Most Over Rated Band of All Time?

[RuntheDamnBall]

over-rated is a difficult gauge to define, given personal tastes and what's considered popular at the time.

i generally follow the rule of what bands are/aren't influential by how their music has stood up over the years, which is why i'd disagree with those who have included The Beatles in this thread -- though i know where they're coming from as i once, too, had the same thought. the trouble with The Beatles and Michael Jackson, for that matter, and to a degree Nirvana, is you had to be there at the time to understand what they actually did to push music forward.

 

-- The Beatles were, in some ways, the "inventors" of popular music in taking the form to its high limits by crafting catchy songs. The Beatles then built on that by showing they were capable of building on their music by exploring numerous other avenues and expanding their reach. with all due respect to Hendrix and Zepplin, i consider "Helter Skelter" a great early grunge/metal/hard-rock song that helped introduce what's possible.

 

-- the same for Michael Jackson. even overlooking his work with the Jackson 5, which was influential in producing smart bubble-gum pop, his dominance in the early 1980s was essential in providing a counter-point to the punk movement coming from across the Atlantic. Jackson, with two albums, made pop relevant again and, furthemore, his popularity forced change by influencing MTV to broadcast black artists in regular rotation during day-time hours. this alone was important, as it's unlikely Prince would've made the impact he did, while also ushering in lesser lights such as UB40.

 

-- and it's tough to judge Nirvana, because Cobain died so early. Nirvana, though, did provide an acceptable platform to an American underground sound that had been burgeoning for quite some time -- the Mats, Husker Du, Minutemen, Camper Van Beethoven -- and even allowed some hangers-on (Soul Asylum, Cracker) to get some respectable airplay. i was in Vancouver at the time Nirvana hit, and as much as their songs and that of the Pearl Jam, were overplayed, they did again push music forward by creating a departure from the 80s, be it the L.A. hair-bands to Cindy Lauper.

 

as such, i don't include Journey on my list because, essentially, they did what they did without pretention or real sense that they were "artistes" in the standard sense.

 

now to artists that make my over-rated list:

-- genesis, pre and post Gabriel.

-- u2 (hung on far too long), and have failed to provide any new ideas.

-- dave matthews, who to me is much the modern-day version of supertramp, another band that built a high reputation for popularity on a modestly amusing array of pithy tunes.

-- chrissy hynde and the pretenders. why is she still attempting to put out music: it's been far too clear for far too long that late guitarist James Honeywell Scott was the the true influence to this band that put out two good albums a very long time ago.

-- ryan adams, who's capable of writing great songs as much as he's capable of writing the same song over and over and over again and putting it on just about every album he puts out. maybe not over-rated, but he's truly failed to come close to reaching his potential.

-- carrie underwood. take away her looks, and any donkey can be famous producing muzak to the masses.

 

jw

 

by the way: one of the most under-rated bands on my list are The Faces.

Nicely done, Mr. Wawrow. I was going to lose it looking at the lists of others. I like Genesis but definitely overrated. Dave Matthews is very up there, but #1 for my money is John Mayer. If I ever see that guy in public I'll coldcock him. You want to talk about a guy who acts like he's some kind of guitar god when you could locate about 100 "John Mayers" in practice rooms at Berklee? He's a MOR safe-haven for women who haven't graduated to Kenny G yet. His music sucks, his shtick sucks, he's not funny or cool, he's not an innovative or interesting guitarist, his crossover moves suck, I don't like him sucking around, bothering our citizens. I don't like his jerk-off name. I don't like his jerk-off face. I don't like his jerk-off behavior, and I don't like him, because he's a jerk-off. Do I make myself clear?

[Bill from NYC]

I saw the humorous posts about Springsteen, but I for one think that he totally sucked. The best songs he ever made were awful imo.

[RuntheDamnBall]

I saw the humorous posts about Springsteen, but I for one think that he totally sucked. The best songs he ever made were awful imo.

I think even if you hate Springsteen, "Nebraska" is a completely honest and great American folk record. It redeems any of his overbearing qualities, at least in my opinion.

[EC-Bills]

1. Rush

2. Boston

[RuntheDamnBall]

1. Rush

2. Boston

1. John Mayer

[LeviF]

I think even if you hate Springsteen, "Nebraska" is a completely honest and great American folk record. It redeems any of his overbearing qualities, at least in my opinion.

I've always thought that "The Wild, The Innocent, and The E-Street Shuffle" was great work as well as "Nebraska." It's Springsteen's pre-overbearing era album.

[RuntheDamnBall]

I've always thought that "The Wild, The Innocent, and The E-Street Shuffle" was great work as well as "Nebraska." It's Springsteen's pre-overbearing era album.

I can deal with the Boss' grandeur, personally, just trying to suggest that he's done some work that's understated and not at all overrated, for those that can't get into him. I agree with you, though, that's a nice record.

 

Now the voice of Long Island, Mr. Billy Joel: there's a guy I find overrated. I can't find a reason at all to like him or his music.

[Rob's House]

Nicely done, Mr. Wawrow. I was going to lose it looking at the lists of others. I like Genesis but definitely overrated. Dave Matthews is very up there, but #1 for my money is John Mayer. If I ever see that guy in public I'll coldcock him. You want to talk about a guy who acts like he's some kind of guitar god when you could locate about 100 "John Mayers" in practice rooms at Berklee? He's a MOR safe-haven for women who haven't graduated to Kenny G yet. His music sucks, his shtick sucks, he's not funny or cool, he's not an innovative or interesting guitarist, his crossover moves suck, I don't like him sucking around, bothering our citizens. I don't like his jerk-off name. I don't like his jerk-off face. I don't like his jerk-off behavior, and I don't like him, because he's a jerk-off. Do I make myself clear?

I'm sorry, I wasn't listening.

[Special_K]

-- and it's tough to judge Nirvana, because Cobain died so early. Nirvana, though, did provide an acceptable platform to an American underground sound that had been burgeoning for quite some time -- the Mats, Husker Du, Minutemen, Camper Van Beethoven -- and even allowed some hangers-on (Soul Asylum, Cracker) to get some respectable airplay. i was in Vancouver at the time Nirvana hit, and as much as their songs and that of the Pearl Jam, were overplayed, they did again push music forward by creating a departure from the 80s, be it the L.A. hair-bands to Cindy Lauper.

I agree re: Nirvana. At the time they completely opened my eyes to a new sound and I loved it. They were the first band that got me really to sit up and pay attention to music when I was a kid. I was 12 at the time and probably right in the wheelhouse of the grunge turn. I was too young to really get glam/hair rock {I still really don't and would absolutely have Van Halen and Motley Crue on any overrated list) alternative was weird and had way too much keyboard and terrible whiney euro-trash. Metal was still scary and I was way too young to have heard early Metallica at that point. Nirvana and Pearl Jam were a revelation that music with guitars didn't have to suck. Now? I'm a bit over it. They still have that place in my personal history but my love for their work had since been supplanted. That being said, I relish that they did not exist long enough to become and old/tired parody of themselves. They will always have that odd benefit that The Doors had in that they didn't have to live up to their early work and suffer through awkward transitional/experimental albums and post 40 tours full of equally aging fans. They will forever be in a time capsule and, as such, when you hear them you can easily transport yourself to the time when you first heard it. You don't have to unremember the reunion tour or feel the twinge of sadness when they couldn't quite hit all the notes anymore. Every time I put in Nevermind I'm 12, Kurt is 24 and the world seems new.

 

I'm not going to pretend that I'm a music snob who knows every esoteric local band who never made it big and sneers at those who got record deals for selling out. I like what I like. Nirvana was good. Early Pearl Jam was good. In retrospect, early Metallica is just as good as post haircut Metallica is bad (honestly is there a less metal thing in the world than fighting something like Napster? F you Lars, the 18 year old you would want to kick your ass.) For me overrated is in the eye of the beholder and ends up being the type of music you don't get or a band who pimps themselves so hard that they become a joke.

[The Dean]

Just thinking how can a thread of overrated bands/artists be complete with the mention of Kid Rock?

 

Sensuously, Kid Rock?

[Jim in Anchorage]

 

 

. In retrospect, early Metallica is just as good as post haircut Metallica is bad .

Post haircut Metallica? I like that phrase

[RuntheDamnBall]

Just thinking how can a thread of overrated bands/artists be complete with the mention of Kid Rock?

 

Sensuously, Kid Rock?

Again, could he be considered "rated" to begin with? I don't think the guy has ever pretended to be an artiste, nor has he been lauded as one. He certainly has one of the highest ratios of luck to talent I've ever seen in the music world, though. That's some awful music, right there.

[JÂy RÛßeÒ]

Considering they're the style of music I like most, I've never liked Guns N Roses.

[The Dean]

Again, could he be considered "rated" to begin with? I don't think the guy has ever pretended to be an artiste, nor has he been lauded as one. He certainly has one of the highest ratios of luck to talent I've ever seen in the music world, though. That's some awful music, right there.

 

 

Perhaps it is simply a by-product of where I live. Before moving to FL, I just assumed he was the luckiest bum in the world who became popular because he was banging Pam Anderson. But not I find out he is held in high regard by many. A "real talent" they say.

 

The pretty good band I saw tonight at a local bar didn't play Sweet Home Alabama, they played KR's tribute to the song. A song that is interesting (if you find it in anyway interesting) because it is a variation of Sweet Home Alabama. Will there be another single in a few years that is a tribute to "All Summer Long"? I doubt it.

 

A local musician I had some respect for at one time, tells me Kid Rock is a great talent and has a terrific voice. Really?

[Simon]

Man, you cats are harsh.

Multiple votes for Steely Dan, U2, Dave Matthews, Rush, Beatles and Pearl Jam? Damn, I like all those bands.

 

I'd second the vote for Aerosmith and throw in Def Leppard, Boston, and most of the rest of those 70s/80s faux rock bands.

I'd also toss in almost anything that's been on a country music radio station for the last 20 years.

[Buftex]

And here we have another subjective music thread but I have to disagree with you on the Beach Boys. They were competing with the Beatles and I think they blew them out of the water. Listen to bet sounds start to finish it may change your mind.

 

Now with regard to U2........spot !@#$ing on.

 

 

I have purchased "Pet Sounds" in about three different formats over the years, because it is one of those albums I have been told I should love...I can't stand it...I will give the Beach Boys their props, they have been very influential...but most of the stuff that is influenced by them, I am not so fond of. I think music history has been far kinder to them than they warrant. The Beatles and Beach Boys "competed" (if you must) for a second, but the Beatles grew beyond them..."Paperback Writer" was the best Beach Boys song ever written...except it was written by Paul McCartney, and performed by the Beatles. If I hear "Good Vibrations" or say, "Help Me Rhonda", I kind of think, "okay..." but if I hear more than a song or two, I want to rip the speakers off the wall...

 

If you want to get really technical, the Beach Boys were ripping their **** off Chuck Berry, almost word for word, note for note

 

I don't think The Doors music has held up very well after all these years, not at all.

 

 

Good call...I will always have a soft spot for "Riders On the Storm" (just a cool sounding song), and I love the song "Moonlight Drive"...but in the end, the lyrics are mostly silly, bordering on bad poetry, and kind of muzak-y.

 

 

BTW- almost every band that I think is overrated, I am willing to concede, has some respectable material...except Rush!

 

Record sales are now a mark of how good a band is? Really? REALLY?

 

Jonas Brothers, back street boys, Madonna, j-lo, etc, etc, etc have sold tons of albums.

 

I think your argument for why the beatles are great is directly contractictory to the thread. A band is over rated when they sell tons of albums, but are nothing but bubble gum pop. Hey Jude, really?

 

I'm over 30, but the beatles are great to most of you because of the memories associated with them and their "legend". They are not a good band.

 

 

The pot. Oh wait...

 

 

You have no context when it comes to music, do you?

[Delete This Account]

i like Kid Rock, to a degree. he's an overblown egotist, of course, but so are a lot of artists. what draws me to Kid Rock is how he's been able to draw in some Bob Seger influences into his earlier sound. and i grew up listening to a lot of seger.

as for Springsteen, i respect the man. sure, everyone points to Nebraska, which is a good album. but Nebraska was not possible without the very under-rated album he and the band put out, The River, which in my mind makes it impossible to put him on an over-rated list. also, for my money, Springsteen put out the best post-9/11 song of them all, "The Rising," which should have won the Grammy.

 

and yes, RTDB, how could i have forgotten billy joel. must have repressed him from memory, i guess. and you're dead on with the precious john mayer, what a tin-eared tart.

 

jw

[Chef Jim]

I knew this thread was going to turn into a music pissing match. I kind of look at music like wine. You drink what you like and if others don't like it, hey all the more for you. Music is typically written to be enjoyed by those who like it and for them it typically makes them feel good, whether it's me sitting, relaxing and listening to Vivaldi or reliving my teenage angst and banging my head to The Who. Both of which by many (and even some here) can be considered overrated. What does that even mean, well I guess that means the person that considered them overrated didn't like them. Ok, fine but don't ever let me catch you drinking white zinfandel.

[Jim in Anchorage]

I knew this thread was going to turn into a music pissing match. I kind of look at music like wine. You drink what you like and if others don't like it, hey all the more for you. Music is typically written to be enjoyed by those who like it and for them it typically makes them feel good, whether it's me sitting, relaxing and listening to Vivaldi or reliving my teenage angst and banging my head to The Who. Both of which by many (and even some here) can be considered overrated. What does that even mean, well I guess that means the person that considered them overrated didn't like them. Ok, fine but don't ever let me catch you drinking white zinfandel.

I truly enjoyed your post while drinking everclear and listening to the Archie's

[Chef Jim]

 

 

by the way: one of the most under-rated bands on my list are The Faces.

 

Small Faces.

 

I truly enjoyed your post while drinking everclear and listening to the Archie's

 

Now that's entertainment.