Jump to content

Don't Miss a Beat

Join the UK's most passionate festival community. Keep up with the latest conversations, line-up rumours, and music news.

250,000+ Members

Connect with a massive network of fellow festival-goers.

Lively Discussions

Thousands of active topics on music, campsites, and tips.

Hot Rumours & News

Hear about secret sets and lineup drops before anyone else.

Create Free Account
OR
  • Sign Up!

    Join our friendly community of music lovers and be part of the fun 😎

Spiringsteen


Guest Iain333

Recommended Posts

The overriding theme of this thread is that everyones opinions on music are equal.

BUT THEY ARE NOT.

Sorry, as much as you (Neil mainly) would like to think they are, they pretty much aren't.

Back when I was 13, U2 were my favourite band. Now I think they are boring. Why? Because I've spent time listening to more music, and realised that there are bands I like a lot better.

If I meet someone who says Coldplay and The Killers are their favourite bands. I don't think 'Fair enough, you have my tastes, I have mine', I think 'You need to listen to some more music that isn't top of the charts'.

I'm not as stupid as to think I have a 'good music taste' as there are millions of bands and types of music I haven't listened to, and many bands that I have listened to but haven't properly appreciated. In ten years time I'm sure I will look back and think I had crap music taste.

I expect everyone agrees with this theory even if they don't immediately think it. Neil, earlier in this thread you mentioned some granny who knew nothing about music and a westlife fan. Examples of people you obviously thought needed some musical education. How many people think they have a better music taste than their kids or their grandparents? A lot I expect.

I personally find Bruce Springsteen a bit boring and bland. Now either the people who like him haven't listened to enough non-bland music to see he's bland or they haven't listened to him well enough to realise he's bland or I haven't listened to Bruce Springsteen well enough to appreciate it properly. That's the way I see it.

There is always going individual/personal differences in music taste and a whole host of reasons why people dislike and like music, but I think that unless there is such thing as good music and bad music then it loses all artistic value.

Edited by benissright
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 912
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

For some reason neither Neil nor I understand, Bruce Springsteen's songs - with their conventional chord progressions and their well-worn orchestration - speak to certain people. We can't tell those people it doesn't. Nor can they tell us we should keep listening until it speaks to us too.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me put this from a personal perspective.

I like the energy and enthusiasm Bruce Springsteen has. I also admire any political elements to his music, and appreciate he has written some good songs that mean a lot to people.

Unfortunately this is how 90% of his music sounds to me:

Not too distorted guitar strum (same pattern nearly every song), simple keyboard riff, Bruce sings in his never-varying one-note-ranged twang about the American heartland or something similar, saxophone solo, possibly a forgettable guitar solo

His slower acoustic stuff sounds positively refreshing to me just because so many songs sound like the above formula and he rarely deviate or experiments from it.

Now I have to admit that I have not given Bruce's albums a really really good listen. So I am in no position to start labeling him as bad. Since there are lots of people who rave about him, either I am missing something or they are. When I finally get round to giving him the proper listen (and perhaps a read of his lyrics) he deserves I will conclude whether or not I think he is good or bad.

What I suspect is that most people like him in the way they like Bob Dylan or Leonard Cohen. Not the greatest singers, and not the most varied musically, but respected as poets and for their lyrics/stories. Its a lot easier to focus on the lyrics with acoustic songs than full rock songs so I've probably missed this part of Springsteen. However, I think I have heard enough music in my life to conclude that his is boring, although that is always open to change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me put this from a personal perspective.

I like the energy and enthusiasm Bruce Springsteen has. I also admire any political elements to his music, and appreciate he has written some good songs that mean a lot to people.

Unfortunately this is how 90% of his music sounds to me:

Not too distorted guitar strum (same pattern nearly every song), simple keyboard riff, Bruce sings in his never-varying one-note-ranged twang about the American heartland or something similar, saxophone solo, possibly a forgettable guitar solo

His slower acoustic stuff sounds positively refreshing to me just because so many songs sound like the above formula and he rarely deviate or experiments from it.

Now I have to admit that I have not given Bruce's albums a really really good listen. So I am in no position to start labeling him as bad. Since there are lots of people who rave about him, either I am missing something or they are. When I finally get round to giving him the proper listen (and perhaps a read of his lyrics) he deserves I will conclude whether or not I think he is good or bad.

What I suspect is that most people like him in the way they like Bob Dylan or Leonard Cohen. Not the greatest singers, and not the most varied musically, but respected as poets and for their lyrics/stories. Its a lot easier to focus on the lyrics with acoustic songs than full rock songs so I've probably missed this part of Springsteen. However, I think I have heard enough music in my life to conclude that his is boring, although that is always open to change.

Edited by GlastoRulz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
Sorry have to disagree. If you dislike music there is either something wrong with the music, or something wrong with the way you are experiencing it.

oh, so people don 't have personal tastes then? <_<B)

To allow myself to dislike something good, would make me an idiot. And I'd rather not be one...

I could make a comment here. But I'll resist. :D:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry have to disagree. If you dislike music there is either something wrong with the music, or something wrong with the way you are experiencing it.

To allow myself to dislike something good, would make me an idiot. And I'd rather not be one...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

one thing i really don't understand is people complaining that Bruce played for too long!

how can someone play for to long?

if your bored leave but it's definately nothing to complain about as it makes the ticket more worth its money!

if he played for half an hour fair enough, even i'd be moaning but those moaning at the 2 hours 40 minutes need to f**king grow up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

one thing i really don't understand is people complaining that Bruce played for too long!

how can someone play for to long?

if your bored leave but it's definately nothing to complain about as it makes the ticket more worth its money!

if he played for half an hour fair enough, even i'd be moaning but those moaning at the 2 hours 40 minutes need to f**king grow up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An eighteen page thread on Springsteen and still no Jens Wildman comment.

WTF! It's been a week! Is he following Bruce around Europe?

Edited by sifimaster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
Yes they obviously do, never said they didn't.

What I said was that if you don't like music either there is something wrong with the music or something wrong with the way you are listening to it.

That's what personal tastes are.

There are only two options here:

Either my above statement is right.

Or music tastes have nothing to do with personality, individual differences, type of friends, exposure or the quality of music or any other factor and are 100% random (which is nonsense in my opinion).

Music tastes have everything to do with personality, individual differences, type of friends, exposure or the quality of music, etc.

Some people like some stuff, and others don't. That's all there is to it. Your statement above is wrong. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess people would rather have seen the bands preceeding him play for longer.

What's with the "grow up" chat too? If you cant articulate yourself without being abusive then I suggest you f**k right off, you pathetic little worm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Latest Activity

    • Is anything said we need to be aware of?
    • Just listened to the new Madonna album, it would be a catastrophe if that isn't played on the pyramid!
    • Restore getting more than Lib Dems is not good.
    • https://x.com/amirtibon/status/2083054470871535853   Some thoughts on the Gaza agreement announced overnight, which despite my reservations and concerns, I hope will be implemented. 1. Donald Trump is trying to collect "wins" and "achievements" ahead of the midterm elections. His party is entering that election at a disadvantage, but because Democrats may choose weak and unpopular candidates in specific states, much like Republicans did in 2022, there's a reason for Trump to at least try achieving a surprising result like the one Biden secured four years ago.   2. The will to provide Trump such a "win" was an important motivation for all sides involved in this agreement: Hamas, Netanyahu, Qatar, Egypt, UAE and Turkey. All of them hope, each for their own reasons, that the transactional president will remember their role in the agreement and the positive media coverage it has generated and will continue to generate. You can like it or not, but that's the nature of diplomacy, especially in the Middle East, under Trump.   3. Netanyahu and his band of liars in the Israeli media (and the last few suckers in the American media still buying his spin) are already trying to oversell the agreement and present it in terms that contradict the Board of Peace statements and briefings. Of course, the October 7 Prime Minister can't just say the truth on this one, which goes something like: "I'm trying to stay on good terms with Trump ahead of an election here in Israel that will determine my personal fate and whether or not I go to jail in 2027."   4. For Hamas, the agreement is a way to buy time and survive, which is basically the organization's overarching goal since October 7. They lost most of their leadership and thousands of their fighters; they will also, I believe, give up some of their weapons to the new Gaza-based Palestinian government, which is a good thing. But at the bottom of all their decisions is a simple calculation: being able to say, "we committed the most deadly and humiliating attack against Israel since the start of the conflict, and survived as a movement and an organization to tell about it."   5. Hamas was able to say that yesterday, before the agreement was signed, and it can also say that today, after the conclusion of the negotiations. So in that regard, the agreement is preferable to the murky post-war reality that preceded it, in which Hamas was recruiting again thousands of young fighters, holding on to all its weapons, and controlling 99% of Gaza's population, making money off people buying fuel and cigarettes. Changing even a part of that terrible reality, by collecting some of the weapons and allowing progress on reconstruction under a non-Hamas government, is better. It means coming to terms with the fact that Israel under this government failed to dismantle Hamas and allowed its survival even before this agreement was signed.   6. Do I think the agreement will be fully implemented over the next 300 days, as I understand the timeline? I'm highly skeptical. But I'm also asking: what are the alternatives? Netanyahu, in his quest for political survival at all costs, ignored David Ben-Gurion's national security strategy of seeking short and decisive wars, which was based on Israel's unique internal and external challenges that make it dangerous for this country to have long wars of attrition. The result is an Israel that is hated, isolated and denounced around the world like never before, and is totally reliant on the support of one man (TRUMP) to avoid crushing international sanctions. Going to war in Gaza once again based on the same promise of "finishing Hamas," which this government failed to achieve after three long years, would have been suicidal unless Trump promised his full backing. And Trump, for good reasons, can't give such a commitment after his bitter experience with Netanyahu in Iran and Lebanon.   7. For me and my family, these are all very personal, not only political, questions. My six-year-old daughter will start school on the Gaza border in exactly one month, as we rebuild our life in the same home where Hamas tried to murder us on October 7. We've learned over the years to be highly skeptical of premature victory announcements and diplomatic celebrations. When these things collapse under the cynical realities of the conflict, most of those announcing them are not around to face the consequences. Still, I don't see a better alternative to the 20-Point Plan that Trump presented last year, at least not with Israel's current position of isolation and exhaustion under this government. So I have some hope that the agreement will succeed, even partially, and deliver a period of quiet. For us on the border, that would be significant after three years of war and trauma. And maybe in the long run, with different Israeli and Palestinian leadership, this will become a first step in a broader positive change for the region.
    • Until they're through the first round of votes there's no point believing any reports about who'll win.
  • Featured Products

  • Hot Topics

  • Latest Tourdates

×
×
  • Create New...