Unpopular Opinions You Hold About Music

[Lord Il]

^Thanks! That should help me get started on it.   8)

[Commode]

There's some good stuff in that article; try out Faith No More, Primus, Living Colour, and the albums Fungus Amongus and S.C.I.E.N.C.E by Incubus(everything from Make Yourself on is standard hard rock, with varying degrees of quality).

[Foggle]

There's some good stuff in that article; try out Faith No More, Primus, Living Colour, and the albums Fungus Amongus and S.C.I.E.N.C.E by Incubus(everything from Make Yourself on is standard hard rock, with varying degrees of quality).

I can vouch for these as well! And Enjoy Incubus is also really good (it's the EP between Fungus and S.C.I.E.N.C.E.). Like I said, though, I simply have no real idea what constitutes as "metal", which just leaves me guessing. Don't want to embarrass myself.

[Lord Il]

There's some good stuff in that article; try out Faith No More, Primus, Living Colour, and the albums Fungus Amongus and S.C.I.E.N.C.E by Incubus(everything from Make Yourself on is standard hard rock, with varying degrees of quality).

I can vouch for these as well! And Enjoy Incubus is also really good (it's the EP between Fungus and S.C.I.E.N.C.E.).

Apparently I've been listening to Faith No More, and Primus long before I knew much about the term. lol! Thanks again for the info.

I'm listening to the Enjoy Incubus EP right now. This is GOOD!

Like I said, though, I simply have no real idea what constitutes as "metal", which just leaves me guessing. Don't want to embarrass myself.

Bah, I wouldn't know one way or the other. No worries, man.

[Avaitor]

Can someone tell me what the big deal about ABBA is? I don't get it, at all.

[Nel_Annette]

They're a big deal? I thought they were just a joke!

[Spark Of Spirit]

I don't care about 'cultural differences', The Jam should have been big here.

[Avaitor]

It isn't an unpopular opinion to say that Deep Purple contributed way more to music than Nirvana, right?

[No-Personality]

No. But Nirvana defined the 90's in a very big way. What 2Pac and Notorious B.I.G. were to rap, they were to grunge. Which gave way to alternative, the two are very strongly connected. Deep Purple may be the forerunners in a specific brand of rock but as for Rock 'N Roll itself, they have to stand in a sizable line of influential acts of their time. Historically, they don't stand out very much unless you know rock very well.

And the big deal with ABBA is: have you heard them?

[Commode]

Historically though Deep Purple does stand out.  Name me one person in a rock band that doesn't start out playing "Smoke on the Water".  You can't, it's one of the most, if not the most, played song for beginners in guitar.

And aside from being an influence of young Kurt Cobain himself(alongside other 70s rock acts like Led Zeppelin, Aerosmith, Black Sabbath, and Kiss), they have been highly influential to pretty much every facet of hard rock since their time.

People say Nirvana was influential to the alternative rock scene, but I think they were merely at the right place at the right time.  The alternative scene was already bubbling under the surface at the tail end of the 80s, from mainstream acts like Jane's Addiction and R.E.M. to lesser known acts like Sonic Youth and the Pixies.  Some exec somewhere down the line shoveled the Smells Like Teen Spirit video down MTV's throat and it caught(similar to Guns N Roses and Welcome to the Jungle a few years prior).  They had a few year run, were already on the verge of losing relevancy when Cobain committed suicide in April 1994, and within a few years the grunge scene had withered away and was forgotten, as punk/pop-punk, nu-metal, and Brit-pop(Oasis, Radiohead) was at the forefront of alternative music.  There was post-grunge for a period in the mid to late 90s(Bush and other crap) that has continued to this day with the likes of Nickleback and Puddle of Mudd(thanks for that, Nirvana), but I mean in the grand scheme of things they really aren't that influential.  The biggest influence they had was in the Foo Fighters, which was a great band for a few years, then got progressively worse.

And I take offense to comparing Nirvana to 2pac and Biggie, since they were some of the best lyricists in rap history.  Kurt's lyrics by comparison are utter garbage.

[Avaitor]

It is hard to say that Nirvana had no impact on the industry, whether you like them or not. There really wasn't much else on the radio that sounded like Nevermind, and a lot of artists who hit the scene since consider the band one of their greatest influences, so I have a lot to thank them for. I don't think that they're the greatest band of their kind, or obviously they weren't the only alt band to appeal to the mainstream at that point, even if R.E.M. shared next-to nothing with them in terms of sound. But it is hard to say that they had no impact.

I didn't vote for them in the HOF, because they don't need my vote, but I would not be against them making it in on the ballot. LL Cool J and N.W.A. are other stories, but hey.

But with Deep Purple, I swear that most people who bought one or more of their albums back in the day ended up forming a band of their own. They've been the guiding light for so many different great bands, and continue to influence people to pick up a guitar or drumstick today. And certainly not just for Smoke.

[No-Personality]

Historically though Deep Purple does stand out. Name me one person in a rock band that doesn't start out playing "Smoke on the Water". You can't, it's one of the most, if not the most, played song for beginners in guitar.

Historically, they don't stand out very much unless you know rock very well.

Yeah, I covered that. And there's plenty of ignorance on my part to what Deep Purple are to their fans and to people who play loyalty to rock as encompassing-all to the point where they reject everything on the radio if there isn't rock on it that hits them right in their [fill in the blank, whatever organ DP touch the most prevalently]. But absolutely no disrespect: I wouldn't love Wayne's World as much as I do if I didn't feel they really knew what they were talking about. I even sort of liked Airheads.

The audience is what makes music history. And the history of the past is a history unto itself, the messages and importance of a band or artist is decided on the relevance they have to the time in which their names are made. And if you think the audience for Nirvana were just responding to a sound and not everything that band was, you're off. The fans were smarter than that. Nirvana were much more than a sound. People responded to an actual message in their music as well as their force on the zeitgeist. They took it to heart and the band spearheaded legitimate and profound thought on real life issues as its theorized that they (with message as well as sound) represented the awakening collective unconscious angst of a generation. It was not one song, one line, one anything. There was no Fluke Success here. That band lived what they believed in and the fans did too. Were they the only great, important, relevant act? No. But they don't have to be the best or most important to be "the one" who made history.

I don't disagree with you on the scene at all. But I very strongly disagree about this "right place, right time" theory. Because we are still discussing this from a masses-consideration standpoint. They don't usually have much of a clue what's going on (and I'd be the first to lead the torch-wielding mob if we were discussing horror rather than music) but we can't deny they are where the history happens.

The alternative scene was already bubbling under the surface at the tail end of the 80s, from mainstream acts like Jane's Addiction and R.E.M. to lesser known acts like Sonic Youth and the Pixies.

I don't disagree. But, how do you remember the late 80's? If your answer doesn't involve some sort of softening of the early 80's pop, you may be on a page in a whole other book away from me. Any reading on R.E.M. that I do which discusses music in the late 80's mentions that the band had about zero mainstream success until "The One I Love," and that then they didn't become overnight successes. Just look at the song itself, the mainstream thinks it's fucking romantic. We both know the scene didn't change until Nirvana. And record company agendas do not always work co-dependently with the way an audience reacts. I have never bought that argument and I'm not about to start now. The people who believe it does are, here we go again: typically the Noah Van Der Hoffs of the industry (yeah, that's Wayne's World again).

They had a few year run, were already on the verge of losing relevancy when Cobain committed suicide in April 1994, and within a few years the grunge scene had withered away and was forgotten, as punk/pop-punk, nu-metal, and Brit-pop(Oasis, Radiohead) was at the forefront of alternative music.  There was post-grunge for a period in the mid to late 90s(Bush and other crap) that has continued to this day with the likes of Nickleback and Puddle of Mudd(thanks for that, Nirvana), but I mean in the grand scheme of things they really aren't that influential.  The biggest influence they had was in the Foo Fighters, which was a great band for a few years, then got progressively worse.

I very much don't disagree with you on Foo Fighters. I admit I just stopped caring after "Headwires" (which I fuckin' LOVE), but - what do I know? - I hate "Everlong."

Anyway, as for the rest of that cynical viewpoint: I clearly don't share it. As a horror fan, I know all too well how one work's influence affects trends. But why the hell would I blame Last House on the Left for I Spit on Your Grave, Night Train Murders, etc? I sure as fuck don't blame Scream for Valentine, Disturbing Behavior, Scary Movie, etc. Cash-in rip-off artists are a reality of the industry. So what? Did the Monkees rip-off the Beatles or could they make great music of a similar type on their own? It doesn't matter. Talent of those ripping them off is entirely unrelated to an artist or group unless they are collaborating.

And I take offense to comparing Nirvana to 2pac and Biggie, since they were some of the best lyricists in rap history.  Kurt's lyrics by comparison are utter garbage.

I clearly wasn't comparing lyrical styles specifically.

But, thanks for your outrage.
(I never know what to say in these situations, but rest assured I'll always say somethin'.)

[Spark Of Spirit]

Never really liked them even at the time (they also weren't very big here until after he died) but I don't deny that they deserve a place in the hall of fame for at least being a figurehead of the movement.

Still, they should not be in before Link Wray or Dick Dale. I'm floored that neither are in yet.

[Avaitor]

Queens of the Stone Age, man. I keep on giving them multiple chances, but they always just underwhelm me each time. Their music as a whole really just sounds like watered-down doom to me.

I'll take Kyuss and the Desert Sessions over QOTSA any day.

[Nel_Annette]

I like a bit of their songs, but a bunch of people were praising their latest release and I just don't see it. The album didn't even get good until the last three tracks. That's bad.