Overrated bands

Discussion in 'Movies, TV and Music' started by zverskiy yobar, Oct 18, 2004.

  1. brianzappa

    brianzappa Member

    Oct 21, 2003
    In a big country
    Couple of my thoughts and opinions:

    The Moon and Antarctica takes me to a special place when I listen to it. Very good stuff and sounds a lot less like bts than their other stuff.

    I agree with whoever is saying Aerosmith is overrated.

    If you think the White Stripes are overrated, listen closer. If in your opinion you still don't like them, fine, but try to really consider the word overrated.
     
  2. firstshirt

    firstshirt Member+

    Bayern München
    United States
    Mar 1, 2000
    Ellington, CT / NK, RI
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    when you talk of bands that have influenced todays Rock,,,Zepplin is probably right on top....Metallica, megadeath...etc all say Zepplin was the band that got them into music...sabbath is another band that influenced so many bands today. To say either is overrated is incomprehensible
     
  3. royalstilton

    royalstilton Member

    Aug 2, 2004
    SoCal
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Led Zeppelin is one of the seminal hard rock bands of the 70s, and their career spanned 20 years, more or less. To say they were overrated is like saying Bach was overrated.

    What I am seeing here is a bunch of 19 year old guys who have developed strong opinions about their musical tastes but have limited musical education.

    I myself have never been a big Bach fan, but I know how influencial he is and that he was a musical genius.

    Give me Shostakovich any day.
     
  4. Lithium858

    Lithium858 Member

    Aug 11, 2002
    Baton Rouge
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I see that arrogance comes in forms of crap now. I'm sorry but not every single band that happened to come out after the Beatles has been influenced by them.
     
  5. Ted Cikowski

    Ted Cikowski Red Card

    May 31, 2000

    Ok tough guy, you want to match musical pedigrees? By the way, your top ten albums, in my opinion, are crap.
     
  6. royalstilton

    royalstilton Member

    Aug 2, 2004
    SoCal
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    ---
    first of all, did I actually say that? i don't think so.

    i know better.

    what i do know as well is that the Beatles have been massively influential, and their music is beloved by billions of people, certainly over a wider-spread audience than any other 'pop' music group. saying that they are overrated is unadulterated silliness. it's a red light on the loony detection machine.

    so trot out your list, boyo, and we can parse your choices.
     
  7. royalstilton

    royalstilton Member

    Aug 2, 2004
    SoCal
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    ---
    sure, ted. if you want. as i said to Lith, trot out your list. our readers want to know.
     
  8. Footix

    Footix Member

    Dec 11, 1998
    Left Of The Dial
    I know you crazy kids will keep name calling and personal insults out of this battle royale, so I thank you in advance.
     
  9. royalstilton

    royalstilton Member

    Aug 2, 2004
    SoCal
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    ---
    I'm not a crazy kid, and I'm guessing that Ted C is an adult, too. Please address directly the person or persons you believe are offending public decency, and be specific in your complaint. Please do not paint all of us with the same brush.

    I, thank you in advance...
     
  10. yellowbismark

    yellowbismark Member+

    Nov 7, 2000
    San Diego, CA
    Club:
    Club Tijuana
    Nat'l Team:
    United States

    I will reply to this, since I think I was the first to mention Zeppelin on this thread. And I also sort of fit being a young guy, though a bit older than 19.

    I agree, that to many, Led Zeppelin may be a seminal rock band. Not for me though.

    My reasoning for not liking Zeppelin, is that for starters, I think their lyrics suck (and a seminal band should have both good lyrics in addition to a good sound), Robert Plant has crap vocals, their music is boring--I mean come on doesn't Kashmir kind of remind you of rock music's version of the never-ending informercial? You could be flipping channels on the radio for 10 minutes and that song will still be droning away :rolleyes:

    and fourth and most irritatingly (to me) is that many of their ignorant fans (and this is likely no fault of the band itself) often rate Zeppelin as being superior to the Who, when in fact they are not. If we want to talk about context, Zeppelin wouldn't exist without the Who. In fact, Keith Moon dubbed the bands name. I think Zeppelin is a cheap ripoff of the Who, that happened to get more popular. And that's what irks me.

    I think it's fair to say I don't fit into the category of having no musical context, I have quite a bit IMO, not a vast amount, but enough that I consider my overrating Led Zeppelin a sound judgement.


    And Lithium, amigo, sorry I don't agree the Beatles are overrated for many of the reasons stated on this thread, though I understand why some people may find them boring. I mean, it's been a while since I've listened to my Beatles albums too, for me, it's about needing something different. I heard them too many times. Although, I do realize and understand the Beatles have an indisputable influential role in rock music.
     
  11. royalstilton

    royalstilton Member

    Aug 2, 2004
    SoCal
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    ---
    i think something has gone wrong in your sensory perceptions, yb, because the who and led zeppelin are worlds apart in terms of musical styles. first of all, the who wrote pop ditties, like 'My Generation' and Magic Bus while Led Zeppelin played 'Your Time is Gonna Come' and 'Communication Breakdown'.

    Fast forward to 'Baba O Riley' and 'Won't be Fooled Again', both of which fall closer to the "progressive" rock vein than anything Led Zep ever did, unless you want to claim that 'Kashmir' is progressive.

    Who's Next and Led Zeppelin IV came out the same year. IV is a guitar dominated album, with melodic riffs galore. Who's Next is very synth based, comparatively speaking.

    I don't think that Led Zeppelin was trying to write trancendental rock songs with deeply sourced lyrics ( "If there's a bustle in your hedgerow, don't be alarmed, now..." -- i mean, c'mon! ;) ). Zeppelin had no "Behind Blue Eyes" in their repertoire.

    Finally, the Jimmy Page/Peter Townsend question must be posed. Which guitar player has had a greater influence on the guitar as a rock instrument. Given the fact that Page is derivative, himself, you might be able to argue that Townsend has had more "air guitar" influence or somesuch, but the truth is that without Page ( and Clapton and Beck ) there would be fewer Steve Vais, Joe Satrianis and Kirk Hammets ( himself a Satriani student ).
     
  12. 655321

    655321 New Member

    Jul 21, 2002
    The Mission, SF
    Do you really want to go on record with saying that these albums are crap??

    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

    I wouldn't say this is a definitely top ten of all time, but calling them "crap" is a bit over the top, no?
     
  13. tog

    tog Member

    Oct 25, 2000
    Seattle
    Just Achtung, Baby. I'd replace that with Joshua Tree. I hate Achtung, Baby.
     
  14. Unorthodox Yank

    Feb 27, 2001
    Constant Flux
    Club:
    --other--
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Y'know what?

    Let's stop this.

    Let's stop getting into stupid musical arguments over incredibly broad topics that end up being little more than a 23 page dick measuring contest.

    Subjectivity is a beautiful thing. Let's keep it that way.
     
  15. royalstilton

    royalstilton Member

    Aug 2, 2004
    SoCal
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    ---
    i don't have a big complaint with Joshua Tree, but Achtung Baby is a broad departure from Joshua Tree, especially in terms of production values. i have a good deal of experience running a sound board, not on a professional level, so i know something about the process. much of the success of these two albums borrows from Lanois and Eno, who are clearly two of the best producers around.

    hating Achtung Baby is a little severe to me. it's a little like hating Dylan's Highway 61 Revisited because it's such a departure from earlier work.
     
  16. royalstilton

    royalstilton Member

    Aug 2, 2004
    SoCal
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    ---
    That's one idea. Another idea is to suggest that people who don't know squat about aesthetics or musical genres or music production or the history of Western Civilization do their homework and stop spouting off until they school themselves. There is nothing wrong with subjectivity. De gustibus non est disputandum. But taste that is not grounded in a broad range of experience is something that should not be put forth as a common standard.

    It's one thing to say "I don't like U2's music because they rely heavily on studio production to achieve their musical effects. The music is gummy and overly textured." ( If you think that's the case )

    It's quite another thing to say "U2's crap. I hate their music. Theys just a bunch of arrogant Irish wankers, prattling on about their stupid philosophies."

    I agree with about 50% of what's being said here, and the other 50% is stuff that doesn't sound a bit thought out. I think it's fair to take issue with that.
     
  17. Unorthodox Yank

    Feb 27, 2001
    Constant Flux
    Club:
    --other--
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    And so it becomes an argument about who REALLY knows more about music then?

    Fine. At least it's something concrete that can be measured.

    But what, exactly, are you hoping to gain?
     
  18. royalstilton

    royalstilton Member

    Aug 2, 2004
    SoCal
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    ---
    Excellent question, worthy of consideration.

    This started out as a negative thing: the topic of overrated bands is inherently one that invites criticism. Subjectivity must enter in unless some standard can be agreed upon, and even that would be subjective to anyone who didn't endorse the standard.

    I guess I could have avoided this forum, and so could you. When I saw someone call Yo La Tengo overrated, I was frankly more than a little shocked, not just because I like YLT, but more because they are such a small blip on the musical radar screen that paying that much attention to their "rating" seems nearly bizarre. Not quite like saying that my wife is overrated as a cook, when probably only 100 people world wide have eaten her cooking, but you get the idea.

    Anyway, I'm a lot older than most posters, and it strikes me that 19 year old guys could stop with the pontificating about how Aerosmith and Led Zeppelin suck, when clearly those bands are historically popular and maybe even influential.

    Really, I was hoping that people wouldn't just say "Blue Oyster Cult" and leave it at that. How about why you think they are overrated, and what do you think is good, so we can gain a sense of your musical aesthetic.

    BTW, I thought "Lose Yourself" by Eminem was clean, deserved the Grammy. I'm too old to hold such a view. Go figure.
     
  19. brianzappa

    brianzappa Member

    Oct 21, 2003
    In a big country
    Typically I enjoy music threads here because people around here are into good music and enjoy discussing it. What the hell happened here?
     
  20. Unorthodox Yank

    Feb 27, 2001
    Constant Flux
    Club:
    --other--
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I killed it with my rotten mood.

    Sorry.
     
  21. nancyb

    nancyb Member

    Jun 30, 2000
    Falls Church, VA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I think you helped me with a decision right there.
     
  22. nancyb

    nancyb Member

    Jun 30, 2000
    Falls Church, VA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Don't you know better than to avoid these threads? I managed to stay away quite awhile, but curiosity got the better of me. I just wanted to see how many times the Beatles got a mention, or the Stones or Pearl Jam or Nirvana or Bob Dylan....
     
  23. Crewbasher

    Crewbasher Member

    Jul 7, 1999
    The Enemy Base
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    It's a very fine line between being a relative unknown entity and being overrated. Some people have mentioned Nirvana, who only got really big once Nevermind came out. Same story goes for REM and several other bands. I agree that in several cases, some bands tend to go into a downward spiral after some initial greatness (Aerosmith, for example - "Sweet Emotion" and "Dream On" are two of my all-time favorite songs, but after the Run-DMC song, they have put out nothing but power ballad MTV saccharine garbage) or some bands have one great album define their work and find it hard to come back afterwards (Boston, anybody?)

    I agree with BrianZappa about the Stripes though. I own their previous efforts. Their self-titled debut is a bit too raw for my tastes, but De Stijl and White Blood Cells are excellent rock albums (especially the former). Very minimalist style, simple beats, but Jack's guitar playing is pretty damn good. You can still hear it on Elephant (which, I admit, is largely disappointing compared to their previous efforts, but I chalk it up mostly to the industry trying to produce their sound and screwing up - can't explain "It's True that We Love one Another", though :( ) in song like "Ball and Biscuit" and "There's No Home for You Here" -- long titles piss me off, though. Anyway, I think that the Stripes are perhaps overhyped, but they're not some god-awful garage band as some of you may make them out to be. They can play pretty well as long as they try not to become too produced in their sound.

    Personally, I'm not too big a fan of the Hives (somehow, I sense people readying their flame-throwers....). I can't explain why - I loved "Hate to say I told you so", but most of their other tracks just don't sit well with me. I don't necessarily think they're overrated, but I don't think they're so spectacular either. Just my opinion.
     
  24. Lithium858

    Lithium858 Member

    Aug 11, 2002
    Baton Rouge
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    You suggested it by saying "Name a group that wasn't influenced by the Beatles."

    Why should I name the bands that I like? All of this is subjective and obviously since you are out to prove a point, my choices will all be "bad" taste. Then everyone will criticize me and my list of bands. Sorry but I think I'll pass.
     
  25. jec1

    jec1 Member

    Sporting Clube de Portugal
    Portugal
    Aug 27, 2004
    Los Angeles ATM
    Club:
    Sporting CP Lisbon
    Nat'l Team:
    Portugal
    u2 is so overrated. everytime they come out with a cd the critics always rave. simply they use to rock now they suck. what happened to hits like with or without you, where the streets have no name, and one. please they starting to be like the rhcp over and done with. the standards have been met bono needs to focus alittle more on music then politics cause u2 is all bout the music. hope one day they can return to form. peace!
     

Share This Page