truth on hold Posted September 3, 2010 Share Posted September 3, 2010 (edited) I know this will offend a lot of people, but I'm sorry, it's U2. These guys could barely play their instruments on their 1st few albums. And how can a greatest band ever claim songs like "Sweetest Thing" and "Mysterious Ways?" And come on, Boner wearing dark sunglasses in doors and at night? And "The Edge" with the winter skull cap at all times too? For this they get treated like royalty? I mean, seriously, no ... Edited September 3, 2010 by Joe_the_6_pack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omar Little Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 Radiohead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b stein 22 Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 Beatles they could not write a song for ****. It was just repetitive an got boring after a while. JK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 I know this will offend a lot of people, but I'm sorry, it's U2. Of ALL TIME? Dunno Probably of my time. Has to be the most pretentious band of my time. They are uninteresting in every conceivable way, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 U2. I did not open this thread until I thought about it after a while seeing it. Came up with U2. Completely agree. South Park satire of Bono is great. U2 sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLZFAN4LIFE Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 I've got to go with The Beatles. I can respect their experimentation and diversity, however, in the end, it was nothing but over-hyped bubble gum pop music. See "the monkeys". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 Dave Matthews Band. Though I can't disagree with U2, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLZFAN4LIFE Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 U-2 does come in at a close second. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rackemrack Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 U2 was the first band that came to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zevo Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 Nirvana Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 Nirvana Excellent choice. Can't decide which band is worse, but some think Cobain was the 2nd coming. Bono vs Kurt C in a who gives a crap suck-off! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 (edited) I thought you were going to get slammed with the U2 thing, but it's so true. They've been riding the same bass line for the last 5 or so albums. With the exception of "One" what do they have besides a couple of relaxing mood songs and a seemingly endless reel of uninspired time filler radio songs? I'll also give a second to Nirvana. I remember a time when a framed picture Kurt Cobain was as common in a in a college kids apartment as a picture of the Queen in a North Ireland household. Edited September 4, 2010 by Rob's House Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 Bruce Springsteen is by FAR the most overrated band of all time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quester74 Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 Not nearly as over-rated as U2, simply because of their global following, but I will throw KISS into the arguement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 Not nearly as over-rated as U2, simply because of their global following, but I will throw KISS into the arguement. Well KISS certainly sucks. But don't most know they are a make-up bulls#it band? I know few who take them too seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 Radiohead No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeviF Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 Nirvana youtube.com/watch?v=rF8khJ7P4Wg No. Agree with both of these. I hate Cobain, even in death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frit0 Bandit0 Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 add "Duran Duran" to the list Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el Tigre Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 The Who. Lots of people my age think they're great,but I don't see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 (edited) I know these won't be popular choices, but I will go Rush, Steely Dan and the Beach Boys... shame on you Beatle bashers! Although I don't hate everything they have ever done, I could also agree with Springsteen and U2... Edited September 4, 2010 by Buftex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted September 4, 2010 Author Share Posted September 4, 2010 Nirvana Like or dislike them -- I happen to like -- but you have to admit they weren't phony and watered down like U2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omar Little Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 youtube.com/watch?v=rF8khJ7P4Wg No. Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 Here's my list: Herman's Hermits Dave Clark Five Paul McCartney Journey Daryl Hall and John Oates Huey Lewis & The News Genesis George Michael Michael Bolton Michael Jackson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 (edited) Grateful dead. Sorry NOS junkies. Edited September 4, 2010 by Jim in Anchorage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 the beatles?...seriously? even if you don't like em (and why wouldn't you?) you gotta respect em....everyone who plays an instrument knows how to play multiple beatles songs and they're mimiced, covered and copied over and over by bands (good and bad, of multiple genres) 40 years after their heyday. now, milli vanilli- there was an overated grammy winning band. Yes. yes is overated Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 the beatles?...seriously? even if you don't like em (and why wouldn't you?) you gotta respect em....everyone who plays an instrument knows how to play multiple beatles songs and they're mimiced, covered and copied over and over by bands (good and bad, of multiple genres) just one example:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5qakFIecBU Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACor58 Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 Rush, definitely Rush. They are like Nickelback from 30 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 I forgot to mention Kiss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 I can't argue with U2. I'd include AC/DC only because they have made the exact same album their entire career. Lol @ at those that mentioned Rush and Steely Dan. Rush is basically rock's biggest cult band and has been largely dismissed for their entire careers by the "in" crowd. Mentioning Nickelback in the same sentence as Rush is like...well actually it's so laughable it's really not like anything else as far as ridiculous analogies go. I'm not fan of Steely Dan, but again another band that has never dominated the airwaves or headlines in their career can't possibly be overrated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 Rush, definitely Rush. They are like Nickelback from 30 years ago. Rush is like Nickelback? You gotta explain this one to me...even if you don't like Rush (and I'm not a fan of prog rock) how the hell are they like Nickelback? As for Nirvana, at least they ended the hair band era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 I know these won't be popular choices, but I will go Rush, Steely Dan and the Beach Boys... shame on you Beatle bashers! Although I don't hate everything they have ever done, I could also agree with Springsteen and U2... And here we have another subjective music thread but I have to disagree with you on the Beach Boys. They were competing with the Beatles and I think they blew them out of the water. Listen to bet sounds start to finish it may change your mind. Now with regard to U2........spot !@#$ing on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 Has anybody mentioned Oasis yet? God, what a terrible band. And there wasn't a bigger tool in the music industry than Noel Gallagher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 Has anybody mentioned Oasis yet? God, what a terrible band. And there wasn't a bigger tool in the music industry than Noel Gallagher. Regarding Oasis in order to be overrated you need to be rated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 Regarding Oasis in order to be overrated you need to be rated. Haha, I guess it depends on if we're talking overrated in the context of critics or just average music fans. Despite the legions of great bands produced by the UK, Brits love Oasis arguably more than all of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 I know this will offend a lot of people, but I'm sorry, it's U2. My wife will hunt you down and beat the crap out of you for that! U2 helped her through some very difficult times. I've seen them 2 Xs with her and both shows were very good, but...to each his/her own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 (edited) David Bowie. What a worthless piece of anemic trash. Edited September 4, 2010 by Jim in Anchorage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 I can't argue with U2. I'd include AC/DC only because they have made the exact same album their entire career. Lol @ at those that mentioned Rush and Steely Dan. Rush is basically rock's biggest cult band and has been largely dismissed for their entire careers by the "in" crowd. Mentioning Nickelback in the same sentence as Rush is like...well actually it's so laughable it's really not like anything else as far as ridiculous analogies go. I'm not fan of Steely Dan, but again another band that has never dominated the airwaves or headlines in their career can't possibly be overrated. Steely Dan has generally been considered to be a band for the cerebral. Once they started posting here and exposed their true "intellect", it has perhaps turned some off as to the intelligence level of thier music. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMadCap Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 The Beatles are over-rated? What they hell? People who think this have got to be under 30. 27 number one songs, 15 number one albums, in less than ten years. Yeah, over-rated. I had some kid try and tell me that fukin Radiohead was a better band than the Beatles the other day. What the Beatles did will NEVER be repeated... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 Steely Dan has generally been considered to be a band for the cerebral. Once they started posting here and exposed their true "intellect", it has perhaps turned some off as to the intelligence level of thier music. Steely Dan and Bruce Springsteen are people, not bands so technically they don't belong in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delete This Account Posted September 4, 2010 Share Posted September 4, 2010 (edited) over-rated is a difficult gauge to define, given personal tastes and what's considered popular at the time. i generally follow the rule of what bands are/aren't influential by how their music has stood up over the years, which is why i'd disagree with those who have included The Beatles in this thread -- though i know where they're coming from as i once, too, had the same thought. the trouble with The Beatles and Michael Jackson, for that matter, and to a degree Nirvana, is you had to be there at the time to understand what they actually did to push music forward. -- The Beatles were, in some ways, the "inventors" of popular music in taking the form to its high limits by crafting catchy songs. The Beatles then built on that by showing they were capable of building on their music by exploring numerous other avenues and expanding their reach. with all due respect to Hendrix and Zepplin, i consider "Helter Skelter" a great early grunge/metal/hard-rock song that helped introduce what's possible. -- the same for Michael Jackson. even overlooking his work with the Jackson 5, which was influential in producing smart bubble-gum pop, his dominance in the early 1980s was essential in providing a counter-point to the punk movement coming from across the Atlantic. Jackson, with two albums, made pop relevant again and, furthemore, his popularity forced change by influencing MTV to broadcast black artists in regular rotation during day-time hours. this alone was important, as it's unlikely Prince would've made the impact he did, while also ushering in lesser lights such as UB40. -- and it's tough to judge Nirvana, because Cobain died so early. Nirvana, though, did provide an acceptable platform to an American underground sound that had been burgeoning for quite some time -- the Mats, Husker Du, Minutemen, Camper Van Beethoven -- and even allowed some hangers-on (Soul Asylum, Cracker) to get some respectable airplay. i was in Vancouver at the time Nirvana hit, and as much as their songs and that of the Pearl Jam, were overplayed, they did again push music forward by creating a departure from the 80s, be it the L.A. hair-bands to Cindy Lauper. as such, i don't include Journey on my list because, essentially, they did what they did without pretention or real sense that they were "artistes" in the standard sense. now to artists that make my over-rated list: -- genesis, pre and post Gabriel. -- u2 (hung on far too long), and have failed to provide any new ideas. -- dave matthews, who to me is much the modern-day version of supertramp, another band that built a high reputation for popularity on a modestly amusing array of pithy tunes. -- chrissy hynde and the pretenders. why is she still attempting to put out music: it's been far too clear for far too long that late guitarist James Honeywell Scott was the the true influence to this band that put out two good albums a very long time ago. -- ryan adams, who's capable of writing great songs as much as he's capable of writing the same song over and over and over again and putting it on just about every album he puts out. maybe not over-rated, but he's truly failed to come close to reaching his potential. -- carrie underwood. take away her looks, and any donkey can be famous producing muzak to the masses. jw by the way: one of the most under-rated bands on my list are The Faces. Edited September 4, 2010 by john wawrow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts