Quote:
Originally Posted by Savage Clone
I did see that, and I disagree with that assessment as well. They definitely display musical prowess, but I see what they have done (and the attitude they have done it with) as taking the slickness and sterility OUT of that style of playing, keeping it visceral and raw. To compare them to the likes of Satriani or Vai only shows how much you missed the point. So does lumping them in with "noise" bands, for that matter.
By "objective listening skills," I meant having the presence of mind to give people their due. They have shown discipline and determination well beyond most of their peers, and have been lauded by a fanbase that normally shuns pure displays of virtuosity. Whether you care for the music or not, it IS valid and it IS worthwhile. In this regard, "sucky" is hardly the right adjective. I hate a lot of peoples' music, but they do not all "suck" and they are not all doing music that is "not worthwhile."
Yeesh.
|
As I said before, the thread is asking a question, not making as statement: sucky??? You decide. I'm just sharing my opinion.
A lot of people agree that Britney Spears makes great music, but that doesn't mean it's valid.
And I'm not sure I want to "get" the point of this music. Yes, it is more raw than Vai or Satriani...I heard that when I listened to the music....and?