Scott and crew, that has everything to do with my taste, not my age. Mankie's love for the Beautiful South, another band I tried and hated, futhers my feelings on the above issue. Again, nothing to do with my age. I love and appreciate plenty of bands whose careers ended before the Waterboys' began.Well if you hate a.) The Beautiful South and b.) The Waterboys…you obviously have no respect for a). great lyrics and b.) great musicians, which explains your love for Exit Clov. I suppose the fact you're knobbing the singer doesn't do any harm either!
:D
reviews sure to be littered with "doodle" "footie" and "america not good"
Originally posted by Rhett Miller:
[QB] Positive reviews are borrrrrrrring. I for one would love to read Mankie's trashing of various albums, assuming they are well written and offer cogent arguments. Hell, I'd even enjoy him trashing stuff I like if he makes a good argument.
What a great idea!!!!
Wouldn't it be interesting if we could figure out how to get cd's to each other (easily), then we could select a favourite album then choose a board member to review it for everyone. There would have to be an honor system that the review is to be done as honestly and be as objective as they can, ("It's shite and the singer is a pretentious wanker" wouldn't be acceptable) and we have to select the reviewer by thinking of the one who would most probably like it the least.
That would be a cool idea, Mank. God, someone will give me Wilco or Cracker. But I'd promise to listen closely. You know what would be cool about it? Really examining what it is that causes you to dislike a song, album or band. What an interesting exercise.
Originally posted by mankie:If its not country or americana, you could just give it to Rhett, if its not 80s britpop give it to Mankie, if its not cheesy 80s pop/metal give it to Guiny.
who would most probably like it the least.
Originally posted by mark e smith:If it's not the new hip/hyped/trendy/15minute band…give it to markie!
Originally posted by mankie:If its not country or americana, you could just give it to Rhett, if its not 80s britpop give it to Mankie, if its not cheesy 80s pop/metal give it to Guiny.
who would most probably like it the least.
Originally posted by redsock:
Originally posted by beetsnotbeats:No, not at all…if you referring to my dislike for everything I've heard from Mike Scott and crew, that has everything to do with my taste, not my age. Mankie's love for the Beautiful South, another band I tried and hated, futhers my feelings on the above issue. Again, nothing to do with my age. I love and appreciate plenty of bands whose careers ended before the Waterboys' began.
Besides, we need reviews written about good music. Not sure your tastes (Waterboys, cough, cough) really cut it.You must be very young.
Allow me to correct myself…we need reviews written about music that we anticipate might be good, by bands we know to put out good music, with a sound we think has a good chance to be good. Your taste in music makes me think at least half of your CD collection doesn't fit that mold. Which means your reviews might speak highly of shit, while giving no respect to the good stuff.These quotes make me think that Big Yawn will not be particularly objective. The Waterboys and Beautiful South are just two bands with fairly long histories and critical acclaim that potential readers of, and writers for, Big Yawn may enjoy, much to your dismay. It is likely that many artists that you enjoy happen to enjoy bands you despise.
You are running the risk of making Big Yawn's editorial perspective too narrow and irrelevant. You don't have to invite everyone to the party but you have to mix it up some. All thumbs up or down is boring; Ebert and Roeper are most entertaining, and elucidating, when they disagree.
-edit- sorry Mank, didn't notice that you hadn't written the last post.
Beets, bigyawn is starting out mixed – including a review of the Peter Gabriel new greatest hits CD. It's really early on, but it looks like it should be not overly one-sided. And, so far this year I don't think there have been any new Beautiful South or Waterboys CDs. ;)
Beets, bigyawn is starting out mixed – including a review of the Peter Gabriel new greatest hits CD. It's really early on, but it looks like it should be not overly one-sided. And, so far this year I don't think there have been any new Beautiful South or Waterboys CDs. ;)
Originally posted by beetsnotbeats:Look Beats…you need to take a step back and view those quotes in perspective. As I stated previously, this all started with sarcasm, and Mankie and I, as well as Mankie and just about everyone else, have a history of sarcasm. My comments to him were based almost entirely on that premise. Though I do think Waterboys and the Beautiful South suck.
]These quotes make me think that Big Yawn will not be particularly objective. The Waterboys and Beautiful South are just two bands with fairly long histories and critical acclaim that potential readers of, and writers for, Big Yawn may enjoy, much to your dismay. It is likely that many artists that you enjoy happen to enjoy bands you despise.
You are running the risk of making Big Yawn's editorial perspective too narrow and irrelevant. You don't have to invite everyone to the party but you have to mix it up some. All thumbs up or down is boring; Ebert and Roeper are most entertaining, and elucidating, when they disagree.
In terms of my site…I take offense to the point you are trying to make. The writers on thie site are free to review absoultely anything they want to. I try to provide some CD suggestions when I can, which consist of bands with some sort of reputation, i.e. Basement Jaxx, or bands with no reputations (some local bands we are reviewing[not exit clov]). And the writers are free to feel and write anything they want regarding the CD's. The point of the site is to promote good music, regardless of the form it comes in. At the same time we need to alert folks to crap too. If a writer wanted to review a new Waterboys CD, knock yourself out. Whetehr you love it or hate it, as long as you express yourself intelligently, it works for me. And of course, there will be plenty to disagree with.
We are just starting up, and it is a bit of an up-hill struggle. There is all sorts of weird crap we have to review. So please be patient as we try to find our niche, and reserve any judgments till then. (thanks Bags)
Originally posted by beetsnotbeats:And you're still invited to the party. It's tomorrow night. ;)
You don't have to invite everyone to the party but you have to mix it up some.
Originally posted by redsock:
Though I do think Waterboys and the Beautiful South suck.Exellent and open-minded review on two very successful, long running bands, with great insight into your thoughts and opinions, thank you. I'll throw all the cd's of theirs I have away.
And, so far this year I don't think there have been any new Beautiful South or Waterboys CDs.not this year (2004) but the waterboys did release an album last year…..drum roll please…..which was crap! (and thats from someone who thinks Mike Scott is a genius)