Achtung! Post unpopular music opinions that you have

rickenvox said:
Again, who cares what Pearl Jam did after the first 2 albums or STP after the first 5?
Just because people need to continue making a living doesn't mean they're any longer relevant. Discerning listeners stop listening to bands after their peak.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

STP and PJ both had only 3 multiplatinum albums (though PJ sold considerably more). Then PJ had 3 single platinum albums (two studio, one live album), while STP only had one. Not caring about their post-relevance (which is beside the point) doesn't change the facts about what was actually relevant.

It makes no sense to say STP was relevant for 5 whole albums while PJ was for only 2. By any measure PJ had more sustained relevance and more successful albums overall. Then they had more successful and sustained touring packing arenas. You're actually trying to argue that No. 4 and Shangra-La-di-Da were relevant albums. Which they were not really. Especially not the latter.

Furthermore, if the Deleo bros. are geniuses it seems like they would have had more than 3 big albums in them. Paul McCartney and John Paul Jones did. Or they could have started another project to do something else that was good. But it doesn't seem like it.
 
Megadeth is superior to Metallica

Prince is boring

Kid A and everything after was terrible

Most metal is pretentious with terribad lyrics/vocals

The Foo Fighters are a solid rock band
 
Bones McHorror said:
STP and PJ both had only 3 multiplatinum albums (though PJ sold considerably more). Then PJ had 3 single platinum albums (two studio, one live album), while STP only had one. Not caring about their post-relevance (which is beside the point) doesn't change the facts about what was actually relevant.

It makes no sense to say STP was relevant for 5 whole albums while PJ was for only 2. By any measure PJ had more sustained relevance and more successful albums overall. Then they had more successful and sustained touring packing arenas. You're actually trying to argue that No. 4 and Shangra-La-di-Da were relevant albums. Which they were not really. Especially not the latter.

Furthermore, if the Deleo bros. are geniuses it seems like they would have had more than 3 big albums in them. Paul McCartney and John Paul Jones did. Or they could have started another project to do something else that was good. But it doesn't seem like it.
Click to expand...

Sorry, 1st 3 STP albums (more than the Sex Pistols by the way). Robert DeLeo is a genius bass player in spite of whatever shit band he continues to play in. If Pearl Jam had platinum albums after the first two it doesn't change the fact that they sucked. Sometimes people latch onto things late because of the inertia created by their beginning popularity (like Coachella today). People who keep track of what projects and bands these people are in after their prime are just loser listeners. Scott Weiland died, there is no more STP, just as there wasn't in the last few years of his life. I did see them when they played the Jimmy Kimmel show as I worked in the building next door on Hollywood Blvd. It was probably around 2003 or so. They sounded heavenly as I was watching from the parking structure over the outdoor stage in the back lot.

People who followed Velvet Revolver and Audioslave are again vulgarian listener losers who can't distinguish between great original works by artists and shit they do later.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Some of these really aren't unpopular.

Anyways, maybe mine aren't either.

Jeff Buckley's Hallelujah is pretentious as fuck, but with nice guitar work.

I like the Foo Fighters at least up until Sonic Highways.
 
rickenvox said:
Sorry, 1st 3 STP albums (more than the Sex Pistols by the way). Robert DeLeo is a genius bass player in spite of whatever shit band he continues to play in. If Pearl Jam had platinum albums after the first two it doesn't change the fact that they sucked. Sometimes people latch onto things late because of the inertia created by their beginning popularity (like Coachella today). People who keep track of what projects and bands these people are in after their prime are just loser listeners. Scott Weiland died, there is no more STP, just as there wasn't in the last few years of his life. I did see them when they played the Jimmy Kimmel show as I worked in the building next door on Hollywood Blvd. It was probably around 2003 or so. They sounded heavenly as I was watching from the parking structure over the outdoor stage in the back lot.

People who followed Velvet Revolver and Audioslave are again vulgarian listener losers who can't distinguish between great original works by artists and shit they do later.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
You're confusing relevance for your own personal taste then.
 
wok said:
Peen, whenever you feel the urge to post a reply, take a step back and consider for a bit whether what you are about to say adds something of value.
Click to expand...

I’m sorry, arguing about Pearl Jam vs STP in 2019 is vital discourse. Many apologies, M’Lady.
 
90s AOR bands ranked by artistic merit and general musicianship:

1) Faith No More
2) Stone Temple Pilots
3) Alice In Chains
4) Black Crowes
5) Soundgarden
6) Living Colour
7) Smashing Pumpkins
8) Foo Fighters
9) Pearl Jam
 
Last edited:
Stone Temple Pilots were a shitty grunge follower band without a single original idea. I have no idea why anybody would still be talking about them
 
VoidTerraFirma said:
90s AOR bands ranked by artistic merit and general musicianship:

1) Faith No More
2) Stone Temple Pilots
3) Alice In Chains
4) Black Crowes
5) Soundgarden
6) Living Colour
7) Smashing Pumpkins
8) Foo Fighters
9) Pearl Jam
Click to expand...
living color was the most interesting of these by a loooong margin
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top