Legends or not (yet) ?

[The Sad Punk]

In terms of success or talent? Because the Beach Boys, I believe, are the most overrated musicians in history.

A bit of both, I suppose.

I don't see how anyone can possibly not think the Beatles are the most overrated band of all time.

 

[Trinity3000]

I never got the Beach Boys thing, cheesey surf music is what springs to mind. Is there some other Beach Boys music that I'm not aware of?

 

[cobl04]

Stop dissin' Wikipedia!

They have ALL the facts...

You know what the worst thing is about that picture? The website. What a horrible blight on wikipedia.

 

[gman]

A bit of both, I suppose.

I don't see how anyone can possibly not think the Beatles are the most overrated band of all time.

Can you say The Beatles are overated when they have sold well over a BILLION records??? I think that kind of says it all.

 

[U2isthebest]

Can you say The Beatles are overated when they have sold well over a BILLION records??? I think that kind of says it all.

I definitely don't think The Beatles are overrated. I doubt any of the bands mentioned in this thread would exist without their pioneering of the rock industry. That being said, can sales really prove the legendary status or influence of an artist? People like Britney Spears have sold something like 50 million albums. That is millions more than many brilliant, deserving musicans. I would hurt somebody who called her a legend.

 

[U2isthebest]

To the original question, I would definitely say U2 are legends. To me they are the greatest band of all time, but that all comes down to a matter of opinion. Nearly every band coming up today, no matter how shite they are, lists U2 as a musical influence (apparently they weren't listening that closely) They're still critically acclaimed, their fanbase is still growing, etc. The thing that seals it for me is the fact that even most non-fans consider them legends. I wasn't a U2 fan until last summer, but I knew they were considered one of the "greats" and I always had that term "legendary band" stuck in my mind when I saw them. Most of my friends aren't fans, yet they still consider U2 a legend. Of course that to them means, "How come they're still around?"

 

[JCOSTER]

The day u2 stormed Live Aid was the day they became legends in a vast majority of the publics eye.

Yeah, I think your right.

 

[LMP]

Can you say The Beatles are overated when they have sold well over a BILLION records??? I think that kind of says it all.

don't use the record sales excuse to relate to rating a band.

according to that logic, britney spears, the backstreet boys, and the spice girls are undeniably good.

I personally am a big fan of the Beatles, but I can definitely see how people can see them as overrated.

 

[BVS]

Can you say The Beatles are overated when they have sold well over a BILLION records??? I think that kind of says it all.

Really? So sales say everything?

 

[toscano]

Re: Re: Legends or not (yet) ?

When it comes to popularity they are up there with the artists you mentioned but legends to me implies that you've made an unequaled artistic statement and that you'll be remember a hundred years from now like we remember Mozart and so on. Of the bands you've listed only Pink Floyd would qualify. U2 would not because they've never made a true artistic statement that spanned many records. I'm also not sure that they'll remember in a hundred years.

You can't say exactly WHO will be remembered 100 years from now, maybe Floyd will be the ones who won't be regarded as highly, a reputation tarnished indelibly by the travesty that was the Water-less era Floyd

 

[corianderstem]

I never got the Beach Boys thing, cheesey surf music is what springs to mind. Is there some other Beach Boys music that I'm not aware of?

Yes.

God Only Knows
Wouldn't It Be Nice
Good Vibrations
Surf's Up (don't let the title fool you; it's not a fun, spritely little tune like Surfin' USA or Catch a Wave)

The Beach Boys get unfairly maligned for the cringe-worthy later year crap like Kokomo, and the little ditties they had early in their career.

Although Don't Worry Baby and The Warmth of the Sun are early Beach Boys songs that are really brilliant and gorgeous.

 

[xaviMF22]

Re: Re: Re: Legends or not (yet) ?

You can't say exactly WHO will be remembered 100 years from now, maybe Floyd will be the ones who won't be regarded as highly, a reputation tarnished indelibly by the travesty that was the Water-less era Floyd

nope...even with your so called "tarnished reputation"....

their legacy and place in the music industry is set.

 

[toscano]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Legends or not (yet) ?

nope...even with your so called "tarnished reputation"....

their legacy and place in the music industry is set.

And still none of us has a crystal ball to see how they will be regarded 100 years from now.........if it will be any better or worse than the Beatles, Zeppelin, Stones, U2, etc.

As for the tarnished reputation you did notice the "maybe" right ?

Floyd is no more or less set to be acclaimed 100 years from now than ANY of those bands, I'd wager LESS so than the Beatles ,even though I love Floyd and don't see the big fuss about th eBeatles

 

[gman]

To those of you questioning my post regarding record sales of the beatles...........its the equivalent of saying Michael Schumacher wasnt that great a racing driver just coz he won shitloads of Formula 1 races. Can any of the doubters give me a more appropriate way to measure an artists popularity if not by record sales? Love em or loath em, the Beatles changed music. They are the most popular band in history by a country mile, if you wanna waste yer time and breath trying to dispute it, be my guest!

 

[BVS]

To those of you questioning my post regarding record sales of the beatles...........its the equivalent of saying Michael Schumacher wasnt that great a racing driver just coz he won shitloads of Formula 1 races.

Bad analogy. A race has an objective qualifier. Music doesn't. Music is all subjective.

And popularity doesn't guarantee anything.

Michael Jackson was very popular at one time.

 

[david]

I never got the Beach Boys thing, cheesey surf music is what springs to mind. Is there some other Beach Boys music that I'm not aware of?

yeah, the album "pet sounds" which was inspired by the beatles album "rubber soul" which then inspired the beatles to make sgt peppers.

the beach boys and the beatles were a bit competitive.

 

[gman]

Bad analogy. A race has an objective qualifier. Music doesn't. Music is all subjective.

And popularity doesn't guarantee anything.

Michael Jackson was very popular at one time.

You can say music is subjective, but it is still quantifiable!
I would agree with yer point if the beatles had sold around 200-250 million records and were touted the same as they are currently. It would be up for debate and rightly so. But when its over 4-5 times that amount, IMHO, you cant justify saying they were overated!

 

[U2Man]

A bit of both, I suppose.

I don't see how anyone can possibly not think the Beatles are the most overrated band of all time.

overrated in what sense?

 

[BVS]

you cant justify saying they were overated!

You can almost justify anything my friend.

Overated is a relative term. I don't think they are overated in the sense that Creed was once overated. They are overated in the sense that so many make them untouchable. They are not gods, yet many put them on that alter. Numbers won't justify anything when it comes to music.

Especially considering the Beatles have gone through several different formats. Vinyl, 8track, cassetes, CDs, etc...

And tomorrow it will even be harder to use numbers to justify anything because it's so easy to steal music these days.

 

[U2Man]

easier and cheaper to distribute too, though.

 

[gman]

You can almost justify anything my friend.

Overated is a relative term. I don't think they are overated in the sense that Creed was once overated. They are overated in the sense that so many make them untouchable. They are not gods, yet many put them on that alter. Numbers won't justify anything when it comes to music.

Especially considering the Beatles have gone through several different formats. Vinyl, 8track, cassetes, CDs, etc...

And tomorrow it will even be harder to use numbers to justify anything because it's so easy to steal music these days.

Sorry bonovox, can you tell me how you measure a recording artists sucsess then? i would have thought record sales was as good a place to start, followed by touring attendances perhaps. I dont get yer "numbers wont justify anything when it comes to music" point. I would have thought that was THE defining factor in music industry. I cant think of any artists dropped by their label for selling too many records!

 

[BVS]

Sorry bonovox, can you tell me how you measure a recording artists sucsess then? i would have thought record sales was as good a place to start, followed by touring attendances perhaps. I dont get yer "numbers wont justify anything when it comes to music" point. I would have thought that was THE defining factor in music industry. I cant think of any artists dropped by their label for selling too many records!

I'm talking about measuring quality. Yeah you are perfectly able to measure one's success by the numbers. But success doesn't always equal quality.

'I'm Too Sexy' was a very successful single.

 

[gman]

I can see what yer sayin bonovox....however, in Uk certainly, it has been known to get to number one with about 25 000 sales. Thats a 1/100th of what the beatles used to shift in singles. if i remember correctly, u2 had really poor sales for Desire wen No1. the flip side of the coin is that Right Said Fred can hardly be classed as successfull group in the grand scheme of things.
I take on board yer points about crap selling, but cant think of too many artists making a lengthy, noteworthy career from it.

 

[The Sad Punk]

overrated in what sense?

In the sense in which it's almost become a point that they can't be compared to anyone else in the history of music. People reflect on them being much better than they really were.

By no means do I hate the Beatles, I'm definitely a fan. But it's not like they were the beginning and end of music - and this is a belief which seems to exist within a lot of critics and fans, casual or otherwise.

I'm not sure if I can get this across making much sense, but that's as good as I'll try.

I never got the Beach Boys thing, cheesey surf music is what springs to mind. Is there some other Beach Boys music that I'm not aware of?

Just as the Beatles had some fairly standard 60's pop tunes early in their career, the Beach Boys had a lot of summer/surf based tracks. Even then, they had some amazing harmonies.

No doubt they had some terrible tracks, but "I Just Wasn't Made For These Times" and "All I Wanna Do" are among the greatest of all time - definitely matching the best of the Beatles, IMO.

 

[BVS]

I take on board yer points about crap selling, but cant think of too many artists making a lengthy, noteworthy career from it.

There are plenty:

Celine Dion
Air Supply
Kiss
AC DC
Def Leperd

just to name a few...

But my point is everyone of these bands has a devoted fanbase, all had somewhat long careers, but they all make my ears bleed.

It's all subjective. For every band you think is crap, someone out there thinks they are the best band in the world.

 

[intedomine]

1. The Beatles
2. U2

...Daylight...

3. Elvis, Pink Floyd, Led Zep, Stones, Bob Dylan, Gin Blossoms, Abba

 

[vaz02]

1. The Beatles
2. U2

...Daylight...

3. Elvis, Pink Floyd, Led Zep, Stones, Bob Dylan, Gin Blossoms, Abba

 

[AtomicBono]

Nearly every band coming up today, no matter how shite they are, lists U2 as a musical influence

here is one of the most important points in the entire thread...U2's universal influence. We all know Chris Martin has a hard-on for U2, but who would have predicted that Linkin Park would change their sound to reflect U2's? How about Radiohead, who everyone just loves to compare to U2 negatively (y cant u2 b mor liek radohed lozlolozlolzoz56)? I'm pretty sure multiple members of the band have said positive things about U2 and they are an obvious influence (as far as I'm concerned Radiohead have always been a few steps behind U2... U2 did Achtung Baby, Zooropa, Passengers, and Pop, and then Radiohead did OK Computer, Kid A, and Amnesiac). What about all those hipster not-quite-indie bands (Interpol, The Killers, Bloc Party, etc)? What about these shitty boring pop songs I hear on the radio that have blatantly generic Edge guitar? Yes, people will say BUT U2 DIDNT MAYK THAT SOND EKO AND THE BUNIMEN DID AND JOY DIVISON LOLZOZLZ U2 DIDNT INVENT N E TING thats fine, but first off, I fully believe that U2 did create their own sound, regardless of other similar sounding bands at the time, the U2 sounds stands out from the rest - it's not just the Edge guitar tone. secondly though, U2 brought this sound to the masses. and U2 evolved. U2 is the band people will remember 50 years from now, because their influence will still be heard in music, just like the influence of The Beatles and Led Zeppelin and The Velvet Underground (not as famous, but incredibly influencial) can be heard today.

oh yeah and U2 made some decent albums too, some shit about trees and babies and leaves, that might have something to do with the whole legendary status thing. and the whole, you know, amazing live shows with groundbreaking technology and connecting with the audience and Bono going farther than any previous rock star in actually making a difference politically. Those could be factors too.

plus, they had their own iPod. that was neat.

 

[xaviMF22]

U2 rocks

 

[LMP]

1. The Beatles
2. U2

...Daylight...

3. Elvis, Pink Floyd, Led Zep, Stones, Bob Dylan, Gin Blossoms, Abba

Are those opinion or fact?

Because you lost me at Gin Blossoms.