Author Topic: Musicological banter  (Read 895127 times)

evilizac

  • Member
  • Posts: 315
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #1815 on: October 13, 2016, 11:26:07 am »
I have definitely gained my share, and my significant other's, share of relationship weight.
At the same time I wouldn't necessarily call her "chunky" but maybe that's just my own relationship weight talking. 
WHAT?

sweetcell

  • Member
  • Posts: 21448
  • I don't belong here.
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #1816 on: October 13, 2016, 12:23:02 pm »
I'm going to deport Hutch and make him pay for it.

i hate it when you make me agree with you.
<sig>

grateful

  • Member
  • Posts: 9854
  • 👤 👩 👦 📷 📺
    • Wait, the entire rest of the internet exists and you CHOOSE to post here? Who hurt you?
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #1817 on: October 14, 2016, 12:07:37 pm »

walkie,talkie

  • Guest
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #1818 on: October 14, 2016, 04:23:27 pm »
Is pearl jam, good?

I love them.  They put me in a happy place when I listen to them.  But music is subjective . . . so,

Yada

  • Member
  • Posts: 11603
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #1819 on: October 14, 2016, 04:28:04 pm »
Is pearl jam, good?

I love them.  They put me in a happy place when I listen to them.  But music is subjective . . . so,

other than sally's favorite group Alice in Chains, probably one of the best bands to come out of the Pac NW IMO.

Julian, Forum COGNOSCENTI

  • Member
  • Posts: 28522
  • 11x MVP, 1st Posts, HoF, Certified Weblebrity
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #1820 on: October 14, 2016, 04:30:11 pm »
Pearl Jam is both a band I think has an unquestionably great discography and yet I NEVER EVER listen to them anymore and I don't really know why.
LVMH

bob72

  • Member
  • Posts: 478
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #1821 on: October 15, 2016, 12:39:06 pm »
PJ has aged very well
PENIS

Space Freely

  • Member
  • Posts: 9993
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #1822 on: October 15, 2016, 12:41:56 pm »
Is pearl jam, good?

I love them.  They put me in a happy place when I listen to them.  But music is subjective . . . so,

I always thought the singer sounded like he needs to take a really huge dump.

hutch

  • Guest
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #1823 on: October 15, 2016, 11:17:58 pm »
Is pearl jam, good?

I love them.  They put me in a happy place when I listen to them.  But music is subjective . . . so,

I always thought the singer sounded like he needs to take a really huge dump.

geez dude.. i'm eating my steak and ale pie for chrissakes

Justin Tonation

  • Member
  • Posts: 5130
  • Did you ever wonder?
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #1824 on: October 16, 2016, 05:22:15 pm »
😐 🎶

hutch

  • Guest
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #1825 on: October 16, 2016, 05:52:53 pm »
oh that is good....


I think Salman Rushdie should be included....

Julian, Forum COGNOSCENTI

  • Member
  • Posts: 28522
  • 11x MVP, 1st Posts, HoF, Certified Weblebrity
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #1826 on: October 16, 2016, 07:25:17 pm »
Brilliant.
LVMH

hutch

  • Guest
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #1827 on: October 17, 2016, 01:33:35 pm »
maybe he won't accept his award... and make Julian happy?

http://pitchfork.com/news/69019-nobel-committee-says-bob-dylan-is-ignoring-them/

grateful

  • Member
  • Posts: 9854
  • 👤 👩 👦 📷 📺
    • Wait, the entire rest of the internet exists and you CHOOSE to post here? Who hurt you?
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #1828 on: October 17, 2016, 01:49:25 pm »
The fancy gold medal comes with $1.4 million.  I mean, he's Bob Dylan and maybe he doesn't need it, but you don't walk away from $1 million no strings attached.

walkie,talkie

  • Guest
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #1829 on: October 17, 2016, 02:11:38 pm »
oh, azealia banks.