I'll have to disagree (I'm hesitant to do this since you're avatar is from one of my favourite bands of all time). I think Nirvana was a symbol of the time they came out, and while they were not a great band, they came out at the perfect time and captured the youth at that time because of what they did and said. The youth of the time needed something to latch onto and grunge (Nirvana being the figureheads for grunge) was it happened to be.
Very similar thing can be said for the Sex Pistols, really quite a terrible band (I actually love some the songs they did, but I noticed someone labelled them as overrated in this thread), and in many ways a fabrication by Malcolm McLaren, but they represented something and that something captured the youth and made them an iconic movement in music history. Heck, you coudl say the same thing for The Beatles before them, and Elvis before them.
Generally happens every generation or so.
KT
I changed my mind.
The Beatles
The Velvet Underground
The Sex Pistols
The Pixies
Bad Brains
The Kinks
Pink Floyd
Guided by Voices
Dave Matthews Band. Okay first off they are NOT and jam band that some fuck heads think that honestly compare DMB w/ Dead - I've been to over 20 Grateful Dead concerts and *that* was a jam band. Second what's up with that middle linebacker that plays fiddle. Not only does he suck at that he only plays a quarter the time and takes center stage all the time. Next is EMO Dave himself. Bitch sings nothing but misery and sorrow and sounds like he has the hick ups all the time. What's your take?
Oh and the Who.
It is a matter of taste, but I'd say Bruce Springsteen and REM. I've never understood all the gushing about them.
The Joshua Tree and Rattle and Hum are the shit, the rest of their stuff is shit.
This thread is going to be fun.
I'll help:
Metallica
Led Zeppelin
Pink Floyd
U2
The Who
Michael Jackson
Elton John
Foo Fighters
Beatles
Pearl Jam
Rolling Stones
Neil Young
...not a lick of musical talent in any of their bones.
Rush? Van Halen? Yes? Aerosmith? Too much talent/genius in all of those bands to be called overrated, give me a break with some of these.
Tool, Metalica, Pearl Jam, Coldplay, Nirvana.. now THESE are overrated bands. Scientifically proven.
And U2? Please.. it's amazing how much personal, misguided hatred of a band's lead singer turns people into biased morons. I'm tired of their music personally but even I understand how great some of their work is, enough already.
Oh yeah can't forget KISS and Radiohead.
Phish
How they get people to follow them all around the country is way beyond me.
The Grateful Dead. Super-overrated.
I list them not because they suck more than anyone else, but rather because they're held up as legends. Their popularity stems from the Woodstock flavor of their concerts - an excuse to get baked for two days in the middle of Indiana. Beyond that, they're adequate but prolific musicians.
The Beatles are overrated.
And I dont believe too many arguments about them being "influential". Paris Hilton has influenced millions of young girls all over the place.
Jesse Jackson has influenced millions of black men in America.
They are both people who qualify as "influential" even though I dont care for what they've done. Dunno if influential should be an automatic WIN when describing someone. Especially if the argument is Overrated vs Underrated, which is what we have here.
i do not understand how you can call the Beatles overrated. They simply transformed music in their time. Yes, they were, in essence, a pop band, but they brought non mainstream stuff to the main stream. That "weird stuff", well, that was then transforming themselves into something beyond a teeny popper band.
Michael Jackson has to be the most overrated 'musician' of all time... Perhaps its that I didn't grow up in the 80s but damn, he was not entertaining at all and his voice is down right annoying.
I actually feel that while I enjoy some of Rush, I don't think of them as anything special.
Yep, that's what I did.
That's fine, but I stand by my comments. They were definitely not great musicians and they have only a small handful of good songs, but it was about more that that.
KT
Are you near 100,000 miles? My advice:
Check you sarcasm meter; it's failed twice in one thread now.
Michael Jackson was easily the best thing out of the 80s.
easily.
to not understand how awesome those early albums are is to have no soul. or taste.
I "get" the popularity of Springsteen and have come to understand his influence, but I still say is the greatest example of someone who can do so much with essentially 0 talent.
I would say that everyone of the bands that have been mentioned have had some good songs, obviously due to some mixing engineer who was able to get the band on the radio.
I tend to be a fan of songs not bands and will admit that even my favorites have songs that suck. And oddly enough even some of the less talented bands have been able to put together songs that I enjoy, such as Three Days Grace, there tunes are very musically simple but often enjoyable and occasionally the lyrics are good. Their appeal seems to be with a young musically immature listener.
On the other hand, for me, I don't see the appeal of most jazz. It always seems to be the background music at any events that I attend and I find it grating.