Everything about musical taste is subjective, and the “What’s the rarest opinion you possess” showed there are quite a lot of diverse opinions on ILX too. However, this thread are devoted to the exceptions; statements so bizzare you have never heard anyone—not even the most devoid trolls—claim them.
Starting out with:
- The best Rolling Stones albums ever were the ones released in the 80s and 90s.
- Andrew Ridgeley was the true creative brain of Wham!
- David Bowie reached his creative pinnacle in the mid 80s, around “Tonight” and “Never Let Me Down”
- “Never Mind The Bollocks...Here’s The Sex Pistols” was a terribly boring and overproduced piece of clever-clever crap, made by a bunch of exaggeratedly talented musicians who just wanted to show off their skills in instrument wanking.
The last opinion has long been held by Dan Perry.
geir is an valued member of ilx and i hope he will continue posting forever
Lock thread.
NLMD is Bowie’s third best album, as I’ve said before. Tonight is probably his second worst—just better than the truly appalling Black Tie White Noise.
- “Never Mind The Bollocks...Here’s The Sex Pistols” was a terribly boring and overproduced piece of clever-clever crap, made by a bunch of exaggeratedly talented musicians who just wanted to show off their skills in instrument wanking.
What, you weren’t arounf in 1977/8 then?
Mark’s right. Jon Savage said basically the same thing in 1977. Called the record the “musical headstone.”
TRU GEIR RETURNS
“Guns & Roses are better than the Sex Pistols” was the first thing that came to mind upon reading the title of this thread.
“1969 was the worst year ever for popular music”
believe it or not, somebody (not an idiot) recently wrote this in his blog. Bizarre. I read it but I still don’t believe it.
I can’t believe that he really believes it = what I mean
“Guns & Roses are better than the Sex Pistols” was the first thing that came to mind upon reading the title of this thread.
I’ve never heard any Sex Pistols tune that would make me rate them higher than G&R. Admittedly I don’t rate either band that high, but I still think the latter is better.
ah tuomas you silly fin you. ;-)
I’m quite happy to admit, being fairly familiar with both, that Guns’n’Roses are much better. That’s not even remotely a bizarre opinion, is it?
Yeah, I’m not a big fan of the punk aesthetic, and if you don’t count in cultural importance (the question was about which one was better, not more important), then it seems G&R have more hummable tunes, which is really what matters to me as far as rock music is concerned.
There are probably millions of 14-year-olds in the world who think GnR are better than Sex Pistols. There were also millions of 14-year-olds who though the same thing in 1989.
G’n’R were probably more “culturally important” than the Sex Pistols too, at least outside of rockwrite. I mean, it’s not the Ramones didn’t exist. And musically, it’s no contest in favor of GnR. If the Sex Pistols never existed, there’d probably just be a slightly greater reverence for the Clash.
Blimey, I’m lucky I read the title of this thread before reading the last three postings.
i hold the opinion that gnr > sex pistols too
even when i was really into punk i was so bored by the pistols, what shit
ruben studdard: better than al green
stereophonics: better than the beatles
sting: more street cred than dr. dre
There are probably millions of 14-year-olds in the world who think GnR are better than Sex Pistols. There were also millions of 14-year-olds who though the same thing in 1989.
I can vouch for this personally, if you substitute “Motley Crue” for “Guns n Roses” — after they covered “Anarchy in the UK” there was a minor school-bus argument on my route wherein Paul Z defended this position quite rigorously. (I believe his main argument was “Vince Neil could kick all the Sex Pistols’ asses,” which after seeing the size of Steve Jones on that reunion tour seems far from convincing. Plus I bet Lydon would bite.)
Hitler was a New Romantic.
Bahahhaha
Hitler was a New Romantic.
admit it, you’re baiting ILX for Anal Cunt lyrics.
- Andrew Ridgeley was the true creative brain of Wham!
is this your actual opinion or just an opinion you have never heard anyone else express?
I have heard it said that Ridger’s contribution to Wham! was quality control and a general guidance into certain directions (“loads of girls in swimming costumes in the video”) that the other guy might not have been into.
Well, the other guy did continue to have them girls in his videos after Wham! split.
Well the other guy obviously learned teh creative lesson then!
:)
admit it, you’re baiting ILX for Anal Cunt lyrics.
anal cunt were every bit as technically accomplished as tool or primus!
... not to mention as lyrically profound & thoughtful as radiohead or the tindersticks. plus seth putnam is a much better singer than either thom yorke AND stuart staples.*
(* i’m SERIOUS about that last one.)
paris [hilton]‘s brilliance is such that it dazzles any cultural theory with which you try to explain her appeal.
Menswear have dated surprisingly well -better than most of that stuff
“David Bowie reached his creative pinnacle in the mid 80s, around ”Tonight“ and ”Never Let Me Down“”
well, this was a widely popular opinion among my schoolmates in 1988 or so.
lol @ enrique
menswe@r are great thou! the nuisance album stands up really well!
the reputation of other britpop bands is down to the menswear level, i think.
Miles Davis isn’t jazz.
Is the rareity of said opinions directly related to the degree of bizarreness or is there something inherently bizarre?
For instance it seems that there are many teenagers on here that seem to back the GNR>Pistols argument.
In order to fully, truly understand country-rock, you need to reverse the equation Byrds>Eagles.
x-post
i’m 31, but accept the GNR>Pistols argument.
“Guns & Roses are better than the Sex Pistols” was the first thing that came to mind upon reading the title of this thread.
Where do you live that this is bizarre?! The reverse seems more unusual, if anything. (In fact, I’m TAing a course on rock history this semester. GnR appear far more often than the Pistols on the students’ lists of favourite bands.)
The Eagles>Byrds thing doesn’t sound too ludicrous to me, though I don’t pretend to understand country-rock well enough to have an opinion on the larger issue. I can say that in pop music courses and books I’m familiar with, the Eagles are usually presented as the main example of country-rock.
I don’t really know how to answer the main question though. There are really obvious answers like “No orchestra in the world contains a violin player” or “Guitars were invented on Uranus” but I don’t know that they’re really worth listing.
“GnR appear far more often than the Pistols on the students’ lists of favourite bands.”
surely this is yr usual youthful contrarianism when it comes to an old band that’s a sacred cow (the Pistols) and a younger one that’s perceived as more challenging to the prevailing order?
Do radio playlists and record sales charts also reflect this contrarianism?
they do in America, where the Pistols never had a hit or sold that much
I mean, Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, the Beatles, Elvis all appear very often. Is it really surprising that students in Western New York might connect more with “Paradise City” or “Sweet Child o Mine” than “Anarchy In the UK” or “EMI?” (I think I do and I’m not even that big of a GnR fan.)
xpost I’m not sure what you’re saying anymore.
My point was exactly that—the Pistols were never that big this side of the Atlantic and GnR were huge. So why would it be surprising, bizarre, or contrarian that more people listen to GnR (and, presumably, might think they’re better)?
I’m basically agreeing with you—I can’t think of any reason why kids in America today would (or even should?) give a shit about the Sex Pistols.
One reason would be because they were pretty good.
I mean I would fully expect that the only reason kids today would even know who the Sex Pistols are is because of rock criticism—and rejecting that canonical endorsement out of hand is a no-brainer for a young’un. Especially when someone like GnR is a handier, more recognizable alternative—and one that still carries an air of myth and danger.
(I totally hate GnR btw)
i think you’re overestimating the impact of rock criticism on today’s youth
well we are talking about kids in a history of rock class here
xpost I’m not sure what you’re saying anymore.
— sundarsubramanian
^^ co-sign ^^
uh it really isn’t that complicated. My personal opinion is that both bands are boring. Today’s American kids preferring GnR to the Sex Pistols makes total sense, as the only cultural cache the Sex Pistols have in America is derived from rock criticism, an orthodoxy which kids are liable to reject out-of-hand if they are aware of it at all.
I’m 34. I’m not American. I’ve read a bit of rock criticism in my time. I prefer, as I said already, GnR to the Sex Pistols. I’m not claiming to be representative of anyone, but I still don’t see how that’s that bizarre a claim—saying “the majority of X say Y” is not the same as saying “the world says X, no-one’s ever said Y ever”.
xpost I’m not sure what you’re saying anymore.
— sundarsubramanian
^^ co-sign ^^
— Tim Ellison is number one proponent of Beatle!!!Mania!!! on nu-ILX
^^ c-s ^^
someone’s already said everything.
one that still carries an air of myth and danger.
(FWIW some other bands who are also doing a lot better than the Pistols include Bon Jovi, Journey, Foreigner [this one may be a WNY thing], DMB and numerous jam bands, ...)
“GnR appear far more often than the Pistols on the students’ lists of favourite bands.”
surely this is yr usual youthful contrarianism when it comes to an old band that’s a sacred cow (the Pistols) and a younger one that’s perceived as more challenging to the prevailing order?
— Shakey Mo Collier (audiobo...), February 15th, 2007 11:12 PM. (Shakey Mo Collier)
Thank god there are bands from 20 years ago that are around to challenge the “prevailing order” bands from 30 years ago.
I’ve heard “Sweet Child” & “Paradise City” & “Welcome to the Jungle” on rock radio my entire life; “Anarchy in the UK,” maybe once or twice.
You’ve heard “Anarchy In the UK” on commercial radio?
On an alt-rock station, during the “retro music” hour.
GNR vs. TSP = music is the loser
truly
Like James Brown, music would have been better today had Mary J. Blige never happened.
— Geir Hongro (geirhon...), February 16th, 2007.
The Jews broke up Audioslave.
Like James Brown, music would have been better today had Mary J. Blige never happened.
James Brown would be better today had Mary J. Blige never happened? Was there a gift of magi at work?
Miles Davis isn’t jazz.
well, he never referred to his own work as “jazz”, and never proclaimed himself to be a “jazz” musician. same with ellington, monk, and parker.
CC deville’s guitar solos are among the greatest ever.
Never heard this claimed, even from CC.
The Boss should re-record Nebraska with CC Deville.
Talk Talk would have benefited greatly if CC played on Spirit of Eden.