Probably... But you won't convert me anymore...

Muse is enjoyable to see live, but if they want to get me interested in new album material, they'll have to start doing something else...

It's ok, just sit back and listen to Pinback and we can chill to that.

Alright

my dear friend, we never argued. i just stated that i thought origin was a much better album than it was getting credited for, and pelican said he'd check it.

i agree with orpheus. i've had that stance since it first came out and every other muse fan seems to be all, "OMFG ITS THERE BEST ALBUM YETTTT!!!!"

I really dont like Muse! No no no no...not good music. Me no like.

But I guess that i shouldnt be writing here then cause the topic says: For those who listen to muse...And i dont and wont, ever.

I love you in the most non-homosexual way right now. Matt Bellamy has a very powerful voice, but the problem is it's Thom Yorke's voice. We get it, you know how to use falsetto, cut it out already! Also I think their production and songwriting is very good, but as chris so perfectly put it, they wrote one song and changed a few things here and there.

So I think everyone needs to realize Muse for the trio of hacks that they really are. If they are your favorite band then you seriously need to re-examine those albums, examine your hearing, or examine your IQ. I'm not as harsh as chris though. I don't think there is anything wrong with liking a Muse song or owning a Muse album, just as long as you don't like the band. When it comes down to it they're just a bunch of one-hit wonders that have been fooling people for years into thinking they've improved (or even changed) since day one.

Chris is right though, Ours is a way better choice than Muse. Jimmy Gnecco sings just as well as (if not better than) Matt Bellamy does but at least he doesn't flaunt his voice during every single chorus of every single song. Also thier range... well, Ours actually has a range. It's not a bombardment of the same old thing on the albums.

One more thing. Muse is NOT better than Radiohead!

i had several problems with this post. they are like this:

1) since when has IQ factored into subjectivity? it hasn't. telling people they need to "check their IQ" because they like a band is one of the most stupid elitist arguments i've heard in a long time. any idiot knows that you don't have to be einstein to like a band. not everything is technique and pretense to some fans, you know.

2) apparently, as it seems from your post, you can't like a band if it sounds like another band. oh. well i guess every other kid out there will have to stop listening to skinny puppy/nin, or franz ferdinand/interpol/joy division, or placebo/the smiths/morrissey. what a load of tripe. what if people likes muse because of the similarities they can draw between it and radiohead, who also happen to be one of their favourite bands? another stupid point. so the hell what if they sound like another band? newsflash! nearly every band out there today sounds like another band that has already been. it doesn't change anything.

3) you aren't going to change a fans view on this, so why bother even trying? "one-hit wonders"? doesn't that mean, technically, they are only supposed to have one hit? maybe you meant this in the way that you perceive every song sounds, basically, the same (i'm not going to contest that; i can pick out differences, of course, but there is an obvious formula -- oh goodie, let's rally against them for giving their fans what they know they want) but you cannot possibly listen to "bliss" and then "time is running out" and call them the same.

i haven't even listened to muse in months and this got me a tad pissed off. not so much your views but the fact that it seems you thought you could change other people's by "advising" them, or whatever. it's not going to happen. i like that trio of hacks, as you so affectionally refered to them as, and no one else's subjective OR objective opinion is going to change that.

this seems defensive. but i'm not sorry.

p.s. this isn't to spite anyone or anything, but i always found ours a little bland.

idont know where you got that from. he said that Muse's lead singer sounded like Thom Yorke [and he doesnt hav half the voice of Thom], he didnt say that Muse and Radiohead sound alike and he didnt say that because they do is why they shouldnt be liked. they shouldnt be liked [or at least respected] because their catalogue is so one dimensional its not funny [and that one dimension isnt that great anyway].

and yes, 'Bliss' and 'Time Is Running Out' are fairly distinct [as distinct as any two Muse songs iguess] but 'Time Is Running Out' is simply a terrible song so if yure tring to point out range with this example it would range from mediocre to pure shite- not flattering.

re: "the problem is".

Now if there is one thing you can't deny is that Matt Bellamy's voice is nearly the same as Thom Yorke. I'm not blaming him for that, but Matt uses falsetto on almost every Muse track. When he does that he sounds just like Thom Yorke. I'll stop being so general even. What's usually the most memorable part of a song? It's the chorus. Well, nearly every Muse track has a very similar chorus, highlighted by Matt's voice which he feels the need to stretch to the outer limits as if to impress everyone. Now if the chorus of these songs sounds so similar, and that's the most memorable part, then every track ends up sounding the same. When I say every I don't mean "every every", but thier popular tracks share a lot of similarities. I'm only complaining about thier creativity. Matt has the ability to stand on his own as a very good vocalist without comparison to Thom, but Matt's the one writing the lyrics. They've also come up with some pretty good riffs and had some well produced tracks, but like the vocals the music itself has been following a set structure for years.