Bands you don't get that everyone else seems to like

[boomana]

I'm not talking about bands or singers no one here would listen to, but about the bands people whose opinion you respect seem to like a lot, but you just don't get. I'm sure I've got more than this, but here's a start.

Opeth: very silly stuff

Dream Theater: C'mon people, this is as corny as it gets

Flaming Lips: interesting for a minute, then yawn

Portishead: okay, not bad but still unlistenable

Bright Eyes: a couple great songs, but pretentious drips

Ryan Adams: okay, a good song or five, fav is an Oasis cover, but blech

[ojnihs]

easy, Radiohead

[jinp6301]

dream theater I agree with,

a lot of classic rock (might be because I wasnt exposed to it until a couple of years ago),

have to agree with reks about radiohead, theyre good but not as good as people make them out to be

animal collective, just WTF? I like some of their songs but most just have me pressing the skip button

bjork, sometimes the same deal as animal collective but i like bjork more then AC (reks is gonna rip me a new one probably )

greatful dead, i get bored real fast with them

theres definitely more but I cant remember anything else right now

[fierce_freak]

^x2 about Opeth. I love them, but they're not a favorite. I also like Dream Theater, but less than Opeth.

As far as bands I don't get: almost anything mainstream (I know that's probably a given). I don't get most female vocal music, either, especially Norah Jones (I think her voice is pretty ugly, actually).

There are a lot of metal and hardcore bands that a lot love that I don't get, either. Hatebreed, for example. Or Throwdown. Metal and hardcore make up ~80% of my music, but there's a lot of it I just don't understand people liking (but of course I'm sure a lot of metal lovers would say the same about the stuff I listen to ).

[jinp6301]

Time to put on Vespertine AGAIN

maybe it'll be like the arcade fire for me. it took me a year and a half to really get into them

[neilvg]

I could never quite get into Opeth or Porcupine Tree really. I can understand what they are going for but it doesn't fully engage me.

Dream Theater I like but because I am a musician for the most part. I wouldn't expect most to like the ripping solos and what not because on their own they don't hold up (on a song by song basis) as much as they could, and certainly not as much as classic 70's era progressive rock which has all the technical skill + the songwriting.

There is ONLY 1 Flaming Lips Album worth hearing, and if you can get it setup properly, you will be treated with one of the most amazing listening experiences of your life (in my opinion)... drum roll ---- ZAIREEKA! Who is with me? It is 4 discs and they all have to be sync'd up and played on four different CD players simultaneously. That's 8 speakers! Every time I hear I say to myself "wow, it really IS this good". Nothing else they have done comes close.

I agree Portishead and Bright Eyes... a little boring.

Ryan Adams though - you have to listen to Cold Roses. It's a great album. The rest, not as good. Also, he has done live shows with Phil Lesh & Friends, and in this scenario he jams out and his vocal stylings on Jerry Garcia's songs is quite good, as well as his long form improvisational solo work. Not as good as Jerry or anything.

The Grateful Dead: If it makes you fall Asleep, you likely haven't been 'initiated' so to speak =) <hint hint, nudge nudge, toke toke >

Neil

I'm not talking about bands or singers no one here would listen to, but about the bands people whose opinion you respect seem to like a lot, but you just don't get. I'm sure I've got more than this, but here's a start.

Opeth: very silly stuff

Dream Theater: C'mon people, this is as corny as it gets

Flaming Lips: interesting for a minute, then yawn

Portishead: okay, not bad but still unlistenable

Bright Eyes: a couple great songs, but pretentious drips

Ryan Adams: okay, a good song or five, fav is an Oasis cover, but blech

[Dusty Chalk]

Great topic idea.

I don't get Flaming Lips, I just don't.

Bright Eyes -- yuppers, I agree there.

I'm one of those people who likes Opeth and Dream Theater a lot. I suspect one of the differences is that I don't take the lead singer seriously in either case, and am listening to the rest of the band, while you are having a hard time getting over the lead singer. To the point where I'm used to both of them by now, and, like Robert Smith, can't imagine anyone else singing their songs.

Rolling Stones -- a couple good songs, but they should not have been anywhere near as huge as they are/were. Shattered just goes nowhere, for example.

U2 -- well, that's not really fair, I saw them live around the time of Under a Blood Red Sky, and (a) they were nowhere near as good as they were on that live record, and ( they annoyed the shit out of me by telling everyone else in the stadium to ignore security and come on down to the front, despite my desires to the contrary, just to feed their (his?) ego(s).

And Rattle and Hum just sucked -- it, to me was like their Coda (Led Zeppelin) -- just a mishmash of stuff thrown together hastily.

But it's hard to fault Achtung Baby.

Mahler -- I don't like him as much as I should -- I love bombast, usually.

How can you not like Portishead? I've got two words for you: Moody Atmosphere. See the live DVD if you can, you may appreciate them a bit more. Or not -- I am one of those people who says, "don't force yourself" if we end up disagreeing on something, if the fact that I like them makes you doublethink for yourself whether or not you like them. I love "Roads" (in fact, now that I think about it, I'll have to put it on Sad Vol. 2).

Grateful Dead -- I love jamming, why the hell don't I like Grateful Dead? I've only heard one song by them that I like ("estimated prophet").

Wilco -- just boring, from what I've heard.

[Iron_Dreamer]

I definitely don't get Radiohead. Never have, and don't see how I ever will (probably because I'd fall asleep ten minutes into a given album).

By "don't get" I mean that I don't understand what it is that people like about them (much like how I "don't get" Etys). There are bands like Pink Floyd who I rarely feel like listening to (and hence I'm not crazy about them as many people are), but I can appreciate what they've done and understand why someone else would be crazy about them.

[Uncle Erik]

Mostly Radiohead.

I own a few of their albums, like a song here and there, nothing offends me or sounds bad, but their music has never grabbed me. Some bands/albums do that right away, others take time. To me, it sounds like generic indie rock, almost like background music.

Too bad, I wanted to like Radiohead. Usually like the cultish bands, but not this one.

Then again, I didn't like Bach for the longest time. Just caught on one day and he's my favorite classical composer now.

[zippy2001]

I have to agree on Radiohead, some of their albums just sound like background music.

But they do have outstanding packaging, some of their limited edition booklets, etc. are very nice.

[boomana]

Rolling Stones -- a couple good songs, but they should not have been anywhere near as huge as they are/were. Shattered just goes nowhere, for example.

Beggars Banquet? Sticky Fingers? Let it Bleed? Exile on Main Street? I'm aghast!

I'm with you on Mahler. I keep trying, but I can't seem to pay attention for more than a few minutes in.

I forgot about Radiohead. I pretty much listen when they come up when my ipod's on shuffle and I'm always happy to bump into a song. I get them, but I don't go looking for cds to sit down with. The only ones I have are The Bends, OK Computer and Amnesiac. I can't remember the last time I heard one whole.

[Fungi]

I'm with you on Mahler. I keep trying, but I can't seem to pay attention for more than a few minutes in.

I just listened to his first symphony today and thought the same thing.

[humanflyz]

Bach: never really "got" it, and not for lack of trying, since I have multiple versions of the violin concertors, cantatas, well-tempered clavier, goldberg variation, and a bunch of others.

In fact, I'm with Dusty on this one: give me the bombast and bring on the full symphony orchestra.

[lupus]

Beggars Banquet? Sticky Fingers? Let it Bleed? Exile on Main Street? I'm aghast!

me, too. i'm hard pressed to think of four better albums put out consecutively by one band. 'between the buttons' almost makes it five, but isn't quite up to the standard of what followed. i don't care much for what the stones did before or after, but from '68-'71, they were on their game.

[boomana]

me, too. i'm hard pressed to think of four better albums put out consecutively by one band. 'between the buttons' almost makes it five, but isn't quite up to the standard of what followed. i don't care much for what the stones did before or after, but from '68-'71, they were on their game.

I knew I liked you

[itsborken]

They are great albums but I could never figure out why they were recorded so badly. Have to be honest that I don't listen to them as much as they deserve just because the flaws bother me too much.

[itsborken]

...greatful dead, i get bored real fast with them...

The dead wasn't just about the music. They were about concerts, sense of community, psychedelics, the road trips to get to a concert, etc. I can see it being difficult to pick up after the fact though; they had so many songs in their playlists and never had huge singles.

[The Expanding Man]

me, too. i'm hard pressed to think of four better albums put out consecutively by one band. 'between the buttons' almost makes it five, but isn't quite up to the standard of what followed. i don't care much for what the stones did before or after, but from '68-'71, they were on their game.

By sheer coincidence, it was over this period that Keith was hanging out with Ry Cooder and Gram Parsons.

I've read in some interviews that Ry is quite bitter because, to his mind, he was being auditioned to join the band. Keith "borrowed" a number of his alternate tunings that feature quite heavily on these albums, and perhaps explain the quantum leap from their earlier R'nB and pop sound.

All's fair in rock'n roll

[n_maher]

Phish - I worked with them on and off for 5 years and they were never anything more than entertaining. All the while people around me were gaga about something they did, but I just never got it.

Massive Attack - Some of it is really, really good, but mostly it strikes me as uneven.

[en480c4]

The Beatles. Just. Can't. Listen.

And don't we have a music forum?

[grawk]

There is an awful lot of music that people love that I don't really like, but it's mostly because of overexposure rather than "not getting it". I absolutely can not stand most of the beatles and bob dylan catalogs. I'm mostly bored by Dark Side of the Moon. Most prog rock doesn't speak to me, because I don't get feeling in the math. They do the math problems on their instruments really well, and I appreciate the talent. I just don't find it appealling. Then there's the modern prog, which is accompanied by the blue guy from sesame street singing about cookies.

Most of the artists I find myself really liking are deeply flawed in some way. No one is ever going to say the Flaming Lips are masterful musicians, but they're a band that communicates emotion to me in a way few others ever have. They manage to write a silly song, perform it off key, and somehow manage to show how life can REALLY suck, but that it's still fun, and you have to appreciate both.

Phish and the Grateful Dead were both a time and place thing. I saw each of them way too many times, and had a few experiences I wouldn't trade for the world. Sometimes Jerry would sing songs that would just rip your heart out. Right before Brent died, you could hear in his voice how the weight of the world was bringing him down. There are a few phish songs that communicate pretty well what it's like to be a rich white kid being exposed to evil for the first time. But mostly these bands were about the experience, and I made great friends and got to experience a lot of great things as a result of my time driving around the country in a 69 vw bus selling soda and going to concerts. I wouldn't expect anyone to fall in love with either band based on a recording, be it a live recording or an album. Because you can't fit what was right about those shows entirely in a recording. The recordings can help you relive the memories, but they just don't contain all the data otherwise.

[ph0rk]

Pink Floyd, Radiohead, Tori Amos, Ani Difranco

[Pars]

I grew up on Hendrix, Cream, the Who etc. Never really cared for the Stones past about '68 or so (sloppy playing), didn't like the Dead (though I never did go see them). Prog rock I loved at the time (ELP, Yes, etc.), most of which hasn't aged very well. ELP was amazing to see live though. Was never into Pink Floyd for some reason.

I haven't heard Opeth or Dream Theatre. Flaming Lips I don't quite get, though I do have Yoshimi. I do like Radiohead, although they sometimes get out there a bit. Bjork I actually do like at times. Phish I never got into (sounded like a modern Dead somewhat to me).

Mahler: listen to the 2nd. If you can't get into that, you'll be headed to the place aerius' YMCA picture in the slow forum thread portends

[philodox]

Massive Attack - Some of it is really, really good, but mostly it strikes me as uneven.

And here I thought I liked you. \

I agree that Portishead is boring... I've never understood why people put them up on a podium. To me it is just standard middle of the road trip hop. That said, I still like them, just get irritated at how everyone else seems to LOVE them.

Radiohead has a couple good songs, but in general I think they suck monkey balls.

Tried listening to Flaming Lips recently and didn't really get it.

Oh, and my number one pick...

Scott Walker

[ojnihs]

Oh, and my number one pick...

Scott Walker

100% Agree with that one. How did I leave that out?