Lost In Time

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from jesseyeric. Show jesseyeric's posts

    Lost In Time

    This is kind of a two part discussion. One being subjective and the other being objective.

    1) Is there a band which you thought would remain one of your joys forever but as time has passed, you find that you cannot listen to them anymore and you sometimes question why you liked them to begin with?

    2) What artist or artists do you believe completely tarnished their reputation and image as the years passed?
     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Lost In Time

    Interesting questions.

    #1 I can't really think of any artist that clearly fits this category.  Certain bands disappointed me, like Scorpions, Judas Priest and Def Leppard.  I thought they were capable of a lot more based on albums like Lovedrive, British Steel and Hysteria.  Grand Funk's later stuff was a major disappointment.  But I still enjoy those particular albums that drew me to them.  

    #2 Now I'm going to have to beat the dead horse, but the one band I am really harsh with is Aerosmith.  I just can't forgive Steve Tyler for that string of really dumb songs after the brilliance of their early albums.      
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Lost In Time

    U2

    Not so much a love-hate thing as it is their maddening inconsistence.  For a band that was capable of such brilliant, edgy turns and that started with such promise and then only sporadically delivered, they can be very disappointing.

    It's not surprising that many of the bands which followed in their wake have since passed them on the relevance and experimental scales during the past 20 years. "War", "The Joshua Tree" and "Achtung Baby" will always remain modern classics to me.  Much of the rest has not stood up very well.

    I guess there is such a thing as a band or artist aging gracefully (and with their audience), but it seems to be an increasing rarity. 

    "Better to burn out than fade away", indeed.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Lost In Time

    I tend to agree with HF and with Matty, Aerosmith and U2 were brilliant and then stunk , U2 tends to be inconsistent, Aerosmith was consistently bad since 1979.

    But I have got  to commit the unthinkable and say that Paul McCartney has really disappointed me from "Wings at the Speed of Sound" until now with the exception of "London Town" and "Tug of War" which contain some of his better songs. I really wore out vinyl copies of "Ram", "McCartney","Red Rose Speedway" ,"Band on the Run" and "Venus and Mars."

    I know it is sacrilege to throw stones at a Beatle, but surely McCartney was capable of more consistent albums from about 1976 forward. The early solo and Wings stuff was quite good (except "Wildlife"), but his later stuff is very inconsistent and sometimes awful.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from phsmith8. Show phsmith8's posts

    Re: Lost In Time

    1.) i was a very big primus fan for a while, and i still love frizzle fry and a lot of their stuff...but some of it just escapes me completely now. so wacky.

    2.) neil diamond when he plays sweet caroline at least 3 times per concert
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from jesseyeric. Show jesseyeric's posts

    Re: Lost In Time

    I decided to come up with this conversation even though I have no defined answers in my own little head.

    Stevie Winwood was always a disappointment to me. Although he has received many accolades during his solo career, for whatever reason, it never struck a chord with me when compared to his work with SPG, Traffic and Blind Faith.

    I have to agree with many choices here; Chicago, Def Leppard, etc. And I completely agree with U2 and Aerosmith. And I always thought that when REM resigned with Warner Bros for that big $ contract, that the music went downhill.

    As to one band that I cannot listen to anymore, it is Bon Jovi. I readily admit that I enjoyed Farenheit 7800. But from the opening track of Slippery When Wet up to the present, I basically cannot stomach even one chord from that band.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from soxmeister. Show soxmeister's posts

    Re: Lost In Time

    REM ... IMO they have completely lost the magic.  Guess money and success do that to you.

    Metalica, not that I am a metal head, but they were excellent in the 80s and commercial bozos in the 90s.  It didn't help with all that Napster stuff going on either.

    Gin Blossoms too.  Great first two efforts, mediocre at best ever since.   I don't think they have an identity anymore, at least by their last album. 
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from newman09. Show newman09's posts

    Re: Lost In Time

    I agree with you to a point on U2, meaning they have been doing it for so long, over 30 years. I feel a band or artist putting our records for that long is bound to put out what some consider junk at some point. But I don't feel they have totally lost it yet! As far as Aerosmith it's mostly junk since Joe Perry came back to the group in the early 80's. The only songs I can stomach from them still is their earlier stuff.

    For some reason when ever The Police come on the radio in my car, 99% of the time I turn it within the first few notes. I use to be a fan, and do acknowledge their place in history and talent. But for me anyway it's not holding up, at least in my car. 

    As much as it pain's me to bash any Beatle, I do agree with what has been said here about Paul McCartney. Such a great pop song writer who could always come up with these great catchy melodies, has lost it for a while now.


    It's hard to make it in this business, and even harder to stay relevant over years forget decades. Is there anyone still doing it as good as they did when they were first coming up and collected their huge fan base? Maybe you guys can think of someone, I can't.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from phsmith8. Show phsmith8's posts

    Re: Lost In Time

    In Response to Re: Lost In Time:
    [QUOTE]It's hard to make it in this business, and even harder to stay relevant over years forget decades. Is there anyone still doing it as good as they did when they were first coming up and collected their huge fan base? Maybe you guys can think of someone, I can't.
    Posted by newman09[/QUOTE]

    i would say radiohead but everyone knows that of course i would say that.

    i do think it's true, though.

    coming up on 20 years together, same lineup, 8 albums.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Lost In Time

    In Response to Re: Lost In Time:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Lost In Time : i would say radiohead but everyone knows that of course i would say that. i do think it's true, though. coming up on 20 years together, same lineup, 8 albums.
    Posted by phsmith8[/QUOTE]

    That was kind of my point.  20 years in, and Radiohead continues to experiment and not remain too satisfied with themselves, and they are among the most prominent/obvious of U2's heirs.

    [Note: I'm not directly comparing the two bands; their aesthetic and approach are totally different, but they do share some anthemic qualities.]
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Lost In Time

    In Response to Re: Lost In Time:
    [QUOTE]1.) i was a very big primus fan for a while, and i still love frizzle fry and a lot of their stuff...but some of it just escapes me completely now. so wacky. 2.) neil diamond when he plays sweet caroline at least 3 times per concert
    Posted by phsmith8[/QUOTE]

    Still love Primus up to and including most of the Brown Album.  There's still nobody quite like them.  Frog Brigade and Oysterhead had their moments, too.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from phsmith8. Show phsmith8's posts

    Re: Lost In Time

    another would be the flaming lips, though even i would argue a misstep here or there...amazing to keep a semi-mainstream status like theirs the whole time while still being distinctly different from anything else.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from newman09. Show newman09's posts

    Re: Lost In Time

    In Response to Re: Lost In Time:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Lost In Time : i would say radiohead but everyone knows that of course i would say that. i do think it's true, though. coming up on 20 years together, same lineup, 8 albums.
    Posted by phsmith8[/QUOTE]

    Good call on Radiohead, seems like it would be a real short list though.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from phsmith8. Show phsmith8's posts

    Re: Lost In Time

    yeah, i still have a great time listening to primus, it's just that some songs i can't make it through without skipping to the next. it's gotten to the point where i don't feel like i need to listen to certain tracks anymore


    ...don't forget c2b3 either matty, i think that album was very underrated.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Lost In Time

    In Response to Re: Lost In Time:
    [QUOTE]another would be the flaming lips, though even i would argue a misstep here or there...amazing to keep a semi-mainstream status like theirs the whole time while still being distinctly different from anything else.
    Posted by phsmith8[/QUOTE]

    Agreed.  Perhaps the states' best answer to Thom & Co., though certainly different strata of success....
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Lost In Time

    On the other hand AC/DC continues to put out great LP's.

    Accused of putting out the same LP 12 times, Angus corrected the critic who pointed this out by saying, "we've put out the same album 13 times."

    If it ain't broke....
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Lost In Time

    On issue #1:  The Cure.  Can't stand even one song, and that includes those "left over lunch" favorites,  Friday I'm in Love, and their version of Purple Haze.  As Newman said, if I even hear two chords on the radio, I switch the station.   It's hard to believe I ever liked them.  As for their newer material, (and I say this for myself, so feel free to chime in if you like them), it just went from bad to worse.  Bloodflowers?  Yes, I question what I ever saw in them.   :)  So it goes. 
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Lost In Time

    In Response to Re: Lost In Time:
    [QUOTE]On issue #1:  The Cure.  Can't stand even one song, and that includes those "left over lunch" favorites,  Friday I'm in Love, and their version of Purple Haze.  As Newman said, if I even hear two chords on the radio, I switch the station.   It's hard to believe I ever liked them.  As for their newer material, (and I say this for myself, so feel free to chime in if you like them), it just went from bad to worse.  Bloodflowers?  Yes, I question what I ever saw in them.   :)  So it goes. 
    Posted by yogafriend[/QUOTE]

    Disintegration will CURE you of this feeling that "it's hard to believe you ever liked them."

    This is without a doubt one of the masterworks of the late 80's/early 90's Alternative era. Along with Midnight Oil's 'Blue Sky Mining' and Depeche Mode's 'Violator.'
     

Share