Anyone heard this song?

CaTaClYsM · Post by **CaTaClYsM** » Fri Apr 04, 2003 2:48 pm

Allman Brothers - Little Martha

Farlo · Post by **Farlo** » Fri Apr 04, 2003 6:16 pm

nope...only allman bros. i know is whipping post

CaTaClYsM · Post by **CaTaClYsM** » Fri Apr 04, 2003 7:09 pm

I think I should create a thread where I rate peoples playlists on a 1 to 10 scale based on the all around content of the playlist. Too many people listening to children of the bodom, not enough listening to Gordon Lightfoot, Mason Williams, and the Allman brothers.

kthulhu · Post by **kthulhu** » Fri Apr 04, 2003 8:18 pm

Good luck on that. I have over 2000 tracks. I bet most other people do too. You can either pointlessly go over every single track on each playlist and waste your time, or declare a bunch of 70s mellow music to be better than most of the shit on peoples' playlists and tick off a ton of people.

CaTaClYsM · Post by **CaTaClYsM** » Fri Apr 04, 2003 9:29 pm

and I find it strange for someone to have 2000 tracks of stuff like children of the bodom, and have never even heard of the Allman brothers is beyond me. And what is even funnier is how I can safely say that of those 2000 songs not one of them is a Buddy Holy song, or a Rolling Stones song, and I'm 70% sure that you don't have any beatles in there either.

SarahtheBoring · Post by **SarahtheBoring** » Fri Apr 04, 2003 10:21 pm

Errr, that'd be because the average person on this site is, like, 14 and likes nothing but Linkin Park. *twitches*

I don't know that song in particular; my Allman Brothers knowledge stops right after "Jessica". I'm not huge on classic rock - I just listen to the radio for it usually, a song here and a song there.

And, yeah, [insert standard bitching about the lack of musical diversity on the .org]. Not that there's no diversity at all, but that doing something different is definitely the exception to the LP/POD/whoever rule.

kthulhu · Post by **kthulhu** » Fri Apr 04, 2003 10:37 pm

CaTaClYsM wrote:and I find it strange for someone to have 2000 tracks of stuff like children of the bodom, and have never even heard of the Allman brothers is beyond me. And what is even funnier is how I can safely say that of those 2000 songs not one of them is a Buddy Holy song, or a Rolling Stones song, and I'm 70% sure that you don't have any beatles in there either.

And I'm willing to bet you have no Two-Mix, Sentenced, Catch 22, or OOMPH! in yours.

I've heard of the Allman Brothers. I've just never been tempted to hear them. Klinky has some Buddy Holly, and I DO, as a matter of fact, have some Beatles.

So take your "my listening to 70s fogey rock makes me holier than thou" attitude and shove it. It impresses no one, not even the people who listened to it back in the day. I have pretty damn diverse musical taste, if I do say so myself.

You seem pretty enamored with the 70s/80s. Why don't you go back there?

CaTaClYsM · Post by **CaTaClYsM** » Fri Apr 04, 2003 11:44 pm

First off, buddy holly was 50's, beatles is 60's Along with Gordon Lightfoot and Mason Williams. If your going to bash my taste in musiv at least get the DECADE correct. And no, as a matter of fact I don't have Two-Mix, Sentance, Catch 22 or OOMPH! on my playlist. But then again, I don't try to listen to every brand new garage band or every band of one specific genre. And there is nothing wrong with not listening to them since they arent that famous, (relatively speaking). So why don't you take your "I think I know what the hell I'm talking about" attitude and shove it.

CaTaClYsM · Post by **CaTaClYsM** » Fri Apr 04, 2003 11:46 pm

SarahtheBoring wrote:Errr, that'd be because the average person on this site is, like, 14 and likes nothing but Linkin Park. *twitches*

I don't know that song in particular; my Allman Brothers knowledge stops right after "Jessica".

Another good Allman brothers song

SarahtheBoring · Post by **SarahtheBoring** » Fri Apr 04, 2003 11:58 pm

indeed, albeit six hours long.

IMO, claiming moral superiority over anyone because of any musical taste is kind of lame. But everyone and his dog does the exact same thing, so complaining every time somebody pulls an attitude over it would leave me with laryngitis and/or serious carpal tunnel.

IMO again, variety is good, not just having type of music X or type of music Y in your collection. If only because variety is good in darned near any aspect of life. But "variety" != "having music X or music Y in your playlist." If someone had hysterical J-pop and mindfuck British techno in their collection, I'd consider that a form of variety. As would having hippie-rock and Black Sabbath. Even if I happen to not like any of them. There's no one so dreary as a person who only listens to one band or one genre, ANY one genre, and that's the bottom line.

...and I am obviously lacking lots of sleep, so I'm done. 8)