snake wrote:
i never understood aerosmith. i mean dream on was good so that era aerosmith was fine i guess. but for me aside from black sabbath alot of classice rock bands just dont do it for me. when i was a kid i went thru my 70's phase. i listened to led zep and played out the first four albums of thiers but where do you go after that? do you just keep spinning those albums? same goes for aerosmith. really the only two bands from that whole time period that retain their value for me are pink floyd and black sabbath. im at the point where if led zep comes on the radio i quickly turn it off. same goes for aerosmith.
idk i guess if id have grown up with these bands when they were in their prime id have more of an appreciation for what these bands play. i do appreciate what bands like led and aerosmith did for music but i cant take hearing the same songs over and over and over.
really how many times can you listen to whole lotta love???
I totally agree Snake. Sorry about how my comments might have been perceived in that troll thread. I tend to make one idea someone has and write a couple paragraphs that are not related to their post. My difficulty using the correct articles, such as "you" when I mean "(some)one" rubs people the wrong way and adds to the confusion.
I really don't like how some people will talk about all these old ass bands that have been eclipsed in both musicianship and songwriting and pretend that the newer bands just ripped off everything they did.
It really needs to be said. Anytime anyone listens to a record to the point that they have memorized the songs several times over and in a wide array of emotional states that can be drawn upon when re-listening to those songs, you are going to be convinced it is great one way or another. People get a new record, especially in a time of disposable musical abundance, do not devote nearly the time they have put into a newer record and expect the same emotional resonance. People really expect an album to live up to the proportions they have imposed on their favorite albums through sheer reputation and repetition in an attempt to comply with the perceived opinion of such work that nothing can live up to it.
The old bands are not better, they have just been heard far more times per person and a lot more people have been convinced by Rolling Stone, et. al, that they are indisposable masterpieces that only a moron would criticize.
Personally I trust my own judgement and have enough faith in my own musical knowledge that if I disagree with a heavily favored album, I know I am right and refuse to argue with fanboys that don't realize that they have been mildly brainwashed into a sort of gospel of canonized rock n roll that applauds and marginalizes the same shit year after year.
The only stuff that lives up to it's sales and reputation that was uber-popular and well regarded by many for me is Boston.
I have never been that interested in pre-dio sabbath and am just now starting to listen to Deep Purple.
Aerosmith are one of those bands where if you owned the LP's and played them enough, or someone else projected their opinion heavily enough, you would like those records a lot. Not to say there are not a great number of people that truly appreciate it, but in my experience people usually have flimsy reasons they liked the record other than they did not disagree with an overblown assessment of the material initially and grew to accept these opinions as their own.
