alright im drunk but im right.

[herts tickler]

ive just got in from the pub and as many of you will know now is the optimum time to take up a pointless gripe. the gripe of choice is bands who state ridiculous influences for theyre music.

i give to you one example: there is this band whats called neon trees. now i actually dont mind they're stuff but i just saw they liken theyre music to the smiths and the strokes among others. lemme ram that home. THE SMITHS and THE STOKES!!!!! two of my fave bands. as a result i now hate them. and they're families. and they're dogs. and they're dog's families.

i absolutly love listening to new bands but dont dare try to make yourself something your not because i WILL turn London against you. Neon trees cant enter the city without being hung by morrissey, drawn by johnny marr and quarterd by Julian Casablancas. true story. end.

 

[ParanoidChant]

I'll let you rally the village mob, but I agree with you: it's like they're trying to make you like them by saying they sound like bands you like.

Same way I feel about record reviews: I'd rather just listen to the band myself and make up my own mind.

 

[chicago]

It doesn't affect me one way or another when bands or artists mention their influences. Sometimes, you can hear it in their music. Sometimes, you don't know what they're talking about.

I like when you read about a band and there may be comparisons to other better known groups because I feel like you get more of an idea of whether you might like them or not. Honestly, I think that kind of thing does better than just listing the genre because people are getting a little too pretentious with the fucking genres and sub genres (indietronica, anti-folk, chicken scratch, mathcore?). Ridic.