Red Mosquito

ABNorman wrote:Though I admit I also do get a little turned off by the music snobbery that sometimes pervades places like RM. For every song that people pan because they legitimately don't like it, there's another that they pan because they think they should. That's my perception, at least.

You make a good point.

Extreme music snobbery is annoying. Kind of funny on a forum for the band Pearl Jam. You know, who has sold about 60 million records world wide.

All of that being said Nickelback is fucking garbage.

Despite having the most picks made (260), this tournament produced the least amount of chart toppers from the US, UK, Canada, or Australia (10).

Nothing Compares 2 U
The Fly
Jump
Creep
Zombie
Tomorrow
Don't Look Back in Anger
Ready or Not
You Learn
If You Tolerate This Your Children Will Be Next

So really, you're all pretentious assholes.

I think a lot of people's concepts of what is or isn't obscure comes more from the shape of their personal bubble than something that is actually true.

Lament wrote:Despite having the most picks made (260), this tournament produced the least amount of chart toppers from the US, UK, Canada, or Australia (10).

Nothing Compares 2 U
The Fly
Jump
Creep
Zombie
Tomorrow
Don't Look Back in Anger
Ready or Not
You Learn
If You Tolerate This Your Children Will Be Next

So really, you're all pretentious assholes.

Haha awesome.

I'm sure I can be pretentious sometimes without even thinking about it. That is interesting though.

I fucking love Nothing Compares 2 U

BigRedLedbetter wrote:I fucking love Nothing Compares 2 U

Nothing Compares 2 U is perfection of the highest order.

Lament wrote:I think a lot of people's concepts of what is or isn't obscure comes more from the shape of their personal bubble than something that is actually true.

Truth. I just kind of live in the land of my iPod. I like what I like and don't really give a fuck if it's popular or not. It's about if I connect with it or not. I can't remember the last time I listened to the radio.

Lament wrote:

BigRedLedbetter wrote:I fucking love Nothing Compares 2 U

Nothing Compares 2 U is perfection of the highest order.

I win bar bets all the time that Prince wrote it.

Have you ever heard the original version, by The Family? It's weird and dark and awesome. Nowhere near as awesome as the Sinead version, but it's a really interesting listen nonetheless.

http://mais.uol.com.br/view/zwuxgmhe6ko ... 26?types=A

It's not for everyone, but it just might hit the spot for you...

Oh totally heard it. I dig it.

Lament wrote:I think a lot of people's concepts of what is or isn't obscure comes more from the shape of their personal bubble than something that is actually true.

True, but there's definitely groups that get mentioned again and again with regards to the music of a certain time. That have developed name recognition for various reasons. Googling "top bands of the 90s", Google specifically brings up all the usual suspects in a scrollable bar: Nirvana, RHCP, Pumpkins, Pearl Jam, AIC, Stone Temple Pilots, Oasis, Radiohead, GnR, REM, Nine Inch Nails, Foo Fighters, Soundgarden, Metallica, Blur, Weezer (and, of course, the Backstreet Boys).

Backstreet's back, baby.

ABNorman wrote:

Lament wrote:I think a lot of people's concepts of what is or isn't obscure comes more from the shape of their personal bubble than something that is actually true.

True, but there's definitely groups that get mentioned again and again with regards to the music of a certain time. That have developed name recognition for various reasons. Googling "top bands of the 90s", Google specifically brings up all the usual suspects in a scrollable bar: Nirvana, RHCP, Pumpkins, Pearl Jam, AIC, Stone Temple Pilots, Oasis, Radiohead, GnR, REM, Nine Inch Nails, Foo Fighters, Soundgarden, Metallica, Blur, Weezer (and, of course, the Backstreet Boys).

Counting Crows and Smashing Pumpkins not being on this list is ridiculous in my opinion. But whatever.

Side note....surprised nobody picked November Rain on their 90s team....unless I missed it

BigRedLedbetter wrote:

ABNorman wrote:

Lament wrote:I think a lot of people's concepts of what is or isn't obscure comes more from the shape of their personal bubble than something that is actually true.

True, but there's definitely groups that get mentioned again and again with regards to the music of a certain time. That have developed name recognition for various reasons. Googling "top bands of the 90s", Google specifically brings up all the usual suspects in a scrollable bar: Nirvana, RHCP, Pumpkins, Pearl Jam, AIC, Stone Temple Pilots, Oasis, Radiohead, GnR, REM, Nine Inch Nails, Foo Fighters, Soundgarden, Metallica, Blur, Weezer (and, of course, the Backstreet Boys).

Counting Crows and Smashing Pumpkins not being on this list is ridiculous in my opinion. But whatever.

Pumpkins are on there - third result. But this is just Google saying who gets mentioned frequently.

ABNorman wrote:

BigRedLedbetter wrote:

ABNorman wrote:

Lament wrote:I think a lot of people's concepts of what is or isn't obscure comes more from the shape of their personal bubble than something that is actually true.

True, but there's definitely groups that get mentioned again and again with regards to the music of a certain time. That have developed name recognition for various reasons. Googling "top bands of the 90s", Google specifically brings up all the usual suspects in a scrollable bar: Nirvana, RHCP, Pumpkins, Pearl Jam, AIC, Stone Temple Pilots, Oasis, Radiohead, GnR, REM, Nine Inch Nails, Foo Fighters, Soundgarden, Metallica, Blur, Weezer (and, of course, the Backstreet Boys).

Counting Crows and Smashing Pumpkins not being on this list is ridiculous in my opinion. But whatever.

Pumpkins are on there - third result. But this is just Google saying who gets mentioned frequently.

Oh haha. I missed it. I suck again.

BigRedLedbetter wrote:
Side note....surprised nobody picked November Rain on their 90s team....unless I missed it

i was considering on picking Coma. Easily the best song on the Use Your Illusions albums.

kp

A list based on mentions is going to be invariably skewed towards who was bigger in bigger regions.

I don't know, I'm sure a lot of people would beg to differ, but I'd say that once you get past bands that were truly WORLDWIDE PHENOMENONS (we're talking the U2s, REMs, and GNRs of the world), I would put any band that reached elite status in any country/region on the same level. Pulp or the Manics were just as successful in the UK as Stone Temple Pilots were in the US. The US just happens to be much, much bigger, so they sold more records. No one is mistaking "Plush" for defining an era the way "Common People" or "A Design for Life" did though.

Lament wrote:A list based on mentions is going to be invariably skewed towards who was bigger in bigger regions.

I don't know, I'm sure a lot of people would beg to differ, but I'd say that once you get past bands that were truly WORLDWIDE PHENOMENONS (we're talking the U2s, REMs, and GNRs of the world), I would put any band that reached elite status in any country/region on the same level. Pulp or the Manics were just as successful in the UK as Stone Temple Pilots were in the US. The US just happens to be much, much bigger, so they sold more records. No one is mistaking "Plush" for defining an era the way "Common People" or "A Design for Life" did though.

In most instances, the US has a far larger influence on global pop culture though. Hitting it big in America almost always equates to being successful elsewhere.

Springbok Nude Girls were massive in South Africa, are one of my top 10 favourite bands, and are definitely elite there (platinum records, awards, break-ups and "legendary" reunions), but I wouldn't put them on the same level as pretty much any of the bands that came up on that Google search.

Hitting it big in America is obviously the biggest chip in hitting it big worldwide, but I don't think when you're looking at things from a down-the-road perspective being big in America trumps being big somewhere else. Bush was a veritable Goliath in America compared to Blur, but Blur was one of the few DEFINING acts for an entire generation, whereas Bush was another also ran even in America. Obviously when all is said and done, Bush sold far more records. But I don't see how being the 10th favorite band of a country full of people sad that there's never going to be another Nirvana record is a bigger accomplishment than altering the course of a country's popular consciousness just because the former country is like five times than the latter bigger.

Out of curiosity, I googled "Top UK bands of the 90s" to see if Google would produce another black bar at the top. It did, and this is who was on it...

Oasis, Blur, Radiohead, Pulp, Suede, The Rolling Stones, The Happy Mondays, Manic Street Preachers, Primal Scream, Elastica, Five, Supergrass, Slowdive, Belle & Sebastian, Stereophonics, Inspiral Carpets, Lush, Travis, East 17, The Cocteau Twins

I would have a hard time considering any of these bands "obscure" if they come up as one of the most discussed results for a pretty generic search term.