Good rant. It's all totally true, kudo's to him for not lumping LP in with all the other bullshit. Though I've gotta ask... Was he nominated for something and didn't win?
Dead on. I was so pissed that all the commercials even said PATD and FOB were playing but didn't, I thought something was up when the show started, they never announced them to play But DID name all the shitty performances and said and others..well there were no others. MTV isn't my friend. Like it was in the 90's, then again in the 90's I was a youngin with no musical taste except what my grandmother got me for Christmas (backstreet boys millennium cd)
Whaaaaaaaaa, whaaaaaaaaaa, whaaaaaa. Everyone wants to be a rebel against modern music, but there's normally a reason something sells. It's pleasing to the ears is the reason. Rihanna is no more butchered than any of Everytime I Die's own music. Sure, there's a lot of beats and such, but hello.... that's the genre. Her voice is still great, and her live appearances indicate as much. If anyone could get away with just using ProTools then Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan would be selling a whole lot more albums. Sure, they'll sell some just because of their celebrity, but no one seriously thinks they're great musicians. I'm sure that 20 years from now some Psuedo-celebrity like Keith Buckley is going to rage against the establishment and say "Man, _____ is no T-Pain! She's no Rihanna! He's no Lil Wayne!" Sorry, but I don't care much for his comments. I don't even like those artists, but to go as far as he does is ridiculous.
Well done, Captain Obvious. Of course, music is appealing in some way or another to those who buy it! Why didn't I think of that? I don't see him denying that himself, in any case, so your point's probably irrelevant. He thinks the majority of music and videos celebrated at the VMAs are vapid farce, and I'm inclined to agree. In regards to Rihanna, it would indeed be past the point to criticise the tracks she uses because of the way they're arranged, but he doesn't actually do that. He essentially just says that her voice is overproduced and, regardless of whether she can sing or not, he would appear to have a point. And this is coming from someone that enjoys quite a bit of her output. I'm guessing you didn't have the attention span to read on from there because you've failed to address any of his other points. He definitely makes a much more compelling argument than your nth pathetic attempt at playing the devil's advocate, although I'm sure he'd be offended by you referring to him as a "pseudo-celebrity". Seriously though, if Keith or anyone like him is around in 20 years I'm sure they'd choose to praise some of today's more superior music to praise as opposed to Lil Wayne and T-Pain. There's plenty of it, both in the charts and elsewhere, and if I could choose between being one of them or one of the Keith Buckleys of the world I know what my choice would be.
Well done, Captain Smartass. For one, he quite obviously implied that Rihanna doesn't have talent. He specifically said that she was far too overproduced, and she performed at the ceremony, did she not? Well, why mention it unless it had something to do with that? Clearly he was voicing his complaints in regards to her in general. And, sorry, but I still don't think that she's overproduced. If she's overproduced, so is Chester. Her voice really isn't touched up that much, except for distortion effects, which really don't "polish" vocals. I mean, hell, if we're going to go off that, Linkin Park clearly abuses the ProTools themselves. And no crap he's not denying that. But isn't that because he didn't SAY anything about the subject? I mean crap man, here if I would have thought answers could be attributed to me simply because of what I DIDN'T say, I could be Einstein's modern day equivalent by now! You are responding to me. Not him. So don't give me this "Captain Obvious" bullcrap. He didn't bring it up. Clearly he doesn't find her music appealing in any way, and he's pretty obviously implied she lacks talent. Your definition of "past the point" and mine clearly differ. As I've said, he's quite clearly emphasizing that these artists are not talented. That's a bit harsh, because he definitely just doesn't like the musical styling. Neither do I, but for me to imply they're talentless is stupid. I never argued against his point about the VMA's being a "farce" in terms of the show itself. In fact, I agreed with him. Maybe you should go back and re-read that. MTV is a company and they're going to do what it takes to reap the benefits from the "awards" show. I guess you simply don't have the attention span to read my short post in its entirety, and instead refute what I've already agreed with. I didn't dissect any of his other points because I didn't disagree with him on them. Is that really that hard of a concept for you to grasp? Come on, man. It's called reading. My fault, though. I wasn't aware that because I'm on a Linkin Park fansite that I have to agree with everyone from some crappy screamo/emo band about how horrible the music scene is, in general, in addition to what we already know about MTV. Next time I'll be sure to read your memo, buddy.