Hill(s) you're Willing to Die on

[zitothebrave]

This is a thread for people who want to make a post about a hill they're willing to die on. Obviously you're allowed to do more than one post duh doi britta.

[zitothebrave]

For me, the quintessential Bon Jovi album is New Jersey. Sure Slipper When Wet was the best selling album and has their most iconic song ever (Livin' on a prayer) it's an amazing album, but New Jersey takes what works from SWW and turned into to 11.

Stadium rock anthem like You Give Love a Bad Name or Livin' on a Prayer, now you have Bad Medicine and Lay Your Hands on Me. Slightly slow rock song (wanted dead or ALive) you got BOrn to Be My Baby. Heres where I give it the edge, the next wave. I'll be there for you. THe love ballad. Something Bon Jovi didn't have as a hit before. And would wind up being their next 2 biggest hits (Bed of Roses and Always)

If you had to say this is the album to summarize the band, it's the best one. Just like how Led Zeppelin it's Physical Graffiti, for Pink Floyd it's The Wall, for Pearl Jam it's Vitalogy (though I guess it could be Yield) are these the best albums from the bands? Not necessarily. But it's the best snapshot.

Though I think New Jersey is a better album than Slippery When Wet.

[striker42]

The Breakfast Club is a bad movie. There, I said it.

[zitothebrave]

The Breakfast Club is a bad movie. There, I said it.

I agree with you. Most 80s movies are bad. People are too nostalgic for their childhood movies.

[The Chosen One]

Nickelback and Imagine Dragons get **** on for being "generic" but if people didn't like them they wouldn't be famous or have the standing they do.

When I watched the Kenny G documentary, it was a similar feeling. A lot of pure Jazz enthusiasts hate Kenny G. But Kenny G has a big following and introduced a lot of people with his style to classic Jazz.

People just need someone to hate and draw heat. Like in wrestling.

[Tapate50]

The Beatles are outrageously over blown.

[zitothebrave]

The Beatles are outrageously over blown.

Beatles I feel like are the type of act who when it happened blew people's minds. 40 years later, you realize they didn't really do anything revolutionary, they just rode the way. Similar to Nirvana.

But yeah, gimme the Kinks for my early 60s rock group. BUt the real GOAT is Chuck Berry. Crazy mother****er who is the legend of Rock and Roll.

[cajunrevenge]

Bountygate was a farce most likely to distract from the NFLs conspiracy to diminish the CTE research. It was a minor salary cap violation that was blown way out of proportion. I want out draft picks back damnit!

[zitothebrave]

Nickelback and Imagine Dragons get **** on for being "generic" but if people didn't like them they wouldn't be famous or have the standing they do.

When I watched the Kenny G documentary, it was a similar feeling. A lot of pure Jazz enthusiasts hate Kenny G. But Kenny G has a big following and introduced a lot of people with his style to classic Jazz.

People just need someone to hate and draw heat. Like in wrestling.

I will expand on this with a newer belief I have. That Pop Music is still basically the same as it ever was. What changes ones belief is that the sub-genre they like was in a popular boost at the time or whatever the opposite of recency bias. So for example if you like alt-rock you probably really thought 90s was peak. Etc.

Now I'll say popular music is distilled and perfected in a way that it used to not be. And perhaps more than ever Video Killed the radio star. It has been a thing since the 80s for sure but now I think it's even easier because of pitch correction software. Someone who isn't a quality singer can sound better because of pitch correction, smart doubling, etc. But it's not like it's new. Milli Vanilli famously were a fake band. Famously many other boy/girl bands would only have 1 or 2 great performers and the rest simply were there as eye candy. I mean but even beyond that, it's not like other acts haven't used studio tricks. Bands would commonly hire studio musicians to play things. IIRC as Brian WIlson got more technically interested he would hire studio drummers who would be more precise than his brother.

But anyway. While there are exceptions, and in the past before clear channels dominance, there were years that certain DJs could heavily influence the charts, but yeah my challenge is pick a year. FOr my siblings they went with 1992, figuring middle of grunge probably some A+ stuff at the top. THen look at the billboard year end top 100.

So 1992 the top 10 winds up being

End of the Road - Boyz II Men
Baby Got Back - Sir Mixalot
Jump - Kris Kross
Save the Best for Last - Vanessa WIlliams
Baby-Baby-Baby - TLC
Tears in Heaven - Eric CLapton
My Lovin (Never gonna get it) - En Vogue
Under the Bridge - RHCP
ALl 4 Love - COlor Me Badd
Just Another Day - Jon Secada

SMells like Teen Spirit comes in at 32.

So of that top 10. Only 1 of those songs is truly timeless (Under the BRidge) Baby Got Back is highly memeable, essentially the Careless whisper type of song. Same with Jump. Tears in Heavy is close to timeless but it's hardly an elite level Clapton song. ANd there's multiple songs there I couldn't tell you what they are.

So I go to when I was 15, 2002.

How You Remind Me - Nickelback
FOolish - Ashanti
Hot in Herre - Nelly
Dilemna - Nelly
Wherever You WIll Go - The Calling
A Thousand Miles - Vanessa Carlton
In the End - Linkin Park
What's Luv - Fat Joe
U Got it Bad - Usher
Blurry - Puddle of Mudd

As this was my early high school stuff it's the music I should be the most in tuned with and I know most of these songs. But without reference i probably couldn't do more than a line or 2 from most of these songs. Like How You Remind Me, I remember the prechorus and chorus but without listening to it again I couldn't tell you the words for the most part even though I knwo it's super simplistic and could pick it up. And that's true of most songs I can pick up the main hook/melody but I couldn't tell you how the song really goes.

None of those songs are what I'd consider Elite. In the End is one Linkin Park's weakest singles. Dilemma is a solid Nelly song, but Country Grammar era Nelly was the best.

And I went what was 2021's year end top 100?

Levitating - Dua Lipa
Save your Tears - The Weeknd
Blinding Lights - The Weeknd
Mood - 24kGoldn
Good 4 U - Olivia Rodrigo
Kiss Me More - Doja Cat
Leave the Door Open - Silk Sonic
Driver's License - Olivia Rodrigo
Montero - Lil Nas X
Peaches - Justin Bieber.

What songs on this list will be remembered in 15 years? Who knows. If I was hedging my bet, Olivia Rodrigo is going to age well. Montero is going to be an interesting study in the direction of lil nas x's career. Leave the Door Open is a ****ing banger. I think the Weeknd songs will become the memeable ones. I think Mood will be forgotten about for th emost part.

Now all that said, there are years that what's popular is better. Usually it ties to a seminole pop record being released. See 1983 and 1984. 1983 saw Thriller songs charting (Billie Jean and Beat It) and 1984 saw Purple Rain and 1984 (Van Halen) launch. What there also do is lead to adjacent chart toppers too.

My final example to my siblings (who all were at least 10 by 92) how many top 40 hits (standard for a hit) did COlor Me Badd have? Usually I got like 3 as the answer, not the right answer which is 9 and how many cna you name, which anyone can name I Wanna Sex You Up, which wasn't even their highest charting single.

My point is that what gets popular is usually simplistic and generic and no one cares. People just generally only remember the songs that stand the test of time. Usuing my 2002 example, lower down the list you have iconic songs like Family Affair - Mary J Blige, Without Me - Eminem, Whenever, Wherever - Shakira, Work It - Missy Elliot, The WHole WOrld - Outkast, Lose Yourself - Eminem, and songs that didn't make the year end including Clocks - COld PLay, No One Knows - QUeens of the Stone Age, Like a Stone - AUdioslave, etc.

Every year has massive songs, songs that will last the test of time. We just remember the ones we want to remember. My final bullet point is 1965, middle of beatle mania, etc. you'd think the top 10 would be filled with iconic songs and there are some there, but the number 1 song of that year was Wooly Bully, 1966 Stones and Beach Boys were established, number 1 song? California Dreamin. 1967 which has heavy hitters, like All You Need is Love, Light My Fire, Respect, Brown Eyed Girl, etc. what's number 1? To Sir with Love by Lulu. 1968? Hey Jude Hey they did it! First time since their explosion on the scene in 64 they hit the top. number 2 must also be an iconic song, nope it's Love is Blue by Paul Mauriat. 1969 sees the release of Abbey Road, Led Zeppelin, etc. Number 1 song? Sugar Sugar by the fake band the Archies.

[The Chosen One]

Shame on you for dragging Boyz II Men's name in the mud.

[thewupk]

Nickelback and Imagine Dragons get **** on for being "generic" but if people didn't like them they wouldn't be famous or have the standing they do.

When I watched the Kenny G documentary, it was a similar feeling. A lot of pure Jazz enthusiasts hate Kenny G. But Kenny G has a big following and introduced a lot of people with his style to classic Jazz.

People just need someone to hate and draw heat. Like in wrestling.

It happens in sports a lot. Especially when a team/player becomes goated like Brady and the Patriots. Their first couple of superbowls were feel good stories. Keep winning and you get hated on for being good/popular.

[thewupk]

Beatles I feel like are the type of act who when it happened blew people's minds. 40 years later, you realize they didn't really do anything revolutionary, they just rode the way. Similar to Nirvana.

But yeah, gimme the Kinks for my early 60s rock group. BUt the real GOAT is Chuck Berry. Crazy mother****er who is the legend of Rock and Roll.

Those that pave the way aren't necessarily the best. There is a lot of luck that goes into becoming "that" band. And it's that popularity that will eventually cause people to overrate them and the flip side comes where it's held against them for being overrated.

IMO it shouldn't be a detriment to a band that they are the pioneers of a certain type of music that gains popularity.

[zitothebrave]

Shame on you for dragging Boyz II Men's name in the mud.

I love Boyz II Men, but unless you grew up in Philly Metro in the 90s or a fan of R&B you probably don't idolize them. THis was confirmed when I joked with a coworker about starting a boy/girl band and mentioned we should do Motown Philly (long joke) and she looked at me like I had 6 eyes.

[Carp]

IPA's are bitter dog**** and IPA fanboys secretly agree with me. Heffeweizens, Kolsh's and Gaelic Ales are 1000x better

[Tapate50]

Kolsch is where it’s at

[zitothebrave]

IPA's are bitter dog**** and IPA fanboys secretly agree with me. Heffeweizens, Kolsh's and Gaelic Ales are 1000x better

You can die on that hill on your own, I'm not and oneing that one.

- Signed Guy who just spend 230 bucks on 2 cases of high octane IPAs

THat being said, anyone should like whatever beer they like. i love bolder ales. People can turn their noses up at my IPAs, barrel aged imperial stouts, and sours. I don't care.

[zitothebrave]

Macs just suck compared to PCs. Macs assume their users are idiots, but make the system virtually unusable. I was trying to help my girlfriend do something on the mac and just told her to screw it up and send it to me and I cranked it out on the PC in less time than she was tinkering around on the map.

[striker42]

Macs just suck compared to PCs. Macs assume their users are idiots, but make the system virtually unusable. I was trying to help my girlfriend do something on the mac and just told her to screw it up and send it to me and I cranked it out on the PC in less time than she was tinkering around on the map.

Same with iPhone vs Android. I have an iPhone for work and it's nonsense compared to my personal Galaxy.

[Carp]

Same with iPhone vs Android. I have an iPhone for work and it's nonsense compared to my personal Galaxy.

Yup. But there's no way you're going to convince an iphone user of that. They steal all their technology from Android phones (usually 2-3 years after Android phones came out with it. And they refuse to cooperate with other companies.
They also are hard headed and refuse to update technology like switching over to USB C chargers, which literally every other phone or electronic device in the world uses as the standard now.

[Tapate50]

I just haven’t seen the point. My iPhone does everything I need it to?

I’m not enamored with it either. The new versions aren’t any different from my iPhone 8

[thethe]

Nobody actually thinks Macs are as useful as PCs do they?

[chop2chip]

Nobody actually thinks Macs are as useful as PCs do they?

The M series chips are on a different planet than any chip Intel or AMD make.

If you are a creative and do a lot of content creation, video/photo editing, etc., you are crazy to not own a Mac.

(This is coming from someone who builds PC as a hobby)

[thethe]

The M series chips are on a different planet than any chip Intel or AMD make.

If you are a creative and do a lot of content creation, video/photo editing, etc., you are crazy to not own a Mac.

Fair - My wife bought a Mac for this purpose.

[zitothebrave]

The M series chips are on a different planet than any chip Intel or AMD make.

If you are a creative and do a lot of content creation, video/photo editing, etc., you are crazy to not own a Mac.

(This is coming from someone who builds PC as a hobby)

I don't think M Series chips are significantly better. I think they do produce a unique advantage in that they're designed for the system.

Which is smart, Apple should be optimizing chips for macs. That's a smart move. Other companies should be too. There's no real reason to buy a dell vs. hp, but if hp worked with AMD to custom tweak a processor to their system and improve performance that would be an advantage.

You're partially right on point 2. It's changed significantly. It was the standard, and many people stick with it because of familiarity, but PC has made massive grounds. Mainly because Adobe took over the market on software and because of such many people prefer PCs. If you're doing hard core graphics work, you'd much rather have a PC with an AMD Threadripper and a dedicated GPU to a MAC. Macs are the better "home" product because they aren't as expensive to get off the ground at a respectable level, but they're also just much more limited if you go to the high end level.

[Krgrecw]

The M series chips are on a different planet than any chip Intel or AMD make.

If you are a creative and do a lot of content creation, video/photo editing, etc., you are crazy to not own a Mac.

(This is coming from someone who builds PC as a hobby)

The M series chip is also powering apples upcoming head set. If I didn’t suffer from vertigo I’d give the head set a shot.

[zitothebrave]

Nobody actually thinks Macs are as useful as PCs do they?

Countless people.

I've told everyone who owns a mac that if you want a better experience than MAC learn a tiny bit of work and install Linux. It's going to be more like a Mac experience, but much better.

I personally don't love the Linux experience, I prefer Windows warts and all. But that's just me. Microsoft is brilliant at making PCs user and poweruser accessible. Even if I've been spending a week bashing my head into figuring out why network printing just stopped and how to fix it without enabling SMB 1.0 and opening computers up to being hacked.

[chop2chip]

I don't think M Series chips are significantly better. I think they do produce a unique advantage in that they're designed for the system.

Which is smart, Apple should be optimizing chips for macs. That's a smart move. Other companies should be too. There's no real reason to buy a dell vs. hp, but if hp worked with AMD to custom tweak a processor to their system and improve performance that would be an advantage.

You're partially right on point 2. It's changed significantly. It was the standard, and many people stick with it because of familiarity, but PC has made massive grounds. Mainly because Adobe took over the market on software and because of such many people prefer PCs. If you're doing hard core graphics work, you'd much rather have a PC with an AMD Threadripper and a dedicated GPU to a MAC. Macs are the better "home" product because they aren't as expensive to get off the ground at a respectable level, but they're also just much more limited if you go to the high end level.

Sure the Threadripper ($3,000 CPU plus the $1,000-$2,000 GPU)) is going to be more powerful (and you have to run it in a tower with an AIO with fans running like a jet engine), but it will beat Apple’s M2 ultra that can run in a laptop with just a small fan and heat sink.

[zitothebrave]

Sure the Threadripper ($3,000 CPU plus the $1,000-$2,000 GPU)) is going to be more powerful (and you have to run it in a tower with an AIO with fans running like a jet engine), but it will beat Apple’s M2 ultra that can run in a laptop with just a small fan and heat sink.

I'm not gonna deny Apple's M2 is a great processor for it's cost. But it can't outhit x86. And APple is ahead in the ARMs race vs. PC (M2 is much better than SQ2)

And yeah I threw out threadripper because it's silly overpowered. but current gen i9s and 7950x are both much faster too. You're right there are advantages to the M2 (and just to ARM processors in general) but they still have a long way to go to compete with x86 on power levels.

But compare the Studio with the M1 Ultra to a comparable PC and you'll find the PC comes out on top more times than not. Especially when future upgradability comes into play (aka next year you can sell your GPU and CPU and buy new ones on a PC but you can't on a Mac)

[chop2chip]

As in all things, it depends what the user values.

You can go buy the flagship i9 chip that could heat a home with how much power it requires and you’ll get some modest performance gains in certain workflows (and infinitely better with gaming). For this type of user, having a 360mm AIO in a full ATX tower with six fans is part of the fun.

For creatives that do primarily video compiling and editing, Mac users are better off with a chip that uses 1/4 of the power consumption (hello battery life).

I have a Mac laptop and my daily driver PC is a 12700k / RTX 3090. I like the combination, especially since my MBP plays so nicely with my iPhone and AirPods.

[Krgrecw]

MLB is the only professional sport out of the big three, where the professional version is better than the college version.

[Runnin]

The minor pentatonic box everybody teaches on guitar stunts musical growth and makes everyone sound the same.

[zitothebrave]

The minor pentatonic box everybody teaches on guitar stunts musical growth and makes everyone sound the same.

I mean the minor pentatonic was a blues standard. Like Jazz standards it's the language of the music.

I think what keeps most people sounding the same is that the average music consumer is a nincompoop who only wants to hear the same basic thing.

I forget the stat but something like 21 times Taylor Swift has used the I V vi IV progression on released songs. Which is a lot. But it works because there's only so many things that you can do that organically resolve and are pleasing to pop sensibilities.

[Krgrecw]

The minor pentatonic box everybody teaches on guitar stunts musical growth and makes everyone sound the same.


There’s a lot of big rock songs that use that scale

[Runnin]

There’s a lot of big rock songs that use that scale
I went that route for years but I now think it's a hack and will stunt your improvement if you stay there. It quickly makes you sound pretty good, but the chords and playing the changes are the better way, imo.

There are a lot of great rock songs that use the major pentatonic scale too. And the melody of songs are almost always from the major pentatonic.

My point is that a huge majority of guitar players think all they have to do is learn the minor pentatonic scale and they can sound like they know what they are doing. And they are right. They will sound like they know what they are doing to a lot of people. But the minor pentatonic is still only part of it.

[Runnin]

I mean the minor pentatonic was a blues standard. Like Jazz standards it's the language of the music.

I think what keeps most people sounding the same is that the average music consumer is a nincompoop who only wants to hear the same basic thing.

It has become the language of the blues, but wasn't always like that. Analyze the melody of the old blues singers. It's mostly major with blue note decorations. Go back to T-Bone Walker, Lonnie Johnson, Robert Johnson, etc. The melodies and riffs are mostly major, that's why the minor sounds so good against it. You can only get away with playing the minor pentatonic exclusively if you've got a bass and rhythm player supporting you playing the major chords and lines.

But there are a lot of minor key blues songs too.

[zitothebrave]

It has become the language of the blues, but wasn't always like that. Analyze the melody of the old blues singers. It's mostly major with blue note decorations. Go back to T-Bone Walker, Lonnie Johnson, Robert Johnson, etc. The melodies and riffs are mostly major, that's why the minor sounds so good against it. You can only get away with playing the minor pentatonic exclusively if you've got a bass and rhythm player supporting you playing the major chords and lines.

But there are a lot of minor key blues songs too.

I mean it's fair enough. As early blues was heavily christian choral singing based. Melodies would mimic that.

That being said, the pentatonic box is a clean thing. It makes for quick and easy riffing/soloing and it sounds good.

A lot of my favorite solos tend to blend the blues and neo-classical. Think Randy Rhoads, Paul Gilbert, Marty Friedman. But something about those pure blues solos just hits the heart.

[zitothebrave]

There is no reason for someone to own vinyl. It's very easy to own superior audio quality and store it on a PC and listen to it through headphone amps and get a superior audio experience than putting your record player through some junky speakers.

But I own records because I like the novelty of them, album art and liner notes, and I've been into unique albums. Like my copy of 2012 that shows Starman when you shine light on it while it plays. I preordered the Legend of Vox Machina soundtrack that has animation tiles drawn onto the disc that plays essentially gifs while you play the album. I have an awesome full cover album art version of Hemispheres. I have an interesting (it's not as cool as any of the ones above) designed Appetite for Destruction. I once bought and audiophile LP and just didn't find it worth it. Aside from giving money to stores and artists I like, I mainly have vinyl as show pieces. Someday I"ll have a house with a music room adn all my records will have individual spots on the wall or at least like display units. Because that's the reason to own vinyl. To show that you have the luxury to waste money on a pointless form of media.

[striker42]

There is no reason for someone to own vinyl. It's very easy to own superior audio quality and store it on a PC and listen to it through headphone amps and get a superior audio experience than putting your record player through some junky speakers.

But I own records because I like the novelty of them, album art and liner notes, and I've been into unique albums. Like my copy of 2012 that shows Starman when you shine light on it while it plays. I preordered the Legend of Vox Machina soundtrack that has animation tiles drawn onto the disc that plays essentially gifs while you play the album. I have an awesome full cover album art version of Hemispheres. I have an interesting (it's not as cool as any of the ones above) designed Appetite for Destruction. I once bought and audiophile LP and just didn't find it worth it. Aside from giving money to stores and artists I like, I mainly have vinyl as show pieces. Someday I"ll have a house with a music room adn all my records will have individual spots on the wall or at least like display units. Because that's the reason to own vinyl. To show that you have the luxury to waste money on a pointless form of media.

It's not always about audio quality. Sometimes it's about the quality of the audio if you get my meaning. You can get digital versions of songs that are more true in terms of sound with less distortion or noise. So you can absolutely get better audio quality. But vinyl offers its own sound experience. There's a certain quality to the sound of a vinyl record that's unique. It gives a different experience.

I own a decent number of vinyl records and I don't own them because I think the quality of the sound is better or as status symbols. I own them because listening to them is a different experience than listening to a digital copy.

[zitothebrave]

We're leaving a golden era of sports. Will the next era be amazing? Of course. There's always legends, but 2000-2020 was a golden era that produced icons.

People wax poetically about superstars of yesteryear, but we have guys like Pujols, Trout, Mookie, Kershaw, Sabathia, A-rod, etc. all ballers. And it's one of baseball's "worse" eras. But really what we saw was the transition of an era. NFL produced the 2 greatest Quarterbacks to throw the ball. multiple legendary other players too (moss, AP, LT, etc.) Soccer saw 2 of the best ever battle it out (Messi and Ronaldo) but also just massive and drastic improvement to the global game where teams that weren't footballing powerhouses are starting to assert some level of improvement. The Africa boom is the biggest boon to the sport since the SA boom in the 70s. Basketball saw a luminary talent in LeBron, people said there would never be another Jordan and they were right because LeBron was a different level of freak. Durant is an all-time shooter and is barely talked about because of how singular of a talent LeBron is. Hockey saw the legendary best competition of Crosby and Ovechkin.

And coverage, from a golden era of ESPN to the era of social media and straming we never had more access to sports either.

[Tapate50]

We are currently living in the age of really mediocre Quarterbacking


Mahomes is the exception

[thethe]

The nba talent level is at highs we haven’t seen in quite some time. Expansion is coming for the nba.

[zitothebrave]

We are currently living in the age of really mediocre Quarterbacking


Mahomes is the exception

I mean is it or have we returned to the pre-2000s levels?

Of course it's hard to compare across eras. But I think we're just back to the level of where we were before like 2003.

But yeah the era of BRees, Rodgers, BRady, Manning, etc. lead to a different era of quality. But now I think we're back to more the 80s/90s where you have a few stars and a bunch of good guys.

What's wild is guys like Ryan and Rivers would have been stars in other era of the league.

[Krgrecw]

Women sports are God awful to watch

[thethe]

Women sports are God awful to watch

Lowering the rim to 9 feet would make a lot of a difference. Otherwise it’s unwatchable

[Tapate50]

Women sports are God awful to watch

X1000

[jgriff3029]

Women sports are God awful to watch

Pro Wrestling and beach volleyball are watchable but otherwise, yep.

[thethe]

Pro Wrestling and beach volleyball are watchable but otherwise, yep.

Golf is fine too

[chop2chip]

Women’s soccer and tennis might be better products than men’s?

[zitothebrave]

Women’s soccer and tennis might be better products than men’s?

What Women's soccer and tennis does well are 2 things.

1. Marketing their stars. Everybody who is moderately interested in sports and over 30 know who Martina Hingis or Mia Hamm are.

2. American dominance.

IMO the women's soccer game could get even better if they shrunk the goal by the average female keeper is around 5'10 or 70 inches. The average MLS keeper is 6'2 or 74 inches. Which means that the woman is sitting around average female keeper is about 5% smaller than the men. I think they'd be much better palying on the u-11-12 goal where it's 7x21 so a foot shorter and 3 feet less long. Would make the women keepers much better to watch.

Honestly it baffles me when women do PKs that scorers don't convert 100%.