Originally posted by: Vic
Oh yeah, my vote goes to Limp Bizkit -- one big fat nasty incompetent vain media-created piece of sh!t.
Originally posted by: MechaSheeba
Originally posted by: Vic
Oh yeah, my vote goes to Limp Bizkit -- one big fat nasty incompetent vain media-created piece of sh!t.
I actually liked Limp Bizkit's music during their first few releases, until they released "Rollin" and remixed it as a hip hop version... Fred Durst was trying to tap into the rap fad like he didn't already have a steady fanbase, and even his own band members were leaving after he lost touch with their roots. Pretty sad when decent bands sell out, reminds me a lot of Gwen Stefani. If you'd have told me during her No Doubt days that in 10 years she'd be dancing and singing songs like "I ain't no holla back girl" I'd have called you fvcking crazy.
Originally posted by: Dee67
Would you settle for a tie for craziest?
Entry #1
Dissection:
Singer Jon Nödtveidt convicted and does time in prison for felony murder charges. Gets out of prison, records a new album written behind bars, plays a handful of sold-out shows and then when he's on top of his game, healthy and happy... kills himself in a satanic ritualistic way. Woo!
Entry #2
Mayhem:
Singer "Dead" kills himself with a shotgun after slitting his wrists and leaving a note that read, "excuse all the blood". Guitar player "Euronymous" breaks in, sees body and runs to the store to buy a disposable camera, takes pictures of the body, takes skull fragments and makes necklaces of the pieces. Uses photos on a future band release. The bass player, Kristian Vikernes (aka Varg Vikernes, Count Grishnackh) later killed the guitar player (Euronymous) ending in 23 stab wounds total. When talking to the police, he said most of the wounds were from him falling on a lamp.
Craziest, definitely. Worst.. I dunno.. Black metal is pretty horrible by most standards, so perhaps this is the thread ender
Originally posted by: Vic
I wouldn't know. I haven't listened to a single thing that No Doubt has done since Tragic Kingdom.
Durst did very bad things to music IMO, and I am very thankful that his 15 minutes are long over. Now if only his MTV-paid-for influence would go away...
Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Originally posted by: BChico
Originally posted by: BlancoNino
The Doors.
/thread.
Guess you don't appreciate good music.
You're right. When I was listening to Rossini's overtures earlier, I should have really been listening real musicians..."The Doors".
Gimme a break.
Originally posted by: TheSlamma
All created after the mid 90's.. wow music sure went to hell
Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Originally posted by: Vic
You seriously have no idea what you are talking about. For one thing, Robbie Krieger (the guitarist) wrote the lyrics to "Light My Fire." Anyone who has ever seen the Oliver Stone movie would know that. Contrary to popular belief, Morrison did NOT write all of their songs. In fact, almost all of their songs were collaborative efforts, with Manzarek and Krieger doing most of the song-writing, with Morrison just providing some of the lyrics.
For another, the lyrics are an important part of the music, and the singer's voice is an instrument unto itself. Music conveys emotion to people, and the meaning (drug-induced or not) is an important aspect of that emotional message.
And WTF?? you're knocking the Doors for being drug-induced while praising Pink Floyd?? Oh yeah, the members of Pink Floyd never did drugs ... :roll: :|
1. I didn't know that. But overall, song for song, I don't find their lyrics to be all that poetic or meaningful.
2. I agree that the singer's voice is an instrument unto itself, but lyrics IMO, aren't important (Not a lot of people agree with me though, but it's just my opinion). I shouldn't have said anything about the lyrics, because I'm not a lyrical guy, more of a musical guy (ask my bandmates how bad my lyrics are), so I won't debate their lyrics (especially if I'm going to compare them to older Pink Floyd lyrics which aren't much different). I know first-hand how difficult it is to write the actual music compared to the lyrics. This is a worse band ever thread. Bands make music, therefore I'm judging mainly on the quality of The Doors' actual music...which IMO, I find rather dull, lazily written, and poorly performed.
3. Syd Barrett was the only member to do drugs in Pink Floyd, and he was gone after their first album. Older Pink Floyd music, IMO, is vastly superior. Not only were the musicians more talented, but their music was much better produced and had a great sparkle to it.
4. Whoops, I'm on the wrong end of an argument with Vic.
<---- preparing to get owned.
Originally posted by: icyroy05
Originally posted by: Darthvoy
all the recent emo bands.
Originally posted by: Darthvoy
all the recent emo bands.
Originally posted by: Vic
Sorry, I don't feel like owning you as you are simply wrong on every count. The Doors were much more than just Morrison's lyrics, and (just like Barrett with Floyd) Morrison was also the only one of the Doors who really abused drugs. Morrison might have been the flashy controversial frontman who gave them fame, but what really gave the Doors the lasting legacy they have today was their groundbreaking style and musicianship. You might not like them, and that's fine as your personal opinion, but to nominate one of the most respected and groundbreaking bands of the late '60s as "the worst band ever" is simply ridiculous. You might as well have said the same about Led Zeppelin or Cream, that's how stupid you made yourself look in this thread. Like them or not, the Doors created the west coast rock sound -- everyone else followed.
Originally posted by: MechaSheeba
Originally posted by: LoKe
Slipknot is far from the worst band. :roll:
I agree, Slipknot are fvcking masters of their genre. You can easily get away with not appreciating that entire style of music, but to say that about a band that's internationally multiplatinum as well as fvcking Grammy winners is just ignorant. No sh!t there's gonna be people that can't get into the music, that can be said of any band, but to call them the worst ever? Pffft.
Originally posted by: Fritzo
10 bucks he had to Google to find the name Rossini. Oh, and Rossini's William Tell Overature played while you were watching a Bugs Bunny cartoon doesn't count.
Originally posted by: gocubs2k5
you say you don't like the drug induced music...then you say the early floyd music is at least on some level drug induced, and said music is vastly superior....anybody else see a consistency problem here?
Originally posted by: veggz
Once the quality of music starts to be measured by Grammy awards and worldwide popularity, at that point we have reached a sorry state indeed. By your standards Linkin Park and Evanescence are also wrongfully labeled as musically inept by many, including some in this thread. To further illustrate my point, the Backstreet Boys also perfectly match the criteria you have set in your post.
The reason I nominated Slipknot over these other "poor" (if you will) bands is because they simply possess no skill whatsoever at their respective instruments, and they feel the need to express their creativity by wearing ridiculous masks (whose sole purpose I take it is to hide the band members' true identities so as to not be associated with the trash they are producing). You state that they are masters of their particular genre, yet what genre is that? I tell you, Slipknot has established a new genre for themselves, and that genre does not fall within the realm of music. In case you still doubt where I am coming from, try this: write out the chord progressions in any Slipknot song of your choosing. If you are somewhat familiar with music theory you will see that the progressions they use cannot even be described as juvenile, for they follow no logic whatsoever. It is as if all the cords were thrown into a hat and drawn at random, accompanied by spiteful lyrics that spew the same nonesense in every song.
/end rant; This is my justification for hating Slipknot, and my bafflement at those that defend it.
Originally posted by: MechaSheeba
Originally posted by: veggz
Originally posted by: MechaSheeba
Once the quality of music starts to be measured by Grammy awards and worldwide popularity, at that point we have reached a sorry state indeed. By your standards Linkin Park and Evanescence are also wrongfully labeled as musically inept by many, including some in this thread. To further illustrate my point, the Backstreet Boys also perfectly match the criteria you have set in your post.
The reason I nominated Slipknot over these other "poor" (if you will) bands is because they simply possess no skill whatsoever at their respective instruments, and they feel the need to express their creativity by wearing ridiculous masks (whose sole purpose I take it is to hide the band members' true identities so as to not be associated with the trash they are producing). You state that they are masters of their particular genre, yet what genre is that? I tell you, Slipknot has established a new genre for themselves, and that genre does not fall within the realm of music. In case you still doubt where I am coming from, try this: write out the chord progressions in any Slipknot song of your choosing. If you are somewhat familiar with music theory you will see that the progressions they use cannot even be described as juvenile, for they follow no logic whatsoever. It is as if all the cords were thrown into a hat and drawn at random, accompanied by spiteful lyrics that spew the same nonesense in every song.
/end rant; This is my justification for hating Slipknot, and my bafflement at those that defend it.
I wouldn't call the backstreet boys the worst band ever either. You have no point, so you're not further illustrating anything other than the fact that you have your head stuck up your ass. You don't sell millions of records if your music sucks. The fact that you even try to argue that is stupid. You're obviously talking out of your ass like you know anything about instruments or music writing in general, let alone anything about Slipknot. Wear masks to conceal their identity? Yeah cause nobody knows all their real names or what they look like, it's a fvcking mystery. Try again when you have a clue.
My friend, this is where we differ. Popularity is not a result of musical enlightenment, nor is it a measure of a bands' skill. You are also completely out of line to question my musical integrity, especially since you don't know who I am. But I will humor you nonetheless- in addition to attending the Juilliard pre-college program in piano performance and composition, I took AP music theory in high school and two electronic music composition courses at the local university. So I would say I am not "clueless" in these matters.
I am usually not one to judge especially on the basis of something as petty as musical taste, but with your recent unfounded remarks and your vehement defense of Slipknot I'm not sure how much longer that will last.
Edit: I believe we are in agreement that the Backstreet Boys are not the worst band ever, since that position is reserved for Slipknot . However they are quite bad, to say the least (though I would not be surprised if you attempted to refute this point as well).
Originally posted by: veggz
My friend, this is where we differ. Popularity is not a result of musical enlightenment, nor is it a measure of a bands' skill. You are also completely out of line to question my musical integrity, especially since you don't know who I am. But I will humor you nonetheless- in addition to attending the Juilliard pre-college program in piano performance and composition, I took AP music theory in high school and two electronic music composition courses at the local university. So I would say I am not "clueless" in these matters.
I am usually not one to judge especially on the basis of something as petty as musical taste, but with your recent unfounded remarks and your vehement defense of Slipknot I'm not sure how much longer that will last.
Edit: I believe we are in agreement that the Backstreet Boys are not the worst band ever, since that position is reserved for Slipknot . However they are quite bad, to say the least (though I would not be surprised if you attempted to refute this point as well).
Originally posted by: MechaSheeba
Originally posted by: veggz
My friend, this is where we differ. Popularity is not a result of musical enlightenment, nor is it a measure of a bands' skill. You are also completely out of line to question my musical integrity, especially since you don't know who I am. But I will humor you nonetheless- in addition to attending the Juilliard pre-college program in piano performance and composition, I took AP music theory in high school and two electronic music composition courses at the local university. So I would say I am not "clueless" in these matters.
I am usually not one to judge especially on the basis of something as petty as musical taste, but with your recent unfounded remarks and your vehement defense of Slipknot I'm not sure how much longer that will last.
Edit: I believe we are in agreement that the Backstreet Boys are not the worst band ever, since that position is reserved for Slipknot . However they are quite bad, to say the least (though I would not be surprised if you attempted to refute this point as well).
Write a song and post it. Popularity not a measure of a band's skill? How many songs did the backstreet boys write themselves? They were poster boys backed by successful producers, their only talent was their vocal and dancing abilities on top of the raging hormones of teenage girls. Was their success short lived? Yes, but can anyone argue that their skill as vocalists is what sold millions of records worldwide? No.
The same applies to Slipknot, and just about any other band that's enjoyed any sort of success, regardless of how short or long lived it may have been. While these guys who started out of their basement with no formal instruction on music or the music writing process whatsoever are all sitting in their million dollar mansions enjoying a life you wish you had thanks to the money they've made off their record sales, you sit on an internet message board talking sh!t about being a pre-college program attendant at Julliard.
People like you can take all the classes they want and sit around being jealous about the people all around them with natural talent they didn't try to buy from a performing arts school, but it's not gonna change the fact that you're just bitter that you'll never be in a real band so some nerd ass on ATOT can call it the worst ever.
Originally posted by: veggz
Your initial example illustrates my point perfectly. In your own words you admit that the Backstreet Boys possess little skill of their own essentially reaped the benefits of their producers, which makes them a perfect nomination for the worst band ever. The producers and songwriters are not part of the Backstreet Boys, and it is absurd that you would even suggest so. The actual members of the Backstreet Boys (and Slipknot, for that matter) are individuals almost completely devoid of musical ability, ergo, worst band ever.
As to the rest of your post, I'm not exactly sure what you are trying to say. You hint that I have ambitions to form a band of my own, yet I assure you that I am perfectly happy (and successful) in my own field. You hint that I have no natural talent, yet when I entered Juilliard at age 9 I was selected as among an entering class of 20 from a pool of 250. I am not arguing that Slipknot has not been successful; indeed, the OP necessitates this, as it clearly states that nominations should be limited to relatively mainstream bands. However, I am arguing that their lack of formal training is painfully obvious by the way they attempt to produce music, and I can assure you that I harbor no secret "jealousy" of Slipknot or any of its devil loving affiliates.
Perhaps bands like Slipknot should try taking, I don't know, a music lesson or two. It may or may not show them the path of true musicianship and not theater posing as music.
I say again: please cite your reasons for so vehemently defending the integrity of Slipknot so that I can refute them instead of these nonsensical and unfounded attacks on my character.
...waits for "LOOK AT TEH SALES" response.
Originally posted by: MrPickins
Whatever happened to the subjectivity of art? The music may not be technically sound, but it contains plenty of emotion.
I thought that was the point of art. To express ones' self.
Originally posted by: MechaSheeba
Originally posted by: MrPickins
Whatever happened to the subjectivity of art? The music may not be technically sound, but it contains plenty of emotion.
I thought that was the point of art. To express ones' self.
The music is plenty technically sound, this retard just has no idea what he's talking about. Notice I haven't nominated any band as the worst ever. The concept itself is just stupid. Any sort of band that is mainstream can't be nominated the worst ever, because there are plenty of losers out there like the OP that can't perform for sh!t who would be the true candidates.