Song You're NOT Listening To...

[CubbiefanMike]

Jefferson Airplane Starship

Greatful Dead

Bruce Springsteen (although I am starting to like some of his albums.. earlier ones.)

Jon Bon Jovi (any of the hair bands from the 80's yuck!)

Van Hagar

Eddi Brockell & the Bohemiams

Rap

most motown

[CubbiefanMike]

Ira... Yardbirds is Led Zepplelin but without the good studio quality.

Led Zeppelin.

Always realized they had something special...Never liked the sound though...Prefer their great grandfathers "The Yardbirds".-Ira.

[CubbiefanMike]

Very deep cuts Hollies... I prefer the hits.

#2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWs8Ia71L-Q&feature=related

[CubbiefanMike]

Blackhawk Pat shame shame... Chicago is the 2nd biggest fan base of Rush... next to Canada. If my memory serves me correct the Rush debut album outsold Styx album that came out the same year. Spinal Tap was actually making fun of bands like Black Sabbath, Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple and the Beatles. Rush has never sung about Sex Drugs and Rock & Roll the lyrics have alot more depth to them.

I'm going to say a group that I know a number of people here like, but I just don't see what is so good.....Rush. I even have a nephew named "Neal" after the drummer. Never liked them.

To me, they sound like a band making fun of "Spinal Tap".

I'm also not listening to Bob Dylan, the Grateful Dead, or Simon and Garfunkel (though I do like Art as a soloist). Sorry, just not my cup of tea. Even bought a few albums to see what I was missing.

I wasn't.

[blackhawkpat]

Well, the next time I get the urge to hear the fourteen minute version of "Temple Of Syrinx" or "Cygnus X-1", will be the first.

Mike, if I ever win free tickets to see Rush in Chicago, I promise, they're yours, buddy!

[JohnO]

Generally, over the past 10 or so years, I'd say there's a 90-95% chance that I'm NOT listening to anything on the Billboard charts.....

Guys - lighten up here! This is a like/dislike thread, and NOT a detailed critical analysis. All of this "I can't believe you don't like (fill in the blank)....it's obvious you haven't really listened to them......because they're a great artist!!!!" Hell, there are tons of great (and very popular) artists whom I can't stand, as far as listening to their music.....WHO CARES?????

[wimvriezen]

I am...he wrote and sang two classic songs... 'Jennifer Tomkins', and 'Timothy'.

What about "Give up your guns" by the Buoys twice a Top 10 hit over here in Holland!

Without Rupert Holmes later on the Buoys recorded the sensational: "Look back America"!!!

[CubbiefanMike]

BlackhawkPat Havent seen them since the Vapor Trails tour... will have to take you up on the offer. It seems to me most people that criticize Rush have not really listened to them... they are very talented and have won numerous awards in Canada... even Marvin will have to admit to this.

Well, the next time I get the urge to hear the fourteen minute version of "Temple Of Syrinx" or "Cygnus X-1", will be the first.

Mike, if I ever win free tickets to see Rush in Chicago, I promise, they're yours, buddy!

[CubbiefanMike]

The Raspberries and the Beatles are better.

Quote:

Originally posted by boopell:

Yeah...I sort of feel guilty.

Yup you should. The Bee Gees and the Beach Boys are two of the greatest muscial acts EVER.

[marvin]

Oh yeah Rush is huge in Canada, and have always been, but I've never been a fan. Not my style.

[CubbiefanMike]

Marvin your support of Rush is like most peoples support of The Raspberries here in the USA. Some countries just dont appreciate their own talent.

[marvin]

Marvin your support of Rush is like most peoples support of The Raspberries here in the USA. Some countries just dont appreciate their own talent.

Well there's slight difference: Rush is surviving just nicely without my support. They sell zillions of albums. The Raspberries need everyone's support.

[CubbiefanMike]

Which Rush albums do you own... if any.

[JohnO]

"Well there's slight difference: Rush is surviving just nicely without my support. They sell zillions of albums. The Raspberries need everyone's support."

As do most, if not all, of the obscure bands that the likes of Hollies65, Popdude (when he posted), and I have posted about over the past few years here.....unlike, let's say The Eagles, Jackson Browne, or Springsteen!

P.S. If you don't like Rush's music, that's fine. I don't either.

[marvin]

I don't own any albums by Rush. Other than a song here and there, their music has never done anything for me. Not the case with Springsteen, the Eagles, Browne and others.

[JohnO]

I was just looking at a week-old Billboard, and noticed the weirdest thing. I own exactly 1 CD that was in that particular Top 40....and it was the #1 one! (AC/DC - Black Ice). I'd be willing to bet this has never happened before with me.....

P.S. I also own nothing by Rush. Great musicians, but their music just doesn't float my boat. I almost did pick up that covers album they did several years ago, though.

[Billy K.]

I've been a bit burned out on early Beach Boys...

and this is coming from a big fan. I really enjoy the later stuff. And yes, I cringe every time "Be True to Your School" is on the radio.

And the reverse is true with Journey. Perry is great, but I'd prefer listening to EARLY Journey.

Billy Joel.....only because he hasn't really done nothing lately.

I don't listen to the majority of the "hair bands"....never did like White Lion or Skid Row. Rap, there are a few cuts here and there, but by and large I don't care for it.

Also, these jazz and jazz-pop artists who try to convince you as being "sophisticated".....i.e. Ambrosia, Spyro Gyra, etc.

And I don't listen to those who try too hard showing off--even though they are blessed with a good set of lungs(i.e. Bolton, Mariah).

And certainly not the overrated John Mayer.

[wimvriezen]

About Rush:

I loved their single: "Spirit of the radio"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Tq-UsaRchI

and so I bought their album "Permanent waves" in the early 80's...

[Daisy McLintock]

Also, these jazz and jazz-pop artists who try to convince you as being "sophisticated".....i.e. Ambrosia, Spyro Gyra, etc.

Hello Billy K. I am curious. Can you explain to me in what way(s) you think Ambrosia tries to convince?

The reason I ask is because I've always loved Ambrosia and have always felt that they never needed to convince anybody because David Pack is a very talented musician who's got a very flexible vocal column. In my boat, being able to sing octaves puts you into a cut above the rest. Pack won a Grammy and is Producer & Music Director to Global Events.

[hollies65]

"early Beach Boys"...if you omit alot of the hits...makes for top notch listening. For every 'Be True To Your School' there are three 'Let Him Run Wild' or 'In The Back Of My Mind'.

[Billy K.]

OK, Daisy, there is no question that the guys in Ambrosia have some talent. The first few albums were great, but they decided to change styles. Which is fine, musicians need to grow.

But the thing that bothers me is it seems(in my own opinion)is that later on, the songwriting seems to be a bit forced/contrived. I'm not sure if anyone else on the board seems to feel that way, but it appears to me that it is.

I know that a lot of people think of Toto in the same terms.....phenomenially good musicians, great arrangements, with songs that are solidly structured.....but not exactly grabbing you emotionally.

The "Old" Ambrosia had some really great songs, in a unique style. Although "You're the Biggest Part of Me"(later on)is solid, it's not any more special than what Hall and Oates would offer. But at least Daryl and John do sound convincing. Whereas that era of Ambrosia appears--at least to me--more of a calculated, production line approach. (Label pressure, perhaps?)

Quite a contrast from the very original/unique sound of "Holding Onto Yesterday" and "Nice Nice Very Nice".

I'm usually "open-minded" when making an assessment of somebody's music. However, this one incident that happened kind of put away any chance of wanting to get a second chance at their music.

Back in the early 80s, some of my friends in LA went to see them at a club(along with other bands). They did get to talk to them after the show....which ultimately turned out to be talking high and mighty about themselves, and talking "trash" about other bands. I wasn't there, but my friends were a bit disappointed and disgusted with these guys.....

Not exactly an incentive for me to want to check out any of their more recent material....

[Daisy McLintock]

Musicians, actors, directors, royalty -- they can all be snooty at times, I fully agree, and it's no fun when you hear of it or see it for yourself. I'm not famous obviously, but I often wonder if I was, would I be that way, too? God help me if I was.

Alright, turning to the Ambrosia tables now.. I am not in favor of any musician changing styles unless their sound is so bad that it needs altering. Let me clarify this just a little.

If a band is recording music but not selling any of it, then yes, maybe they ought to change styles a bit. But, if they are selling their music then changing styles could be a big taboo. It's kinda like, don't fix what's not broken.

Now, I disagree with you on "musicians need to grow," and maybe I just don't understand what you mean by that. Can you explain that a little more? Do you mean grow in an upward direction, as in an upward swing on a graph? Or do you mean grow as in changing genres? Can you maybe name some examples of a band that grew? How do you define better? Making more money? Attracting a larger fan base? Just so that you know, I personally do not define "better" as making more money or amassing a larger fan base. Heck, rap makes money but it is nothing more than a kid pressing some buttons in a recording studio.

I don't know, Billy. Music to me has always remained on a horizontal level -- some songs are good, some are not so good, but to change genres is a very drastic thing in my opinion.

If you want to talk improved music, you could take a plain song (I didn't say a BAD song) and add some instrumentals to it. A good example of this would be Bill Withers "Ain't No Sunshine." A great, great song without any extras. Agreed? Okay good. The song doesn't need extras to sound better. Bill playing the guitar alone is fine.

But, to "improve" this song you could add more instrumentals to it. Still, that would be improving music, not improving personal growth, so, I guess I'm still a little confused.

One last thing. I'd take Ambrosia over Hall & Oats.

[hollies65]

Hall & Oates over Ambrosia...7 days a week!

I own Abrosia's best record...their first.

[marvin]

I'm with Steve on this one. I love the first Ambrosia album, and David Pack is a fine talent, but there is no way I'd take Ambrosia over H&O.

[Billy K.]

Daisy, the point on the "needing to grow"....many artists are compelled, at a certain point, to make some changes. There are some cases, where it is a case of economics(i.e. Maroon 5, who did not do well, when they called themeselves something else and did a slightly different style).

In most cases, the artists themselves feel a need of "creative" growth after a few years.....hence, we have such albums as "Taking it to the Streets", "Sgt. Pepper", "Hotel California", etc.

So not neccessarily about money. And there are some artists that are satisfied with doing "more of the same", and could care less about expanding their style(i.e. AC/DC, George Thorogood).

Personally, I was a bit surprised that Ambrosia shifted gears that early on(third? album, I think?) They sold a respectable amount of albums.

It does puzzle me why they made the style change at that time....nothing needed to get "fixed".

The timing of the L.A. incident also was bad, which was around the same time.......so, two decades have past since then.....maybe it's time for me to actually take an objective look, and not just assume anything.

So, in all fairness, and since you are knowledgable on what they do, please let me know what songs you would recommend. And, of course, a bit what has happened since "Life Beyond L.A."