From bunnythor@earthlink.net Tue Oct 03 22:36:42 2000 Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written.robert-jordan Subject: Re: TAN: 1999 From: Thor Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 03:36:42 GMT The Great Gray Skwid wrote: > > We leaned closer as Kate Nepveu whispered: > > rgormley@comtech.com.au (R Gormley) wrote: > > > > Quit true, and relating to your following point, their live versions > > > are frequently better, IMHO, than their studio versions. > > > Band most guilty for that in recent years? Matchbox 20. Though I do > > > like If You're Gone from their latest CD... > > I was completely put off Matchbox 20 forever by their first single. > > I was completely put off Matchbox 20 by the fact that _every_ cover band > seems to do at least one of their songs, and if you're in random bar A > with random cover band B playing, you get sick of it real fast. I was completely put off Matchbox 20 because I couldn't tell them from Everclear or Third Eye Blind. As far as I can tell, there's one band using three names, and it's singing one song with about a dozen different titles, and no matter what they call themself or what they call the song, the song still tastes like ass. Back in the 80's, we had bands that sucked. Oh, Lord! Suckiness was both prevalent and predominate. In fact we had our own bunch of raspy-voiced, pop-oriented, no-talent hacks. But at least you could tell them apart. Songs by the loser Huey Lewis were blatantly different than songs by the hoser Bryan Adams. And though they both sucked really hard, they were distinctly different from the poser Rod Stewart. Bad music? Yes! Horrible, wretched, god-forsaken scratchy howlings, but at least in the 80's, "musicians" had enough wherewith all to stink distinctly. --Thor