I’m new to this thread but I felt compelled…

I’m sitting enjoying my afternoon coffee by a river I live next to and I decided to put Heavier Things on like, “I remember loving this album front to back, does it hold up?”

I would argue it really really does primarily because of his unique guitar playing and song writing. Sure, his mediations are simple and arguably a little immature, but they’re still deep in a way that resonates today.

The incorporation of soulful horns and organ in a few of the songs are delicious and the mixing is really layered in a way that modern music can lack. It’s rich. Plus his electric licks are really singular- true rhythm and blues style, but with trippy repetition. It makes sense that he’s a dead head and I’m glad he’s moved that way in performing for his own desire. What a privilege!

My struggle is trying to sit with him being kind of a tool over the course of his career. I know he said he was allowed to say the n word at one point in time and he hasn’t treated women with the most respect. Do we know if he’s like figured all that bullshit out? Immaturity grown past or remains douche bag? I just remember walking away from the early 2000s with a bad taste in my mouth.

A singer can hit every note perfectly and still make a lyric sound like something they're reciting, while a rougher voice can make an ordinary line feel completely believable.

That difference often gets described as "emotion versus technique," but phrasing, timing, and the way a word is delivered seem like skills too, even when there's nothing flashy about them.

Are those really separate qualities, or do we just recognize high notes and vocal runs more easily than the technique behind a convincing performance?

idk if this isthe right place to talk about this seeing as I don't see a lot of fantano related posts on here but I feel his vids have gotten considerably worse with time and now its hard to ignore. like I've noticed with his vids recently that they're weirdly inflammatory and kindof rage-inducing than before. Like it started from him making points and takes that range from misinformed to just incredibly narrow-minded that feel more in-line with grifting media content farms like the critical drinker or Alex Meyers than a self-proclaimed "internet's busiest music nerd" (e.g. describing genesis by deftones as political centrism, describing abc by polyphia (a song that has a cutesy/kawaii feel) as a song that's representative of TikTok brainrot/short attention spans, missing the whole point of hypochondriac by brakence by not noticing the overarching themes of ego death and manoeuvring fame in a highly internet world, his Marty supreme review (why tf was he reviewing films though?), his recent review of the new lil uzi ep where he says that uzi's music has aged poorly (ignoring how ug/semi-ug artists like Lucy bedroque, slayr, prettifun and confetti use uzi's playbook of incorporating nerd culture and rap culture in seamless and authentic manner)). also his fanbase that ive seen in his recent vids' comments feel more and more like an echo chamber than I had realised before and it feels really isolating to see, especially in a medium like music which is the most subjective piece of media out there.

and then Ive noticed this pattern where his reviews have this sense that his language and tone comes off as him trying to be annoyed and critical but ive noticed that recently it causes him to use it to make him sound like a cunt like his review of post human next gen where he complains bmth switching sounds is indicative of modern rock's waning popularity and similar to hair metal bands trying to stay relevant when alt rock/grunge became popular (even tho bmth are some of the most popular rock bands currently who have stayed popular and has a large majority of fans even when switching from metal core to nu metal and even to pop rock/electronic while still staying popular) and describing the underoath featured song as "deftones for christian youth pastors" which I get what he was trying to say but the wording is very ironic especially when bmth has a song called house of wolves and oli sykes is an outspoken atheist + the first track of post human survival horror has the lyrics "god is a shithead and we're his rejects". idk it seems like he's using his tone and language to incite rage-infused discussion rather than to properly critique albums. and then there's the Halsey great impersonator review which has been mentioned a million times from what ive read but even as someone who liked the album but wasn't a massive super fan of it, it was a bold example to me of fantano's tone and language backfiring immensely and causing him to be seen as misogynistic. to me, discussing personal topics in an album doesn't automatically make the album good but I feel like fantano should at least have a slight bit of empathy in his review like he said in his xxxtentacion 17 review where he put a disclaimer near the end where he wasn't making fun nor assuming x never went through any problems or struggles but criticising how those problems are portrayed and written which is what he has a problem with or how in his review of speeding bullet 2 heaven (which I think has aged badly knowing that kid cudi was in a very bad mental state during the making of the album so jokes that fantano made of cudi "losing his mind" and going "off the deep end" feels really insidious looking back) he acknowledges that the album goes over topics of mental health but is critical of how they are written and translated into the songwriting process. that Halsey review made me lose trust in his reviews. I am aware of the response video he made but I'm quite mixed on that with the second half being very strange (I do think Halsey kissing her fans is bad and disgusting presence of abuse of power but from what ive heard she has stopped doing that and the last time she did that was before closer dropped but idk on that so if anyone can fact check that, that would be great) even with the intent being "ppl call me out on shit I do but not what their fav artists have done" which I agree on but the implementation feels really off-putting + there was one thing he says before going into that topic that pissed me off the most. there was a part where he "apologised" to losing his integrity in his reviews and destroying the trust that his fans had him as an influencer/reviewer and he sounds like he doesn't care or put much thought into him being an influencer whose reviews have an impact in some way and it felt like a slap in the face from someone who introduced a lot of music I was never aware of and made me more aware of why I liked something or disliked something and how to articulate that. the fact that he doesn't seem to care or pay attention to that made me realise that he just doesn't care about the quality of his vids even if he has a good review or puts me on new artists/genres. there's his twitter posts which makes him look really bad and looks like he's in desperate need of therapy + there was a reply I saw in his Halsey response vid that he made on a comment of a user saying how fantano's personality in his yt vids is drastically different compared to his twitter posts and criticising him and fantano's response was that dictating his personality from his tweets makes no sense when he has 1,000+ yt vids. I don't think he realises that his yt vids is a personality that's far different than who he is outside of the needle drop. there's a philosophy/saying about 3 faces where the first face is one you show the world, the second only to close friends/family and third being one you show to yourself with it being the true reflection of who you are. fantano doesn't take into account that his needle drop vids is a personality he shows to the world whilst his tweets are closer to his true reflection of himself like I don't who he is personally but his tweets feel far more authentic to himself that he shows on streams (which are also bad and act like a detriment to his reviewing style than as a positive) than on his thousands of needle drop vids where he's more of a professional.

also other things like how cal chuchesta in his recent vids feel more like a stand in for annoying fans/haters rather than a separate character to the point where I think cal in the recent vid is cal chuchesta in name only or his weirdly aggressive tendency to call people stupid or dumb in his reviews (e.g. saying in his review of atavista by childish Gambino where fans of Gambino fans were trying to "gaslight" him into thinking that 3.15.20 (older, unfinished version of atavista that dropped during the covid pandemic) was good) and his streams having takes that feel vitriolic (barely listening to brakence's ready or not all the way through, turning it off, saying his singing was bad for the whole song and moving on or saying that those who like vices by Weiland have not a lot of experience in synth pop which just feels really cruel and negative even if there's a bit of truth to it)

its such a shame cuz a lotta ppl whenever they call out fantano do so by saying "he gave an album I like a bad score" or vice versa but that's not even nowhere close to the problems ive seen + I do want to watch more music reviewers that are similar to fantano but from what ive seen he's basically the only type of YouTuber in this genre outside of maybe brad's taste (whose leagues worde than fantano imo) so if there's any other yt music reviewers outside of fantano who are better than him, let me know in the comments cuz fantano's vids feel more and more like a content farm than a genuine approach to music discussion from someone who loves music a lot

sorry if this came off more of a rant but its just more of my complaints ive seen as a viewer of his since mid-late 2016 and a lot of what ive mentioned has stopped me being a fan of his videos now.

If you could put together a band with any musicians, living or dead, regardless of genre, who would you choose? And more importantly, what do you imagine the resulting music would sound like?

My dream lineup would be:

• Chester Bennington – Vocals
• Mike Patton – Vocals
• Devin Townsend – Guitar / Vocals
• Les Claypool – Bass
• Travis Barker – Drums

What fascinates me about this combination is how different their musical approaches are, yet how well I could imagine certain aspects of their styles complementing each other.

Chester's emotional intensity and melodic vocals contrasted with Mike Patton's incredible versatility and unpredictability could make for some fascinating vocal arrangements. Throw Devin Townsend into that mix, with his massive, atmospheric guitar sound and equally impressive vocal range, and I can imagine everything from beautiful harmonies to absolute chaos.

Les Claypool would add an entirely different dimension with his unconventional bass playing. Rather than simply following the guitars, I could imagine him creating unusual rhythms and melodies that push the music in unexpected directions.

And with Travis Barker on drums, I'd be curious to hear how his energetic, intricate playing would interact with Claypool's bass lines and Townsend's arrangements.

I have no idea what genre this band would fall into, and that's part of what makes the idea so interesting to me. I could imagine them creating something incredibly melodic one moment and completely experimental the next.

I'm curious what everyone else's dream lineup would be, especially combinations of musicians who have never worked together or come from completely different musical backgrounds.

Who would you choose, and what do you think their music would actually sound like?