"Over across the tracks in the industrial side of Cream

>>72333750
>I've been worried something like this was going to happen ever since I first saw a numerology column in an underground newspaper.

4chan must be Xgau's worst nightmare.

To be a professional music journalist, you need to be a smug nu male hipster who wears a Rolling Stones tongue logo T-shirt who writes a column about about how awesome The Clash were while Sleater-Kinney is playing on the stereo in the background.

>>72333750
probably because they were deemed 'uncool', being from birmingham probably didn't help either

>>72333830
kek
>>72333927
this. most reviewers are weak, petty, narcissists.

>>72333750
Sabbath is all about their "influence" because actually -as a band- they were completely mediocre despite a couple of good riffs and an interesting vocal tone.

And they were hugely influential because their music was the easiest to copy and perform at an amateurish level by young kids in their garage. Well at least until Punk rock and subgenres appeared and level the bar even lower.
Last decades indie's appeal follows that exact scheme.

They were somewhat "good" at best but are to blame for the most nonsensical garbage that followed their first albums -both from them and their imitators-.

Meh

>>72334052
Not true, they had a first rate rhythm section as well and their dark lyrics were a portent of the changing times and how the happy-go-lucky 60s were over.

Grand Funk Railroad were eviscerated by critics in the early 70s as well, Led Zeppelin also got a lot of hate. The Rolling Stones, The Who, Velvet Underground, John Lennon, New York Dolls, Bruce Springsteen...they always had their dicks slurped.

Why? Because critics are smug nu male hipsters and they like any band with a Bohemian hipster artfag image. It didn't help that most of those first generation rock critics were New Yorkers, so they had a bias towards artists from NYC.

>>72334249
When my cousin was a teenager, there was this one rock magazine he read a lot, and he couldn't get why one of their columnists kept trashing Ted Nugent as he released one kickass album after another.

>>72334293
I enjoy Nugent's music. But what the fuck happened? He's the musical equivalent of 'Avatar.'
The average dude can name cat scratch fever and maybe stranglehold.
I live in prime buttrock conservative country and he gets zero radio play.

>yfw the first Rolling Stone Album Guide from 1979 gave one and two stars to every Black Sabbath album
>yfw not until the last edition in 2004 were they given any credit

>>72334370
RSM has been utterly worthless outside of the first dozen or so issues in the late 60s. And that's not even getting into their habit of trashing an album or artist and then 10 years later backtracking and saying how awesome and groundbreaking they were, or their massive dickriding of George McGovern, Bill Clinton, and Niggy.

>>72333750
>England's answer to Coven

Isn't it interesting if not ironic that Coven had Ossie Osbourne and Black Sabbath had Ozzy Osbourne?

Just thought I'd point that out.