If that's dumb, then you must be plain stupid because you are thinking that anyone who likes the Clash doesn't know music.
Rank these acts for me....
Bruce Springsteen
The Clash
The Stones
Led Zeppelin
Pink Floyd
The Beatles
CCR
The Eagles
If that's dumb, then you must be plain stupid because you are thinking that anyone who likes the Clash doesn't know music.
A joke is believing that. Because I have heard everything from Black Boy Shine to The Black Ace to The Black Keys is why I see The Clash as weak and uninspiring. When you've heard great music you know when you're not.
I don't really need to. Were you paying attention when I said your taste is pedestrian? I know who those artists are and they don't move or inspire me. It's pablum. Uninspiring, easily digestable, old, white guy music.
Everything.
What age group do you think listens to The Clash?
So, how would you explain someone who has had a similar experience but has come to a completely different conclusion?
What does your track almanac say?
I would imagine it ranges from anyone who was alive when they started making music to anyone who is currently alive, dumbass.
The Black Keys are old white guy music? John Campbell is old white guy music? Dude that is about as stupid as it can get. Old white guy music is Hank Williams. That was totally stupid.
Dude, I do listen to everything that's how I know what's good and what isn't.
You have no idea who Johnny "Slim" Campbell is do you so why lie?
London Calling came out in 1979, so all ages tbh.
Check your almanac.
The Eagles suck. They are way worse than The Clash imo.
You cannot be that ing ignorant. It isn't real obvious who the target audience is for The Clash, yep those who attend concerts and spend big money on music....kids.
The Clash wouldn't make a pimple on The Eagles ass.
Wanna compare hit records?
Dude, you really haven't figured out I mostly listen to black music? You know the ones who pretty much influensed everything we hear today.
Which is weird since you're such a horrible racist.
See how ing stupid you are? Think about what you just said.
Here ya go dummy, education is grand.
paste
With seven number-one singles, six Grammys, five American Music Awards, and six number one albums, the Eagles were one of the most successful musical acts of the 1970s. At the end of the 20th century, two of their albums, Their Greatest Hits (1971–1975) and Hotel California, ranked among the 20 best-selling albums in the U.S. according to the Recording Industry Association of America. Hotel California is ranked 37th in Rolling Stone's list of "The 500 Greatest Albums of All Time", and the band was ranked No. 75 on the magazine's 2004 list of the 100 Greatest Artists of All Time.[2]
It's my opinion, asshole.
But when I give mine, I'm this and that and, hahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Eagles were far more successful than The Clash, you do know that right?
translation
Who are The Clash?
I know full well who they are, and they don't suck just because you say they do....
London Calling is #8.The Clash are #28.and the band was ranked No. 75 on the magazine's 2004 list of the 100 Greatest Artists of All Time.[2]
Thanks for proving definitively that the Clash are measurably better than The Eagles.
This and thast?! What?!
Here's the difference, dummy . . . I can accept that just because I don't like them doesn't that other people shouldn't like the Eagles.
more successful
How do you measure success?
School.
That doesn't say anything about the quality of their music. Milli Vanilli won a Grammy. Were they good?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)