BuffettNews.com

pair8head wrote:

nycparrothead wrote:

parrotsgirl wrote:We're NEVER going to ALL agree

I DISAGREE WITH THAT!!!

You would.

WOULD NOT!!!

parrotsgirl wrote:OK....somehow we have gotten wayyyyyyy off track here....

I think you've both made your points...personally...Connie...you know I love you...

and Jahfin...maybe cause I've gotten to know you, when you post I understand them.....I really dont think you directed anything to anyone in particular...but I guess I wonder how a "FUN" thread about music got way off track....

can we just let it all go, maybe it's where im at...but a place that is suppose to phun, and a stress reliever isnt suppose to turn into an arguement....I understand it's discussion...but if people dont see eye to eye...then maybe just let it go???

sorry...I've been watchin this since yesterday, and maybe Im butting in...but I had to....We're NEVER going to ALL agree

Thanks for your kind words but I think you've also gotten to know me well enough to know I'm not just going sit back and watch as people accuse me of things I'm not guilty of. I've tried to take part in a discussion about what someone's idea of a top ten list of the best bands ever is, it's beyond me why people feel the need to chastise me for what they percieve as me being confrontational and accuse me of not having interpersonal relation skills. All I have done is offer up my opinion, I now find myself in the unfortunate circumstance of defending it.

ph4ever wrote:

parrotsgirl wrote:OK....somehow we have gotten wayyyyyyy off track here....

I think you've both made your points...personally...Connie...you know I love you...

and Jahfin...maybe cause I've gotten to know you, when you post I understand them.....I really dont think you directed anything to anyone in particular...but I guess I wonder how a "FUN" thread about music got way off track....

can we just let it all go, maybe it's where im at...but a place that is suppose to phun, and a stress reliever isnt suppose to turn into an arguement....I understand it's discussion...but if people dont see eye to eye...then maybe just let it go???

sorry...I've been watchin this since yesterday, and maybe Im butting in...but I had to....We're NEVER going to ALL agree

Lisa as long as he continues to comment about my comment I'm going to reply. Period. I have just as much right to comment as anyone here

You still seem to be reading things into my posts that simply aren't there. I have never said you don't have the right to comment.

Jahfin wrote:

ph4ever wrote:

parrotsgirl wrote:OK....somehow we have gotten wayyyyyyy off track here....

I think you've both made your points...personally...Connie...you know I love you...

and Jahfin...maybe cause I've gotten to know you, when you post I understand them.....I really dont think you directed anything to anyone in particular...but I guess I wonder how a "FUN" thread about music got way off track....

can we just let it all go, maybe it's where im at...but a place that is suppose to phun, and a stress reliever isnt suppose to turn into an arguement....I understand it's discussion...but if people dont see eye to eye...then maybe just let it go???

sorry...I've been watchin this since yesterday, and maybe Im butting in...but I had to....We're NEVER going to ALL agree

Lisa as long as he continues to comment about my comment I'm going to reply. Period. I have just as much right to comment as anyone here

You still seem to be reading things into my posts that simply aren't there. I have never said you don't have the right to comment.

No you didn't say that Lisa basically did.

And I am not the only one that has taken your posts in the way you obviously did not intend them to be taken.

well I guess maybe I should of kept my comments to myself....

Yes I have gotten to know you pretty well...and hell..I know you hate alot of my choices of music...

and I also know Connie well...and she is a GREAT person...I didnt mean to single you or her out of this....I guess it just amazed me that a "music list" and difference of opinion could be like it was....

Like I said, maybe it's my state of mind...who knows....you know what...maybe it's not you that doesnt fit in....maybe I should of just shut up...so on that note...Im going to mind my own business....sorry for the interuption...guess I should of shut it to begin with

Jahfin wrote:

LIPH wrote:

Jahfin wrote:

LIPH wrote:Any list of the best bands ever that includes the Ramones can't be taken seriously.

A list without the inclusion of the pioneers of punk rock wouldn't be complete. For better or worse, punk rock is a vital part of the musical landscape, that can't be denied. If it wasn't the Ramones then it would be the Sex Pistols, Iggy Pop and the Stooges or the MC5.

My point was, if you're going to be considered one of the best bands ever you should at least be able to play your instruments.

That isn't really true, especially considering that technical skill isn't a part of punk rock and never has been. Punk rock is about raw emotion, not how proficient one may or may not be on their instruments.

Sorry, but I don't buy that. You can't be the "best" at what you do if you're not proficient.

I wanted to initally check out this thread to read about the greatest all time bands. Whats its turned into is something crazy. People get their feelings hurt too easy and have a hard time letting things roll. We all know that everyone here has the right to post what they want (within obvious reason), and everyone has the right to disagree. Lets just move on. This thread is staying at the top too much here. Let have a drink!!!

LIPH wrote:

Jahfin wrote:

LIPH wrote:

Jahfin wrote:

LIPH wrote:Any list of the best bands ever that includes the Ramones can't be taken seriously.

A list without the inclusion of the pioneers of punk rock wouldn't be complete. For better or worse, punk rock is a vital part of the musical landscape, that can't be denied. If it wasn't the Ramones then it would be the Sex Pistols, Iggy Pop and the Stooges or the MC5.

My point was, if you're going to be considered one of the best bands ever you should at least be able to play your instruments.

That isn't really true, especially considering that technical skill isn't a part of punk rock and never has been. Punk rock is about raw emotion, not how proficient one may or may not be on their instruments.

Sorry, but I don't buy that. You can't be the "best" at what you do if you're not proficient.

The Ramones or any other punk rock band aren't included in such lists as these because of their ability to play their instruments. They've been included not only because of the influence they've had on other bands but because of the overall effect punk rock has had on the course of music history, which is undeniable. They were among the first punk rock bands ever which makes them pioneers of that genre of music, another reason why a list of the best rock bands ever wouldn't be complete without including them.

Jahfin just curious, are you a music major of some sort? Where did you get your apparent vast knowledge of music history which enables you to speak with so much authority on the subject

Jahfin wrote:The Ramones or any other punk rock band aren't included in such lists as these because of their ability to play their instruments. They've been included not only because of the influence they've had on other bands but because of the overall effect punk rock has had on the course of music history, which is undeniable. They were among the first punk rock ever which makes them pioneers of that genre music, another reason why a list of the best rock bands ever wouldn't be complete without including them.

Sorry, but once again I have to disagree. To me "the best rock bands ever" means just that. THE BEST. I don't think influence should enter into the equation, either you're good or you're not. The Ramones, in my opinion, never should have made it out of the garage. They were awful. If the list was called "the most influential rock bands ever" I might grudgingly agree with your analysis. But it isn't, it's called "the best rock bands ever", which they clearly were not.

LIPH wrote:

Jahfin wrote:The Ramones or any other punk rock band aren't included in such lists as these because of their ability to play their instruments. They've been included not only because of the influence they've had on other bands but because of the overall effect punk rock has had on the course of music history, which is undeniable. They were among the first punk rock ever which makes them pioneers of that genre music, another reason why a list of the best rock bands ever wouldn't be complete without including them.

Sorry, but once again I have to disagree. To me "the best rock bands ever" means just that. THE BEST. I don't think influence should enter into the equation, either you're good or you're not. The Ramones, in my opinion, never should have made it out of the garage. They were awful. If the list was called "the most influential rock bands ever" I might grudgingly agree with your analysis. But it isn't, it's called "the best rock bands ever", which they clearly were not.

Influence does enter into the equation though, no matter their abilities. Without the Ramones, the Clash, the Sex Pistols or any of the other prominent punk rock bands of the mid to late 70s you would of never had the post punk period that followed that gave birth to such bands as U2, R.E.M., or the Cure. By the same token, without the Velvet Underground, the MC5 or Iggy Pop in the Stooges those same punk bands may of never had the inclination to pick up their instruments and play. Technically speaking the Clash may of been the more instrumentally proficent of the two but the Ramones were among the first to give birth to the punk rock genre in America, I feel that's why they belong on the list. "Best" is in the ear of the beholder. I'm not even a fan of punk rock myself but rock n' roll had grown so excessive and pompous by this time period that rock n' roll was in dire need of being reminded of the primitive roots from which it originally sprang. I feel the Ramones (and others) did this to remarkable effect.

Jahfin wrote: Without the Ramones, the Clash, the Sex Pistols or any of the other prominent punk rock bands of the mid to late 70s you would of never had the post punk period that followed that gave birth to such bands as U2, R.E.M., or the Cure.

That's reason enough to keep them off the list.

ph4ever wrote:Jahfin just curious, are you a music major of some sort? Where did you get your apparent vast knowledge of music history which enables you to speak with so much authority on the subject

I'm just a music fan like everybody else. It just so happens that when the music bug bit me back in the early 70s I've gone out of my way since then to read, watch and listen to anything I could get my hands on regarding the subject. That doesn't make me any more of an authority on it than anyone else but I feel I've certainly done my best to educate myself on the subject.

rednekkPH wrote:

Jahfin wrote: Without the Ramones, the Clash, the Sex Pistols or any of the other prominent punk rock bands of the mid to late 70s you would of never had the post punk period that followed that gave birth to such bands as U2, R.E.M., or the Cure.

That's reason enough to keep them off the list.

HEY...dont you pick on U2
or the Sex Pistols for that matter

guess if ya cant beat em join em

rednekkPH wrote:

Jahfin wrote: Without the Ramones, the Clash, the Sex Pistols or any of the other prominent punk rock bands of the mid to late 70s you would of never had the post punk period that followed that gave birth to such bands as U2, R.E.M., or the Cure.

That's reason enough to keep them off the list.

Just because you don't like those bands doesn't mean the Ramones or any other punk rock band shouldn't be included. I admittedly am not a fan of punk rock but it's a very vital part of music history that did happen and who's repercussions are still being felt. Some of you don't seem to be too happy about that but it took punk rock to knock some of the so-called "dinosaur" bands of the time off their high horses. Remarkably, many of them sat up and took notice. Not the least of which were Led Zeppelin who fans of the Damned at the time. This influence later made it's way into some of their songs, most notably "Wearin' and Tearin'" from their posthumous Coda album.

Jahfin wrote:Just because you don't like those bands doesn't mean the Ramones or any other punk rock band shouldn't be included.

Sure it does.

Jahfin wrote:

rednekkPH wrote:

Jahfin wrote: Without the Ramones, the Clash, the Sex Pistols or any of the other prominent punk rock bands of the mid to late 70s you would of never had the post punk period that followed that gave birth to such bands as U2, R.E.M., or the Cure.

That's reason enough to keep them off the list.

Just because you don't like those bands doesn't mean the Ramones or any other punk rock band shouldn't be included. I admittedly am not a fan of punk rock but it's a very vital part of music history that did happen and who's repercussions are still being felt. Some of you don't seem to be too happy about that but it took punk rock to knock some of the so-called "dinosaur" bands of the time off their high horses. Remarkably, many of them sat up and took notice. Not the least of which were Led Zeppelin who fans of the Damned at the time. This influence later made it's way into some of their songs, most notably "Wearin' and Tearin'" from their posthumous Coda album.

this statement confuses me. Please explain yourself further.

Jahfin --
"Best" and 'influential" are two entirely different things. Let's take Madonna as an example, she's been very influential in the music world over the last 20 years. Without her to blaze the trail we probably wouldn't be inundated with all these talent-free little bimbettes that are around today. Using your analysis, should we consider Madonna among the "best" of all time? Sometimes influence is a bad thing.

rednekkPH wrote:

Jahfin wrote:Just because you don't like those bands doesn't mean the Ramones or any other punk rock band shouldn't be included.

Sure it does.

I get the impression from some of you that you would like to ignore the fact that punk rock ever happened, but it did. Each of our lists would be different if we compiled our own, you may not include any punk bands on yours but I most certainly would on mine because they have been such a crucial part of music history.

Jahfin wrote:I get the impression from some of you that you would like to ignore the fact that punk rock ever appened

Really? Wow, you're good.