Most overrated musical act of all time?

[ArecWithABigA]

I'm sure this has been done before but I am new to the board and would love to hear what people think. I would like to know who the most overrated musical act of all time is. I have come up with a few options...

A) The Beatles
B) Nirvana
C) Elvis Presley
D) Radiohead
E) Kiss

Personally, I think the Beatles are the run away choice for this honor but I would love to hear what other people think...

[Furtherman]

KISS.

Clowns with guitars.

[OGC]

U2

[Snoogans]

I'm sure this has been done before but I am new to the board and would love to hear what people think. I would like to know who the most overrated musical act of all time is. I have come up with a few options...

A) The Beatles
B) Nirvana
C) Elvis Presley
D) Radiohead
E) Kiss

Personally, I think the Beatles are the run away choice for this honor but I would love to hear what other people think...

That's not a bad list. I wouldn't include Nirvana though. Them and Sublime were rated fine, they just got overplayed cause they couldn't make new music, so it just got old. But at the time they were as good as people made them out to be.

Anyway, my official list:
a) Jay Z
b) Beatles
c) Jay Z
d) Jay Z
e) Jay Z

[Chigworthy]

All of the above, plus Snoogan's list times 2.

[Dude!]

justin timberlake
come on

[MrPink]

Led Zeppelin, people must have liked shitty music in the 70's.

[Snoogans]

justin timberlake
come on

but, i mean come on, he brought sexy back.

Actually, the music he puts out now is better then half the other shit that comes out, sadly. I actually don't mind a couple of songs.

[Death Metal Moe]

That's not a bad list. I wouldn't include Nirvana though. Them and Sublime were rated fine, they just got overplayed cause they couldn't make new music, so it just got old. But at the time they were as good as people made them out to be.

Anyway, my official list:
a) Jay Z
b) Beatles
c) Jay Z
d) Jay Z
e) Jay Z

God yes, I have never and will never get why Jay Z is put on such a high pedestal, away from all other rappers in a lot of people's eyes. He's not that great and there's plenty of other rap/hip-hop acts that do way more.

And The Beatles only gain my respect because of their position in Rock history, but they have like 2 songs I would listen to.

[fezident]

Jimi Hendrix.
I just don't get that sloppy bastard.




And KISS. (nice call, Furtherman.) I hate THE MONKEES and I hate them even more when they're wearing silly makeup and spitting out fake blood.
A KISS concert is nothing more than a really loud Star Trek convention.

[cupcakelove]

The name of this thread should be popular bands I don't like. I'll give you Kiss and even Radiohead as being overrated, but the others have way to much influence in music to be considered overrated.

[Death Metal Moe]

And KISS. (nice call, Furtherman.) I hate THE MONKEES and I hate them even more when they're wearing silly makeup and spitting out fake blood.
A KISS concert is nothing more than a really loud Star Trek convention.

http://maochan.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/oh-snap.jpg

[fezident]

the others have way to much influence in music to be considered overrated.

I kinda disagree.
Whenever I hear some "expert" say something like: "Jimi has influenced everyone who ever picked up an electric guitar", I laugh.
I know a squillion guitar players and practically NONE of them cite Jimi as an influence or even an inspiration.
And THAT is the very definition of being over-rated. Giving somebody a world of credit that he/she doesn't deserve.
I give Jimi credit for doing what he did when he did it. But.... I think we can put it in its proper context now that it's 50 years later.

To me... that's like saying "every person who ever designed an automobile is influenced by Henry Ford". Nuh-uh. 22 year old dudes who are designed new prototypes are definitely not using an Edsel as a template.

[EddieMoscone]

I gotta go wth these hipster bands that people went on and on about, like Bloc Party, Arctic Monkeys, etc. I can't even get through like 3 songs of that shit. I do love TV on the Radio though...

Bands like Led Zep, Kiss, The Who and such usually get on these lists because they have been played to death and people of tired of hearing them, not because they actually suck.

[Death Metal Moe]

I kinda disagree.
Whenever I hear some "expert" say something like: "Jimi has influenced everyone who ever picked up an electric guitar", I laugh.
I know a squillion guitar players and practically NONE of them cite Jimi as an influence or even an inspiration.
And THAT is the very definition of being over-rated. Giving somebody a world of credit that he/she doesn't deserve.
I give Jimi credit for doing what he did when he did it. But.... I think we can put it in its proper context now that it's 50 years later.

To me... that's like saying "every person who ever designed an automobile is influenced by Henry Ford". Nuh-uh. 22 year old dudes who are designed new prototypes are definitely not using an Edsel as a template.

I agree with this assessment. He was quite talented in my personal opinion, and lots of people show him respect, but I can't think of any musicians I know that say Hendrix is an influence on them and I don't know any bands I listen to that really sound like they're influenced.

I think Hendrix is one of those guys that you pay respect to just so you don't sound uncool in a group of musicians, but he's just like every other musician. Your influence is someone else's hack.

[Snoogans]

I agree with this assessment. He was quite talented in my personal opinion, and lots of people show him respect, but I can't think of any musicians I know that say Hendrix is an influence on them and I don't know any bands I listen to that really sound like they're influenced.

I think Hendrix is one of those guys that you pay respect to just do you don't sound uncool in a group of musicians, but he's just like every other musician. Your influence is someone else's hack.

the problem with hendrix is how long ago. Not many bands today cite him, but im sure alot of the bands they site site Jimi or things like that. I would say Hendrix is amazing and also overrated at the same time. He is put on a way higher pedestal then he should be, but let's not act lik ehe didn't do alot for music back then, even if it isnt brought up anymore

[RhinoinMN]

http://maochan.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/oh-snap.jpg

http://base.googlehosted.com/base_image?size=2&q=music/image/0/0CWIf1QA0YoH.jpg

The Power!

[TheMojoPin]

Led Zep. If people say they were "influenced" by them, they're probably lying. They get hype as helping birth heavy metal, but I think Sabbath is infinitely more influential and key in that regard. Zeppelin just has some decent sounding songs that are just jumped up blues tracks (something the Animals already did)...nobody actually tries to sound like them, except Aerosmith, who are 2nd on my list.

Pink Floyd is 3rd for me. Agan, nobody is really influenced by them because their music alternates between incredibly simple and incredibly wanky and pointless.

The Doors are 4th. Just awful, and again, people know it because nobody bothers trying to sound like them.

[Snoogans]

I think this guy's album was in Mojo's most underrated:
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41E35T9CWWL._AA280_.jpg

[Hottub]

I'll second Mojo on The Doors. and throw in B.I.G. for good measure.

[Snoogans]

I'll second Mojo on The Doors. and throw in B.I.G. for good measure.

GASP

[Ritalin]

Yeah, it's U2.

Yawn.

[Chris from TX]

KISS and I am writing in Kanye West and the Black Eyed Peas.

[FUNKMAN]

not sure but definitely not Grand Funk

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/aLE4w43g_Ak&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/aLE4w43g_Ak&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

[topless_mike]

the beatles.
they were a rock band with 4-part harmony.
whoopie-fucking-do.

2 down, 2 more to go. then everyone can move on.

[fezident]

the beatles.
they were a rock band with 4-part harmony.
whoopie-fucking-do.

2 down, 2 more to go. then everyone can move on.

I have a real problem with how how over-rated George Martin is too!
I keep hearing from people (who are always OLD, by the way) say... "Wow, The Beatles records STILL sound fresh!"

No. They don't.
You wanna like how they sound? Fine.
But let's stop pretending like those records can compete - sonically - with modern recordings.

[DiabloSammich]

The two-headed monster Rush and Jethro Tull.


Ughh.

The best thing Geddy Lee did was "Take Off" with Bob and Doug Mackenzie.

Write it on a rock...

[underdog]

I'll second Mojo on The Doors. and throw in B.I.G. for good measure.

Whatever on The Doors, but B.I.G. is just crazy talk.

And I'm not a big Beatles fan, and they may be overplayed, but there's no way they can be overrated. They basically changed music.

[Jughead]

I have never understood what people see in the Doors.....When I was 10 I heard a sound I had never heard before and loved it..And the popular sounds just kept on coming and coming... They seemed to change there sound with the times I thought anyway.....The Beatles.... I thought they influenced not only vocals and harmony's of that time period, but guitar chord patterns as well......The beginning on come together for example

[TheMojoPin]

I'm sorry, but it's insane to say the Beatles are overrated in terms of influence.

[Jughead]

I'm sorry, but it's insane to say the Beatles are overrated in terms of influence.

Could not agree more I really respect your post in all forums... Mojo....

[TheMojoPin]

Could not agree more I really respect your post in all forums... Mojo....

I respect anyone else who is also willingly a Bears fan. A moment of silence, please.

[Snoogans]

I respect anyone else who is also willingly a Bears fan. A moment of silence, please.

shut up, sissies. Id still take neckbeard at whatever he makes over Eli and his fuckin 10 mill a year

[fezident]

I'm sorry, but it's insane to say the Beatles are overrated in terms of influence.


This is one of those "matter of degree" situations.
YES, The Beatles were/are the biggest band in history. No contest.

HOWEVER.... Some kid who is picking up a guitar for the first time today, probably has no connection to The Beatles. This (poor) kid digs on Nickelback. To this kid... Blink 182 is "classic rock". And Blink was influenced by Green Day. And Green Day was influenced by The Replacements & Cheap Trick.... and Cheap Trick... yes THEY are directly influenced by The Beatles.
But The Beatles mean NOTHING to 13 year old today.

Know what I mean??


Like I said in my Hendrix post.... at some point, the strength of your influence is diluted so much that it can't be considered an influence any more.

[underdog]

This is one of those "matter of degree" situations.
YES, The Beatles were/are the biggest band in history. No contest.

HOWEVER.... Some kid who is picking up a guitar for the first time today, probably has no connection to The Beatles. This (poor) kid digs on Nickelback. To this kid... Blink 182 is "classic rock". And Blink was influenced by Green Day. And Green Day was influenced by The Replacements & Cheap Trick.... and Cheap Trick... yes THEY are directly influenced by The Beatles.
But The Beatles mean NOTHING to 13 year old today.

Know what I mean??


Like I said in my Hendrix post.... at some point, the strength of your influence is diluted so much that it can't be considered an influence any more.

Except for the fact that if the Beatles didn't exist, that kid might not be picking up the guitar.

See, the Beatles mean EVERYTHING to that 13 year old.

[Sheeplovr]

HOWEVER.... Some kid who is picking up a guitar for the first time today, probably has no connection to The Beatles. This (poor) kid digs on Nickelback.

eww kick this kids head in

[Stankfoot]

#1 - Wilco
#2 - The Replacements
#3 - Tool



































OK - how many heads just exploded? :wink:

[TheMojoPin]

Talking like kids today by and large never listen to the Beatles is also pretty ludicrous. Seriously, they're THAT huge.

[underdog]

Talking like kids today by and large never listen to the Beatles is also pretty ludicrous. Seriously, they're THAT huge.

Especially young musicians. they absolutely know the Beatles.

[Bulldogcakes]

http://www.metalsludge.tv/main/modules/subjects/pages/DuBrow99.jpg

"I really want to be . . . . . overrated."

[pennington]

I nominate Mr. Robert Zimmerman:

http://www.dylanchords.com/pictures/nick_lucas_bob_dylan_12_64.jpg

[thejives]

How about Sinatra.

I think he was a cultural force more than a musical force. I listen to the crooning and I just don't get it. I think his acting was better.

[Snoogans]

How about Sinatra.

I think he was a cultural force more than a musical force. I listen to the crooning and I just don't get it. I think his acting was better.

http://www.danielnester.com/news/uploaded_images/joepiscopo-792425.jpg

you are black and I am white, life's an eskimo pie, let's take a bite

that was groovy thinkin lincoln, when you seeeet them freeeeeeeeeeeeee

[thejives]

you are black and I am white, life's an eskimo pie, let's take a bite

that was groovy thinkin lincoln, when you seeeet them freeeeeeeeeeeeee

Joe Piscapo ... underrated bit.
He did that with Eddie Murphy didn't he?

[Snoogans]

Joe Piscapo ... underrated bit.
He did that with Eddie Murphy didn't he?

yea as stevie wonder

[thejives]

yea as stevie wonder

But it was Phil Hartman who played sinatra when he said he'd put a bag over Sinead O'Connor's head and do his business.

I think Hartman had the funnier impression.

[Snoogans]

best SNL music skit ever

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Ctf3TtTO-sU&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Ctf3TtTO-sU&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

[keithy_19]

Pink Floyd is 3rd for me. Agan, nobody is really influenced by them because their music alternates between incredibly simple and incredibly wanky and pointless.

The Doors are 4th. Just awful, and again, people know it because nobody bothers trying to sound like them.

I agree with the doors. My girl is such a morrison fan though and I don't mind their first album. But after that I can't get into them. Drugs and references you can only get when on drugs, maybe.

As for Pink Floyd, I disagree with you full heartedly. Of course, I consider Wish You Were Here as one of the top five albums ever made.

[TheMojoPin]

I agree with the doors. My girl is such a morrison fan though and I don't mind their first album. But after that I can't get into them. Drugs and references you can only get when on drugs, maybe.

As for Pink Floyd, I disagree with you full heartedly. Of course, I consider Wish You Were Here as one of the top five albums ever made.

I'm talking in terms of obvious influence. For all the talk, PF hasn't really inpired any kind of "sound" that can be traced to them.

[grlNIN]

The Doors are 4th. Just awful, and again, people know it because nobody bothers trying to sound like them.

You obviously have never heard The Black Angels.


I also want to say that the Foo Fighters and The Who can lick my butt.

[MHasegawa]

http://www.danielnester.com/news/uploaded_images/joepiscopo-792425.jpg

you are black and I am white, life's an eskimo pie, let's take a bite

that was groovy thinkin lincoln, when you seeeet them freeeeeeeeeeeeee

When I think of Ebony I think of a magazine that people do not read, and when I think of Ivory I think of a soap that floats.

[fezident]

Especially young musicians. they absolutely know the Beatles.


Are we all talking about the same thing?
OF COURSE there are kids who know who The Beatles are. Of course.

But... I'm 36 and I've been a musician my entire life. I grew up playing Funk & Soul. Then I discovered proggy stuff like YES, RUSH, & QUEENSRYCHE. Then I really embraced pop and started to make my living playing professionally & recording Top40 songs. In that time (25 years!!), I don't think any fellow band member has ever tried to take things in a Beatle-y direction. Never. I've never had another musician suggest a Beatle-influenced solution to musical roadblock.

I AM AGREEING that they are legendary. And they definitely DID write the blueprints (IE... intro-verse-chorus-verse-chorus-solo-double chorus-outro).
What I'm saying is; when some musicologist says "every band owes a debt to The Beatles", I don't agree.
Some kid who formed his band because of LimpBizkit, or Linkin Park, or Destiny's Child, or Avenged Sevenfold, or System Of A Down or WHATEVER... is most certainly not feeling a Beatles influence. Not even a little. That Beatles DNA is now 6 generations removed.
Not one bass guitar student of mine has EVER asked to learn a Beatle song or, for that matter, to play like Paul McCartney and I've been teaching since 1995ish.





THAT is what I mean by over-rated.
Yes they are huge.
Yes they are legendary.
But there are finite limits to their influence.

[keithy_19]

I'm talking in terms of obvious influence. For all the talk, PF hasn't really inpired any kind of "sound" that can be traced to them.

Fair enough.

[sailor]

okkervil river

[TheMojoPin]

Are we all talking about the same thing?
OF COURSE there are kids who know who The Beatles are. Of course.

But... I'm 36 and I've been a musician my entire life. I grew up playing Funk & Soul. Then I discovered proggy stuff like YES, RUSH, & QUEENSRYCHE. Then I really embraced pop and started to make my living playing professionally & recording Top40 songs. In that time (25 years!!), I don't think any fellow band member has ever tried to take things in a Beatle-y direction. Never. I've never had another musician suggest a Beatle-influenced solution to musical roadblock.

I AM AGREEING that they are legendary. And they definitely DID write the blueprints (IE... intro-verse-chorus-verse-chorus-solo-double chorus-outro).
What I'm saying is; when some musicologist says "every band owes a debt to The Beatles", I don't agree.
Some kid who formed his band because of LimpBizkit, or Linkin Park, or Destiny's Child, or Avenged Sevenfold, or System Of A Down or WHATEVER... is most certainly not feeling a Beatles influence. Not even a little. That Beatles DNA is now 6 generations removed.
Not one bass guitar student of mine has EVER asked to learn a Beatle song or, for that matter, to play like Paul McCartney and I've been teaching since 1995ish.





THAT is what I mean by over-rated.
Yes they are huge.
Yes they are legendary.
But there are finite limits to their influence.

You're still talking like people are forming bands in vacuums, or just instantly leap into listening to bands like Limp Bizkit or System of a Down. I'd argue it's incredibly rare when someone who has the means to do so does not listen to the Beatles very early in their life. That's what I'm talking about in terms of influence. They're typically a common link in terms of being a big part of people's formative leap into being a fan of "rock" or guitar-driven music or whatever you want to call it.

Let me put it this way...if you think they're overrated in terms of influence, name a band or musial act in the last 50 years that you think is more influential.

[PhishHead]

okkervil river


hahaha are they even considered rated to begin with?

[underdog]

What I'm saying is; when some musicologist says "every band owes a debt to The Beatles", I don't agree.
Some kid who formed his band because of LimpBizkit, or Linkin Park, or Destiny's Child, or Avenged Sevenfold, or System Of A Down or WHATEVER... is most certainly not feeling a Beatles influence. Not even a little. That Beatles DNA is now 6 generations removed.
Not one bass guitar student of mine has EVER asked to learn a Beatle song or, for that matter, to play like Paul McCartney and I've been teaching since 1995ish.

Without the Beatles, those bands probably don't exist. Or exist in a completely different way. You really cannot be any more influential than that.

And as far as any bass student not wanting to play the Beatles, that's one thing. But they've probably ALL listened to the Beatles. Heavily. As has just about 100% of the rock musicians today and to come.

I'm sorry. There is no way the Beatles are overrated.

[sailor]

hahaha are they even considered rated to begin with?

yeah, that was just for you.

[PhishHead]

yeah, that was just for you.

i knew it! you are still mad at me for not recognizing you.

[Marc with a c]

i knew it! you are still mad at me for not recognizing you.

he wouldnt be on this board if he was mad at everybody that didnt recognize him.

[sailor]

i knew it! you are still mad at me for not recognizing you.

haha i just thought it'd be funny.

he wouldnt be on this board if he was mad at everybody that didnt recognize him.

"ignored by" isn't the same thing.

[PhishHead]

he wouldnt be on this board if he was mad at everybody that didnt recognize him.

haha i just thought it'd be funny.



"ignored by" isn't the same thing.

yea I didn't ignore him I said "hey whats up thanks" I just couldn't place a name to the face.

it was funny i laughed

[Dude!]

bright eyes sucks way beyond normal suckdom

[fezident]

You're right.
I can't name a bigger band. Or a more influential one.
I completely agree with a lot of your points. I do disagree with the sentiment that "it's impossible to overstate how influencial they are" when, I myself have made an entire career playing, performing, and recording music and I am not at all influenced by them - musically or stylistically.



I am telling you that Hannah Montanna simply does not know who The Beatles are. She just doesn't. They aren't in her DNA.
She probably cites Fergie and Avril as her main influences. Her favorite rock band is probably NO DOUBT.

All I'm saying is, at some point... there's a huge disconnect.
If you wanna play six degrees from Hannah to The Beatles well, then... I guess I'll just have to admit defeat here. Michelle Branch, on the other hand.... is a Beatle fan and I can hear that in her music.

I just don't think that every song that has a guitar and a melody... is automatically Beatles influenced. Especially if the band in question actively doesn't like The Beatles in the first place!



As for my students. I know them well. We talk about music endlessly. Some of them for 10 years!! The Beatles have not been a factor or a presence.. Occasionally, one of them likes The Eagles, Steely Dan, Zep and stuff but, specifically THE BEATLES... it's a bit of a void. One kid saw Paul McCartney on his most recent tour because he wanted to "see him before he dies". That's kinda it.

I would never say that an artist/band exists in a vaccum. But, it's up to THEM to say who their influences are. Not us.

Take a band like Def Leppard.
They are extremely open about their influences. Queen, Slade, Sweet, Mott The Hoople, Bowie, Zep, The Stones, Gary Glitter, T. Rex, Mick Ronson, etc etc. And I really do hear all those elements in their music. They've never once cited The Beatles as a musical influence. Not coincedentally, I don't hear any Beatles flavorings in their music. Sure... many of their influences were born from a love of The Beatles. But, at some point, they started doing their own thing.

I dunno.
Maybe I'm not articulating myself.
I just think that it's very very possible for a band to form, write, and record without tipping their hats to The Beatles.

Does what I'm saying make sense to anybody here?? No??

Ok then.

[thejives]

You're right.
I can't name a bigger band. Or a more influential one.
I completely agree with a lot of your points. I do disagree with the sentiment that "it's impossible to overstate how influencial they are" when, I myself have made an entire career playing, performing, and recording music and I am not at all influenced by them - musically or stylistically.



I am telling you that Hannah Montanna simply does not know who The Beatles are. She just doesn't. They aren't in her DNA.
She probably cites Fergie and Avril as her main influences. Her favorite rock band is probably NO DOUBT.

All I'm saying is, at some point... there's a huge disconnect.
If you wanna play six degrees from Hannah to The Beatles well, then... I guess I'll just have to admit defeat here. Michelle Branch, on the other hand.... is a Beatle fan and I can hear that in her music.

I just don't think that every song that has a guitar and a melody... is automatically Beatles influenced. Especially if the band in question actively doesn't like The Beatles in the first place!



As for my students. I know them well. We talk about music endlessly. Some of them for 10 years!! The Beatles have not been a factor or a presence.. Occasionally, one of them likes The Eagles, Steely Dan, Zep and stuff but, specifically THE BEATLES... it's a bit of a void. One kid saw Paul McCartney on his most recent tour because he wanted to "see him before he dies". That's kinda it.

I would never say that an artist/band exists in a vaccum. But, it's up to THEM to say who their influences are. Not us.

Take a band like Def Leppard.
They are extremely open about their influences. Queen, Slade, Sweet, Mott The Hoople, Bowie, Zep, The Stones, Gary Glitter, T. Rex, Mick Ronson, etc etc. And I really do hear all those elements in their music. They've never once cited The Beatles as a musical influence. Not coincedentally, I don't hear any Beatles flavorings in their music. Sure... many of their influences were born from a love of The Beatles. But, at some point, they started doing their own thing.

I dunno.
Maybe I'm not articulating myself.
I just think that it's very very possible for a band to form, write, and record without tipping their hats to The Beatles.

Does what I'm saying make sense to anybody here?? No??

Ok then.

Who are these "Beatles" you keep ranting about?

[Death Metal Moe]

Who are these "Beatles" you keep ranting about?

Don't worry about them, they suck.

[keithy_19]

Don't worry about them, they suck.

"Phony Beatle mania has bitten the dust..."

http://www.filmfestivaltoday.com/uploadedimages/sundance07_joe_strummer.jpg

[thejives]

While I would take the clash over the beatles any day...
I like the beatles' music a lot. (And I don't think I'm alone in saying so.)

[TheGameHHH]

Don't worry about them, they suck.

The Shitty Beatles? so its not just a clever name

[keithy_19]

While I would take the clash over the beatles any day...
I like the beatles' music a lot. (And I don't think I'm alone in saying so.)

I'm not a fan of the Beatles. Not really into much of their stuff, though I understand that they had such a major impact on rock, and music in general.

But I would say the Clash were just as revolutionary in their own way.

[spoon]

I'm sure this has been done before but I am new to the board and would love to hear what people think. I would like to know who the most overrated musical act of all time is. I have come up with a few options...

A) The Beatles
B) Nirvana
C) Elvis Presley
D) Radiohead
E) Kiss

Personally, I think the Beatles are the run away choice for this honor but I would love to hear what other people think...

Wow, what a bad list. I'd say the only one that deserves to be there is Kiss. I don't even like all those left, but every one were/are very talented and had HUGE impacts on music over time and will continue to.

[spoon]

Led Zep. If people say they were "influenced" by them, they're probably lying. They get hype as helping birth heavy metal, but I think Sabbath is infinitely more influential and key in that regard. Zeppelin just has some decent sounding songs that are just jumped up blues tracks (something the Animals already did)...nobody actually tries to sound like them, except Aerosmith, who are 2nd on my list.

Pink Floyd is 3rd for me. Agan, nobody is really influenced by them because their music alternates between incredibly simple and incredibly wanky and pointless.

The Doors are 4th. Just awful, and again, people know it because nobody bothers trying to sound like them.


Zep and the Doors I can easily get behind and add to Kiss, but not Floyd.

[spoon]

I agree with the doors. My girl is such a morrison fan though and I don't mind their first album. But after that I can't get into them. Drugs and references you can only get when on drugs, maybe.

As for Pink Floyd, I disagree with you full heartedly. Of course, I consider Wish You Were Here as one of the top five albums ever made.

Holy shit, I have to back up Keithy on this one. Great album indeed. I love to slap that on jukeboxes in bars when it's 3 songs 5 bucks! I get 20+ minutes for my 3 songs, and the album is awesome front to back.

[spoon]

I'm talking in terms of obvious influence. For all the talk, PF hasn't really inpired any kind of "sound" that can be traced to them.

I can agree on that more so in the states, yet in Europe, they seem to have a much bigger influence. I believe they had a great influence on Radiohead themselves, along with a few other bands I really respect and listen to. Yet I surely get your point.

[NickyL0885]

Nirvana and Led Zep. Both VERY overrated, especially Nirvana. How can you like a band when you cant understand wtf the singer is saying?

[keithy_19]

Nirvana and Led Zep. Both VERY overrated, especially Nirvana. How can you like a band when you cant understand wtf the singer is saying?

I think Nirvana gets such a high ranking among bands because of the fact that they came around when there wasn't a band like them, at least not main stream.

[joethebartender]

Justine Bateman. My sister had this one and played it over and over until it was mysteriously destroyed.
http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/ciu/90/86/3512d250fca0b379f46b7010.L.jpg

[sailor]

when did this become a debate over how influential a band was? i don't think that was the original intent.

[A.J.]

Grateful Dead
Aerosmith
Nirvana

[spoon]

when did this become a debate over how influential a band was? i don't think that was the original intent.

Even so, influence is an important factor in the argument on overrated bands in my mind. And even though they were influential, to me the Grateful Dead is #1 hands down. Great call.

[Dirtybird12]

Jimi Hendrix - feedback & distortion = genius?
If he wasn't black - nobody would even have known his name.

Pink Floyd? Lazy & booooooring music played by creepy english twats.

Anything from london.

Bob Marley? anything sounds good high. when it comes down to it... the guy has zero talent.

Sex Pist0ls - too bad they didnt all overdose.

The Clash - ( see London)

The Ramones - nothing more than a green day tribute band.

Kurits Blow

[PhishHead]

Grateful Dead
Aerosmith
Nirvana

Even so, influence is an important factor in the argument on overrated bands in my mind. And even though they were influential, to me the Grateful Dead is #1 hands down. Great call.

the only people really overrating GD is hippies.

Thats why there will never be an answer to this question it is subjective.

To me GD is not overrated.

[EddieMoscone]

It's disturbing that when people ask what music/acts are OVERRATED it usually ends up with people just listing anything that is POPULAR. Too many of us (me included) try to be too cool for the room sometimes.

[Freakshow]

It's funny--I was watching the 'Classic Albums' on Nevermind and they were talking to Butch Vig about recording Kurt Cobain's vocals. Vig said he got Cobain to double track his vocals by constantly saying 'John Lennon did it.' Once Cobain heard that Lennon double tracked, he agreed to do it on the album. Seems to be that's a pretty big influence on music, since Nirvana was the biggest band of the last 18 years...

Influence pops up in places you would never expect.

[jafter]

The Ramones - nothing more than a green day tribute band.



Wouldn't that be the other way around.

Let me put it this way...if you think they're overrated in terms of influence, name a band or musial act in the last 50 years that you think is more influential.
__________________


The person who I would through into the mix would be Chuck Berry everyone after him copied him or learned to play his music and then created their own. The Beatles, Stones, Beach Boys. ETC. I think he is the first building block or "Rock and Roll". Elvis, Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Jerry Lee Lewis, and Buddy Holly are the Godfathers are rock and roll. They brought the blues and country together to make rock and roll without them you would not have rock and roll today.

As for the kids today what the fuck do they know banging a fucking plastic guitar attached to a TV set and they think they are a rock star. Most of the music today sucks and they all think they will be the next "American Idol" no talent superstar.

[TheMojoPin]

It's disturbing that when people ask what music/acts are OVERRATED it usually ends up with people just listing anything that is POPULAR. Too many of us (me included) try to be too cool for the room sometimes.

It's difficult to find indie or underground acts that are "overrated" since overrated basically hinges on too much attention/praise. Pretty much any group that can be called overrated is going to be pretty big or well known.

[grlNIN]

Fuck the Ramones.

[FUNKMAN]

Fuck the Ramones.

ditto

and Hendrix

[hedges]

Jimi Hendrix - feedback & distortion = genius?
If he wasn't black - nobody would even have known his name.

Pink Floyd? Lazy & booooooring music played by creepy english twats.

Anything from london.

Bob Marley? anything sounds good high. when it comes down to it... the guy has zero talent.

Sex Pist0ls - too bad they didnt all overdose.

The Clash - ( see London)

The Ramones - nothing more than a green day tribute band.

Kurits Blow

Well, it all boils down to what you like, right? Or how one sees musical history. Without The Ramones, you got no Green Day. You also probably got no Clash or Sex Pistols. So we can wipe those bands out. (Malcom Mclaren brought the style and the NY sound across the ocean). I love all these bands. You just don't like the music, fine. Movin' on...Bob Marley to me is just good reggae. Overrated, yes. This is where I will agree. He has become an icon, which has transcended the music. I much prefer Peter Tosh, Lee Perry, King Tubby, Augustus Pablo, and others.
Pink Floyd I fucking love, from the Syd Barret days, Live at Pompeii, Saucerful of Secrets,
all the way up to Final Cut and stuff after that without Roger Waters. No band like them.
Who cares if they're influential or not.
When Chas Chandler brought Hendrix to England in '67, Hendrix was a complete unknown. Clapton was God over there. Townsend, Beck, Clapton--all these guys went to see Hendrix play. Hendrix blew their fuckin' minds. Then he came back to the states and played the Monterey Pop Festival and blew a few more. Axis: Bold As Love is one of the top ten rock records ever made I believe. Overrated? Naahhh....
Dirtybird12 I just have a difference of opinion on some points, that's all...

[weekapaugjz]

1. U2
2. Pink Floyd
3. Aerosmith

i can't stand any of their music.

i also can't stand the beatles but in no way would say they were overrated.

[mildly amusing]

#1...Nirvana....not nearly as good as everyone gives them credit for...we get it...Cobain was a tortured genius...enough already...

[SatCam]

William Shatner

[underdog]

#1...Nirvana....not nearly as good as everyone gives them credit for...we get it...Cobain was a tortured genius...enough already...

Nirvana doesn't get credit for being "good", they get credit for changing the landscape of the (mainstream) music scene. Which they did. I can't see them being overrated.

[mildly amusing]

Nirvana doesn't get credit for being "good", they get credit for changing the landscape of the (mainstream) music scene. Which they did. I can't see them being overrated.

they were lucky...picked by mass media to be the poster child of that movement...Soundgarden, Alice in Chains, Pearl Jam...anyone of them could have "changed music history" and been the impetus that moved us from the Poison's of the world...Nirvana was just the face of that...not because they were musically any better than the other Seattle acts of the time...but just because they were anointed by MTV as the best and it seems to me that a lot of people parrot that opinion....

[underdog]

they were lucky...picked by mass media to be the poster child of that movement...Soundgarden, Alice in Chains, Pearl Jam...anyone of them could have "changed music history" and been the impetus that moved us from the Poison's of the world...Nirvana was just the face of that...not because they were musically any better than the other Seattle acts of the time...but just because they were anointed by MTV as the best and it seems to me that a lot of people parrot that opinion....

It doesn't matter who it could have been, it was Nirvana.

And if not for Nirvana, those bands might not have had the exposure that they did. They were probably a "right time, right place" band, but they changed music.

[Jughead]

http://www.buzzard8.com/jpgfiles/jugcd.jpg:tongue:

[mildly amusing]

It doesn't matter who it could have been, it was Nirvana.

And if not for Nirvana, those bands might not have had the exposure that they did. They were probably a "right time, right place" band, but they changed music.

That's exactly the point...Nirvana was picked to be the media darling regardless or whether or not their talent merited that distinction...Nirvana was not as good as everyone portrays them to be....it was serendipity that they changed the course of music...not talent...hence, in my mind they are overrated...but hey...if you love them...they're great to you and i can't argue you out of that....that's what makes art great......

[tele7]

The Oneders

[hedges]

Oasis

[underdog]

That's exactly the point...Nirvana was picked to be the media darling regardless or whether or not their talent merited that distinction...Nirvana was not as good as everyone portrays them to be....it was serendipity that they changed the course of music...not talent...hence, in my mind they are overrated...but hey...if you love them...they're great to you and i can't argue you out of that....that's what makes art great......

I do like Nirvana, but not nearly as much as Alice In Chains. But that's not the point. I just don't believe Nirvana can be overrated, for what they did to music. The same reason I don't think you can overrate the Beatles. Whether or not you like Nirvana and whether or not you think they weren't talented, they still changed music drastically.

[deepinthewoods]

I enjoy the flame wars ignited by the broad subjectivity of this thread. I mean, there's cunts out there who can make a good case for the artistry of Kenny G (the best case for Kenny G would be one with brass handles, but that's just me). So some bands hum to the resonant frequency of society. Some give hummers to a select few. People like what they like. To try and argue someone else's likes is retarded, unless they like pedophilia. All I am trying to say is that 1) Nirvana totally rox, 2) Alice In Chains, STP and Linkin Park absolutely eat ass, and 3) The Beatles are an undeniably important, ground breaking and influential band for MOST kids 12 and under. That's all I'm trying to say.

[hedges]

I put down Oasis because I remember some music journalists at the time comparing them to the Beatles; and it didn't help that the band was doing the same thing. And they sucked.
As far as Nirvana goes, they were in the right place at the right time with that video and mediocre song "Smells Like Teen Spirit". I had already been listening to a little stuff from Seattle like Soundgarden's Loud Love and one of their late 80s eps; about the same time Nirvana got big, a song called "Man in a Box" came on the radio, which to me blew Nirvana off the map. As time went on, Nirvana was put on a pedestal while all the other "grunge" bands came out. They were unique, Kurt was a good songwriter--but I believe it was the collective force of these bands, rather than just Nirvana, that changed music drastically.

[deepinthewoods]

My vote for most overrated: Beethoven. Come on..."dun dun da dun, dun dun da dun?" The birth of the cliche. The "Hey Ya" of its generation. And especially purile when that nazi Von Karajan lays his filthy mitts on it.

[lleeder]

High School Musical 2

[underdog]

I enjoy the flame wars ignited by the broad subjectivity of this thread. I mean, there's cunts out there who can make a good case for the artistry of Kenny G (the best case for Kenny G would be one with brass handles, but that's just me). So some bands hum to the resonant frequency of society. Some give hummers to a select few. People like what they like. To try and argue someone else's likes is retarded, unless they like pedophilia. All I am trying to say is that 1) Nirvana totally rox, 2) Alice In Chains, STP and Linkin Park absolutely eat ass, and 3) The Beatles are an undeniably important, ground breaking and influential band for MOST kids 12 and under. That's all I'm trying to say.

What?

How can you like Nirvana but think AIC "eats ass"? And to put Linkin Park in the same category as STP & AIC is ridiculous.

And what flame wars are you talking about? This thread has seemed pretty civil.

[deepinthewoods]

What?

How can you like Nirvana but think AIC "eats ass"? And to put Linkin Park in the same category as STP & AIC is ridiculous.

And what flame wars are you talking about? This thread has seemed pretty civil.

Maybe you're right about Linkin Park, because they are a 2 initial band and AIC & STP tidy up nicely as 3 initial bands, ideal for promotional sweatbands and visors. So, you mean to tell me they are not all secretly the same band? I personally liked them much better under their original 3 character name: MC5.

[scottinnj]

Bruce Springsteen.

[EddieMoscone]

It's difficult to find indie or underground acts that are "overrated" since overrated basically hinges on too much attention/praise. Pretty much any group that can be called overrated is going to be pretty big or well known.

As I posted near the beginning of this thread there are a million hipster bands and underground acts that blow that have come out the past 5 years or so that get ridiculous hype. Be it in magazines, online, and with the the douchebags who roll their own cigarettes outside of coffeeshops. I can probably make a list a mile long.

Sufjian Stevens
Bloc Party
Arctic Monkees
Bright Eyes
and so on and so on.

That's how I mean an overrated band doesn't necessarilly need to be popular.

[TheMojoPin]

As I posted near the beginning of this thread there are a million hipster bands and underground acts that blow that have come out the past 5 years or so that get ridiculous hype. Be it in magazines, online, and with the the douchebags who roll their own cigarettes outside of coffeeshops. I can probably make a list a mile long.

Sufjian Stevens
Bloc Party
Arctic Monkees
Bright Eyes
and so on and so on.

That's how I mean an overrated band doesn't necessarilly need to be popular.

And I would argue that the only way for them to be "overrated" is for them to hit a certain vague level of general public awareness that actual "underground" or "indie" bands don't even sniff. And I think all of those are on divisions of major labels or major distribution. Those bands are hitting levels of awareness that real indie bands can't even dream of, so they're on the same type of overrating as bigger bands...just on a lower end of that scale. Actual indie bands simply don't come close to any of those bands.

And I think "overrated" also hinges on major attention, not just nobodies ranting in person or online as the peak of the attention they get.

[RoadBlocks]

it has to be NIRVANA !!! I mean they did what everyone else was doing in seattle. but they got poputar because kirk did the world a favor . just a shame courtny wasn't standing in front of him.

[PapaBear]

it has to be NIRVANA !!! I mean they did what everyone else was doing in seattle. but they got poputar because kirk did the world a favor . just a shame courtny wasn't standing in front of him.
They were definitely popular WAY before Kurt died. They were a major part of what completely changed the music that was being played at the time. For several years, all you could hear on rock radio was hair bands.

[epo]

it has to be NIRVANA !!! I mean they did what everyone else was doing in seattle. but they got poputar because kirk did the world a favor . just a shame courtny wasn't standing in front of him.

They were definitely popular WAY before Kurt died. They were a major part of what completely changed the music that was being played at the time. For several years, all you could hear on rock radio was hair bands.

No doubt PapaBear. Nirvana was fucking huge in 1992-1994.

[thepaulo]

Music is dead.

[epo]

Music is dead.

Rock is dead. Hip-hop is very much alive.

[tele7]

Was Kiss mentioned yet? I'm watching them in concert from 1998 on VH1 Classic now. What a disaster.

[mikeyboy]

Rock is dead. Hip-hop is very much alive.

You know it.

http://www.ronfez.net/gallery//watermark.php?file=3479&size=1

[deepinthewoods]

Sufjian Stevens
Bloc Party
Arctic Monkees
Bright Eyes
and so on and so on.

That's how I mean an overrated band doesn't necessarilly need to be popular.


To quote Dr Robert: I'm diggin' your scene, man, though I LOVE to listen Arxtic Monkeys when I'm fuckin a dead horse...I mean whore.

By your underground yardstick I would have to say Wolf Eyes and/or Sunn O))) are totally overrated, but no one on this list gives a fuck about them in the first place, even though avant garde freeform electronic musique concrete doom metal is the new grunge. Maybe I'll start a thread about most overrated underrated band. That's right, I'm drunk; I am going to watch The Soup, eat cookies and pass out instead.

[thepaulo]

I can’t remember if I cried
When I read about his widowed bride,
But something touched me deep inside
The day the music died.

[ArecWithABigA]

Personally, I can't figure out what I'm more shocked by...the fact that no one has mentioned that the bands most heavily influenced by the Beatles are Nsync, Backstreet Boys and 98 Degrees or the that no one is saying that Elvis was a culture raping thief. But I have to say I am bummed I didn't include The Doors, that was a hell of a call, as was Jay-Z. But come on why would anyone even bring up the Black Eyed Peas...100% of us don't need a reminder that they are Music's most grandious cancerous tumor.

[ArecWithABigA]

DeepInTheWoods...even though your post is an incredibly wordy attempt at depth, your credibility is shot to hell when you say STP eats ass...you might as well say Soundgarden or Queens of the Stone Age eat ass. Cut it out you silly goose.

[TheMojoPin]

Personally, I can't figure out what I'm more shocked by...the fact that no one has mentioned that the bands most heavily influenced by the Beatles are Nsync, Backstreet Boys and 98 Degrees

Because that doesn't pan out at all. If you're saying that due to teenage girls going nuts over them, then guys like Sinatra are actually the biggest influence in that regard because they did it first and decades earlier. If you're saying that the Beatles were a manufactured boy band, well, I'd be curious to see how you could argue that...that makes more sense being applied to someone like the Sex Pistols than the Beatles.

[deepinthewoods]

DeepInTheWoods...even though your post is an incredibly wordy attempt at depth, your credibility is shot to hell when you say STP eats ass...you might as well say Soundgarden or Queens of the Stone Age eat ass. Cut it out you silly goose.

Well, the main difference between QOTSA/SG and STP is that the former do not suck ass and that the latter sucks ass, so, in that regard, you are correct. That AND an evil witch turned me into a silly goose many years ago. Somebody please kiss me so I can turn back into a gila monster!

Despite the name, I have no depth because I live in Flatland. If the third dimension is STP, then cubes eat ass. Gimme a copy of SWANS "Cop" and I'll shall never want for sky.

[scottinnj]

Any band that Eddie Trunk praises during Metal Month on VH1.

[JimBeam]

I can't believe it took 5 pages ( unless I missed it earlier ) to get Springsteen mentioned.

Unless people left him off because he's not really a band.

I'm a huge AIC fan and I don't think they can be lumped with anybody not even their bretheren that came out around the same time.

Their's was a very differnt sound probably due to way they were able to succeed with the dual lead singers niche.

[hedges]

Maybe you're right about Linkin Park, because they are a 2 initial band and AIC & STP tidy up nicely as 3 initial bands, ideal for promotional sweatbands and visors. So, you mean to tell me they are not all secretly the same band? I personally liked them much better under their original 3 character name: MC5.

Thank God the Stooges aren't a three initial band. Nice Swans reference!

[ArecWithABigA]

Because that doesn't pan out at all. If you're saying that due to teenage girls going nuts over them, then guys like Sinatra are actually the biggest influence in that regard because they did it first and decades earlier. If you're saying that the Beatles were a manufactured boy band, well, I'd be curious to see how you could argue that...that makes more sense being applied to someone like the Sex Pistols than the Beatles.

The Beatles were absolutely a boy band. The Average Boy Band (ABB) consists of four or five young, clean cut, heart-throbs...CHECK. An ABB has a catalog full of poppy and incredibly sappy love songs...CHECK. The ABB starts out wearing matching outfits...CHECK. The ABB appeals mainly to teenage women...BIG CHECK.

[tele7]

The Beatles were absolutely a boy band. The Average Boy Band (ABB) consists of four or five young, clean cut, heart-throbs...CHECK. An ABB has a catalog full of poppy and incredibly sappy love songs...CHECK. The ABB starts out wearing matching outfits...CHECK. The ABB appeals mainly to teenage women...BIG CHECK.

Who writes the ABB songs?
Who plays the the instruments at an ABB show or on the albums?

[PapaBear]

The Beatles were not a boy band, but I can accept the argument that the boy band concept was probably modeled on the type of marketing that The Beatles had. That's not the fault of The Beatles, though. Music producers of the late 90's and early 00's used the successful marketing techniques, and manufactured cookie cutter bands that appealed to the same type of demographic that the early Beatles enjoyed.

[MellySmelly]

I hated Evita! Bleeeeech http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/9167/pukeza0.gif

[tele7]

The Beatles were not a boy band, but I can accept the argument that the boy band concept was probably modeled on the type of marketing that The Beatles had. That's not the fault of The Beatles, though. Music producers of the late 90's and early 00's used the successful marketing techniques, and manufactured cookie cutter bands that appealed to the same type of demographic that the early Beatles enjoyed.

Agreed. I think I missed the bigger picture outlook in my previous post. The concept worked, so why not exploit it.

[led37zep]

Bel Biv Devoe

[thepaulo]

all musical acts are overrated except the ones who truely suck, which then by converse logic become underrated because nothing is ever really that bad....not even Alvin and the Chipmunks.

[hedges]

That is brilliant. ::thumbup:

[sailor]

The Beatles were not a boy band, but I can accept the argument that the boy band concept was probably modeled on the type of marketing that The Beatles had. That's not the fault of The Beatles, though. Music producers of the late 90's and early 00's used the successful marketing techniques, and manufactured cookie cutter bands that appealed to the same type of demographic that the early Beatles enjoyed.

so, you're saying they influenced boy bands?, which i think was his point originally.

[PapaBear]

so, you're saying they influenced boy bands?, which i think was his point originally.

No. I'm saying that the marketing of the Beatles influenced the future marketing (and creation of the concept) of boy bands.

[sailor]

No. I'm saying that the marketing of the Beatles influenced the future marketing (and creation of the concept) of boy bands.

but, they're modeled after them, no matter whose fault it was.

[fezident]

This thread means different things to different people.
It's the word "influence" and "over-rated" that's causing the debates.

One could argue that a band like, say, NSYNC was heavily influenced by NKOTB who, I personally, don't feel were influenced by THE BEATLES but rather; NEW EDITION. NEW EDITION was certainly a direct descendant of THE JACKSON 5 who, in my opinion, owe almost everything to Motown acts and James Brown revue-type shows.

Now...
this is where I start to split hairs.
ALL THESE BOYBANDS (and, keep in mind... I was kinda in two of 'em!!) have managers and handlers that are MUCH older than them.
To put it another way; if you wanna bash 'em for not writing their own material and for basically being drones... fine. But then you also have to admit that perhaps all that Beatles influence you're somehow hearing is not directly from THEM but rather, from somebody much older... and that somebody might have been a Beatle freak.




When NKOTB came out with their single "Tonight" it was not written by them. It's an extreeeeemely strong nod the Sgt Pepper sound. It's practically a Beatles (meets ELO) medley. I think Maurice Starr wrote it. (not sure if he had co-writers)
I would be VERY VERY surprised if 5 "no talent clowns" from Beantown were suggesting to their managers... "we'd really like to take things in a Sgt Pepper direction... I wanna completely ripoff The Beatles".
I think it's more likely that Maurice wrote a song that THE PARENTS wouldn't totally despise. He was in his 30ies at that time. Makes sense to me. It also makes sense that, PERHAPS it was some kinda "beatlemania" statement. Ya know... addressing the screaming-chicks-at-the-airport, crazed teenage girls, fainting, media blitz, fan club frenzy that The Beatles had and that NKOTB was currently experiencing.
But when NKOTB piled onto the bus, I don't think they were cranking The White Album on their walkmans.

[TheMojoPin]

but, they're modeled after them, no matter whose fault it was.

The only way they're modeled on them is through the basic idea of "girls go nuts over boys in a band, " in which case thousands of bands influenced the boy band. Nevermind that the basic forumla (musical and media-wise) for what we know as boy bands was already around before the Beatles even showed up, so even if someone is arguing that the marketing of the Beatles was influential on boy band mania, it was actually nothing new and a pre-existing model they themselves were using to a degree.

[TheMojoPin]

The Beatles were absolutely a boy band. The Average Boy Band (ABB) consists of four or five young, clean cut, heart-throbs...CHECK. An ABB has a catalog full of poppy and incredibly sappy love songs...CHECK. The ABB starts out wearing matching outfits...CHECK. The ABB appeals mainly to teenage women...BIG CHECK.

You just checked off pretty much every rock band/act from the "beginning" up until the late 60's. Again, the original model for this kind of reaction/marketing in terms of pop music was young Sinatra, and then there were dozens of groups/acts that milked the same response/image for years until the Beatles showed up. The Beatles as a boy band argument has always been a lazy one that simply does not fly.

And your perception of the Beatles' demographic, even at the beginning of their fame, as being "mainly teenge women," is woefully and completely wrong.

[DiabloSammich]

It's funny, I've never heard The Beatles referred to as a boy band until Ronnie B did it.

[sailor]

The only way they're modeled on them is through the basic idea of "girls go nuts over boys in a band, " in which case thousands of bands influenced the boy band. Nevermind that the basic forumla (musical and media-wise) for what we know as boy bands was already around before the Beatles even showed up, so even if someone is arguing that the marketing of the Beatles was influential on boy band mania, it was actually nothing new and a pre-existing model they themselves were using to a degree.

first, i'm not even saying i agree with the boy band theory (BBT), but based on the pwords papabear used "I can accept the argument that the boy band concept was probably modeled on the type of marketing that The Beatles had." i'm saying he agreed with the basic premise of the BBT. that's all, nothing to see here.

[FezPaul]

Nirvana and Led Zep. Both VERY overrated, especially Nirvana. How can you like a band when you cant understand wtf the singer is saying?


Yeah, that's why I hate Mozart. :smoke:

[thejives]

I still say Sinatra ... and I'm surprised nobody has agreed with me on that.

[ArecWithABigA]

This thread means different things to different people.
It's the word "influence" and "over-rated" that's causing the debates.

When NKOTB came out with their single "Tonight" it was not written by them. It's an extreeeeemely strong nod the Sgt Pepper sound. It's practically a Beatles (meets ELO) medley. I think Maurice Starr wrote it. (not sure if he had co-writers)
I would be VERY VERY surprised if 5 "no talent clowns" from Beantown were suggesting to their managers... "we'd really like to take things in a Sgt Pepper direction... I wanna completely ripoff The Beatles".
I think it's more likely that Maurice wrote a song that THE PARENTS wouldn't totally despise. He was in his 30ies at that time. Makes sense to me. It also makes sense that, PERHAPS it was some kinda "beatlemania" statement. Ya know... addressing the screaming-chicks-at-the-airport, crazed teenage girls, fainting, media blitz, fan club frenzy that The Beatles had and that NKOTB was currently experiencing.
But when NKOTB piled onto the bus, I don't think they were cranking The White Album on their walkmans.

Brilliant

[TheMojoPin]

The whole "boy bands are designed to get a massive public response like the Beatles got, thus the Beatles are a boy band" still feels like a huge stretch. Again, it totally ignores Sinatra when he first started and all the other acts and groups between him and the Beatles.

Nobody's been able to explicitly spell out some kind of actual model that makes the Beatles a boy band beyond "lots of girls liked them," namely because the Beatles' origins and then career as a group completely contrasts wih groups like NKOTB or N'Sync or whomever.

I really have no idea what an NKOTB song having vaguely Beatle-esque production proves along those lines beyond Maurice Starr and company were really savvy in their marketing of the group. One group trying to ape the sound of another group does not magically make the latter group the same as the former. Most of these boy bands are trying to have a "Motown" vibe. Does that make them actualy Motown acts? Of course not. Does that make acts like, say, the Temptations a "boy band?" Of course not.

[tupper65]

As far as I can tell, the only difference between the Beatles and boy bands is INCREDIBLE TALENT!

I'm sorry, but compairing the Beatles in any way to a boy band is completely INSANE!

[CruelCircus]

My vote is Nirvana, too, because in my mind not only are they overrated musically, but time has shown us that the entire "movement" they supposedly created/influenced- Grunge- is overrated in and of itself.

[fezident]

Does that make acts like, say, the Temptations a "boy band?" Of course not.


Actually... I have made the Motown = Orlando argument a few times before. Here on this board, in fact.

I definitely DO see how somebody could connect those dots.

The very small group of writers who are, pretty much, loyal to the artists on one label.
A very select group of producers and engineers who are, pretty much, loyal to said label.
A small group of select (virtually unknown) studio musicians playing on every track.
High quality recordings with great attention to detail.
Appeal to black AND white audiences.
Good looking vocal groups with a flair for fashion. And dancing.
"Breakout" stars born from the more successful groups.
etc
etc.


JIVE & Clive Davis is very much this generations version of MOTOWN & Gordy.

[TheMojoPin]

Actually... I have made the Motown = Orlando argument a few times before. Here on this board, in fact.

I definitely DO see how somebody could connect those dots.

The very small group of writers who are, pretty much, loyal to the artists on one label.
A very select group of producers and engineers who are, pretty much, loyal to said label.
A small group of select (virtually unknown) studio musicians playing on every track.
High quality recordings with great attention to detail.
Appeal to black AND white audiences.
Good looking vocal groups with a flair for fashion. And dancing.
"Breakout" stars born from the more successful groups.
etc
etc.


JIVE & Clive Davis is very much this generations version of MOTOWN & Gordy.

No, that's yet another "boy bands modeled on parts of previous genres/acts" argument. Again, someone copying parts of previous genres/acts does not make the previous act the same as the act doing the copying. That's a backwards argument.

The key difference is that the boy bands are being made to explicitly remind people of sounds and acts they have heard or seen before. The acts that they're copying weren't doing that. They were using what you listed above to sell and push new music...the boy bands are doing it to play on what people already know and barely tweek it.

[DiabloSammich]

I'm gonna have to say Okkervill River. Seems I hear them being brought up at least once a day.

I just don't get it.

[IMSlacker]

I'm gonna have to say Okkervill River. Seems I hear them being brought up at least once a day.

I just don't get it.

You're going to make Phishy cry.

[PhishHead]

I'm gonna have to say Okkervill River. Seems I hear them being brought up at least once a day.

I just don't get it.

You're going to make Phishy cry.

I am already crying.

Diablo you use to be one of my favorite posters/people.

Now you are at the bottom with the bob weir lovers.

[DiabloSammich]

I am already crying.

Diablo you use to be one of my favorite posters/people.

Now you are at the bottom with the bob weir lovers.



Sorry. I haven't been myself since, well, you know.

(sigh)

[IMSlacker]

Sorry. I haven't been myself since, well, you know.

(sigh)

You better watch your ass in TINR chat on Saturday.

[PhishHead]

You better watch your ass in TINR chat on Saturday.

i dont think i can do a show i am too distraught.

[DiabloSammich]

i dont think i can do a show i am too distraught.


I know the feeling.


(sigh)

[Jughead]

What do ya think???..Well you know( he's)doing right now???:sad:

[Hottub]

i dont think i can do a show i am too distraught.

We can always do my music.:drunk:

[DiabloSammich]

What do ya think???..Well you know( he's)doing right now???:sad:


I don't know Jug, but whatever he's doing, he's great at it.


(sigh)

[Jughead]

With 2/8 coming up its just to much to take all at one time....:Sob...Sob...