NDRU said:

But would you believe that I've come across some folks that are not fond of Miles or Trane?

Moonbeam said:

The music

NWF said:

Well, much I love Miles and respect Trane, through no fault of their own, they do seem to have gained a slightly unfair stranglehold as the 'undisputed gods of jazz', at the expense of many many other equally great names.

For some, I think it's easier just to dig the obvious Miles/ Trane stuff, rather than possibly drown in the wonderful, wider ocean of jazz. And it's their loss if people don't go beyond those two great 'doormen' of jazz.

namepeace said:

i'm okay with some of aretha's classics, but i think she's a mean, nasty person. i've heard too many really bad stories about how she treats people. that doesn't ruin my enjoyment of the few songs of hers i like, but as a personality she really rubs me the wrong way.

MOZART















except for him ofcourse

Anx said:

I'm kinda with you on that.

ThirdandFinal said:

that's kinda interesting, because their music was so all over the place that to hate their style is to hate a whole bunch of styles. i mean, they did cold synth new wave, they did bubblegum pop, they did R&B, they did rock, they did folk, they did big lavish epic pop ballads, they did retro french pop sounding songs...i could understand if you just didn't like the quality of annie lennox's voice or maybe dave stewart's production style (which i have to admit can be a little too sugary for me at times), but 'the music'? that's pretty broad, from all i've heard.

not to disagree with you cuz you know what you like and what you don't like...but that's a big chunk of sound to dismiss.

RZR said:

If someone doesn't like James Brown, they should just stop listening to music all together.

sextonseven said:

Well, I stand corrected! There's one.

Anx said:

Anx said:

I will admit to not knowing them except for what was on the radio, but it all had such an 80's sound, and I can't stand 80's music.

I like all the lennox solo I have heard, and she was amazing at this concert:

http://www.youtube.com/wa...NG2z4wWkhA

RZR said:

i forget how he presented his argument, but i thought he was brave for raising the question. to be honest (and this is just me flaunting my OWN ignorance), i don't know what exactly james brown contributed to his work as a musician - he just kinda seemed to channel the groove and give it a direction and a visual center. which, hey, is enough for me. all i know is i really love the end results. but i never think of JB sitting around plunking out a new tune on the piano or running into the studio with a guitar screaming "HEY FELLAS, CHECK OUT WHAT I JUST WROTE!" but there could be a lot i just don't know. i've only listened to the records - i never really studied the man.

ThirdandFinal said:

you've GOT to reserve final judgment until you've heard the "savage" album all the way through once. if you can remove enough preconceived expectations to listen to it as an ALBUM instead of just a EURYTHMICS ALBUM, i can't see how you wouldn't be rewarded. it's really just great pop music, and it doesn't sound at all dated to my ears.

The Beatles, The Stones, Dylan, The Beach Boys, Stevie Wonder, James Brown, only a few that seem to have universal appeal. Mostly because of genre bias. People have to box music into little pithy subcatagories. Poor people tend to listen to more "street" forms of music, metal, rap, punk, country, southern rock. Middle class kids tend to listen to more commercial pop, soft metal, rock, some alternative.

It's a mystery, actually. lol

Anx said:

Upon hearing Savage for the first time, one of my best friends said, "How come it all sounds like Camille?"

Anx said:

It's enough for me too. The fact that he solidified 2 whole genres of music gives him exemption from criticism in my book.

Anx said:

I guess I could, but I buy about one album a year, and this year is probably Eat Me, Drink Me.....or maybe I'll splurge and get the new White Stripes as well

GangstaFam said:

Also, didn't his band members change from time to time? It was consistant because of him.

Sure, having a great band helps, but a great band won't follow just anybody, and they were definitely following him, not just supporting him. And without strong leadership a band that big could have been a huge mess.

I guess I could see someone not understanding his contribution, though. But it doesn't make them right.
[Edited 5/8/07 15:51pm]

NDRU said:

Yeah, I think Bootsy was only with him in like '70 and maybe '71.

GangstaFam said:

There you go. Bootsy's a great addition to a band and an artist in his own right, but they were still playing "James Brown" music.

ThirdandFinal said:

Anx said:

I can't stand Aretha Franklin.

Moonbeam said:

Being totally honest here, when someone says they hate the Beatles or Aretha Franklin, I have to wonder what exactly does the person like about music at all?

loving this thread!!!

We should just call this Sade.org

NWF said:

not tryong to be rude, but where are they now, there is nothing to compalin about because thet aren't around, if they are are around they must be doing little things in another country

GangstaFam said:

i'm a fan of his dancing but not so much of his singing

I don't remember anyone here on the org who absolutely hated the Beatles or thought that their music was shit, but I have seen a lot of heated arguments on this forum when some people overly praised them as musical gods. That is worthy of discussion, whether you believe The Beatles are God's gift to popular music or whether you believe Prince could run circles musically around the Beatles.

Bob Marley is loved all over the world and his music is timeless because he used it to advocate social change-for freedom of mankind, regardless of race, ethnicity, or economic status.

RZR said:

They're not the end-all, be-all of music. Enjoyment of music is entirely subjective and can be based on many factors. There are qualities in musicians I love that I don't get from The Beatles or Aretha. I'm sure there are qualities that they have that my favorites lack.