Is this a sign of the apocolypse?

I like this cover

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reeOOA4Ha7M

carguy123 wrote: Commercial crap that makes her millions just proves lots of people like it which is the definition of good taste. As they say the proof is in the pudding. If it makes a lot of money then people must like it.

Uh, no?

We had this discussion during the recent election we had up north here; the vast majority of people are retards. No, like, if you look at IQ numbers, isn't 100 supposed to be average? That means 50% of a countries population is below that (give or take, work with me here!). I've met people with an IQ of 100 or less, and it scares me! It also goes to show that there can be a lot of retarded, misguided young people who hop on the band wagon to fit in while listening to E36 M3ty music.

Whoever said Nirvana felt real or had soul or whatever is correct. He actually cared for the music. Not like the pop-garbage that is forced on us nowadays. And she isn't even a good singer to boot, doesn't matter how good your music is if you can't sing.

So you're saying that only a select few are the arbiters of good taste?

It doesn't matter what the masses want or like we must protect them from themselves?

To the OP's original question: Yes, yes it is. The headline says it all.

uncle al

carguy123 wrote: So you're saying that only a select few are the arbiters of good taste? It doesn't matter what the masses want or like we must protect them from themselves?

Yes, I am saying that the "arbiters" of good taste are a relative select few. Just like the arbiters of "common sense" are actually a select few as it doesn't seem so common. It's no different than asking a wise-person for advice, you do so because they are wise and you heed their advice.

It's like having Oprah recommend a diet or excercise program over insert any health-famous-person. I think I know whose advice I'd take...

As for protecting them from themselves, I never said force them to do anything. It's not good taste to have relations with your cousins, even if some people in the south think so (THAT'S A JOKE!)

ditchdigger wrote: Wait....... These aren't the signs of the apocalypse?

So if I'm reading that sign right, the Hanna Montana Harbinger of the Apocalypse concert starts at 7:30?

I guess it will be a short tour.

And it looks like the Jonah(s) brothers will be there from 3-8 as well!

HiTempguy wrote:

carguy123 wrote: So you're saying that only a select few are the arbiters of good taste? It doesn't matter what the masses want or like we must protect them from themselves?

Yes, I am saying that the "arbiters" of good taste are a relative select few. Just like the arbiters of "common sense" are actually a select few as it doesn't seem so common. It's no different than asking a wise-person for advice, you do so because they are wise and you heed their advice. It's like having Oprah recommend a diet or excercise program over *insert any health-famous-person*. I think I know whose advice I'd take... As for protecting them from themselves, I never said force them to do anything. It's not good taste to have relations with your cousins, even if some people in the south think so (THAT'S A JOKE!)

Hmmm, now we're setting up a class system. What's the criteria for becoming one of the elite arbiter of good taste. We're talking a slippery slope here.

carguy123 wrote: We're talking a slippery slope here.

First off, that is a pretty big stretch.

Second of all, we already have a caste system, its called politics.

Edit- And you may think everyone is equal, I sure don't (I've seen it with my own eyes). Not everyone is the same, not everyone is as "smrt" as everyone else. As I said in my joke, just because some people "believe" something does not make it right.

mtn wrote: I keep wondering whether she's going to go down the "Britney Spears Route" or the "Pop/fake country" route. This doesn't put her down either, but at least it puts her farther from the "Britney" route.

As much as I have no interest in her music, she actually appears to be pretty pretty self aware, image conscious, career minded, and sane.

I see her going down more the Justin Timberlake route; slowly evolving and updating her performance persona as she matures and musical tastes change. But still not being something I listen to.

carguy123 wrote: If a lot of people don't like a certain music that's just proof it's not very good. Commercial crap that makes her millions just proves lots of people like it which is the definition of good taste. As they say the proof is in the pudding. If it makes a lot of money then people must like it.

Yep. Which is why Budweiser is the best beer in the world.

And the Front wheel drive cars are substantially superior to RWD.

She did a credible duet with Joan Jett, on some talk show the other day (maybe Oafra). Cherry Bomb was a great fit.

HiTempguy wrote: Uh, no? We had this discussion during the recent election we had up north here; the vast majority of people are retards. No, like, if you look at IQ numbers, isn't 100 supposed to be average? That means 50% of a countries population is below that (give or take, work with me here!). I've met people with an IQ of 100 or less, and it scares me! It also goes to show that there can be a lot of retarded, misguided young people who hop on the band wagon to fit in while listening to E36 M3ty music. Whoever said Nirvana felt real or had soul or whatever is correct. He actually cared for the music. Not like the pop-garbage that is forced on us nowadays. And she isn't even a good singer to boot, doesn't matter how good your music is if you can't sing.

It's around 110, and is actually a sliding number that's constantly being adjusted (today's 110 was yesterday's 120, for example).

Dumbass!

On a somewhat related note:

Foo Fighters > Nirvana

Yeah. I said it.

Also, while some covers are better than the original, some are far, far worse. Even when covered by their original artists. I provide this as proof.

jg

1988RedT2 wrote:

Zomby woof wrote: Paul Anka does Nirvana Paul Anka does Van Halen

Oh, damn! That E36 M3 rocks!!

I must admit I have the CD simply because I couldn't believe it was true.

It made me sad because I imagined my life when I'm in my 70's listening to some lounge singer doing exactly the same thing....

-Rob

JG Pasterjak wrote: Also, while some covers are better than the original, some are far, far worse. Even when covered by their original artists. I provide this as proof. jg

That would have been interesting if they just had an acoustic guitar, bass, and either mandolin, slide, or banjo. As it was, it just sounded silly. And that was without David Lee Roth missing every note.

Some guys here are taking all this way too seriously. There's always been "pop" music. It's short for popular. It's meant to be consumed like candy. Styles and flavors come and go.

There's other music that has more staying power. Some like it some don't. Again different styles and flavors.

For her sake I hope she goes more of the pop-country path. It seems to have a slightly better chance for personal survival.

Britney went the Madonna path, but compressed Madonna's 20 year career into 2 years. I don't think anyone could survive that intact.

I agree with JG on the Foo Fighters > Nirvana. I never got what the big deal was with Nirvana. I was in their listener demographic (yes a "commercial music" reference) at the time they first broke. Never saw the big deal. Of the Seattle "grunge" movement, I preferred Soundgarden. Of all rock musicians ever to come out of Seattle, Jimi is still the best.

For the younger members here, Smells Like Teen Spirit was a deodorant for teenage girls before Nirvana wrote the song. I'm sure the commercials inspired the song. I did find the humor in that. So having Miley singing it seems to bring it full circle.

Osterkraut wrote: It's around 110, and is actually a sliding number that's constantly being adjusted (today's 110 was yesterday's 120, for example). Dumbass!

Really? That's not what the wiki gods say:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient

Edit- Obviously, the median is "set" as 100, and with the creep, I guess you could say you are right compared to 20 years ago, but who compares IQ scores from 20 years ago to now?

poor miley the biz has her stoned and worked to death--public stoning american style. on top of all thaaaaaat, she's starting to baaaahhh like stevie nix

JG Pasterjak wrote: On a somewhat related note: Foo Fighters > Nirvana Yeah. I said it. Also, while some covers are better than the original, some are far, far worse. Even when covered by their original artists. I provide this as proof. jg

I actually had the Foo Fighter vs Nirvana conversation at work last week. It was my stance that, while I hold Nirvana high, they couldn't compete with Foo Fighters today.

John Brown wrote:

JG Pasterjak wrote: On a somewhat related note: Foo Fighters > Nirvana Yeah. I said it. Also, while some covers are better than the original, some are far, far worse. Even when covered by their original artists. I provide this as proof. jg

I actually had the Foo Fighter vs Nirvana conversation at work last week. It was my stance that, while I hold Nirvana high, they couldn't compete with Foo Fighters today.

especially without a guitar player

Per Schroeder wrote: Only tangentially on topic--just wanted to bring these gems out. Some covers can be just as good as the original--if not better. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8261446656697194112# or even better: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2965592541240207203#

Let's bring it full circle then.

Cheese does Nirvana too.

In reply to HiTempguy:

Anyone who makes a claim the population is getting dumber, for starters.

Rob_Mopar wrote: Some guys here are taking all this way too seriously. There's always been "pop" music. It's short for popular. It's meant to be consumed like candy. Styles and flavors come and go.

You're right that it's a topic too easily and too often taken too seriously.

That being said, I do think that popular music has declined as a result of the record companies figuring out that marketing has a greater ROI than scouting new music does.

From Elvis Presley to Elvis Costello, and many others before, between, and beyond, there's been a lot of popular music that didn't suck. Some of it was even really clever and had insightful lyrics.

You can manufacture popular music, but not necessarily good music. There are certainly plenty of people who enjoy the pop I hate and whose enjoyment isn't lessened by my grouchiness (and why should it be?), but I stand by my assertion that our musical experiences are diminished and depleted by the marketing-and-lawyers approach...