90's Region - Marilyn Manson vs Defiance, OH

Marilyn Manson vs Defiance, OH

  • Marilyn Manson

  • Defiance, OH


Results are only viewable after voting.

IrishCanadian25

Going on 10 years with WrestleZone
1st Round 90's Match

Marilyn Manson vs Defiance, OH

Please take into account the entire body of work of the artists, their mark on the music industry and/or society as a whole, their influence on other artists, lyrics, music, etc. If you have not already done so, please review the rules of the tournament and the Wrestlezone Forums. Have fun!​
 
I voted Manson, only because I cannot STAND the actual geographical location that is Defiance, OH. We would play them in tennis here at college, and they were major scrubs who played tennis like P.E. students. It might be the worst location on Earth.
 
I voted Manson, only because I cannot STAND the actual geographical location that is Defiance, OH. We would play them in tennis here at college, and they were major scrubs who played tennis like P.E. students. It might be the worst location on Earth.

That's the stupidest fucking thing I've ever read. Ever.

You shouldn't even be allowed to vote in this tournament if you're going to vote against a band simply because you don't like what they're named after. Completely idiotic.

Okay, so, Defiance, Ohio were my wildcard pick. I say were Mr. IC25 because if you remember correctly I thought we changed it to Spacemen 3? Oh well, I'll run with this here.

Defiance, Ohio are a folk-punk band that are among the best bands I've ever heard in the last 10 years. I'll try to explain their sound. They play all acoustic instruments (including otherwise "bizarre" instruments for a rock band like violin, mandolin, cello) and still manage to rock harder then 9/10 electric bands. They play a form of indie rock meets 60s folk meets the energy and spirit of punk rock, with the grassroots ideals of folk music. Best damn show I ever went to in my life, cost a buck to get into some random guy's house in Providence, where the band was set up in the living room. There was only about 30 people there, and they played like they were playing infront of 10 million. Absolutely amazing show and experience I will never forget.

So, since I'm betting I am the ONLY person on this board to know who Defiance, Ohio are, I shall post videos (with links incase the videos don't work) for you all to sample.

PLEASE LISTEN TO DEFIANCE, OHIO BEFORE VOTING ON THIS

(Note: Listen to their studio stuff first. It's better. Just search for "Defiance, Ohio" on Limewire. Download the songs Petty Problems and Tanks Tanks Tanks. You will not be disappointed)

Defiance, Ohio - I Don't Want Solidarity If It Means Holding Hands With You
[youtube]0lzb_Cdt3Fk[/youtube]

(link: http://youtube.com/watch?v=0lzb_Cdt3Fk)


I was going to post more, but I have to go. Damnit, CHECK THEM OUT PEOPLE!
 
Marilyn Manson brought Shock Rock back, and created mass controversy, all while putting fear in the hearts of children all around the world. That alone gets him my vote.
 
I will vote for Defiance, OH because I refuse to vote for the total crap that is Marilyn Manson and I enjoyed the video xfear posted, I may be checking out some more of their stuff if I get some free time, good WC choice BTW.

Marilyn Manson sucks!!
 
Xfear, I feel terrible. I really do. I had promised both wildcards to you and even had one list with both Defiance, OH and Spaceme 3 involved in the tournament. Not sure what happened to that list, but nobody caught my mistake until now. If there is EVER a spot I can plug them into the 90's (kinda tough now at the end) I would. Total misstep on my part.

Anyway, I will not vote here until I have done proper research (unlike the miscreants who voted for Evanescense over Dream Theatre). It will be tough to get me to vote against Manson, not because I enjoy their music, but because I respect the social influence. I will hold off until the end - I can be convinced.
 
That's the stupidest fucking thing I've ever read. Ever.

You shouldn't even be allowed to vote in this tournament if you're going to vote against a band simply because you don't like what they're named after. Completely idiotic.

You've obviously never been to Defiance, OH. I'm pretty sure it embodies what Columbus and other explorers feared existed if they were to sail west.



So, since I'm betting I am the ONLY person on this board to know who Defiance, Ohio are, I shall post videos (with links incase the videos don't work) for you all to sample.

That might be a sign as to why they are not winning.

PLEASE LISTEN TO DEFIANCE, OHIO BEFORE VOTING ON THIS

Well, sorry, but too late for that. I was not too impressed with these fellas. The quality of music can't compete with Manson's cultural influence.
 
This is easy. Marilyn Manson is one of the best ever at what he does. His covers spit venom and are better composition wise than the originals. His original songs like Torniquet is haunting and has everything that I require from a song. His voice on his older albums is purely venomous, Just put on his Greatest Hits and you have a great cross section of his work. It is venomous, Biting and all those other words that describe the sound. He has also evolved his sound over the years with a more Industrial sound coming in in the album before the latest album. Which I haven't gotten a chance to listen to yet. But He is such a force in the Music industry in the last 18 years, combine in that he is one of the most articulate men in Rock today, look for his interview he did with Bill O'Reilly it is a great interview where he turns what he is accused of back to O'Reilly.

Torniquet
[youtube]-Z2QpRcyLUc[/youtube]

Sweet Dreams (Are Made of This)
[youtube]F7cPgonpbwo[/youtube]

The Dope Show
[youtube]FFiuPnWBM80[/youtube]

Heart Shaped Glasses
[youtube]imB6pVM_IB0[/youtube]
 
You've obviously never been to Defiance, OH. I'm pretty sure it embodies what Columbus and other explorers feared existed if they were to sail west.

Which has absolutely fucking NOTHING to do with this match.

That might be a sign as to why they are not winning.

No fucking shit? Really? Here I was thinking they'd win this easily.

Well, sorry, but too late for that. I was not too impressed with these fellas. The quality of music can't compete with Manson's cultural influence.

HOW THE FUCK ARE YOU GOING TO NOT BE IMPRESSED BY THIS BAND IF YOU NEVER EVEN FUCKING LISTENED TO THEM?

Seriously, just leave. You've proven already that you don't understand how to follow rules. Continue to vote blindly on bands based off of whether or not you like their name. Can we ban this guy from voting since he apparently doesn't understand the RULES of the god damn tournament? Which include, amazingly, LISTENING TO BOTH BANDS.

Marilyn Manson is musical trash. His sole reason for being in this tournament and for being famous is that he likes to shock people. Thats literally the ONLY reason he became famous. Not based off of his (terrible) music, but because people thought he removed one of his ribs so he could suck his own dick. What a visionary.

Seriously, I don't care if people vote for Manson here, because thats already what I was expecting, but please FOLLOW THE FUCKING RULES (Steamboat) and actually LISTEN TO BOTH BANDS before voting. Otherwise, just leave. We don't need you here fucking up votes.
 
I have to defend Steamboat Ricky here. After all, his vote counts the same as anyone else's.

I can totally understand why someone would vote for a band on the basis of immense, mainstream social influence. Marilyn Manson was one of the first bands in a LONG TIME to truly turn the world on it's ear, largly by making such a loud rucus that people couldn't turn away. They are music's version of a highway car wreck with visible fatalities. Even Manson's interview on the Michael Moore documentary "Bowling for Columbine" speaks volumes about his political knowledge and prowess. He is the Dee Snyder of the 1990's.

Shadowmancer made the quintessential post for WHY people would want to vote for Manson in this thing. X, I loved your bio on these guys, but the fact is you've seen them in concert at some guy's house for a dollar. That alone speaks volumes of where they are in the musical books. Manson is a band that eithe rmakes people smile, cheer, shudder, or become outraged as soon as their are mentioned.

I still have not voted - but everyone, Steamboat Ricky included, has made some valid points.
 
I have to defend Steamboat Ricky here. After all, his vote counts the same as anyone else's.

I can totally understand why someone would vote for a band on the basis of immense, mainstream social influence. Marilyn Manson was one of the first bands in a LONG TIME to truly turn the world on it's ear, largly by making such a loud rucus that people couldn't turn away. They are music's version of a highway car wreck with visible fatalities. Even Manson's interview on the Michael Moore documentary "Bowling for Columbine" speaks volumes about his political knowledge and prowess. He is the Dee Snyder of the 1990's.

That's perfect reason for voting for Manson here IC. I understand that 95% of people will vote for Manson.

But Steamboat Ricky didn't vote for Manson because he likes him better then Defiance, Ohio. He voted for Manson because he "doesn't like the town" of Defiance, Ohio. Which is a total breaking of the rules, which say pretty damn clearly in EVERY SINGLE thread that you need to actually LISTEN TO BOTH BANDS before voting. Steamboat Ricky apparently found it to be just too hard to take all of 5 minutes out of his life to just listen to a song by Defiance, Ohio. That's my beef here. I don't care that he voted for Manson, I care that he's essentially voting on this thing based on who's name sounds cooler.

X, I loved your bio on these guys, but the fact is you've seen them in concert at some guy's house for a dollar. That alone speaks volumes of where they are in the musical books.

That's because that's apart of what Defiance Ohio is ABOUT IC25. They could charge fuck more if they wanted to, and they could sell out any number of small-capacity venues, but because of their ideals and politics, they want to bring music to their fans for the cheapest they can, in the most comfortable environment they can. It speaks nothing of their musical talent. You can't base the talent of a band on their popularity. If that were the case in life, then we'd all agree that Van Gogh was one of the worst painters to ever live, considering he never sold a painting while he was alive. Obviously, that's not the case.

Defiance, Ohio are better then Marilyn Manson in every way you could musically be better. Better musicians, better lyrics, a MUCH MORE well-thought out political backround (Manson's political rants are laughable at best) and they actually stand for something, whereas Marilyn Manson stands for shocking kid's parents so it can create controversy, which as we all know, equals more cash. The man is a hypocritical capitalist in the truest sense of the word and if anyone has been taken in by him, well in the words of Slyfox, you've been completely WORKED.
 
Actually, I did listen to Defiance, OH. They sounded average, at best. You can disagree, if you wish, but I was rather bored with them very early on.

Furthermore, shouldn't the name of the band be part of the overall judging process? I mean, if a band wants people to listen to them, then they should probably have an attractive name. If a band's name sucks, then people are going to be less likely to pay attention to them. In this instance, their name sucks, from my perspective, because I have had poor experiences with the town of Defiance, OH. Thus, to bash my voting as "idiotic" is something that is rather moronic in its own right, as you have not considered the value of marketing into the overall quality of a good musician.
 
Actually, I did listen to Defiance, OH. They sounded average, at best. You can disagree, if you wish, but I was rather bored with them very early on.

If you did listen to them, then why have you waited until now to bring it up, and you said in your first post that you voted against Defiance Ohio based on their name alone.

Furthermore, shouldn't the name of the band be part of the overall judging process?

Umm, fuck no? Does it say that in the criteria for judgment? No it doesn't.

I mean, if a band wants people to listen to them, then they should probably have an attractive name.

Go tell that to Toad the Wet Sprocket, who scored numerous Top Ten rock hits in the 90s, with the single worst name in music history.

If a band's name sucks, then people are going to be less likely to pay attention to them.

Yeah, if they're a moron who judges bands on their name. Do you judge everything based on it's name? Books, movies? The idiocy here is really astounding.

In this instance, their name sucks, from my perspective, because I have had poor experiences with the town of Defiance, OH. Thus, to bash my voting as "idiotic" is something that is rather moronic in its own right, as you have not considered the value of marketing into the overall quality of a good musician.

ROFLMAO

I really could not stop laughing when I read this.

Since when has marketing been a factor in the overall quality of a good musician? Are you fucking kidding me? Thank you, you've proven my point that you have no idea what you're talking about. I guess Steve Vai, Yngvie Malmsteen, and Joe Satriani are all TERRIBLE musicians considering they're bad marketers. Hell, look at Yngvie's name; obviously he's a terrible musician with a name like that!

And no, it's not moronic to bash you for voting on this based off of not liking the name of one band, it's actually something called FOLLOWING THE FUCKING RULES OF THE TOURNAMENT.

WHAT is so god damn hard for some of you to understand here? The rules for criteria are in EVERY SINGLE THREAD, and yet you've seemed to miss it every time.

Feel free to respond if you'd like to continue to be made a fool.
 
If you did listen to them, then why have you waited until now to bring it up, and you said in your first post that you voted against Defiance Ohio based on their name alone.

Because I did initially just vote for manson because of the name "Defiance, OH." It wasn't until after you made a huge deal about it until I listened to them. When I did listen to them, they were average, at best.



Umm, fuck no? Does it say that in the criteria for judgment? No it doesn't.

No, but clearly, if the band's name wasn't "Defiance, OH," then I may have given them more of a chance. Thus, name = very important.


Go tell that to Toad the Wet Sprocket, who scored numerous Top Ten rock hits in the 90s, with the single worst name in music history.

You see, that name is awesome to me. If I had a band, I hope that the name could be at least half as random and awesome as Toad the Wet Sprocket.

Yeah, if they're a moron who judges bands on their name. Do you judge everything based on it's name? Books, movies? The idiocy here is really astounding.

Obviously not. But it sure helps to get butts in the seats. If you want something to have credibility, then it needs a good name. Sex Pistols, for example. How many people first listened to the Sex Pistols because of their name alone? Probably a lot. It just turns out that they were also revolutionary and made quality music. But without the name "Sex Pistols," they may not have been as successful.



ROFLMAO

I really could not stop laughing when I read this.

Since when has marketing been a factor in the overall quality of a good musician? Are you fucking kidding me? Thank you, you've proven my point that you have no idea what you're talking about. I guess Steve Vai, Yngvie Malmsteen, and Joe Satriani are all TERRIBLE musicians considering they're bad marketers. Hell, look at Yngvie's name; obviously he's a terrible musician with a name like that!

Read above.

And no, it's not moronic to bash you for voting on this based off of not liking the name of one band, it's actually something called FOLLOWING THE FUCKING RULES OF THE TOURNAMENT. WHAT is so god damn hard for some of you to understand here? The rules for criteria are in EVERY SINGLE THREAD, and yet you've seemed to miss it every time.

IC25 in all of the Music Tourney threads said:
Please take into account the entire body of work of the artists

Last I checked, a name is part of the artists' entire body of work. It's what they are known by. If the artists' do not have something to be identified and remembered by, then they will flop.



Feel free to respond if you'd like to continue to be made a fool.

If what you are posting is "making me a fool," then continue to do so as you please.
 
Because I did initially just vote for manson because of the name "Defiance, OH." It wasn't until after you made a huge deal about it until I listened to them. When I did listen to them, they were average, at best.

Bull-fucking-shit. The FIRST thing you said wasn't that you didn't like Defiance, Ohio's sound, it was that you didn't like their name. Spare me the bullshit.

No, but clearly, if the band's name wasn't "Defiance, OH," then I may have given them more of a chance. Thus, name = very important.

So because YOU didn't like the name, that makes it a bad name? Seriously, just stop, every thing you say is even more idiotic then what you've said previously. It's rather astounding.

A name is not important to a band. It's the music. If The Beatles were called The Butt-Fucking ********ers, I would still love them. A name only matters if you're a moron who judges things based off of looks and names alone.

You see, that name is awesome to me. If I had a band, I hope that the name could be at least half as random and awesome as Toad the Wet Sprocket.

Are you fucking kidding me? Toad the Wet Sprocket is the single stupidest name for a band, ever. Atleast Defiance, Ohio is an interesting name. Toad the Wet Sprocket is just fucking stupid, something a 10 year old would come up with.

And you didn't address the fact that I just destroyed your incredibly weak point that a name is important for a band's marketing. Toad the Wet Sprocket, a name that 99% of people thought was fucking stupid, were very successful. So there goes your "point" which took all of 20 seconds to debunk.

Obviously not. But it sure helps to get butts in the seats.

Which is relevant to musical quality how? It's not. At all. Popularity does not equal quality, whats so fucking hard to understand about that? I guess Mariah Carey is better then Elvis, right? She's had more #1 singles. And I guess Britney Spears is better then your favorite band Jimmy Eat World right? She's sold fuckloads of more records, so using your logic, Britney Spears is a better musician then Jimmy Eat World.

If you want something to have credibility, then it needs a good name.

Says who? You? I ALREADY proved this point to be wrong. See: Toad the Wet Sprocket.

Sex Pistols, for example. How many people first listened to the Sex Pistols because of their name alone? Probably a lot. It just turns out that they were also revolutionary and made quality music. But without the name "Sex Pistols," they may not have been as successful.

Quality music? Seriously? Are you kidding me? The Sex Pistols? NOT ONE OF THEM COULD PLAY THEIR INSTRUMENTS. They didn't have to, they got off on spirit and attitude alone, but to say the Sex Pistols made quality music is absolutely ridiculious. Sid Vicious may very well have been the single worst bassist in music history. He didn't even know what the strings were called for christ's sake!

Last I checked, a name is part of the artists' entire body of work. It's what they are known by. If the artists' do not have something to be identified and remembered by, then they will flop.

ROFL

I should just start saving your posts, so whenever I have a bad day, I can pull them out and laugh my ass off.

The name of an artist is NOT a part of their body of work. Apparently you don't know what the term "body of work" means. It refers to their MUSIC. Not their name. Christ, am I really having to explain something this simple?

And AGAIN you bring up popularity as if it has ANY BEARING AT ALL on musical quality. It doesn't. This is not rocket science here.

If what you are posting is "making me a fool," then continue to do so as you please.

Don't worry, you make a fool out of yourself more then I could ever hope to. Please PLEASE respond so me and the rest of the forum can continue to laugh at you.
 
Bull-fucking-shit. The FIRST thing you said wasn't that you didn't like Defiance, Ohio's sound, it was that you didn't like their name. Spare me the bullshit.

Steamboat Ricky said:
Because I did initially just vote for manson because of the name "Defiance, OH."

I think I stated that pretty clearly.



So because YOU didn't like the name, that makes it a bad name? Seriously, just stop, every thing you say is even more idiotic then what you've said previously. It's rather astounding.

You contradict yourself more and more in every post. What I have done is expressed an opinion. If you don't like that opinion, then you can choose not to agree with it. You have done that, so congratualtions.

Because I don't like a name doesn't mean that it's a bad name. But it does weigh into why I didn't vote for them. This is my vote, after all. Not your's.



A name is not important to a band. It's the music. If The Beatles were called The Butt-Fucking ********ers, I would still love them. A name only matters if you're a moron who judges things based off of looks and names alone.

Here is a prime example of you contradicting yourself. Just because you say that a name isn't important to a band, does that make it not important? No. It's all relative.

Are you fucking kidding me? Toad the Wet Sprocket is the single stupidest name for a band, ever. Atleast Defiance, Ohio is an interesting name. Toad the Wet Sprocket is just fucking stupid, something a 10 year old would come up with.

Again, relative crap. What makes Toad the Wet Sprocket "the single stupidest name for a band ever"? Because you don't like the name? What makes Defiance, OH an "interesting" name? Again, this is all just your opinion, followed up by profanely bashing my opinions in order to get them to sound weaker.

And you didn't address the fact that I just destroyed your incredibly weak point that a name is important for a band's marketing. Toad the Wet Sprocket, a name that 99% of people thought was fucking stupid, were very successful. So there goes your "point" which took all of 20 seconds to debunk.

Yeah, I like how you "disproved" my theory with some of the greatest research the world has ever seen. I'm sure that "99%" of all people thought that Toad the Wet Sprocket was a stupid name. You must have supernatural abilities that can help you poll the entire world in 20 seconds. You should be very proud of yourself.



Which is relevant to musical quality how? It's not. At all. Popularity does not equal quality, whats so fucking hard to understand about that? I guess Mariah Carey is better then Elvis, right? She's had more #1 singles. And I guess Britney Spears is better then your favorite band Jimmy Eat World right? She's sold fuckloads of more records, so using your logic, Britney Spears is a better musician then Jimmy Eat World.

It's relevant in that it gets the word out about the quality of the music. If a tree falls in a forest with no one around, does it make a sound? Even if it did, then no one would know because they were not there to experience it. Therefore, if the music isn't being heard, how can it be deemed "good"? How can it be deemed "music"?

Again, it's relative, bra. To Susie down the street, Britney was probably the cat's pajamas in 1999. If you had her listen to both Britney and Jimmy, she would likely much rather listen to Britney. Why? Preference, dude. PREFERENCE. So to her, the quality of Britney's music is better. Jimmy would lose that one. My preference would be to listen to Jimmy and to burn every Britney Spears album within my parameter. But that's just MY opinion. Susie down the street from 1999 has the right to her opinion, too.



Says who? You? I ALREADY proved this point to be wrong. See: Toad the Wet Sprocket.

Proved what wrong? All I read was this:

xfearbefore said:
OMG!!!! YOU ARE AN IDIOT *(^&)&&^&. WITH EVERY POST I PROVE YOU TO BE MORE *&^(*&^*&( IDIOTIC. *&*&^*&*&^%*&^(*&)(*^&%*^%(&^)(*(&^)*)(*&)*(&)(*^^&%*&^%(*&Y)*(Y&)*(&(^&%*&()*(*)(&(^(*&^(&^)*(&)(*&^(*&^))(



Quality music? Seriously? Are you kidding me? The Sex Pistols? NOT ONE OF THEM COULD PLAY THEIR INSTRUMENTS. They didn't have to, they got off on spirit and attitude alone, but to say the Sex Pistols made quality music is absolutely ridiculious. Sid Vicious may very well have been the single worst bassist in music history. He didn't even know what the strings were called for christ's sake!

Again, preference man.


ROFL

I should just start saving your posts, so whenever I have a bad day, I can pull them out and laugh my ass off.

Good, I'm glad that you can find personal joy in "ripping on me."

The name of an artist is NOT a part of their body of work. Apparently you don't know what the term "body of work" means. It refers to their MUSIC. Not their name. Christ, am I really having to explain something this simple?

Apparently I don't know what "your definition of 'body of work' means." I like how this is relative also, and that because of your elitist perspective, you cannot understand that people define things differently.

And AGAIN you bring up popularity as if it has ANY BEARING AT ALL on musical quality. It doesn't. This is not rocket science here.

Already addressed that.


Don't worry, you make a fool out of yourself more then I could ever hope to. Please PLEASE respond so me and the rest of the forum can continue to laugh at you.

I hope you do. You should also get the 99% of people that think Toad the Wet Sprocket is a bad name to make a fool out of me and subsequently laugh.
 
You contradict yourself more and more in every post. What I have done is expressed an opinion. If you don't like that opinion, then you can choose not to agree with it. You have done that, so congratualtions. Because I don't like a name doesn't mean that it's a bad name. But it does weigh into why I didn't vote for them. This is my vote, after all. Not your's.

And where again did I state that you couldn't express your opinion on the band's sound? I never said that. What I said was that you should actually LISTEN to both bands before voting on the matter, as per the rules of the entire tournament. Is it really so hard to listen to a band for a few minutes? Really? Can people not take the time out of posting bullshit in the Bar Room to listen to a band that was considered among the best of it's decade and just decide whether or not you liked it? If that's something you can't do, then just don't participate in the tournament. It's not an obligatory thing that you need to participate in.

Here is a prime example of you contradicting yourself. Just because you say that a name isn't important to a band, does that make it not important? No. It's all relative.

How is music relative? Sound waves are not a relative thing. A name is not music. None of the criteria for this tournament asks you to judge bands based on their name.

And how am I contradicting myself? When did I ever say that the name of a band was important to it's quality? Really, where are you coming up with this stuff? Are we reading different posts?

Again, relative crap. What makes Toad the Wet Sprocket "the single stupidest name for a band ever"? Because you don't like the name? What makes Defiance, OH an "interesting" name? Again, this is all just your opinion, followed up by profanely bashing my opinions in order to get them to sound weaker.

You're right, it is my opinion. This thread is about Defiance, Ohio and Marilyn Manson, where you can give opinions on the bands. I think their name sounds interesting, and I brought up Toad the Wet Sprocket's name because it would be common knowledge among music listeners that their name is rather stupid. If you'd like I could honestly supply you with a couple of different magazines/websites that have printed articles on some of the stupidest band names in history, among which Toad the Wet Sprocket is always a high scorer. Do I really need to go out and take a poll to prove to you that a majority of human beings think that "Toad the Wet Sprocket" is an idiotic name?

Yeah, I like how you "disproved" my theory with some of the greatest research the world has ever seen. I'm sure that "99%" of all people thought that Toad the Wet Sprocket was a stupid name. You must have supernatural abilities that can help you poll the entire world in 20 seconds. You should be very proud of yourself.

Apparently you couldn't understand what I was saying. You stated that a name to a band is very important to it's success. I showed you the success of a band that a majority of people think have an absolutely ridiculious name. We were both stating our opinions on the matter, I don't understand how I contradicted myself.

It's relevant in that it gets the word out about the quality of the music. If a tree falls in a forest with no one around, does it make a sound? Even if it did, then no one would know because they were not there to experience it. Therefore, if the music isn't being heard, how can it be deemed "good"? How can it be deemed "music"?

...Are you high? Seriously, what's with the tree analogy? How is that even slightly relevant or helpful to this discussion, or what you're trying to compare it to? You're going into impossible questions to answer now. Shouldn't you start asking what's the meaning of life? Is there a God?

Again, it's relative, bra. To Susie down the street, Britney was probably the cat's pajamas in 1999. If you had her listen to both Britney and Jimmy, she would likely much rather listen to Britney. Why? Preference, dude. PREFERENCE. So to her, the quality of Britney's music is better. Jimmy would lose that one. My preference would be to listen to Jimmy and to burn every Britney Spears album within my parameter. But that's just MY opinion. Susie down the street from 1999 has the right to her opinion, too.

I understand that, and once again, I never said you couldn't state your preference in the matter. I was asking you to follow the rules of the tournament, or to not participate. Is that really such a terrible thing to ask?

Proved what wrong? All I read was this:

Yes, because obviously if someone elects to use curse words that immediately rebutes anything they have to say. I choose to curse in my posts because that is how I speak. Blame the area where I grew up.

Again, preference man.

I think you misunderstood me. I wasn't saying the Sex Pistols was a bad band. I absolutely love the Sex Pistols, and have championed them many times before on this board. But they didn't know how to play their instruments. This isn't a matter of preference, this is simply a fact. Have you ever seen a live performance by the band? They honestly did not know how to play their instruments, and the band members have freely admitted this at times. They were simply strewn together because of the look and aesthetic feel to the "punk rock" look that the bands hand.

You can't honestly be telling me it's a matter of preference as to whether or not someone was skilled at an instrument?

Good, I'm glad that you can find personal joy in "ripping on me."

I really don't even need to. You're obviously an intelligent poster, and yet you're arguing with me about whether a name is music and asking me hypothetical questions that no one can answer. What are you talking about? All I was saying in my previous posts was for you to follow the rules of the tournament. You admitted that you didn't. Case closed.

Apparently I don't know what "your definition of 'body of work' means." I like how this is relative also, and that because of your elitist perspective, you cannot understand that people define things differently.

How am I an elitist? I never once claimed that your opinion was lesser then mine in any way. And now you're debating with me the definition of words? Is this a joke? Are you seriously arguing with me that an artists "body of work" is anything other then their music? How does a musician express his art, or his "work"? Through his MUSIC obviously. Are you honestly debating me on that?

Already addressed that.

Was that with the tree analogy or the Suzy down the street rant?

I hope you do. You should also get the 99% of people that think Toad the Wet Sprocket is a bad name to make a fool out of me and subsequently laugh.

Sorry bud, but thats simply how the cookie crumbles. We here at Wrestlezone enjoy and bask in the verbal humiliation of others. It's simply the WZ way of life.
 
A name is not music, but to say that a band's name is not a form of art or expression is misguided, in my opinion. From my knowledge of musicians, their music is an expression of their collective souls. So, to put their entire being into their music and then have some random, unrelated name would seem unfair to the music they create. Thus, yes, I am stating that I think that a musician's name is part of its body of work.

The elitism that I speak of is that you seem to have some kind of general idea of what the criteria for "quality music" is, and you are judging all bands by that benchmark. But again, the part where people have a variety of different opinions as to what "quality" means comes into play here. Someone out there might think that the inability to play an instrument correctly, yet still sell millions of albums, is an artform in and of itself.

You seem to be stating that what I am bringing up has nothing to do with music or "body of work." But to say that social impact, etc., is part of "body of work" as you seem to be defining it is a stretch, at best. Thus, the rules for this contest, in my opinion, seem to be fairly grey.
 
Arguing about names is silly but it DOES matter. How many bands have you seen lately that have gotten huge due to a few quirky lyrics and a wierd sounding name? (Arctic Monkeys, dont believe the hype? No i didnt, now fuck off)

But then how many bands have you seen that are not big, because they dont have the "look" that the mainstream market is looking for. I have seen many bands like this on my travels around the West Yorkshire music scene. They can blow you away with thier playing, but because they dont imitate the f*cking Artic Monkeys or look like every other band nowadays, they wont ever make it big.
 
OMFG, are you people actuelly suggesting that a bands name is really matters this much, really?, please, it doesn't matter how stupid the bands name is, it matter how much exposure the bands gets, and how much support they get whether that be from the fans the record companies or the radio, I mean for fuck sake, Limp Bizkit, Orgy, Toad The Wet Sprocket, Korn, Papa Roach are just a few names off the top of my head, that are simply stupid fucking names, yet all those bands had mainstream success (I'm not saying they were all good by any means just that they had mainstream success), name isn't nearly as important as you people are fucking claiming, if your gonna judge a band just based off of what their name is, then you mine as well just rip your fucking ears off cause you don't deserve to listen to music
 
OMFG, are you people actuelly suggesting that a bands name is really matters this much, really?, please, it doesn't matter how stupid the bands name is, it matter how much exposure the bands gets, and how much support they get whether that be from the fans the record companies or the radio, I mean for fuck sake, Limp Bizkit, Orgy, Toad The Wet Sprocket, Korn, Papa Roach are just a few names off the top of my head, that are simply stupid fucking names, yet all those bands had mainstream success (I'm not saying they were all good by any means just that they had mainstream success), name isn't nearly as important as you people are fucking claiming, if your gonna judge a band just based off of what their name is, then you mine as well just rip your fucking ears off cause you don't deserve to listen to music

Hopefully you've actually read what I posted and not just saw that I was posting about bands' names and then got pissed.

If you did read, then you'll realize that I was making the argument that a band's name is part of what attracts people to it if they hadn't heard the band's music before they heard the name of the band.

Furthermore, I'll refrain from ripping my ears off because I do deserve to continue to listen to music, regardless of your disagreeing with my opinions.
 
Wow. I just don't know what to do anymore. I really tried my hardest here. But apparently, you people are just absolutely incapable of figuring out an incredibly simple concept.

The NAME of a band, is not the music. That's what you vote for in this tournament, on the MUSIC of the band, not how successful they were, how cool they looked, or what their name was. Is this really that hard for you to understand? Because I'm afraid there really is no way for me to simplify it any more then I already have.

How about, and follow me here because I know this is where you seem to get lost, but how about just maybe you follow the rules of the tournament? Just maybe? Or is that really too hard for you to do? If you can't do it, then don't vote. It's a rather simple concept.

Sound good?
 
I've already explained myself to the fullest possibility. I am not in violation of the rules, whatsoever. You're just going to have to get over it, man.

IC25 and the Rules said:
Voting - please look at each band objectively and vote on the band's ENTIRE BODY OF WORK, not just the decade they are a part of. The decades are there to separate and organize the bands, not to marginalize longevity. Other useful criteria include: influence, inspiration, mainstream hits, experimentalism, quality of albums, etc. We are trying to decide the best band of all time...

xfearbefore said:
The NAME of a band, is not the music. That's what you vote for in this tournament, on the MUSIC of the band, not how successful they were, how cool they looked, or what their name was. Is this really that hard for you to understand? Because I'm afraid there really is no way for me to simplify it any more then I already have.

Apparently the rules have something to do with the success of the band, bra.
 
But you're not. Because the criteria doesn't make any mention to the name of a band. And a name of a band is NOT a part of their body of work, which is a phrase that IC25 used to describe ALL of their MUSIC, as in, you have to consider their early and later stuff even if some of it isn't as good. Why are you just being a prick here for no good reason? Is it really so hard to just say "Okay, I will actually listen to both bands before voting on the contest and I will judge them on the music?". This isn't the "Who's Name is the Most Marketable?" tournament, it's the MUSIC tournament.
 
In no way have I been "being a prick." Not once have I called you stupid, idiotic, or any other intellectually degrading label. Rather, I have merely stated an opinion, and when it has been refuted, I have done my best to back it up. I have read and interpreted the rules many times, and I do not find any of my actions to be in violation of the rules.

I have listened to the bands. I did not initially in this one, and for that, I apologize. I went back and listened to them to give them a fair shot, and they were average, at best. In other threads, I did listen to the music. I had never heard Dream Theater, but I listened to them and they were awesome. However, I refer back to my countless points about the name of a band...I did not choose to listen to Defiance, OH, as I highly dislike the name.

It's not that I don't understand your point. It's that I think it is misguided. So, you can reword it or put it in bold letters if you want, but I've considered your point and decided that I disagree with it.

As long as you refute my opinions, I will continue to defend them.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,851
Messages
3,300,884
Members
21,726
Latest member
chrisxenforo
Back
Top