Music world being Filled with more and more crap and copy artists then ever before?

I might add, that although the "metalcore" is popular today, it is at least a step up from the "nu-metal" back in 99-?. While bands like Darkest Hour and All that Remains are not on par with Opeth, they at least have guitar solos, are in fact heavier, and they are a step up from the Limp Bizkits and the Korns that dominated the music scene a while back. Maybe in a couple more years, people will raise the bar on the music they listen to, and "the scene" won't be comprised of sucky bands.
 
angelofdeath9308 said:
I might add, that although the "metalcore" is popular today, it is at least a step up from the "nu-metal" back in 99-?. While bands like Darkest Hour and All that Remains are not on par with Opeth, they at least have guitar solos, are in fact heavier, and they are a step up from the Limp Bizkits and the Korns that dominated the music scene a while back. Maybe in a couple more years, people will raise the bar on the music they listen to, and "the scene" won't be comprised of sucky bands.
No, nu-metal kicks hardcore's ass.
 
Agalloch have alright music, but the vocalist is terrible, maybe you should try some prog rock, start with king crimson - in the court ofthe crimson king. if you dont like that, youre probably just an idiot
 
Gunhaver said:
"they" is wrong, too. IDIOT
Hm. I'll ignore the irony of you calling anyone an idiot, but not the original argument. Read ANY music magazine...the bands are always referred to using collective nouns and plural verb forms. The instance I'll use as an example is even relevant to Agalloch.

"Agalloch are one of those bands who really truly put a lot of thought into every aspect of what they do. That may seem a strange statement to make but their considered and confident approach has worked immeasurably in their favour in enabling them to produce something with their new album 'The Mantle' that is highly absorbing and sets the mind racing with all sorts of questions - hence this interview."

Etc. The above is a direct quote. Think I'm making it up? Click here for the actual interview.
 
Boo for everyone here for thinking everything sucks. I mean, Woods of Ypres is okay. It's not terrible. And Agalloch's singer is good. I don't know by what criteria anyone could come to that conclusion other than just preference. But if that's the case, you're just as bad as someone who hates growls because they don't like how they sound.
 
MasterOLightning said:
Boo for everyone here for thinking everything sucks. I mean, Woods of Ypres is okay. It's not terrible. And Agalloch's singer is good. I don't know by what criteria anyone could come to that conclusion other than just preference. But if that's the case, you're just as bad as someone who hates growls because they don't like how they sound.
I agree. having a different opinion on what sucks is good, but people really seem to make their day insulting bands they don't like. Is it really that traumatic that you can't just ignore the music you hate and be happy listening to the stuff you love? I just don't get it.
 
Gunhaver said:
"they" is wrong, too. IDIOT
Um no

On topic: There's always been, and will always be, crap music in the mainstream and everywhere. Just ignore it.
 
vampyrouss said:
But if you have heard a band its because someone doesn't think they are crap. And maybe there is something we can learn from even the seemingly worst music? I mean pop stars have such charisma, they have to, afterall in most cases its all they have.

Rappers are very skilled, to babble on like they do for an entire show must be a challenge. I don't like rap, but I can see how they are talented at talking fast and its better than shooting someone.

Those annoying hardcore bands, they are good at taking Nu Metal and rehashing it and making lots of money. If this music is so bad why does it sell so much? Because someone likes it. Or is taken in by the hype. Whatever, there's a skill, and I can appreciate it, even if its just brainwashing kids into buying their albums.

I just don't see the point in saying everything is bad. Dismissing things is pointless and selfish dont you think? At least try to come up with something positive to say, like "I think that most music is crap but even the worst band I can think of sells more CD's than I ever will and touches more people emotionally than I ever will physically."

Thats not supposed to be aimed at anyone in particular by the way, for all I know ya'll could be sex maniacs who do "touch people" for a living. But I'm sure you get my point.


Jesus christ, people who have forgotten how to judge are retarded. Ill dumb this down to a simple, easily absorbable sentence: Just because something is successful, does not inherently mean it is good. Hitler was pretty damn successful, but not so much 'good' as a 'deranged lunatic'. Much music these days is successful, but so inanely derivative, repetitive, bland and formulaic, that there is no point in trying to defend some positive attribute that you've arbitrarily invented to justify its success. Its stupid, lazy music for stupid, lazy people. If you disagree, then you probably don't know any good bands, so cannot tell the difference. There IS good music out there, but its an insult to those truly great bands when you say that the likes of N*Sync deserve their success and recognition, that we should be learning from them.


Oh yeah, and the word 'band' may be used in both the sense of a cohesive singular unit, or a collection or individual members, so both the plural form 'are' and the singular 'is' are both correct. Just depends on usage.