Grohl the most accomplished musician of the last 25yrs?

[Terry Yake]

For those unfamiliar, Beefheart was "a heartless monster" to a lot of people, including his bandmates:

=He'd put bandmates in a barrel and emotionally and physically abuse them for hours.
=Amongst other ridiculous things he'd do include: kidnapping/house arrest for his band, food deprivation, sleep deprivation, brainwashing, threatening and sometimes using weapons on them(whips and crossbows are the infamous ones), other forms of negative reinforcement, and encouraging physical and emotional fighting between them.

Beefheart was a psychotic and drug abusing *******, in complete honesty. Even if he made good music.

yeah i meant cool guy as in his music. definitely not as a person

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

I guess it's just Beefheart's voice or delivery. It's just so offputting to me and takes away from the instrumentals too much, it feels like it wants to be part of the main stage when it doesn't belong imo.

Beefheart himself is the wildcard. The rest of the band executed his preformed ideas with precision while he often barked and skronked off the top of his head.

I've listened to instrumental versions of his best music, and while I love getting to hear each part with clarity, it misses Vliet's energy and spontaneity.

Also, it doesn't help him that he sounds like a horrible person offstage, all the word of mouth stories of how he treated his band and such, even if he had a mental disorder(s). I just couldn't get into his music.

Besides a notorious artistic temperament, it takes more to make music with that kind of vision than most people are capable of - not only finding musicians with the technical ability to play it, but to be open-minded enough to see the value in it, and stick with it despite very little in the way of "rock star" rewards.

Vliet couldn't have been a good person if he wanted to make that great music. Whether the trade-off was worth it is up for debate.

Exactly, outside impressionability is something that I think should be embraced to some degree, and it's pretty much completely unavoidable. The way I see it, you're either at the mercy of the advertising/marketing machine which has zero correlation with quality, or you're at the mercy of critical consensus, which has some correlation with quality, or you're at the mercy of word of mouth from people who were also at the mercy of exposure from critics/advertising.

The only way to avoid that is to wander the board aimlessly between entire decades and genres of music, somehow getting the idea that you'll be able to miraculously stumble upon something better than everything else/common knowledge that decades and decades of music criticism somehow missed. That seems like a psychotic way to do it.

There's also a very good chance that you could find yourself in a musical clique where there's little chance for growth.

The cross-pollination available on the internet has been huge for anybody interested in hearing what the whole world has to offer.

As a starting point, sure you can look up some of "the best" and expand from there. That's a perfectly acceptable entry point. But you should keep digging well beyond that point. Find the forgotten bands, the overlooked albums in the discography, the 3rd and 4th wave of artists in a genre that brought a new idea to the table or simply perfected an attribute of the sound, etc. When someone limits themselves to only "the best," that's when I don't really value their opinion.

In my experience, that's exactly what Shareefruck has done. The difference is that when you're casting a wide net, there's a lot more to sift through.

I've had some quality conversations with him, and he's been nothing if not open to suggestions.

Personally, I discover new music thru various different means. The most consistent methods all simply revolve around interacting socially with people who have tastes I respect. Both in-person and online. I've been parts of online communities with similar tastes, and learned of new music that way. I've frequented plenty of shows, and learned of tons of new music that way. From those shows I've grown my social circle, and been exposed to new music via my friends. Expanding my social circle once again exposes me to new online communities, and so on and so forth.

The danger of that method, of course, is never being exposed to (or seriously engaged in) different kinds of music.

 

[OzzyFan]

Beefheart himself is the wildcard. The rest of the band executed his preformed ideas with precision while he often barked and skronked off the top of his head.

I've listened to instrumental versions of his best music, and while I love getting to hear each part with clarity, it misses Vliet's energy and spontaneity.

To each his own. Having heard a number of his songs with instrumentals purely, I think if he actually had a good clear vocalist and "more sensical" lyrics with deep meaning(yeah, I know his "style" is supposed to be a bit), I think he could have had a lot more mainstream and financial success, and his music could have been taken to another level (a listenable level for many). Just my opinion. I just can't take his vocals and choppy lyrics.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

To each his own. Having heard a number of his songs with instrumentals purely, I think if he actually had a good clear vocalist and "more sensical" lyrics with deep meaning(yeah, I know his "style" is supposed to be a bit), I think he could have had a lot more mainstream and financial success, and his music could have been taken to another level (a listenable level for many). Just my opinion. I just can't take his vocals and choppy lyrics.

What a tragedy that would have been. But like you say, to each his own.

We're all looking for something different out of music.

 

[Shareefruck]

I don't see how "good clear vocalist and more sensical lyrics with deep meaning" could fit well with the similarly jarring, unorthodox style of the music, though (even though it's calculated, the illusion/feeling it gives you isn't that). Seems like that would be a fundamental mismatch. It would be like hearing Frank Sinatra crooning to free jazz or punk, wouldn't it?

 

[PeterSidorkiewicz]

I'm actually a little shocked at how much dislike Grohl seems to have gotten in this thread. I think he's fantastic.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

I don't see how "good clear vocalist and more sensical lyrics with deep meaning" could fit well with the similarly jarring, unorthodox style of the music, though (even though it's calculated, the illusion/feeling it gives you isn't that). Seems like that would be a fundamental mismatch. It would be a like if Frank Sinatra crooned to free jazz. How would that work?

I dunno. But I'd love to have seen him try.

 

[Terry Yake]

I'm actually a little shocked at how much dislike Grohl seems to have gotten in this thread. I think he's fantastic.

i don't think anyone's denying the fact that he's talented

many agree that his music is just bland and boring

 

[kook10]

In my book, vision and technical ability without taste are not worthless but definitely worth less. The greatest works of art incorporate all of those. Even the great classical composers understood the value of established (and even-gasp!-popular) cadences and harmonic progressions to build tension and resolution. Beethoven was a big fan of the I-IV-V.

Some music is undeniably progressive and challenging in the artistic sense, but in the end the true accomplishments are those that can incorporate that progression into pieces that will for many years be listened to and enjoyed as opposed to read about and appreciated.

[That said, I don't think Dave Grohl is the guy]

 

[K Fleur]

It's his gimmick to go into threads and just post how he's never heard of something or someone notable.

I've seen him do it on the main boards, didn't realize it stretched out to these one to. Pretty lame.

I'm actually a little shocked at how much dislike Grohl seems to have gotten in this thread. I think he's fantastic.

Grohl is a great drummer, and talented overall musician. Terrible singer though.

 

[Shareefruck]

^ The main board? So he goes around posting "Dustin Byfuglien? Never heard of him!" and things like that?

The way I see it, the bland/boring comment applies uniformly to tastefulness as well. I don't think Grohl is spectacularly tasteless or anything, but I also don't don't think he's notably tasteful.

 

[K Fleur]

^ The main board? So he goes around posting "Dustin Byfuglien? Never heard of him!" and things like that?

The way I see it, the bland/boring comment applies uniformly to tastefulness as well. I don't think Grohl is spectacularly tasteless or anything, but I also don't don't think he's notably tasteful.

Pretty much.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=125137283&postcount=15

^^At least in this example he admitted to his feigned ignorance(and folowed it up with real ignorance lol).

 

[Shareefruck]

To be fair, if everyone was talking about something as if it was a household name, I would probably be thinking out loud "Am I the only one here who has no idea who this is?"

Sometimes it's outright ***-hole attention-seeking though. I've seen _____ vs. _____ polls where some guy comes in just to say something along the lines of "Gee, that's a tough choice, because I've never heard of either of them." and I'm thinking "What the.... What is this?"

 

[Sarcastic]

As the King of Gimmicks, I know a gimmick when I see one. Plus in this case, it's a large stretch for someone to have been on the internet since 2004 and have never heard of Dave Grohl.

 

[BonMorrison]

To be fair, if everyone was talking about something as if it was a household name, I would probably be thinking out loud "Am I the only one here who has no idea who this is?"

It's so much more than just coming in and saying he doesn't know things. He frequently does what people accuse you of (but are wrong) about being contrarian. He'll intentionally praise trash things (like the movie Pixels) to annoy people and call things garbage for the sole reason that he didn't understand them. There are other things (like low-key general anti-marginalized people mentalities and this one time he spent an entire thread being racist before the thread got taken down) but yeah. It takes a lot to get on my "Ignore List" but here we are.

 

[Shareefruck]

Don't get me wrong, I wasn't defending the poster (I think I've had some unpleasant encounters with him as well). Just saying that the act we're talking about can be tenable.

 

[K Fleur]

It's so much more than just coming in and saying he doesn't know things. He frequently does what people accuse you of (but are wrong) about being contrarian. He'll intentionally praise trash things (like the movie Pixels) to annoy people and call things garbage for the sole reason that he didn't understand them. There are other things (like low-key general anti-marginalized people mentalities and this one time he spent an entire thread being racist before the thread got taken down) but yeah. It takes a lot to get on my "Ignore List" but here we are.

This reminded me of these gems;

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=106939613&postcount=108

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=106940705&postcount=110

 

[kihei]

I actually haven't paid any real attention to Grohl's music though he seems an interesting guy. Having done a quick skim, I guess the thing about this thread that surprises me most is how few possible candidates are coming up for discussion. 25 years is a long time. Anyway, another vote for Greenwood. Does Noel Gallagher count as "accomplished"?

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

I actually haven't paid any real attention to Grohl's music though he seems an interesting guy. Having done a quick skim, I guess the thing about this thread that surprises me most is how few possible candidates are coming up for discussion. 25 years is a long time. Anyway, another vote for Greenwood. Does Noel Gallagher count as "accomplished"?

It's been a relatively underwhelming quarter-century of music.

 

[kihei]

It's been a relatively underwhelming quarter-century of music.

True.

Mulling this over a bit, is Grohl actually that accomplished or is he just a curious, open-minded guy who likes to collaborate a lot with other musicians?

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

True.

Mulling this over a bit, is Grohl actually that accomplished or is he just a curious, open-minded guy who likes to collaborate a lot with other musicians?

The latter, unless I have totally different idea about what constitutes accomplishments.

 

[jw2]

I'm actually a little shocked at how much dislike Grohl seems to have gotten in this thread. I think he's fantastic.

I like a lot of his stuff.

But to ask "is this guy the most accomplished musician in the last 25 years" is a joke.

 

[Buckets and Gloves]

Dr Dre??

 

[PeterSidorkiewicz]

I like a lot of his stuff.

But to ask "is this guy the most accomplished musician in the last 25 years" is a joke.

Hmmm why do you say that? I feel like with all of his side projects he has done it sets him up for being very accomplished.

Just to get a feeling, are there any examples of people you feel more worthy? I just think the guy is ultra talented whether you like his style or not. I mean stuff like the foo fighters isn't even up my ally and is till think he's pretty awesome.

 

[Xelebes]

It's been a relatively underwhelming quarter-century of music.

I don't know about you but I am having a lot of fun. It's been a pretty good time. It just sucks for rock fans. It's probably as stinky as the 1960s and 1970s for jazz - if all you could think for accomplished musicians were ones who played jazz, you would be ignoring John Lennon and gang.