the_gloaming09

nice! I have still on DVR

Chieftan Mews originated during their webcasts from HTTT [ame= ] [/ame] [ame= ] [/ame] Though also IR webcast [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I37Sr9YkMtM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I37Sr9YkMtM[/ame] [ame= ] [/ame] Though he seems like a troll who just messes around w/ people.

exactly. it's familiar in the sense of people hearing it on the radio repeatedly.

Exactly

cool! well maybe i'll see you there

of course The Escapist and Death and All His Friends are not mainstream... because they're never played on the radio!

welcome to the US rudyiohead you should go to NY when lore visits

Exactly! ...it doesn't matter how the song is composed... it's how popular it is

You still are not understanding at all. Mainstream deals with how popular a song or band is. It has nothing to do with how a song is written. There are tons of folk songs that use verses and choruses from a bunch of unknown artists... are you going to tell me that that is mainstream? Bohemian Rhapsody is played on the radio constantly and made Queen a lot of money... hence Mainstream

:lol: Mainstream is anything that is popular. It has nothing to do with how songs are written. A song like Money by Pink Floyd is very unconventional in terms of it's arrangement for a Pop song. But almost anytime you hear Floyd on the radio that song is played. Also Bohemian Rhapsody is incredibly mainstream too

If you think of the 1970's you think of Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd... so yes... mainstream. Also Pink Floyd was very mainstream especially when they released DSOTM, which has the record for being on the charts for the longest time ever (like I don't know how many years).

Queen, Pink Floyd and Led Zeppelin not fitting the typical band image? :lol: they were artists that made the whole band image... especially Led Zeppelin (look at all the 80's hair metal bands). I also really disagree with your second statement. Bands like The Beatles were mainstream, but they still showed their ideas as well as other bands like Queen, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd too. They may have not been as mainstream as the Top 40 artists, but they still were incredibly popular. In fact I also disagree with the samples thing too. I could argue that since sampling is so popular today that Coldplay are using it to be popular. To be honest I feel that Coldplay is more about wanting to be popular than anything else. I mean just read that article posted here http://www.coldplaying.com/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=7556 If they weren't trying to be popular I'm sure they wouldn't even have mentioned not being able to compete with artists like Gaga or Timberlake or whoever.

I don't see how the contradict themselves at all. You don't have to love everything about a band. And saying that they "suck" doesn't mean that you are not a fan of the band either. Personally I'm not really a fan of their last few releases and I can say that the band sucks with songs like Teardrop and Violet Hill. That doesn't mean that I'm not a fan of the band, being that I love their first two albums as well as a bunch of other songs scattered since then, and have seen them live more than any other artist. And my second sentance was saying that there are much other places on this forum to talk (WoM, Lounge, News) besides it only being about Coldplay. alright, just how you had it set up it made it seem as though you were splitting up a quote by briggins. But even so I have to agree with what Reilly has been saying thus far about musical talent.

You are confusing songwriting capabilities with musical playing capabilities. Both are completely different. I'm not discrediting The Beatles at all, because they have been my overall favorite band ever. Of course they were innovators, and helped initiate and shape our modern looking of pop music. But I disagree that no one has been able to take music to another level since The Beatles. If that was the case we'd still be listening to 60's music. Like I said you're confusing musical talent for songwriting talent. All of The Beatles were talented in songwriting and in the context of the band they worked well. I'm saying if you took any of the members out of their band environment and only listened to them play they're not hugely musically talented. I mean they are talented, but they're not like virtuosos or anything. Like I said McCartney is by far the only extremely talented member of the band. Whether it be his extremely melodic basslines, guitar playing, playing multiple instruments, arrangement/composition of orchestral work or whatever. I'm just saying if you compared them or any really popular artist to a really talented musician like any jazz artist it'd be a joke. What I'm trying to get at is that you don't have to be overly talented in playing an instrument to make a lot of money and be popular. Even so I'm not trying to call The Beatles or any other band bad or anything. Also John didn't record all the tracks on Come Together, it was the whole band. In fact almost all of his songs, including solo work, (except for maybe acoustic songs), was recorded with a band. Paul on the other hand released full solo albums like McCartney, Ram, McCartney II, Chaos and Creation in the Backyard, Electronic Arguments in which he played nearly if not all instruments

I will agree with you almost fully. were they all amazing musicians? no. Paul McCartney I would say was amazing because he was a multi-instrumentalist and composer and was amazing at bass playing. He was the only extremely talented member of the band. The other members, don't get me wrong I love the Beatles more than so many other bands, but they were pretty mediocre. They were just able to write really catchy, popular and interesting songs.

I disagree with you completely. Firstly I've known Briggins for a while and he's not a hipster and likes a whole bunch of mainstream alternative bands like U2, Radiohead, Coldplay, and Arcade Fire. Also maybe the arrangements of songs are good, but in general Coldplay as well as so many other bands aren't really good musicians when you compare them to jazz artists or unknown musician virtuosos. These people are super talented and will never get to be popular because the music they play is way too complex. And saying coldplay sucks on a coldplay fansite is not being a troll... you don't have to love everything a band releases to be a fan. Plus there are many other sections to the forum

It is true. If music was based off talent and how good someone was at an instrument then none of the popular artists over the last few years would be popular. I do think that Coldplay does have relatively simple songs, but I find their simple arrangements work so well. And the overall sound too (of course I'm mainly talking about their first two albums)

You know it ;) WAH WAH WAH WAH WAH-TERFALL!

Some of these are my favorite coldplay songs

:lol: yeah i know... i just keep forgetting oh okay cool

not too bad. I enjoyed the beats a lot! What program do you use? I do sort of wish I could hear your voice a bit more to see what you are saying, and also that maybe there was a little more variety in the arrangement of songs. nice job though :thumbsup:

haha... a really good guy indeed I'm sure that he would've appreciated your humor there it's a good song

:lol:

:lol: it's alright if you miss him... he was a good guy afterall right? :P

:lol: taking after your idol I see :lol: