The Shred Room or The In-Betweeners Club

blank


Edited by James - December 03 2008 at 16:56

And VdGG aren't really that avant-garde.  Challenging: yes; avant-garde: slightly

They're just unique.  No other band sounds anything like them.

James wrote: And VdGG aren't really that avant-garde.  Challenging: yes; avant-garde: slightly They're just unique.  No other band sounds anything like them.

fanboy

Discipline/Matthew Parmenter sound a lot like VDGG, and quite frankly I prefer them. 

Sorry. 

And although I like Unfolded Like Staircase it doesn't come anywhere near VdGG or Hammill.

King By-Tor wrote: LinusW wrote: King By-Tor wrote: TGM: Orb wrote: nonononono All the phrases build atmosphere, and contribute or heighten something, and the piece delivers an incredible moral message through a metaphor. The piece is well connected, develops, capitalises on previous phrases later in the lyric, and includes some rather choice sonic effects. *sigh* I could say the same thing about Rush. I never said they were bad, I just said rather silly. Which they are. And you can't convince me otherwise I agree. It's all about what you read into them. Hammill usually writes good lyrics, but this isn't an example of that. Being a fan I think you're more inclined to read more into it than what is actually there. Just as you might do with Rush. I think this is a battle of the two biggest fanboy cults of all time. But the VdGG-ers get extra credit (which is unfair) because their band is avant and not widely popular

If something's not there, you can't read it. If it's there, and wasn't intentional, there are all sorts of arguments about whether it's a subconscious action deserving merit or an unconscious accident, which shouldn't get credit.

One of the reasons that I'm a fan of VDGG is the lyrics (in fact, that was probably the reason I got into them at first), and Killer is an example of that. 'Sides, I read a lot into lyrics, poems and epic poems all the time. Van Der Graaf Generator aren't an exception, they're just a really good example of the rule.

LinusW wrote: VdGG is emotionally challenging more than anything else. The music gets under your skin, whether you like it or not. That's why my appreciation is so mood-dependent.

Excellent post.

Anyway, night all.

King By-Tor wrote: fine you all win. VdGG is better than Rush on the basis of facts, not opinions - which really makes more sense in the end anyways *By-Tor in defeat retreats to HELL!*

I never said they were better than Rush.

I never stated that.

I just said:

They are unique, they're not especially avant-garde and Hammill's lyrics are an important aspect of their music.

I love their music and lyrics and their whole aesthetic.

But that isn't saying anything about Rush.

TGM: Orb wrote:

If something's not there, you can't read it. If it's there, and wasn't intentional, there are all sorts of arguments about whether it's a subconscious action deserving merit or an unconscious accident, which shouldn't get credit.

One of the reasons that I'm a fan of VDGG is the lyrics (in fact, that was probably the reason I got into them at first), and Killer is an example of that. 'Sides, I read a lot into lyrics, poems and epic poems all the time. Van Der Graaf Generator aren't an exception, they're just a really good example of the rule.
[/QUOTE]

rushfan4 wrote: And one of the reasons that I am a Rush fan is because of the lyrics. I find that they either tell good stories or have deep meaning, and I like them way more than I like VDGG's lyrics.   But you know what opinions are like a****les; every one has one, and sometimes I'd just prefer not to hear them.