Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

A lot of bands have been reforming of late, Rage, the smashing pumpkins, crowded House, the police.

What do people think?, is this a good thing. I hope RATM dont sully their reputation.

I heard Zac De la Rocha drives a f@cking hummer or some other kind of monster gas guzzler, what a toss bag.

It's not a bad thing, whether or not it becomes a good thing is open to whatever happens.

I never heard about Zack driving a hummer, in fact, I've never known a great deal of musicians as uncomfortable with fame as he was/is.

Daron Malakian from System of a Down is the one who said he drives a hummer, not that it actually matters if you do your research.

-AC

I'm not sure Rage are officially back together. It looks like its going to be a one time only deal.

Well, Audioslave calling it quits won't hinder any such decision.

How much do you think what's happening here with these artists is that...

A) They're getting back together for the money

or

B) They are so lost with direction in their lives that the only thing they can do well and that brings them joy is to WANK out with their old band mates (who are most likely also in the same pathetic boat) and WANK out on their comfy old material.

Unfortunately...what the bands who reform aren't able to do well is write relevant music again. Sure they're gonna write "music"...and there's gonna be people who'll believe the hype, buy the albums, and go to the concerts...but again...It's all about having a clue...and if you have a clue...you know this is all just a joke.

Did he just say that Rage Against The Machine don't know how to write music?

Is that the guy who claims he has the absolute taste?

Wow.

Wow.

That's not what I said. Read it again.


..."WOW!"

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES


Unfortunately...what the bands who reform aren't able to do well is write relevant music again. Sure they're gonna write "music"...and there's gonna be people who'll believe the hype, buy the albums, and go to the concerts...but again...It's all about having a clue...and if you have a clue...you know this is all just a joke.

That's your opinion. "Having a clue", or not, is basically insinuating that fans of the band just buy it because it's there, instead of consciously enjoying the music, new or old, and see the band out of nosalgia. Just because you don't think it's inspired artistically doesn't mean it's a mindset shared by everyone.

What does that say for new fans of the band that just discover them?

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
How much do you think what's happening here with these artists is that...

A) They're getting back together for the money

or

B) They are so lost with direction in their lives that the only thing they can do well and that brings them joy is to WANK out with their old band mates (who are most likely also in the same pathetic boat) and WANK out on their comfy old material.

Unfortunately...what the bands who reform aren't able to do well is write relevant music again. Sure they're gonna write "music"...and there's gonna be people who'll believe the hype, buy the albums, and go to the concerts...but again...It's all about having a clue...and if you have a clue...you know this is all just a joke.

So, those two options are the only options because you say so? That's a bit pathetic isn't it?

A contradicts B.

They have enough money to do whatever they want in life, so your argument makes no sense. Zack has happily spent the last few years more or less in hiding, voluntarily.

I suggest you research bands before claiming things regarding them. If you can find time between listening to The Killers and Lily Allen, maybe you'll learn something.

-AC

Why is it a joke? Because a band that were amazing have gotten back together. Just because they are dosn't mean they have no other options, or maybe your carrying a flame for Cornell.

blowup

Thats a big flame

You guys don't get it.

Someone...please...let them see the light!

I like how this is just a thread asking about what we think of these reformations...but if we allude to them being negative then it's like..."Well...that can't be! Get outa here!"

Weirdos! (not you Core)

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
You guys don't get it.

Someone...please...let them see the light!

I like how this is just a thread asking about what we think of these reformations...but if we allude to them being negative then it's like..."Well...that can't be! Get outa here!"

Weirdos! (not you Core)

They can be negative, but they don't have to be.

Tom Morello continued to make relevant music after RATM, why should they suddenly lose the touch?

Though, as someone else said, it's probably a one time reunion anyways.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
You guys don't get it.

Someone...please...let them see the light!

I like how this is just a thread asking about what we think of these reformations...but if we allude to them being negative then it's like..."Well...that can't be! Get outa here!"

Weirdos! (not you Core)

You're posting under the pretense that they are negative. Atleast that's how it seems. I respect your approach, but it's really without merit. None of the reforming bands are in the poor house. Sting has never really stopped making music. It may be a one last hurrah..a thank you, for The Police, anyway. As for RATM, as long as politics exist, and people's personal political convictions are strong, RATM's music will be relevant

you really do love to speak about bands being relevant dont you?

relevant to what exactly?....to society?....to the youth?...

given they are fractured and apathetic respectively then its no wonder that so called "emo" is flourishing and genuinly great bands with passion like RATM get generally overlooked by the uneducated masses

I'd venture to guess "relevant" to today's musical standards. If relevancy were really an issue, AOR/Classic rock radio stations wouldn't exist.

Reunion tours for the sake of making money aren't always a bad thing if the demand is there and the artists are still physically capable. It's the album that comes after that you have to worry about, lol.

Originally posted by The Core
I'd venture to guess "relevant" to today's musical standards. If relevancy were really an issue, AOR/Classic rock radio stations wouldn't exist.



Well, relevancy could still be an issue, it's just that you'd have to include those within it.

Though I imagine it's now been thought about more than the sense in which it was used, which was 'bullshit'.

Are you American, EPIIIBITES?

-AC

It also looks like there might be an Operation Ivy reunion in the near future.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
Who is Brian Philips?
Hee hee! I was thinking of the Wilson Philips connection...

Brian Wilson! Sorry.



A band being relevant is partly determined by today's musical standards, social landscape and technological progress, but also with whether or not what the band are bringing to the table has any significance to the art or the evolution of music itself.

The Beatles making Sgt. Peppers in the 60s was the epitome of relevance...and you can even say (like 'em or not) Limp Bizkit making Significant Other in the 90s was also relevant.

Guess what? Limp Bizkit, although I love em, are no longer, and will probably never again be relevant...and neither would the Beatles if they were still around. Their stars have shone.

There are very, very few artists who remain relevant over a long period of time...It's incredibly hard to do, because it means being a sponge and an antenna for what's goin on in the world (both musically and socially), AND at the same time managing to hold close to the peak of your artistic powers. If one of those is missing, you're just not gonna be relevant.

For example, Lily Allen is actually quite relevant right now for a couple of reasons. For one, her music is ripe with modern sounds and production, modern youth rebellion and "individuality", and even modern party drug references...and most importantly it's all presented in a creative and fresh way. She is hip, she is smart, and she's made what is widely heralded as one of the best pop albums in recent years.

Aside from that, she's one of the first and definitely the biggest star whose take-off platform came in the form of a virtual community (MySpace)...very telling of the times.

Ignoramuses like you though have written her off simply because she's mainstream "pop", as if mainstream pop music has nothing to offer to the musical world.

Christ.

Limp Bizkit, The Backstreet Boys, Lily Allen, Kasabian, The Killers; This is the taste you feel puts you above us? Oh dear, anyway...

I've written her (Lily Allen) off cos she's shit, it has nothing to do with pop. Also, Lily Allen being relevant for the reasons you've said would basically mean that to you...relevance is just saying stuff about the modern world, regardless of how obvious it may be. Yet, you go on about relevance as if it's some unattainable thing. If it's that easy for Lily Allen to be relevant, anybody can be.

I asked you a question, are you an American?

-AC

So you're too scared to tell me whether you're American or not?

I guess it's because you know what I was going to say, and you're chicken shit scared.

-AC

As a London born Englishman, I can tell you your opinion of how much shit is or isn't accepted is completely wrong. You've assumed that because...? Oh, it's England. No other reason.

A girl comes along and sings about "English life" in an English accent and the simple minded American, with no sense of cultural diversity nor history, sucks it up like a fat little calf, regardless of whether it's true or not. However, to the point; Why did I ask your nationality?

Because as predicted, you're an anglophile, and therefore I laugh at you and your glorification of a certain country for one, over-generalised reason. You're a silly little wannabe Brit, but only ever end up being the stereotypical ignorant American. So caught up in the "We'll create our own reality." of modern Americanisation, that you've fallen under the blanket of illusion that has caused you to believe you have an accurate view of this country and it's culture, based on nothing. You fail, and I laugh at you.

-AC

Ohhhhhhhh! You're a Brit! So that automatically means you're the authority of British music...(which I know you're not because of the continuous examples of cluelessness you've given around modern music).

BTW...I'm not American...and you shouldn't make fun of them.

I'm Canadian...and I've had a lot more exposure to your backyard than you might think.

I know EXACTLY what you mean with people in North America sucking up anything British-pop...you shouldn't go out on a limb like that and assume I don't...becasue you just coudn't possibly know if I do or not.

Believe me...I know it better than you because I see it right in front of me, and I feel like slapping people who think Starsailor are the next BIG THING!

Jeez!

i would hazard a guess at the fact that AC being English and from London makes him better placed to gauge the relevancy of a musician (and i use the term loosly) who is English and from London and who sings about being English and from London, more accurately than someone who is neither from London nor England nor even the United Kingdom

now if by some degree of a miracle she is relevant to you in Canada...then please...take her away

let it also be said that she's not doing anything thousands of other UK Urban acts haven't been doing for the past 10 years...

singing about party drugs...hahaha...that'd be the drugs that the likes of the stone roses and happy mondays were singing about 15 plus years ago

perhaps (as is typical with Northern Americans) you need your relavancy to have absolutely no subtlety about it whatsoever and those artists who put their point across without the need to spell it out for the dumb and ignorant are shunned by the brainless mainstream audience.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Hee hee! I was thinking of the Wilson Philips connection...

Brian Wilson! Sorry.



Or maybe you just don't know what you are talking about.

Who knows?

(Me)
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES

A band being relevant is partly determined by today's musical standards, social landscape and technological progress, but also with whether or not what the band are bringing to the table has any significance to the art or the evolution of music itself.

The Beatles making Sgt. Peppers in the 60s was the epitome of relevance...and you can even say (like 'em or not) Limp Bizkit making Significant Other in the 90s was also relevant.

Guess what? Limp Bizkit, although I love em, are no longer, and will probably never again be relevant...and neither would the Beatles if they were still around. Their stars have shone.

There are very, very few artists who remain relevant over a long period of time...It's incredibly hard to do, because it means being a sponge and an antenna for what's goin on in the world (both musically and socially), AND at the same time managing to hold close to the peak of your artistic powers. If one of those is missing, you're just not gonna be relevant.

For example, Lily Allen is actually quite relevant right now for a couple of reasons. For one, her music is ripe with modern sounds and production, modern youth rebellion and "individuality", and even modern party drug references...and most importantly it's all presented in a creative and fresh way. She is hip, she is smart, and she's made what is widely heralded as one of the best pop albums in recent years.

Aside from that, she's one of the first and definitely the biggest star whose take-off platform came in the form of a virtual community (MySpace)...very telling of the times.

Ignoramuses like you though have written her off simply because she's mainstream "pop", as if mainstream pop music has nothing to offer to the musical world.

Hahaha. Good one, Epibites. Funny how when you define a term, you bring up more indistinct terms, like 'individuality' and 'modern youth rebellion'. Indicative of the fact that you are talking bullshit.

I don't write Lily Allen off. She's just another pop chancer.

What you have just said (or tried, desperately to say) is that relevance is some sort of zeitgeist. So essentially, things are relevant if they appeal to the prevailing trends, as decided by random idiots.

Apparently music is relevant if it is trendy and socially bonded to current events, as determined by fools in the NME and other such pieces of trash.

Great. Relevant music sounds excellent. Such a brilliant way to judge musical quality. It must be, actually, if Lily Allen is an exemplar.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Ohhhhhhhh! You're a Brit! So that automatically means you're the authority of British music...(which I know you're not because of the continuous examples of cluelessness you've given around modern music).

BTW...I'm not American...and you shouldn't make fun of them.

I'm Canadian...and I've had a lot more exposure to your backyard than you might think.

Where did I say that? I said it makes me more of an authority on what the culture and standards of British music are like, because I live here and you...well you're just guessing.

You've not had more exposure to English music and culture than me though, have you? That's like me saying I know more about Canada because I love it there.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I know EXACTLY what you mean with people in North America sucking up anything British-pop...you shouldn't go out on a limb like that and assume I don't...becasue you just coudn't possibly know if I do or not.

Believe me...I know it better than you because I see it right in front of me, and I feel like slapping people who think Starsailor are the next BIG THING!

Jeez!

For someone obsessed with relevance, you can't apply it to your debates.

-AC

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
Who knows?

(Not me)



I never lost control.

This is what I'm really curious about...

The Core hasn't given his response yet. I have a feeling...just a feeling...he has enough insight into this particular topic that he would generally agree with how I've attempted to define relevancy, and that he wouldn't go on record (as you fools have) to totally discard what I've said about it.

And coming into the argument at this point, I think he has a good enough perspective to admit that I've successfully pointed out how you lot have put forth pretty lame arguments to the contrary.

Actually...what am I saying. The Core...agreeing with me?

For some reason that line "I love the smell of napalm in the morning" has come to mind.

I really feel like that guy this morning...don't know why.

Are you that insecure that you really have to monologue three posts in a row? Seriously? Can't you just post everything at once, instead of panicking, feeling scared, and attempting to win something you've already lost by posting many times?

Seriously, why the triple posts? Just post once with everything in it. It's not that hard.

Also, you didn't reply to my post. You're a wannabe Brit anglophile, that's why you love everything to do with Britain, well, your opinion and perception of Britain is entirely wrong, fact. I'm telling you that as one that lives here, was born here.

How many times have you even visited England? London, specifically?

I think it's endearing how you are the one telling yourself that we're lame, and that you've won.

You make shit points, we counter them, and you ALWAYS, without fail, say "You don't get it! *Crying*". You're pathetic, little Brit wannabe.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I think the song “Angels” is a great song (whether you do or not is beside the point…we’re talking about how I’m defining relevancy)…but I don’t think it’s at all relevant. It doesn’t have to be in order to be great.

And your taste gets worse. I didn't think it was possible.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
It would only matter if she was singing about stuff that happened ONLY when the Mondays and the Roses were around. What a CRAP point! Oh what, we can't sing about war songs any more cause CCR ad Hendrix did it in the 60s??? Yes, that is what you're saying with your lame example.

"You don't get it!!!".

You couldn't sing about Vietnam and be relevant, because it's long gone. You could sing about Iraq and be relevant, because that's now. He's not referring to the concept of an anti-war song, just the time in which they're set.

Furthermore, Lily Allen really isn't singing about anything relevant that isn't blisteringly obvious. "London can be a bit bad, people get mugged and do drugs.", yes, I know, I've lived in one of the worst parts of London for 21 years while she was living with her rich, comedian father.

I can tell you for a fact that your view of her is biased because you're a Brit lover, because any aware Londoner would tell you that she's not saying anything special or new, or good. Only NME idiots who want to believe they are "in" and "cool" are citing her as fresh because they believe they are getting an insight into London life and youth culture. You're not and they aren't either. She's some buttered up little rich girl would wouldn't know trouble if it bit her face off.

She's on Jonathan Ross's talk show in designer clothing with her posh mum, what does she know about how bad London can be? Nothing. What do you know about it, as a Canadian? Much less than even her.

You're uneducated, and I expect everything I've said to be dodged as a result.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
She's some buttered up little rich girl would wouldn't know trouble if it bit her face off.

She's on Jonathan Ross's talk show in designer clothing with her posh mum, what does she know about how bad London can be? Nothing. What do you know about it, as a Canadian? Much less than even her.
You clearly don't know anything about Lily Allen's life...and you entered an argument completely uninformed...Again, just shot yourself in the foot.

Amazing! You seriously have a knack for proving you're completely clueless. Truly incredible how bad you get time after time.

You excel at incompetence in pretty much all areas. You're weak in your knowledge, logic, musical insight, and character.

I feel my soul and brain are actually starting to rot just by talking to you.

(...and again, I'm sticking it to you cause you're a punk)

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
You clearly don't know aything about Lily Allen's life...and you entered an argument completely uninformed...Again, just shot yourself in the foot.

Amazing! You seriously have a knack for proving you're completely clueless. Truly amazing how bad you get time after time.

Dunno, Wikipedia agrees with him...but whatever...I'd like if RATM would make another Album.

That's Wikipedia!

Are you serious?

How about hearing her story from her?...or from a more reliable source.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
That's Wikipedia!

Are you serious?

How about hearing her story from her?...or from a more reliable source.

Alright, provide me with it.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
You clearly don't know anything about Lily Allen's life...and you entered an argument completely uninformed...Again, just shot yourself in the foot.

Amazing! You seriously have a knack for proving you're completely clueless. Truly incredible how bad you get time after time.

You excel at incompetence in pretty much all areas. You're weak in your knowledge, logic, musical insight, and character.

I feel my soul and brain are actually starting to rot just by talking to you.

(...and again, I'm sticking it to you cause you're a punk)

So how about an actual reply to my post? Can you manage that, or are you too insecure, scared and wrong?

I don't need to know about her life to know she's a poser. I'm from the city she sings about, one of the worst parts. I've lived here 21 years, and I know a damn sight better about my own country and it's culture than some wanna be Brit. That was the point, you don't have the backing to talk about how relevant my country's music is in general, how much is accepted, how much isn't, or what's accurate and what isn't. You don't live here.

I happen to know for a fact that Lily Allen is talking crap, you believe her cos you're just sucking up anything from Britain.

I said you'd dodge everything, I was right.

Also, as for you bashing Wikipedia:

"Allen is accused by some of cultivating a chav image, but she actually enjoyed a highly privileged upbringing, attending the private schools Hill House and Bedales, famous as one of the five most expensive schools in the UK.".

That's true, isn't it? That's not made up, and she's said so herself. So what business does she have of talking about how bad London life is? She has no clue. That's precisely why her "social commentary" is limited to "People get mugged, do drugs etc". Because that's a given in any city. She can't pinpoint specific experiences outside of having problems with her boyfriend, because she's a sheltered little rich girl faker.

-AC

...don't know if I'll be able to find what I saw on tv or read in whatever I read it in. And not about to waste my time trying to search for it either.

What do you know about Lily Allen (apart from Wiki-"knowledge" to suggest otherwise?

...skedaddle!

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
...don't know if I'll be able to find what I saw on tv or read in whatever I read it in. And not about to waste my time trying to search for it either.

What do you know about Lily Allen (apart from Wiki-"knowledge" to suggest otherwise?

...skedaddle!

Well, I also asked Allmusic.com

With her omnivorous musical tastes and cheeky attitude, London-based pop singer/songwriter Lily Allen made a name for herself almost as soon as she released her demos on the Internet. The daughter of comedian Keith Allen, Lily spent most of her childhood bouncing from one school to another -- in fact, she attended 13 different schools between the ages of five and 15. This constant moving meant she didn't have much of a chance to make lasting friendships, so Allen entertained herself with books and, especially, music: she listened to everything from T. Rex, the Specials, and the Slits to the Happy Mondays and drum'n'bass, and even ran away to see the Glastonbury Festival when she was 14.


And that kinda goes along with AC said...so, I don't know why you say he doesn't know anything about her...

I hope RATM do reform, i couldnt care less about the others.

I think the world needs bands like that, especially now

He's dodging the point, it's not about whether I know anything about her or not.

It's about the fact that she is a poser and he's using her as some anglophilic gauge of English culture because she sings about "life" and has an English accent, when anyone from here will tell you she's just being general.

Dizzee Rascal, whom I dislike, has more accurate descriptions of London than she does, because he's actually been involved in some of the bad shit that goes down. I know this because I know him, I went to school with him. Lily Allen looks up to him because he sings about shit she wishes she could sing about.

She's a faker, and that's a fact. No uneducated Canadian is going to prove me wrong.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Can you manage that, or are you too insecure, scared and wrong?
Go away. My brain's gonna explode!!

You are completely incapable of grasping concepts, understanding music, and being a man. As a result, I don't want to talk to you.

You're an insufferable little punk kid.

Thought so.

My work here is done.

-AC

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, I also asked Allmusic.com

With her omnivorous musical tastes and cheeky attitude, London-based pop singer/songwriter Lily Allen made a name for herself almost as soon as she released her demos on the Internet. The daughter of comedian Keith Allen, Lily spent most of her childhood bouncing from one school to another -- in fact, she attended 13 different schools between the ages of five and 15. This constant moving meant she didn't have much of a chance to make lasting friendships, so Allen entertained herself with books and, especially, music: she listened to everything from T. Rex, the Specials, and the Slits to the Happy Mondays and drum'n'bass, and even ran away to see the Glastonbury Festival when she was 14.


And that kinda goes along with AC said...so, I don't know why you say he doesn't know anything about her...

WHAAAAAAT???

While I was reading that, I was waiting until the part that actually alluded to anything to the effect of "posh" or "buttered up" or "rich".

Could you have found a more HORRIBLE quote to back yourself up with?

Are you guys all that incompetent?

That was freakin hilarious!!!

Even if you're suggesting she had privileged beginnings...things changed.


And what does all this have to do with anything??

AC, you're some piece of work. You've totally taken the argument away from relevancy to try and prove I don't know anything about Lily Allen and Britain.

????

Is your lame point that she can't write about the times because she wasn't as poor as you think she needs to be to have any idea about what she sees around her....what??? Did you even get a high school education???

I honestly can't do this anymore, this is just insane!

...Be back later when there's actually something good to talk about. Not gonna argue with a 10 year old.

She is the daughter of a comedian and a film producer and she attended a rather pretigous boarding school...

I mean. Come on. ...come on? Please?

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
AC, you're some piece of work. You've totally taken the argument away from relevancy to try and prove I don't know anything about Lily Allen and Britain.

????

Is your lame point that she can't write about the times because she wasn't as poor as you think she needs to be to have any idea about what she sees around her....what??? Did you even get a high school education???

I honestly can't do this anymore, this is just insane!

...Be back later when there's actually something good to talk about. Not gonna argue with a 10 year old.

I own you, haha.

My point is that she can't credibly and realistically talk about how bad London life is because she hasn't experienced it, which is precisely why her "special", "fresh" and "witty" "social commentary" is limited to such over-generalised observations as "People get mugged and do drugs".

So therefore, you using her and artists LIKE her to determine your view of what British culture and musical culture is like, is faulty, because her description is faulty. So don't sit there and tell me what music is accepted, what music isn't, and what my country's culture is like. I wouldn't sit there and tell you about Canada, I've been there once. Me loving the place (Or at least places I've been) doesn't qualify me as an authority on it, like you and Britain.

So before you go putting Britain on a pedestal based on what you think you know, come here and live here for a while, then make your judgement. Don't listen to Lily Allen and assume you know about British life.

About relevancy: What's so special about her? She's talking about relationships and problems the city has. She's not being especially relevant to a specific cause with any kind of intelligence, like Bob Dylan would, or System of a Down would. She's being about as relevant as 2pac; "The world/London is shitty.". Yes, thank you for that profound observation, I was quite unaware that my city can be the pits, living in East London (Which, I believe, has the highest murder rate of any part of London, not sure if that's still the case). I'm sure she gained all the London life experience when she attended three of the top five most expensive private schools in the UK.

You know nothing about that which you base your opinions on. I do.

The reason you're shitting yourself is because you know you can't debate me on my own country's culture, I've lived here for 21 years, it's unknown as to whether or not you've even stepped foot here.

Of course, this post won't be met with a significant reply. You will pick and choose which parts to twist and reply to, if any, before telling me I don't get it and running away.

-AC

I'm not reading your post. You're a very silly man, and this is totally lame.

And somehow I'm the 10 year old? You're sitting there, essentially going "Lalalalala notlisteningtoyou!".

I love how I've reduced you to one liners, you cretinous lump.

-AC

Originally posted by Bardock42
Though I assume you won't.
That's right, I absolutely won't. It defies the point...the point being I'd have to justify myself to people who don't know what they're talking about in the first place. No thanks. The truth is out there...find it yourself.

PS. I commend you for having the guts to be honest. Maybe you're not as feeblish as some of these other goofs are.



...and AC, still haven't read your post...that's what you get for being a joke of a conversationalist. You used your weaselish tactics one too many times to be bearable anymore.


Back to relevancy or reuniting bands then...or something.

EPIIIBITES:

You said relevance was talking about modern terms, correct?

Then what stops RATM or Smashing Pumpkins singing about those issues?

First, I'd like to say thank you for changing the subject.

But no, I didn't say relevance was: "talking about modern terms".

Read it again.

He just ignores everyone who whoops him, or just their points, Rocas.

He talks of being a man and not being immature, yet he just ignores my post because he KNOWS I have him beat every single time.

-AC

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
First, I'd like to say thank you for changing the subject.

But no, I didn't say relevance was: "talking about modern terms".

Read it again.

Then how is Lily Allen relevant again?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
He just ignores everyone who whoops him, or just their points, Rocas.

He talks of being a man and not being immature, yet he just ignores my post because he KNOWS I have him beat every single time.

-AC

I'm just going to try. If he ignores me, it'll probably be a godsend.

So then...you do or don't want an answer to your question?

See what I mean?

Possibly the biggest willful idiot ever witnessed on KMC.

-AC

?

He asked me a question.

Go away, feeble little child.

He asked you a question and you then ask him if he wants an answer, when it's quite clearly not rhetorical?

Do you see the idiocy?

Also, no. I'll stay and hammer home every mistake and idiotic remark you make, seeing as you've been so childish as to ignore me now I've proven you wrong.

-AC

?

AC. I really feel sorry for you. I really do.

It doesn't much sadder than this.

Go back to the Recently Banned forum where you belong you silly man.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Also, no. I'll stay and hammer home every mistake and idiotic remark you make, seeing as you've been so childish as to ignore me now I've proven you wrong.
You're a winner.

Originally posted by RocasAtoll
If he ignores me, it'll probably be a godsend.
Sorry, but that last part kinda threw me off dude...

Oh my.

That's good. Keep it goin' you musical layperson. You and AC have just gone on record and basically said "Angels" is actually a bad song. You really got the musical smarts...no, really.

Anyone else wanna jump in?

Come on. It's free! Seriously...let's all see whose on board.

Angels...

Wait, just to clarify...Angels by Robbie Williams?

You believe this is a good song?

-AC

remind me...was it you that said this



pick your chin up...there's a good boy

neither fresh nor new nor relevant...0 out of 3...you're doing well son...

not to mention



2 words...arctic monkeys...and no i dont like them...and even though they're shite...they're alot more relevant that lily allen...who lets not forget has a celebrity father...and thus isn't exactly best suited to describe youth culture...given that she went to a private school

you say a band is only relevant if they use new technology...so that makes every single guitar band in existence completely irrelevant?

cause i can assure you the white stripes are far more relevant (not to mention musically gifted) than the vast majority of bands who rely on technologically produced dirge.

but its good that you see the flaw in that your intepretation of relevancy is debatable...cause everyone here knows its completely wrong

Originally posted by jaden101
i would hazard a guess at the fact that AC being English and from London makes him better placed to gauge the relevancy of a musician (and i use the term loosly) who is English and from London and who sings about being English and from London, more accurately than someone who is neither from London nor England nor even the United Kingdom

now if by some degree of a miracle she is relevant to you in Canada...then please...take her away

let it also be said that she's not doing anything thousands of other UK Urban acts haven't been doing for the past 10 years...

singing about party drugs...hahaha...that'd be the drugs that the likes of the stone roses and happy mondays were singing about 15 plus years ago

perhaps (as is typical with Northern Americans) you need your relavancy to have absolutely no subtlety about it whatsoever and those artists who put their point across without the need to spell it out for the dumb and ignorant are shunned by the brainless mainstream audience.

Just because people listen to mainstream music doesn't mean their brainless, you stupid, stupid person.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
That's right, I absolutely won't. It defies the point...the point being I'd have to justify myself to people who don't know what they're talking about in the first place. No thanks. The truth is out there...find it yourself.

PS. I commend you for having the guts to be honest. Maybe you're not as feeblish as some of these other goofs are.



...and AC, still haven't read your post...that's what you get for being a joke of a conversationalist. You used your weaselish tactics one too many times to be bearable anymore.


Back to relevancy or reuniting bands then...or something.

Do you understand what 'burden of proof' is?

On the original thread topic, I'm hoping that the RATM reunion becomes something more than just a single concert; I did say when that was announced that I wouldn't consider it anymore than just a remote possibility, but it's definitely more of a possibility than it was when the reformation was announced, as Audioslave is gone...

Originally posted by Arctic
Just because people listen to mainstream music doesn't mean their brainless, you stupid, stupid person.

the fact that they dont get subtle references makes them dumb...and the fact that they only listen to mainstream music makes them ignorant...

so off with you youngster...come back when you

a: learn to read things in context

b: formulate a decent opinion

and c: learn the difference between their, there and they're

What's that one 2Pac song?

"Me Against the World"?

If ever there were a relevant musical analogy for a thread..

Originally posted by The Core
What's that one 2Pac song?

"Me Against the World"?

If ever there were a relevant musical analogy for a thread..

haha...you notice nobody is siding with EPIII...he claims its a personal vendetta yet most of the people haven't actually had any other discussion with him other than this one...

Pass the popcorn.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
So then...you do or don't want an answer to your question?

Why yes. I would like to know why Lily Allen is relevant.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Sorry, but that last part kinda threw me off dude...

Just going by public opinion. I'll withdraw that and apologize.

Originally posted by jaden101
the fact that they dont get subtle references makes them dumb...and the fact that they only listen to mainstream music makes them ignorant...

so off with you youngster...come back when you

a: learn to read things in context

b: formulate a decent opinion

and c: learn the difference between their, there and they're

Screw you elitist bastard. Your opinion is that because people listen to mainstream music they are ignorant? Yeah, thats definitely what I would call a decent opinion. And also, be sure to come up with another witty and intelligent sounding comment that makes you sound like even more of a jerk.

Oh and by the way, this isn't an english class so shut the hell up about grammar, no one cares about grammar on a stupid message board.

Originally posted by Arctic
Screw you elitist bastard. Your opinion is that because people listen to mainstream music they are ignorant? Yeah, thats definitely what I would call a decent opinion. And also, be sure to come up with another witty and intelligent sounding comment that makes you sound like even more of an jerk.

You have no right to call others elitists, Arctic.

Yeah, I do. He thinks just because people listen to mainstream music they are ignorant, and that because he listens to whatever music he listens to makes him more intelligent. I would call that elitist.

You learn English in class so you can use it properly outside of class.

Yeah but on a message board? I might use it correctly on a story I'm writing or something like that, but I'm not going to be monitering it on a message board. And I usually even use good grammar on message boards, but I don't want to be corrected when I make a mistake.

Well, people have to read and understand it.

I'm not saying confusing the odd there/their is a crime, but my point was it does matter outside of class.

Anyway, to reply on topic:

I think the reformations could possibly be good.

It all depends on how good the music is. Nothing else, even in RATMs case. **** the politics.

Originally posted by Arctic
Yeah, I do. He thinks just because people listen to mainstream music they are ignorant, and that because he listens to whatever music he listens to makes him more intelligent. I would call that elitist.

No, you don't. You are an elitist, so therefore have no right to accuse others.

I'd like to know when elitism in itself became a bad thing.

As if people who accept any form of bastardised art are better just because that have more variation of shit.

-AC

Originally posted by RocasAtoll
No, you don't. You are an elitist, so therefore have no right to accuse others.

I am, huh? I'm not the one claiming people who listen to a different type of music than me are ignorant.

And AC, why in the world would elitism ever be a good thing?

On your side Arctic. Jaden's comments were all quite pointless.

They were very much representative of the warped reactions you get from most people here.

Warped minds who only like to see what they wanna see just so they can come out of an argument to appear (usually to themselves) that they've won at all costs.

Truly sad.

Can you guys believe this???...and this is what happens all the time with this guy...
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You say Tom Petty isn't relevant because he doesn't make good music
And here's what I had just finished saying...
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
-Not because he doesn't make good music anymore...I still think he makes quality music though.
WOW! It truly is a miracle how bad this guy is at this stuff...oh and here's another!!!
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Again, I'm just looking at these artists according to my definition of being relevant. Go ahead and disagree with the definition itself...but if you start defending the individual examples then you're missing the point.
That's right...he missed the point.

AC...you are a phenomenon. Seriously

Go away...you're a child...no, no... yes you are.

It's truly a wonder to see that these guys are so whoopped up in a frenzy, that they don't even realize how confused they've made themselves.

I was asked to give a definition of "relevant", and since then it's basically been...

PROVE THAT LILY ALLEN ISN'T RICH!!!

ANGELS ISN'T A GOOD SONG!!!

RAGE AGINST THE MACHINE ARE SOCIALLY CONSCIOUS!!!

...as opposed to offering a different definition of "relevant" and not obsessing over why my self-contained examples don't work within my own criteria.

I'm going to REPEAT that again...

...as opposed to offering a different definition of "relevant" and not obsessing over why my self-contained examples don't work within my own criteria.


Can anyone take a guess as to why that hasn't happened???

...the term "rabid dogs" comes to mind.

Can you please stop panic posting? It's really sad.

Second, if you're going to pick and choose what parts to reply to, and then not even properly reply to the parts you pick, shut up and don't reply at all, because that's not debating.

Third: "-Not because he doesn't make good music anymore...I still think he makes quality music though.".

He doesn't make good music...but he still makes quality music? Read that back to yourself you retard.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
He doesn't make good music...but he still makes quality music? Read that back to yourself you retard.
Right. I asked..."Tom Petty. Relevant? Again, I'd say no."

...not because he doesn't make good music (meaning, my point isn't that he makes bad music...If you had anyidea of how to look at things in context - ESPECIALLY since my last example what the opposite of this one - then you would get what I was saying...and I added "he makes quality music" at the end just in case people like you wouldn't get it.

Solid!!

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
So, you see, if you make a silly 'point', and use incorrect criteria in your judgement, then people will call you on it...

What are you on about you strange, person?

Know when you've been schooled and be quiet!

I made a post about Rage not being able to make a decent comeback, and you ASSUMED I thought they were never a great band. Brilliant. Good work.

And then I made a second post with a completely different focus...you argued that post, and I schooled you.

Again, know when you're beat...and be quiet.

Now you're saying..."but from what I got from your first post...and then the second post...b-but the first post"

Are you serious? That's what you came back here to say?

Again...pathetic, weaselish, wanting to drag a point out of nothing.

Get real.

Hey here's an idea...

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I'm going to REPEAT that again...

...as opposed to offering a different definition of "relevant" and not obsessing over why my self-contained examples don't work within my own criteria.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
What are you on about you strange, person?

Know when you've been schooled and be quiet!

I made a post about Rage not being able to make a decent comeback, and you ASSUMED I thought they were never a great band. Brilliant. Good work.

Come on, little one! Surely even you can see where you're going wrong? The reasoning you used for saying they wouldn't make a decent comeback is because they weren't 'relevant' - here's that word again, 'relevant'. You based your whole ass(umption) on criteria that has no bearing - as you belatedly acknowledged - on musical quality. Please can you at least attempt to wind your neck in.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
And then I made a second post with a completely different focus...you argued that post, and I schooled you.

Again, know when you're beat...and be quiet.

Now you're saying..."but from what I got from your first post...and then the second post...b-but the first post"

Are you serious? That's what you came back here to say?

Again...pathetic, weaselish, wanting to drag a point out of nothing.

Get real.

When you masturbate I bet you think of 'us' gang-banging you, don't you?

What's that? Huh? We just bukkaked all over you? Lick it up, special boy. We know that's what you're here for.

That was funny...

...but you're still poo!

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo




When you masturbate I bet you think of 'us' gang-banging you, don't you?

What's that? Huh? We just bukkaked all over you? Lick it up, special boy. We know that's what you're here for.


Hahahahahaha, I thought that was AC's job, don't make it any easier on him, or else you'll be on cleanup doody.

AC sent me a PM the other day saying that his skin is now really soft (Welcome!), so he thinks the love juice should be shared (OK!).

Originally posted by Arctic
Screw you elitist bastard. Your opinion is that because people listen to mainstream music they are ignorant? Yeah, thats definitely what I would call a decent opinion. And also, be sure to come up with another witty and intelligent sounding comment that makes you sound like even more of a jerk.

Oh and by the way, this isn't an english class so shut the hell up about grammar, no one cares about grammar on a stupid message board.

If you'd bothered to read my post correctly you'd have understood it. They're is a word in there (unintentional piss taking) and that word is ONLY. Now, generally people who make no attempt to go beyond what is rammed down their throats by corporate radia and tv stations are ignorant, both in a musical context and in general.

I notice you've given up on the dumb argument.



You just got ***** slapped from me and everyone else in this thread...so you're biased...

double post

you really have descended into farcical posting

I've seen five year olds with the same debating style as you which is the internet equivalent and sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling "NA NA NA NA NA NA NA"

Originally posted by jaden101
double post

Triple one might even claim.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Triple one might even claim.

Woah, you're good.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Woah, you're good.

You taught me well.

Indeed.

Teach me what love means...

Please.

oh dear god...it never ends

Ahhh, yes...eternal love.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Ahhh, yes...eternal love.

Eternal Love is now on my trail
Got my red glitter coffin, man, just need one last nail
While all these ugly gentlemen play out their foolish games
There's a flaming red horizon that screams our names


Well...close enough.

Oh...there's a comma. I always thought it was a red glitter coffin man.

I wondered why that made no sense.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
Oh...there's a comma. I always thought it was a red glitter coffin man.

I wondered why that made no sense.

Ha...haha....

Originally posted by jaden101
you really have descended into farcical posting
Shut up, you've lost.

Go away!

Seriously they have. They are just too stupid to admit it.

Haha, I love the way he's so desperate for people to side with him that he's recruiting the Nickelback fan.

-AC

Wait a sec...looking that up...

Yes...you're right Ya Krunk'd, that does apply.





(hee hee hee...I actually mean it applies the other way around, but "shhhh"...he doesn't know that)

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
-EB

(...I mean who does that? Seriously?)

You, apparantly.

I'm still trying to work out if this is all a joke or if you do actually believe you know about music.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I'm still trying to work out if this is all a joke or if you do actually believe you know about music.
I'm absolutely certain you are AC.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Wait a sec...looking that up...

Yes...you're right Ya Krunk'd, that does apply.





(hee hee hee...I actually mean it applies the other way around, but "shhhh"...he doesn't know that)

Hmm, interesting. Funny and sophisticated use of parenthesis, but it would be factually incorrect if it was used in the way you describe.

Let me break it down for you:

You think that if a majority of people are calling you out for being an imbecile, then it's because you're not one. Whereas the most logical and factually correct answer is because you are one.

Do you see where you went wrong there?

I knew you'd say that!

It can be very much used the other way around because me and my proof are calling you lot out as well...and I'm bold enough to suggest that my army of logic is as valid as it appears to be.

Don't sweat it...

You and your proof = Robbie Williams' musical credibility.

Do you see what I did there?

Nope, "Angels" = musical credibility to be exact...way to go on record as well. That's you, AC, and VVD who have shown you don't have an innate ability to determine what good music is. I KNOW I do...that's the difference small fry.

For someone who professes to 'know good music', why are you always stuck on the same pathetic tune?

...and what tune is that?

Originally posted by EPiBITES

"Angels" IS a good song.

Wooo-hooo! You know it brother!!

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
...what tune is that?
Self-awareness is more than just looking in the mirror.

Dinsosaur Jr have reformed and recorded an album too, it sounds pretty good.

Also i heard that The Jam were going to reform without Paul Weller

Yeah...what's with all this stuf...even the Spice Girls are in on this as well. Trendy I guess.

Of course, I will throw the whooping in gratis. Start off with a small one and then build up to a huge idiot (You) posting along on his own for aaaaages.

You'll post your top off, you're babbling.

-AC

This argument just keeps going around in circles...

There hasn't been a debate for ages, he's lost every one he's been in. He just thinks that sticking around and denying everything means he hasn't lost.

-AC

SHUT UP ALREADY!!!

You're a baby!

Uh oh, he's losing it...

Maybe if you stopped ignoring my civil posts due to being scared of them, this wouldn't happen. Now you can just spend time tasting your own medicine.

-AC

Unbelievable...

It's truly horrible and annoying isn't it? Now imagine what it's like for everyone else here coping with that which you do.

-AC

Again, unbelievable...

It's a two-way street buddy.

I'd like to hear some new RAtM, it would be interesting.

Pumpkin's new CD comes out in July. Looking forward to it! Not sure if they were able to recruit James Iha or D'arcy Wretzky, but we'll see.

Originally posted by RocasAtoll
So she relevant because she has modern themes and how her music sounds?

Then what, again, keeps RATM or Smashing Pumpkins from evolving?
I'm not sure you got all of it though. It's what you said, AND "it's been done in a very innovative and fresh way musically".

I'll tell you right now that I don't think Allen or MIA have what it takes to be as relevant over as long a period of time as The Pumpkins were...

But...as I said earlier about bands who have already been around a while maintaining relevance..."it means being a sponge and an antenna for what's goin on in the world (both musically and socially), AND at the same time managing to hold close to the peak of your artistic powers."

I think the Pumpkins, for as well as they've done in the past on the musical end of things, don't have their mojo anymore...the same goes for Rage. I don't think they'll offer anything new to the table or make a significant, fresh contribution to music today. So I think they're done.

Of course I can't prove that...the same way I can't "prove" that Sgt. Peppers was one of the most relevant albums in rock history, but I've learned to develop a sixth sense about this stuff...and if you are looking for some kind of proof, then just look at the track record of MOST bands in the past who have attempted to do the same...it's overwhelmingly been pretty bad.

That's as best as I can explain it.

Thanks for being patient.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Haha, I love the way he's so desperate for people to side with him that he's recruiting the Nickelback fan.

-AC


Hahahahaha

Nickelback.

Hahahahahahahahaha.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I don't think they'll offer anything new to the table or make a significant, fresh contribution to music today.

But you just said that those artists (M.I.A and Allen) are relevant, partially because they speak about the now, which anybody could do. So in that sense, The Pumpkins and Rage can quite obviously be relevant to what's going on today.

That's one use of the word relevant, I'm not sure what nonsense you're talking about when you say being relevant by being innovative.

-AC