I love how you see reviews of underground scene albums, some that dont even reach stores, and then you see a review for usher. you do know that hiphop also has an underground scene right?
hey dude, not only should you listen to chris (quoted below) but you should fuck off. i write for my school newspaper, where i had reviewed this album previously. and i know for sure i haven't seen a review for usher on this website. so why the fuck would i NOT submit it to a site i visit? and how is it hurting the review database in any way?
go do something productive, or continue being a jerk-off.
I just don't understand how could one review a record of Usher or any other current R'n'b "artist". It's just a gigantic musical void! Sorry if what I'm gonna say is shocking but to me, it just seems to be music for ignorant rednecks/sluts who think that there is no other music that what they're fed on MTV!
You can't concentrate on it without realizing it's plain shit! People who listen to it have to... not really listen to it, it's a background hum in your radio or in a club, it can't be more than that!!
I don't understand! Really!
...It's just my opinion...
Tool, Deftones, Isis, Radiohead, Thursday, Thrice, Jimmy Eat World, dredg, Cave In, At the Drive In, A Perfect Circle, Envy, Biffy Clyro, Silverchair, Incubus, Feeder, Metallica, Nine Inch Nails, Foo Fighters, Soundgarden, Hundred Reasons, Rage Against the Machine, Cult of Luna, Smashing Pumpkins, Funeral for a Friend, Circa Survive...
so none of the bands i've bolded have ever been on MTV or radio? you are one of the dumbest people i've ever seen post. period.
how is r&b for ignorant rednecks/sluts? you live in france, do you even have the SLIGHTEST fucking clue as to what a redneck even is?
rhythm and blues is, has and always be an art form. regardless of if you like it or not. usher's been around for longer/as long as many of the bands on your list. now go fist yourself.
To begin with, I apologize for wording my opinion in a harsh and violent way; I was just trying to express my "incomprehension", in a very inappropriate way, I'll admit it. Sorry, I always do that.
What I was trying to explain, is that to me, music like Usher is... well... horrible, and I don't understand how anyone else than people who are not really into music, casual listeners who've never heard anything else than Soulja Boy kind of stuff, can really appreciate it. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying you are one of these people (the fact that you are posting stuff on this site proves it). I was just trying to say that that kind of music, like for example music by the Pussycat Dolls, that nu-R&B stuff, is in my opinion like an empty shell; I just don't understand what can people appreciate in it (that kind of slick, overproduced, radio-ready music; just like boy band music actually, but without the band!), what's good in it.
I know it's a "strange" and provocative opinion. Usually, I tend to throw everyone that listen to this kind of music in the category "average listener, who just listens to marketed music on the radio, who buys 2-3 CD's a year", I believe that enjoying it can only happen if you've never heard anything "better" than that and therefore can't suspect there is way better things elsewhere (idiot comparison: if you go to McDonald's everyday since the beginning of your life, you don't know there is way better food elsewhere).
I've tried to express it in a mild way (it's hard!), I don't mean to look pretentious (...but I do!). But I think I'm not the only one to think that, it's just hard to tell it without shocking people and being considered an intolerant prick.
Of course, there is music that I personally don't like, but it's just a matter of taste, it's subjective. In the case of Usher, I just believe well... that noone can like it once you have a little knowledge of music; it's just mass-consumption music, not even better than Miley Cyrus! Once again, I know it sounds really intolerant, but that's the only way I can express it.
As for the MTV thing, I was thinking of that kind of maketed music I mentioned earlier. Moreover, I don't really know which different channels there are in the USA. I just heard that the "real" MTV isn't MTV anymore (no music, just stupid reality shows), and that there is also MTV2, dedicated to more alternative music (I suppose the bands you have bolded are present on this channel). Here in France, there are several channels, but it seems there is no difference between them! It's always 50 Cent, Pussycat Dolls and stuff! There is just the English version of MTV2, dedicated to rock music.
...Isis and Cult of Luna are on MTV?!
I repeat it, I'm not trying to sound like an intolerant asshole. I'm just questioning...
don't compare usher to the pussycat dolls or miley cyrus. he has been around for over 10 years making good pop/soul/r+b music. i don't care what your opinion is on him, but he is not just "radio" music. he is a relevant artist making relevant music, and is mocked by some of pop's biggest stars today...heard of ne-yo, chris brown or omarion? all of them try to be what usher was.
i listen to A LOT of different types of music. yes, i have my guilty pleasures. yes, i love usher. but go look in my profile and you'll see that i like every thing from hardcore to gangsta rap to french house/electro. i'm not the average listener and as far as this site is concerned, i have a more diverse taste than most. i don't pigeonhole myself into a scene, i work on a blog with my friend that embraces all types of music (i mean shit, there's even a musical posted on there). i buy about 2-3 albums a month, also.
yes, i've listened to and love sigur ros, but i also love usher. there's no law that says i can't do both. you should spend more time broadening music tastes and less time criticizing what's reviewed on a music web site. give other genre's a shot and stop categorizing ALL POP music as if they were all the same.