Since we all seem to be self-appointed music nerds over here, I thought I'd pose a question and see where it goes. I thought I'd throw one out there that didn't involve Jerry Garcia and Eric Clapton (yet).
Name a few bands you think are overrated, and explain.
I'll start.
1) Nirvana. Yes, they made one of the best and most important albums of the 90's (I'll even throw a chink in that in a second). However, if you take a look at their body of work, it basically consists of Nevermind and a bunch of stuff that got more airplay than it should have due to the success of Nevermind. IMHO, the only thing that is keeping Nirvana in some rarified air is the suicide of Kurt Cobain. Without that, they would have drifted into the irrelevance he was so afraid of (I think they were already there) and that shine would have worn off.
I used to think Nevermind (edited for a typo) was the most important album of the 90's...now I rank it third behind The Chronic and Dookie. Yes, I said Dookie. Just as Nevermind killed the hair bands, Dookie sent grunge into a downward spiral and introduced the pop-punk genre (they're not real punk), which hasn't been killed off by anyone else yet. The Chronic was the album which took rap into the 'burbs and made it financially lucrative...I also think it all but pulled the plug on some of the more insightful purveyors of the genre.
2) The Doors. No, I don't have something against bands with iconic lead men who died at 27. I rarely even listen to The Doors anymore. I'd rather give Velvet Underground a spin if I'm aiming for that trippy-60's vibe (if Jim Morrison ever for it "right", Heroin is the song he would have written). I would even go out on a limb and say they're basically trying to be Velvet Underground with cleaner production and less creativity. When you take a step back...and ignore the love people have for Jim Morrison...what was their contribution to music and was that contribution really as significant and people build them up to be?
I don't dislike either band, I just don't think either one quite belongs on the pedestal so many people place them on. In fact, I was listening to Nevermind last night while I was cleaning last night.
Thoughts? Opinions? Disagreements? Additions?
I watched some of the live at the paladium or whatever Nirvana's new live video is called and I fully agree. The only thing I kept thinking while watching that awful mess is if we would have ever found out that Grohl has more talent than Cobain if Cobain hadn't sucked the shotgun? Kind of obvious that Cobain had already ran out of his depressed ramble music and was going to be done anyway in a couple more years. As you said that had already started. They were on a downward spiral.
Foo Fighters kick a$$!
As far as the Doors goes I kind of agree also. I went through my love of the Doors 20+ years ago and it just ran out of gas after a while. I can still listen to some of it but overall I can live without hearing Manzarek's organ or Morrison's crazed ramblings very often.
I like The Doors, but as far as them being some sort of seminal group that defined something, no way.
I'll have to disagree with you on Nevermind, but as far as the rest of Nirvana's work, I would agree.
The Chronic is definitely one of the most important albums of the 90's, along with, sadly, "Doggystyle."
But Dookie? No way...Green Day is a poor man's Clash. They didn't usher in anything; they copied it.
As for mine, I have always thought that the Doobie Brothers and the Grateful Dead were extremely overrated.
**EDIT: whoops; so much for not including Jerry Garcia, I guess.**
(10-05-2011 07:52 AM)tigertommy Wrote: [ -> ]I watched some of the live at the paladium or whatever Nirvana's new live video is called and I fully agree. The only thing I kept thinking while watching that awful mess is if we would have ever found out that Grohl has more talent than Cobain if Cobain hadn't sucked the shotgun? Kind of obvious that Cobain had already ran out of his depressed ramble music and was going to be done anyway in a couple more years. As you said that had already started. They were on a downward spiral.
Foo Fighters kick a$$!
As far as the Doors goes I kind of agree also. I went through my love of the Doors 20+ years ago and it just ran out of gas after a while. I can still listen to some of it but overall I can live without hearing Manzarek's organ or Morrison's crazed ramblings very often.
shoot You the one with the crazy ramblins
(10-05-2011 08:40 AM)Wilbur Wrote: [ -> ] (10-05-2011 07:52 AM)tigertommy Wrote: [ -> ]I watched some of the live at the paladium or whatever Nirvana's new live video is called and I fully agree. The only thing I kept thinking while watching that awful mess is if we would have ever found out that Grohl has more talent than Cobain if Cobain hadn't sucked the shotgun? Kind of obvious that Cobain had already ran out of his depressed ramble music and was going to be done anyway in a couple more years. As you said that had already started. They were on a downward spiral.
Foo Fighters kick a$$!
As far as the Doors goes I kind of agree also. I went through my love of the Doors 20+ years ago and it just ran out of gas after a while. I can still listen to some of it but overall I can live without hearing Manzarek's organ or Morrison's crazed ramblings very often.
shoot You the one with the crazy ramblins
Sit back with Hank Jr on your record player and yell about Hitler for a while.
(10-05-2011 08:30 AM)tigergreen Wrote: [ -> ]I like The Doors, but as far as them being some sort of seminal group that defined something, no way.
I'll have to disagree with you on Nevermind, but as far as the rest of Nirvana's work, I would agree.
The Chronic is definitely one of the most important albums of the 90's, along with, sadly, "Doggystyle."
But Dookie? No way...Green Day is a poor man's Clash. They didn't usher in anything; they copied it.
As for mine, I have always thought that the Doobie Brothers and the Grateful Dead were extremely overrated.
**EDIT: whoops; so much for not including Jerry Garcia, I guess.**
The Grateful Dead can hardly be overrated. They never had a hit album or were really thought of as a great band. They just had a caravan of losers who followed them from city to city. I don't think anyone besides those losers and some rock critics really hold them in high regard.
(10-05-2011 07:30 AM)99Tiger Wrote: [ -> ]Since we all seem to be self-appointed music nerds over here, I thought I'd pose a question and see where it goes. I thought I'd throw one out there that didn't involve Jerry Garcia and Eric Clapton (yet).
Name a few bands you think are overrated, and explain.
I'll start.
1) Nirvana. Yes, they made one of the best and most important albums of the 90's (I'll even throw a chink in that in a second). However, if you take a look at their body of work, it basically consists of Nevermind and a bunch of stuff that got more airplay than it should have due to the success of Nevermind. IMHO, the only thing that is keeping Nirvana in some rarified air is the suicide of Kurt Cobain. Without that, they would have drifted into the irrelevance he was so afraid of (I think they were already there) and that shine would have worn off.
I used to think Nirvana was the most important album of the 90's...now I rank it third behind The Chronic and Dookie. Yes, I said Dookie. Just as Nevermind killed the hair bands, Dookie sent grunge into a downward spiral and introduced the pop-punk genre (they're not real punk), which hasn't been killed off by anyone else yet. The Chronic was the album which took rap into the 'burbs and made it financially lucrative...I also think it all but pulled the plug on some of the more insightful purveyors of the genre.
2) The Doors. No, I don't have something against bands with iconic lead men who died at 27. I rarely even listen to The Doors anymore. I'd rather give Velvet Underground a spin if I'm aiming for that trippy-60's vibe (if Jim Morrison ever for it "right", Heroin is the song he would have written). I would even go out on a limb and say they're basically trying to be Velvet Underground with cleaner production and less creativity. When you take a step back...and ignore the love people have for Jim Morrison...what was their contribution to music and was that contribution really as significant and people build them up to be?
I don't dislike either band, I just don't think either one quite belongs on the pedestal so many people place them on. In fact, I was listening to Nevermind last night while I was cleaning last night.
Thoughts? Opinions? Disagreements? Additions?
Disagree a little bit about Nirvana. In Utero was a better album than although Nevermind had some better individual songs(SLTS, Lithium, Breed, Something In The Way).
I don't think you can necessarily call any rock album the most important of the 90's since the 90's are basically the decade when Hip-Hop took over music. In terms of just rock albums though, you would have to put Nevermind in the same category of importance as Radiohead's OK Computer or Jeff Buckley's Grace.
In terms of actual overrated artists, I would add Wilco(enjoyed SunVolt side of Uncle Tupelo more), Mars Volta(enjoyed the Sparta side of At The Drive-In more), Modest Mouse, and Tupac.
(10-05-2011 09:58 AM)aTxTIGER Wrote: [ -> ]In terms of just rock albums though, you would have to put Nevermind in the same category of importance as Radiohead's OK Computer or Jeff Buckley's Grace.
Grace is one of my all-time favorites - it never gets dated in my mind.
(10-05-2011 08:49 AM)tigertommy Wrote: [ -> ] (10-05-2011 08:30 AM)tigergreen Wrote: [ -> ]I like The Doors, but as far as them being some sort of seminal group that defined something, no way.
I'll have to disagree with you on Nevermind, but as far as the rest of Nirvana's work, I would agree.
The Chronic is definitely one of the most important albums of the 90's, along with, sadly, "Doggystyle."
But Dookie? No way...Green Day is a poor man's Clash. They didn't usher in anything; they copied it.
As for mine, I have always thought that the Doobie Brothers and the Grateful Dead were extremely overrated.
**EDIT: whoops; so much for not including Jerry Garcia, I guess.**
The Grateful Dead can hardly be overrated. They never had a hit album or were really thought of as a great band. They just had a caravan of losers who followed them from city to city. I don't think anyone besides those losers and some rock critics really hold them in high regard.
You crack me up.
(10-05-2011 08:30 AM)tigergreen Wrote: [ -> ]I like The Doors, but as far as them being some sort of seminal group that defined something, no way.
I'll have to disagree with you on Nevermind, but as far as the rest of Nirvana's work, I would agree.
The Chronic is definitely one of the most important albums of the 90's, along with, sadly, "Doggystyle."
But Dookie? No way...Green Day is a poor man's Clash. They didn't usher in anything; they copied it.
As for mine, I have always thought that the Doobie Brothers and the Grateful Dead were extremely overrated.
**EDIT: whoops; so much for not including Jerry Garcia, I guess.**
You should wash your mouth out for mentioning Green Day in the same sentence as The Clash. I didn't say Green Day was great, I just said that Dookie was the start of the bastardized, pop version of punk. You could argue that The Clash was a bit "poppy" too (especially compared to other punk acts like the Sex Pistols, Black Flag, and even the Misfits), but I still mentally classify them differently than Green Day.
I just realized I made a typo in my first post. I'll have to go edit that. When it comes to Nirvana, I can really only stomach Nevermind. I've given the others a few spins, and just don't dig them anywhere near as much.
My comments on The Doors isn't that they're bad (neither is Nirvana), just that so many people hold them in higher regard than they really should.
(10-05-2011 09:58 AM)aTxTIGER Wrote: [ -> ]Disagree a little bit about Nirvana. In Utero was a better album than although Nevermind had some better individual songs(SLTS, Lithium, Breed, Something In The Way).
I don't think you can necessarily call any rock album the most important of the 90's since the 90's are basically the decade when Hip-Hop took over music. In terms of just rock albums though, you would have to put Nevermind in the same category of importance as Radiohead's OK Computer or Jeff Buckley's Grace.
In terms of actual overrated artists, I would add Wilco(enjoyed SunVolt side of Uncle Tupelo more), Mars Volta(enjoyed the Sparta side of At The Drive-In more), Modest Mouse, and Tupac.
I would put Nevermind above OK Computer and Grace in terms of importance...although not necessarily quality. Nevermind was one of those seminal moments that altered the course of music (even though Ten was released first)...SLTS was the end of the hair acts and altered the mindset enough to allow Seattle grunge to rule the musical world for a few years.
OK Computer and grace are phenomenal albums...but what musical ground did they break for other to follow?
I would have a hard time disagreeing with your additions to the list...although I still think of Mars Volta as more of an esoteric group that is still more unknown than known.
Right on with Nirvana. They really benefitted by Cobain's suicide...they left on a high note so to speak. Just look at Pearl Jam and note their relative slide into obsurity.
Just think, Cobain would be in his early-mid 40's now doing the banquet circuit. It is amazing that those you die young really benefit (as to thier legacy) because they really never had to experience the downfall of thier popularity. There is no "fat Elvis" or "molester Michael Jackson" to tarnish thier memory. Hendrix, Joplin, Morrison (as mentioned) all very well could have just faded out and have been seen as old farts by the early 90's.
I remember when Nevermind first came out - it was a huge success and Nirvana skyrocketed to fame almost overnight. The Seattle grunge sound was "in" at the time. A lot of the bands who reach superstardom do so by accident, as a result of timing and luck.
I was never a huge fan of the Doors but know many who love their music. Like many popular groups, their music resonates to listeners who prefer a certain style - which doesn't necessarily mean it's over-rated, more a matter of taste.
i may get completely blasted for this but i think U2 is way way over rated, what have they done that has been revolutionary. take away the one name band members and Bonos work with charitable organizations and what do u have? Oasis!!
i think the grateful dead are terrible but i agree that their not over rated bec generally the only people that like them are hippies who are way way too high to realize that the music is trash.
Green Day sucks. I've never understood their industry accolades. Nouveau-punk...what a concept.
Nirvana ushered in a new sound so they should be given credit for phasing out the hair bands of the 80's, but they just mass marketed the Pixies sound.
I've gotten to the point now, however, where I'm just content putting in the Ryan Adams or the Patti Griffin and just relaxing. I guess I'm getting old.
(10-05-2011 11:23 AM)salukiblue Wrote: [ -> ]Right on with Nirvana. They really benefitted by Cobain's suicide...they left on a high note so to speak. Just look at Pearl Jam and note their relative slide into obsurity.
Just think, Cobain would be in his early-mid 40's now doing the banquet circuit. It is amazing that those you die young really benefit (as to thier legacy) because they really never had to experience the downfall of thier popularity. There is no "fat Elvis" or "molester Michael Jackson" to tarnish thier memory. Hendrix, Joplin, Morrison (as mentioned) all very well could have just faded out and have been seen as old farts by the early 90's.
A lot of those old farts are sill kickin' it.
It's all personal preference. Everyone has a right to like who they like. I may disagree, but as long as you get into some good tunes, that is all that really matters. Rock on Friends.
(10-05-2011 12:08 PM)Original Sabretooth Wrote: [ -> ]Green Day sucks. I've never understood their industry accolades. Nouveau-punk...what a concept.
Nirvana ushered in a new sound so they should be given credit for phasing out the hair bands of the 80's, but they just mass marketed the Pixies sound.
I've gotten to the point now, however, where I'm just content putting in the Ryan Adams or the Patti Griffin and just relaxing. I guess I'm getting old.
Have you heard Ryan's new album?
(10-05-2011 12:22 PM)salukiblue Wrote: [ -> ] (10-05-2011 12:08 PM)Original Sabretooth Wrote: [ -> ]Green Day sucks. I've never understood their industry accolades. Nouveau-punk...what a concept.
Nirvana ushered in a new sound so they should be given credit for phasing out the hair bands of the 80's, but they just mass marketed the Pixies sound.
I've gotten to the point now, however, where I'm just content putting in the Ryan Adams or the Patti Griffin and just relaxing. I guess I'm getting old.
Have you heard Ryan's new album?
Its not my favorite from him, but there is no denying, the guy is a tremendous song writer.
(10-05-2011 12:07 PM)biglewlew20 Wrote: [ -> ]i may get completely blasted for this but i think U2 is way way over rated, what have they done that has been revolutionary. take away the one name band members and Bonos work with charitable organizations and what do u have? Oasis!!
No blasting here...a few on here will agree with you, but I love U2. Oasis isn't even remotely on the same planet.
My age and the fact that their live show is nothing short of amazing are why I am nuts about them. Achtung Baby (again, going back to that 1992-ish Nirvana era) is a fabulous album...I actually prefer it to The Joshua Tree.
The reason that I think they're not overrated is the fact that they've managed to revamp themselves several times over (sometimes less successful than others) to at least stay in the mainstream for over 30 years, and their older stuff stands the test of time. That, and the fact that NO ONE puts on a better live show. That's an accomplishment, no matter your opinion of the music.