He is one of the greatest lyricist of all time, plays a great guitar (and harmonica :D), his attitude and vocal style. His musical style wouldn't make you want to get up and dance or air guitar like a retard, but it would reach you on a more deeper and soulful way. Get rid of the stupid norms of 'regular' singing and songwriting and immerse yourself in his music and try to feel what he is saying and it will touch you like few other musicians have.

(Kinda reminds me of Syd when I talk about this :shycouch:)

Thanks, Lucifer Sam. I'll be sure to do that. Oh, I see what you're saying on the whole FOB & Creed bit. Very good point. I'm assuming most professional music critics aren't fond of them? =D And I take no offense at all. Hell, music is one of the most subjective things in the universe. And I wasn't saying that they weren't talented musicians, I just grow tired of their style rather quickly. I can see where you're coming from when you say that Van Halen didn't have much going for them with songwriting, but I believe Aerosmith were quite talented songwriters.

I love Bob Dylan, I enjoy the way he plays but Bob Dylan is not a great Guitar player, and not even a good harmonica player. He gets the job done, it all fits and there is no denying the lyrics or the power his music had on people.


The first thing you need to understand is that no one blows their brains out because they "feel misunderstood" that's like saying someone dies from sneezing. It's a symptom, Cobain was suffering from a disease and not being treated. He was an addict, his addiction caused severe depression, distortion of reality and ultimately his death. To chalk it up to merely a bad or cowardly decision shows a gross misunderstanding of his condition.

I tend to agree with your opinion on their musical catalog, I like In Utero is a very good album and Nevermind is above average, but I tend to think the circumstances of Cobain's death have elevated the band's status. Much like the status of Hendrix, Joplin, The Doors, Tu-Pac and others who meet unfortunate and untimely ends.

Second Buddy Holly was like 20 when he died, maybe a bit older but nowhere near 27.

I would say Aerosmith are clever songwriters and talented sure, but I don't know that they wrote too many great songs. A lot of music I like but tire of quickly. What would you say to that?

I would say that we have reached a barrier that cannot really be torn down. I would say that Aerosmith were quite prolific in their songwriting skills, ranging from songs like Dream On to Love In An Elevator, but in the end it's all a matter of opinion.... Hello, by the way! =D

I'd take Aerosmiths first 5 albums over any of Queen's shite

To be quite honest, Freddy Mercury's voice annoys me after a while....

http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/...V37078732_.jpg

Have you heard this album? I think his guitar playing on is great (then again, I think Dylan is the greatest vocalist ever, so there you go. I consider a great vocalist to be someone whose singing is emotional, not "technically" good).

I don't know about the harp either; on Live 66, it's pretty transcendant. I can't imagine You're A Big Girl Now or Tangled Up In Blue without the harp solos at the end. Most of the songs on Blonde On Blonde open up with Dylan's harmonica playing; after Kenny Buttrey's drums (and maybe Kooper's organ), it's probably the most important instrument on the album.

In my area (close to Boston) Aerosmith is treated like a god. I personally cannot stand them though (somewhat of a backlash type of thing). Tyler's vocals really get to me and are really annoying, the guitars are unoriginal and dull to me. I really dislike most of their songs, but 'Walk This Way', 'Love in An Elevator', 'Hangman Jury', 'Same Old Song And Dance' are all superb. No matter how much people tell me, I simply cannot like Dream On. I think Tyler's voice is overrated, but their songwriting is really underrated.

EDIT:
Maybe not the best vocalist, but he is amazing. Singers don't need to be technically good, Joe Strummer and George Harrison were great singers.

I think I can relate to what you're saying about the whole "Aerosmith is a god" thing. My friend has been obsessed with Queen ever since like 7th grade and he always talked about them. He even burned me 2 CDs of alot of their album cuts. I guess after awhile I just got sick of hearing them or something. And don't get me wrong, there are quite a few of their songs I enjoy, such as "Bohemian Rhapsody," "Killer Queen," "Under Pressure," and "We Will Rock You." I even have a t-shirt of them. But I fail to see what's so special about "We Are The Champions," for instance. Everyone loves that song and it practically bores me to tears.

Speak for yourself. I'll take one of the most original and talented bands ever over some overhyped third rate c*ck rock band of below average musical talent any day of the week.

Not to be out of line or anything, but I do believe he was speaking for himself. So what bands would you consoder original and talented?

As you can see it doesn't take much for me to want to listen to something other than Queen :laughing:

Off - topic a little but how many cd's do you have of them? I have 'Having A Rave Up' and the songs 'For Your Love' and 'Shapes of Things' from a 60s greatest hits. Are any of the other albums worth buying?

Five Live Yardbirds is okay. Pretty much everything after the big three (Clapton, Beck and Page) left has been devoid of talented songwriting. They just retained fans because of the name.

Yeah, why are The Yardbirds even still together? Should we even call it The Yardbirds? It's just the rhythm guitarist and drummer now of the original members.

They don't even have Keith Relf anymore, he left for Renaissance and then he got freaking electrocuted to death. Seriously whats the point in having a "reunion" when it's only 2 original members who didn't contribute much anyway? :laughing:

You have to get Roger the Engineer. Sometimes just credited as an eponymous (self0titled) album.

Also any live stuff from the 60's or early 70's is pretty damn good.

Hey OP, I suggest you post the rest of the artists before this thread dies.

Honestly, I find Metallica to be overrated. The dedication of their fans though, its quite admirable. They like to rip on them and talk about how much they suck now, but go to sell out shows and always buy the new album even if they dont really like it! Lets see...I'll also say Dave Matthews Band is overrated.

What about The Beach Boys? Pet Sounds might just be the most overrated album of all time.

An opinion I voiced a very, very long time ago. What's unique about The Beach Boys is that they only became critically acclaimed years and years after they lost their popularity, as if to say, "We know Dennis is dead and Brian is crazy, so we're going to start force-feeding their shit down our readers' throats." They are, to date, one of the worst acts to be compared to the Beatles. Despite the clear lack of musical ability (of any of the Beach Boys) and their pithy songwriting, I am consistently reminded of how high their shitpile rose. To my everlasting dismay, I regularly see articles like "Why Brian Wilson Is So Great" and "Let's Hold Hands and Suck His Cock Together." And it's about fuckin' time someone has the sense to pull these people's inflated heads outta their asses.

The way I see it, they have a few decent songs, such as God Only Knows and Good Vibrations, but holy ****, they don't deserve the credit they're getting.

The Immortals: The First Fifty : Rolling Stone

The Beach Boys above Led Zep and The Who? What is the world coming to?

I can't think of a single Beach Boys song I can listen to for more than five seconds without wanting to kill myself. Good Vibrations is probably the most overrated single ever.

You have very extreme musical opinions...

I take music seriously. :D

I respect that and will proceed with caution. Just know that while I love music as much as any inanimate or intangible thing in the world but I don't take discussing it all that seriously.

Oh c'mon now, I agree that Pet Sounds is a bit overrated, but it's still a great album and Brian Wilson was one of the best melodicists around. Not liking them is one thing but calling them talentless is just plain wrong, their vocal harmonies were brilliant and just because Carl Wilson was no Jimmy Page and Dennis was no Bonzo dosen't make them horrible musicians either. Brian Wilson is a favorite songwriter of mine. The post Brian stuff IS pretty horrible though.

If anything, the worst band to consistantly be compared to The Beatles is The Rolling Stones, they haven't done a damn thing as innovative as The Beatles, or The Beach Boys, at at least 30 other bands from the 60s.

Compared to whom? Ringo Starr?

I apologize for bringing my personal feelings into this. After spending a few hours reviewing their talents, I have objectively concluded that The Beach Boys were indeed a steaming pile of shit.

I must apologize again. I called Carl and Dennis horrible musicians, but...where's the music to show they were ever musicians? Carl's EXTEMELY limited skills on guitar allowed him to play a few scales, while Dennis was absent or nearly so from most of their recordings. But I have to give them credit. The Beach Boys realized a LONG time before The Monkees did the wonders of session musicians.

And the post-Beach Boys Brian Wilson equally so. I implore you not to romanticize about Brian's insanity as evidence of his creative expression (a la Syd Barrett). The bird flew a LONG time before Smile was written.

Now you're just being dificult on purpose. :laughing:


And whats wrong with that? I've always thought of The Beach Boys as being more of a collective than a band. Who cares if Carl is not a great guitarist or if Dennis is not a great drummer? Has anyone ever called them such? I don't recall anyone ever raving about Carl as a guitarist or Dennis as a drummer. But they did their job and it's not like the ever f*cked anything up on record. The praise has always been directed at Brian Wilson and deservedly so. He's the writer and producer. And thats always been what the Beach Boys were about, the melody and vocal harmonies and the production.

For one, Wilson is a better songwriter than Barrett (sue me, it's true) and no I'm not gonna use his insanity as proof of his genius. His music is a better example.

Smile was a great piece of work btw.

http://www.terminally-incoherent.com/img/facepalm.jpeg

What part, exactly, of Brian's work, is better than Barrett's? The lyrics and structures in Brian's songs, even in their "best" work, Pet Sounds, are far, far less innovative and diverse than Gates of Dawn, or even Barrett's solo albums.

:crazy:

I love Wilson and actually like the Beach Boys, but Barrett's work on Piper and his best songs on his solo albums have better lyrics than almost all of the Beach Boys stuff (God Only Knows is their lyrical peak). See Emily Play is a better song in every aspect (save backing vocals) than anything the Beach Boys have ever done.

Well lets see, Brian wrote songs about love and longing and as cliche as those themes may be, he was really damn good at it. His structures and melodies were brilliant too.

Syd wrote about mostly nonsensical things and his "structures" pretty much just meant endless noodling and odd noises. And Prog bands do it better. His melodies and lyrics were nothing more intricate than your average nursery rhyme, since thats basically what most Syd era Floyd songs actually sound like.

Oh, I forgot to add Peter, Paul, and Mary to my overrated list. I love music from the 60's, but I can't stand them.

I like this thread. No need for all the semantics. Whether you call it "over rated", "lame" or just "bands that I don't get", it's pretty obvious what the OP is expressing.

I can't stand U2. Radiohead is also extremely boring and pseudo intellectual IMO. Most art pop is.

Lil Wayne, Cant Rap For ****

Ah, glad you pointed out Radiohead.

Should he even be considered overrated? I mean, do the critics even take him seriously?

Radiohead isn't art pop. Not even close. (VU probably best approximates what good art pop should sound like). And if you want to hear pseudo-intellectual bullshit, download Tool's discography. Maynard doesn't even know what the fuck he's singing about. Certainly a must for your twonk friends.

How is Radiohead pretending to be intellectual? How the hell are they 'art pop', whatever that means.

As a self-proclaimed hip-hop head I feel I must re-open the discussion on Kanye West. I understand that you would say he is overrated, I've heard people compare Kanye's rapping to that of Lupe Fiasco which is a ridiculous comparison. the thing I have an issue with is the people saying that Kanye West is garbage and uncreative. Sure, as a lyricist, Kanye West is most definitely sub-par, but his production style more than makes up for it. He's not a conventional rapper either, Kanye is more of punchline rapper, he'll say a coupl okay rhymes and then say something that makes you chuckle, it's a breath of fresh air from a lot of hip-pop played on the radio. As for Kanye's use of samples, I don't believe it's lack of creativity, to be able to listen to one song and form something entirely different out of it, is a form of creativity. I'd compare it to garbage diving, he's found something that is forgotten in some sense and made something new.
Jay-z's "Lucifer" is a good example
Sample:
YouTube - Chase The Devil-Max Romeo
Lucifer:
YouTube - Jay-z - Lucifer

There is a distinct difference in feeling you get from both tracks which I like. So yes, Kanye is a ****y mutha and, yes, his rappig is sub-par compared to a Lupe Fiasco or a Jay-z etc.. but his skills lie as a producer/punchline rapper also keep in mind, another celebrated producer/MC, Dr. Dre, was never the greatest on the mic either.

Where is the encyclopedia you are referencing? I ask because as you are disagreeing in an absolute sense, I am certain you must have a solid and established stance from which to draw your conclusion from. I would also be interested in what *is* an excellent example of Art Pop?

Thanks!