ngw

"Exhilarating theses". Among the groups/artists you mentioned, there isn't a single one from the '80s, and I'd say not even from the late '70s, not people who weren’t playing for a long time back then. Music changes, if you haven't noticed; at the beginning of the '80s, a good part of the artists you mentioned simply did not reflect the "feeling" of the time. I repeat, no one is saying that Tool are crap, they were just unsuitable, they had had their moment. The Pixies were "right" for '88; their sounds (which at the time were pretty unlistenable to the general public) are such that now Surfer Rosa is just a nice album; its sounds have been completely assimilated and come off as "normal." The '80s must be judged based on the production from the '80s, not from pincfloi.

If the term "amen" makes you laugh, it's not like "indie," "corporate," "postrock" are a triumph of intelligence, or "progressive," if that fits you better. They're just terms.
I really can't stand Guns, way more than Nirvana. But we were discussing the rather absolutist statements of the review. I also said that Appetite isn't bad, for what it's worth.
Then again, opinions are opinions, but if you don't hear the Pixies in all of the '90s music, in my opinion, you've listened to very little '90s music - clearly, there's nothing wrong with that. I'm sure you'd wipe the floor with me on "progressive," since I don't appreciate the genre, but allow me to disagree without trying to stick some bullshit label on me.

Ah, I never said I was niche; that’s nonsense you’re making up to support your hilarious arguments. Everyone knows Pixies and My Bloody Valentine, even those with almost zero musical culture. You are living proof of that.

You challenged a term I used, quite offensively, I might add. The term is found in three online encyclopedias and is commonly used to describe, for example, the Cocteau Twins (and by the Cocteau Twins themselves, imagine that). You clearly said something ridiculous, whether or not you followed it up with whining. Go ahead and laugh; it doesn’t make you look any better, does it?
By the way, I understand that rebutting is pointless, since you’re not exactly coming across as particularly bright, but no, Wikipedia (which, by the way, is not a "pop encyclopedia," but just an encyclopedia—at this point, you don’t even know what you’re saying) is not among my sources; it’s merely a useful tool to verify obvious things like the term "Dream Pop" (which you didn’t criticize; you just laughed like an idiot). I understand that three online encyclopedias may not be as strong as the "cugggggino" you just pulled out (I assume that's "someone"), but those who are satisfied enjoy. After all, not everyone has the chance to talk to Metheny.

It's not about what you like or dislike; everyone is free to enjoy whatever they want, for God's sake. The discussion is about the importance of certain groups in the history of rock. No one here has ever said that Zeppelin weren't extremely important and seminal, or that Pastorius wasn't, or any other obvious thing you've managed to say in your previous post, but the '80s had their incredibly important and seminal groups, the Pixies being among them. Is that not okay because you don’t like them or they annoy you? Alright, got it. Can I point out that Nirvana took practically everything from the Pixies? Can I point out that a certain Bowie expressed fantastical praise for the Pixies? Can I mention that Black Francis's singing has set a standard, just like Santiago's guitar? That without My Bloody Valentine, bands like Verve or Slowdive would have been just a dream? You acknowledge this, okay, otherwise amen, I assure you I will survive. Who exactly considers the Pixies or My Bloody Valentine overrated? I don’t know anyone by the name of "someone." Don't bring up names of artists who evidently can't appreciate the _genre_, because the discussion becomes childish and completely pointless. By the way, here you are singing the praises of G'n'R, you're tripping yourself up. Did G'n'R take inspiration from Miles or Metheny? Or maybe from punk and garage bands like I believe? By the way, anyone who talks about technique as a must-have to make good records in my opinion really understands very little about music. There are several excellent portrait artists on the beach in Rimini, people who have studied and are technically superior to many more highly regarded artists. The fact is that Mirò is at the Prado, and these people are on the beach doing portraits for 20 euros. Maybe you should ask Metheny why.

"the joke about dream pop (how nice, dream pop, I bet you had a wank after saying such bullshit) I won't even comment on... it comments on itself"
Dream pop - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
link rotto
Answers - The Most Trusted Place for Answering Life's Questions
Not a bad way to make a fool of yourself, you're talented.

"Ngw what the hell do the '80s have to do with this record?" "It's definitely a fact that Guns N' Roses were one of the most important bands of the '80s." Which part didn't you understand exactly? If you tell me, I can try to help you get it.
"Then, by the way, who do you think I was referring to when I talked about minimalism, the mbv?! reread before you write crap!" "My Bloody Valentine seminal?! Meh... then by the way what the hell do the Pixies have to do with the Guns, what kind of shit comparison is that???? It's like comparing the Stooges to Pink Floyd!!!! If someone likes minimalists, fine, but there’s much more, and it seems to me that too many losers who don’t know shit about music are posing as musicians with the excuse of minimalism!!! I would love to know what Metheny thinks about the Pixies and the Valentines... he'd have a good laugh." Again, some part of your own post that you didn't understand? Here it's tougher because you sung it to yourself, but I can manage.

Until '80, I love everything by Bowie. But if you give this a 4 compared to Hunky Dory or Low, then you just don't know what to rate anymore, and those are so, so much better.

True, in fact My Bloody Valentine is a band I made up just to be a "gaggio." But damn, now you’ve figured me out and I have to come up with another name. Lol.

You're six different kilometers off the road. The Jesus & Mary Chain have done nothing but put pop songs over tons of feedback; it's not shoegaze at all. Shoegaze is My Bloody Valentine, with a practically non-existent rhythm section, dreamy vocals where the words are barely distinguishable, layers of guitar on layers of guitar (which is different from just laying feedback under the track) - the guitars in MBV are not destabilizing at all like in JMC; they are melodic and dreamy and integrate beautifully into the piece, though they deconstruct it. JMC are a wave band, not even among the best, with a very nice and atmospheric debut, a very lysergic album, though, very "post-nuclear," those atmospheres so dear to the English wave, and with motives totally different from MBV, and Psychocandy does not have and will never have the aura of a masterpiece like Loveless. If you want, MBV are closer to a certain dream pop like Cocteau Twins than to JMC. To prove what I'm saying, you can listen to Isn't Anything; you'll see it's an album that strays far from JMC, but is certainly the genesis of the subsequent Loveless (even though I believe you know both of them well). My Bloody Valentine, unlike JMC, are very ethereal, introspective, tender; the distortions are never "confusion."