The Strokes

Originally posted by jaden101

Vic

so what your saying is kerrang will put a shit band on the cover to get sales...then slaughter them in the article...nice exploitation...i like it...where as NME do there piss taking of shit bands in a way other than that which caters for angry 13 year olds...so i dont really get your point because obviously their styles are going to be different in the way they deal with bands they dont like

Kerrang is given a sales mandate. The journalists themselves choose not to follow that line when they interview or review, which is to their credit.

What's the angry 13 year olds remark about? I'm not angry, or 13. If there's an applicable stereotype here, it's sarcastic trend-following students that the NME actively fosters.

While I consider myself extremely well-versed in music, I definitely know what is, and what is not, bad writing.

NME journalists have a pathetic writing stance, which is to never commit to anything for fear of appearing wrong, or uncool. The only interesting writer they ever had was Steven Wells, and that was because he despised all the others.

Kerrang! has some genuinely excellent writers such as Ian Winwood and Neil Kulkarni (Ex-of the Melody Maker which had the beating of the NME every week bar in sales.)

That's the point you failed to get.

Originally posted by jaden101

both of you have this weird attitude that if NME backs a good band from the outset then its somehow a fluke of taste...if they back the same band after they get some commercial success then they are jumping on the bandwagon....but when kerrang do it then it must be great journalism and for the love of music...a strange viewpoint

It is a strange viewpoint. You might like to point out where I held it.

Well with viewpoints as ignorantly non-moving as "The Darkness are shite and they always will be", what's the point? You're the kind of person to deny it because you don't like it. I'm not gonna spend my time proving things for you to go "Nah." I've done that too much in the 60s band thread.

am i saying the darkness are technically shit musicians...no im not...im saying they make shit music...which they do

you still haven't proven that one band is technically better than another...your resorting to the same excuse you always do

you also seem to be saying that because a drummer plays fast that makes him a technically god drummer...when its pretty much well accepted by drummers that jazz drumming is technially better than metal drumming...yet not as fast

fast doesn't equate to good...

you may also remember that we established that with guitarists...even technical ability doesn't equate to good

it can be shown that joe satriani is a far more technically accomplished guitarist than jimi hendrix...because thats what satriani has dedicated his life to doing...does it make him a better guitarist?...no

Like I said above, I've gave you examples using Mastodon. Deny them as you will.

i'm not denying their ability....i'm questioning your ability to prove that they are technically better musicians

take the band that this thread is about...the strokes...can you prove they are or are not technically accomplished by listening to their albums....because on that basis you could assume from the simplicity of their riffs, drums and bass...that they are totally pish...but they can probably play faster and more complex stuff than their albums show

Do you listen to NME's champions and then listen to Mastodon and think "Bloc Party have the dexterity and talent to play this well"? If you do, you're baffled.

no...i've already told you but you obviously didn't bother reading it...i dont swallow every band NME harps on about as the greatest thing since sliced bread...but when i listen to the bands i like...i think "hey...good song...good album...i like"....when i listen to mastodon's hail to fire or blood and thunder, i think "pish...noise...here comes a new metal band...same as the old metal band"...

although i can just about stomach elephant man

but thats me...i make my desicions of bands on hearing them...not on which magazine features them

Find me a guitarist in those bands who doesn't play variations of the same song, in every song.

i'm presuming by this you mean that when they play live they play different versions of the same song

personally thats something i prefer...i dont want to pay to go to a gig just to hear the songs from the album played exactly as they are on the album...a little bit of change is good...counting crows being one of my favourite bands who change their songs in just about every gig they play...razorlight done the same thing when i saw their small gig...it was an acoustic set and the ability to change the same song to fit different styles, to me, makes for a talented musician

It is a strange viewpoint. You might like to point out where I held it.

was it not you who said when someone mentioned a band that they were "a bit too NMEish for me"

perhaps not...

Vic

"seething" wells was a good writer...but for some reason i think you prefer him simply because of the music he promotes rather than his writing...and him hating everyone was kind of the point...much is the likes of "red eye" who writes for edge...but given that his other persona was a susan williams says alot about him

i guess now he makes a living writing about how shit other writers are...enter playlouder.com...guess what...i dont care how good or shit the writers are...i give a shit about how good or shit the bands are

Originally posted by jaden101
am i saying the darkness are technically shit musicians...no im not...im saying they make shit music...which they do

Well they don't but that's clearly a no budge issue for either of us.

Originally posted by jaden101
you still haven't proven that one band is technically better than another...your resorting to the same excuse you always do

Really?

Originally posted by jaden101
you also seem to be saying that because a drummer plays fast that makes him a technically god drummer...when its pretty much well accepted by drummers that jazz drumming is technially better than metal drumming...yet not as fast

fast doesn't equate to good...

I never said fast equated to good, I used speed as one facet of his technical ability which, should you have forgotten, was/is what we are/were discussing.

Originally posted by jaden101
you may also remember that we established that with guitarists...even technical ability doesn't equate to good

Yep. We're discussing technically though.

Originally posted by jaden101
it can be shown that joe satriani is a far more technically accomplished guitarist than jimi hendrix...because thats what satriani has dedicated his life to doing...does it make him a better guitarist?...no

I've said this many times. I'm sure you'll say something disproving me soon.

Originally posted by jaden101
i'm not denying their ability....i'm questioning your ability to prove that they are technically better musicians

Despite the fact that you overlooked the examples I gave you? I can't make you agree their music is better. They are better on their instruments though, how is that provable? Technically. Technically doesn't equal good but that's what we're discussing isn't it.

Originally posted by jaden101
take the band that this thread is about...the strokes...can you prove they are or are not technically accomplished by listening to their albums....because on that basis you could assume from the simplicity of their riffs, drums and bass...that they are totally pish...but they can probably play faster and more complex stuff than their albums show

They don't play overly simple stuff, but I do, in part agree with what you're saying. However, my point was, if you listen to two bands. One of the calibre of Mastodon then one of say Franz, Bloc Party or The Libertines, would you sit there and think "Hmm, Franz could play this music." Or "Bloc Party are as technically efficiant." I doubt it.

Originally posted by jaden101
no...i've already told you but you obviously didn't bother reading it...i dont swallow every band NME harps on about as the greatest thing since sliced bread...but when i listen to the bands i like...i think "hey...good song...good album...i like"....when i listen to mastodon's hail to fire or blood and thunder, i think "pish...noise...here comes a new metal band...same as the old metal band"...

Well that's clearly due to your lack of ability to appreciate heavy metal isn't it. Because Mastodon are quite different to alot of metal bands of recent years, it's not traditional heavy metal at all.

You think "pish same old" but you read NME, who champion bands who actually do sound EXACTLY like each other. Literally. Maximo Park, The Kaiser Chiefs. All part of this new wave that seems to be stemming from the midlands.

Originally posted by jaden101
although i can just about stomach elephant man

but thats me...i make my desicions of bands on hearing them...not on which magazine features them

Same as me then.

Originally posted by jaden101
i'm presuming by this you mean that when they play live they play different versions of the same song

No Franz Ferdinand song is drastically different. The only band who can claim to have some kind of difference between songs is Bloc Party and even then it still stems around the same structure and similar hit and miss sound.

Originally posted by jaden101
personally thats something i prefer...i dont want to pay to go to a gig just to hear the songs from the album played exactly as they are on the album...a little bit of change is good...counting crows being one of my favourite bands who change their songs in just about every gig they play...razorlight done the same thing when i saw their small gig...it was an acoustic set and the ability to change the same song to fit different styles, to me, makes for a talented musician

You're missing my point. I agree with you. But to claim that alot of the bands I've mentioned don't play exactly the same....ALL the time would be rather oblivious. Keane, Athlete, Embrace, Thirteen Senses....

-AC

Originally posted by jaden101

was it not you who said when someone mentioned a band that they were "a bit too NMEish for me"

perhaps not...

It was me. That's because the current NME bands are a pile of shite, as proven by their album of the year polls for the last couple of years. They used to be fairly good.

Originally posted by jaden101

"seething" wells was a good writer...but for some reason i think you prefer him simply because of the music he promotes rather than his writing...

No, I liked his writing. The man claimed Let Me Entertain You was the greatest lyrical performance ever so I don't think I agree with the man's taste.

Originally posted by jaden101

i dont care how good or shit the writers are...i give a shit about how good or shit the bands are

Well, if you are reading a music magazine, you won't get anywhere near the good bands if the writers don't know what they're doing.

Kind of my point.

Yep. We're discussing technically though.

the only thing we are discussing on technical ability is your inability to prove that one band is better than another...

I've said this many times. I'm sure you'll say something disproving me soon.

once again...i'n not the one saying either is better than the other...you are...so the burden of proof is on you...not me

Despite the fact that you overlooked the examples I gave you? I can't make you agree their music is better. They are better on their instruments though, how is that provable? Technically. Technically doesn't equal good but that's what we're discussing isn't it.

what examples....because someone said so...thats no different from you saying so...still doesn't prove anything either way...

no point in discussing it further because i know...and you know...that you cant prove anything

They don't play overly simple stuff, but I do, in part agree with what you're saying. However, my point was, if you listen to two bands. One of the calibre of Mastodon then one of say Franz, Bloc Party or The Libertines, would you sit there and think "Hmm, Franz could play this music." Or "Bloc Party are as technically efficiant." I doubt it.

once again...i'm not saying anything either way...perfect example being Ryan Adams...he's known for being a predominantly acoustic player...from his music you wouldn't think he had the right skills to play anything other than his alt country stylings...then you listen to the finger (his project with jesse malin) and their album "we are **** you" and can see how his ability stretches a wide variety of music

i'm guessing its the same with a lot of musicians...just because they choose not to play every song as fast as their sweaty hands will allow...doesn't mean that they cant

and i really dont know why you keep mentioning bands i dont even like...ie franz ferdinand, embrace, athlete

Well that's clearly due to your lack of ability to appreciate heavy metal isn't it

i dont think it is...i've got quite a bit of metal in my collection...from sepultura, machine head, Deftones etc...do i listen to it as much as my mellower stuff...no...thats just what i'm into though...music for moods and all that

You think "pish same old" but you read NME, who champion bands who actually do sound EXACTLY like each other. Literally. Maximo Park, The Kaiser Chiefs. All part of this new wave that seems to be stemming from the midlands.

i can flip your argument on its head...just cause you don't hear the difference...doesn't mean that i don't

Well, if you are reading a music magazine, you won't get anywhere near the good bands if the writers don't know what they're doing.

so that can be translated as "you wont get anywhere the good bands if you dont have the same taste as the writer"

i dont see how you two just cant admit that the magazine caters for people who listen to music that you dont like...at least i have the honesty to admit that kerrang focuses on a genre that on the most part...i dont like...hell...i even tell you that i dont like the vast majority of the stuff that NME writes about

Originally posted by jaden101
the only thing we are discussing on technical ability is your inability to prove that one band is better than another...

Sweet retort and everything, but we're not discussing me, factually. Are we? No. Let's press forward.

Originally posted by jaden101
once again...i'n not the one saying either is better than the other...you are...so the burden of proof is on you...not me

I've shown you where I get what I believe, and why. I can't magically kick up your iTunes and show you what I'm talking about. I'm good, but not that good.

Originally posted by jaden101
what examples....because someone said so...thats no different from you saying so...still doesn't prove anything either way...

Who said what? What are you jibber jabbering on about? I gave you basis on which I believed Mastodon were the better technical band than the bands I mentioned. I can't make you go listen to it and agree with me, I even have you a situational example of which my proof stands.

Originally posted by jaden101
no point in discussing it further because i know...and you know...that you cant prove anything

Stop being intentionally oblivious and start realising what I've said, why I said it and in what context. You're clearly ducking, diving and dodging each and every point I've made.

Originally posted by jaden101
once again...i'm not saying anything either way...perfect example being Ryan Adams...he's known for being a predominantly acoustic player...from his music you wouldn't think he had the right skills to play anything other than his alt country stylings...then you listen to the finger (his project with jesse malin) and their album "we are **** you" and can see how his ability stretches a wide variety of music

i'm guessing its the same with a lot of musicians...just because they choose not to play every song as fast as their sweaty hands will allow...doesn't mean that they cant

and i really dont know why you keep mentioning bands i dont even like...ie franz ferdinand, embrace, athlete

Jaden! JADEN! I'm over here with my point that you missed.

My point was, judging by the limited range you've heard from a band like Bloc Party (who are supposedly oh so innovative), do you listen to them play, or listen to ANY "NME" band play and think "I believe these guys could play what Mastodon play"?

As for the bands, this is about NME being a shit magazine. That's what we're primarily discussing. So I'm showing you examples of bands that NME believe to be the best.

Originally posted by jaden101
i dont think it is...i've got quite a bit of metal in my collection...from sepultura, machine head, Deftones etc...do i listen to it as much as my mellower stuff...no...thats just what i'm into though...music for moods and all that

Mastodon are considerably heavier in alot of ways than those bands and more melodic in many. To claim that they are just noise is purely ignorant because you can tell quite evidently from parts of their heavier songs and even their instrumental melodic songs, that they aren't.

Originally posted by jaden101
i can flip your argument on its head...just cause you don't hear the difference...doesn't mean that i don't

Let's be honest though. If you compare Mastodon, Sepultera, Machine Head, Shadows Fall. There are massive differences. Any differences between those bands I mentioned are minute enough that to be detected you have to actually have the time for their boring, samey music. Which defeats the point anyway.

-AC

Originally posted by jaden101

so that can be translated as "you wont get anywhere the good bands if you dont have the same taste as the writer"

That's right. NME writers don't know what they are doing. That's the problem.

Originally posted by jaden101

i dont see how you two just cant admit that the magazine caters for people who listen to music that you dont like.

Firstly, stop addressing me with AP, I'm not arguing with him, if he wants to join in with what is going on, it's nothing to do with me.

Secondly...that's exactly what I am saying. It's no big concession is it?

NME caters for people who listen to music that I don't like.

I said it. I've been saying it all along. What's your point?

Stop calling me AP you mincing boy hungry idiot.

-AC

Originally posted by Alan Centauri
Stop calling me AP you mincing boy hungry idiot.

-AP

K

My point was, judging by the limited range you've heard from a band like Bloc Party (who are supposedly oh so innovative), do you listen to them play, or listen to ANY "NME" band play and think "I believe these guys could play what Mastodon play"?

yes i do...and you cant prove that they dont have the ability to do so...and therin lies the flaw in your argument...you dont know how good (technically) they are...neither do i

I've shown you where I get what I believe,

which is pretty much irrelevant and doesn't prove anything...case closed

I can't magically kick up your iTunes

dont use iTunes...sorry... 😉

As for the bands, this is about NME being a shit magazine. That's what we're primarily discussing. So I'm showing you examples of bands that NME believe to be the best.

i thought we were discussing technical ability of musicians...my mistake

Stop being intentionally oblivious and start realising what I've said, why I said it and in what context. You're clearly ducking, diving and dodging each and every point I've made.

i'm the one ducking and diving?...i think not...i ask for proof and you give me "do you think they can play the tunes mastodon play?"

thats not proof...show me that they definitely cant play mastodons stuff and i'll give you your due...but we both know that you cant do that

Any differences between those bands I mentioned are minute enough that to be detected you have to actually have the time for their boring, samey music. Which defeats the point anyway.

i'm sure i've said this exact same thing before...but if you cant tell the difference between bloc party and keane...given that one uses guitars and bass and no piano...and the other uses piano and no guitars and bass...then you really aren't all that qualified to make a statement

I even have you a situational example of which my proof stands.

WHERE OH WHERE...PLEASE SHOW ME WHERE...because you saying that you dont think they can doesn't consiture proof

NME caters for people who listen to music that I don't like.I said it. I've been saying it all along. What's your point?

that is my point...kerrang caters for bands i think are shit...therfor kerrang is shit...pretty much the same point as you...

That's right. NME writers don't know what they are doing. That's the problem.

in your opinion...oh sorry...in wells' opinion...or are they one and same?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Stop calling me AP you mincing boy hungry idiot.

-AC

a side question to lighten the mood

whats the beef between you two...just curious

Originally posted by jaden101

that is my point...kerrang caters for bands i think are shit...therfor kerrang is shit...pretty much the same point as you...

Except it's not though is it? My point is that NME is, at the moment, shit writers writing about shit bands and shit, sarcasm drenched, self-made trends.

You said that 'hell...i even tell you that i dont like the vast majority of the stuff that NME writes about'

What exactly are you still arguing about then?

It's not even Kerrang! vs NME, I didn't bring Kerrang! into it, AP did. You might have the same point as him, not as me.

Originally posted by jaden101

in your opinion...oh sorry...in wells' opinion...or are they one and same?

Not sure what you're on about there but you're entertaining yourself it seems so far be it from me to ruin it.

As for your other post: AP is just the Denis Leary to my Hicks. No big deal.

Originally posted by jaden101
yes i do...and you cant prove that they dont have the ability to do so...and therin lies the flaw in your argument...you dont know how good (technically) they are...neither do i

I never claimed that it was stone cold fact, but from experience, which is all we have, I find it EXTREEEEEMELY unlikely than any NME band could pull off Blood and Thunder, or furthermore, write it. Or Aqua Dementia, or any Mastodon song.

You truly believe the likes of Maximo Park have that in them? Don't be foolish.

Originally posted by jaden101
which is pretty much irrelevant and doesn't prove anything...case closed

No cases closed here because I use a back pack. Second, it does, you're just being very ignorant aren't you? As I just proved in the above post.

Originally posted by jaden101
i thought we were discussing technical ability of musicians...my mistake

Yeah, we are currently. Or were, because you saw fit to raise the issue. I was always about showing why NME are shit.

Originally posted by jaden101
i'm the one ducking and diving?...i think not...i ask for proof and you give me "do you think they can play the tunes mastodon play?"

The proof is in the pudding as it were. I've asked you if you believe those bands can play what Mastodon do, you say yes. Then you go ahead and say you don't know how talented they are, so you're contradicting yourself. Given the nature of music produced and the amount of ability shown on so-called "developed" records by bands I mentioned, when compared to Mastodon (bearing in mind that both sides likely aren't showing off), pale in comparison. So if what Mastodon do technically on record is still better than what Maximo Park etc are doing on record, it IS logical to deduce that if they were to max out and completely let rip, they would leave all the dull and pointless bands in the dust. You don't like Mastodon, therein lies the barrier.

Originally posted by jaden101
thats not proof...show me that they definitely cant play mastodons stuff and i'll give you your due...but we both know that you cant do that

I see what you've done, you've gone confused. My original point wasn't to do with specific Mastodon songs, you've made it that way. It was a question, that question was: When you listen to Bloc Party etc, do you sit there and think "These guys can play to THE LEVEL AND WITH THE DEXTERITY AND ABILITY of Mastodon."? It wasnt specifically aimed at Mastodon's songs. Anyone can pull off a shitty cover of Blood and Thunder.

Originally posted by jaden101
i'm sure i've said this exact same thing before...but if you cant tell the difference between bloc party and keane...given that one uses guitars and bass and no piano...and the other uses piano and no guitars and bass...then you really aren't all that qualified to make a statement

I specified that they are the only band with any kind of difference didn't I? I also didn't specifically compare Bloc Party and Keane.

Originally posted by jaden101
WHERE OH WHERE...PLEASE SHOW ME WHERE...because you saying that you dont think they can doesn't consiture proof

That'll be your little secret won't it? Try reading my posts and not misreading my questions, then all will be revealed.

The point of this whole debate was to establish the fact that NME are trend fellating morons. Kerrang aren't.

Not who thinks who's magazine is shit.

Originally posted by jaden101
a side question to lighten the mood

whats the beef between you two...just curious

No beef, we know each other. He's a shit.

-AC

Originally posted by Alan Centauri

No beef, we know each other.

-AP

You might notice coincidentally that the rare occasions the 'man' talks sense, he is using one of my original points with all the dexterity of an epileptic brain surgeon.

During severe strobe effects.

Why does everything have to come down to me being some how mentally damaged with strobe effects?

And stop calling me AP.

-AC

As for your other post: AP is just the Denis Leary to my Hicks. No big deal.

oh stinger...hicks has it every time

No beef, we know each other. He's a shit.

and a mystery (from my viewpoint) is solved...i've just always been amused by the banter between you two..

The point of this whole debate was to establish the fact that NME are trend fellating morons. Kerrang aren't.

and we already established that kerrang will gladly plug the popular to get the sales....that means trend followers (regardless of the genre) and hence they do articles of bands like feeder

The proof is in the pudding as it were. I've asked you if you believe those bands can play what Mastodon do, you say yes. Then you go ahead and say you don't know how talented they are, so you're contradicting yourself.

and i'm also saying that you dont know either...so cant prove anything

it IS logical to deduce that if they were to max out and completely let rip, they would leave all the dull and pointless bands in the dust.

but is it?...you cant assume without knowing some facts about their ability

i did wonder when you would get around to citing the genre of music that a band plays are evidence of their technical ability...given that one isn't applicable to the other then it doesn't matter

if a drummer is playing a basic rock beat with little else thrown in, as fab moretti, as alot of the songs dictate simplicity...then you could ASSUME that he is a shit drummer because he isnt hammering them fast and tight and timed as many metal drummers do (because the genre as a general prinicple dictates that they do)

does that mean that you can therfor say that fab is a worse drummer than most metal drummers when it comes to technical ability?

no it doesnt

but we're going round and round on our merry-go-round as we always do

i dont like metal...you dont like indie...thats what it generally boils down to...the rest is just bells

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
You might notice coincidentally that the rare occasions the 'man' talks sense, he is using one of my original points with all the dexterity of an epileptic brain surgeon.

During severe strobe effects.

Why does everything have to come down to me being some how mentally damaged with strobe effects?

as the poofs from "chewin the fat" would say

I ONLY COME HERE FOR THE BANTER

😛

Originally posted by jaden101
oh stinger...hicks has it every time

We agree, at least.

Originally posted by jaden101
and a mystery (from my viewpoint) is solved...i've just always been amused by the banter between you two..

Some of the shit he posts, I doubt anyone else gets. But yeah, that's why there's probably been no bans.

Originally posted by jaden101
and we already established that kerrang will gladly plug the popular to get the sales....that means trend followers (regardless of the genre) and hence they do articles of bands like feeder

I'm not a huge Feeder fan, can listen to them. I have one of their albums.

Anyway, that's for sales as stated. All mags do it, but it's who does it solely. Kerrang are clearly more about the music than NME are, for reasons already stated.

Originally posted by jaden101
and i'm also saying that you dont know either...so cant prove anything

Well considering I've obviously got an appreciation of Mastodon, I have more relevant info don't I? You're contradicting yourself by saying that I can't say anything because I don't know how talented they are, yet you sanely claim that those mediocre bands can play to the level of Mastodon. I'm sorry but that's foolish. Naturally I mean that as no insult, it's a foolish viewpoint.

Originally posted by jaden101
but is it?...you cant assume without knowing some facts about their ability

i did wonder when you would get around to citing the genre of music that a band plays are evidence of their technical ability...given that one isn't applicable to the other then it doesn't matter

if a drummer is playing a basic rock beat with little else thrown in, as fab moretti, as alot of the songs dictate simplicity...then you could ASSUME that he is a shit drummer because he isnt hammering them fast and tight and timed as many metal drummers do (because the genre as a general prinicple dictates that they do)

does that mean that you can therfor say that fab is a worse drummer than most metal drummers when it comes to technical ability?

no it doesnt

Fab Moretti doesn't play SOLELY basic stuff though. Meg White does and (although I don't think she's shit) she's not got a technical bone in her body, you can tell by the way she plays. That, and she's admitted it. When someone isn't playing school music teacher drum beats, I always assume that they could probably some me SOMETHING impressive on the drums. However, it's not REALLY about how BAD the drummers I'm talking about, are. It's about how GOOD they quite possibly aren't, when compared to a Brann Dailor, a Chris Pennie etc.

Originally posted by jaden101
i dont like metal...you dont like indie...thats what it generally boils down to...the rest is just bells

It's not anything to do with that, really.

-AC

We agree, at least.

i believe we're agreed on that before...it kind of grates that leary is alive and hicks isn't...you wouldn't see hicks starring along side emilio estavez in some bollocks film involving a lost winebago

it's a foolish viewpoint.

i'm happy to admit my "lack of experience" of mastodon...but i'm as equally happy to say that i've no doubt more experience the likes of bloc party than you...and am therfor better equiped to judge their ability...am i not?

However, it's not REALLY about how BAD the drummers I'm talking about, are. It's about how GOOD they quite possibly aren't, when compared to a Brann Dailor, a Chris Pennie etc

so its "quite possibly" now is it?...not proven fact?

at least i respected you when you stuck to your guns AC... 😉

Well considering I've obviously got an appreciation of Mastodon, I have more relevant info don't I? You're contradicting yourself by saying that I can't say anything because I don't know how talented they are, yet you sanely claim that those mediocre bands can play to the level of Mastodon.

so if it doesn't come down to a difference of taste in the genres then it does come down to me being unable to prove that x is as good as y...and you being unable to prove that y is better than x

a rather pointless circular discussion then?

Originally posted by jaden101
i'm happy to admit my "lack of experience" of mastodon...but i'm as equally happy to say that i've no doubt more experience the likes of bloc party than you...and am therfor better equiped to judge their ability...am i not?

Well, we've both heard Silent Alarm, you more times no doubt. I've heard Remission, Lifesblood and Leviathan many MANY times over.

Originally posted by jaden101
so its "quite possibly" now is it?...not proven fact?

That was sarcasm. Because to be fair, no Maximo Park/Bloc Party/The Libertines/The Kaiser Chiefs/Kasabian drummer is as good as Brann or Chris, by far. If you want hardcore evidence, jesus man, listen to the damn albums. I respect that I can't hear the music for you, but even if you don't like it, listen to the guitars, the drums. The rhythm sections of the respective bands. How can you actually claim any of the other aforementioned drummers are as good as that? You can tell they aren't by the way they play. Fab Moretti is good enough to be in The Strokes, no Mastodon. Hence why he's in The Strokes.

Originally posted by jaden101
so if it doesn't come down to a difference of taste in the genres then it does come down to me being unable to prove that x is as good as y...and you being unable to prove that y is better than x

a rather pointless circular discussion then?

Well no, not at all.

Because it's been proven that the NME magazine highlights and champions bands of horrible talent just because they're popular. Kerrang don't do that. Kerrang albums of the year aren't chart toppers or whatever's in the press. When did you see Blood and Thunder performed on Top of the Pops? Franz did, coincidentally the album of the year for NME that same time. Amidst the hype.

-AC