I also was going to say Load..... I bought it like the day it came out and was very disappointed in that load of crap.
He's coming out with a new CD on Tuesday. Anyway, I'd have to join Jeff and go back to my LP days and admit, yes, I owned a Tiffany album.
what do people hate about Load and ReLoad so much? granted, I'm not a hardcore fan...but some of my favorite stuff by them has come off of those two CDs
Not the CD. I bought the tape before I had actually seen the movie. Who knew? I wasn't expecting "News of the World," but that was ridiculous. I think that it was the last soundtrack I ever bought.
I agree that you need to do things that don't always challenge you, and I really don't care about being challenged by any of the other things that you are talking about. However, with music it's a different story. In my opinion, you get more enjoyment and pleasure out of listening to something that always sounds fresh and gives you something new every time you spin it. Manny, with all due respect, that is a highly subjective observation. Music is, by its very nature, entertainment. Some are entertained by music that would not necessarily be considered a challenge to other listeners or even musicians but that doesn't mean that it isn't enjoyable. If that were the case, Sketches of Spain would have sold about 5 million copies. An example is "Kid A" by Radiohead. I listened to it for like the 6th time the other day, but the first time with headphones, and I heard stuff that I have never heard before. Artists like Radiohead, Aphex Twin, Massive Attack, The Orb, etc. are unbelievable artists because they can do this. Not wanting to pick on any artist in particular, but can anyone honestly say that listening to a Britney Spears CD or an 'N Sync Cd sounds any fresher the 4th or 5th time compared to the first? First off, I have to agree with Supermac on this one. I don't get a bit of Radiohead and the others you mention don't really rank in terms of "high art" when it comes to music. They may sound fresh to your ears, but they sounded stale to mine the first time I heard them. By the same token, I could imagine that listening to John Scofield or Queensryche or Miles Davis might make you go "eh" while I might listen over and over and over just to hear it for the first time. As for Britney Spears or 'N Sync, fresh is in the ear of the beholder. I can tell you that the guys producing that stuff spend HOURS putting little crap all over it. It may bore the hell out of you (and me too), but it is not easy to put together. If it were, we could all sell 1 million records. Catchy music to me is basically pop music or top 40 music. It still is great and fun to listen to in a lot of situations, but I want substenance to my music, and I'm afraid that the stuff out there today on pop radio does not offer it. I agree with you on that one. I just see it both ways. What you like is what you like. It doesn't make anything else any less substantive or interesting. Just different.
Swordfish-soundtrack. Why would Oakenfold want to be associated with this movie? The tracks he made were hideous in comparison of his other compilations.
Jeff, I see what you're saying, and I'm not arguing with you. I said this because over a year ago people who knew me would have never guessed that I like the stuff I like now. I feel that I have matured when it comes to music. Granted not everybody is going to feel like listening to Kid A or Selected Ambient Works, Vol II by Aphex Twin, but to me, I get more enjoyment from listening to those CDs than the Backstreet Boys or Britney Spears or any of the other, what I like to call, bubblegum pop. However, they do do well in selling so many CDs. It's the popular music of today..I just don't think it's music that will be remembered 50 years from now. Miles Davis, Queensryche, and John Scofield are great artists especially Davis but they are not my cup of tea just like Kid A is not yours. However, I feel that those artists' works will be remembered longer than what is "popular" today. Another example is Pink Floyd. I personally can't get into their music, but I feel that Pink Floyd is a great, great musical group because their music has proven, so far and will prove, that it's timeless. I feel that Radiohead will be the same way and the same can be said for Miles Davis. Ah, Kid A. Not many people can get into Kid A. So, I don't blame you for saying that it is overrated. I can see why many people feel that it is "pretentious". BTW - Francis 4 Prez: you can include the worst CD that you have ever owned with regard to your own taste.
I'm sorry, but "Ice Ice Baby" is STILL a great jam... <i>We make it hype and you want to step with this Shay plays on the fade, slice like a ninja Cut like a razor blade so fast Other DJ's say, "damn" If my rhyme was a drug I'd sell it by the gram Keep my composure when it's time to get loose Magnetized by the mic while I kick my juice</i> pure genius...He also did a metal version of that song a while ago that was also pretty cool... Anyways, <i>Supposed Former Infatuation Junkie</i> by Alanis Morissette has GOT to go down as the all time worst follow-up to a hit debut album, as well as the worst album I own...
Thank you again. Not that I have the album, but I was trying to say the name of this in another post and screwed it all up. In reference to picking a worst by my own taste, I'm not sure I could simply b/c I buy so few and they've all been recent enough that I don't go out and get ones that I don't like and I haven't tired of them. Although as resistant to change as I am, I probably will still like all the ones I have 50 years from now (even good ol' Britney Spears). threw in the Britney just for you Manny
ok, i bought these for a friend as a joke. I also got him the John Tesh album, but the two worst albums of them all:
I won't deny that a whole lot of work is put into one of Britney's albums. The craftsmanship on your average Top 40 song is immaculate but the content (lyrical and musical) is 90% awful or non-existent. The formula for most of these songs is (a) a danceable beat, and (b) a memorable line in the chorus (i.e. Hit me Baby One More time). All that's really necessary to sell the songs is a tight body and a massive marketing push. To say that this is subjectively substantive is just ludicrous. Sure alot of work is put into the sound of the song. Then again, a master craftsman could spend a lifetime shaping a turd so that it is perfectly symmetrical and shiny as a mirror. But it would still be a piece of ****. I see the producers and engineers behind the jailbait bands as the musical equivalent to Jackie Collins or harlequin romance novels. They use a formula that is familiar and easily digested and simply fill in the blanks with young, attractive persons of dubious talent. The music lacks soul because everything expressed is calculated rather than honest (one reason why I think Madonna is a massively overrated artist - although I'd hire her as a business woman in a sec). The jailbait bands aren't the only offenders- rap, 90s punk bands Nashville country and heavy metal are just as guilty. But at least some of these bands started out as legitimate - Britney was never anything but a media machine. You can have great catchy music without it being soulless. The Police, David Bowie, Public Enemy and Motown all put out (at least some of the time) great music that was catchy but had some real passion and thought behind it. Motown is especially interesting because they were using the formula approach and inserting attractive young singers into the mix. But unlike today, there was a much higher level of interaction between the writers, musicians and singers. The musicians (who worked regularly together) were actually able to inject themselves into the songs, rather than have to duplicate sequenced parts. Also, the artists at Motown were genuinely good singers, not one of these Pro-Tool (perhaps the most badly abused technological advancement in music today) enhanced mirages that we get today. You might not like Radiohead or Massive Attack, but one of the reason their fans are so rabid is because we've seen them grow in directions that are completely the opposite of what was expected. If I had been told after listening to Blue Lines that Massive Attack (a very soul/R&B type album) would grow increasingly dark over the years, I would have looked at you funny Similarly, if you had told me in 1993 (when "Creep" came out) that Radiohead would evolve into a band that combined guitars and electronic instruments in non-verse/chorus/verse song structures, I would have laughed. But these bands evolved, rather than watered down their initial sound so that the "Buzz' would play their songs. That's why I say they have substance and Britney has none.
Great post, subtomic... I agree that music is subjective and everyone might have their own interpretations, but the pop industry is very cookie cutter... My worst album ever owned.. Bee Gees Greatest Hits..
It's all about the music. We were trying to write the new album, and Wes was writing very eclectic stuff, and he became very, very obsessed with Radiohead. Maybe a month later, he just gave up. He's a human being, and he's allowed to feel that way. " Fred Durst on why Wes Borland left Limp Bizkit
Ok, I haven't actually heard it, but I think everyone can agree it beats everything: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/A...8483/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_12_1/107-5998244-4709326 --Deji
I've watched this thread for the last day and a half and I still can't think of a worst CD that I've owned!? I guess I still have bad taste!
