Album Rating: 3.0 | Sound Off

Nah. These guys were just popular, and nothing else.

Did you ever listen to another band that sounded like they were influenced by Tool, unless you explored far underground? I don't think so.

The old guard of rock will eat their young commercially, so it probs won't die until Robert Plant and Mick Jagger do

Album Rating: 5.0

popular does not equal culturally significant

...right?

Cool! I'm glad people think that. Radiohead were not the most culturally significant rock band of the 2000s then...

Album Rating: 4.5

>Did you ever listen to another band that sounded like they were influenced by Tool, unless you explored far underground? I don't think so.



Haha, oh boy. This is like the most erroneous statement ever made.

Also, the most culturally significant Radiohead album is probably The Bends. Definitely their most influential. (Not their best though)

Album Rating: 3.0 | Sound Off

"popular does not equal culturally significant



...right?"

Yes. Otherwise The Velvet Underground would be irrelevant.



"Cool! I'm glad people think that. Radiohead were not the most culturally significant rock band of the 2000s then..."

It's funny because you're right. Radiohead created excellent and even innovative music, and they managed to influence less than 0.0000000001% of music.

Give it 150 years until people barely remember rock and the fact that people played live shows at all seems astounding. Nickelback gonna get some serious hagiography
“I think live music is going to be obsolete soon [...] As a performer, I hate the potential of failure in front of a giant audience" - Grimes giving us the scoop here

Album Rating: 3.0 | Sound Off

"Haha, oh boy. This is like the most erroneous statement ever made."

Literally the only bands I know that were (at the very least) clearly influenced by Tool are A Perfect Circle and Form The Void. One is highly popular and the other one is extremely obscure.

Album Rating: 3.0 | Sound Off

"Give it 150 years until people barely remember rock and the fact that people played live shows at all seems astounding to people"

Uh, no. Look at jazz and classical for the biggest counter examples.

Album Rating: 4.0

'Too much explosions in the sky and mono perverting the concept of post-rock.' (3).

Can't this be partly explained by the whole 'wave' argument, in that people hear the more modern interpretation of post-rock pioneered perhaps most notably by GY!BE and either apply it retrospectively or simply don't recognise/know about it's previous incarnation(s)?

I don't know, I just imagine in a previous life hearing Spiderland for the first time and refuting the possibility it could be in any way related to the modern interpretation of the genre.

"Look at jazz and classical for the biggest counter examples"
jazz and classical have never been performed live, get woke plz

Yes. Most people barely remember Jazz and Classical. This is true.

Finally getting the real takes itt

Album Rating: 5.0

ya'll lost me I'm out

Aha sorry idk how this transitioned to shitposting classical
"I don't know, I just imagine in a previous life hearing Spiderland for the first time and refuting the possibility it could be in any way related to the modern interpretation of the genre."
I vibe this, but also imagine going back to your crusty Mogwai collection after hearing Slint for the first time...

Mogwai are key in the lineage that connects older american post-rock to the newer stuff. The difficult part is making the connection between early American and UK post-rock.

Talk Talk -> Bark Psychosis and Seefeel, no?

Is that just a question about influence?

Bark Psychosis - yes
Seefeel - no.

The only thing they have in common is that they are both connected to krautrock. Interestingly, Seefeel never heard any krautrock bands until after journalists made the connection. They probably got it from listening to Stereolab and P.I.L
They are a hard band to categorise. A lot of people now say that they are not post-rock and were only dubbed post-rock because they were on "Too Pure".

Album Rating: 5.0

"what does rock need to stay alive for (other than great live experiences)? I don't mean that as a rhetorical question, but it's harder to answer than feels comfortable"

as a counter to an increasingly digital culture, to prevent an overly on-the-nose Black-Mirror-ish world dominated by nothing but screens & electronica. and on the other side of things, electronic music itself benefits from having a counterbalance like rock (among other things) to thrive, itself. electronic and electronically-produced music is on a mainstream high now because rock & things like it dominated for so long, at some point people are inevitably going to want a break from it for something a bit less processed again. it's a more extreme version of what happened from the 70s -> 80s -> 90s, I guess

either that or we're all going to be androids soon