• Iamsqueegee@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    28 days ago

    AC/DC and CCR come to mind. Doesn’t bother me though. It’s the audio equivalent to eating a bag of Doritos. The flavor doesn’t change, but every now and then there’s one with a little more powder on it.

  • Krudler@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    27 days ago

    “look at this photograph”

    Can’t even be bothered to name them, they suck so fucking hard

  • The Picard Maneuver@piefed.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    28 days ago

    AC/DC for sure. Every song has the same vibe. It’s a good vibe, but once you’ve heard one song, you’ve heard them all.

    …is it going to be controversial if I also say The Beatles? Maybe not ALL of their music, but most.

    • Deacon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      28 days ago

      Pre 1964 Beatles I will give you. After, say, Revolver? I don’t see how you could compare Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds to Tomorrow Never Knows to Martha My Dear to Back in the USSR to Sun King, etc etc etc

      Often you can tell it’s the same band, but these are meaningfully different sonic experiences.

    • IWW4@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      28 days ago

      It is very controversial to say that of the Beatles. Once they stopped doing live shows they reinvented themselves.

    • AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      28 days ago

      Say what you will about AC/DC, nobody else can convey the idea of sweaty testicles in musical form as effectively as they do.

    • Canopyflyer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      27 days ago

      AC/DC music is nothing more than 4 chords and a beat.

      And you know, sometimes that’s all you need.

    • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      28 days ago

      The Beatles did evolve over time. Their early stuff all sounds the same and their late stuff all sounds the same, but there’s a big difference between their boy band phase and their stoner phase.

      • The Picard Maneuver@piefed.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        28 days ago

        I guess I’m just associating them with their “boy band” phase then. Most of my Beatles listening was probably from the collection of hits on the 1 album back in the late 90s or early 2000s, whenever that came out.

    • 0ops@piefed.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      26 days ago

      The Beatles is like 4 bands wearing a trenchcoat, so I’m gonna have to disagree with you there. I wouldn’t even say any individual album is samey from at least sgt peppers on

  • scytale@piefed.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    28 days ago

    Imagine Dragons. I don’t know a lot of their songs but when I hear them I can guess it’s them with pretty good accuracy.

  • HexagonSun@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    28 days ago

    The Ramones.

    If it’s been a while, I’ll listen to 5 tracks and be like “Yes, The Ramones!!!”

    Then after a couple of tracks more I suddenly really need to put on something else.

    • Krudler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      28 days ago

      God The Ramones are such a weak band. I’ve never understood people’s fanaticism.

        • Krudler@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          27 days ago

          I’m not debating that they bring the hype, people love them and yes they have their influential place in the history of rock.

          I’m just saying in this era, I am lost as to why anybody would seek that music out. It had its place and it had its time, but that was like 50+ years ago.

          I don’t need to hear these boots are made for walkin’, and I don’t need to hear I wanna be sedated. They’re anthems from an ancient time.

          • [object Object]@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            27 days ago

            Well, firstly, ‘These Boots are Made for Walkin’’ is a great song that sounds gorgeous compared to most of its contemporaries.

            Secondly, there are pretty much no other bands that sound like Ramones. If you want that kind of fast and fun sound once in a while, there’s no other option. Most other punk sounds like punk, but no punk other than Ramones sounds like them.

            The only ones sounding similar to Ramones are those making deliberate effort to emulate their sound: Ramonetures, ‘Gabber Gabber Hey!’, Helen Love.

            • Krudler@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              27 days ago

              You’re missing my point.

              These are dried up, shallow pieces of music that had their place. Once you’ve heard one of their 2 minutes songs, you’ve heard their entire discography!

              There’s actually great music you could spend your time on, which is what I do. There’s 20 new albums every day, there’s amazing jazz, amazing punk, amazing growth in various forms of music. In a way, listening to primitive music like Ramones is depriving oneself of what’s out there now, which makes it sound like children’s jingles in comparison.

              I realize I may be coming off harsh, but that is my personal perspective, I think it’s weak and one dimensional. Then again, that statement could be applied to many popular acts.

              • [object Object]@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                27 days ago

                Somehow I’m sure just from your comments that I wouldn’t consider most anything that you listen to ‘good’, and I’ve heard lots of musics in my life. And I certainly wouldn’t turn down good music just because it’s old or simpler than other music.

                • Jackie's Fridge@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  26 days ago

                  Krudler is coming at it like music is a zero sum game, which is silly. I love the Ramones. I also love more innovative, complex music, as well as plenty of vapid garbage. I’m happy jumping from Art Pepper to Guatafán. None of it is a waste of time if it’s what I’m in the mood for.

                  The Ramones were a fresh slap in the face back in the day, and without them punk & new wave wouldn’t be what they are. In the meantime, other artists have built on the Ramones’ foundation. Similarly, Jimi Hendrix revolutionised how people used the electeic guitar as an instrument, but other artists ran with it to the point that his stuff is archaic (I can’t listen to Hendrix for the same reason K dismissed the Ramones, but to each their own).

                  I guess what I’m saying is that even if you personally don’t like an influential band, you have to acknowledge that they might be exactly what resonates with someone else. That’s why we have so much music in the world. To the original topic though, Ramones music does all sound the same. Why mess with perfection?

      • LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        28 days ago

        That’s how I feel about Michael Jackson. Except he wasn’t a band. He was just 1 person who whispered like a shy little girl & flailed around onstage like a noodle and he kept grabbing his crotch and nobody asked him to grab his crotch. I’ve never understood people’s fanaticism.

        • Krudler@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          28 days ago

          All your personal issues with the man are yours and not in dispute. I think a big difference here is that MJ was a musical virtuoso, not just a singer and showman.

          • sangriaferret@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            28 days ago

            Was he virtuoso though? I feel like his best work was with Quincy Jones and Rod Temperton and without them he was just meh.

            • Krudler@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              27 days ago

              Yes, look into the man. He composed a shitload of his music.

              I personally don’t even like the man’s musical output. That said, I can recognize genius. The man was nothing short of a musical genius with very few I could even list next to him, perhaps with the exceptions of Stevie, Herbie, Prince, Eno, and other brilliant minds. The guy was out of his tree, but on a level of musicality most people can’t even grasp.

              • sangriaferret@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                27 days ago

                Only two and one co-written on Off the Wall and three and one co-written on Thriller (although they are bangers). He did write most of Bad but anything outside of that is imo sub-par. I’m not denying he had a lot of talent but I think he’s far from a virtuoso.

                • Krudler@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  27 days ago

                  Lol right. Give me a god damned break! You can’t be serious, you’re trolling, or genuinley know nothing of music.

  • TheDoozer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    27 days ago

    Linkin Park.

    Look, I like them, so I’m not exactly knocking them, but a long time ago I was working an overnight inventory shift, and my manager at the time put on a Linkin Park album, and I predict how every song was going to go because they all seemed like the same song.