Bands/records that have not aged well

Originally posted by Bombay Chutney:
Yeah - I meant to imply that the earlier stuff is still good, but everything from the late 80's-onward pretty much blew - even back then. First Issue is still my favorite though.

I tried to see them at the Ontario Theater in 1985 (?) but I was a youngin' and had to leave before they came on (or anyone showed up). Then saw them with the Beastie Boys opening for them and it was a shell of their former selves.

I have to relisten to Compact Disc for "Seattle" is supposedly a bash at the city because Mudhoney trashed their dressing room.

Originally posted by Sir HC:

Originally posted by Bombay Chutney:
Yeah - I meant to imply that the earlier stuff is still good, but everything from the late 80's-onward pretty much blew - even back then. First Issue is still my favorite though.

I tried to see them at the Ontario Theater in 1985 (?) but I was a youngin' and had to leave before they came on (or anyone showed up). Then saw them with the Beastie Boys opening for them and it was a shell of their former selves.

I have to relisten to Compact Disc for "Seattle" is supposedly a bash at the city because Mudhoney trashed their dressing room.

Seattle is on the Happy? album

Mary J.Bilge

Originally posted by Relaxer:

Originally posted by Sir HC:

Originally posted by Bombay Chutney:
Yeah - I meant to imply that the earlier stuff is still good, but everything from the late 80's-onward pretty much blew - even back then. First Issue is still my favorite though.

I tried to see them at the Ontario Theater in 1985 (?) but I was a youngin' and had to leave before they came on (or anyone showed up). Then saw them with the Beastie Boys opening for them and it was a shell of their former selves.

I have to relisten to Compact Disc for "Seattle" is supposedly a bash at the city because Mudhoney trashed their dressing room.

Seattle is on the Happy? album

Shows you how long it has been since I played any of those…

This is 2nd edition weather though.

Originally posted by Relaxer:
There was quite a bit of hype this year around early Oasis, with the re-issue of Definitely Maybe and the best-of compilation. And back in the mid-90s, I really loved Definitely. So I gave it another spin and… it's not aging well. The drums are exactly the same – and lame – in every song, and the whole thing just sort of plods along at mid-tempo.

I pretty much agree with this but have a little bit different take on them.

To me, Oasis are a band that had several really great songs early on. They sounded a bit different than a lot of the crap that was getting airplay back then. (You have to first understand that I've never liked most Grunge nor most of the music that got the airplay around here at that time.) Oasis had that sound that I liked. When I'd play their CDs, the filler helped to hold me over between the songs I liked the most. Not bad songs at all but not their best, which is true for just about any CD by anyone.

After a bit of time goes by, you can only keep playing those same songs over and over again without wanting, or needing, something more. As a listener, I'm sick of them. As musicians, they got very boring and dropped the great songs and just keep on replaying and revising (barely) those same few songs which left me, among many others, off the Oasis bandwagon chasing other sounds.

Mary J.Bilge

I agree on Oasis. How would you all say Nirvana's "Nevermind" has aged? I used to love it, and it is widely considered a classic, but these days it just doesn't appeal to me… when I do hanker for Nirvana, it's more likely to be something off In Utero.

There is always the possibility when considering these things that it is us who have aged (or to put a better light on it, grown), rather than the music…

http://dcalex.blogspot.com

If I'm at a bar and any song off Definitely Maybe comes on, I'm excited.

<img src="http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/5702/rundmcraisinghell2or.jpg" alt=" - " />