Unpopular Musical Opinions: What are Yours?

[Buddster]

47 minutes ago, leftybassman392 said:

 

It's a matter of perspective I think. In technical terms, digital recording is demonstrably cleaner and more analytical than vinyl. That ship has long since sailed.

 

On the other hand, vinyl has a certain sound character that many listeners find very appealing. A limitation made into an asset, so to speak.

 

 

You pays yer money, you makes yer choice. Personally I'm happy to listen to either.

Yes, I do agree. I prefer a CD, but see why people prefer vinyl. It's very easy to play devil's advocate. Vinyl has an intrinsic quality with built in nostalgia (that record companies have tapped into). 

I do however resent CD players for having a 'random' button. It should be disabled on the first playing. An album should be listened to in the order presented at least once. 

[Buddster]

Oh and while I'm at it

Rock'n'roll shouldn't be recorded with Dobly...... 😉

[Leonard Smalls]

5 minutes ago, Buddster said:

Vinyl has an intrinsic quality

You can't build a 6 skinner on a cd case, never mind a download!

😈

[dclaassen]

3 hours ago, Vin Venal said:

It's a myth that old stuff sounds better.

 

Whether that's items which were actually made a long time ago, or new stuff made with obsolete tech, like tube amps.

 

I think the reason people think this is because with a lot of such gear, you can just plug it in, and it will sound good, but with modern gear, the same sounds are there, you just have more options.

 

Eg - old instruments which sound super warm and organic - that's because a load of high frequencies are being attenuated, you could get the same results with a modern sounding bright instrument and a good enough EQ.

 

Tube amps - whatever magic is in there is emulatable, and not even just digitally, which is cheating. I'm confident that given a good enough ear, and judicious use of the right effects (mostly compression, distortion and EQ) and you could get that sound from any nasty sounding solid state amp.

 

The flat, dead sound of a modern class d amp when it's first plugged in is just because it doesn't already have a load of frequencies sucked out in a characterful way - it's up to you to shape the sound.

Respectfully disagree…I have used modelling amps…can’t give you the sound of a tube amp. I will happily haul an old fender tube amp around. Additionally, if kept in good shape, it will always get you through the gig.

[dclaassen]

While we are at it…compression is the sworn enemy of good sound…you’re just conditioned to like it. Compressed bass tone is as annoying as auto tune.

[Nail Soup]

4 hours ago, Woodinblack said:

and firewood weren't really looked after or cherished and broke or dissapeared

Or burned.

[Vin Venal]

18 minutes ago, dclaassen said:

While we are at it…compression is the sworn enemy of good sound…you’re just conditioned to like it. Compressed bass tone is as annoying as auto tune.

Weird how everyone's ears are different, cuz to me, compression is a key component of the distinctive tubey sound we were just talking about. They call it tube sag, but I think its the same thing, that feeling of give in the attack you get with compression.

[chris_b]

4 hours ago, Woodinblack said:

 

I don't think that is entirely true, I think back in the past before mass production the quality of things was really variable, so for instance, if you had 10 les pauls, 1 would be fantastic, 2 would be very good, 5 would be ok and two would be firewood. Over time, the ones that were ok and firewood weren't really looked after or cherished and broke or dissapeared, but the fantastic ones were kept.

So it provides this myth about them being great - no, just the good ones were.

 

Les Paul's have always been expensive, so my guess is that they were all treated well. The real "dogs" would have been sold on until they ended up with someone who didn't mind or didn't notice any "shortcomings". How much of the guitar can you actually hear if you are using 15 pedals?

 

There's a happy owner for every bass and guitar.

[ezbass]

Just now, chris_b said:

How much of the guitar can you actually hear if you are using 15 pedals?

 

And/or a ton of distortion.

[skankdelvar]

11 minutes ago, chris_b said:

The real "dogs" would have been sold on until they ended up with someone who didn't ... notice any "shortcomings".

 

That would be me. Bought an early 80's LP Std about 1987. At first I thought it was great, then I slowly came to see its very many deficiencies. The only upside to that guitar was that one day a fretboard marker popped out so I looked up local luthiers in the phone book. 'Hang on... Tony Zemaitis lives round here?'

 

Dropped it in for a repair, admired a lovely Zemaitis acoustic on the wall. 'Have a go,' says he, so I did. It sounded amazing and I said so.

 

'Yeah,' says Zemaitis. 'The owner's picking it up next week'.

 

And that's how I got to play (one of) George Harrison's Zemaitis guitars.

[dclaassen]

30 minutes ago, Vin Venal said:

Weird how everyone's ears are different, cuz to me, compression is a key component of the distinctive tubey sound we were just talking about. They call it tube sag, but I think its the same thing, that feeling of give in the attack you get with compression.

And yet, not the same, IMO

[uk_lefty]

On 18/05/2022 at 14:02, police squad said:

Luckiest Average Pub Band In The World.

Awesome name for a cover band.

[Frank Blank]

3 hours ago, Skinnyman said:

I hated punk in the 70s.

 

Still do

As an old 70s punk can I just say we didn’t mind.

[Frank Blank]

2 hours ago, Leonard Smalls said:

You can't build a 6 skinner on a cd case, never mind a download!

😈

I can build a 6 skinner on a toothbrush, mind you, I am currently doing six months in Wandsworth for fraud.

[zbd1960]

12 hours ago, zbd1960 said:

Yeah, been there...

I should add that disliking football and having no interest in it at all when growing up in Liverpool in the 60s/70s.... didn't help... (I still can't stand football, I just have to accept I;m in a minority on that one)

[Lozz196]

6 hours ago, Woodinblack said:

 

I don't think that is entirely true, I think back in the past before mass production the quality of things was really variable, so for instance, if you had 10 les pauls, 1 would be fantastic, 2 would be very good, 5 would be ok and two would be firewood. Over time, the ones that were ok and firewood weren't really looked after or cherished and broke or dissapeared, but the fantastic ones were kept.

So it provides this myth about them being great - no, just the good ones were.

In 2007 I bought a Les Paul Studio. I asked to try all of the ones in the shop out from the same range - they had three. One sang, one spoke evenly, one vomited on the floor. I bought the singer, but it was hard to believe how 3 identical guitars, all set up pretty much the same could differ so much.

[SteveXFR]

I think Radiohead are boring and mediocre at best. They had a couple good tunes but far too much self indulgent noodling. 

Second possibily unpopular opinion. Foo Fighters never made a great album, their records were 75% filler. In their career, they could have made one and a half truly great albums. 

Third unpopular opinion.  Elvis sucks.

[xgsjx]

Defo a popular opinion with everyone I know.

Elvis does indeed suck. 

[ezbass]

1 hour ago, SteveXFR said:

I think Radiohead are boring and mediocre at best. They had a couple good tunes but far too much self indulgent noodling. 

Second possibily unpopular opinion. Foo Fighters never made a great album, their records were 75% filler. In their career, they could have made one and a half truly great albums. 

Third unpopular opinion.  Elvis sucks.

 

6 minutes ago, xgsjx said:

Defo a popular opinion with everyone I know.

Elvis does indeed suck. 

 

 

Edited May 24, 2022 by ezbass

[tegs07]

 

Pretty difficult to judge music from another era entirely. When the world was listening to Vera Lynn and Doris Day he must have been astonishing.

Edited May 25, 2022 by tegs07
1956 USA Billboard Top 50

[garyt]

9 hours ago, SteveXFR said:

I think Radiohead are boring and mediocre at best. They had a couple good tunes but far too much self indulgent noodling. 

Second possibily unpopular opinion. Foo Fighters never made a great album, their records were 75% filler. In their career, they could have made one and a half truly great albums. 

Third unpopular opinion.  Elvis sucks.

Although I quite like Radiohead and Foos as background music, I think all your points are pretty much spot on. 

[tegs07]

9 hours ago, SteveXFR said:

I think Radiohead are boring and mediocre at best. They had a couple good tunes but far too much self indulgent noodling. 

Second possibily unpopular opinion. Foo Fighters never made a great album, their records were 75% filler. In their career, they could have made one and a half truly great albums. 

Third unpopular opinion.  Elvis sucks.

I’ve lost count of the number of times i’ve tried to get into Radiohead or The Foo Fighters. I must be missing something but I just don’t get the appeal.

[Fishfacefour]

 

 

I just don't click with Bowie.

I can see how he was innovative with his use of characters etc. but I always feel the music is meh. 

 

Also the only proper screaming roe me and my other half ever had was about the stone roses. I just didnt get them, I've warmed to then a little over the years but still, meh.

[Fishfacefour]

10 hours ago, SteveXFR said:

 

Third unpopular opinion.  Elvis sucks.

Elvis was a hero to most, but he never meant sht to me

You see straight up racist that sucker was

Simple an' plain, mother f him an' John Wayne

 

Classic insight from public enemy.

[Rich]

1 hour ago, tegs07 said:

 

Pretty difficult to judge music from another era entirely. When the world was listening to Vera Lynn and Doris Day he must have been astonishing.

 

My word yes, he was very popular.

 

Still sucks, though.