Mudfuzz wrote:D.o.S. wrote:behndy wrote:neh. them bitches wouldn't have stood a chance in modern times against the athleticism of average players, let alone exceptional ones.
it's like how the Beatles aren't really that good unless you have an emotional attachment. props for being first'ish, but people have taken that meh baseline and built way better off of it.
You straight tripping son.
Pretty much. you kind'a have to look at pop music before and after and look at the effect, and sometimes… ok always… the coming up with a idea is better then perfecting it and polishing it like a golden turd from on high.
behndy wrote:NOPE. BEATLES SUCK.
.... i mean, to me they do. but i'm not into that kind of music really. and i've heard some, never dug anything enough to want to listen to more.
buuuuuuuut it always seems like they just get love for being the first, which is cool and all, but doesn't make it GOOD.
D.o.S. wrote:You straight tripping son.
D.o.S. wrote:You straight tripping son.
D.o.S. wrote:You straight tripping son.
D.o.S. wrote:You straight tripping son.
D.o.S. wrote:You straight tripping son.
D.o.S. wrote:You straight tripping son.
D.o.S. wrote:You straight tripping son.
D.o.S. wrote:You straight tripping son.
D.o.S. wrote:You straight tripping son.
Like The Beatles or not, you have to at least acknowledge their massive impact on popular music, turd pants. Which it seems, you kinda do. Kinda begrudgingly though. They had enough of an appeal to totally transform shit (obviously not literally, because their source material was far superior to their own output) into gold.