Red Dog wrote:RockMessiah wrote:Of course, I liked the individual Tomahawk members in their 90s bands more, too, but those days are gone, if you accept that and take the music for what it is, "Mit Gas" is outstanding.
I have to take issue with that statement, RM. A lot of people use that same argument at times, and it's like you're saying, "Yeah, I know Tomahawk's music isn't that great, but you should like it because John Stanier is in it and if you don't, it's because you simply can't accept he's no longer in Helmet and move on." Or we're back to that insinuation of "I guess you're not a real fan" jazz. It's as if you see something that the rest of don't, so somehow we're the ones that are flawed or "unaccepting." Sorry, I don't buy that.
I'm not trying to sound harsh, it's just I've heard that so many times before and I really don't agree at all.
Well that was absolutely not what I was aiming at with that statement. It shouldn't be "excusing" that Tomahawk "isn't that great" or something, because I think Tomahawk IS great. It was more of a direct reply to what eht13 said:
I actually think the parts were greater than the sum in this case. Meaning I liked Patton in FNM better, I liked Stanier in Helmet better, and I liked Denison in The Jesus Lizard better (not too familiar with Rutmanis' work with the Melvins, I believe).
... so it was my fault that I didn't quote that earlier, it had been more clear who I was referring to.