Jump to content


Photo

GOAT music debate stuff


  • Please log in to reply
110 replies to this topic

#21 blueminister

blueminister
  • Members
  • 204 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 08:29 PM

Are you calling Prince consistent now? lol


Compared to Bob Dylan, who's gone through extended spurts as a less-than-compelling live performer and lost at least two decades as a top tier creative force to alcoholism and annoyance with the studio process? God yes.

#22 tomk

tomk
  • DVDVR 80s Project
  • 1365 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 January 2013 - 08:31 PM

Super dissapointed that this was cut off from wrestling thread as the point I was making holds both places

The music analogy is ridiculous. So rock music is all that's relevant yeah? Bollocks.


What you're going to put Notorious BIG against Dylan? How about Prodigy? How about DJ Shadow? Once another genre produces a Dylan, maybe then they'll get brought up in GOAT conversations. It hasn't happened yet. It will. There just aren't any other people with 9-10+ bona-fide ***** albums. That is why it is just Beatles and Dylan.


Not sure why you can only look to post Dylan music. I don't know anything about UK music pre-Joe Meek, but in the US we have a rich history of popular music on record, where you can find spectacular stuff going back to 1893. There is a giant history of recorded French popular music as well as Spanish recorded pop music. The amount of recorded Portugese pop music from Brazil alone is amazing. The idea that two English speaking 60s artists are all that's relevant to pop music history, comes off as willfully ignorant.

#23 JerryvonKramer

JerryvonKramer
  • DVDVR 80s Project
  • 11324 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 January 2013 - 08:38 PM

No I'm a big fan of the Library Congress recordings. There's tons of great stuff from the 20s and 30 and 40s. I listen to that stuff a lot. I spent a day wandering around New York once looking for a Mississippi Sheiks album (my wife wasn't very pleased, we were only there a week). I just haven't come across anyone I consider on that level. These aren't views I've just made up on the spot, they are views I've come to from years of obsessively being into things, seeking things out, and so on. It's not a lazy view. You have assumed it is a lazy view. As I said though, I am not interested in having this out. People can think what they want to. The conclusion I have come to, is that Dylan is without peer, and the Beatles are in the conversation with him because as far as I can see, they only made great albums. There are a handful of other bands with shorter runs -- Talking Heads, The Smiths, a few others -- who also only have great (or interesting) albums. I didn't say they are the be all and end all. I said they are the only ones in the GOAT conversation. Thinking Flair is the GOAT does not preclude you from watching all other wrestling. Why would it? I might go a year without listening to a Bob record. I've spent the last month mainly listening to Of Montreal. I've said my piece now.

#24 Badlittlekitten

Badlittlekitten
  • Members
  • 662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London

Posted 22 January 2013 - 08:39 PM

The way I see it, Dylan is an artist approaching Shakespeare levels and he will be remembered as such. They don't come along very often. That's my view, I'm not interested in getting people who don't see it that way to see it that way -- I'm not a preacher, I don't want to convert anyone. For someone who thinks that of Dylan, having a conversation with someone who doesn't like Dylan is probably the worst thing in the world. I can't be bothered with it. If you want to think he never recorded a great album after 69, or after 76, or even ever. So be it. If you want to think Eric B. and Rakim are The GOAT. So be it. I do not want to argue the case one way or the other.


If you'd said something like that in the first place instead of drivel like "I don't think there's any argument at all to put Charles, Brown, Crosby or Armstrong (or indeed Sinatra) in the same conversation as Dylan or the Beatles" then no one would have called you up for such narrow/dim views.

You're a Residents fan though so you can't be all bad.

#25 blueminister

blueminister
  • Members
  • 204 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 08:40 PM

Can we talk about New Order?

I've got an opinion about New Order and here it is: I like the first album a lot more than other people.

#26 Dylan Waco

Dylan Waco
  • Moderators
  • 10173 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 January 2013 - 09:08 PM

I'm totally opposite of my views on wrestling in my views on music, where I am blissfully dense and possibly a little shallow. Synthesizers are more interesting than "real" instruments. Bob Dylan is boring. Can we talk about New Order?


I would rather listen to Swans, Amps For Christ, Moss Icon, Karate and any other number of random bands that the average person probably doesn't know. I think Shotmaker's Mouse Ear Forget Me Not is the best album I've ever heard. I think Lucero is easily the best band of the last fifteen years.

Not all of that is obscure (although most of my favorites are) and I like a lot of pop music, but generally I don't care about listening to pop standards. The exception is Motown.

But I do enjoy New Order :)

#27 goodhelmet

goodhelmet
  • Admins
  • 18952 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 09:48 PM

I was named after Bob Dylan, but I like Phil Ochs better as a songwriter from that era.

I will not discuss The Beatles as I don't want Will to have a stroke.


I just want to make sure that jdw doesn't compare himself to the Beatles again or I might have that stroke.

#28 jpchicago23

jpchicago23
  • Members
  • 940 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tampa, Fl but originally from Chicago, Ill.

Posted 22 January 2013 - 09:54 PM

Because BIG doesn't have the ammo to go up against Dylan that's why. The best you can hope for in hip-hop, is to take the entire output of the Wu-Tang Clan and put that against Dylan, and even then it's not really a conversation.

I am the wrong person to try to argue this with since I'm one of the biggest hip-hop fans going. There is no Dylan of hip-hop yet. There may be in time.

I will not discuss music anymore because I believe it's against the rules to go this off topic.

EDIT: Robert Johnson recorded 31 songs, total. He's not in contention.



So since you're o.e of the biggest fans that means your opinion is what matters? I happen to be a huge hip hop fan but I wouldn't gloat that my opinion isnt to be argued with. I mean do you really think big doesn't have the ammo? Seriously? Cmon bro get real he's top ten easy and had no where bear the volume of material as his peers who also claim him top 5 dead or alive. Big mixed street vibes with story telling and serious word play as well as one of the best deliveries of all time. What else would you need from hip hop? Nas is my personal favorite and I can argue the same for him but I would only say he has longevity on big and that's about it

#29 JerryvonKramer

JerryvonKramer
  • DVDVR 80s Project
  • 11324 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 January 2013 - 10:03 PM

BIG made 2 albums in his career. Two. Let's say Ready to Die is as good as The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan. Let's say Life After Death, being a double album, is as good as Blonde on Blonde. Let's just say that. Highway 61 Revisited. What as Biggie got now? That remix album with the Duran Duran sample? ("Born Again") No, I'm being serious here. What's he got now? Bringing It All Back Home - what now? Junior MAFIA? John Wesley Harding -errr, guest appearances on No Way Out? Blood on the Tracks - and now? the 4th remix of All About the Benjamins? Street Legal - errrr ghost writing for Foxy Brown? Desire - the Tupac diss? Nashville Skyline - Craig Mack remix? Oh Mercy Time Out of Mind Love and Theft Modern Times Bootleg Series 1-3 Basement Tapes Another Side of ... Do you not see the total absurdity of trying to make a Dylan vs. BIG comparison? It can't be done. It just can't.

#30 jpchicago23

jpchicago23
  • Members
  • 940 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tampa, Fl but originally from Chicago, Ill.

Posted 22 January 2013 - 10:06 PM

I wasn't making the comparison but to rely on quantity is pretty Fucking absurd as well. So what if he made two albums their two of the best hip hop albums of all time. Two. I don't know shit about bob Dylan so I song argue against him bit just because he puts out a ton of albums doesn't mean they're all great. Jay z is a perfect example

#31 JerryvonKramer

JerryvonKramer
  • DVDVR 80s Project
  • 11324 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 January 2013 - 10:10 PM

They really aren't though. Ready to Die is good, but Life After Death isn't all that. It's patchy. The Source probably only gave it 5 Mics because of timing. There's nothing groundbreaking on either of them. Ready to Die is a solid, very tight gangster rap album. It isn't Liquid Swords. It isn't Return to 36 Chambers. It isn't It Takes a Nation. It isn't Straight Outta Compton. Arguably it is a top 10 all-time hip-hop album. You want to say that making one all-time great hip-hop album is enough to get you into a GOAT conversation? That's your argument here?

#32 JerryvonKramer

JerryvonKramer
  • DVDVR 80s Project
  • 11324 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 January 2013 - 10:12 PM

You know, let's just forget this. It's not worth it.

#33 Death From Above

Death From Above
  • Members
  • 1422 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Alberta, Canada

Posted 22 January 2013 - 10:34 PM

Charles Mingus is way better than John Coltrane.

#34 jpchicago23

jpchicago23
  • Members
  • 940 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tampa, Fl but originally from Chicago, Ill.

Posted 22 January 2013 - 10:37 PM

That's merely you're opinion. Doesn't make it true. To me they're both classic as is liquid swords and 36 is my second favorite al um ever. Why do they have to be compared though? Saying its not as good as 36 doesn't make it any less of an album. Not everything u like is going to be agreed upon you don't have to bust vessels over it

#35 Death From Above

Death From Above
  • Members
  • 1422 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Alberta, Canada

Posted 22 January 2013 - 10:37 PM

Also, Americans obsession with turning music discussions into a race baiting contest is seriously fucking sad.

#36 jpchicago23

jpchicago23
  • Members
  • 940 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tampa, Fl but originally from Chicago, Ill.

Posted 22 January 2013 - 10:45 PM

Care to elaborate? You pretty much just outed a while country with no back up.

#37 ohtani's jacket

ohtani's jacket
  • DVDVR 80s Project
  • 5724 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 10:54 PM

What do you mean you're one of the biggest fans going? One of the biggest fans on this board? One of the biggest fans born in Wales? I don't get it. I'm sure there are several of us here with large hip-hop collections. Most hip hop acts make one great album, usually their debut album, then struggle to replicate its success thereafter. Some go on a three or four album tear like Boogie Down Productions, EPMD, Kool G Rap and DJ Polo, Big Daddy Kane, Ice Cube, Gang Starr, Scarface, A Tribe Called Quest, De La Soul and whoever else I'm forgetting, but why are albums the metric? Bob Dylan can't sing very well and isn't an amazing guitar player. What you're left with is his songwriting. Is it not possible that there's an MC with better flow than Dylan's singing and (shock horror) better lyrics? I happen to think there's a lot of hip hop beat that are far more killer than freewheelin' Bob Dylan, that's for sure. You never said that Dylan was your choice for the GOAT. You said it was an open and shut case. I think it's great that after discovering everything there is to know about everything you came to the conclusion that nobody can touch Dylan. You say you don't want to talk about Dylan but you keep making the Beatles/Dylan analogies. I also think you're shitting on jazz. Whether you like jazz or not there are at least twelve major jazz artists who are comparable to Bob Dylan in terms of importance and output. I don't own a single Beatles album or Dylan album. I'd rather listen to the Kinks than the Beatles and I'd rather listen to Willie Nelson, Waylon Jennings, Johnny Cash, Merle Haggard, David Allen Coe and other country artists than Dylan, but GOAT doesn't mean shit if you exclude styles you don't like. I loved your film nerdery comment too. If there's one thing I've learnt it's that there's always someone who knows more about something than you do. Let's not blow our own horns too much.

#38 BrickHithouse

BrickHithouse
  • Members
  • 677 posts
  • Location:KS

Posted 22 January 2013 - 11:44 PM

I do not believe I have ever heard a Bob Dylan song - or if I have I didn't know it was Bob Dylan. Who is the musical equivalent to "I've never seen a Ric Flair match?" Michael Jackson? Led Zeppelin?

#39 JerryvonKramer

JerryvonKramer
  • DVDVR 80s Project
  • 11324 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 January 2013 - 12:03 AM

I loved your film nerdery comment too. If there's one thing I've learnt it's that there's always someone who knows more about something than you do. Let's not blow our own horns too much.


Is it blowing your horn to say you are a big geek/nerd/whatever of something? I don't know.

There's always someone who knows more, for sure.

I like The Kinks too.

#40 S.L.L.

S.L.L.

    Grapz Opinionz 4 Y00z From J00z

  • DVDVR 80s Project
  • 2217 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Long Island
  • Interests:The Good and The Beautiful

Posted 23 January 2013 - 01:13 AM

I don't want to derail this thread, but I don't think there's any argument at all to put Charles, Brown, Crosby or Armstrong (or indeed Sinatra) in the same conversation as Dylan or the Beatles.


The Beatles were together for less than a decade.

It was a hell of a less than a decade. It was still less than a decade.

I have no problem accepting The Beatles as GOAT types, because I do believe they were just that good, but....

BIG made 2 albums in his career. Two.


...if you're treating longevity as an issue, surely the fact The Beatles really only had a six-year run as a GOAT-level band must open up room for longer-running acts with strong outputs to at least contend.

In fact, that's exactly what Dylan did. Dylan never had a concentrated run as strong as The Beatles' '64-'69. He reached those peaks at times, but outside of the one-two-three punch of Bringing It All Back Home, Highway 61 Revisited, and Blonde on Blonde, no Beatles-level runs for him. I guess you could give him a '63-'69 peak, a '74-'76 comeback peak, and a few late-career albums like Love and Theft and Modern Times that hold up to some of his better (though not his best) works.

Are those unmatchable in music history? Hell, forget comparing them to acts from other eras and genres. Are those unmatchable even just within the realm of 60's pop and rock?

The Rolling Stones had a '64-'72 Dylan-level run that hit Beatles-level peaks in '68-'72. Outside of Some Girls, they never did anything after that on that level, but I don't think their record looks out of place next to Beatles/Dylan.

Led Zeppelin had a Beatles-level peak from '69-'75. It's tempered by the fact that they released nothing in '72 or '74, but even excising those years, it's a run that doesn't look out of place next to Beatles/Dylan.

Neil Young had a '69-'75 Dylan-level run, hitting short Beatles-level peaks on the front and back end of that, and had some really strong post-peak stuff like Rust Never Sleeps/Live Rust and Ragged Glory. Not out of place with Beatles/Dylan.

That's three more acts on that level, and I didn't even look outside of pop/rockers who hit their stride in the 60's. They're not even controversial picks. I really wanted to make a case for The Kinks. I think they peaked really high, but it was too short, and their pre- and post-peak stuff was too scattershot for me to do it. But the Stones, Zep, and Young all feel like pretty safe GOAT-level picks that most wouldn't really argue. And yeah, you could argue that the Beatles and Dylan are still better. That's fair. I'd certainly agree the Beatles are the cream of that crop. Dylan I'm less sure about. I'd probably have him below the Stones but above Zep and Neil. I could see the argument for him as #2 on the depth chart, though. Point is, even if you have Beatles/Dylan ahead of Stones/Zep/Young, I don't buy that they're so far ahead that Stones/Zep/Young shouldn't even be considered GOATCs. And again, that's just pop and rock acts of the 60's. Imagine what we find if we actually open our minds a little and start looking at different genres and eras.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users