The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
This is the thread for general chat.
Tell us how your day was, say hello or just introduce yourself if you're new to the site.
Post edited by Hmmm... on 29/12/2018 at 18:19.
Tell us how your day was, say hello or just introduce yourself if you're new to the site.
Post edited by Hmmm... on 29/12/2018 at 18:19.
Page:
chasfh wrote:
That's two of my "musical heroes" gone.
Grew up on Mr. Mercury and Mr. Bowie, both pioneers and both sorely missed.
At the risk of encouraging some serious flak from the younger set, the talentless dweebs that rank as "great musicians" now just can't compare.
Don't worry, everyone says that when they get old. It's a sign of ageing, like grey hair and dementia :D
Seriously, though, there are only a few really great musicians at the most in any generation, think of all the pap during the 70s and 80s but certainly Freddie Mercury and David Bowie shone through in the pop/rock genre. Same with other genres and eras, there are hundreds of singers and musicians but they'll never be thought of in the same light as the ones who are just legends.
Off the top of my head I can think of no-one from the last 20 years who comes close to the legends before them, but perhaps part of that is that they need a longer time to mature.
Louie Armstrong, Billie Holiday. Miles Davis, Eric Clapton, Jimi Hendrix, Ray Charles, Stevie Wonder, John Lennon, Elton John, Prince, Whitney. All 50s to 80s (yes, some still making songs, but they're best known for that era). Maybe Adele will mature and become a legend or Gary Barlow will come into his own!
I think the biggest issue is actually that those legendary singers came from the times that created them and took music forward in some way and we haven't had that monumental shift that allows modern artists to do that. Partly because of the media's interference creating even more of a manufactured environment (remember we had that even back in the 60s though, but it wasn't so pronounced). We've had a few; Kurt Cobain, Dr Dre perhaps at a push in a different genre entirely, but it was never just about the music for those other legends.
That's two of my "musical heroes" gone.
Grew up on Mr. Mercury and Mr. Bowie, both pioneers and both sorely missed.
At the risk of encouraging some serious flak from the younger set, the talentless dweebs that rank as "great musicians" now just can't compare.
Don't worry, everyone says that when they get old. It's a sign of ageing, like grey hair and dementia :D
Seriously, though, there are only a few really great musicians at the most in any generation, think of all the pap during the 70s and 80s but certainly Freddie Mercury and David Bowie shone through in the pop/rock genre. Same with other genres and eras, there are hundreds of singers and musicians but they'll never be thought of in the same light as the ones who are just legends.
Off the top of my head I can think of no-one from the last 20 years who comes close to the legends before them, but perhaps part of that is that they need a longer time to mature.
Louie Armstrong, Billie Holiday. Miles Davis, Eric Clapton, Jimi Hendrix, Ray Charles, Stevie Wonder, John Lennon, Elton John, Prince, Whitney. All 50s to 80s (yes, some still making songs, but they're best known for that era). Maybe Adele will mature and become a legend or Gary Barlow will come into his own!
I think the biggest issue is actually that those legendary singers came from the times that created them and took music forward in some way and we haven't had that monumental shift that allows modern artists to do that. Partly because of the media's interference creating even more of a manufactured environment (remember we had that even back in the 60s though, but it wasn't so pronounced). We've had a few; Kurt Cobain, Dr Dre perhaps at a push in a different genre entirely, but it was never just about the music for those other legends.
That's two of my "musical heroes" gone.
Grew up on Mr. Mercury and Mr. Bowie, both pioneers and both sorely missed.
At the risk of encouraging some serious flak from the younger set, the talentless dweebs that rank as "great musicians" now just can't compare.
Grew up on Mr. Mercury and Mr. Bowie, both pioneers and both sorely missed.
At the risk of encouraging some serious flak from the younger set, the talentless dweebs that rank as "great musicians" now just can't compare.
Sad news pb. Certainly a fan of his early stuff.
Well, another music luminary gone. David Bowie has died. Wasn't a fan of his later stuff but he was certainly creative and went his own way.
dav2612 wrote:
Went to the cinema to see Star Wars this morning. Thought it was alright, nothing special.
Thought the same Dav, Darth Emo (or whatever the hell his name was) was terrible, he looks like they pulled him out of a boyband or something. Not sure if I was supposed to laugh at his tantrums... but I did.
Anyone else seen Deathgasm? I loved every stupid second of it, think The Evil Dead meets Trick Or Treat. You don't have to be a metalhead to enjoy it but it probably helps. It gets a UK release on home formats at the end of next month. It's tonnes of fun IMO, especially if you cared for the kind of old school cheesy OTT 80's B-Movies you thought they didn't make anymore.
Went to the cinema to see Star Wars this morning. Thought it was alright, nothing special.
Thought the same Dav, Darth Emo (or whatever the hell his name was) was terrible, he looks like they pulled him out of a boyband or something. Not sure if I was supposed to laugh at his tantrums... but I did.
Anyone else seen Deathgasm? I loved every stupid second of it, think The Evil Dead meets Trick Or Treat. You don't have to be a metalhead to enjoy it but it probably helps. It gets a UK release on home formats at the end of next month. It's tonnes of fun IMO, especially if you cared for the kind of old school cheesy OTT 80's B-Movies you thought they didn't make anymore.
Went to the cinema to see Star Wars this morning. Thought it was alright, nothing special.
Morning.
Dark, cold and wet today. All the Christmas stuff was due to go back in the garage today but have to wait for the rain to stop now.
Dark, cold and wet today. All the Christmas stuff was due to go back in the garage today but have to wait for the rain to stop now.
pb wrote:
Well, that's it. Christmas is now over. Still plenty of chocolate sitting there waiting to be eaten, though. Best time of year for cheap chocolate in the supermarkets as well. Not so good time of year for my health, however...
I have that very same problem. If I had any sort of will power then I'd have enough chocolate to last the year but santa didn't bring me any will power.
Well, that's it. Christmas is now over. Still plenty of chocolate sitting there waiting to be eaten, though. Best time of year for cheap chocolate in the supermarkets as well. Not so good time of year for my health, however...
I have that very same problem. If I had any sort of will power then I'd have enough chocolate to last the year but santa didn't bring me any will power.
Well, that's it. Christmas is now over. Still plenty of chocolate sitting there waiting to be eaten, though. Best time of year for cheap chocolate in the supermarkets as well. Not so good time of year for my health, however...
DL wrote:
pb wrote:
[i]Also worth pointing out that it's certainly not always a 'Devine entity' involved in some of history's biggest wars.
Missed the point ... every war has basically two sides. Each side subscribes to a 'religion' and each member of each side believes that 'their God' is the one to guide them through the destruction they are causing to the other side, who are doing the same!
The 'God' happens to be the same but has a different name ... i.e "there is only one God" ...
Whether it's done 'in the name of' or 'done in the name of but we're not mentioning it in the scripts/media of the day' ... it's the same![/i]
But every war isn't done in the name of a god. World War 2 is the most obvious first choice given that Hitler was against the idea of a God, but of all the wars in history only just over 6% were religious. Most of the religious and non-religious wars are actually just about moral superiority with the leaders finding a way to 'prove' this or at least to control the crowd.
What is true is that a fundamental group (IS) are currently using a religion in this way while the actual people who follow the book of their religion are shocked and appalled that IS are even using their religion as a front. This war has many sides rather than just 2, borders, land and politics all play into the war and the factions involved. 'Our' previous enemies, the Taliban, are actually against IS, Syria is against IS and their enemies who are a mix of IS and militant rebels, it's a very complicated 'war'.
pb wrote:
[i]Also worth pointing out that it's certainly not always a 'Devine entity' involved in some of history's biggest wars.
Missed the point ... every war has basically two sides. Each side subscribes to a 'religion' and each member of each side believes that 'their God' is the one to guide them through the destruction they are causing to the other side, who are doing the same!
The 'God' happens to be the same but has a different name ... i.e "there is only one God" ...
Whether it's done 'in the name of' or 'done in the name of but we're not mentioning it in the scripts/media of the day' ... it's the same![/i]
But every war isn't done in the name of a god. World War 2 is the most obvious first choice given that Hitler was against the idea of a God, but of all the wars in history only just over 6% were religious. Most of the religious and non-religious wars are actually just about moral superiority with the leaders finding a way to 'prove' this or at least to control the crowd.
What is true is that a fundamental group (IS) are currently using a religion in this way while the actual people who follow the book of their religion are shocked and appalled that IS are even using their religion as a front. This war has many sides rather than just 2, borders, land and politics all play into the war and the factions involved. 'Our' previous enemies, the Taliban, are actually against IS, Syria is against IS and their enemies who are a mix of IS and militant rebels, it's a very complicated 'war'.
Page: