>I'm not confusing the issue, you are. The OP named Radiohead
>as a band that hides poor musicianship behind good
>songwriting. I responded saying they can play.
>
>Now you're looking for "excellent musicianship", lol. All I
>said was they can play. That video more than showed that.
>They weren't playing like Weather Report because they're a
>rock band. They're not supposed to!
>
>Buddy, we're cool. I'm calm. Don't get upset over a little
>snark. Let's hug it out. :)
>

Haha, ok then we're cool. But I'm still not confusing the issue on this one - the OP in question did say he was looking for "great" musicianship, and his exact words were none of them were *great* at what they do , he never once said they were poor musicians - that's on you! And to a certain degree, he has enough of a point. People react to Radiohead in such an extreme way, and I'm just trying to be objective to what I see - so I was reacting to that too. And for the record I like Radiohead a lot, I got respect for them for sure.


>It tends to be the go to question for douchey musicians (not
>calling you one) to try to flaunt their self perceived
>superiority over other cats on this board, as if its the end
>all/be all for being able to talk music.
>
>Yes, it's relevant but what a lot of musicians that harp on
>chops & the like fail to understand is most artists aren't
>making music for musicians. I mean, would you rather Paranoid
>Android sounded like a Victor Wooten record? :/
>
>
>

I see. Yea, definitely did not mean it like that, and chops is definitely not at all what determines whether I like something or not. I mean, I love hip hop so what does that say?!