Suspect Music: Mediocre Taste - Page 2

Good thing their career imploded.
They out-whined even the emo kids.

Early Incubus was good.

You are suspect.

Ditto the Muse love. Very baffled by there inclusion on this list. As Collins stated (more or less) they have put out 4 great (and solid) albums.

How about adding My Chemical Romance and Smashing Pumpkins (yeah, I know SP gets much love, but they never really appealed to me lyrically or musically).

Muse is such shit that it's mind-boggling. They really represent a new level of being suspect.

How about no? I'm not on board with all of the Pumpkins albums, but owning the first few is definitely no indication of mediocrity. Also, the classification of something as a mediocre-identifier is more complex than "I don't like it." I don't like Minor Threat all that much, but the presence of a Minor Threat CD in someone's collection is far from an indicator of mediocrity.

Absolutely not, sir.

edit: To Devin, I mean.

Muse makes Generic Rock Music. I downloaded that album with the song that has a cool video and I couldn't tell one song from the other.

I guess it all comes down to how we are defining mediocre. I wouldn't (and didn't) say that I dislike SP (as it would imply that I care about them that much one way or the other). They just never appealed to me (and that was after giving many of their albums a spin - as I have several friends who worship all things Billy Corgan and have attempted to sway my non-interest). Honestly, I consider those who don't inspire such hate/love diatribes mediocre (perhaps that is where the disconnect is in this conversation). With that in mind, I should probably remove MCR from consideration (as I do dislike that group).

You seem to have vetoed your own nomination with your definition.

It's not clear to me what suspect music is suspect of. Maybe I was hasty in my reprieve. While Kraftwerk isn't mediocre, I expect anyone who says "I'm a big Kraftwerk fan" is suspect of something.



This man is most likely a big Kraftwerk fan. I would not trust this man.

I love Muse, but I can't believe that even those who don't would think so little of them as to actually make them an indicator of bad taste.

I will, on the other hand, add Hawthorne Heights.

Come on, Dev. The "generic" claim is demonstrably false. There isn't a single other mainstream band that incorporates neo-classical piano, multi-tracked harmonies, and electronics anywhere near the extent that Muse do. Even their power-trio configuration is fairly unique these days. Radiohead would be the closest, and they fail on the piano (and somewhat on the harmonies) test, while also eschewing "rock" of any type in their sound any more.

Sure, Muse can have some "same-y" stretches on their albums, but that's no different than any band with such a signature sound (e.g. The Arcade Fire, The Shins, etc.).

"Generic" rock would be, oh, a five-piece with 1-2 guitar players and a yelping, quasi-emo singer that sprinkle the occasional keyboard or orchestral flourish while rocking similar outfits and eyeliner (see: The Used, Panic! At the Disco, Taking Back Sunday). Despite me liking their next-to-last record, My Chemical Romance fits the bill, too.

I think the distinction is that we're talking about taste in a general sense. Does the presence of the Smashing Pumpkins in your friends' collections indicate that they have bad taste, overall?

Also, an important thing to realize in making fun blanket statements is that your personal distaste for something doesn't count. That is, if a lot of people with generally good taste (let's take your friends for example) tend to own Smashing Pumpkins albums, this effectively nulls your distaste for them. Alternately, assuming that you also have good taste, generally speaking, their absence in your collection doesn't automatically mean that your taste is suspect. They're just sort of a non-issue.

For the record, I'm not sure what it means that I own two seldom-listened-to (but initially enjoyed) albums by Coldplay, a band whose presence I will absolutely concede is a strong mediocrity indicator. I think if you have a big enough and generally good enough music collection, its individual mediocrities are effectively cancelled out.

I also have some Muse albums, but I honestly don't get the hype. They're glossy and technically talented, sure, but sort of derivative and characterless. I've been told they're amazing live, but the songs don't really do it for me.

I love a lot of these bands that are mentioned. I dont think having any of these cds in my collection makes me suspect. Suspect to what I dare ask???

I'm aboard the philosophy that there are just plain Rock bands that just make Rock music and some of these bands do it very well and explain their longevity in the music industry.

An understandable critique. I'll even allow that a portion of my love for them comes from the fact that they're carrying Queen's torch moreso than anyone since, just with a lot more apocalyptic/millennial tension to the songs/vocals.

But that is their particular twist on a rather tricky formula.

Oooh. Very suspect. That's almost as bad as "I like all kinds of music."

Very suspect indeed.

Let me go get the big, bright light and the uncomfortable, straight-backed chair. Brad, you work him over, Dave, you scream things about The Eagles at him. I'll come back with a cup of tepid water five hours from now.

eta - I really like Parachutes, mostly because it's evocative of a particular point in my life. But, if only to cover my own ass, I'm going to go with Dave's assertion that a good collection cancels out the mediocrity of individual albums.

I hate it when people say that or "I'll listen to anything." It just tells me that you can't tell what's good and what's shit, and therefore you have no taste.

I stand corrected. They make Generic Prog Rock.

From one listen or two?


I'm not the world's greatest Muse fan, I just argue against the idea that to enjoy listening to them would result in one having mediocre taste.

Bad Taste and/or fascinating taste - complete collections of gimmick bands (Violent Femmes, They Might Be Giants)

Mediocre Taste: having one album of Oasis, Alanis Morrisette, having later albums when obviously the first couple albums are seminal (owning only Loaded is way way suspect).

Muse make fun, pop songs, but that's it. At times it feels like Rock Songs to score movies/TV shows by. Black Holes and Revelations is the definition of this.

Smashmouth 2010?

Once you get married, you immediately become "suspect."

Merging 2 CD collections might just be a painful experience for Adam Warren.

Absolutely right.

What's additionally funny is that I originally read that as "Load," which is equally suspect in the same way. I don't really like Metallica, but there's really nothing inherently musically suspect about owning their albums... unless you somehow managed to pick up Load or St. Anger, but don't have anything else by them. Similarly -

Your taste is suspect if you own:

How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb, but nothing else by U2.
Liz Phair's self-titled album, but not Exile in Guyville.
Up, but nothing else by R.E.M.

(For the record, I own all three of these - none are without some merit. But no one who's heard other albums by the artist in question would deem them the essential disc to have by that artist.)

Wasn't the case at all for me. I'm quite pleased to now jointly possess Bossa Nova (the only Pixies album I hadn't gotten around to updating from cassette), a whole bunch of Van Morrison, an unbelievably massive collection of Jeff Buckley mp3 bootlegs, and a bunch of other stuff. Even with combined collections, we're relatively suspicion-free.

Being dedicated to artists who go bad is not all that suspect, though having Phair's follow up to the self-titled is pretty damning.

Having a Public Enemy greatest hits and not having It Takes a Nation of Millions, or later De La Soul without the first two, etc.

On the negative side, I gained 80's R&B Cassette tapes of Bobby Brown (which I secretly like), TLC, and Boys II Men.

but I also gained the entire Prince CD collection (which was a surprising plus).

This is the best indicator by far. And the Loaded example is great IMO. And the spread taste coined by DaveB is a good one, I will only ad that if the entire collection was recommend by your brother there you have a big red one (as some lovely friend of mine does).

BTW wasn't he referring to VU's Loaded? I hope.

Yeah, Velvet Underground. Having Loaded only is so damning because if you hear that and don't want to follow through, but maybe you just want Sweet Jane...

Yeah, that's what I'd figured. It's just that when I first read it, I thought Load, which, while not a reference I'd expect from Andre, illustrates the point just about as well as Loaded does.

More suspicious behavior:

Having Sgt. Pepper and nothing else by the Beatles.
Having Bob Marley's Legend, but no other reggae CDs.
Owning anything by the Steve Miller Band.

So one of the man-machines had seriously defective programming; heck, not even all of Subaru's cars work perfect.

My wife's CD collection is not allowed near mine.

Her taste has improved due to my genteel guidance ("It puts Tom Waits on random or else it gets the hose again")

Immediately suspect:

Owning and/or listening exclusively to TATTOO YOU while ignoring anything the Stones released pre-EMOTIONAL RESCUE.

Van Hagar over Van Halen (I just can't even fathom comparing both eras)

Nirvana = NEVERMIND, Pearl Jam = TEN

Godsmack

Bon Jovi

Lifehouse

'90s and latter day Aerosmith

I understand the Muse hate. But for every song of theirs that's virtually unlistenable (and I do like to skip), there are some solid (read: heavy) tunes with great performances. Particularly the bass player, who's amazing. Having said that, if you can't dig the Radiohead meets NIN/SP sound with a campy Jeff buckley singing, it's just not your thing.

I kinda got into these guys and The Darkness at the same time. They both exist in this unironic world of rock & roll excess for me.

I guess I'm guilty of having some suspect taste since I only have (What's the story) Morning Glory and I also compiled a collection of my favorite Violent Femmes songs. But why would owning only one album from Oasis be suspect since it's the only one I found worth keeping? And how is Violent Femmes a gimmick band? Please explain, I must be oblivious.

So that's why I hate Muse! They're a prog rock band! Still, Muse and The Smashing Pumpkins just don't belong in this thread. Many just didn't get the meaning of this thread.

I'll nominate The Downward Spiral when it's surrounded by Christina Aguilera, The Wallflowers and Shawn Paul.

With the Femmes, you either own the first album or a best of. There's no point in having much more. Someone who's really into VF either has bad taste, or is O/C, which is kinda cool.

Oasis is like the British Bush, which is slightly redundant, but whatever you think of that wave of Brit-pop (including Blur, Pulp, Supergrass, etc.), even Suede seems more interesting artistically. Oasis made radio music. There's nothing so much wrong with them per se, but if you have a lot of albums like that, you're essentially just towing the corporate line, which is the definition of mediocre.

Fuck Suede and Supergrass. Pulp is loads better and I don't even own an album by these guys.

I'll agree with you there. Oasis is not as good as other bands you mention, but they do have a good song or two.

And I've got to disagree with you The Alexor, listen to Supergrass's first album I Should Coco. There are plenty of great songs, including the track that plays at the end of Hot Fuzz, which is funnily enough called Caught by the Fuzz.

I'll stand by my statement: fuck Supergrass. I fuckin hate boring and pretentious British pop rock that everybody would hate if it came from the US.

Stone Temple Pilots
Velvet Revolver
essentially anything that involves Scott Weiland

Actually, as great as that album is, I would say Downward Spiral falls in the category of "you're suspect if you own this and nothing else."

I think that applies to anyone who owns just one piece of music.

"What kind of music do you like?"

"Billion Dollar Babies. I only like seven songs in the world, and they're the songs on this album."

"Oh. 'kay, Bye."

Do you mean nothing else by Nine-Inch Nails or nothing else, period?

I own a few NIN CDs, but I could easily see ditching them all except for that one.

Andre -
As far as the Femmes go, there's one demographic you missed, and it's understandable that you would. Milwaukee is fairly lacking in terms of local acts who made it on the national level. Among those acts who did make it, the Femmes are really the only ones who got much longstanding critical cred (minor as it may be). Thus there are huge Violent Femmes fans here who basically embrace the band as they might a sports team. Oddly, even most of them only own the first one or a best-of, but there are completists, too.

A Milwaukee site recently asked a bunch of local music industry folks whether they thought the Femmes would have a chance in the Rock'n'Roll Hall of Fame when they become eligible next year. The delusions were kind of spectacular, with people equating them with Husker Du and the Replacements. So if you're from here, I think one can chalk it up to a lapse in taste due to a misplaced sense of regional pride.*

Basically, you're right, though - the first album and a few songs from Why Do Birds Sing? (probably all on the greatest hits disc) are really all you need.

* On the local level, a hefty Femmes collection isn't all that damning when you consider that, alternately, this local pride can manifest in owning BoDeans albums, and just one of those fuckers in your collection makes the whole thing suspect, as far as I'm concerned.

Nothing else by Nine Inch Nails.

I can see being underwhelmed by earlier/later albums, but I can't see anyone with some sort of musical taste having Downward Spiral and not being the least bit curious about the other stuff....unless you're one of the assholes who bought it for Closer, which is where the musically suspect label comes from.

Dave, again, having everything by the Femmes is not the worst thing in the world, it's more a question of "when would you ever be in the mood for it?" Speaking of, they did a cover of Tom Waits for some comp album, they did "Step Right Up" and it was one of the most painful things I've ever heard. I'm pretty sure I stopped that in the middle of the track while doing my college radio show.

In terms of Trent's sound, TDS is kinda where he perfected it, and made it more than just goth emo boy and his cutting fetish. I'd never get into production sound arguments, etc. but TDS is his most accessible and danceable album. Take that as you will. Or that is to say I tried PHM and the Fragile and was like.... uh oh. Then again, I think I threw that on as recently as I threw on a lot of music from that period. With MP3's my collection's mutability is immutable.

Ironic taste, or getting a song from childhood vs. owning the whole body of work is also suspect. If you have a Journey itch, having the Greatest hits is okay, but more is just weird. A taste of Christopher Cross, fine. But more of a side dish.

No way. Half of tthat album is sounds from an industrial steel mill meets Pink Floyd. Pretty Hate Machine, with it's radio length songs and electronic dance beats, is easily the most accessable. Or was, anyway.
But I second Dave's proclamation that Downward Spiral doesn't belong here. The fact tthat it yielded a breakthrough hit just shows that once in a blue moon the general populace gets it right.