who are the greatest band in the world right now

Girrrrseach

smarmy git

:rolleyes:

BaZmO*

:rolleyes:

Snap!

Mossy Monk

I am listening to Zeitgeist more than anything else atm so that must mean Smashing Pumpkins are the best*

*This of course is a load of rubbish

One Cold Hand

The Magic Numbers are the 'biggest' band in the world. Have you seen them? They're huge.

Seriously tho, can't really answer your question. If by greatest you mean biggest, then yeah, U2 / Greenday / REM someone like that. Greatest musically is someone like Arcade Fire, Kings of Leon, Arctic Monkeys. It's all a matter of opinion and all that.

The Polyphonic Spree

red_ice

arcade fire, interpol, kings of leon, queens of the stone age

so hard to pick

Hermy

Cream, Jimi Hendrix Experience, Mothers of Invention, Mahavishnu Orchestra, Miles Davis Quintet, Weather Report, King Crimson, Led Zepplin...I could go on.
These were some of the great bands of the past and they are still some of the greatest bands of the present because as artistic merit continues to be subsumed by financial concerns the chances of musical endeavours reaching the heady heights of the past seem highly unlikely.

Smegball

Muse

Sir Graball

The Rubber Band !! Brilliant:D

qwertplaywert

Based on past and present material?The Foo Fighters are the best band currently active in the world
The biggest is properbly u2, followed by Green Day[I cant stand either of U2s stuff, and any of Green Days Stuff in over 10 years]

Rozie

demanufactured wrote:

Theres no greatest band in the world, everyone just has an opinion of what is.

That's not really true. There's such thing as a level of artistic merit, how much creativity, inventiveness emotion is put into music. It's not the same as technical ability or hard work which are easier to measure, but it's st

In those terms the only band that really fits the bill is Muse. But I'm sure there's a band I haven't thought of that's even better, or just as good. Because it's so fuzzy, there are probably several "greatest bands", depending on what genre or style you're looking at. Then subjective opinion comes in, what of these efforts do you actually enjoy.

We live in a world with a lot of "bias" though, and pap is marketed to the masses. Music with higher objective effort would have wider appeal "by default" in more accessible genres, like Rock or Alt Rock, but would still remain somewhat niche for more obscure genres.

Rozie

I think the Smashing Pumpkins would be a great candidate if they were still around in their original form(and if their next album impresses more than Zeitgeist, in their current forum they could be too, never know if past members will rejoin based on the success too), though obviously will have somewhat less mass market appeal or else they wouldn't be "Alternative" rock. Zeitgeist was pretty mainstream though. It lacked the ambience of past Pumpkins records. I'm forgiving it since it's the break-in album for the new line-up, Tarantula is an awesome track(as is another one I can't remember the name of, think it's Track 3 or so) and it actually sounds like real rock music, unlike much else that's been supposedly published under that genre in the last few years.

Foo Fighters.

JC 2K3

Rozie wrote:

That's not really true. There's such thing as a level of artistic merit, how much creativity, inventiveness emotion is put into music. It's not the same as technical ability or hard work which are easier to measure, but it's st

In those terms the only band that really fits the bill is Muse.

A lot of people, myself included, felt that BHaR was Muse adjusting to a more commercial sound and hated that album, whilst others feel that it was a Radiohead-esque, brilliant change of musical direction(lol IMO).

Point being, artistic merit, creativity etc. is immeasurable, no matter how much you think you're right, your opinion only applies to you.

Karl Hungus

It's Dimmu Borgir, end of story. Just watch this, and close the thread, because we have a winner.

Mr. Presentable

OK,so, if this is the new standard, then Turbonegro are the greatest ever.

Rozie

JC 2K3 wrote:

A lot of people, myself included, felt that BHaR was Muse adjusting to a more commercial sound and hated that album, whilst others feel that it was a Radiohead-esque, brilliant change of musical direction(lol IMO).

Point being, artistic merit, creativity etc. is immeasurable, no matter how much you think you're right, your opinion only applies to you.

No. First off I'll point out that you're championing what I call "common man's wisdom". Most people would "agree" with you, at least on the surface. But that doesn't make it through.

What you're describing is that you simply didn't like the musical direction of the new Muse album. It doesn't change the amount of actual creaitivity in the album.

It might be difficult when you're dealing on a less extreme level - but consider comparing "Bohemian Rhapsody" to The Fast Food Rockers.

When you say it's solely down to personal taste, you put the likes of Steps shoulder to shoulder with Joy Division. Do you really think that's a good thing? You can't tell me that there's something in there, that's different, not quite right with the former, that isn't just down to personal taste.

People might like or claim to like things, but the actual depth of experience they go through is as highly effective by this objective merit as much as it is by my taste.

There's also no other way to explain how certain songs have a wider appeal than you'd expect, when they didn't have the mass market explosion that pop acts get nowadays(and have done since the 1920s). Some things simply are popular based on how good they are - of course, this doesn't apply to more niche music, but there are still plenty of somewhat alternative tracks that get popular. The fact that Muse is so popular may well be evidence of this. They're not really part of any current marketable phenomenon - they're completely their own thing. In the 90s when Radiohead were still making good music, then maybe I could see some basis for this argument, but Muse are still very different, more epic, operatic.

And I have no idea how Map of the Problematique is more commercial sounding That's probably the most "alternative" and expriemental singles they've ever released...

Karl Hungus

Pfft, Dimmu Borgir are 10 times more creative than Muse, and on the whole, a far, far better band.

bazwin

stone Roses Without A Doubt.......

Buttons_sb

For me its The Who, Queen or The Killers

JC 2K3

Rozie wrote:

What you're describing is that you simply didn't like the musical direction of the new Muse album. It doesn't change the amount of actual creaitivity in the album.

And what do you measure that with?

Rozie wrote:

It might be difficult when you're dealing on a less extreme level - but consider comparing "Bohemian Rhapsody" to The Fast Food Rockers.

Or, say, Plug in Baby and Starlight. I definately know which one I consider far superior.

Rozie wrote:

When you say it's solely down to personal taste, you put the likes of Steps shoulder to shoulder with Joy Division. Do you really think that's a good thing? You can't tell me that there's something in there, that's different, not quite right with the former, that isn't just down to personal taste.

See, you're comparing manufactured, commercial music to an actual band with integrity. The only reason bands like Steps are conisdered bad is because what they did has been done to death and it becomes a little boring. Therefore, across the board, most people who're into music wouldn't enjoy it and it's generally universally regarded as inferior. However, this isn't a fact, it's a widely held opinion.

Rozie wrote:

They're not really part of any current marketable phenomenon

lol. The same people who listen to the marketable crap are the majority of Muse's fanbase, like it or not. Muse are so popular because they're marketed alongside other indie bands. Their sound might be a bit different, but they still are very much a part of the same marketable phenomenon.

Rozie wrote:

In the 90s when Radiohead were still making good music, then maybe I could see some basis for this argument

Kid A, Amnesiac and Hail to the Theif were all released in the 00s.

And if you're one of those people who thinks that Radiohead went downhill after OK Computer then you're not worth arguing with tbh.

Rozie wrote:

And I have no idea how Map of the Problematique is more commercial sounding That's probably the most "alternative" and expriemental singles they've ever released...

Is it the standard, accessible 4/4 beat, the generic chord progression, the unimaginative bassline or the general song idea that's been done many times before that makes you think it's experimental and "alternative"?

It wasn't me!

+1 for Dimmu Borgir.

Rozie

And if you're one of those people who thinks that Radiohead went downhill after OK Computer then you're not worth arguing with tbh.

Uh, why? Because I didn't like their new musical direction, I'm not worth arguing with?

See, you're comparing manufactured, commercial music to an actual band with integrity. The only reason bands like Steps are conisdered bad is because what they did has been done to death and it becomes a little boring.

I don't buy this at all. That kind of music had only been "done to death" by cheesy Eurovision entries which were ALWAYS considered pap.

I'd also like to put forward the fact that people that people that are really into music tend to have better "taste" than casual listeners on a whole. This backs up my point even further.

lol. The same people who listen to the marketable crap are the majority of Muse's fanbase, like it or not. Muse are so popular because they're marketed alongside other indie bands. Their sound might be a bit different, but they still are very much a part of the same marketable phenomenon.

I really don't think they are. Most indie bands are, like I said, lacklustre light rock. They're watered down rock'n'roll. Muse's tracks are often synth heavy, Matt has a very unconvential voice and often playing style. In fact, the album they DID have that's more comparable with modern Indie(but obviously much better), is Showbiz, which didn't do as well as the later albums.

Is it the standard, accessible 4/4 beat, the generic chord progression, the unimaginative bassline or the general song idea that's been done many times before that makes you think it's experimental and "alternative"?

I don't see why 4/4 beat matters. I do a lot of very expiremental stuff and still use 4/4 beats and fairly generic chord progression. Having odd beats and chord progressions is often something associated with the world of Prog, which can often put the technical before the atomspheric.

Map is a very atmospheric song. From the effects and tones used, to the vocals and progression. Modern Indie has little to no atmosphere. That alone sets it apart immensely. That's always what's set Muse apart from me from "indie" - Indie is generally a label given to more playful, less deep(not necessarily in a bad way) Alternative rock.

Cunny-Funt

Pearl Jam

Karl Hungus

I'm giggling to myself right here.

Calling Muse experimental, or for that matter, atmospheric... That's just chucklesome.

Now, Ulver! That's experimental, and extremely atmospheric. Hell, just listen to the song Gnosis.

John

We need a formula and take into account various important factors to describe the Greatness (G) of a band:
Creativity = I
Depth (emotional) = D
Accessibility = Acc
Number of albums = Atot
Number of good albums = Ag
Number of bad albums = Ab
Critical acclaim = CAcc
Sales = S
Number of dead band members = M
Number of songs they've covered = Q
Number of times they've been covered = K
Album art = V
Quality of live performance = W
Quantity of live performances = R

and say some constant, C.

So I suggest:

JC 2K3

Rozie wrote:

Uh, why? Because I didn't like their new musical direction, I'm not worth arguing with?

I'm not sure what your initial point was.

You didn't like Radiohead's new direction? Fine, that's your opinion.
I didn't like Muse's new direction, that's my opinion and that's fine too.

So obviously we both have different views of what "greatness" is and thus it is totally opinion based.

JC 2K3

John wrote:

We need a formula and take into account various important factors to describe the Greatness (G) of a band:
Creativity = I
Depth (emotional) = D
Accessibility = Acc
Number of albums = Atot
Number of good albums = Ag
Number of bad albums = Ab
Critical acclaim = CAcc
Sales = S
Number of dead band members = M
Number of songs they've covered = Q
Number of times they've been covered = K
Album art = V
Quality of live performance = W
Quantity of live performances = R

and say some constant, C.

So I suggest:

LMAO.

That's an Unencyclopedia article just waiting to be uploaded.

Rozie

JC 2K3 wrote:

I'm not sure what your initial point was.

You didn't like Radiohead's new direction? Fine, that's your opinion.
I didn't like Muse's new direction, that's my opinion and that's fine too.

So obviously we both have different views of what "greatness" is and thus it is totally opinion based.

That last sentence has to be one of the most dumbass things I've ever heard on the subject of relativism vs. objectivity.

Just because people have two different views on what something is, doesn't mean neither are correct. For instance, I can think that the square root of 4 is 6, and someone else could think it to be 2, and it'd pretty obvious they'd be right.

I am just sick of everyone putting things in relativist terms nowadays and thinking it clever. It's not. Relativism means you don't have to think about anything, ever, since it's all relative to whatever person is experiencing it, it's their dealio and not your place to butt in. It's completely anti-intellectual and is of course very popular since it doesn't require any brain power to think in those terms.

I'm giggling to myself right here.

Calling Muse experimental, or for that matter, atmospheric... That's just chucklesome.

No, it really isn't. Especially on the atmospheric with regards to songs like Map of the Problematique, New Born, or hell most of the Origin of Symmetry album.

And it's not as if I have no idea what expiremental or atmospheric music is like - I listen to a lot of weird **** like Cinema Strange and Alien Sex Fiend, which while not as "out there" in terms of expirementality as some bands, are still about as expiremental as you're going to get in a band that is based around the Rock genre, and still retains it's over all movement. And I know atmosphere, one of my favourite bands is Black Tape for a Blue girl who are pure atmosphere, and Dead Can Dance often aren't far off.

Muse are still very much a rock band, so they're not going to do far out. As far as most rock bands go, it's pretty laughable not to call them experimental in contrast. I would never define them under the genre of "expiremental", of course. But they're still far more so than most rock acts, and certainly anything else out there at the moment. It's not an on-off switch. Bands can be expiremental without being done by drugged out hippies and harpsicords made from broken china dolls.


Actually, I'm pretty inclined to say that one of the greatest bands of recent years is Switchblade Symphony. They might be a bit depressing, but they cover a different range of styles, and are just outright incredible. Nothing very complex, very little in the way of virtuosity(except with the occasionaly operatic singing, they don't overdo it like some acts do) but there's just so much great stuff in there that sounds like absolutely nothing else.

I'm also surprised nobody's nominated the Cure. Most of their stuff is very light and whimsical, but they have those things(which to be fair aren't bad), and all the music they did in the 80s.

Don't forget Rage Against the Machine are back together, heh. On the merit of shaking things up and not caring about idiots who think getting angry about things makes you a bad person(and people who call them hypocrites for spreading a socialist message over capitalist means; how else are they going to do it exactly?), they deserve serious kudos.

Cunny-Funt

Yeah Rage are actually one of my most loved bands, I hope they do a new album!!