Blizzards Vs Coronas

iamnothim

for the record, i'm a bloke. I play music with one of the bands professionally - thus the bias

shakespeare

well on youre recommendation...

ill listen even more intently to the next album.

PaulBrewer

iamnothim wrote: »

for the record, i'm a bloke. I play music with one of the bands professionally - thus the bias

Come on then..... which one? And give us the inside line? Are yez both Shyte or wha?;)

PaulBrewer

iamnothim wrote: »

for the record, i'm a bloke. I play music with one of the bands professionally - thus the bias

And who'd win in a fight? I reckon the Blizzards, the singer and rhythm section are big guys ...

11811

PaulBrewer wrote: »

And who'd win in a fight? I reckon the Blizzards, the singer and rhythm section are big guys ...

Hmmm I reckon the Coronas would fight dirty tho!

AnonoBoy

iamnothim wrote: »

I play music with one of the bands professionally - thus the bias

Wait - you're in one of the bands?

Of course you're going to say ye're not ****e then. You kinda have to.

30txsbzmcu2k9w

AnonoBoy wrote: »

Wait - you're in one of the bands?

Of course you're going to say ye're not ****e then. You kinda have to.

But you are.
Dull bland-by-the-book calculated throwaway shiite. The flaws get an honourable mention too.

The Coronas. I mean FFS. Your muse is a beermat. Please leave down your instruments and become accountants bacause there's not an ounce of creativity between ye.

kjt

Sylvie Fat Revolt wrote: »

Please leave down your instruments and become accountants bacause there's not an ounce of creativity between ye.

Hahah harsh, but funny! I have to agree though, the second their song comes on I turn off the station within a second.

red_ice

shakespeare wrote: »

a) charisma? has got a lot to do with this type of music as it does in pop/rock/rap etc. even metal and emo...anywhere there is a market...charisma is involved. Live shows particularly...whats the point in having killer songs but not being able to effect the crowd with your performance of them...youre on stage persona??? neither of these bands have songs or charisma...that was my point...

well, i dont know about that... Part of a bands charisma could be the distant approach, they dont want to engage the crowed. Leonard cohen is pretty drab imo and hes considered to be 'good'. Eric Clapton's crowed interaction is miserable, his gigs are basicly him playing with his mates and not bothering with the crowed, i think he said something to the crowed once when he played last here. Then again, look at queens of the stone age, josh would most definitly take time out all the time to check on the crowed, interact, drop a few jokes etc. Interpol, no interaction, just movement on stage.

I agree to an extent with you on that point, but i have to say some bands dont need to interact with a crowed that much, id say the coronas stage presence is perfect for the type of music that they play. Likewise for the blizzards.

shakespeare wrote: »

b) monkeys can play in time if you teach them long enough...only when timing is perfected in improvisation or crafted into something clever and effecting is "timing" an impressive aspect of a band...in fact...timing is a Necessity for an even half decent band...not something to be proud of or rate a band by...."this band is good.....it can play its insturments in time"...and since their respective recorded material isnt very good then you can see why i didnt enjoy them live.

Well most up and coming bands find it hard to keep in time. For any established musician playing in time (up and/or down beats)should be a natural thing. I might be picking you up wrong but theres only one way to stay in time with 2/4, 4/4 etc.. unless you mean going into 7/4 etc which makes it sound a bit weird but the basics of staying in time are still the same there. Staying in time to any time pattern is easy, its just counting to a point and starting again. As far as that in relation to a band i would seperate the timing end of things to the rythem section(drum and bass), thats where timing matters most. If a bass player is playing drab root note riffs and hes out of time theres something seriously wrong there. Anyone can play in time is my main point, its not hard. Whats hard is bridging the rythem with the melodies being put forward on the guitars in a way that isnt obvious, thats when you have a good band!

shakespeare

all the bands/artists you mentioned relating to the point i made about charisma do different styles of music and have a stage pressence based on the points they are at in their career. plus they arent going for the modern pop rock market...cohen is much like dylan from the point that it depends on what side of the bed he got out of and having seen him live many times would be concerned to see him try and exagerate his peformances...clapton was never about that sort of thing, occupying a more reserved demenour to match his audience (since solo ie.clapton gigs dont have moshing gunsligers looking to air guitar his riffs...more old school appreciators)

my point was that the blizzards play fast and loud...but because i didnt think they had the actual songs to carry a live show i expected more from them in the performance/charisma department...which they dont have...fairly stadard and run of the mill....thats why...imo...plainly bad songs, basic musicianship, obvious and straight forward arrangements, repeated formats and no real indviduality or stage pressence means i dont like them so much.


and the timing thing i was speaking of was more in relation to the fact that the other guy (the guy who plays in one of the bands) said that.....

"Both are very tight live and are at least a good as their respective recorded material"

and my point was that tightness is ESSENTIAL to be considered even as a professional band never mind a good one. so saying they were tight really has no bearing.

in terms of "staying in time" and 4/4,7/4 etc.

i was speaking more about originality. not the actual beats and rythms being used.
having intersting breaks and unusual/unexpected changes in intensity and depth...a bit of imagination. only then can you comment on "being tight".
if a guy is playing 4/4 to the beatles then its hard to give him any real credit as a drummer...
again...just pointing towards the statement this other guy made that being tight was enough to be considered a good band.

iamnothim

shakespeare wrote: »

just pointing towards the statement this other guy made that being tight was enough to be considered a good band.

'Good' is a subjective term in this sense. My point was that, putting your musicial preference aside, their live performace cant be faulted.

shakespeare

"good" band...."good" food..."good" hair...
whatever...lets not split hairs...you know what im talkin bout...

4 guys playing "tightly" doesnt necessarily make a "good" band...and since ive already said that I THINK (in capitals!)
-their songs are tripe
-thier live show is nothing more then pedestrian and akin to watching a child joining dots
-and more to the point, you've just told me im wrong and questioned my phrasing instead of giving me examples of how...

a)theyre music is anything other then what i think it is
b)theyre live show is more then just bog standard
c)how they are not just making music that fits into the slots that record companys want to fill...upity indie pop and whingy rock baladry,strings on tap and woo hoo's/ ohh oooo's a pleanty...fake sincerity and produced to the hilt with every cliche available thrown in to boot until any remnence of the original track is just a dot that some child is joining on a page!

thats what they are...and i dont care...fair play to them...and long may they send their kids to college with the proceeds...but i dont have to like it or buy it and im entitled to my opinion....

why do you keep making statements that are just incorrect....

"their live performace cant be faulted. "

I CAN FAULT THEM...and just have!

shakespeare

let me sum up...ya cant polish a turd...

PaulBrewer

shakespeare wrote: »

let me sum up...ya cant polish a turd...

Ya can!! .... but not to the level of a turd that's naturally shiny ...

30txsbzmcu2k9w

shakespeare wrote: »

let me sum up...ya cant polish a turd...

Exactly right. Depressing to think what these guys are peddling. Haircuts, same hi-hat beat, same weak spikey guitar sound (never turned up too loud or distorted too much could offend someone). Playing it safe for radio stations and their advertisers. Stock Aitken Waterman had more balls than this shower of clones.

Worse still, It hurts my head to think people can be so simple minded to listen to this generic drivel. Actually probably best not to think of it. It's a question of intelligence rather than taste really.

iamnothim

I think Paul Brewer get's what I'm saying

PaulBrewer

I've never seen either band live but, by coincidence, The Coronas are playing in Tullamore (the country seat) this Saturday.

So if you're in them, put me on the list, Yea?;)

Word is the Blizzards are coming over from Mullingar and they're going to fight outside Supermacs ... should be good.

I will give a report here after the bruises/wounds are counted.

pinksoir

Sylvie Fat Revolt wrote: »

Exactly right. Depressing to think what these guys are peddling. Haircuts, same hi-hat beat, same weak spikey guitar sound (never turned up too loud or distorted too much could offend someone). Playing it safe for radio stations and their advertisers. Stock Aitken Waterman had more balls than this shower of clones.

Worse still, It hurts my head to think people can be so simple minded to listen to this generic drivel. Actually probably best not to think of it. It's a question of intelligence rather than taste really.

I suppose the two bands are just fast food. They're not trying to be art, at least I hope they're not, and music doesn't have to be an intellectual experience every time. They exist for the very same reason there is 'film' and then there are 'the movies', that there is 'cuisine' and there is Mcdonalds. There is art and there is trash. They are popular for the same reason that people pay to go see Meet The Spartans.

Just ignore it.

AnonoBoy

pinksoir wrote: »

They are popular for the same reason that people pay to go see Meet The Spartans.

Ah Jaysus they're bad, but that's taking it a bit far!

iamnothim

PaulBrewer wrote: »

So if you're in them, put me on the list, Yea?;)

I haven't been asked to play that one yet but have a rehearsal tonight for the big olympia show in 2 weeks so they may mention it tonight. I can get you on the list no worries though, PM me

pinksoir

AnonoBoy wrote: »

Ah Jaysus they're bad, but that's taking it a bit far!

Ah, I don't mean that they're equivalent to Meet The Spartans, it's not one or the other, Citizen Cane or Meet The Spartans, I just mean there's a sliding scale and there is a market for them.

Basically, not everything has to be high art.

PaulBrewer

Off to see what all the fuss about The Coronas is tonight ..... I'll have some rotten tomatoes with me just in case ....

PaulBrewer

PaulBrewer wrote: »

Off to see what all the fuss about The Coronas is tonight ..... I'll have some rotten tomatoes with me just in case ....

Didn't make it to the gig afterwards ..... however my sister did and reckoned they were good!

Pen1987

The fact there is enough people to fill five pages worth of opinion on these two bands means they're doing something right.

Rockee

ecoli wrote: »

While the Corona s seem to have more international exposure at this stage i was just wondering which people thought were the greater talent and who will be remembered as the better band?

My opinion:
Blizzards hands down

They are both absolute sh1te, so neither.

Carroller

I thought Coronas were very good when I saw them in concert.

Rockee

Pen1987 wrote: »

The fact there is enough people to fill five pages worth of opinion on these two bands means they're doing something right.

Doing what right though? A are they good or are they crap debate isnt the sign of a band doing the 'right' thing.

PaulBrewer

Pen1987 wrote: »

The fact there is enough people to fill five pages worth of opinion on these two bands means they're doing something right.

Well it implies people are interested enough to express an opinion .... I'm not sure much more though.


I'm thinking of forming a new band called 'Kinky Ring' .... is anyone interested in that?

themonk

need a lead singer .. stage name phil doe:D

themonk

themonk wrote: »

need a lead singer .. stage name phil doe:D

phil doe is pete dohertys half brother btw:o

Rockee

PaulBrewer wrote: »

I'm thinking of forming a new band called 'Kinky Ring' .... is anyone interested in that?

Bagsy drummer! Rockee Racoon :P

Pen1987

PaulBrewer wrote: »

Well it implies people are interested enough to express an opinion .... I'm not sure much more though.


I'm thinking of forming a new band called 'Kinky Ring' .... is anyone interested in that?

I understand where you're coming from. A lot of smaller bands would love the media profile the Coronas/Blizzards have, and a lot of them would quickly change their style if someone in business promised them that. And to all those about to come in and say "no I would NOT! I would never change the style of my music to appeal to more programmer managers."

Bull****.

A certain percentage, no they would not change.

The majority, lets be honest - a lot of bands playing Dorans, downstairs in W, the Lower Deck etc are not that far from the sound the Blizz or Coronas are producing anyway. If someone "in the business" approached them and told them "if you just change that bass line, take out that line of lyrics with '****' in it. After that I'll get a few promo shots done with my photographer friend and send out a media mailshot about you lot. You'll be on Fm104 in 3 weeks, start rehearsing now - an acoustic version of something by Britney would be great." They jump at it!

Any band playing the general standard indie-band style. i.e guitarist, bassist, drummer, key (optional) a lead singer with long hair and a few catchy choruses. With nothing else (i.e. not post-punk, guitar-solo or different insturment element)... is begging for that to happen them deep down. And there is hundreds of bands out there like that.

PS. I call the lead trumpet role in Kinky Ring.

insinkerator

Carroller wrote: »

Saw Coronas at Oxegeen and i though they were very good.

played a good show

Thats and MCD gig. Edit it out before you get in trouble

PaulBrewer

So who's got the best name then?

Blizzards v Coronas v Kinky Ring

Aodan83

Seen blizzards and coronas live, both very good, imo. Can't see either of em being remembered long term though. 20 years down the line, I can imagine people saying "hey, remember those guys", and the kids not havin a clue who youre talkin about.

And Kinky Ring is a pretty kick-ass name.

PaulBrewer

Aodan83 wrote: »

And Kinky Ring is a pretty kick-ass name.

Wha-hey!

eamon234

+1 with the crapness

Diamond007

Neither..

Both crap college bands..

Dudess

lottodrink wrote: »

They actually draw in an older fan base as well.. herendous? U into westlife or some rubbish like that!

Yeah, of course it must mean they're into something like Westlife...

Pen1987 wrote: »

The fact there is enough people to fill five pages worth of opinion on these two bands means they're doing something right.

Or wrong. That causes people to talk too.

Mr Alan wrote: »

i agree that neither will be remembered. The Blizzards songs are too ****ty and insipid to my ears, which is a shame, because the track Dublin Town (which Mr Brewer should be familiar with) is, imo, an excellent song and is much more interesting than **** like "fantasy" and "trust me, i'm a ****ing doctor".....but they seem content to churn out ****e disposable pop tunes, while their more interesting stuff (Dublin Town for example) is lost as a b-side.

Gotta pay the bills I suppose.

Anyway, moved from Alternative & Indie, as this is more suited to the general Music forum.

themonk

PaulBrewer wrote: »

So who's got the best name then?

Blizzards v Coronas v Kinky Ring

kinky ring by far

whats their first single or album name to be:pac:?

PaulBrewer

"Slap This'" .... it's a sort of Funky number...

Mars Bar

I have seen and met both bands...while I think they are both a bit dull, I prefer the Corona's. The singer has a lovely voice...and the San Diego song is fantastic.
Was not impressed by the Blizzards at all. I think they played an hour and fifteen minutes...I sat outside for the whole lot. Could hear them perfectly and that was enough for me.
I found the Corona's more appealing...

tinkletoes

Used to like both bands but now find that their new releases are boring and repetitive of their old songs.

PaulBrewer

..... and Kinky Ring?

Rock Dog

The Coronas are talentless,the only reason they are getting anywhere is cos of a band members well connected mam.
The Blizzards are just like The Village People without the costumes.

Executive Steve

is this a fight to the death? can they both lose?

please?

RichTea

Blizzards or Coronas? Is this a new (considerably lesser quality) modern equivalent of Blur or Oasis?

xOxSinéadxOx

RichTea wrote: »

Blizzards or Coronas? Is this a new (considerably lesser quality) modern equivalent of Blur or Oasis?

no becuase neither of these 2 can win

SlipperyPeople

neither? listen to black rebel motor cycle club's album howl or else...nam sayin

FibbersON

I saw both bands before Christmas, Coronas in Dolans, Limerick. Blizzards in the Academy, Dublin. I have come to the following conclusion, - I will never do anything which will earn the Blizzards money in anyway, their fans and their music are as annoying as each other.

The Coronas on the other hand I thought were excellent live, they connected with the audience and although some of their more main stream songs will die away, I think as an album, what they released was, is and will be a very good album that I will return to every so often.