Are Steely Dan good? I can't tell if they're just cheesy soft-rock/smooth jazz or actually really good.
>>64144762
why can't you figure that out for yourself without having to validate your opinions with anonymous 14-year-olds on a korean sculpting board?
Yes they're really good. Their music is also great for testing a new sound system because of the great production.
Maybe they're both
They have some good songs and some bad songs
Listen to Reeling in the Years or Do It Again and tell me you aren't enjoying that shit and I'll tell you you're just self-conscious about liking one of your dad's favorite songs because it puts a stain on your flawless indie cred.
Steely Dan is GOAT. End of discussion.
I want RYM to leave
>>64144762
a little of column a, a little of column b
>>64145002
what's the message you're trying to convey with this post?
Pretzel logic. Enjoy!
>>64144762
Yes and both
Happy?
>>64144762
>I can't tell if they're just cheesy soft-rock/smooth jazz or actually really good.
It is soft/smooth jazz rock, there's nothing wrong with that necessarily. And I wouldn't describe them as cheesy.
Nearly any genre - electroswing or steampunk excepted - can be good.
>>64144762
They're really good. Pic related is god tier
>>64144762
Their REAL magnum opus
>>64144762
nope.
>>64145002
Seems like a /mu/ user to me
They seem like music that the really weird nerds of yesteryear would have listened to. Not as extreme as Zappa (who is more try-hard and fans justify as being "technically complicated") but more just naturally weird. Also remind me of Pavement.
Listen to deacon blues man
>>64146367
it's easy to forget how much of a greasy weird band they can be considering their clean cut audience of 50 year old dads. i heard "hey nineteen" playing at the fucking bank yesterday
