Albums critics/fans worship that you can't stand

[No spoken words]

Tomato - tomahto

Squabbling - lively discussion



Between this comment and your comment in the Golden Globes thread, I have to ask: who pissed in your corn flakes this morning?

Does someone really need to piss in his corn flakes? Look at his screen name! I'm afraid to see what he might be posting in the sports threads, where I usually run into him. And we're both Yankee fans, Mr. Pryck, we should be agreeing!!!

While debate is good now and then, I think people are a tad too sensitive in this thread...this is an overrated thread, not a "this band sucks" thread, nobody is really attacking your beloved bands. My posts concerned Bob Dylan and Nirvana. Who in their right mind would say Bob Dylan sucks!?!? But, for me, since he is so very revered, and since I do not really enjoy his music...in my mind, he's overrated. But, I get why he's so revered, and I wish I could write 1/100th as well as he can. Same with Nirvana, though, I must say that an earlier post estolling the fact that Kurt could scream in tune was not necessarily something that made me reconsider my position. If I wanted to listen to song after song of screaming, I'd probably start listening to Metal, or, would just think back on my childhood, as my parents used to scream at me a lot and often it would sound like a duet.

 

[U2girl]

Nirvana and Oasis.

For a particular album, Sgt Pepper's lonely hearts club band.

 

[U2girl]

If solo artists can be mentioned too, Madonna.

 

[Salome]

re. the Nirvana debate (if there is a debate going on)

the people who claim that Nirvana was pivotal to music back then do not just claim that Nirvana created grunge, they debate that thanks to Nirvana alternative rock/music in the top 40

there is something to be said about that when you look at the state the hitlists were in right before and right after Smells like teen spirit

 

[Aygo]

If solo artists can be mentioned too, Madonna.

I think that Madonna is not worshiped, nort by public neither by the critics... Never was...

 

[U2girl]

The Queen of pop? The biggest MTV icon of all?

Overhyped to the max.

 

[Aygo]

The Queen of pop? The biggest MTV icon of all?

Overhyped to the max.

MTV icon? That's not enough... Probably one of the biggest icon of the contemporaneous culture. I'm not saying she's a good singer...

 

[mediaman44]

I've always felt the Stones were overrated. Blasphemous, I know.

I totally agree. I just don't like mick jagger's voice. Many bands of that same era are much better.

I can't get into Bob Dylan's voice either. I totally respect his songwritting skills and I do own Modern times, his latest album, but I can only listen to it every once in a while.

Also I'm not a huge fan of Radiohead, Nirvana or Oasis so I agree that they are overhyped. I like a few songs but nothing worth noting.

 

[XHendrix24]

Bob Dylan, Radiohead, The Rolling Stones, Nirvana, and Oasis are all overrated.

How's that?

To be fair, I certainly LIKE (even LOVE) some of the stuff from these people/bands, but on their lesser material, Dylan tends to bore me, Radiohead tends to bore/depress me, The Stones tend to bore me/grate my nerves, Nirvana tends to grate my nerves, and Oasis tends to annoy me.

OK Computer is a bit overrated probably, but I can at least see what people like about it (even though "Fitter, Happier" is one of the worst/lamest tracks that I have ever heard in my life). I probably prefer The Bends a bit as a whole, and possibly even Kid A (probably not though). Aside from those three albums and some great B-sides, I don't get the hype with Radiohead. Amnesiac was alright but nothing too special for the most part, and Hail to the Thief was pretty lame barring a few songs. Pablo Honey isn't as bad as people say it is - I might put it slightly above HTTT in Radiohead's catalogue personally.

My main deal with Nirvana is how ridiculously overplayed they were when I was growing up. I knew the vast majority of Nevermind by heart before I even bought the album. It's got some good songs on it, but I could honestly go my entire life without hearing it ever again (especially "Smells Like Teen Spirit" ).

Dylan has some really great songs, but he was definitely more of a songwriter than a performer. He's got some great lyrics and songs, but I just can't stand listening to him perform them for very long. Not much of a fan overall, obviously.

The Stones have some FANTASTIC singles ("Honky Tonk Woman," "Gimme Shelter," "Sympathy for the Devil," "Shattered," etc.), but I have yet to get into any of their full albums. Sticky Fingers didn't really click with me when I gave it a listen, and I found Beggar's Banquet to be pretty good ("Sympathy...," "Street Fighting Man," and "Salt of the Earth," especially), but a little too country-sounding for my taste on the whole. So overall, pretty good, but I'm not sure about "the best band of the 60's after the Beatles" as some people peg them as.

Oasis has some pretty good singles, but Liam annoys the hell out of me (his antics as well as his vocals), so that's pretty much all they're good for in my eyes. Maybe it's a British thing.

Also, I can't stand Bright Eyes. The way Conor Oberst sings just makes me want to punch the guy in the face. I can't take that much feigned melodrama in one sitting. He's got a couple songs that I'll admit are decently written, but I just cannot listen to the guy.

*phew* I think that's good for now.

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

okay now that the stones have been mentioned i'm going to mention the beatles. i know they're influential and all that but i don't like them. sorry.

also, i'll be the 20th or whatever person to say radiohead.

 

[LemonMelon]

Where is Muse in this thread?