Most Overrated Band/Artist Ever
- strangerinthehouse
- Posts: 311
- Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 2:14 pm
- Location: fort myers florida
- strangerinthehouse
- Posts: 311
- Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 2:14 pm
- Location: fort myers florida
- noiseradio
- Posts: 2295
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 12:04 pm
- Location: Dallas, TX
- Contact:
I think Zep is overrated as well, but then I think a lot of AOR classic rock is overrated. And that's probably just because when I was in high school you had three choices where rock was concerned: You could listen to metal, underground (for me) college rock, or classic rock. I hate metal (with notable exceptions), and I didn't know about the underground stuff. I listened to classic rock all the time. Some of it still works for me. I think i'll always dig The Who and to a lesser extent Hendrix. And some artists transcend that label, like the Beatles and Bowie. But hearing things like Pretty Hate Machine, Doolittle, Document, and Ritual del lo Habitual for the first time made me realize that all the fretboard wanking and pomp of most classic rock did little for me. I'd rather listen to Peter Buck, Thurston Moore, or Black Francis on guitar over Clapton, Page, or other guitar gods any day of the week.
These days, 30 seconds of Yes, Zep, Floyd, or Skynyrd makes my flesh crawl. But that's just me.
These days, 30 seconds of Yes, Zep, Floyd, or Skynyrd makes my flesh crawl. But that's just me.
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
--William Shakespeare
--William Shakespeare
- Mr. Average
- Posts: 2031
- Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2003 12:22 pm
- Location: Orange County, Californication
Zep is properly rated and holds a proper place in the history of rock and roll, in my opinion.
Considering the diversity of the first 4 records, the band rarely ("When the Levee Breaks"/"Immigration Song) took a simple tune and ran it into the ground (the "Pink Floyd Principle for Success" ). Songs like HeartBreaker, Whole Lotta Love, and many others from the first few albums featured a myriad of changes that were rooted in sounds that had, heretofore, not been incorporated into rock and roll. While the Beatles, Stones, and others listed progenitors of the Blues sound among their influences, I think Led Zeppelin actually derived a tremendous benefit from lifting, then adapting that influence to their unique sound. To this day, I do not see them as simply the leader in a large pack of bands that were all doing the same thing. They took many more risks, and they did indeed celebrate a driving sound that was elegant but simple.
While it was very much in vogue for a lead singer of that era to describe his voice as an instrument, Plant adapted his voice perfectly to complement the musicians. The high-pitched squeal that he found himself characterized by was not accidental...it accorded him a range to carry into the more bluesy numbers, when the band sounded like a different band entirely, and restraint was the order of the day, not excess for the sake of excess.
Towards the end ("Trampled Under Foot"/"Kashmir") they were reaching a bit to adapt to a changing musical landscape, and the machine just was not ready, willing or able to adapt.
John Bonham played drums like no other of his era, save for Keith Moon. But his signature was so huge, bombastic. While I am not an ardent fan, and I began to lose interest with the release of Houses of the Holy, I still think that they were able to draw on influences and resources that were, frankly, unmined, and therefore, very experimental and quite adventuresome. Comparing that to today's artists, who can freely sample from all that has gone before, I think they accomplished a lot, and are deserving of their place in history.
I recently completed a compilation CD of their work. The songs were selected to highlight their diversity and their ability to deftfully make changes on a dime and draw on multiple influences. Maybe that has colored my opinion on this.
And to name a song, "Rock and Roll" that is arguably one of the greatest Rock and Roll songs ever recorded is a gutsy move. Unfortunately, an entire generation of youth thinks "Cadillac" everytime they hear the song. The branding has been so perfect, so complete, that Cadillac has railroaded the song into the corporate environment. Nonetheless, It remains a great single, one of many that make the band better than 99% of the other bands of it's day.
Considering the diversity of the first 4 records, the band rarely ("When the Levee Breaks"/"Immigration Song) took a simple tune and ran it into the ground (the "Pink Floyd Principle for Success" ). Songs like HeartBreaker, Whole Lotta Love, and many others from the first few albums featured a myriad of changes that were rooted in sounds that had, heretofore, not been incorporated into rock and roll. While the Beatles, Stones, and others listed progenitors of the Blues sound among their influences, I think Led Zeppelin actually derived a tremendous benefit from lifting, then adapting that influence to their unique sound. To this day, I do not see them as simply the leader in a large pack of bands that were all doing the same thing. They took many more risks, and they did indeed celebrate a driving sound that was elegant but simple.
While it was very much in vogue for a lead singer of that era to describe his voice as an instrument, Plant adapted his voice perfectly to complement the musicians. The high-pitched squeal that he found himself characterized by was not accidental...it accorded him a range to carry into the more bluesy numbers, when the band sounded like a different band entirely, and restraint was the order of the day, not excess for the sake of excess.
Towards the end ("Trampled Under Foot"/"Kashmir") they were reaching a bit to adapt to a changing musical landscape, and the machine just was not ready, willing or able to adapt.
John Bonham played drums like no other of his era, save for Keith Moon. But his signature was so huge, bombastic. While I am not an ardent fan, and I began to lose interest with the release of Houses of the Holy, I still think that they were able to draw on influences and resources that were, frankly, unmined, and therefore, very experimental and quite adventuresome. Comparing that to today's artists, who can freely sample from all that has gone before, I think they accomplished a lot, and are deserving of their place in history.
I recently completed a compilation CD of their work. The songs were selected to highlight their diversity and their ability to deftfully make changes on a dime and draw on multiple influences. Maybe that has colored my opinion on this.
And to name a song, "Rock and Roll" that is arguably one of the greatest Rock and Roll songs ever recorded is a gutsy move. Unfortunately, an entire generation of youth thinks "Cadillac" everytime they hear the song. The branding has been so perfect, so complete, that Cadillac has railroaded the song into the corporate environment. Nonetheless, It remains a great single, one of many that make the band better than 99% of the other bands of it's day.
"The smarter mysteries are hidden in the light" - Jean Giono (1895-1970)
Last night I was listening to Hendrix's Little Wing and Long Hot Summer Night and got to thinking about this thread. I would defy anyone to say that Hendrix was overrated (and mean it)... in fact, I would go so far as to say that despite him being the guitar legend that he is, he is still underrated.
I agree that Led Zeppelin deserve their rep and that they are definitely not overrated (having seen them live twice in their heyday - 1972 and 1975). I would not however, agree that Page is the greatest guitarist we have seen; he just has a fairly unique approach... I would rate several of his fellow countrymen his equal for starters (for example, Peter Green, Alvin Lee, Robert Fripp, and Roy Buchanan) and then there are the likes of Elmore James, Johnny Lee Hooker, Chet Atkins, Jimi Hendrix, Larry Coryell, etc etc... all innovators and all equal, if not superior, to Page.
I agree that Led Zeppelin deserve their rep and that they are definitely not overrated (having seen them live twice in their heyday - 1972 and 1975). I would not however, agree that Page is the greatest guitarist we have seen; he just has a fairly unique approach... I would rate several of his fellow countrymen his equal for starters (for example, Peter Green, Alvin Lee, Robert Fripp, and Roy Buchanan) and then there are the likes of Elmore James, Johnny Lee Hooker, Chet Atkins, Jimi Hendrix, Larry Coryell, etc etc... all innovators and all equal, if not superior, to Page.
- noiseradio
- Posts: 2295
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 12:04 pm
- Location: Dallas, TX
- Contact:
I never really 'got' Bobby Sherman.
A group of musicians that I feel are underrated is KISS. Their shows may be-over-the-top and they may be overrated as far as a corporate image, but musicianship-wise they are underrated.
A group of musicians that I feel are underrated is KISS. Their shows may be-over-the-top and they may be overrated as far as a corporate image, but musicianship-wise they are underrated.
It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think that you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt
- M. Twain
- M. Twain
- King Hoarse
- Posts: 1450
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 11:32 pm
- Location: Malmö, Sweden
KISS never played anything difficult ever (although some of their guest musicians did) and even manage to fuck up the simplest of riffs most of the time. I mean, they've admitted that even "KISS Alive" is overdub city and that's still embarrassing to listen to. Take the drums on "Nothing To Lose" for example.
When I was 9 I had all their records and won a KISS trivia contest but not even then would I say the original line-up were good musicians. Gene's pretty solid, but as for the others...
I mentioned Zeppelin because of their almost official "best rock band of all time" tag, not because they weren't talented and original. Of course they were.
When I was 9 I had all their records and won a KISS trivia contest but not even then would I say the original line-up were good musicians. Gene's pretty solid, but as for the others...
I mentioned Zeppelin because of their almost official "best rock band of all time" tag, not because they weren't talented and original. Of course they were.
What this world needs is more silly men.
-
- Posts: 1192
- Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2003 3:00 am
- Location: København, DK
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 1192
- Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2003 3:00 am
- Location: København, DK
- Contact:
Noize...I've been a pretty big fan of REM over the years, but kind of lost interest in their music over time. What's your opinion of what makes Peter Buck so great? Has he really played anything great since Life's Rich Pageant?noiseradio wrote:. I'd rather listen to Peter Buck, Thurston Moore, or Black Francis on guitar over Clapton, Page, or other guitar gods any day of the week.
These days, 30 seconds of Yes, Zep, Floyd, or Skynyrd makes my flesh crawl. But that's just me.
I'd never leave the house if I had a Gimp
- bambooneedle
- Posts: 4533
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 4:02 pm
- Location: a few thousand miles south east of Zanzibar
I actually saw Motley Crue on the Dr. Feelgood tour... naturally, they kicked ass man. I still like Too Fast For Love. Vince Neil made the band (don't know what they're up to now), just seems to unaffectedly embody the certain hedonistic image or ethos of it however dumb that so many copycat bands would try to contrive; he really believes in it.
- King Hoarse
- Posts: 1450
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 11:32 pm
- Location: Malmö, Sweden
I saw Mötley Crüe on the Theatre Of Pain tour. Probably the worst gig I've ever heard. Vince didn't hit one correct note. The funniest part of the gig was when they told Mick Mars to extend his already worthless guitar solo (because Tommy Lee had broken a pedal). He ended up playing the same three notes over and over for about four minutes at earcrushing volume looking very ashamed.
What this world needs is more silly men.
- noiseradio
- Posts: 2295
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 12:04 pm
- Location: Dallas, TX
- Contact:
Haven't we had this conversation before?cope wrote:Noize...I've been a pretty big fan of REM over the years, but kind of lost interest in their music over time. What's your opinion of what makes Peter Buck so great? Has he really played anything great since Life's Rich Pageant?
I'd say give Document another listen. Then listen to the stunning acoustic work on Automatic for the People (and Out of Time, come to think of it). His playing on Monster is quite good as well. Then pick up a couple of discs by Tuatara, an instrumental group for which Buck is the guitarist. He also does some great work on the Minus 5's last couple of releases.
I edited this post. Somehow I managed to quote bambooneedle and respond to cope. Don't know how. But I meant to quote cope. So now my post might make sense.
Last edited by noiseradio on Tue Feb 08, 2005 5:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
--William Shakespeare
--William Shakespeare
-
- Posts: 2476
- Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2003 8:35 am
- noiseradio
- Posts: 2295
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 12:04 pm
- Location: Dallas, TX
- Contact:
Millions of Britney Spears fans can't be wrong then, either. And the millions of N'Sync fans are right, too.laughingcrow wrote:Greatest, most innovative rock guitarist ever.
Greatest rock drummer ever.
Brilliant bassist/pianist
Brilliant vocalist...
millions of Zepheads can't be wrong!
I think the players in Zep are fine. I even like some of their stuff a lot. I just don't think that they're as collosally important as most. I don't think they're bad, just too highly regarded--overrated. But they're not the most overrated to me. Again, that's the Eagles. People adore these guys, and their music is SO PEDESTRIAN. They suck.
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
--William Shakespeare
--William Shakespeare
- noiseradio
- Posts: 2295
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 12:04 pm
- Location: Dallas, TX
- Contact:
- noiseradio
- Posts: 2295
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 12:04 pm
- Location: Dallas, TX
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 1192
- Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2003 3:00 am
- Location: København, DK
- Contact:
Yeah we've had this one before when you dogged Jerry Garcia big time! I've listened to Document a million times, and there are some cools songs and cool guitar playing at times. But also VERY lame playing. Maybe I'll check out Tuatara. My Peter Buck fandom is more in the early period, Carnival of Sorts type stuff and Murmur through Pageant.noiseradio wrote: Haven't we had this conversation before?
I'd say give Document another listen. Then listen to the stunning acoustic work on Automatic for the People (and Out of Time, come to think of it). His playing on Monster is quite good as well. Then pick up a couple of discs by Tuatara, an instrumental group for which Buck is the guitarist. He also does some great work on the Minus 5's last couple of releases.
I'd never leave the house if I had a Gimp