>"This band is like X and Y had a baby!"

File: 2017-04-19_23-59-54.png (414KB, 853x480px) Image search: [Google]

414KB, 853x480px

>this band is like band X on crack

File: 6382871.jpg (46KB, 566x800px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 566x800px

>>73293154
>i liked this song better when it was called X by Y
>song sounds nothing like X by Y

File: 1488432819777s.jpg (83KB, 499x600px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 499x600px

>the new (band that sounds vaguely similar) album sounds great! xD

File: 1465975274458.jpg (4KB, 175x152px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 175x152px

>This album has noisy guitars, omg MBV rip off!
>This album has jangly guitars, omg Smiths rip off!

File: IMG_0456.jpg (63KB, 700x1059px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 700x1059px

>>73293154
>band x is just a watered down version of band y

File: You cant be serious.jpg (32KB, 212x377px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 212x377px

>They sound like if X played Y's songs

File: 1431816337634.gif (4MB, 330x246px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 330x246px

> band Y has really taken up the mantle of where band X [still a band, still making music, still touring] left off

>>73293154
>band members are literally the descendants of band X and Y, and sound like a modern combination of the two bands.

>>73293977
What band would you want to do this /mu/?

>I liked [band] better when they were called [older band].

>>73293506
no one says this

>>73294480
clearly you don't spend enough time browsing the youtube comments of shitty mainstream rock bands

>X is the new Y, yet Y is still active and making even better music.

>X are like the asian Y

File: IMG_8389.gif (885KB, 500x444px) Image search: [Google]

885KB, 500x444px

>Wow this sounds like something by [band's old name]