...
Is there a band with a worse fanbase?
Radiohead
Tool
Maybe.
Animal Collective
Death Grips
Grimes
Kendrick Lamar
The Beach Boys. Brian Wilson fanboys in particular are insufferable milk-and-cookie boys
>most popular band in existence
>has shit fans
Wow, it turns out that people in general are shit!
This, but actually unironically
My Chemical Romance, love their old stuff, but their fan base is cancer.
shut up, mike
Rick and Morty
ghost
if you tell me my terrible pop music circus act abomination isn't metal i'll take is personally and freak out on you for being an elitist meanie
But user, that's not a band
>animal collective
what. i've yet to meet anyone irl who's heard of anco. and even on the internet, anco fans seem to be pretty benign my dude. it doesn't seem like the kind of band that'd draw a toxic fanbase.
>because they're the most popular it means that everyone is a fan
found the beatles fan
I dont know, I just care about the music. What are beatles fans like?
The Beatles were not a terribly interesting band, but their fans were and still are an interesting phenomenon. I can only name religious fundamentalists as annoying (and as threatening) as Beatles fans, and as persevering in sabotaging anyone who dares express an alternate opinion of their faith. They have turned me into some kind of Internet celebrity not because of the 6,000 bios that i have written, not because of the 800-page book that i published, not because of the 30 years of cultural events that i organized, but simply because i downplayed the artistic merits of the Beatles, an action that they consider as disgraceful as the 2001 terrorist attacks.
Jakub Krawczynski sent me this supportive comment in 2010:
I find it quite amusing that almost all of the Beatles songs have their own entries on Wikipedia (nothing wrong with that in itself, actually), even if they are not singles, and each of them is meticulously dissected as if there were transcendental suites exceeding human comprehension, yet bands like Faust or Red Krayola, etc. have biographies even shorter than just one article about any random Beatles song. Needless to say, none of their songs have any articles on them, yet I'm sure there would be a lot more to talk about. Moreover, if you had put any bad review of their album on the site with the intention to show the broader scope of opinions, you'd risk your "life" there, since such fanatics don't accept any single sign of trying to be objective. You are seen as public enemy number 1 to them. It is like your article is one giant cognitive dissonance to them and vandalizing your bio was the only way to reduce this dissonance.
No, but it means they have the largest fanbase. Literally, by definition.
It means it's the band with the largest and most diverse fanbase, so it's retarded to say it's the most annoying fanbase.
Maybe you mean the most annoying fanbase on Sup Forums specifically?
You're trying to argue that because they have the largest fanbase, they cant have the most annoying fanbase because if their size (irrelevant) or their diversity (possible, but not necessarily true. You can also apply this to literally any other fanbase, and you'll find that most of it's fans (like The Beatles) aren't obnoxious and annoying, however The Beatles differ in how their (very) vocal minority is actually some of the most obnoxious people I've ever seen.
>Maybe you mean the most annoying fanbase on Sup Forums specifically?
Not necessarily, but I feel like I accidentally walked into reddit whenever I open up a Beatles thread
Death grips or Kendrick Lamar.
I was just trying to say since The Beatles fanbase is so incredibly huge, diverse (inb4 only white men listen to the beatles), and global it's silly to generalise about it. Generalising about a fanbase works when said fanbase is mostly similar in demographic (e.g: Death Grips, My Bloody Valentine, AnCo). I'd wager that The Beatles is the band with the MOST diverse fanbase, therefore the one that's toughest to generalise about. Unless you're talking about a specific subset of Beatles fans (Beatles fans on Sup Forums, for example)
>it doesn't seem like the kind of band that'd draw a toxic fanbase.
They're pop music with a "weird" twist. That's at most one degree of seperation from Radiohead, yet Radiohead's fanbase is 10x more cancerous for some reason.
XXXTentacion?
>blocks your path
The weeknd
Queen. OMG! Bohemian Rhapsody is a masterpiece!!! Freddy is the best vocalist EVER!!!
MCR
Mac Demarco. Not a band, but still.
You’re clearly only thinking of newer AnCo. Fans appreciate the older stuff which has nothing poppy about it (e.g. STGSTV thru HCTI). Anyone who defends newer AnCo is insufferable.
Bohemian Rapsody is overrated shit.But Queen is still God-Tier
Queen is 9gag: the band
Step aside, you well-mannered open minded people.
REAL IGNORANT HOUR WHO UP
They all and you probably too just now their meme songs like dont stop me now or we will rock you.
Queen has very nice albums especially the early ones.
Grimes, by far
If i recall, they once self described themselves as black metal.
Beyonce
Black females and queers
the two worst demographics
Kendrick Lamar, he's just decent, fans misconcept him
...
discussing fanbases is for brainlets
led zeppelin
people only know one song of theirs but they are called legends
Rush and meme theater
They all have Wikipedia pages because like it or not, The Beatles were the most significant cultural phenomenon of the 20th century across any medium. It's simply of huge historical significance to study each and every moment of the band's history.
Also, most of the songs are pretty damn great.
Also as a disclaimer I know I replied to pasta
And for retards
This is true. I have discussed The Beatles with someone of every age group at some point in my life.
mom jeans
/thread
frank ocean
...
nirvana unfortunately
dang thats uh
Get schwiftyyyyyyyyyyyy
My inner emo called xD Who else is ready to get freaky with the eyeliner :D
Mikey *-*
any prog metal
Death Grips
but did you not even notice them deconstructing rap
You've also apparently never heard of Chuck Berry or Bob Dylan, both of whom were far more important culturally than the Beatles. Chuck Berry's music was part of the reason the color barrier in the United States was broken to the degree that it was
online
irl
yeah i hate all humans too
yes
Nirvana and Queen
>a fan of one of the most popular and accessible artists of all time has probably never heard of two other most popular and accessible artists of all time
what
>fanbase
you mean the entire world?
>Is there a band with a worse fanbase?
Not a band, and I love his music, but it must be admitted. Also, this .
rap in general has the worst fanbase for suretainly
this
If you don't like this album ur altrite
Depends on the sub-genre. Gangsta is worse by far.
its not a very enjoyable album desu. i respect it, but dont listen to it nearly as much as his other albums
this is very true. I recommend sheer heart attack
Sup Forums is the only place with really annoying Beach Boys fans. In every Beatles thread they feel the need to state that they are better than them. They're so insecure and I don't even know why.
Radiohead for sure
You forgot NMH.
/thread
its hard not feeling concerned when a legion of 14 year olds wearing ratty overalls and chain smoking are surrounding you
>Radiohead
>Led Zeppelin
>Rush
>King Crimson
>Frank Zappa
What's with all the pretending MCR was ever good meme
They were a shitty band for edgy 12 year olds, that hasn't changed
Oasis better
I hate everything after their second album, anything after that was shitty pop rock. Their first two albums were really good, especially their first. Their first album was post hardcore, while their second was emo/poppunk (with some post hardcore elements). The Black Parade was bad expect for a couple songs, and their last album was complete dogshit.