I was waiting for you to mention Elden
how you diggin it ? Is it too fantasy for me or more like a DS3 vibe ?
Nah you'll dig it, it's pretty much Dark Souls 4
@drjdeponytail tell these fools about Aladdin Sane
i think people sometimes overstate the "togetherness" of the individual decades, if that makes sense
acting like 1980 and 1979 belong more with their respective "decades" than with each other
also kinda ties back to the idea that people have a set year in mind too prominently anyway when listening to music and it should just go beyond worrying if something "sounds like 1966" or is "timeless" but i realize that is a totally useless discussion and people will always utilize the calendar to describe a lot of these things
i think people sometimes overstate the "togetherness" of the individual decades, if that makes sense
acting like 1980 and 1979 belong more with their respective "decades" than with each other
also kinda ties back to the idea that people have a set year in mind too prominently anyway when listening to music and it should just go beyond worrying if something "sounds like 1966" or is "timeless" but i realize that is a totally useless discussion and people will always utilize the calendar to describe a lot of these things
Personally all this s*** made alot more sense once I knew exactly when everything came out
@drjdeponytail tell these fools about Aladdin Sane
Was listening to Transformer earlier and Ronson was truly a beast, underrated tbh

i think people sometimes overstate the "togetherness" of the individual decades, if that makes sense
acting like 1980 and 1979 belong more with their respective "decades" than with each other
also kinda ties back to the idea that people have a set year in mind too prominently anyway when listening to music and it should just go beyond worrying if something "sounds like 1966" or is "timeless" but i realize that is a totally useless discussion and people will always utilize the calendar to describe a lot of these things
This is only a recent phenomenon in reality. Before about the 19th century nobody ever really distinguished time in this way. There wasn’t really a perspective on past and future but more so a continuation of the present. The constant shifts in culture and technology in the last couple hundred years has made these distinctions more prominent and I think breaking time down by decades while flawed tends to work well enough.
Personally all this s*** made alot more sense once I knew exactly when everything came out
same but then there is just a point where sometimes its good to take a step back. after all it is something nonmusical that can unintentionally pollute thoughts of the music. its cool if something seeming "ahead of their time" makes it more interesting but potentially unfair if something amazing can just get cast aside because it was released a few years too late
and yes this is convo is too nerdy anyway
same but then there is just a point where sometimes its good to take a step back. after all it is something nonmusical that can unintentionally pollute thoughts of the music. its cool if something seeming "ahead of their time" makes it more interesting but potentially unfair if something amazing can just get cast aside because it was released a few years too late
and yes this is convo is too nerdy anyway
I don't recall ever casting something aside just for being derivative
usually enjoy picking out the influences
I don't recall ever casting something aside just for being derivative
usually enjoy picking out the influences
same here but some people definitely do i feel like. not itt, just in general, probably some critics
innovation is great but some can take it a step too far and disregard (building on) tradition which is bad imo especially considering how important it is for some forms of music
but ofc it can be lame if something is just a direct copy or something though years later
same here but some people definitely do i feel like. not itt, just in general, probably some critics
innovation is great but some can take it a step too far and disregard (building on) tradition which is bad imo especially considering how important it is for some forms of music
but ofc it can be lame if something is just a direct copy or something though years later
Critics hated early Zeppelin cause they were “derivative”
there are definitely different levels to it. someone who blends influences in a novel way, someone who doesnt invent much but still pays respect to the tradition and does it in a valuable way, or someone who might as well just be a lukewarm cover artist with no identity
Critics hated early Zeppelin cause they were “derivative”
link on that being the reason? i bet they were just disregarding any blues based music as looking too much into the past
good example of obviously taking influences from something but inarguably making something new out of it. despite a few dumbasses who probably claim that they werent originals at all. ofc the uncredited covers/occasional plagiarism thing complicates it as well as people not understanding the blues tradition but its not like songwriting was their major contribution to music
Hail Caesar ends a little too abruptly. Could have watched another hour in that world. Still what is there is like 4 star material.
Critics hated early Zeppelin cause they were “derivative”
Revisited all zep at work the other day and I probably would've been a hater of the first two tbh
Revisited all zep at work the other day and I probably would've been a hater of the first two tbh
as if they even sound that different from the rest
especially II which was the real crystallization of the sound
Revisited all zep at work the other day and I probably would've been a hater of the first two tbh
First one is above average but the second is a slog. Lemon Song
as if they even sound that different from the rest
especially II which was the real crystallization of the sound
3 and Houses are very different
First one is above average but the second is a slog. Lemon Song
They are kind of egregious too because they were ripping off blues standards without giving them the songwriting credit
They are kind of egregious too because they were ripping off blues standards without giving them the songwriting credit
I remember an iTunes review of Zep 1 said it was a Willie Dixon cover album
They are kind of egregious too because they were ripping off blues standards without giving them the songwriting credit
this would hit me differently if it was another genre besides the ones where half the standards were ripped off other ones anyway
They were their own thing by then
they were their own thing with I and that is their most significant album, and you know i can be a slight detractor of them sometimes
lowkey one of the more important albums in rock history ngl
this would hit me differently if it was another genre besides the ones where half the standards were ripped off other ones anyway
Yeah but how many of the British Invasion bands were doing slight rewrites to avoid giving up songwriting? Can't think of many
Also iirc they are still in court over Stairway intro which they might as well throw Spirit a frickin bone at this point cause i doubt they're living the cozy rockstar retirements they deserve