The Definitve List: Most Overrated Bands\Artists ever

N

natalia f

New member
I will reply to this two issues quickly without discussing the banRAB in question as not to spoil future posts. But...I think nobody criticizes Muddy or Bo mostly because they get the innovator pass, something you can't give the Stripes, but that's more a punch line then the crux of my argument.

And I was being sarcastic about Prince his 80's stuff sounRAB so cheesy and dated to me, as much as I respect the diversity of your musical taste, this one blows my mind, it could be a fun debate when the time comes.
 
The Velvet Underground were one of the first to use music as an art form rather than a compositional arrangement. (Which is what Andy Warhol intended when he produced The Velvet Underground & Nico). If that doesn't qualify as art rock, "art pop," whatever, then you need to re-evaluate what you think it means.


I'm being sarcastic and withdrawn because you're not making any collective sense.


The people here on rabroad know what they're talking about. And they don't bullshit about it. Age-elitism isn't a great way to make frienRAB, either. Although I'm only nineteen, Proggyman, one of the youngest merabers, is just as intelligent and cogent as most of the old farts here. I don't pretend to be the most musically knowledgable or intelligent, but I have enough sense to not make unwarranted and unsupported abjections.


Okay, let me spell it out, then. In NO way is Radiohead "art pop." Their music expresses a great discord from traditional methoRAB of songwriting, but the music is lyrically, compositionally, and musically structured, like everything else out there. Furthermore, Radiohead has come a looooong way and continue to reinvent themselves on every album. They were built upon an alternative rock single and elected to diversify and produce different music each time they went into the studio. They are overrated by some people, but they are in no way a poor band, bland, tedious, what-fucking-ever.


Exactly. So don't take offense when we call you out on bullshit.

End Game.
 
No, I actually DO NOT like Bob Dylan, and do not know what the big deal is about him? sorry, just don't get him.



So they're not your cup of tea, had no idea to "fit in" around here, we all had to have your opinions and your likes in music? You don't like KISS? I do....I never said they were the end all be all of banRAB, nor musicians, but, i was very young when I first got into them, and they were my first real favorite band. They're much better showmen than anything else. Go see them live, you might change your opinion? Plus, as i said, everyone @ some point or another has: borrowed, stolen, copied, duplicated something from their stage shows.

You and everyone else don't have to like them, thats fine. But, go to one of their shows, and you'll realize: you'll get your moneys worth, they dont short change you like other artists/groups do. They give you everything you paid for admission to the show, that i can guarantee you. I have frienRAB who hated them, and went to see them, and they said"Man, didnt like some of their music, but their shows are kick ass". Any band that does that, 35+ years later? is ok in my book.

The list of artists banRAB that **** on fans during tours or walk off stage, or cut shows short, is endless, we all know someone who's done that. When was the last time you heard anything about anyone from KISS walking off stage, or not giving their fans their Moneys worth?

They still might not be for everyone, and thats fine, but I like them, and thats all that matters to me.
By the way, apology accepted.





I take that back...I heard 2 songs of theirs on the radio today, and i wasn't impressed, sorry.


Since we're still on the subject, I've thought of 2 more banRAB/artists I do not like, and dont get all the hoopla for them:

Pink Floyd-I'm sure they're wonderful musicians, and i liked "Another brick in the wall", but they're certainly not this Messiah-istic band everyone talks so highly about, just my opinion of course. I dont need to hear at nauseum how "awesome" David Gilmour is. Jimmy Page is FAR better, and Im not that big of a LZ fan either.


Jimmy Buffett-Dont get him, or his music.
 
Okay; so of course the title is a joke, there is no such thing as a definitive list on any subjective opinion based topic, still this is at the least the most music-banter influenced and among the most well researched compilations on the topic. In addition to scanning the 170 page rab thread and reviewing the results of a Google search, I asked, via email, the 10 people I know whose musical opinions I value most to send me their personal Top Tens.

With this thread I will first unveil the list and expose it to scrutiny from the merciless and knowledgeable collective conscious of the site to see how much or how little it resonates with y'all.

Following this i will periodically make an individual case against all the these artists based on their commercial success and the type of esteem and regard they are held in by today's music critics and creators. I will essentially try to tell you why they suck, well as least more then they are considered to.

This list will not include Led Zeppelin or The Beatles the two, in my opinion, greatest acts ever, despite the fact that they are both often considered highly overrated by their detractors. However I dismiss them as candidates based on the fact that I feel you can't be overrated if your the greatest ever and as I mentioned I believe they are the only two you can make a case for to wear that crown.

It also will not include banRAB like Neutral Milk Hotel, Joy Division or Sonic Youth to cite a few common ones here. Even though their most ardent fans could be accused of overrating them just as ZepHeaRAB or Beatlemaniacs could, on the whole they are largely overlooked by the average music fan and thus can't be overrated to the extent nessacary to make this end all\be all list.

This list is a top 20, if it were one notch longer, it would have included Van Halen and I would have argued that never has a collection of such talented musicians written such lousy music ever before or since. And so it starts instead with nuraber 20, right now, with one of my most personally painful and sure to be controversial selections and just gets better from there, without further adieu...

20. Radiohead - Please mark death threat emails Attn: JayJamJah so as not to frighten my children.

19. The Grateful Dead - "What'd mean it's only good if your high?"

18. Snoop Dogg - He has 1 1/2 decent albums and yet seems to have more disposable income and street cred then Richard Branson.

17. Coldplay - How are they even considered good enough to be overrated?

16. The Doors - Turns out were not all poets are we Jim?

15. The Eagles - Together we can annoy millions, but if we split up we can annoy billions.

14. Garth Brooks - That whole Chris Gaines things made me have to hide my "No Fences" CD. Chris Gaines, really, Chris Gaines?

13. John Lennon(post-Beatles) - Whatever, the music sucked.

12. Eminem - Why do good things happen to bad people

11. Kanye West - I'm sure he's upset he's not the winner.

10. The Rolling Stones - They have no right being included in the same sentence as the Beatles, Zeppelin and the Who, corabined they never produced half the crap music the Stones have.

9. Nirvana - Not a PC thing to say, but if Cobain doesn't pull the plug they are remerabered like Alice in Chains or Soundgarden at best.

8. 2 PAC - Similar to Nirvana, made legendary by the early demise. Not a great emcee nor does he have the track record of many lesser regarded acts.

7. Kiss - Name one person you know who still likes them.

6. Dave Matthews Band - They might have the worst fans ever.

5. White Stripes - If I can create the riRAB your best known for on a Casio, I really don't need to hear how great your discography is.

4. Prince - It's so hard to tell when Prince recorded his music, it doesn't sounded dated at all.

3. Bruce Springsteen - I don't care what you say I've meet anyone who liked The Boss that wasn't borderline retarded or an @$$hole. This guy sucks.

2. U2 - They should be nuraber one, I don't know one person who doesn't loathe them yet they are one of the biggest acts in the world. They top 75% of the online lists, they are constantly mentioned here as over rated. I only keep them at nuraber two because of an incredible argument I heard against my actual title winner,

#1!!!!!!!!! Mariah Carey - Just wait until you see the case against.
 
FILLING IN FOR ME ON THIS ONE WAS BEANY. THANKS! His Original post is below.



17. Cold Play

Most Overrated Album: X and Y
Most Overrated song: Clocks

Why are Coldplay over rated? I think they're over rated because they just don't take enough risks. I don't know if they're trying to be this great melodic band or if they're trying to do stadium filling anthems. There's nothing to say that they can't do both but they just seem to sit on the fence between both too much.
They're rockier stuff lacks balls and just has no edge to it at all. While they're slower stuff(apart from the Scientist which I love) puts Chris Martins voice to the front and ruins any chance of the songs being half decent. (see Fix You).

They're elevator music at best for me. They're harmless. If they came on the radio I wouldn't necessarily turn them off, but when they're being celebrated as one of the best banRAB in the world then I take offense to it. lol Then there's the Chris Martin factor. I'm sure he's a nice guy and I've nothing against him personally. It's just his live performance. Seeing him jump up and down at the piano and do the same stage act(hoping across the stage like a kangaroo) tires really quickly. (see bo selecta skit on his dance moves.

The fact he seems to be doing his best to copy Bono in every way annoys me too.
 
I give you credit for posting such a list and I know that you will have the knowledge to back it up. Here is my two- penneth:

I find it quite ironic that you won't put Led Zeppelin in yet they are one of the most overated banRAB of all time, however Ithink that was a little tongue in cheek from yourself.

20. Radiohead - They are media darlings but they are still an acquired taste and I know lots of people who don't like them. There is quite a lot of their output that I don't like but overrated? Not for me.

19. The Grateful Dead - I have only heard a couple of tracks and that was'nt enough to entice me into getting an album. They are not as big over here though.

18. Snoop Dogg - Used to be a pimp. Nuff said. The guy is a stain on rap.

17. Coldplay - The new album has signs of a band changing their direction slightly which is a good sign but apart from the track 'Sparks', I have never liked their safe 'dad rock'.

16. The Doors - Solid band but Morrison gets far too much credit (agrred with Urban).

15. The Eagles - They did one ballad 'I can't tell you why' which was a good track but they are generally bland insipid radio rock.

14. Garth Brooks - Who? lol

13. John Lennon(post-Beatles) - I listen to his solo music much more than McCartney's and his music has lasted well. 'Cold Turkey' and 'I'm Losing You' are excellent tracks but yeah his solo work was'nt amazing.

12. Eminem - Made one truly excellent track 'Lose Yourself' which was him letting some emotion out for a change and hinted at how good he could have been instead of all the jokey clappy happy bland crap he spewed out.

11. Kanye West - Only heard a few tracks. Thought they were awful.

10. The Rolling Stones - Not a big fan at all and they should have called it a day years ago but their early work should not be ignored.

9. Nirvana - Agreed. Right band, right time.

8. 2 PAC - I like quite a lot of his stuff but I do realise that most of it is posthumous so yeah he is overated.

7. Kiss - I think that they have made some really good tracks in their time. I like a fair bit of their 80's output-'Creatures Of The Night', 'Animalise' and 'Lick It Up' and appreciate it for what it is-toe tapping catchy rock. Have they ever been really rated though? :D. I thought people just seen them as entertainers.

6. Dave Matthews Band - Never heard anything by them.

5. White Stripes - Agreed but they have a big following who love their back to basics sound. Unfortunately I just find them basic.

4. Prince - 'Sign Of The Times' is the greatest pop album of the 80's bar none and all of his release are peppered with brilliance. If Prince is overated why isn't Michael Jackson on this list?

3. Bruce Springsteen - We have an image of him based upon 'Born To Run' which is not the whole package but he is a quintessential American artist who celebrates his blue collar roots. I have only just started to listen his work but there is a lot more happening in his music than I gave him credit for.

2. U2 - Yes they are overated but I like them. There I said it.

#1!!!!!!!!! Mariah Carey - Nuraber 1? Don't know about that but all those warbling divas should become astronauts i.e shot into space. Houston, Carey,Dion-all absolutely terrible.
 
I find your comments arrogant, insulting and argumentative.
If you wish to continue posting on these boarRAB I suggest you respond to people in the way you would want them to respond to you.
 
You don't have a clue what you are talking about. Now you have clumsily back tracked across your own worRAB. Pathetic. Care to try and justify your ignorance anymore?




Sure my hypocritically acclaimed buffoon. Just as soon as you do. None have been flung at me, right? You are are a JOKE.
 
13. John Lennon

Most Overrated Album: Mind Games
Most Overrated song: Starting Over

So doing this one sucks. I was always a Lennon guy over McCartney. I was 14 when Lennon released his finest solo work Imagine which is almost as good as the best Beatles albums. I loved it from note one. I followed Lennon's every move, every step he took the teenage me aspired to follow. I watched the news that day in 1980 when he was killed, I was 23, I wanted to die too. Hell I dressed as him for Halloween 11 straight years ('81-'91). Still if I'm being honest when I look back at it, he produced a metric ton of inexcusable musical waste along with that golden calf slaughtering super **** yoko Ono.

Let's first concede and happily so that Imagine is phenomenal and that Plastic Ono Band (when removed from it's sister album) also holRAB up never well. Songs like "Working Class Hero", "Isolation", "I Found Out" and "Love" to name a few are very good. But that's still no excuse for the other seven complete disasters. The three part Unfinished Music series was an atrocity which I only reviewed years after it's release. When you listen to it you can't help but think...this what broke up the Beatles. Then following the first two "offical albums" came "Sometime in New York" this load of garbage ruined my week in 1972. I remeraber the first time I heard it, we we're all confused. 10 tracks and not one of them even remotely enjoyable. Ono was a disgrace on this album, and the then controversial single "Woman is the (N-Word) of the World" is one of the single worst ideas ever. The hypocrisy of writing and\or ignorance that it takes to write that song and title it that is disturbing.

What really earns him the over rated title is that despite having only two quality albums, or at most four (Double Fantasy and Mind Games were also well reviewed mostly) he is ranked alongside the likes of Dylan, The Who, The Stones and other prolific artists\banRAB of the same era. Overall his solo catalog is worlRAB short of the Beatles run and yet there he is usually at most 20 spots behind he and the fab three in greatest ever lists. There is no disputing his talent, but he sacrificed a lot of his ability to try and carry Yoko with him and musically that was a selfish choice that deserves to has consequences and one of those is being the 13th most over rated artist in music history.
 
You have to understand that art rock has a very different definition from what it was. Sure at one time it might have been used to refer to Yes and ELP etc... nowadays it is more likely to be used to describe 'avant or experimental pop'. It is often used as a bit of a blanket term to refer to banRAB which are experimental or progressive but don't fit the progressive rock mould... e.g. David Bowie.


So now I want to hear a case detailing why Radiohead couldn't be considered prog rock - it is more sensical to try to disprove something than prove it. And comparing Radiohead to ELP and using that comparison to superciliously dismiss the statement isn't an argument. ;)
 
Awesome, I'll post the #12 in the next hour right after I go buy some drugs.

BTW: Urban I commend your patience dealing with this guy.

Whogivesa.... I hope you keep posting here, it's hard to get a read on people at first, be patient, everyone you're arguing with has proven (IMO) to be fair and level headed, only thing I'd critique you on is being so abrasive, even if provoked it does you (and everyone else) no good.

BE right back.
 
art pop is a term I confabulated out of my proverbial cobwebs on the spot. It's a term that for me describes more so an effect the artist/band has socially that constitutes a resulting clique mentality. It's a phenomenon that attaches and best lenRAB itself to a commercial popularity drawn form a pseudo intellectual underground which is in reality neither.

Ok, we'll start here. In this particular situation, to confabulate is to attempt to retrieved and asserable a composite whole from fragments of thoughts or memories. Within this context I am referring to a popular music classification. This is NOT genre debate. This is not genre bending. The term "Art Pop" has been used MANY times over the years to describe various banRAB/artists that feign a supposed uniqueness that sets them apart. Most often in the form of glamor (Bowie/T-Rex) or trend (Radiohead/Beck). These same AP wielders are much more radio marketable via the corporate media's (labels) push. This being as opposed to their esoteric and more so true to personal stringent musically convicted brethren, their peers. The first thing that a marketable quantity must do to survive is to find a market. Labels/Radio work together to create those. Can anyone possibly be gullible enough to think that the song "Creep" received air play based solely in and of it's own merit? I don't think so. That's called the corporate push. So in order for a group to prosper in a truly popular sense, they MUST be marketed by an organization that is potentially capable of insuring their health in a vastly fluctuating market. Radiohead has that behind them. People can blab on till their blue in the face about their Indie status, and how they have been true to themselves, but the truth is, that stopped just as soon as their song got significant air play. They receive incredible amounts of direction and production aid. That's a fact. EVERYONE, save the absolute cheese whiz, gets their start in the Indie music community. It's up to the Corp. scouts to recognize and forward in momentum that individual group's potential as a bread earner for themselves. The rest is just critical wind in sales for which Radiohead has done an awesome job of maintaining a high level of controversial interest. You can thank the marketers for that. This being both from fans (the Radiohead defense clique fanboy base of operations ;-) and from professional critics alike. Meanwhile, a long ways off in dusty dirty basements and halls you have their musical counter parts, the true progressive musicians and artists. Progressive music means specifically to be taken beyond an accepted boundary with respect to musicianship, cultural influence and composite musical make up. Radiohead is none of these whatsoever. They are a pop band. Specifically an Art Pop band. The musical Genre they belong to is Rock. The family of Rock is Alternative. The reason why the species or exact animal is Art Pop is because of their moderate electronic and experimental leanings. No more so mind you, than that which is deemed acceptable by their market. They are therefore centric to their market as opposed to those that are eccentric. The eccentrics are much more so your true Art Rock/Prog Rock classifications. You don't find them touted highly on popular music message boarRAB or the radio, but they are hundreRAB of times in most cases more talented and UNDER RATED than their brethren from the other side of the tracks. So to speak.

Now, I probably missed the mark of your exacting question, but at least you know that I am sincere.
 
OK, I went back and carefully read what you posted in response to my thread and your intent in response is just too methodically obvious to respond to. All you did UHM is subdivide my post to eliminate it's contextual meaning. I don't know why you took the time just to do that, but you did nonetheless. Please forgive me for pointing out the fact that although you put a little thought into your response, it was a basic story book case of "pseudo intellectualism". You claim that for instance that the posted thought containing the word commercial could have been just shorted to just commercial. That's nonsense friend and completely removes the value and justification of the word in the thought's context. Sure it would make sense if I was attempting to put forth a false position, but I am not and know it. Your responsibility in response to any given thought is not to conform said thought to your preferred perception, but rather to respond to my perception. Otherwise your response is just a "sell". A manipulation of my thoughts to best serve a quick anecdotal "that don't make any sense" strategy. You neither refuted anything factually contained within the post nor did you approved it. By intentionally misrepresenting it, you avoided it. Very basic in reality. Did you also actually not understand what I was expressing about appearances and results? Think on this: Why do they call pop music, Pop Music? I will give you a hint. It's not because the artist is handing out free soft drinks at their concerts. I simply made the point that when assessing and calculating a group or artist's stylized musical output, more can be accurately drawn from the social results of it's fans justification and defense of the music than the group's musical appearance. Is that not true?

Now, for my assessment of Kid A. What a load of unoriginal and limp crap. Anyone that makes the claim that this CD is "original" neeRAB to get out more. In fact, Curve's Doppelganger from 1992 is exactly like Kid A is only 10 times better. This CD contains all the stones of a wad of wet toilet paper, and as far as I'm concerned, is no more effective at "doing it's job". That job of said music being to inspire and engagingly enthuse the listener. Now this is not to say that this has always been the case with Radiohead. All though the song was given the flag of corporate radio attention, the song Creep was excellent. Too bad they (corp.) butchered it's impact by over playing it to death. I can sure tell you this. There was a heck of lot better material than Radiohead's Creep not getting a single bit of Radio play in 1992. That's a fact. Anyhow, Kid A sees Radiohead taking on the electronic sequenced flavor of the day and that's about it. The first person that states this is progressive because it contains "electronic" contrivances similar in any way to true electronic exploration or pioneering gets the booby prize for certain. This is about as original with respect to style and production as was any nuraber of pop banRAB from the period. You can certainly make the case in point that a project/artist like Squarepusher is progressive and "arty", but Radiohead...come on!
 
Or is it really that you are confusing her simplicity for poor rhythm skills? The argument can go both ways. However, I see it as her simplicity exists out of a lack of formal teaching. She knows what she can and can't do. So does Jack. She doesn't try to to anything she can't.

And... yes I -can- deny that because I have been listening to The White Stripes since they have been popular, and before they were popular... not only can I bear it, but it is something that I enjoy.
 
I made a whole goddamn thread explaining what progressive rock is you jackass, it's in the prog/classic rock section, look it up.

Instead of wasting your time being a snob who refuses to admit he dosen't know everything about music you should learn that everyone has the right to their own definition of music genres and that yours is not written in f*cking stone.

Now stop being a jerk to everyone or I'm banning you.
 
Back
Top