New Panic CD.

[Cure4commoncold]

I liked the old CD until it was raped and played everywhere and got really old. Their new CD just came out I knew it wouldn't be like the first one but, even that's an understatement it's like they're a completely different band the new CD reminds me remotely of the Beatles. Has anyone else given a listen to this yet? I like it a lot better than their old CD.

[animehater]

I haven't bought it yet but looking forward to. I like the song "That Green Gentleman (Times Have Changed) So far and the leading single. Wasn't a fan of the old CD

[Cure4commoncold]

The old CD is good if you haven't heard it in a LONG time but it's nothing like the new one I could listen to the new one and NEVER get tired of it.

[Light Angel]

I haven't bought their new CD yet but I am going to get it. I heard it was very good.

[Cure4commoncold]

I haven't bought their new CD yet but I am going to get it. I heard it was very good.

This is to anyone but even if you absolutely HATED their first one I'd still recommend at least giving a listen to the new one it's just that good and it's a 15 track cd so you're getting your dollars worth.

[Majin]

I can't take it anymore. All this talk of it being good. The CD is terrible, the band is terrible (and that coming from the guy whose name use to be P!ATD), and no one should waste their money on it.

Brandon's vocals sound just like they do live, and they are horrid. There is no creativity to the album and is a blatant ripoff of anything that has every been done by the Beatles.

[Cure4commoncold]

I can't take it anymore. All this talk of it being good. The CD is terrible, the band is terrible (and that coming from the guy whose name use to be P!ATD), and no one should waste their money on it.

Brandon's vocals sound just like they do live, and they are horrid. There is no creativity to the album and is a blatant ripoff of anything that has every been done by the Beatles.

Um, since there's no one in the band named "Brandon", I'm going to assume you had the name P!ATD because you were hopping on the "trend train" and now the trend is to not like the band which is exactly what you're doing. The singers name is Brendan Urie. I've seen them live twice and you are right his voice is exactly like it is recorded. It sounds wonderful. As for "ripping off the Beatles" have you ever heard of musical influence? Guess not that would mean people like Metallica were "ripping off" bands like Motorhead or Porcupine Tree "ripped off" Pink Floyd.

[The Crowing]

I've heard the Beatles comparison. I might check it out, just to say I have

[IndianSummer]

Um, since there's no one in the band named "Brandon", I'm going to assume you had the name P!ATD because you were hopping on the "trend train" and now the trend is to not like the band which is exactly what you're doing. The singers name is Brendan Urie. I've seen them live twice and you are right his voice is exactly like it is recorded. It sounds wonderful. As for "ripping off the Beatles" have you ever heard of musical influence? Guess not that would mean people like Metallica were "ripping off" bands like Motorhead or Porcupine Tree "ripped off" Pink Floyd.

I believe Panic fans are no longer allowed opinions. Can'y call anyhting they've done wonderful exvecpt trend-hop Chuck Pahlaniuk into the next Bukowske

[Panzer]

i heard "9 in the afternoon" and liked it. I don't i'll buy it though.

[Cure4commoncold]

I believe Panic fans are no longer allowed opinions. Can'y call anyhting they've done wonderful exvecpt trend-hop Chuck Pahlaniuk into the next Bukowske

What?!?! Does that drunken slur of words come in oh, I don't know a readable form?

[Civil Disobedient]

Comparing this pretentious piece of nonsense with the Beatles is like comparing monkey brains with a fillet steak.

[Cure4commoncold]

Comparing this pretentious piece of nonsense with the Beatles is like comparing monkey brains with a fillet steak.

That made no sense what so ever since some people consider monkey brains a delicacy. I didn't compare them with Beatles I said the cd reminded me remotely of the Beatles. I don't know where you get off calling the CD pretentious either? Where do you even get that from?

[IndianSummer]

Why do you feel the need to continually defend this band? ****, if this many people thouhgt the bands I likdd were awfuk, I'd reconsider the band s I liked

[Day Man]

Um, since there's no one in the band named "Brandon", . The singers name is Brendan Urie.



No one else wants to point out how funny that is?

[Cure4commoncold]

Why do you feel the need to continually defend this band? ****, if this many people thouhgt the bands I likdd were awfuk, I'd reconsider the band s I liked

I'm not shallow enough to listen to music just because other people say it's good or stop listening because they say its bad that's why. I don't listen to music based on how other people feel about it. That's pointless and if I like a band I'm going to listen to them whether or not people like them. What matters is if I like the music or not.

No one else wants to point out how funny that is?

I have no idea what you're talking about.

[Civil Disobedient]

That made no sense what so ever since some people consider monkey brains a delicacy. I didn't compare them with Beatles I said the cd reminded me remotely of the Beatles. I don't know where you get off calling the CD pretentious either? Where do you even get that from?To answer your first point:

a·nal·o·gy
1. a similarity between like features of two things, on which a comparison may be based: the analogy between the heart and a pump.

For the second, how does something remind you of something remotely? Did you listen to it from really far away or something? Then yes, I guess if you were really, really far away from your stereo, it might sound like The Beatles. Or Van Halen.

In the pretentious stakes, here are a few choice quotes you may want to swish around your head before you re-evaluate your opinion after reading my excellently crafted post.

In January 2007 the band went into "hibernation" in a cabin in Mount Charleston, Nevada, as they began writing new materialPanic then began viral marketing, building puzzles on their official website. For about two weeks the puzzle gave snippets from an unknown song, along with the caption "YOU DONT HAVE TO WORRY...".The band announced the title of the new album, Pretty. Odd. through their website on January 9, and dropped the "!" from their band name at the same time. They've responded to this by saying "We've just traded the exclamation point for a few periods."

[Day Man]

I'm not shallow enough to listen to music just because other people say it's good or stop listening because they say its bad that's why. I don't listen to music based on how other people feel about it. That's pointless and if I like a band I'm going to listen to them whether or not people like them. What matters is if I like the music or not.



I have no idea what you're talking about.


Someone said his name was Brandon and the fan of the band freaked out because there's no one in the band named Brandon. It's "Brenden." Which to me is like if someone called Tom Morello - Tim Morello. Big f*cken deal.

I thought it was funny that the fan of the band made it seem like whoever said "Brandon" was completly out of line.

[Cure4commoncold]

Someone said his name was Brandon and the fan of the band freaked out because there's no one in the band named Brandon. It's "Brenden." Which to me is like if someone called Tom Morello - Tim Morello. Big f*cken deal.

I thought it was funny that the fan of the band made it seem like whoever said "Brandon" was completly out of line.

Read the thread, he was saying his opinion had more value because he used to have the name P!ATD meaning he obviously was saying he liked them at one point. If someone likes a band that much that not going to make the stupid mistake of calling Tom Morello Tim Morello now are they?

To Civil Disobedient: Yeah those quotes are great and how do they make the band pretentious at all? I was using the word remotely in the sense certain elements of the music reminded me of the Beatles. That is completely different than saying their new CD is similiar to the Beatles. You don't look at a ****ing bicycle pump and say, "Hey!, this is similar to a heart!"

remotely |riˈmōtlē|
adverb
1 from a distance; without physical contact : new electronic meters that can be read remotely | a new type of remotely controlled torpedo.
2 [as submodifier ] [usu. with negative ] in the slightest degree : he had never been remotely jealous.


None of this of course changes the fact that the CDs good.

[Tommy Boy]

I've been a hardcore P!ATD fan until this CD came out.

Now I hate them. A lot.

[m4tt]

None of this of course changes the fact that the CDs good.
That is in your opinion, to which you are entitled. I've listened through it three times hoping it would grow on me, but it hasn't. It's just not my cup of tea.

[Cure4commoncold]

I've been a hardcore P!ATD fan until this CD came out.

Now I hate them. A lot.

I knew when I listened to the new CD that a lot of people were not going to like it because the band just U-turned and went the other direction with their music. Maybe they're just experimenting or maybe this is the way they'll stay I have a feeling if they keep this style up they won't be looking at very much success it isn't as catchy as the first CD. The CD in my eyes at least is still a good CD though.

[Jofish]

You have to remember Panic is still a relatively new band. They're going to screw around with different sounds until they feel out what their sound is. Most bands do it, thats why second albums usually don't do as well as the debut. Hence the term "Sophomore Slump".

I think both Panic albums are great in their own manners.
'A Fever You Can't Sweat out' was an achievement in orginality and unique in many ways sonicly and lyricly.

'Pretty.Odd." Is a breath of fresh air the midst of alot of cookie cutter rock bands playing the same songs over and over again.

I'm not a Panic fan but I'm a music fan so I'm not coming from the rabid fan base hyper defensive.

[mr.rpg king]

Hate, hate, hate Panic at the Disco. Unoriginal, regurgitation of the record companies does not work in my musical lexicon. All they did was mix Fall out Boy with The Killers and dress them up appropriatly to steal the hearts of weak-minded fiends of pop-punk. However, Franz Ferdinand still do kick ass.

[Jofish]

Hate, hate, hate Panic at the Disco. Unoriginal, regurgitation of the record companies does not work in my musical lexicon. All they did was mix Fall out Boy with The Killers and dress them up appropriatly to steal the hearts of weak-minded fiends of pop-punk. However, Franz Ferdinand still do kick ass.

I think both Panic albums are a far cry from pop-punk. With the likes of Good Charlotte, Simple Plan, New Found Glory, Greenday, blink 182 how can panic be packaged as pop punk?

Fall out Boy is Crap and the Killers are just Duran Duran polished over with a touch of Morrissey.

Though Panic owe much of their success to getting a boost from Pete Wentz, they have forged their own sound. You can't deny a catchy song, even if you hate it if it stays stuck in your head at all it has served it's purpose.

[coheed]

Does the singer still do that thing where he tries to fit really long words into spaces where they don't fit?

[Cure4commoncold]

Does the singer still do that thing where he tries to fit really long words into spaces where they don't fit?

No, he doesn't do that really annoying fast vibrato either anymore. Jesus this thread is just a bash fest now. Whatever long live Pop Punk.

[Jofish]

No, he doesn't do that really annoying fast vibrato either anymore. Jesus this thread is just a bash fest now. Whatever long live Pop Punk.

On SNL the other night Brenden did the vibrato thing when the played "I write sins..." But it hasn't made an appearance on the new album.

[Cure4commoncold]

On SNL the other night Brenden did the vibrato thing when the played "I write sins..." But it hasn't made an appearance on the new album.

Yeah that's what I meant it doesn't occur in the new album. You've got hand it to this band, for being "terrible and unoriginal" they certainly have written some very catchy songs.

[mr.rpg king]

I think both Panic albums are a far cry from pop-punk. With the likes of Good Charlotte, Simple Plan, New Found Glory, Greenday, blink 182 how can panic be packaged as pop punk?

Fall out Boy is Crap and the Killers are just Duran Duran polished over with a touch of Morrissey.

Though Panic owe much of their success to getting a boost from Pete Wentz, they have forged their own sound. You can't deny a catchy song, even if you hate it if it stays stuck in your head at all it has served it's purpose.

But that's just it. Their songs, or main song I should say, is not catchy at all to me. Catchiness is entirely a matter of opinion and should be left out of this argument. I hum the riff from Soundgardens cover of Big Bottom by Spinal tap all the time and no one ever fills in the chorus for me.

Secondly, Greenday is more atune to punk and alternative rock than it is anything remotely pop-punk. Kinda like The Offspring but with different vocals. Where as Panic fits into the genre of pop-punk perfectly. Just because they don't sound the same as all those other bands you listed, which was foolish to do because I told you who they sounded like, doesn't mean they aren't pop-punk. Think of it like this; Iron Maiden, Black Sabbath, Motorhead, Metallica and Pantera are all heavy metal, but really don't sound anything alike. It's guitar tone, vocal expression and lyrical content that have swayed my judgement, not a miniscule span of diversity. Most bands in general don't sound like other bands in their genre of music. Grunge/Alternative Rock is the perfect example. Though I will admit, it's probably the tinge of Electronica that throws you off. It did at first for me to, but I never have liked it.

[Cure4commoncold]

Everyones entitled to an opinion but, still noone can deny this fact:
2.2 million copies of their first record sold. Somebody out their must like them. For a first record and only after about 3 years that seems pretty good to me. I'm just happy to see success for people even if it may be a band I don't like. The industries about putting expression into your music putting "you" into the music and if a group does that and it sells I'm happy for them. I mean it just dawned on me whoa re any of us to judge? lol I certainly don't have any multi platinum albums. Anyway just trying to lighten things up didn't want to continue the thread ont he path it was going too much hostility.

[JoetheShow]

I really hate that argument... there have been plenty of legitimately awful artists who have sold millions. Didn't Miss Trainwreck Incarnate sale a couple million albums in a month not long ago. Can you defend her?

I won't destroy Panic at the Disco but I don't enjoy them a bit but I'll admit they get stuck in my head at times.

I saw Cobra Starship on Conan the other day... the guy didn't sound too good. But I do like their video.

[Civil Disobedient]

Nobody's denying they've sold a lot of records. The public are gullible and like **** music, doesn't change a thing.

[Jofish]

But that's just it. Their songs, or main song I should say, is not catchy at all to me. Catchiness is entirely a matter of opinion and should be left out of this argument. I hum the riff from Soundgardens cover of Big Bottom by Spinal tap all the time and no one ever fills in the chorus for me.

Secondly, Greenday is more atune to punk and alternative rock than it is anything remotely pop-punk. Kinda like The Offspring but with different vocals. Where as Panic fits into the genre of pop-punk perfectly. Just because they don't sound the same as all those other bands you listed, which was foolish to do because I told you who they sounded like, doesn't mean they aren't pop-punk. Think of it like this; Iron Maiden, Black Sabbath, Motorhead, Metallica and Pantera are all heavy metal, but really don't sound anything alike. It's guitar tone, vocal expression and lyrical content that have swayed my judgement, not a miniscule span of diversity. Most bands in general don't sound like other bands in their genre of music. Grunge/Alternative Rock is the perfect example. Though I will admit, it's probably the tinge of Electronica that throws you off. It did at first for me to, but I never have liked it.



They came from the vein of Pop-Punk, yes. But they've created a sound of their own by blending pop-punk, electronica, string arrangements quality song writing and making energetic and infectious songs. I'm not saying anyone should like them I'm saying they really don't sound like anything else out there and before you go ripping off my head for their beatleesque new sound listen for a moment, 'Behind the Sea' and 'The Piano Knows Something I don't'
are the only heavily beatles influenced songs but pretty much everything else has it's own feel and vibe.

I also think it should be listened to not for the singles but listen to it as an album, as a standalone piece.

[IndianSummer]

Neither Green Day nor Panic (and not the good Panic, the ****ty P!ATD) are pop-punk, both are more pop with ever-so-slight twinges of punk (a chord here or there).

And Cobra Starship was ****ing awful on Conan. It was hilarious how bad they were. This is what Cobra Starship would sound like if they were good: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EUzHl2JAnQ.

Plus the video is awesome. Fun things to look for

1) The shirt the guy at the :40 mark is wearing, props to anyone besides CD who can name the band
2) The guy dancing at the minute mark, and then he does the sprinkler at 2:23
3) The chick in the orange shirt. And by the girl I mean her tits
4) Th girl in the candy-cane t-shirt has a nice pair as well

[Majin]

Everyones entitled to an opinion but, still noone can deny this fact:
2.2 million copies of their first record sold. Somebody out their must like them. For a first record and only after about 3 years that seems pretty good to me. I'm just happy to see success for people even if it may be a band I don't like. The industries about putting expression into your music putting "you" into the music and if a group does that and it sells I'm happy for them. I mean it just dawned on me whoa re any of us to judge? lol I certainly don't have any multi platinum albums. Anyway just trying to lighten things up didn't want to continue the thread ont he path it was going too much hostility.

Panic has replaced boy bands. All 12 and 13 year old girls like them (check the teeny bopper magazine), and you know how good their musical tastes are.

I'm not a cobra starship fan, and gabe saporta is a giant douche, but he has already apologized/made excuses for the conan performance.

Neither Green Day nor Panic (and not the good Panic, the ****ty P!ATD) are pop-punk, both are more pop with ever-so-slight twinges of punk (a chord here or there).

And Cobra Starship was ****ing awful on Conan. It was hilarious how bad they were. This is what Cobra Starship would sound like if they were good: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EUzHl2JAnQ.

Plus the video is awesome. Fun things to look for

1) The shirt the guy at the :40 mark is wearing, props to anyone besides CD who can name the band
2) The guy dancing at the minute mark, and then he does the sprinkler at 2:23
3) The chick in the orange shirt. And by the girl I mean her tits
4) Th girl in the candy-cane t-shirt has a nice pair as well

Alot of people like Brandston's older stuff, but that doesn't include me. Good band though.

[Civil Disobedient]

1) The shirt the guy at the :40 mark is wearing, props to anyone besides CD who can name the bandI saw them when the first record came out and the singer said "man it's great to be in England". Not the best start to a set i've ever seen. Beyond The Sixth Seal were really good, too.

[Cure4commoncold]

Panic has replaced boy bands. All 12 and 13 year old girls like them (check the teeny bopper magazine), and you know how good their musical tastes are.


So what a bunch of 13 year olds like them? What the **** are you that idiotic there's kids that young that like Zeppelin, Nirvana, STP, AC/DC, Maiden but you'd never pull that card out if we were talking about them. Not even going to touch base on why you're reading teenybopper mags but, have fun day dreaming about Zac Efron. Plus, heads up guys every band has bad performances.

[AllThingsEqual]

Prove, using logic, that album sales mean that the band is good. We are going on originality here and if you want to make the band look worse then I guess you could grade their soul.

[IndianSummer]

Alot of people like Brandston's older stuff, but that doesn't include me. Good band though.

Song was off the newest album Ben. C'mon, I had more faith in you than that.

I saw them when the first record came out and the singer said "man it's great to be in England". Not the best start to a set i've ever seen. Beyond The Sixth Seal were really good, too.

Yeah, not exactly the greatest metalcore band, apparently not one of the brighter ones either.

[The Crowing]

So what a bunch of 13 year olds like them? What the **** are you that idiotic there's kids that young that like Zeppelin, Nirvana, STP, AC/DC, Maiden but you'd never pull that card out if we were talking about them. Not even going to touch base on why you're reading teenybopper mags but, have fun day dreaming about Zac Efron. Plus, heads up guys every band has bad performances.
Between the Buried and Me do not. They are absolutely flawless live.

[Luceid]

i didn't think the first panic cd was too bad. not great, but not terrible. i don't mind when bands change their sound around, but sometimes it doesn't work out. 'nine in the afternoon' is a catchy tune, but i don't really care much for the other stuff from the cd i've heard.

[Majin]

Song was off the newest album Ben. C'mon, I had more faith in you than that.



Yeah, not exactly the greatest metalcore band, apparently not one of the brighter ones either.


I know that, why I mentioned their older stuff, since alot of people favor that and don't like Hello, Control.

[mr.rpg king]

Prove, using logic, that album sales mean that the band is good. We are going on originality here and if you want to make the band look worse then I guess you could grade their soul.

I still recall the time you tried to grade soul. It ended in failure.

Neither Green Day nor Panic (and not the good Panic, the ****ty P!ATD) are pop-punk, both are more pop with ever-so-slight twinges of punk (a chord here or there).

Because that makes perfect sense. "Slayer isn't Thrash metal. They are metal with ever-so-slight twinges of thrash in them. For my next act I'd like to make my intelligence disappear completely." If something is a hybrid (Genre) it really doesn't matter what genre is recessive and what genre is dominant, it's still a freakin' hybrid.

Between the Buried and Me do not. They are absolutely flawless live.

Nobody try and justify this with an argument. BTBAM is way, waaaaaaaaaay to talented.... Selkies.

They came from the vein of Pop-Punk, yes. But they've created a sound of their own by blending pop-punk, electronica, string arrangements quality song writing and making energetic and infectious songs. I'm not saying anyone should like them I'm saying they really don't sound like anything else out there and before you go ripping off my head for their beatleesque new sound listen for a moment, 'Behind the Sea' and 'The Piano Knows Something I don't'
are the only heavily beatles influenced songs but pretty much everything else has it's own feel and vibe.

I also think it should be listened to not for the singles but listen to it as an album, as a standalone piece.

I never said they were Beatleesque you need to read my posts. Beatleesque is the dumbest term ever unless we're dealing with Oasis or The Stone Roses. Seriously, everything has been compared to The Beatles; from Black Hole Sun to About A Girl to Karma Freakin' Police. (That's Soundgarden, Nirvana and Radiohead for the unenlightened.) Truth be told I see no similarities in any of that. I mean, pop music owes a thousand percent more to The Beatles then rock music. So I say we should say screw it to the term Beatleesque unless they literally sound like Paul or John is singing, or unless it copies a Beatles riff.

[AllThingsEqual]

I still recall the time you tried to grade soul. It ended in failure.
I am sorry that I am the only one that can tell that Brittany Spears is a whore that can't make good music.

Because that makes perfect sense. "Slayer isn't Thrash metal. They are metal with ever-so-slight twinges of thrash in them. For my next act I'd like to make my intelligence disappear completely." If something is a hybrid (Genre) it really doesn't matter what genre is recessive and what genre is dominant, it's still a freakin' hybrid.
I disagree here. See Slayer is thrash metal so that would not really be relevant to the situation. I mean Opeth has a huge folk influence, but we don't really call them folk.

[mr.rpg king]

I am sorry that I am the only one that can tell that Brittany Spears is a whore that can't make good music.


But being that there is nothing physical in the world that can measure soul at all makes the argument lackluster and does indeed end in failure. Again. I can say anything from Clutch to White Zombie doesn't have enough soul but it wont change the fact that it's still a really bad device to base a debate on. You see because you're arguing with opinions, and I'm arguing with facts, it makes what you say really easily disregardable as banter and banter is not good in an argument.

[Ihsahn]

1) The shirt the guy at the :40 mark is wearing, props to anyone besides CD who can name the band

Get off your high horse :D

[Cure4commoncold]

Man I hate you guys. :chuckle: Topic change: PlayRadioPlay!'s new album Texas. If you haven't the band listen to them it's one guy got a major record deal when he was like 17 or something he's got some talent this is completely different from Panic this guy REALLY has some musical talent and potential. BTW LastFM anyone?

[IndianSummer]

Get off your high horse :D

Get your ass in here more often and I won't forget you like I did. I need to find a hip-hop video where there's a guy wearing a Converge hoodie. I'd bet my left nut that at an over/under of 5 people recognizing the hoodie we'd hit the under.

Between the Buried and Me do not. They are absolutely flawless live.

Absolutely flawless, yet one of the most boring shows ever. The sweeps at the end of "Selkies" is ****ing sick (and anyone who doesn't believe me can watch this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0cFsu-eI7k) and "Mordecai" is one of the sickest songs ever. Too bad they're on such a ****ty label.

I know that, why I mentioned their older stuff, since alot of people favor that and don't like Hello, Control.

Fair enough, just misread it then.

Because that makes perfect sense. "Slayer isn't Thrash metal. They are metal with ever-so-slight twinges of thrash in them. For my next act I'd like to make my intelligence disappear completely." If something is a hybrid (Genre) it really doesn't matter what genre is recessive and what genre is dominant, it's still a freakin' hybrid.

I honestly hate debating genres with you because you still don't get it. Point was that neither Panic At the Disco (I can't refer to them as Panic anymore, takes too much away from the real Panic) nor Green Day are hybrids.

Why do you feel the need to continually defend this band? ****, if this many people thouhgt the bands I likdd were awfuk, I'd reconsider the band s I liked

Haha, I got negative repped on this post for poor grammar and spelling. Twice. Which means there are two people here who have never heard of this magical, wonderful creation called alcohol. Its actually quite good, especially when you consume copious amounts of it, although alcohol seriously limits my motor skills and my vision. But next time I'm drunk, I'll be sure to consult Webster's to make sure I spell everything correctly (grammar is surprisingly good).

[The Crowing]

Nobody try and justify this with an argument. BTBAM is way, waaaaaaaaaay to talented.... Selkies.
Ahhh, the solo is so beautiful.

Anyways, I'm about to download the new Panic album and see what I think of it.

[Cure4commoncold]

Haha, I got negative repped on this post for poor grammar and spelling. Twice. Which means there are two people here who have never heard of this magical, wonderful creation called alcohol. Its actually quite good, especially when you consume copious amounts of it, although alcohol seriously limits my motor skills and my vision. But next time I'm drunk, I'll be sure to consult Webster's to make sure I spell everything correctly (grammar is surprisingly good).

LOL sorry, you should specify you wasted with like a little insignia at the end of your drunk posts. Like the Irish flag.

jesus I just woke up, you're*

[mr.rpg king]

You really are numbly arrogant. Okay, sure genres are decided by music theory according to you. That still doesn't mean music theroists don't argue about what is in what genre(s) amongst themselves. Which makes it still just an opinion. I could italicize that for you as well if you want. Seriously, if you don't believe that I'm sure I can easily google a reference. Quit thinking you have such a broad understanding of what you're talking about when it's all just a matter of interpretation anyway. Even if it does use some divine system.


Haha, I got negative repped on this post for poor grammar and spelling. Twice. Which means there are two people here who have never heard of this magical, wonderful creation called alcohol. Its actually quite good, especially when you consume copious amounts of it, although alcohol seriously limits my motor skills and my vision. But next time I'm drunk, I'll be sure to consult Webster's to make sure I spell everything correctly (grammar is surprisingly good).

You sound like a kid when you brag about alcohol. Especially the placement of copious as the knock-out word. That looks like something I would have written when I was a sophmore.

Here, I got tired of you running your mouth. This is as far as I got with genres of music, oh infinite one.

Classical: Music that was composed in the 18th and 19th centuries by popular artist, like Beethoven.
Folk: Musical adaptions of old stories that were passed from generation to generation. They were popular in the early 20th century.
Rock: Music that originated from Folk. It used newer electrical instruments instead of the classical woodwinds and stringed instruments. It first became popular in the mid 20th century because of famous bands, like The Beatles.
Heavy Metal: Similar to Rock. It usually uses the same electrical instruments, but the music is more pumped up and intense.
Pop: Usually, it refers to any popular music during the time period. It is commonly placed in the mid 20th century, along side Rock music. Usually, it has an intense 'groove' to the tone.
Blues: Gentle music that was common in the early 20th century. They almost always use woodwinds, and don't always need voices to go along with the melody.

And that's about as deep as it will get. Seeing as sub-genres all derive from those, mostly rock, than I think it's fairly easy to reassure that sub-genres are more formed on the basis of opinion. I mean, I couldn't find one consistent
recording (i.e. explaination) of the sub-genres of pop-punk and alternative rock, which I googled and yahooed (After reading about them on Wikipedia) for the sake of making you look bad. Because I'm really tired of you spouting off inane rambles all the time about 'music theory' when it sounds like you took one course of it (it being music theory) in high school and felt like billy badass so now you try to apply the same thing over and over and over and over but all it ever becomes is monotonous and annoying instead of helpful.

[Civil Disobedient]

You really are numbly arrogant. Okay, sure genres are decided by music theory according to you. That still doesn't mean music theroists don't argue about what is in what genre(s) amongst themselves. Which makes it still just an opinion. I could italicize that for you as well if you want. Seriously, if you don't believe that I'm sure I can easily google a reference. Quit thinking you have such a broad understanding of what you're talking about when it's all just a matter of interpretation anyway. Even if it does use some divine system.



You sound like a kid when you brag about alcohol. Especially the placement of copious as the knock-out word. That looks like something I would have written when I was a sophmore.

Here, I got tired of you running your mouth. This is as far as I got with genres of music, oh infinite one.

Classical: Music that was composed in the 18th and 19th centuries by popular artist, like Beethoven.
Folk: Musical adaptions of old stories that were passed from generation to generation. They were popular in the early 20th century.
Rock: Music that originated from Folk. It used newer electrical instruments instead of the classical woodwinds and stringed instruments. It first became popular in the mid 20th century because of famous bands, like The Beatles.
Heavy Metal: Similar to Rock. It usually uses the same electrical instruments, but the music is more pumped up and intense.
Pop: Usually, it refers to any popular music during the time period. It is commonly placed in the mid 20th century, along side Rock music. Usually, it has an intense 'groove' to the tone.
Blues: Gentle music that was common in the early 20th century. They almost always use woodwinds, and don't always need voices to go along with the melody.

And that's about as deep as it will get. Seeing as sub-genres all derive from those, mostly rock, than I think it's fairly easy to reassure that sub-genres are more formed on the basis of opinion. I mean, I couldn't find one consistent
recording (i.e. explaination) of the sub-genres of pop-punk and alternative rock, which I googled and yahooed (After reading about them on Wikipedia) for the sake of making you look bad. Because I'm really tired of you spouting off inane rambles all the time about 'music theory' when it sounds like you took one course of it (it being music theory) in high school and felt like billy badass so now you try to apply the same thing over and over and over and over but all it ever becomes is monotonous and annoying instead of helpful.Wrong.

[coheed]

Blues: Gentle music that was common in the early 20th century. They almost always use woodwinds, and don't always need voices to go along with the melody.
Ehh . . . are you serious?

[Civil Disobedient]

Ehh . . . are you serious?It's not worth it man. He obviously doesn't have a clue at all. Ignore it and it will go away.

[IndianSummer]

You really are numbly arrogant. Okay, sure genres are decided by music theory according to you.That still doesn't mean music theroists don't argue about what is in what genre(s) amongst themselves. Which makes it still just an opinion. I could italicize that for you as well if you want. Seriously, if you don't believe that I'm sure I can easily google a reference. Quit thinking you have such a broad understanding of what you're talking about when it's all just a matter of interpretation anyway. Even if it does use some divine system.

Nope. It just isn't opinion. You can continue to think that, but it'd be wrong.

You sound like a kid when you brag about alcohol. Especially the placement of copious as the knock-out word. That looks like something I would have written when I was a sophmore.

Prefer I use the word "****-ton?" Trying to work on lessening the amount I curse seeing as I curse like a sailor and at my worst a 7 year old kid who just learned the word "****." But that's not important

Here, I got tired of you running your mouth. This is as far as I got with genres of music, oh infinite one.

Classical: Music that was composed in the 18th and 19th centuries by popular artist, like Beethoven.
Folk: Musical adaptions of old stories that were passed from generation to generation. They were popular in the early 20th century.
Rock: Music that originated from Folk. It used newer electrical instruments instead of the classical woodwinds and stringed instruments. It first became popular in the mid 20th century because of famous bands, like The Beatles.
Heavy Metal: Similar to Rock. It usually uses the same electrical instruments, but the music is more pumped up and intense.
Pop: Usually, it refers to any popular music during the time period. It is commonly placed in the mid 20th century, along side Rock music. Usually, it has an intense 'groove' to the tone.
Blues: Gentle music that was common in the early 20th century. They almost always use woodwinds, and don't always need voices to go along with the melody.

Never been a Miles Davis or John Coltrane fan? Because I noticed you left jazz off the list of genres. Other than that your definitions are... wrong. There's a lot more to defining a genre other than the instruments used. And by your definition, a band could be Heavy Metal and Pop, which I'm not even going to get into. And you're missing genres. A lot of them

And that's about as deep as it will get. Seeing as sub-genres all derive from those, mostly rock, than I think it's fairly easy to reassure that sub-genres are more formed on the basis of opinion. I mean, I couldn't find one consistent recording (i.e. explaination) of the sub-genres of pop-punk and alternative rock, which I googled and yahooed (After reading about them on Wikipedia) for the sake of making you look bad.

Wrong. And for the record, I don't acknowledge the genre "Alternative." Too wide of an area. When you can group bands like Oasis with Soundgarden with City of Caterpillar, not a genre.


Because I'm really tired of you spouting off inane rambles all the time about 'music theory' when it sounds like you took one course of it (it being music theory) in high school and felt like billy badass so now you try to apply the same thing over and over and over and over but all it ever becomes is monotonous and annoying instead of helpful.

Off by the amount of courses I took by one. If you'ld like, I'll post information going more in-depth on how wrong you are. Would you prefer that?

[Jofish]

Nope. It just isn't opinion. You can continue to think that, but it'd be wrong.



Prefer I use the word "****-ton?" Trying to work on lessening the amount I curse seeing as I curse like a sailor and at my worst a 7 year old kid who just learned the word "****." But that's not important



Never been a Miles Davis or John Coltrane fan? Because I noticed you left jazz off the list of genres. Other than that your definitions are... wrong. There's a lot more to defining a genre other than the instruments used. And by your definition, a band could be Heavy Metal and Pop, which I'm not even going to get into. And you're missing genres. A lot of them



Wrong. And for the record, I don't acknowledge the genre "Alternative." Too wide of an area. When you can group bands like Oasis with Soundgarden with City of Caterpillar, not a genre.




Off by the amount of courses I took by one. If you'ld like, I'll post information going more in-depth on how wrong you are. Would you prefer that?

I agree with most of this but it doesn't matter how much Music theory you know, theory is crap and everyone knows that. Music is music period.

If you need to theorize music then you don't need to listen to it in the first place, it's something to be appreciated and enjoyed not dissected and analyzed.

[The Crowing]

I agree with most of this but it doesn't matter how much Music theory you know, theory is crap and everyone knows that. Music is music period.
inb4 this is the most ignorant statement ever

[mr.rpg king]

Ehh . . . are you serious?

That's copy-pasted from wikipedia.

It's not worth it man. He obviously doesn't have a clue at all. Ignore it and it will go away.

I've tried to ignore you and yet here you stand before wide eyes.

Also, that whole list of genres is copy-pasted from wikipedia. I didn't take the time to make sure all genres were in place as there are a LOT of sub-genres. Regardless that Jazz is not a sub-genre, I still failed to make sure it was in place. Omigod my bad.

Indiansummer. Honestly, emo is considered a gnere of music. Look it up, it is separate from pop-punk. How can the abbreviation of "emotional" be a type of music. Quote the lead singer of Fugazi "... Isn't all music emotional. Does this mean Bad Brains never played with emotion?". Even if music theory is designed to divide genres, don't you think music theorist ever argue about what fits into what genre? Yeah, exactly. They debate with facts (I suppose) but the final judgment all comes down to a matter of opinion. I shouldn't say you're completely wrong, but you're defiantly not completely right either.

And just to top this all off.


Wrong. And for the record, I don't acknowledge the genre "Alternative." Too wide of an area. When you can group bands like Oasis with Soundgarden with City of Caterpillar, not a genre.

"I don't acknowledge", that wording as applied in the way you did entices an opinion as any English teacher will tell you. Which would you mean you were putting it in your opinion that alternative rock music is not a genre. Other people consider it a genre and you don't. Fact: That's an opinion. Which would mean that the genres do come down to a matter of opinion. Shall I simplify it more or did I just blow your effing mind.

Edit: Copious is such a cliche word when referenced like that it sounds stupid. Granted at least you used a word that not all people know the meaning of, the way the whole thing was written makes it sounded like idiotic bragging. I enjoy alcohol too but I don't talk about it in a douche baggy manner that sounds like I took one drink in beer pong and got ripped.

[Civil Disobedient]

Irony Alert: mr rpg king's posts are now becoming just as pretentious as the band that is the subject of this thread.

[coheed]

I agree with most of this but it doesn't matter how much Music theory you know, theory is crap and everyone knows that. Music is music period.

If you need to theorize music then you don't need to listen to it in the first place, it's something to be appreciated and enjoyed not dissected and analyzed.
Sounds to me like someone needs to check his definition of what music theory is. Sounds to me like you mean breaking up bands into subgenres, and music theory is not that.

That's copy-pasted from wikipedia.
We've gotten to far off-topic, I won't spend too much time on this, but I'm looking at Wikipedia now and don't see what you wrote. Blues is a musical tradition that started with work chants and field hollers in the 1800s, and later evolved into one man with a guitar telling a story before getting really "legitimized," if you will, as a popular music form later. Woodwind instruments have never been considered a mainstay of blues music, and while many bluesmen probably wouldn't be considered amazing vocalists (with the exception of Howlin' Wolf) a vocal melody has always been considered of equal importance with the bluesman's guitar playing. Also, as many early blues tunes were rooted in rage, sorrow, racial oppression, and Satanism, "gentle" is not a word I would use to describe it.

I'm sure you know this. I think Wikipedia just steered you wrong. :bow:

[IndianSummer]

I agree with most of this but it doesn't matter how much Music theory you know, theory is crap and everyone knows that. Music is music period.

If you need to theorize music then you don't need to listen to it in the first place, it's something to be appreciated and enjoyed not dissected and analyzed.

At least rpg king makes an attempt to back up his wrong statements. You are way out of your element here. Go back to being a quiet scene kid.

Indiansummer. Honestly, emo is considered a gnere of music. Look it up, it is separate from pop-punk. How can the abbreviation of "emotional" be a type of music. Quote the lead singer of Fugazi "... Isn't all music emotional. Does this mean Bad Brains never played with emotion?". Even if music theory is designed to divide genres, don't you think music theorist ever argue about what fits into what genre? Yeah, exactly. They debate with facts (I suppose) but the final judgment all comes down to a matter of opinion. I shouldn't say you're completely wrong, but you're defiantly not completely right either.

Never said emo wasn't a genre, its a subgenre if you want to get specific. And its not the abbreviation of emotional, its short for "emotive hardcore," making it an offshoot of hardcore. The difference is that most hardcore bands sing about political issues, drugs, drinking, why people suck, etc. Emo deals with emotions because of death, friendship, whatever. Gradually its evolved to actual music theory to be an emo band (I could pull all this if you want the theory to being an emo band)

"I don't acknowledge", that wording as applied in the way you did entices an opinion as any English teacher will tell you. Which would you mean you were putting it in your opinion that alternative rock music is not a genre. Other people consider it a genre and you don't. Fact: That's an opinion. Which would mean that the genres do come down to a matter of opinion. Shall I simplify it more or did I just blow your effing mind.

Yeah I used the wrong word. A lot of people don't consider alternative a genre outside of MTV just because it has no theory behind it. I guess you could say that under rock you have the "pop" bands and the "alternative" bands, but to be able to say grunge (Soundgarden), Brit-Pop (Oasis), and skramz (CoC) are in the same genre just because all three play instruments and deviated from the mainstream music at the time is bull****.

Edit: Copious is such a cliche word when referenced like that it sounds stupid. Granted at least you used a word that not all people know the meaning of, the way the whole thing was written makes it sounded like idiotic bragging. I enjoy alcohol too but I don't talk about it in a douche baggy manner that sounds like I took one drink in beer pong and got ripped.

While this is immensely off-topic, I was just trying to knock it into those two skulls that I wasn't lucid at the time of writing whatever I wrote. I'm sure you recognized that I was drunk because you've been in that situation before , whatever whatever. Essentially I decided to beat into their skulls that if it looks like my fingers hit whatever they hit and sobeit, I was probably ****faced at the time, and all mistakes should be taken with a grain of salt.

[AllThingsEqual]

Never said emo wasn't a genre, its a subgenre if you want to get specific. And its not the abbreviation of emotional, its short for "emotive hardcore," making it an offshoot of hardcore. The difference is that most hardcore bands sing about political issues, drugs, drinking, why people suck, etc. Emo deals with emotions because of death, friendship, whatever. Gradually its evolved to actual music theory to be an emo band (I could pull all this if you want the theory to being an emo band)
I don't mean to be a nuisance, but Emo does not revolve around lyrics about death, friendship, etc. Hardcore and emo differ in that hardcore tends to be a bit less melodic, I guess you could say. I don't know how to describe it except that a couple of the first emo bands, Rites of Spring and Cap'n Jazz, did not sound like hardcore punk. There is something very different about them.

[IndianSummer]

Thats what the lyrics were usually interpreted to mean though. Some event comes in and forces you to sit back and just wonder what happened.

[Jofish]

inb4 this is the most ignorant statement ever


How is that statement ignorant? IS it ignorant that I believe you don't need to know anything about music to be able to enjoy it? How do you think hits are made? People listen, they like what they hear they want to hear more. Do they need to know that there is an performer singing the song? Do they know that there was a team of musicians behind the performer making the song work do they need to now the roots of the sounds they are hearing? From what subgenre it came from, from what original idea it was borrowed from? No. As complex as people make it out to be in theory and justifications music is as simple as speaking a language.

Just take it for what it is and experience it for it's intended purpose.



At least rpg king makes an attempt to back up his wrong statements. You are way out of your element here. Go back to being a quiet scene kid.

Out of my Element? I think not. I can justify my statements, no matter how ignorant they may seem. Music is my life. I live, eat, breath, sleep and drink it. I'm a bassist and I play music everyday. I don't feel anyone has the right to bash or degrade anyones creative progress or output and thats why I'm here saying that you can't say someone isn't talented just because you don't like it.

Also, what was it? Quiet scene kid? I happen to like Panic at the disco so I'm an emo kid? OR scene kid as you say, but wait! Right now I'm listening to Flogging Molly does that make a punk kid? Five minutes ago I was listening to Thrice, does that make me a hardcore or metal fan? Earlier today I listened to Zeppelin, Flyleaf, Bob Marley, The Shins, The Beatles, Millencolin, Matisyahu, Chevelle, Smashing Pumpkins, Eminem, Tori Amos and Chiodos? Now what scene do I belong too?

[Civil Disobedient]

Earlier today I listened to Zeppelin, Flyleaf, Bob Marley, The Shins, The Beatles, Millencolin, Matisyahu, Chevelle, Smashing Pumpkins, Eminem, Tori Amos and Chiodos? Now what scene do I belong too?The "really ****ty music" scene.

[Jofish]

The "really ****ty music" scene.

Well if you think Bob Marley, The Beatles and Zeppelin is "really ****ty" Then I feel sorry for you.

[Civil Disobedient]

Please don't, i'm on to a winner with my amazing taste in music.

[Cure4commoncold]

Please don't, i'm on to a winner with my amazing taste in music.

Psh, like what? I'm guessing a bunch of Prog probably. Music is meant to express something and hope create feelings in the person listening to the music. Doesn't matter what genre, all music has emotion put into it. Here's my argument if someone sells a lot of records that does mean they are a good artist. The whole point of music like I said is to stir up an emotion in the person listening to the song to draw them into the music and people are all going out buying a CD even if it's freaking "Loose" by Nelly Furtado(Which I do own) the musics still good because it's doing it's job hence why people are buying it. If you think musics about modes, notes, and seeing how many chords you can put into a song you're wrong there's a reason why "Creep" is the most popular Radiohead song. Think about it.

[Civil Disobedient]

I can't even be bothered pointing out how much of that block of text is wrong, ignorant and plain stupid. Instead i'll just go listen to my "prog" that doesn't stir any emotion in me at all that no-one buys because it's not good "musics".

[Cure4commoncold]

I can't even be bothered pointing out how much of that block of text is wrong, ignorant and plain stupid. Instead i'll just go listen to my "prog" that doesn't stir any emotion in me at all that no-one buys because it's not good "musics".

That's because there's nothing wrong with it. Don't reply to something with you meaningless, arrogant, pretentious ad hominem arguments. That's pretty much all you do is attack the person not the actual argument and then use this "I can't be bothered to respond to this message because I'm too busy thinking about how great I am" crap. I didn't create this thread for you to troll through it I created it for discussion and ARGUMENT yes actual argument what you're doing is not arguing. Also I never said prog doesn't stir emotion in people I listen to pleeeeeenty of progressive music and I enjoy the technical precision of the musicians along with artistic value of the actual music and it's lyrics.