[Corpse]

No shit. Its only one of the greatest albums of all time.

Everyone has his/her own opinion; that said, I'd argue it wasn't even one of the greatest albums of the 1990s.

[quote="Douglas"]

No Shit. Yes it sold a TON of albums, but it dosen't make it a good album. Before that album there was no comprimises and front to back the albums were good. The "Black" album was spotty at best. IMO not good at all.

[Corpse]

OK- i've done a search and can't find anything....how the hell do you "quote" something from someones post w/out having to grab the whole post and not have it look stupid like my last post. arrgghhh. cratch:

[Sam]

After you quote the whole post, you can cut out the portions you don't want to include in your reponse by deleting them. In other words, you can edit the 'quoted' portion of your response. Just be careful not to mess with the "

" programming at the beginning and the end of the quote or you'll end up with something less polished than you might have intended.

Your other option is to highlight the section you want to quote, right click and select 'copy' and then paste it into your response window. Highlight the whole thing and then click on the quote icon in the tool menu on the response/post page. This gives you a quote, but it doesn't bring the author's name down with it. Like I'm about to do here:

As far as I can tell, the whole point of the Hip, for example, is the thrill they get from making music with friends, and earning a living doing it.

I agree and disagree. Making music with friends may be the goal but to earn a living at it, you have to engage the music buying public.

Ofcourse, I would argue that the Hip has, and continues, to engage the music buying public. Are people buying IBE in the same number that they bought FC? Perhaps not. Does that make IBE unsuccessful? Absolutely not. The band put out a CD of song they liked, toured on it and came away with more money than they started out with. That sounds successful to me.

If we measure success by 'number of widgets' moved, "I Want to Hold Your Hand" would be the Beatles' best song.

[The Darkest Canuck]

shit i hate it when people call "metallica" that "sellout" album

No shit. Its only one of the greatest albums of all time

uhhhhhhhhhhhhh, no, I'm sorry, but just, no.

calling it a sellout album is a little harsh, but there's no way in hell that it's one of the best albums of all time...it's not even the best Metallica album, that honour would belong to either Puppets, Justice, or Lightning.

[Corpse]

Thanks for the info. I've tried the quote delete deal but it never seems to work right. Must be me. And the cut paste works but I want to give the author props.

Mucho coolnes to darkest canuck on "The D". :thumb:

[mystery met]

Whats this about Gord "Actually singing". Not sure what the guy is implying by that but as far as I know he's been 'singing' since the mid 80's.

[smg333]

that's why i said the writer is a dork

[direwolf74]

Whats this about Gord "Actually singing". Not sure what the guy is implying by that but as far as I know he's been 'singing' since the mid 80's.

I was a little bewildered by that quote as well. Perhaps he's just not a fan of the way Gord sings.

Speaking of Gord's voice, I was having a conversation about the Hip with a friend of mine the other day, and his opinion is that Gord's voice has gotten progressively worse over the years. I've heard other people say this as well, but I totally disagree. I've also noticed that the people who say this usually prefer the Hip's older material (UTH, RA, etc..), my friend included. Personally I think Gord's voice has developed into a truly unique instrument, and I think he has a lot more range these days, especially on recent albums. There's no other rock singer on the planet who sounds even remotely like him. To me, In Violet Light stands out as Gord's strongest vocal performance to date (the range he shows on "Leave" is amazing). I'll admit he sometimes sounds a little rough when they play live, but that's rock n' roll. Live shows aren't supposed to be perfect.

[skippy the wonder dog]

As far as I can tell, the whole point of the Hip, for example, is the thrill they get from making music with friends, and earning a living doing it.

I agree and disagree. Making music with friends may be the goal but to earn a living at it, you have to engage the music buying public.

But you don't have to engage them to the point of selling a zillion albums.

Lots of people settle for smaller audiences, and concentrate on making music that they like rather than music that would sell.

[Cpt. Trips]

Bob Rock killed Music.

[The Darkest Canuck]

Whats this about Gord "Actually singing". Not sure what the guy is implying by that but as far as I know he's been 'singing' since the mid 80's.

I was a little bewildered by that quote as well. Perhaps he's just not a fan of the way Gord sings.

Speaking of Gord's voice, I was having a conversation about the Hip with a friend of mine the other day, and his opinion is that Gord's voice has gotten progressively worse over the years. I've heard other people say this as well, but I totally disagree. I've also noticed that the people who say this usually prefer the Hip's older material (UTH, RA, etc..), my friend included. Personally I think Gord's voice has developed into a truly unique instrument, and I think he has a lot more range these days, especially on recent albums. There's no other rock singer on the planet who sounds even remotely like him. To me, In Violet Light stands out as Gord's strongest vocal performance to date (the range he shows on "Leave" is amazing). I'll admit he sometimes sounds a little rough when they play live, but that's rock n' roll. Live shows aren't supposed to be perfect.

Mike from R.E.M. is quite similar at times, but you can still tell the two apart easily...

and i think Gord's singing is getting much better, before he was more of a screamer and a yeller, now he is a true singer, but he can still do the old stuff just fine...don't worry about it, the people you were talking to have no idea what they're talking about when it comes to the hip...casual fans just wish they were still crankin out bluesy jams like NOIS and probably haven't even given any of the newer material a chance based on a couple singles here and there...w/e, their loss not ours, right? :thumb:

[Detrious]

The whole point of being a band imho is to be accesible, so you can get your work to the larger audience,

Huh? That's the whole point of being in a band? Sorry - gotta disagree with you there.

As far as I can tell, the whole point of the Hip, for example, is the thrill they get from making music with friends, and earning a living doing it. If they were concerned about making their music "accessible" then they'd be on their 6th version of Fully Completely.

quote]

First off I would like ot hold up my special 'get out of talking bollocks free' card by pointing out my 'imho' clause to my argument.

I most likely could have phrased that line better, but my point was rather that a band would want there music to be accessible, as I guess any artist would want a lot of people to like what they are doing and enjoy it. They would also benefit from the ability to make a living out of it, rather than have to go back to their day-jobs as no-one bought that second 3 disk rock opera...

This argument obviously falls down somewhat with the word 'Nickleback'

But if you ask anyone who knows me, most of my argumants suffer from almost 24 hour syncope...

D

[tigerthelion]

The whole point of being a band imho is to be accesible, so you can get your work to the larger audience,

Huh? That's the whole point of being in a band? Sorry - gotta disagree with you there.

As far as I can tell, the whole point of the Hip, for example, is the thrill they get from making music with friends, and earning a living doing it. If they were concerned about making their music "accessible" then they'd be on their 6th version of Fully Completely.

quote]

First off I would like ot hold up my special 'get out of talking bollocks free' card by pointing out my 'imho' clause to my argument.

I most likely could have phrased that line better, but my point was rather that a band would want there music to be accessible, as I guess any artist would want a lot of people to like what they are doing and enjoy it. They would also benefit from the ability to make a living out of it, rather than have to go back to their day-jobs as no-one bought that second 3 disk rock opera...

This argument obviously falls down somewhat with the word 'Nickleback'

But if you ask anyone who knows me, most of my argumants suffer from almost 24 hour syncope...

D

You do have somewhat of a point detrious. Of course the Hip want to make good money. They make a bigger salary than the average person. They wouldn't be with a label as big as Universal if they weren't interested in making a sweet living. I agree with cferneyh also, to a point. I think the Hip do have integrity and love making music for the sake of making music. I just think they like making a lot of money also.

I do agree that musicians want as many people to hear their music as possible. It's just that some bands have integrity and won't sell their soul to make a million dollars and some bands will. You can't tell me that a band like Broken Social Scene would get angry if millions more people heard their music.

[skippy the wonder dog]

Bob Rock killed Music.

Yeah, but Music tried to stab him. It was self-defence.

[deadparrot]

But you don't have to engage them to the point of selling a zillion albums.

Lots of people settle for smaller audiences, and concentrate on making music that they like rather than music that would sell.

Yeah. But let's be honest. It would have been a very different playing field if Music at Work was released before Road Apples. Would they be headlining sold out shows like they do now? The Hip are able to create music such as MAW and IVL because of Up To Here and Road Apples.