Nickelback still getting no respect

Snuckles] <p>[quote wrote:

So what, exactly, do the haters hate about this band?

The sound.

jrose wrote:

Oh, and if anyone needs a real answer to that questions, here you go:

http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/nickelback/figuredyouout.html

yeah, I can't see my way around this one, much as I love the riffs. I was desperately looking for some kind of irony, some twist in this narrative, but alas, none. In fact, the only "irony" occurs when the narrator begins to "hate" everything about his "favourite damn disease", which allows him to cleanse himself of, but continue to use, the object he leaves kneeling in the dirt. Unlistenable, unfortunately. Like many an Eminem track. Unlistenably nauseating.

As for the rest, I guess the article captures it quite succinctly. Too bad, cause they have a catchy formula.

I share, unsurprisingly, jrose and Stargazer's disdain for both the Junos and the lothesome Nickelback.

Catchfire wrote:

I share, unsurprisingly, jrose and Stargazer's disdain for both the Junos and the lothesome Nickelback.

Thanks, 500, for speaking up for what I guess we can call our plebian tastes. Would you agree, however, that the lyrics jrose cites above are inexcusable, unforgiveable, and unlistenable?

Well, Catchfire, technically "sucking" wouldn't cause light to bend. It would require gravity. And they certainly don't have gravitas ;)

Also, I listen to Jimmy Buffet, and as my friend puts it "Jimmy Buffet is the only man to have made alcohol uncool".

I mean we're arguing musical tastes here. We'll never really see eye-to-eye on this fully.

jas wrote:

Catchfire wrote:

 They suck so hard they bend light.

:)

As for "no hooks", well, I think that's a matter of opinion. They would not be selling in the numbers they do if they had no hooks. Hooks are pretty much all they do have. You may not like 'em, but they got 'em.

Well, that and they get massive radio play and have the ability to have their albums put out at the front of stores as well as getting the necessary media coverage to boost their sales. Really, a lot of bad albums will go platinum ;(

jas wrote:

Thanks, 500, for speaking up for what I guess we can call our plebian tastes. Would you agree, however, that the lyrics jrose cites above are inexcusable, unforgiveable, and unlistenable?

 

Well, I can't even make out the words to most songs, but since they're written in that link...

I wouldn't use it as a ring tone but it doesn't seem worse than other lyrics I've read. What's the meaning of someone having powder on their nose? Does it mean snorting cocaine? Why does he go from "And I love the people that you know" to "And I hate the people that you know"?

I think your question is difficult to answer.

In a particularly violent Cormack McCarthy novel. 

Actually, much has been said about Frampton fading from the spotlight over the 80's and 90's.  A whole mythology was concocted to explain his whereabouts, but truth is, he was serving time in San Quentin Penitentiary for gratuitous use of a wa wa peddle.   His cell mate was Rick Wakeman, serving time for  first degree aggravated synthesizer. 

I forgot how much Theory of  Deadman sound like Nickelback. They are also extremely horrible in concert. They were playing NXNE along with Puddy (now Red Elite) and what a difference in the crowd. Red Elite's crowd was full of regular working class stiffs, while Theory of a Deadman's crowd were yuppies with sweaters wrapped around their necks. It truly was eye opening, that difference in crowds. 

And there is nothing wrong with being a cultural snob when it comes to movies and books. 

In fact, I'm going to see Tindersticks for my birthday. Can't wait! 

Tommy you know Tiny Tim was the first true rocker and guitar legend!

If I could be serious for just a moment, I heard some stuff on Randy Backman's show on CBC over a year ago.  He had his hands on an compilation cd on the history of rock, and was playing some recording from it made in the 1920's on someone's porch in Louisianna-- and I recognized some standard Led Zepplin chords.   The "original rockers", I think, pre date  recorded music.  By how much is anyone's guess.  I'm thinking Civil War, at least.

500_Apples wrote:

and also sometimes being a TV snob

An oxymoron. The only kind of TV snobbery possible, imo, is exercised by those who [i]don't[/i] watch over those who do.

Quote:

A few days later the same people were watching the DVD of Romy and Michelle's high school reunion. We all liked "trash", just different kinds.

Romy and Michelle are awesome. They should do a modern-day sequel.

The observations by 500_Apples in this thread remind me of my first serious relationship.  He was a decade older than I was, and every kind of music I liked "sucked" unless it was an artist from the 70's that he liked.  (And the only thing he liked WAS music from the 70's - everything else "sucked".)  Well, as someone who came of age in the 80's, I have a lot of good feelings attached to 80's bubblegum and pop music, and I still like it.  Unapologetically now.

It was hard for me, because in high school, I wanted to be a musician - I was into jazz, big band, classical, but also contemporary top 40 pop.   I also loved all the music my parents liked, so that means I loved 50's and 60's music, and the 70's too.  I was pretty confident about my musical ability and my musical tastes until I started socializing with someone who not only didn't like a lot of the stuff I did (which is fine, I have no problem with that), but went out of his way to say that everything I liked "sucked".  I lost a lot of confidence, and spent a number of years never listening to anything I liked if he didn't like it.

Now, one good thing about this is that I started listening to a lot of stuff (that he liked) that I hadn't really gotten into before, and I still love a lot of it.  But I don't think that making me feel like shit for five years for liking the stuff I liked was necessary.  Nor was trying to remake my musical tastes in his own image. 

Whenever I see threads like this on babble, it takes me back.  I'm not saying don't do it, I'm just saying that this is how you come across to people who like the stuff you're saying factually and categorically sucks.

Catchfire, I agree with you about the Junos.  It would be great if they could be used to nurture new talent as opposed to simply always going to the huge names.  But would people take the Junos seriously if they bypassed all the really popular Canadian bands that people know well?  How much would Canadians across the country relate to the Junos if every winner was some band no one had heard of, as opposed to music they know and like on the radio?

It seems to me that the Junos are basically just a celebration of Canadian pop culture, like the Grammys are in the US.  Maybe Canada needs some other institution to recognize new and upcoming artists.  Maybe there's a place for the Junos as they are, and for another award with a different focus than mass culture.

Well, there's nothing wrong with celebrating mass culture. The only thing is that mass culture is American. It's not really Canadian. So the Grammys aren't 'American Mass culture' and the Junos 'Canadian mass culture'. It's all American, all the time. It would be fine to acknowledge Canadians who have made it into the pop market--there's nothing wrong with tapping your foot to Bryan Adams for crying out loud--but the Junos shouldn't pretend that they're supporting Canadian musicians. They are supporting capitalism in music.

My five year old likes Nickleback's "Far Away" song, he always insists on hearing it whenever we're browsing Youtube videos.  I figure it's the lullaby effect.  They've got a few decent leads in a couple of songs, but overall they wouldn't be among my picks for desert island discs.  The lyrics are horrible.  When listening to most of the music that's available on commercial radio, it's better to keep the bar low and not expect too much out of it.  And besides, they can't all be Metallica.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULgOy4njKZQ

"It's one thing to have more refined standards, and I can relate being a foodie and also sometimes being a TV snob, it's another to condescend to what other people enjoy."

True, but this is pop music we're talking about, so, just like sports talk, snobbery or chauvanism is a given going in.  

In unfairness to Nickleback and all the bands existing on this side of the 70's who all suck ( )   they suffer from the fact that rock critics and audiences  will always compare them to someone else.  That's something the Beatles, Rolling Stones, Led Zepplin,  Jimi Hendrix, yadda yadda yadda,  never had to contend with.    And it's not because these guys were "original" -- much has been said about where their "influences" came from.  For them, originality had a lot to do with a more naive audience, rock critics, and living in an age where new technology gave everything an original feel.

I think the problem with Nickleback is that they seemed to have been barfed up like a "prefab four" by the music industrial complex.  They got fed the royal jelly because the record execs wanted a band that fit a demographic.   

The audience is the product, don't forget.

So, I think a lot of people resent Nickleback not just because they don't sound "original", but also because there is more than a whiff of phoney comming off them.

Hey hey we're the Nickleback, and people say we Nickleback around, but we're too busy singin',  to put anybody down.......