I used to feel that way too but I think I underrated his influence. See, he made black music acceptable to white people without removing the essence, yet adding his unique touch. I'm not sure if any other artist could have done that, except you know, 3rd Bass or Justin Timberlake. And ditto on the Beatles not being overrated. It's like saying Gutenburg's printing press sucks ass because it doesn't do automatic superscript th.
I guess living here in the NW, I remember all of these bands when they were underrated. And this isn't an "I'm cooler because I knew them when" statement (because there are lots of bands I know nothing about until much later in the cycle). It's just that I've been fortunate to follow all three bands from when they were very raw and underappreciated to when they gained wider appreciation to when they gained enough attention that there was the inevitable (and infinitely annoying) backlash. It's as regular and predictable as the moon cycles.
I don't actually think Elvis was overrated. I just felt a Public Enemy quote needed to happen there - I'm all about fighting the power today.
I wasn't aware people actually rate APB. I like them, but I almost consider them a guilty pleasure due to the fact that the lyrics are simply awful.
the lyrics and singing are terrible but on occasion APB has some magical moments like 'rollergirl' and 'kathy's song'. Not sure how APB is overrated since I'm sure they/he only sold about 20,000 albums in the U.S. and plays to small clubs on tour and gets virtually no press from the 'hipster' mags. However I will say that industrial fans proably rate APB's early stuff too highly and underrate his newer non industrial stuff. Other than 'non stop violence' the early stuff is pretty bad.
U2, REM and PHISH,,,I totally agree,,,,I think Nirvana and Curt Cobaine are overrated. I disagree with the statement "That's because nearly everything you've heard your whole life was utterly dependent on the Beatles influence." if this were true the same could be said about Elvis, jerry lee lewis and the like on the beatles. then elvis and the sun record boys by the blues men of the 30's and 40's
ehhh...maybe. But the Beatles expanded on those influences to create a completely different sound. Waaaay more than Elvis expanded on old blues records.
maybe. But I hate when people say that everything came from the Beatles, I happen to know some of my favorite bands are indifferent to the Beatles. I myself am pretty indifferent to their music. I respect them but they don't move me. The Beatles, in my opinion, are no more a part of pop music evolution than Robert Johnson or Kraftwerk or the Velvet Underground. And yes I though Nirvana was way overrated too.
beat me to it.. Yes, a few good songs, but ALOT of garbage and noise in between. I'd also put in Pearl Jam. the majority of their stuff after TEN (great album) was garbage, and it got progressively worse as time went on...
It's strange to see the Beatles pop up here a lot. If nothing else they had one of the best songwriting pairs in music history. Care to compare Lennon & McCartney to say........Puff Daddy or whoever writes that horrid horsesh!t for Britney Spears? Sgt. Pepper's, Beatlemania, known throughout every corner of the globe, constantly innovating and updating their sound, calling it quits when they were still the biggest thing since Jesus. There will never be anything like them again. Just like Muhammad Ali in the public consciousness of the time. Was he overrated too? Kraftwerk is known mostly by music geeks. I'm surprised that there's not a lot of votes for the Stones. They had a real good first 10 yrs. and basically coasted on their name from there out. And no overrated list would be complete without the Grateful Dead.
I forgot Aerosmith. My God do i detest those humps. A band that people who should know better say "yeah, they're pretty good." STFU and stop being so charitable. They had a few decent tunes in the 70s (and were called a Stones rip-off band IIRC), disappeared (thankfully) for a number of yrs. and then made some sort of comeback with Run DMC and now they're instantly likeable. Don't be fooled - they still svck.
Agreed. They should have been shot a long time ago. What is the price on their head?....i think I heard a shot
i will agree with led zeppelin - i never understood what made them so great. my choices are : blink 182 simpleplan - grr i hate them with a passion!!!!!! almost any rapper i would think.
--- please tell me you are kidding. Yo la Tengo isn't even rated, let alone overrated. it's basically a niche group, like Belle and Sebastian or Prefab Sprout. in the USA, they don't get any airplay to speak of, and they are on an "indie" label, Matador.
--- Step back for a minute and realize that you are 19 years old, and you know almost nothing about the musical culture of the 60s. You may have heard the records/discs, but you didn't hear them in context. Your perspective is too narrow. Very few people, relatively, saw the Beatles perform, but they were much more a studio band from about '66 on, with the event of Rubber Soul and later work. What they did in the studio revolutionized popular music. Name a group that wasn't influenced by the Beatles. OK. I would say Slipknot, but I'm not certain.
Since when does age and opinions go hand-in-hand? You're right though, I didn't see them perform live and wasn't alive when they were around. That has nothing to do with me not liking their music.
The Aerosmith of the early days totally rocked. Seeing them live in small venues in the mid 70's was something. Just a hard edged grittty rock and roll band. But much like Rod Stewart (when he was with The Faces) they lost their musical integrity and sold out.
Well, at least we can agree on something--The Fall rule! I have to admit, I've only heard bits of their newer stuff, but back in the day, they were very much in the vein of Built to Spill. Hell, I even saw them open for B2S. They may have moved away from that, but when they were young (and I was exposed to them plenty--I grew up in Seattle), the B2S comparison wasn't controversial at all. But I'll concede that they've probably developed in such a way that the comparison no longer holds true. I still can't stand the vocals, though. As I mentioned above, yep, I have heard the early stuff--I've heard more of it than the recent stuff.
--- http://www2.wmin.ac.uk/clemenr/covers/coversfull.html age and opinions are linked because you are bound to have a perspective based on what surrounds you. i have not been following your musical education. you were eight years old when "Doggystyle" was released...six when Pearl Jam released "10". you hadn't been born when "Thriller" hit the streets. i'm not telling you you should like the Beatles. i'm saying that taking the position that they are overrated makes you look like you have no musical perspective at all. another poster mentioned Lennon/McCartney as one of the top song-writing duos of all time. the fact that their songs have been covered by artists from Julio Eglesias to The Chieftains, Whitesnake to Siousie and the Banshees tells you that the music has virtually universal appeal. check out the link above which is a beatles covers website. it's truly staggering how long the list is. now comes the question: what kind of music do you like? and does your musical education tell you what influenced those artists? Here are my top 10 albums of all time, in no particular order: Hendrix -- Electric Ladyland Rolling Stones -- Exile on Mainstreet Dylan -- Blonde on Blonde Beatles -- White Album Bowie -- Ziggy Stardust Springsteen -- Born to Run Clash -- London Calling REM -- Murmur U2 -- Achtung Baby Robert Johnson -- King of the Delta Blues ( on the list because he slays ) Let the world know where you come from. BTW, I like 'Bleach' better than 'Nevermind'