>"born in le wrong generation lolol", dad rock is crap, so much better mondern music, ha, you defend dadrock, faggut, HI dad.
>MHUMHMHMH MHMHMH IH YEAH DAVID BOWIE DICK TASTE SO GOOD MMMHMMHMHMH OMG NEW BOWIE ALBUM MHMMHHM BEST ARTIST EVER
kek
If you use the word dadrock as a derogatory term you are a child. Led Zeppelin produced great rock music and 70's rock is amazing.
>>61053260
never much zeppelin
reminds me of being sick for some reason?
>>61053260
Hi dad
>>61053260
led zeppelin mightve put out sum good music but dat doesnt mean dadrock isnt shit overall
>>61053285
I'm 23.
>>61053280
I'm guessing you listened to it when you were sick at a young age once.
>>61053295
23 yikes lmaooo old ass gtfo
>>61053287
What is dadrock? Classic rock? If you think classic rock is overall shit you don't play guitar or sing.
>>61053287
my name is alec and i feel bad that you think that typing like this even post-post-ironically is funny
>>61053310
Are you serious? Is this board really that young?
>>61053317
What does being able to sing or play guitar have to do with having an opinion?
>>61053334
Because I respect that music way more after playing guitar and singing for 8 years.
>>61053333
I think the average age is about 18 - 20
but yeah, nothing to be proud of
>>61053333
He probably was not serious, but most of 4chan is seriously high school age.
>>61053334
So do people who play rock music.
>>61053356
Respecting music and liking it are two very different things. I respect Merzbow immensely but I don't like listening to his output at all
>>61053375
>>61053361
The entire internet is flooded with high schoolers, but a normal poster considering 23 old is outside the realm of reddit /b/ or /pol/
>>61053377
Yeah but respecting music more makes you appreciate it and like it more generally.
David Bowie is mom rock
>>61053323
its not supposed 2b funny tbf im humoring myself mostly nice name btw
>>61053317
dadrock is rock my dad listens2 aka rock all dads listen2 and yea i dont do either but i did vocals in a band and i dont see any correlation watsoever anyway like wat the fuck does dat even mean? all ppl who play guitar or sing do not think dadrock is shit? do u even realize wat ur even saying? i mean i no dat theres lots off teenagers on here nowadays but come on
>>61053437
>/mu/ prefers mom rock over dadrock
nothing wrong with that
but just
>>61053451
How old are you man?
>>61053414
Not at all. Like I said, I don't like listening to Merzbow at all. Same goes for a lot of no wave, classical, 80s hip-hop, etc. It's all important and I respect it, but I don't enjoy actually listening to large swaths of it.
Also, so you don't get any wrong ideas, I play guitar and sing too.
>>61053481
So when you're listening to a song, it's technical difficulty doesn't have an effect on how much you like it?
>>61053499
...have I been taking the bait this entire time?
>>61053215
Who cares?
>>61053521
No, not everything is a /mu/ meme. Classic rock is generally more difficult to play than popular 90's or 2000's rock.
>>61053524
you and me
>>61053544
You're right, but what does that have to do with quality? At all? Artistic success isn't defined by how difficult a piece is to create.
>>61053582
Artistic value should be determined in significant part by how difficult it is to create.
>>61053544
>rock dude
more like
>rock&roll dude
>>61053675
? I'm not talking about Rock N Roll.
>>61053688
>rock dude
more like
>rock n roll dude
>>61053609
No. Absolutely not. Trying to hold music up to that throws out entire important genres like punk and no wave, not to mention composers like John Cage.
Beyond that, let's say that hypothetically you heard a track that you absolutely loved and thought was perfect in every way. You adored it, raved about it for years to anybody who would listen, but one day you found out it was composed by a guy who accidentally fell down a staircase of synthesizers. Would you suddenly love it less because it didn't take any technical skill to make? I really hope you don't say yes because the music would still be exactly the same as when you loved it.
Is.. is /mu/ just a bunch of teenagers who don't play music or have played for a couple years acting like their opinions are better than other people because they like KPop Justin Bieber, Taylor Swift and NMH when online strangers told them it was good?
>>61053726
>rock dude
more like
>The car is on fire, and there's no driver at the wheel
And the sewers are all muddied with a thousand lonely suicides and a dark wind blows
The government is corrupt
And we're on so many drugs with the radio on and the curtains drawn
We're trapped in the belly of this horrible machine
And the machine is bleeding to death
The sun has fallen down
And the billboards are all leering
And the flags are all dead at the top of their poles
It went like this
The buildings tumbled in on themselves
Mothers clutching babies
Picked through the rubble and pulled out their hair
The skyline was beautiful on fire
All twisted metal stretching upwards
Everything washed in a thin orange haze
I said, "Kiss me, you're beautiful, these are truly the last days"
You grabbed my hand and we fell into it
Like a daydream or a fever
We woke up one morning and fell a little further down
For sure it's the valley of death
I open up my wallet and it's full of blood dude
>>61053726
Maybe some parts, but most of /mu/ doesn't like K Pop, Bieber, or Swift. You should probably look at the /mu/core chart.
Also, how new are you? It wasn't strangers who told us what was good, it was Pitchfork, Fantano, and Scruffy, who are objectively correct about music every single time.
>>61053714
So you think that artistic value has nothing to do with how difficult it is to create? A 4 chord 4/4 song with a solo an 18 month player could perform and an amateur singer could sing is just as artistically impressive as a song with professional quality singing, instrumentation, time changes and key changes? A stick figure drawing is as good as the Sistine Chapel? Yeah okay man.
>>61053726
Pretty much, fampai.
>>61053781
>It wasn't strangers who told us what was good, it was Pitchfork, Fantano, and Scruffy, who are objectively correct about music every single time.
You see nothing wrong with that sentence.
>>61053809
>>61053792
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiomcuNlVjk is easy to play.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aS_IYe5JTZ4 is not.
The first song is much more artistically accomplished.
Also, >>61053809
pic related
>>61053819
Fantano worked at his college radio station and never played an instrument, I don't know who Scruffy is an Pitchfork receives a lot of criticism for being pretentious, criticizing artists rather than the music, focusing more on their writing of reviews than the actual music and generally favoring indie music unfairly over other genres.
>>61053792
Any response to >>61053831?
>>61053921
>Rock dude
more like
>HARD rock dude
>>61053926
Comparing a single guitar instrumental to a full band song with vocals is utterly meaningless.
>>61053939
I do prefer hard rock much of the time.
>>61053926
Even if there are drums.
>>61053921
The part about getting opinions critics was a tongue-in-cheek joke. The actual discussion was the artistic difference between My Bloody Valentine and Yngwie Malmsteen.
>>61053960
Oh hey, there we go. But no, it isn't. I mean, a song is a song, right? A folk album with nothing but a guitar and vocals is just as valid musically as a full band is. But, if you want to compare things more directly, how about a different Yngwie song but this time backed by a band? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YT3Auukor3g
Technically speaking, he's unimpeachable, but he does absolutely nothing to push the music in an interesting direction. It's basically generic hair metal that's really hard to play. My Bloody Valentine, on the other hand, is super, super easy to play to the point that pretty much anybody can play it. But, the important thing here is that nobody had ever sounded like that before. That album, Loveless, was revolutionary and essentially kickstarted the entire shoegaze movement. Also impressive is that it still sounds completely modern despite being released in the early 90s. It's a great album despite, and maybe even because of its simplicity.
>>61054086
Anon, I never said that easy to play music can't be better than technically proficient music, I've just said it's a significant determining factor. That's what I said at the beginning, that's what I'm sticking by.
>>61054152
And I disagree entirely. Complexity has nothing to do with quality, and I'll back that up with countless boring hair metal songs. Where's your evidence that complexity leads to better music?
>>61054086
I also like Alcatrazz better than My Bloody Valentine. It's a matter of taste. If you asked a bunch of musicians which one has more artistic value, you wouldn't get a consensus.
>>61053726
>rock dude
>>61054209
Alright so you have two songs of similar lyrical and dynamic level, but one song has much more impressive singing and instrumentation. That makes the latter better music.
>>61053260
hello daddio
>>61054251
How? You can't just say that it's better because it's better.
>>61054258
I'm 23.
>>61054263
Oh so you're fucking with me.
>>61054286
kek
>>61054279
No I'm not. I wouldn't take all the time to write out everything that I have just to mess with you. You can't just say that being harder to play makes a song better because it just does.
>>61054308
You can't just say technical skill isn't a factor in how good a song is.
>>61054308
Harder to play sounds more complicated as well. There's more to it.
>>61054318
But I did, and I backed it up by comparing MBV to Yngwie. You may not like the MBV song, but it's much more original and forward-thinking than anything Malmsteen has ever put out despite Malmsteen's unbelievable technical prowess. Where's your evidence that complex music sounds better?
>>61054336
Sounding complex doesn't mean that it sounds better. I could add thirteen more instruments to a song and make it worse by obscuring the good parts with complexity for complexity's sake.
>>61054369
It's an important factor, not the sole determinant. I'm done with this conversation man. You're missing the point on purpose or you're too stupid to understand. Either way it's not worth it.
>>61054426
I'm not the one missing the point when you can't understand that musical complexity has nothing to do with musical quality
>>61054369
But here's the thing, you're talking about how influential MBV is, not why it is better than that hair metal dude you posted, how about a band that isn't in the slightless influential to music but is still the best at it? Is the one that started it superior?
k
---e
------k
--------b-u-m-p
>>61053726
go back to your homeboard
>>61053726
i love Led Zeppelin and NMH though
>>61055280
>>61055280
>NMH
kek
