Overrated Bands and Artists

A lot of people say that about Geddy, but he really hasn't sung like that in a long time. Like the last 30 years. It's just that when most people think of Rush, they typically think of the early stuff.

This is now.

[video=youtube;rYkUre8FWIQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYkUre8FWIQ[/video]

 

Pink Floyd.

 

^overrated? I think they deserve all the credit they get, myself...

 

Anything from the 60s/70s/80s, especially rock. I love my rock, but when people make it out like it's the only genre worth anything I get annoyed.

Jazz is pretty much the greatest single thing the Yanks have ever come up with, but you won't find it on any mainstream stations. Jazz deserves the reputation classic rock has.

 

Fair enough. When they were making big waves I was working up in the outback of South Australia for a few years and we didn't get very good radio reception back then (not even the ABC and particularly at night) so I was right out of it when it came to popular music. When I got back into music civilisation I'd sort of missed out on their introduction and frankly just didn't "get" them when I started to hear them a few years later. Maybe I had bulldust on the brain

 

Then you haven't learned much about it if you think the Beatles guitar playing is bland and boring. Maybe it has to do with what is your definition of exciting and good musical quality. Blackbird is boring/bland ? Dear Prudence ? Julia ? Michelle ? And I Love Her ? Mother Nature's Son ? Norwegien Wood ? Boring ? Bland ? HA HA HA.. Sorry, I just have to laugh at how ludicrous that is. These are clearly some of the best songs ever composed, and that's just scratching the surface.
Rolling Stones overrated ? Pheeeeeww! (high pitched-whistle). You might want to take a break from writing OPs for a while. Only thing you've done here is make yourself look foolish. Seriously.

 

Jimi Hendrix was no big deal ?? Whaaat ? Dude! YOU are no big deal.

 

Jazz is (and always has been) overrated. Bluegrass is perhaps the most underrated high quality genre of music that's ever existed in America. For instance, there's lot's of things you can say about Bluegrass that you can't say about Rock. Like the much better harmony singing in Bluegrass, and the 4 or 5 different instruments for melody, while Rock typically has 1 or 2.
PS - I've played both Rock and Bluegrass professionally for over 40 years.

 

Haha, music is all subjective. Others would tell us that the top 100 charts are filled with masterpieces - we're all right, because there is no objective standard.

Personally I really dig jazz. Bluegrass is awesome too. While I love rock, I think it's a bit overrated.

 

1 is a compilation album by the Beatles, released on 13 November 2000. The album features virtually every number-one single released in the UK and USA from 1962 to 1970, by the Beatles. Issued on the 30th anniversary of the band's break-up, it was their first compilation available on one compact disc. 1 was a commercial success, and topped the charts worldwide. 1 has sold over 31 million copies.

In addition, 1 is the seventh best-selling album since early 1991, the best-selling album in the US from 2000 to 2009, and the best selling album of the decade worldwide. It is also the fastest selling album in history. 1 was re-released in digitally remastered format in September 2011.

 

It may be subjective, but there is nothing subjective about the fact that the standard Beatles band (Rhythm guitar, bass guitar, lead guitar, drums) that we used to get paid on the basis of, had ONE melody instrument in it. Some of the Bluegrass bands I played in had >> Lead guitar, mandolin, banjo, fiddle, dobro guitar, and bass guitar doing solos as well. Count'm. 6 melody instruments in one band. It is typical to see Bluegrass bands with 4 or 5 melody instruments.

 

Context is always the key to understanding.

Trying to take an artist or group from the 50's or 60's and comparing them to sounds 50 years later is nonsensical at best.

Seriously, most of Elvis' best work happened long before 1964. To compare his work before to that after and to those after to make a claim about Elvis being "overrated" really is nonsensical. Post 1964 Elvis was overrated. Pre 1964? not so much.

Overrated?

ABBA
Fleetwod Mac
Jan & Dean
Everly Brothers
The "Disco" Bee Gees
Any disco singer or group
Michael Jackson except for Thriller
any female country singer not named Reba

And for those who think the Beatles were overrated.....

any discussion of the members after the breakup of the band is irrelevant to the period 1963 to 1969 and anyone claiming the Beatles are/were overrated just wasn't listening.

You cannot listen to Starr's work in "A day in the Life" or Harrison in "While my Guitar Gently Weeps" and not appreciate the technical capability of the artists. If you're disappointed because there were no "In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida" type drum sessions or Clapton/Hendrix style guitar solos on their albums then you simply do not understand what the Beatles were about.

But, take note, 50 years after the release of their first album artists today are still covering their work and borrowing from their sounds. 300 years from now they will be recognized with Bach, Mozart and others for the greatness of their work.

 

Your mother!

I never thought he was all that great. I still listen to him now and then but most of his music grates on me. And his little Jimi clone Robin Trower is beyond annoying. I bet I don't have more than 1 or 2 (max) of Jimi's LP's; and I never bothered getting a CD version of any of his albums for my car.

 

I don't agree with that at all. Chick Corea, Al DiMeola, and Carlos Santana are epic. I saw Chick and Al playing with Jean Luc Ponty (from Zappa / Mothers of Invention) and Stanley Clarke when they were called Return to Forever; and they warmed up Carlos Santana. One of my favorite concert memories. And dude - who didn't drop acid and smoke weed and spend the weekend at the Newport Jazz Festival in the early and mid 70's?

 

Early Floyd was amazing. They got way too commercial at the end; but early albums were the stuff of legends. Ummaguma, Meddle, Dark Side, Animals, Atom Heart Mother. I loved all those albums. The Wall and Final Cut were totally commercial crap and even the album tour was lame. Division Bell was beyond lame too. But the early stuff - legendary! Now I want to listen to Echos or Pigs on the Wing.... LOL

 

Who didn't drop acid and smoke weed and spend the weekend at the Newport Folk Festival in the early and mid 60's? I know I was there.

 

In my old band we played Purple Haze, Hey Joe, and Foxy Lady. We couldn't get through a set without the crowd asking (or demanding them). I still play them even now just fooling around. There's something addicting about that "Jimi Hendrix chord" (E7#9), and it's special unique sound, as well as those so cool first 10 bars of Purple Haze, that come right before it.

 

Now I only played violin and viola growing up (while he was alive and touring, I might add) and never played a guitar to any level of competence; so I cannot tell you if his chord decisions were visionary or set the stage for a future generation of musicians. I suspect they probably were and probably did. But I found his music to be way too distorted and his lyrics far from inspiring; and thought he was just relying on "loud and distorted" with all of his creations. When I think of Jimi I think of his star spangled banner at Woodstock. To me that was a prime example of how he themed his music.

 

I didn't start personally going to concerts until about 1970; but I grew up listening to Grateful Dead and remember like it was yesterday when my mom and Uncle went to Woodstock in his VW bus. To this day I love, love, love folk music. Not just Jerry and the boys; but Jim Croce, Joni, Linda Ronstadt, CSNY, Mulduar, Muddy Waters, McKendrie Spring, James Taylor, Bob Dylan, etc.

 

And this is a great example of why I posted this thread in the first place. To challenge conventional wisdom and slay sacred cows. To open an honest discussion about bands and artists that everyone's "supposed to like" without question. And to poke a hole in the pretentious attitude that if someone finds fault with one, then clearly they "must not appreciate the classics." I go on a case by case basis. I don't put things up on a pedestal because society tells me to. I assess it for myself. If I like it, I like it. If I don't, I don't. And truthfully, I think those bands suck.

There was much more interesting music coming out of those eras. The 60s in general were kind of a dull period for music, but they did produce the Doors and Hendrix which I find to be every bit as brilliant as they are culturally considered to be. Hendrix in particular. He had to be mind-blowing for his time. Because his stuff's still good today. I can only imagine the impact it must have had at a time when nobody had heard anything like that.

Things got a lot better in the '70s. Seemingly almost overnight. In fact, I would say that's when real rock and roll actually began. Because there was just an explosion of great music that was absent before that. Music of all genres. Progressive rock, metal, goth, punk, southern rock. You name it. Even though technically Pink Floyd had been around since the 60s, they didn't really get good until the 70s. I don't think much of their stuff is very listenable before Meddle. Then you had bands like Black Sabbath and Aerosmith and Rush and AC/DC and Lynyrd Skynyrd and Van Halen and the Clash and the Damned and Joy Division and the Misfits and the Ramones and the Sex Pistols and Queen and the Police and Judas Priest and the list just goes on and on.

 

See, I'd be a hypocrite if I gave you a hard time for your opinion here. So I do respect it. But personally I have a hard time understanding how anybody could call John Coltrane or Miles Davis overrated. Then again, I used to hate jazz too when I was younger. So I suppose I understand.

I respect bluegrass as a technical art form, but it's too twangy for me to enjoy. And I'm a southern boy.

 

That's one of the things I can't stand about country music. The modern stuff isn't as twangy as the older stuff, but it's still extremely annoying. Just insert a line about trucks, Jesus, fishing with your girlfriend, dirt roads, etc. Those things aren't inherently bad song themes, but almost every single country song on the radio these days seems to have it.

 

I didn't know you listened to Madonna. She's my favorite pop star.

 

The point protectionist was making, was that if you play an instrument, it is difficult not to appreciate the brilliance of the Beatles. They were innovators, their chord progressions were often extremely complex. Same thing for many of their harmonies. They pushed boundaries experimenting. Many of their songs which seem simple to be simple pop songs, are actually incredibly complex musically. You must appreciate them for this fact alone, even if their music is not your cup of tea.

PS. I think the Doors are truly awful. So to each their own, but the doors were no where near as talented musicians or song writers as the Beatles.

PPS. You may not like Imagine, but I think you should go listen to more of the Beatles. Go listen to Revolver or the White Album. It is brilliant and innovative.

 

Yeah, her old stuff's great. Really, everything up through about Ray of Light. I like a lot of pop music actually. I'm all over the board, man. I've got a pretty broad palette.

I think this is true if you buy into group think. But if you judge things on your own standards, you're a lot more likely to come to different conclusions. I appreciate the Beatles for their influence. If I didn't mention that before, then I'm mentioning it now. Ozzy Osbourne has repeatedly stated that they have always been his favorite band. And Black Sabbath influenced pretty much every band I listen to. So the Beatles indirectly influenced everything I like. And I give them their dues on that. But it doesn't mean that I hear any brilliance in it, myself.

Meh, their early stuff was bubble gum pop, and their later stuff was drug addled noise. Okay, that's an exaggeration. Every song obviously wasn't "Revolution 9." But I do find stuff like "I am the Walrus" to be ridiculous.

See, I thought the Beach Boys had a better grasp on this than the Beatles. They wrote bubble gum pop songs too, but their harmonies were incredible.

I listen to Liquid Tension Experiment and Dillinger Escape Plan. Perhaps my threshold for complexity is higher than yours.

I didn't always like them either. I used to think they were overrated as well. Then it kind of occurred to me that they really laid the ground work for the entire goth scene. Their sound was kind of the precursor to Joy Division. And I began to appreciate them more.

Either way, Jim Morrison was a much better front man than John Lennon. He was a better entertainer. He really raised the bar. Sticking needles in his eyes on stage and such. Then along came Iggy Pop and made Jim Morrison look like an amateur.

I have access to all that stuff. I've heard it a thousand times. It puts me to sleep. There are maybe three to five songs in the entire Beatles catalog that I can enjoy. But even then, they're not spectacular. Most of their lyrics are terrible.