Faceplams: 0
Bite me
I really love Bob Marley's Greatest Hits.Originally Posted by c0f3d
And that's it.
There's not enough rum in the world to get me to listen to any more reggae than that. Bob's the MAN. But even too much Bob can bring me to alcoholism.
Kinda like The Blues.
Come to Chicago sometime, we have a SHITLOAD of blues clubs. Lots of fun, for a while, until you realize, "HEY, THESE SONGS ALL FUCKING SOUND THE SAME!!"
Same thing if you ever go to Hawaii. OMG, there aren't enough Mai Tai's.
tempus est umbra in mente
Tattoo You came out after Some Girls, and it was pretty great. The Stones aren't the best example of graceful aging, but they never turned into an abomination, and there's actually some of the more recent stuff that's not as bad as we originally thought it was. Love is Strong actually isn't as bad a song as people were making it out to be when it was released.
Bowie was writing awesome stuff into his older age (even if I'm not that big of a fan of The Next Day). Tom Waits has always been awesome. Scott Walker just keeps getting better. Bob Dylan has put out some really classic stuff in recent years.
she/her/hers
when songs that should never be used to hock products are used in advertisements.
i just saw a commercial for the app messenger (which i'm assuming is facebook messenger, yeah?) that used Deceptacon by Le Tigre.
Active Member
Some of Voodoo Lounge, Bridges to Babylon and the four songs on their Forty Licks compilation aren't too bad at all actually. Whatever the lead single was off of their last proper album wasn't too bad either.
And quite honestly The Who have been putting out some work that is nowhere near an embarrassment as some people have said. Losing Entwistle really hurt their edge but it didn't hurt Townshend's song-writing or Daltrey's voice which is still quite powerful after all these years. Watch the recent Quadrophenia: Live In London show, they really did the album justice to how it sounded when it came out. Or at least as best as they could 40 years later.
Captain Rustleboots
The rock music scene.
Gene Simmons was right.
Hairy Member
Ariel Pink
grrr. woof.
the doors and the dumb kids in high school who wore doors t-shirts, pretending that jim morrison wasn't full of shit and that it wasn't just shitty circus music.
Throbbing Member
Fokin cellphones at concerts.
Administrator
A singer telling at the concert that "you're best audience evah" and "we really liked your beautiful city" (yeah right).
Also: announcing the titles of old well-known songs.
Throbbing Member
When bands don't know where the hell they are. When I go to a concert in Bristow, VA, nine times out of ten the singer refers to it as "D.C.", even though Bristow is nowhere near D.C.
Two of the only people I remember seeing who referred to it by it's proper name were Trent and Rob Zombie. What made Rob knowing it even more amazing was the fact that I saw him there at Mayhem Fest with at least fifteen other bands, and EVERY SINGLE OTHER ONE OF THEM CALLED IT D.C.!
I actually have a KISS DVD that was partially filmed there (at a show I was at, no less), and not only does Paul say "D.C." multiple times on it, but the info on the package even says "filmed in Washington, D.C."
Bite me
http://www.echoingthesound.org/commu...317#post227317
The moron who wrote this misguided misinformed jr high school essay about John Lennon vs Trent Reznor.
"All You Need is Love" was a common anti-war slogan in 1967. It was propaganda. John Lennon loved propaganda.
http://www.songfacts.com/detail.php?id=130
Bite me
You're nitpicking. One of my best friends lives in Manassas and commutes to the District every day. I had an apartment in D.C. Lots of people who either can't afford to live in the District or don't want to still commute to / from the District to VA in your area daily. It's, in essence, a suburb of D.C.
It's like when NIN says they're doing a show in "Chicago" when they're really doing the show way the fuck out in Tinley Park, where Jesus lost his shoes. Or when they do a show in "Detroit" when it's really in Clarkston which is a fucking landfill ski resort in the winter but otherwise fucking nowhere. No band stands on stage going, "FUCK YEAH, HELLO CLARKSTON!!"
Active Member
Also all the stuff he's praising Trent for didn't happen till he was 44 but Lennon was killed when he was 40 so it's a totally unfair comparison. It's like the song titles fitted his theme so he had to twist a load of facts to fit his theme that love isn't a fairytale or whatever
Active Member
yeah but nonetheless I think he is right in that Lennon is popularly perceived as this magnanimous semi enlightened guy, and reznor as this addled angry nasty goth type, when in reality reznor has his head screwed on and acts pretty decently, whereas Lennon's done his fair share of thuggery and his peace and love schtick was probably just a way for him to cope with the fact that he was on some sort of journey to the heart of darkness... Lennon is a very dark voice in many ways yet doesn't seem to be perceived as such. To me he comes across as world weary and bleak
Wanting to change the world with peace and love is essentially rephrasing a desire to destroy the world as it exists
Hope that doesn't sound too wanky, not trying to give it the big one, lol
Bite me
It's wanky. The Beatles were commissioned to write the song for a show / TV special. They weren't trying to change the world with it. Lennon just wanted the Vietnam War to be over, as did everybody else at the time. Zeitgeist.
Active Member
Haha... thanks! I don't mean the love is all you need thing, I mean Lennon's general affected/perceived man of peace image (it goes beyond the anti-war thing, his lyrics and interviews show he was becoming a malcontent generally), in reality he was quite a dark and angry bloke, whereas Reznor who is perceived as a sort of prince of darkness seems quite happy in himself - What I mean is I think there's a bit of truth to that observation
I mean isn't that true? TR is perceived as dark and scary when he's pretty nice and straightforward, Lennon is perceived as a hippyish man of peace when in fact he was a tough angry scouser who battered a fair few people over the years
Last edited by Sutekh; 11-24-2014 at 09:37 AM.
Bite me
I think the whole thesis is reaching. "Perception" is tricky and it depends on whom you're polling. Reznor was known to be a giant asshole until he kicked drugs, never mind whatever dark persona he himself manufactured. He's still known to be a brutal perfectionist and you don't want to be a lazy employee around him. The wonderful loving father is still whatever public persona Reznor is allowing you to see, since he's very private. We don't know enough about him.
Lennon lived in a spotlight Reznor can't even begin to imagine (no pun intended), and 3 of the Beatles tried to channel that fame toward positive light. There aren't really many dark Beatles songs, Lennon and McCartney generally focused on positive messages. But Lennon was human. He got married because he got a girl pregnant (Cynthia). Cynthia has never claimed that Lennon was physically abusive, nor has Yoko, nor has May Pang. Lennon had a heroin problem, and an alcohol problem. Sean Lennon later claimed that the whole stay-at-home-dad story was manufactured and that John was really at home depressed (while Yoko worked) because John no longer had a relationship with Paul and felt useless. It wasn't until Double Fantasy was released that Lennon's comeback stirred him from a long depression and isolation.
Then he was murdered.
Last edited by allegro; 11-24-2014 at 09:58 AM.
Active Member
Sure but going on the current/latterday perceptions of the two guys... I mean Reznor might have been a hardass at work but that's different to being violent - he never gave anyone a hiding (when I say Lennon battered people I don't mean the rumours of spousal abuse - he decked the cavern club DJ and a few others, Lemmy talks about how hard they all were in his book). The last part of what you say seems to agree with what I'm saying - behind the facade lie a pretty dark and broken guy
Perception is tricky and if people incorrectly perceived Lennon to be some enlightened, messianic type then it is correct that he can hardly be blamed for that - however from my perspective it does appear that he attempted to present himself as an agitator for peace and social justice - he was involved in a fair bit of activism and wrote a few protest songs - this is why Nixon kept trying and trying to have him deported... he really was becoming a leftist agitator (of sorts)
Then as you say, he was murdered, so who knows. But ultimately the popular perceptions of these two guys is in a lot of ways at odds with the reality of who they are/were. I wouldn't say it was reaching to say people see Lennon as a hippy man of peace and Reznor as an angry goth
Reznor doesn't have the scrutiny applied to him that Lennon did, but let's be real - TR is not a fighter and never has been (doesn't matter if the spotlight is narrower, he's big enough that if he'd beat someone up they would have a story they could sell - it's not wide the spotlight is so much as how willing the person is to sell their story), and he kicked drugs when he was 34/35, whereas Lennon died at 40 having never managed it
Sean says he was never the stay at home dad, whereas we know TR took a few years off, takes his kids on tour etc. We don't know that much but I don't think that means we have to ignore what we do know
Ultimately I think it still rings true that one seems like a nicer bloke than the other
Last edited by Sutekh; 11-24-2014 at 10:32 AM.
Active Member
Some of Trent's antics onstage seemed a bit beyond the pale to me - some of the Fragility tour footage (early 2000 in particular) I'm surprised the entire band didn't bail on him. But I've never heard of violence to women (except some rumours I read about to do with Courtney Love, it always seems to me in those days Courtney love would probably kick HIS arse, not the other way around)
Bite me
Seems, right now. If you read Manson's books and some of the accounts of Reznor's behavior back in the day, Reznor was known to be a womanizing drunken dickhead, not a nice guy. Even Reznor admitted that in interviews after he got clean. Admitted that he was not a nice guy.
I don't think we know much about Reznor, at all. He managed to hide alcoholism and drug addiction well enough that his best fans didn't know about it until he started doing interviews for the release of With Teeth. He didn't take a few years off "to be with his kids." He was working the whole time, and openly admits this. And he's always been very careful about us seeing what he wants us to see. He carefully shields his kids from the media, didn't even release the names of his kids (that info came from sources other than him).
Also, Lennon's and Reznor's childhoods and backgrounds and upbringings were different. While Lennon may have grown up as a scruffy working class guy with anger issues who'd been abandoned by his dad and mum and left to be raised by his aunt, and then his mum was killed, he also went to art college so he wasn't going around smacking people up like a gangster his whole life; at some point, he grew up. Reznor, on the other hand, was raised on bucolic farmland by two nice grandparents and his mom was right there, and his dad was nearby and readily available. We don't know enough about him to know if he got into any fights during his drunken idiot phases, because he's paid people to keep that quiet. We did have some people here on ETS back during the making of With Teeth who were banned for making serious accusations about Reznor having nefarious people hanging around the studio in the old days selling him drugs and stuff -- which oddly enough probably ended up being true. Reznor used to beat the living crap out of all of his bandmates on stage, including making a few of them bleed on several occasions. Simple stage presence? Nah.
There have never been any stories of John Lennon being violent to women; the lyrics to "Getting Better" are song lyrics, not autobiographical.
Didn't Reznor own Lennon's Mellotron at some point? The one that was used for "Strawberry Fields?"
We can't look at this stuff in a bubble; we have to look at it within the context of the environment; like I said, the Zeitgeist. The Vietnam War and politics and all that, it had a lot to do with the "hippy artist guy" that Lennon became. He was influenced by the times.
Just like Reznor was influenced by Bush when he wrote Year Zero. Unlike Lennon, however, Reznor isn't an overtly political kinda guy. He's admitted that he kinda wanted to be the Clash, but he wasn't. Probably because it was disingenuous. Lennon and the Beatles were part of the Sixties that influenced everybody involved; nobody walked away without being affected by the changing and revolutionary times. Lennon wasn't the only "hippy" reflecting the political culture in popular music. He wasn't the only one on J Edgar Hoover's list.
Admittedly, Lennon was probably just privileged and misguided. Not a whole lot of peace is gonna come from lying in bed all day with signs saying "Bed Peace." Here was a guy with a Rolls Royce telling people to give peace a chance. Sure, he really meant it. But, it's not realistic. Does this make him a womanizing wife-beating douche bag? No. You may say he's a dreamer, but he's not the only one ...
(runs away)
Last edited by allegro; 11-24-2014 at 11:22 AM.
Matador de Froot Loops
Mostly "fans" that sing during the "hit single" at concerts but don't give a shit about any other song about the band (if you just like 1 song i don't see why are you there anyway...).
Active Member
I always feel weirdly rude and confrontational doing the quote by quote dissection thing, so sorry in advance
Yeah not saying he was an angel but he looks after his family and isn't a bruiser like Lennon was. Also Manson's book... I love it but there's a lot of fabrication and exaggeration in there... I think the worst thing he says about trent is that he stopped returning his calls and didn't work with him on the Lost Highway s/t like he said he would... I dunno, sounds pretty fair to me! Manson is a cock. Although poor show on Trent for not just manning up and saying "yeah look... high spirits last night... said something I didn't mean... end of the day you are way too green to work on this s/t with me, sorry"
I really don't know about this... certainly people in the UK talked of him as a drunk/drug user... there's songs on the fragile about drug problems & we all had our suspicions about the lost weekend cancellation. Then there's him hammered off his face on the pantera home video... nah sorry, it was in no way a revelation in 2004/5 that he was messed up
OK my bad - I thought he took time off. But the rest of what you say backs up my perception of him as a decent and caring father
This explains why one is less of an asshole than the other then... I'm confused, weren't you saying Lennon wasn't the bigger asshole? Because it seems like you're saying you can explain why he was
Also I don't get why Art College proves or suggest he wasn't violent... I mean I get the stereotype of art students being effete, but that is just a stereotype... plenty of shitkickers and angry young people in those places
That's quite an assumption - and I thought your point was this is a daft topic to begin with because we don't know these people personally and making assumptions is bad?
Aye but that's more evidence of being a drunk dickhead rockstar taking advantage of the chance to flip out whilst onstage - it shows he's a bit of an arse but I really don't think it shows Reznor is the fighting type. I mean come on look at him in the march of the pigs or woodstock videos... he's not starting anything IRL
There certainly are rumours that he beat Cynthia - possibly just urban legend, but nonetheless it's not true to say that isn't a story that goes around - just put "john beat cynthia" into google and you'll see loads of articles and discussion. I mean "Paul is dead" is a load of bollocks but it still goes around
Apparently yes, and it was used on ACSS and TDS
Last edited by Sutekh; 11-24-2014 at 11:25 AM.
Active Member
ha ha, that was always my problem with that song, obnoxious hippyness. all that peace and love and is that generation really as lovey dovey as they make out?? No they're bloody not
The stuff in Manson's book that disturbed me most was the groupie stuff, some was bordering on abuse. However what you say at the top applies in that some was fabrication / exaggeration and how do we know what was?
Last edited by WorzelG; 11-24-2014 at 11:31 AM.
Active Member
I think bands do kind of rely on these people coming out to make up the numbers at shows though
Bite me
But we don't know that. We also had the perception, for years, that Lennon stayed home to bake bread and take care of Sean, only to later find out, from Sean, that John was sitting around in a bathrobe all day, bummed out, while nannies took care of Sean. For all we know, Trent's in the garage studio from 6 in the morning until 10 at night, and Mariqueen is with the boys all day. We have NO idea. Our own hopes paint Trent Reznor as the Perfect Father, at home playing catch outside with his two boys. Because we see a few photos of him with the boys at Disneyland, and we immediately jump to the conclusion of him sitting around playing with them all day and foregoing all work. Except we forget that Reznor is a total Workaholic. He probably gets up in the middle of the night to work.
No, neither is an "asshole" due to circumstances beyond their control. Why would Lennon be an "asshole" because he was raised by his aunt? wtf?
I read Cynthia's book. Totally honest, absolutely zero allegations of any physical anything.
Active Member
Anything anyone does is a product and reflection of the age they live in... I don't get what you're saying. Do you mean anything that smacks too strongly of the era the person lives in can be disowned by their defenders? You could use that to admonish pretty much anyone from anything they do
I really don't know about that. I mean I appreciate that the spirit of the age Lennon lived in will have influenced his beliefs, but I don't think that means you can just abstract it like that.
Hate to prove Godwin's Law, but anti-semitism was rife in late 19th/early 20th century Europe... so does that mean we are viewing things from within a bubble if we condemn Hitler for his anti-semitism? I would say obviously not
Active Member
No, of course I'm not saying he's an asshole for being raised by his aunt - it seemed like you were comparing and contrasting the upbringings of the two men - Lennon from a troubled family and Reznor from a more stable home - I assumed you were doing that to account for why Lennon was the more troubled individual. Sorry if I've missed the point & tell me what you meant if I have
How do you know she was being honest? You make a big deal out of having to know things for sure only 50% of the time
Bite me
Well, she's the one who could capitalize on honesty. She has nothing to sell other than her story. Dirt sells more than clean.
Bite me
I'm saying that this guy's thesis is reaching far beyond the text. An English professor would bitch slap him.
Active Member
yeah but what about any backlash from Lennon lovers?
Posting Permissions
Likes: 
Reply With Quote