Replace top ranked artist with the next one better

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic
Author Message
RoundTheBend
These, Antithese, Synthese



Location: Ground Control
United States

  • #31
  • Posted: 05/21/2020 04:00
  • Post subject:
  • Reply with quote
baystateoftheart wrote:
I'll make my criteria simple: if the artist has at least one album I love, they stay. I bet this list would be a lot different if I required two.

Welcoming recs for the crossed out artists that you think might change my mind (you can search my ratings to see if I've heard it).

Round 1

1. The Beatles
2. Radiohead
3. Pink Floyd
4. David Bowie
5. Bob Dylan
6. Led Zeppelin
7. Arcade Fire
8. The Rolling Stones
9. The Velvet Underground
10. Nirvana
11. The Smiths
12. Kendrick Lamar
13. Neil Young
14. The Beach Boys
15. Pixies
16. Miles Davis
17. Kanye West
18. Bruce Springsteen
19. The Who
20. R.E.M.
21. U2
22. The Clash
23. Jimi Hendrix
24. The Doors
25. Talking Heads
26. King Crimson
27. Sufjan Stevens
28. Neutral Milk Hotel
29. The Cure
30. The Strokes
31. Joy Division
32. Arctic Monkeys
33. The Smashing Pumpkins

34. My Bloody Valentine
35. Fleetwood Mac
36. Metallica
37. Black Sabbath
38. Oasis
39. Weezer
40. Genesis

Round 2

1. The Beatles
2. Radiohead
3. Pink Floyd
4. David Bowie
5. Bob Dylan
6. Arcade Fire
7. The Rolling Stones
8. The Velvet Underground
9. Nirvana
10. The Smiths
11. Kendrick Lamar
12. Neil Young
13. The Beach Boys
14. Miles Davis
15. Kanye West
16. Bruce Springsteen
17. The Who
18. R.E.M.
19. The Clash
20. Jimi Hendrix
21. The Doors
22. Talking Heads
23. King Crimson
24. Sufjan Stevens
25. Neutral Milk Hotel
26. The Cure
27. The Strokes
28. Joy Division
29. My Bloody Valentine
30. Fleetwood Mac
31. Black Sabbath
32. Oasis
33. Weezer

34. Björk
35. Nick Drake
36. The National
37. Coldplay
38. Wilco
39. Van Morrison
40. Pearl Jam


Round 3

1. The Beatles
2. Radiohead
3. Pink Floyd
4. David Bowie
5. Bob Dylan
6. Arcade Fire
7. The Rolling Stones
8. The Velvet Underground
9. Nirvana
10. The Smiths
11. Kendrick Lamar
12. Neil Young
13. The Beach Boys
14. Miles Davis
15. Kanye West
16. Bruce Springsteen
17. The Who
18. R.E.M.
19. The Clash
20. Jimi Hendrix
21. The Doors
22. Talking Heads
23. King Crimson
24. Sufjan Stevens
25. Neutral Milk Hotel
26. The Cure
27. The Strokes
28. Joy Division
29. My Bloody Valentine
30. Fleetwood Mac
31. Black Sabbath
32. Oasis
33. Weezer
34. Björk
35. Nick Drake
36. The National
37. Wilco

38. Tom Waits
39. Sonic Youth
40. Muse

Round 4

1. The Beatles
2. Radiohead
3. Pink Floyd
4. David Bowie
5. Bob Dylan
6. Arcade Fire
7. The Rolling Stones
8. The Velvet Underground
9. Nirvana
10. The Smiths
11. Kendrick Lamar
12. Neil Young
13. The Beach Boys
14. Miles Davis
15. Kanye West
16. Bruce Springsteen
17. The Who
18. R.E.M.
19. The Clash
20. Jimi Hendrix
21. The Doors
22. Talking Heads
23. King Crimson
24. Sufjan Stevens
25. Neutral Milk Hotel
26. The Cure
27. The Strokes
28. Joy Division
29. My Bloody Valentine
30. Fleetwood Mac
31. Black Sabbath
32. Oasis
33. Weezer
34. Björk
35. Nick Drake
36. The National
37. Wilco
38. Sonic Youth

39. Sigur Rós
40. Prince

Round 5

1. The Beatles
2. Radiohead
3. Pink Floyd
4. David Bowie
5. Bob Dylan
6. Arcade Fire
7. The Rolling Stones
8. The Velvet Underground
9. Nirvana
10. The Smiths
11. Kendrick Lamar
12. Neil Young
13. The Beach Boys
14. Miles Davis
15. Kanye West
16. Bruce Springsteen
17. The Who
18. R.E.M.
19. The Clash
20. Jimi Hendrix
21. The Doors
22. Talking Heads
23. King Crimson
24. Sufjan Stevens
25. Neutral Milk Hotel
26. The Cure
27. The Strokes
28. Joy Division
29. My Bloody Valentine
30. Fleetwood Mac
31. Black Sabbath
32. Oasis
33. Weezer
34. Björk
35. Nick Drake
36. The National
37. Wilco
38. Sonic Youth
39. Sigur Rós
40. Tame Impala


Was surprised by the Prince and Pixies strike-throughs given the inclusions of Nirvana and I thought you had a thing for Prince, but maybe I was wrong for thinking that. Otherwise great list (minus Oasis Laughing... sorry, I should cut them some slack).
_________________
20th Century Classical
RYM
last.fm
Spotify Playlists
Discogs
Back to top
  • Visit poster's website
  • View user's profile
  • Send private message
RoundTheBend
These, Antithese, Synthese



Location: Ground Control
United States

  • #32
  • Posted: 05/21/2020 04:03
  • Post subject:
  • Reply with quote
Oh for those who left in The Who and Oasis, can you help me understand? I'm not looking to start another fight Embarassed Embarassed Embarassed Embarassed ... rather just trying to understand. I mean if it's the crown of brit pop and loud rock, well ok.

But I'm always intrigued by all you who are much smarter/experienced than me.

I suppose throw in Neutral Milk Hotel and The Smiths to this. Neutral Milk Hotel I get if it's one album can make it there - I suppose it would need to be massively significant, but like I mentioned there are quite a few albums I'd put at the same level sonically/lyrically/musicianship, etc. (as great as it is).
_________________
20th Century Classical
RYM
last.fm
Spotify Playlists
Discogs
Back to top
  • Visit poster's website
  • View user's profile
  • Send private message
RockyRaccoon
Is it solipsistic in here or is it just me?


Gender: Male
Age: 29
Location: Maryland
United States
Moderator

  • #33
  • Posted: 05/21/2020 11:48
  • Post subject:
  • Reply with quote
RoundTheBend wrote:
Oh for those who left in The Who and Oasis, can you help me understand? I'm not looking to start another fight Embarassed Embarassed Embarassed Embarassed ... rather just trying to understand. I mean if it's the crown of brit pop and loud rock, well ok.


Like why do people enjoy The Who and Oasis? I mean, it's hard for me to say other than "I just like their music."

For me, I enjoy the range The Who has. They can do some awesome, loud rockers but they're not limited to that either. For each My Generation you get a Baba O'Reily. Plus, there are just so many of their albums that I think are very consistently good. I mean, everyone obviously knows about Who's Next and Tommy, but Quadrophenia and even The Who By Numbers are all really excellent albums. And then Live At Leeds is, in my opinion, one of the best live albums you'll ever hear. It's raw and powerful and fantastic.

Add in the fact that all four members of The Who were top-notch at their instruments and you get a fun band to listen to, for me at least. Sure, Keith Moon couldn't play outside of 4/4 time, but hey, he was awesome in 4/4. John Entwistle is absurdly fun to listen to on bass, Townshend is obviously excellent as a guitarist, and Roger Daltry had one of the best leading man rock voices around.

As for Oasis, my enjoyment of them is a lot simpler - I just think Noel Gallagher is an exceptional songwriter, and he put together some killer tunes for them. I mean, yea, Wonderwall, Don't Look Back in Anger, sure sure, but Live Forever? Stand By Me? Don't Go Away? Just some of the best britpop you're gonna hear.
_________________
2020 Chart

New and improved 2010s chart

Electronic Chart
Back to top
  • Visit poster's website
  • View user's profile
  • Send private message
Fischman
RockMonster, JazzMeister and ClassicalMaster


Gender: Male
Location: Rocky Mountain High
United States

  • #34
  • Posted: 05/21/2020 14:31
  • Post subject:
  • Reply with quote
RoundTheBend wrote:
Oh for those who left in The Who and Oasis, can you help me understand? I'm not looking to start another fight Embarassed Embarassed Embarassed Embarassed ... rather just trying to understand. I mean if it's the crown of brit pop and loud rock, well ok.

But I'm always intrigued by all you who are much smarter/experienced than me.

I suppose throw in Neutral Milk Hotel and The Smiths to this. Neutral Milk Hotel I get if it's one album can make it there - I suppose it would need to be massively significant, but like I mentioned there are quite a few albums I'd put at the same level sonically/lyrically/musicianship, etc. (as great as it is).


As for Oasis, they were a retention simply based on not having to reach too far down on the list to cover too many deletions. I don't really like Oasis, but I don't actually find them offensive.

As for The Who, I could gush about them all day. I think they were hugely important, artistically unique, technically brilliant, and I just love the hell out of them.

Let's take a building block approach:

Guitar: not max virtuosity, but super solid. Great riffs, clever lines, clever melodies, tone appropriate to the music etc. It all works and it works exceptionally well.

Vocals: Roger Daltrey is one of the top vocalists/frontmen in rock history. Killer voice! Big power, great expressiveness. Fantastic range. That wicked powerful vocal presence is also matched by his physical presence; the ultimate rock and roll frontman swagger without it being over the top silly. Just pure power without the theatrics. Best of all worlds IMO.

Drums: Two words... Keith.... Moon! Even people who don't like The Who rave about Moon as one of the all time greats. He is the ultimate madman behind the kit! Nobody else ever played with his elan, flair, aggressiveness, and reckless determination. He propels a rock song like no other. He is a genuine force of musical nature.

Bass: As much as I've gushed over the other three positions.... John Entwistle (aka "The Ox") gets even more. A most unique and powerful bassist..... possibly the most unique and powerful bassist in rock history. His lines are insane. Some of them are among the most iconic ever. He integrates a melodic bass line into a song like a great piece of classical counterpoint, but with a super intense hard rock sensibility. Like Moon, there simply never has been, and never will be, anyone like him. Dude was totally Monster!

Far more subjective, but every bit as meaningful to me, is the great songwriting. Townsend's a fantastic lyricist (who admittedly does drop a stinker once in a while). He rarely writes in the common or cliche realm, but rather skirts the edge of the mainstream and finds immense creativity there.

For much of their career, The Who were highly innovative, creative, and like any great rock and roll band, rebellious, even against the rock establishment itself. They followed their own muse and totally kicked ass in the process.

The depth and breadth of Who dislike (no, RTB, you're far from the only one) really surprises me. Rush is my favorite group, but I've always understood how and why they rub so many the wrong way. When someone goes on an anti-Rush rant, I really do get it in spite of my personal aesthetic placing them at the very top of the musical heap. But I'm at a loss to understand the dislike for The Who. There's just simply nothing there I can see as an out-and-out negative (aside from some acknowledged inconsistency in their output... but when they're on, they're flat out unbeatable).


Last edited by Fischman on 05/21/2020 21:46; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
  • Visit poster's website
  • View user's profile
  • Send private message
CA Dreamin



Gender: Male
Location: LA
United States

  • #35
  • Posted: 05/21/2020 21:39
  • Post subject:
  • Reply with quote
Rocky and Fischman have summed up the case for The Who very well. I'm not sold on Oasis as a Top 40 Band. But The Who? They're awesome and deserve to be in that grouping.
_________________
on such a winter's day
Back to top
  • Visit poster's website
  • View user's profile
  • Send private message
Hayden




Location: CDMX
Canada

  • #36
  • Posted: 05/21/2020 21:55
  • Post subject:
  • Reply with quote
All of your lists are very long and somewhat confusing, so I'll just say Arctic Monkeys and Oasis shouldn't be there and Tom Waits and John Coltrane most certainly should.

And they're way down the line, but I'd make a pretty good case saying Belle And Sebastian should be somewhere in the 30-40 range. Could knock off Genesis for them I suppose.


Understandably not in top 40 but need to be higher—

Seeing Django Reinhardt at 1647th hurts a little. His discography doesn't really hold well on BEA's chart style though, so I get it.

Nina Simone at 249th feels a little low. Same with Monk at 306.

If we could up Fela Kuti from 320th that'd be nice too.

Not sure what you people are thinking with Ravi Shankar at 1416. Go listen to some ragas.
_________________

The List!
Back to top
  • Visit poster's website
  • View user's profile
  • Send private message
Yann



Gender: Male
Location: France
France

  • #37
  • Posted: 5 days ago
  • Post subject: Re: Replace top ranked artist with the next one better
  • Reply with quote
RoundTheBend wrote:


11 The Smiths (Man... try as I might, the clever lyrics don't save this music from being less than great in my book)
I find this band insufferable. Sorry. I feel like the music and the vocals rarely match - it's like they recorded a vocalist from a different band and then a band not related to the vocalist and then superimposed it/forced it to match half the time. Now for 10% of their work it's freaking awesome and the other 90%. Also keep in mind that the clever lyrics are lost on me as that's the last thing I care about. I just feel like half the stuff he sings about anyway aren't really anything I care about either. So yeah the guitarist is pretty alright and the mix on the Queen is pretty great between the drums and bass. Don't get me wrong it's not all bad either - it's just a drag to listen to for me. And you'll probably even think less of me when I say How Soon is Now? is their best song because you probably think I haven't listened to their entire discography desperately trying to understand why this band is rated so highly when I think so poorly of them. Probably 5-8 songs of theirs I'd choose to listen to (which isn't even a full album) with pleasure. The rest is near pain for me.

That's true. Although I think some songs escape this description. These are songs where the music equally drives the song, such as :
Please Please Please Let Me Get What I Want
Barbarism Begins at Home
I Know it's Over
How Soon is Now
Panic
Shoplifters of The world Unite
Stretch Out and Wait
Sweet and Tender Hooligan
Stop Me If You Think You've Heard This One Before (my favourite. And fantastic Mark Ronson cover by the way)
Death of a Disco Dancer

Also, you mentioned the mix. That's precisely the issue you're talking about: the vocal is too much ahead in the mix, given the relatively limited range of Morrissey. Except on Strangeways, but the production there is a bit bland, that's the other problem.

What are your '5-8 songs" you mentioned ?
Back to top
  • Visit poster's website
  • View user's profile
  • Send private message
RoundTheBend
These, Antithese, Synthese



Location: Ground Control
United States

  • #38
  • Posted: 5 days ago
  • Post subject:
  • Reply with quote
RockyRaccoon wrote:
Like why do people enjoy The Who and Oasis? I mean, it's hard for me to say other than "I just like their music."

For me, I enjoy the range The Who has. They can do some awesome, loud rockers but they're not limited to that either. For each My Generation you get a Baba O'Reily. Plus, there are just so many of their albums that I think are very consistently good. I mean, everyone obviously knows about Who's Next and Tommy, but Quadrophenia and even The Who By Numbers are all really excellent albums. And then Live At Leeds is, in my opinion, one of the best live albums you'll ever hear. It's raw and powerful and fantastic.

Add in the fact that all four members of The Who were top-notch at their instruments and you get a fun band to listen to, for me at least. Sure, Keith Moon couldn't play outside of 4/4 time, but hey, he was awesome in 4/4. John Entwistle is absurdly fun to listen to on bass, Townshend is obviously excellent as a guitarist, and Roger Daltry had one of the best leading man rock voices around.

As for Oasis, my enjoyment of them is a lot simpler - I just think Noel Gallagher is an exceptional songwriter, and he put together some killer tunes for them. I mean, yea, Wonderwall, Don't Look Back in Anger, sure sure, but Live Forever? Stand By Me? Don't Go Away? Just some of the best britpop you're gonna hear.


Thanks mate - and thanks for just saying what you like about them and that really it just comes down to... I like them.

Yeah - the tunes are pretty good RE: Oasis... it very well could be me but it just sounds really flat and lifeless and stiff somehow. I mean I guess I say I hate the band, but really and truly they aren't garbage, but top 40 material, I feel like at least 500 artists are way more interesting... then again I know quite a few folks on this site who would say that about Radiohead or U2 or R.E.M. - so I get that. I just don't get them being GREAT... Laughing

And yeah - John Entwistle is totally one of the greatest bassists of all time. He just plays with kinda boring vocalist (he comes across as a little weak compared to a McCartney or McJagger or Robert Plant of the "same" era) and sometimes boring guitarist. Pete is no John Frusciante or Matthew Bellamy when it comes to tonality/musical prowess (which is a dumb argument... but all I'm trying to say is I feel like John is leaps and bounds past Pete musically, so it's an odd match up, vs the other respective bands have amazing bassists AND amazing guitarits). I also feel like as unique as Baba O' Reily is concerned, it still has a bit of that Who style rock, which actually is a good thing. It takes off well, etc. Again 5-8 Who songs are really fantastic. And I actually was kinda bored with Live At Leeds - I'm way more pumped listening to live at red rocks...

Alas - Not trying to minimize anyone's love for a group. I'll admit you could see my favorite band as incredibly boring (as some have) - and the lyricism/operatic vocals, sonic landscapes, booming/punk driving/sometimes groovy basslines, and incredibly rhythmic drumming of U2 description I give of U2 won't ever change anyone's mind about them.
_________________
20th Century Classical
RYM
last.fm
Spotify Playlists
Discogs
Back to top
  • Visit poster's website
  • View user's profile
  • Send private message
RoundTheBend
These, Antithese, Synthese



Location: Ground Control
United States

  • #39
  • Posted: 5 days ago
  • Post subject:
  • Reply with quote
Fischman wrote:
RoundTheBend wrote:
Oh for those who left in The Who and Oasis, can you help me understand? I'm not looking to start another fight Embarassed Embarassed Embarassed Embarassed ... rather just trying to understand. I mean if it's the crown of brit pop and loud rock, well ok.

But I'm always intrigued by all you who are much smarter/experienced than me.

I suppose throw in Neutral Milk Hotel and The Smiths to this. Neutral Milk Hotel I get if it's one album can make it there - I suppose it would need to be massively significant, but like I mentioned there are quite a few albums I'd put at the same level sonically/lyrically/musicianship, etc. (as great as it is).


As for Oasis, they were a retention simply based on not having to reach too far down on the list to cover too many deletions. I don't really like Oasis, but I don't actually find them offensive.

As for The Who, I could gush about them all day. I think they were hugely important, artistically unique, technically brilliant, and I just love the hell out of them.

Let's take a building block approach:

Guitar: not max virtuosity, but super solid. Great riffs, clever lines, clever melodies, tone appropriate to the music etc. It all works and it works exceptionally well.

Vocals: Roger Daltrey is one of the top vocalists/frontmen in rock history. Killer voice! Big power, great expressiveness. Fantastic range. That wicked powerful vocal presence is also matched by his physical presence; the ultimate rock and roll frontman swagger without it being over the top silly. Just pure power without the theatrics. Best of all worlds IMO.

Drums: Two words... Keith.... Moon! Even people who don't like The Who rave about Moon as one of the all time greats. He is the ultimate madman behind the kit! Nobody else ever played with his elan, flair, aggressiveness, and reckless determination. He propels a rock song like no other. He is a genuine force of musical nature.

Bass: As much as I've gushed over the other three positions.... John Entwistle (aka "The Ox") gets even more. A most unique and powerful bassist..... possibly the most unique and powerful bassist in rock history. His lines are insane. Some of them are among the most iconic ever. He integrates a melodic bass line into a song like a great piece of classical counterpoint, but with a super intense hard rock sensibility. Like Moon, there simply never has been, and never will be, anyone like him. Dude was totally Monster!

Far more subjective, but every bit as meaningful to me, is the great songwriting. Townsend's a fantastic lyricist (who admittedly does drop a stinker once in a while). He rarely writes in the common or cliche realm, but rather skirts the edge of the mainstream and finds immense creativity there.

For much of their career, The Who were highly innovative, creative, and like any great rock and roll band, rebellious, even against the rock establishment itself. They followed their own muse and totally kicked ass in the process.

The depth and breadth of Who dislike (no, RTB, you're far from the only one) really surprises me. Rush is my favorite group, but I've always understood how and why they rub so many the wrong way. When someone goes on an anti-Rush rant, I really do get it in spite of my personal aesthetic placing them at the very top of the musical heap. But I'm at a loss to understand the dislike for The Who. There's just simply nothing there I can see as an out-and-out negative (aside from some acknowledged inconsistency in their output... but when they're on, they're flat out unbeatable).



I actually can appreciate that take on the guitar playing - sometimes it's just about the tune - not anything special. It's "playing to the song" - and if anyone knows anything about music, they know what I mean when I say that.

Man - maybe I gotta watch more Live Who, but really the stuff I have seen I haven't gotten the great stage performance you talk about.

And for wiw, I like Rush way more than I do The Who. I don't know why but sometimes when I listen to their music I think of an old man having sex in the grossest way possible, just the grunting and the efforts are all the same as anyone else, but it's just gross with this guy... ahhaahaa. Sorry, that was probably terrible, but somehow makes sense to me.

I do really think My Generation is top 100 songs of all time though. Like that bassline - holy shit and I LOVE how Daltry like purposely stutters in singing... badass for sure... but their entire career being the greatest influence ever... meh. Maybe to bands like G n R and I don't like them either... and possibly therein lies the difference. Maybe those who like The Who also like bands like G n R.
_________________
20th Century Classical
RYM
last.fm
Spotify Playlists
Discogs
Back to top
  • Visit poster's website
  • View user's profile
  • Send private message
RoundTheBend
These, Antithese, Synthese



Location: Ground Control
United States

  • #40
  • Posted: 5 days ago
  • Post subject: Re: Replace top ranked artist with the next one better
  • Reply with quote
Yann wrote:
RoundTheBend wrote:


11 The Smiths (Man... try as I might, the clever lyrics don't save this music from being less than great in my book)
I find this band insufferable. Sorry. I feel like the music and the vocals rarely match - it's like they recorded a vocalist from a different band and then a band not related to the vocalist and then superimposed it/forced it to match half the time. Now for 10% of their work it's freaking awesome and the other 90%. Also keep in mind that the clever lyrics are lost on me as that's the last thing I care about. I just feel like half the stuff he sings about anyway aren't really anything I care about either. So yeah the guitarist is pretty alright and the mix on the Queen is pretty great between the drums and bass. Don't get me wrong it's not all bad either - it's just a drag to listen to for me. And you'll probably even think less of me when I say How Soon is Now? is their best song because you probably think I haven't listened to their entire discography desperately trying to understand why this band is rated so highly when I think so poorly of them. Probably 5-8 songs of theirs I'd choose to listen to (which isn't even a full album) with pleasure. The rest is near pain for me.

That's true. Although I think some songs escape this description. These are songs where the music equally drives the song, such as :
Please Please Please Let Me Get What I Want
Barbarism Begins at Home
I Know it's Over
How Soon is Now
Panic
Shoplifters of The world Unite
Stretch Out and Wait
Sweet and Tender Hooligan
Stop Me If You Think You've Heard This One Before (my favourite. And fantastic Mark Ronson cover by the way)
Death of a Disco Dancer

Also, you mentioned the mix. That's precisely the issue you're talking about: the vocal is too much ahead in the mix, given the relatively limited range of Morrissey. Except on Strangeways, but the production there is a bit bland, that's the other problem.

What are your '5-8 songs" you mentioned ?


Yeah for sure - I hope everyone realizes when I say these people don't belong in the top 40, I'm talking about THOUSANDS of artists... so no I'm not dogging on these artists like they are garbage, just not GREAT.

Ok so for funsies, here's my list of Smith's songs which I rated on this site of a 85 or higher... which could change over time... probably from 2016 when I needed to lock myself in a cage and hide from humanity and clicking song ratings over and over was a good distraction to reality much like others play video games and watch dumbass movies:

(in no particular order... although I already mentioned How Soon Is Now? is nothing like their other material (imo) and is easily their best song for me):

90+
There Is A Light That Never Goes Out
How Soon Is Now?
Bigmouth Strikes Again
The Boy With The Thorn In His Side
Cemetry Gates
What Difference Does It Make?
Nowhere Fast
Some Girls Are Bigger Than Others

85
The Queen Is Dead (Take Me Back To Dear Old Blighty (Medley))
Reel Around The Fountain
Death Of A Disco Dancer
Handsome Devil

As I go through those ratings, I notice that one big reason I can't do The Smiths is for every song I rate a 90+ I have a 60 or 70. GREAT artists have like one 60 or 70 for me and mediocre artists don't have consistent output. This is true for Oasis, too.

So maybe I'm just picky? Maybe the rest of you can look the other way at stuff like "Accept Yourself" and "Vicar In A Tutu" which back in 2016 I thought were kinda next to garbage (not extreme bad but even close to good).
_________________
20th Century Classical
RYM
last.fm
Spotify Playlists
Discogs
Back to top
  • Visit poster's website
  • View user's profile
  • Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic
All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 4 of 5


 

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Similar Topics
Topic Author Forum
Sticky: Artist not listed kufuhder New Members
Will Someone Replace Magenta's Position? Guest Suggestions
Replace One Word With 'Bacon' Guest Lounge
Lowest overall ranked in your top 100 kevinweed7 Music
Top-Ranked Bands RFNAPLES Suggestions

 
Back to Top