The General Discussion Thread

Originally posted by The Grey Fox
King Crimson aren't nearly as influential as the Stones. Also, the Stones really aren't overrated, they're one of the few massive bands from the 60's that live up to their name, unlike The Beatles or something. I count the Stones as debatably my favourite band of all time, actually.
Whats up Sol

Listening to music, you?

Originally posted by Slay
Waiting for Ami Jay's retaliation after I dissed the Stones.

While I should be studying.

You?

I'm making some eggs.

You can study and argue at the same time!

Originally posted by The Grey Fox
King Crimson aren't nearly as influential as the Stones. Also, the Stones really aren't overrated, they're one of the few massive bands from the 60's that live up to their name, unlike The Beatles or something. I count the Stones as debatably my favourite band of all time, actually.
Whats up Sol

By the way, just thought of Blonde On Blonde and Pet Sounds.

I once tried to eat a whole lemon like how you eat an orange

I only finished 3 wedges

was tough

Are You Experienced? - The Jimi Hendrix Experience
In the Court of the Crimson King - King Crimson
Blonde on Blonde - Bob Dylan
Revolver - The Beatles
The Velvet underground & Nico - The Velvet Underground & Nico
Love - Forever Changes
The Beach Boys - Pet Sounds

LIZ

Gonna listen to some Rolling Stones now, wasn't the plan originally.

Originally posted by Selphie
I once tried to eat a whole lemon like how you eat an orange

I only finished 3 wedges

was tough

Try harder!

Originally posted by Slay
Don't give a crap about how influential King Crimson are, I care about how good their music is. The Beatles are about ten times beter than the Rolling Stones. Might be more overrated, but they still make better music, imo. Even then, most bands who claim to be influenced by the Stones are shit guitar-rock bands like The Kooks.

By the way, just thought of Blonde On Blonde and Pet Sounds.

My opinion is that the Stones' music is better than the Beatles. More powerful, goes further, and to me, sounds better.

My opinion.

Blonde On Blonde, definitely. Pet Sounds is as much a cliche as Sgt. Peppers.

Originally posted by Sol Valentine
Listening to music, you?

Originally posted by Sol Valentine
LIZ

Solly Pollyyyy

But Pet Sounds IS amazing mmm

Alright, scratch Let It Bleed, that can be second. VU & Nico is definitely top for me.

I wish my downloads would download faster 🙁

Where's Brad, I haven't talked to him in forever mmm

Originally posted by Selphie
But Pet Sounds IS amazing mmm

Originally posted by The Grey Fox
How 'good' their music is? Again, you keep thinking that because they play complex music, that makes them a better band factually. It doesn't. I don't really listen to Crimson because their music doesn't say shit to me, it's like other progressive/psychadelic bands music, except their lyrics are more pompous and pretentious than the others.

My opinion is that the Stones' music is better than the Beatles. More powerful, goes further, and to me, sounds better.

My opinion.

Blonde On Blonde, definitely. Pet Sounds is as much a cliche as Sgt. Peppers.
Watching cousin play Wrestling plus music.

Drop kick him!

Originally posted by Selphie
Solly Pollyyyy

HOW IS LIZ

Originally posted by Sol Valentine
Drop kick him!

HOW IS LIZ

Originally posted by The Grey Fox
How 'good' their music is? Again, you keep thinking that because they play complex music, that makes them a better band factually. It doesn't. I don't really listen to Crimson because their music doesn't say shit to me, it's like other progressive/psychadelic bands music, except their lyrics are more pompous and pretentious than the others.

My opinion is that the Stones' music is better than the Beatles. More powerful, goes further, and to me, sounds better.

My opinion.

Blonde On Blonde, definitely. Pet Sounds is as much a cliche as Sgt. Peppers.
Watching cousin play Wrestling plus music.

What you seem to forget is that King Crimson, with Zappa, were the first to make 'progressive/psychedelic music' the way they did. You can't blame them for being like all the other ''pretentious progressive'' bands, because ITCOTCK was used as a blue-print by many of the prog-rock bands from the 70's.

I swear to God I even used ''In my opinion'' in my initial comment.

Originally posted by Slay
You stupid ****. I swear to God I'm not going to go over this with you again, but I will say this: I never said anything about them being good factually. That's just an excuse you like to use so you can go on a rant. I never said anything about their complexity, you seem to think I only like 'complex' music because I often comment about disliking Green Day because they're one dimensional, but I don't.

What you seem to forget is that King Crimson, with Zappa, were the first to make 'progressive music' the way they did. You can't blame them for being like all the other ''pretentious progressive'' bands, because ITCOTCK was used as a blue-print by many of the prog-rock bands from the 70's.

Originally posted by Sol Valentine
Drop kick him!

HOW IS LIZ

LIZ IS DECENT

HOW IS SOLDRUMMER

I think Zappa/The Mothers are better than Crimson, anyway. I find Freak Out! and We're Only In It For The Money better albums due to their quirkiness and humour, plus the social commentary.

Originally posted by The Grey Fox
Yeah okay I'm stupid because the way you talk is condescending and arrogant. awehawe Sure. Let's go with that.

Also way to nitpick your way through my arguments to make it seem like my post had no substance at all. Very mature.