i found those the most hilarious.

That's probably why, I wasn't looking at it in a humoristic light.

The first single of Paris Hiltons album was the jam but wasn't too big on the second one.

Any fans of pop music trying to have attitude check out the Veronics. Twins from Brisbane, Australia making sassy pop, full of power-chords. They write at least some of their songs. In one video they spray paint a ex-lovers car and their latest song is called "I'm a revolution".

the secret life of the veronicas = pop album of the year contender (along with lilly allen's alright still)

But nobody did. And nobody has. The point is, Paris Hilton is a disgusting fucking whore who did not write the music, lyrics, or anything, and who's voice has been alterned by mechanical means, and it saddens and sickens me that people here would rather listen to this utter filth than, oh, say... Rather Ripped.

Trendy Hip-Hop Minimalist Bass-Heavy Beat Production meets Geeky, Skateboarder Vans-Worship

Here's a link the video for The Pack's simple and simply hypnotic debut single "Vans"

they are uncomparable, you can't really judge the paris hilton album against a sonic youth album, that's like comparing a pacemaker with cotton candy. in it's league, the paris album is something good and hilarious at the same time, and the thing is that it's not supposed to be that, it should sound like a lindsay lohan or an ashley simpson album but it doesn't, it's actually far better in at least two different levels.

and i don't like paris hilton as a public person, i don't buy into her and her celebrity being, that's why i was mopre surprised about it.

rather ripped on the other hand, can be and almost will be judged against a creteria of 20-plus (major and otherwise) releases by the same band, as well as albums that have come out ever since the release of sonic nurse, and with that criteria, i think that album is mediocre, half-assed, like if they rushed the whole thing to get it out on time and go on tour without a care for the songwriting process.

paris hilton knows it would be a waste of time if she were to write songs because she doesn't know, furthermore, it's the standard m.o. of major labels dealing with pop singer to pursue outside songwriters. when noisemachine or someone else said that that album could be anyone's, he is right, her a&r and managers and perhaps herself selected these songs, but they ended up in her album, and that's what makes it good, there's a craft to doing a pop song and these songs are very well done, unlike much of pop which tries to pass up on half assed songs "sung" by singers with just attitude and celebrity scandals, which paris might have resorted to, but she didn't; that's what's surprising.

whatever the case, the album could be a stinking bowl of self-obsessed ditties with unfinished hooks and little to no arrangements, but the powers that be aimed for something else with a little quality and they succeeded in delivering an album with enough good songs to top the charts (which is unlikely that will happen), unlike a certain new york band who strived to put together a bunch of songs and did photoshopped red and black cover to pass off as a contract obligation. if you can compare rather ripped with paris' album is with the songs and, whithin their own styles and history, paris' album has better songs than sy's latest.

rolling stone gave it three stars. i don't know what the fuck that means; i'm assuming it means you'll immediately experience seizures upon listening.

you read rolling stone?

ewwww!

EEEWWWWW, ROLLING THONE!!! thaths groth liwwy!

I went back and listened to that single you guys are all raving about..."Stars are Stupid Whores" or whatever its called...and I have to say Im not impressed...at all. The music is mediocre at best, the lyrics are laughable. How is this any different than Jessica Simpson, Mariah Carey, or whatever other female pop singers are out there? Why are you people so impressed by it?

Worse was the fact that I had to explain to my roommate why I was listening to Paris Hilton by telling him that I belong to a board with a bunch of members who obviously have shit taste in music.

And now I'll get a bunch of responses about how Im too closed minded and Im being an "indie music snob" just because I dont like listening to shit. Oh well.

i could give a dick who wrote it, so long as it sounds good.

your stupidity amazes me.

You know nothing about being an "indie music snob" it's totally cool and indie to listen to pop music as it's ironic and irony is soooooo indie. Pitchfork even said so.

Next you're going to say you don't even dig Amerie's "one thing"......

What amazes you more: my stupidity, or the new Paris Hilton album?

...and I'm not talking about Paris Hiltons new record specifically, I'm just saying that in general I don't give a dick if some whacko wrote it but isnt hot enough to sing it.

This thread is a fucking joke, surely.

You obviously still haven't noticed that post-irony started in 1997.That was the year when britpop went sour.These days that is such a thing of the past and i live in post-'who gives a toss what indie or not indie people think or have to say'.The term indie,in fact,is so last century.

Everyneurotic has said it all, I would shake his hand were he in front of me. Also, he is still writing better than people for whom English is their first language.

I don't care to compare RR to Paris. It's just not important.

I was going to write some things, but have elected to baulk.

Why someone who writes their own song has to be necessarily more credible than someone who doesn't?Where's that rule written and who has written it?