Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
If it makes you feel any better, and if this is indeed a reincarnation of Juggs/his other 100 names, I'm pretty sure he attacked me in a similar manner within my first ten posts on the forum. I guess it is just his *thing*. Best to ignore it if you feel it affecting you at all.
Yep same here. Its like hazing or a really shitty rite of passage.
Haha yeah I was actually going to use the phrase "rite of passage" but didn't want Vieux getting offended since she's actually been on the board for almost a year, and so she's hardly a noob.
Considering you've found the need to respond to my threads as if you are threatened by me I offer you some peace my confused counterpart. May you find peace in your restless soul.
I don't want to just listen to someone on the radio/album/streaming whatever if they don't have any real talent and have to use technology and studio tricks to make an album that sounds good and sells.
This is so mind-blowingly stupid that I don't know where to begin.
"Yeah, I really can't get into Michaelangelo. He sculpted David, but he did that in his studio and shit. He had like polishing cloths and all kinds of fancy special chisels. What I like are those bearded dudes who paint live on the side of the stage while STS9 rages out a hetti jam. They're the real artists."
No, the analogy would be Michaelangelo just laying on his back and painting the Sistine Chapel instead of bringing in specialists to tell him how to make the faces more appealing, retouching the colors for him, letting him paint god 15 times and splicing it into one image, having another crew paint all of the hands because he sucks at them, and having the pope tell him to put leaves on the dicks because they need to put asses in the seats to fill the collection plate. If you are going to make a terrible analogy, at least use the same medium.
Post by justinmn9319 on May 1, 2015 8:04:52 GMT -5
ugh, my morning radio show is awesome first of all. but the twins played the white sox last night....and chris sail pitched.....thus they played sail in the background. god damnit
Post by theamazingswan on May 1, 2015 8:44:56 GMT -5
My cars stereo is typically set to FM as I turn on the car. My blue tooth takes a few moments to connect so I will listen to a little bit of the local alt rock station before I stream music from my phone. Anyways, new AWOL song comes on. Something about a bad wolf. I seriously had one of those make it stop! moments.
This is so mind-blowingly stupid that I don't know where to begin.
"Yeah, I really can't get into Michaelangelo. He sculpted David, but he did that in his studio and shit. He had like polishing cloths and all kinds of fancy special chisels. What I like are those bearded dudes who paint live on the side of the stage while STS9 rages out a hetti jam. They're the real artists."
No, the analogy would be Michaelangelo just laying on his back and painting the Sistine Chapel instead of bringing in specialists to tell him how to make the faces more appealing, retouching the colors for him, letting him paint god 15 times and splicing it into one image, having another crew paint all of the hands because he sucks at them, and having the pope tell him to put leaves on the dicks because they need to put asses in the seats to fill the collection plate. If you are going to make a terrible analogy, at least use the same medium.
What's funny about this example is that Michaelangelo DID bring specialists to help him learn how to transfer sketches to the ceiling and prevent mold from growing and stuff like that. Plus his apprentices presumably helped him daily. And, maybe I'm wrong here, but it'd be crazy to assume he didn't repaint anything along the way and that it was all done of the first go. And the Cardinals did make someone go back and make all nudes more tasteful.
So, in short, if you're going to make a terrible analogy, at least be factually accurate.
No, the analogy would be Michaelangelo just laying on his back and painting the Sistine Chapel instead of bringing in specialists to tell him how to make the faces more appealing, retouching the colors for him, letting him paint god 15 times and splicing it into one image, having another crew paint all of the hands because he sucks at them, and having the pope tell him to put leaves on the dicks because they need to put asses in the seats to fill the collection plate. If you are going to make a terrible analogy, at least use the same medium.
What's funny about this example is that Michaelangelo DID bring specialists to help him learn how to transfer sketches to the ceiling and prevent mold from growing and stuff like that. Plus his apprentices presumably helped him daily. And, maybe I'm wrong here, but it'd be crazy to assume he didn't repaint anything along the way and that it was all done of the first go. And the Cardinals did make someone go back and make all nudes more tasteful.
So, in short, if you're going to make a terrible analogy, at least be factually accurate.
There is not a shred of evidence that anybody but Michelangelo had any creative control or laid a single brush stroke to the ceiling. Absolutely none. You can presume all that you like, but that is here nor there. What people do afterwards is completely irrelevant, had they hated it they could have removed it completely. It doesn't change the fact that it was one man and a ceiling. I suppose my analogy is also dumb because he didn't build the Sistine Chapel himself too or invent painting.
What's funny about this example is that Michaelangelo DID bring specialists to help him learn how to transfer sketches to the ceiling and prevent mold from growing and stuff like that. Plus his apprentices presumably helped him daily. And, maybe I'm wrong here, but it'd be crazy to assume he didn't repaint anything along the way and that it was all done of the first go. And the Cardinals did make someone go back and make all nudes more tasteful.
So, in short, if you're going to make a terrible analogy, at least be factually accurate.
There is not a shred of evidence that anybody but Michelangelo had any creative control or laid a single brush stroke to the ceiling. Absolutely none. You can presume all that you like, but that is here nor there. What people do afterwards is completely irrelevant, had they hated it they could have removed it completely. It doesn't change the fact that it was one man and a ceiling. I suppose my analogy is also dumb because he didn't build the Sistine Chapel himself too or invent painting.
As much as I hate to fall down this rabbit hole, Mr. "Groovemonkey," you're wrong. He used assistants at least to mix paints and prep the areas he was about the paint. He absolutely had people teach him the techniques necessary and help him transfer the sketches to the surface, at least in the beginning (since he was a sculptor being forced by his patron to undertake an entirely different art form). He absolutely brought in experts to help him prevent mold growth. The final work you see was altered after its completion, yet still remains one of the world's great artworks. And even if you consider all of that insignificant, art experts agree that there's simply no way he could have learned all the techniques necessary and painted every brush stoke on the ceiling in just 4 years without his assistants helping him. You may claim one thing, but documented history, plus logic and common sense, dictate something else.
But let's leave that aside and boil down your argument for a second here. Let's suppose I'm right, that a team of people helped Michaelangelo paint. OR, even better, let's suppose the Sistine Chapel was painted by a team of 4 master painters working collaboratively. Does that mean that the end product suddenly becomes less of a breath taking work of art? That standing on the floor of the chapel and staring at the ceiling suddenly becomes less awe-inspiring because multiple people worked on it rather than just one? No, it doesn't. No reasonable person could think that.
So, circling back to the originally argument. If you listen to a beautiful piece of music created in a studio that, for whatever reason, cannot be recreated live, does that make the music less beautiful? It doesn't to me, and unless you only listen to music recorded in one take with no mixing, there's no way you can honestly say otherwise yourself.
There is not a shred of evidence that anybody but Michelangelo had any creative control or laid a single brush stroke to the ceiling. Absolutely none. You can presume all that you like, but that is here nor there. What people do afterwards is completely irrelevant, had they hated it they could have removed it completely. It doesn't change the fact that it was one man and a ceiling. I suppose my analogy is also dumb because he didn't build the Sistine Chapel himself too or invent painting.
As much as I hate to fall down this rabbit hole, Mr. "Groovemonkey," you're wrong. He used assistants at least to mix paints and prep the areas he was about the paint. He absolutely had people teach him the techniques necessary and help him transfer the sketches to the surface, at least in the beginning (since he was a sculptor being forced by his patron to undertake an entirely different art form). He absolutely brought in experts to help him prevent mold growth. The final work you see was altered after its completion, yet still remains one of the world's great artworks. And even if you consider all of that insignificant, art experts agree that there's simply no way he could have learned all the techniques necessary and painted every brush stoke on the ceiling in just 4 years without his assistants helping him. You may claim one thing, but documented history, plus logic and common sense, dictate something else.
But let's leave that aside and boil down your argument for a second here. Let's suppose I'm right, that a team of people helped Michaelangelo paint. OR, even better, let's suppose the Sistine Chapel was painted by a team of 4 master painters working collaboratively. Does that mean that the end product suddenly becomes less of a breath taking work of art? That standing on the floor of the chapel and staring at the ceiling suddenly becomes less awe-inspiring because multiple people worked on it rather than just one? No, it doesn't. No reasonable person could think that.
So, circling back to the originally argument. If you listen to a beautiful piece of music created in a studio that, for whatever reason, cannot be recreated live, does that make the music less beautiful? It doesn't to me, and unless you only listen to music recorded in one take with no mixing, there's no way you can honestly say otherwise yourself.
This discussion is the most interesting and artistic related thing in this thread.
Sooo.. I saw awolnation last night. It was waaay better than I would originally have thought. And if anyone heard a little drunk girl periodically yelling "sail!" throughout the entire set, it was me, and I blame it on druid for getting that started in this thread. It was fun though. The first song they played was run and I was still in the beer line talking up a sexy Russian guy. I accidentally touched his butt. Accidentally of course. Idk why I said that but this thread has already turned into art history.
1st I know how sensitive people can be about this... but nobody is going to out music snob me.
Once people are determined to dislike a band then said sad individuals puts music in said category to not even listen, give chance, or to have an open mind.
Which I am certain, anyone who says that AWOL suck, is similar/like another band, or shwaggle bush, has not seen them live & certainly isn't being honest with themselves. I believe they are completely unique as an act, & Aaron has vision.
Honestly, the less people who like it the more room for me to freely move.
Two festival Wknds/Days I like to reflect on in my many many days/nights spent knowing my self righteousness -Coachella 2006 Sat Eagles of Death Metal, Daft Punk + b2b2b2b Sun w/ Gnalrs Barkley, Yeah Yeah Yeahs, Massive Attack, & Tool (opening 10,000 days tour) & Coachella 07 with Silversun, Interpol Friday night, Arcade Fire (funeral), Red Hot Chili Peppers (stadium arcadium) b2b Sat night then Sunday with the Willie Nelson, Air, Manu Chao, Rage Against the Machine (Quadfecta awesomeness) - I know when I see an elite band or act. But hey, I'm not trying to convert, just letting you in on a little secret that won't be for very long.
I feel like once you say that anyone who says AWOL suck "certainly isn't being honest with themselves," you've out-music-snobbed yourself.
1/30: Cold War Kids
2/6: Cherub
4/22: The Mountain Goats
5/25: Laura Jane Grace "Killing Me Loudly"
5/31: The Decemberists
6/11-6/14: BONNAROO 2015
6/28: Against Me!
6/30: Against Me!
Black Dynamite
Showerless Shakedown Vendor THE Bongo Guy
