Most Overrated Musicians/Groups

ItsAWindUp

Bruce Springsteen.

MrStuffins

ItsAWindUp wrote: »

Who calls them a rock band?

ItsAWindUp wrote: »

Bruce Springsteen.

Really? Well I am off to write Mr. Springsteen a strongly worded letter.

GOOD DAY TO YOU SIR!

ItsAWindUp

MrStuffins wrote: »

Really? Well I am off to write Mr. Springsteen a strongly worded letter.

GOOD DAY TO YOU SIR!

......okay.....

Ally Dick

acidskiffle wrote: »

Neil Young.

I love his records, but have seen him live twice and was disappointed both times. He was too grumpy and didn't play much of what I liked

acidskiffle

Ally Dick wrote: »

I love his records, but have seen him live twice and was disappointed both times. He was too grumpy and didn't play much of what I liked

He has the odd song I like but I could never get into him at all.
But I guess the whole overrated thing is a bit silly because it boils down to opinion in the end.

Mountainlad

I think Muse were mentioned before Radiohead :eek:

I can't believe the lack of defense of Radiohead in this thread!

But to be fair I'm not at all suprised they were mentioned! They are the kind of band that you either love or don't like! In my opinion, they're the best band going

Muse, however, are merely a poor imitation. If someone thinks Radiohead are over-rated then surely copy-cats like Muse should be considered worse?

Strongly disagree with the suggestions of Arcade Fire, Sonic Youth and Jeff Buckley being over-rated. All have very unique sounds, and have written some amazing songs. I play drums, and while the drumming in most of Arcade Fires' songs is average, the snare patterns played during the climax of 'No Cars Go' is an example of what Arcade Fire do best-create an amazing atmosphere around their music that leaves audiences in awe! It's such a shame Jeff Buckley died when he did, my favourite singing voice without doubt. And Sonic Youth were awesome back when they were at their most popular, you couldn't say they're as big now, think the over-rated tag there is a bit ridiculous.

Don't really like the Beatles, but I respect their influence on music. Have to say though, I don't think it's unfair to suggest they're a bit over-rated, doesn't mean they weren't a very good band nor does it take away from the countless acts they've influenced.

Not a huge Dylan fan, certainly you'd have to admit he's long past his best, and he should really stop.

And Oasis have been on a downward slide since Definetly Maybe, and Wonderwall is one of the most over-rated songs of all time, that I say with extreme confidence!

MrStuffins

Mountainlad wrote: »

Muse, however, are merely a poor imitation. If someone thinks Radiohead are over-rated then surely copy-cats like Muse should be considered worse?

I was the one who said modern day Muse are over rated.

Muse, however, used to be one of the best bands around. The were incredible. When they caught on to the public though, their style changed and they started writing anthems to play at Wembley. Not their fault IMO.

However, Muse aren't and never were a Radiohead copy-cat. This is and always has been a stupid argument against Muse made by those who have never listened to them because NME used this argument to slate their debut album "Showbiz" when it was released. Giving it 6/10.

The same publication printed a new review years later saying that they were wrong and that Showbiz sounded nothing like Radiohead and the only similarity was that Yorke and Bellemy sang in falseto, and gave it (IIRC) 9/10.

If you feel they're over rated that's fine, but your argument is out dated and wrong, meaning you probably haven't listened to them.

Mountainlad

MrStuffins wrote: »

I was the one who said modern day Muse are over rated.

Muse, however, used to be one of the best bands around. The were incredible. When they caught on to the public though, their style changed and they started writing anthems to play at Wembley. Not their fault IMO.

However, Muse aren't and never were a Radiohead copy-cat. This is and always has been a stupid argument against Muse made by those who have never listened to them because NME used this argument to slate their debut album "Showbiz" when it was released. Giving it 6/10.

The same publication printed a new review years later saying that they were wrong and that Showbiz sounded nothing like Radiohead and the only similarity was that Yorke and Bellemy sang in falseto, and gave it (IIRC) 9/10.

If you feel they're over rated that's fine, but your argument is out dated and wrong, meaning you probably haven't listened to them.

So, you know every single person that has made that argument, and can categorically confirm your statement about them having 'never listened' to Muse and have yet formed this opinion of them based on an NME review?

I don't read NME, I don't care whether they had to back track on something they wrote ages ago.

To be frank, you've annoyed me with your post. You've made insinuations about me that just aren't true, reminding me of a dispute I had a few weeks ago with someone about U2.

Disagree with me if you like, but at least make a valid arguement of why Muse are not an imitation of Radiohead, rather than a pathetic attempt to belittle by argument with lies!

I have listened to Muse, and Muscle Museum, Plug in Baby, Bliss, and Map Of The Problematique are all very good songs. But they are definetly over-rated, and I firmly believe Bellamy was trying to recreate Radiohead.

karaokeman

Mountainlad wrote: »

And Oasis have been on a downward slide since Definetly Maybe

So you basically think Oasis have been going downhill since just after their first album?

MrStuffins

Mountainlad wrote: »

So, you know every single person that has made that argument, and can categorically confirm your statement about them having 'never listened' to Muse and have yet formed this opinion of them based on an NME review?

It's simple, Muse don't sound like Radiohead. They never did. It's a lazy argument made by people who don't like Muse without ever having listened to them.

I don't read NME, I don't care whether they had to back track on something they wrote ages ago.

Good for you. The point I was making was, the myth that Muse were a Radiohead rip-off originated in NME's rather powerful review at the time. One which they then went back and changed, claiming they were mistaken to think Muse were a Radiohead rip-off.

To be frank, you've annoyed me with your post. You've made insinuations about me that just aren't true, reminding me of a dispute I had a few weeks ago with someone about U2.

Well you made a silly argument. An argument that nobody makes anymore because even those who made it originally know it's not true.

Disagree with me if you like, but at least make a valid arguement of why Muse are not an imitation of Radiohead, rather than a pathetic attempt to belittle by argument with lies!

It's not up to me to tell you they DON'T sound like Radiohead. it's up to you to show me they do!

My argument is, i'm a Radiohead fan. I'm a fan of Muse's first 2 albums. Muse have never sounded like Radiohead.

I have listened to Muse, and Muscle Museum, Plug in Baby, Bliss, and Map Of The Problematique are all very good songs. But they are definetly over-rated, and I firmly believe Bellamy was trying to recreate Radiohead.

Well he didn't succeed!

Mountainlad

karaokeman wrote: »

So you basically think Oasis have been going downhill since just after their first album?

Basically, yes.

Mountainlad

MrStuffins wrote: »

It's simple, Muse don't sound like Radiohead. They never did. It's a lazy argument made by people who don't like Muse without ever having listened to them.

Good for you. The point I was making was, the myth that Muse were a Radiohead rip-off originated in NME's rather powerful review at the time. One which they then went back and changed, claiming they were mistaken to think Muse were a Radiohead rip-off.

Well you made a silly argument. An argument that nobody makes anymore because even those who made it originally know it's not true.

It's not up to me to tell you they DON'T sound like Radiohead. it's up to you to show me they do!

My argument is, i'm a Radiohead fan. I'm a fan of Muse's first 2 albums. Muse have never sounded like Radiohead.

Well he didn't succeed!

I don't form my opinions based on what reviews suggest. Maybe some do, I don't. And I'm not the only one.

I don't really care about convincing you, only that I made the original point about them trying to be Radiohead, and you didn't really do anything to prove they don't other than wrongly suggest I derived my opinion from NME and that I've never listened to Muse.

I also had this discussion with someone recently, though I have to say that person didn't annoy me buy making false accusations. Out of interest I looked to see what some of the reviewers on Pitchfork said. Here's what I got;

http://www.pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/5519-showbiz/
http://www.pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/9168-black-holes-and-revelations/
http://www.pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/11403-haarp/

Bet they also stole NMEs opinion, yeah?

And actually to be fair, have you not considered how naive you're being as well, to think that NME had a change of heart, and that they now firmly believe there initial opinion was wrong?

The reality is probably more like they back tracked to get the masses of Muse fans that have now emerged to read their magazine, and so that they can get interviews from Muse to make the magazine more appealing and ultimately make more money.

One last thing...I agree completely with the last sentence! He did not succeed at all...despite his best efforts!

Fromthetrees

Peppa Pig when her hardcore stuff went too 'mainstream'.

MrStuffins

Mountainlad wrote: »

One last thing...I agree completely with the last sentence! He did not succeed at all...despite his best efforts!

So you agree he didn't succeed in having Muse sound like Radiohead?

Then where's the big deal?

I'm glad we agree!

Mountainlad

MrStuffins wrote: »

So you agree he didn't succeed in having Muse sound like Radiohead?

Then where's the big deal?

I'm glad we agree!

Yeah, they sound like a bad copy!

Anyway, main point is they are over-rated.

Think it's best at this stage to just accept that we won't see eye-to-eye about the early days of Muse, but certainly think we can acknowledge that the most recent album, and the track Uprising in particular, got far more credit than it deserved!

Ally Dick

Can someone please explain to me the appeal of Arcade Fire ? I just don't get it. The lead singer sings like David Byrne of Talking Heads - not necessarily a good thing. I find the songs themselves extremely pedestrian

rcaz

Ally Dick wrote: »

The lead singer sings like David Byrne of Talking Heads - not necessarily a good thing.

I never got any similarities... And David Byrne is a fantastic singer!

Ally Dick

El Pr0n wrote: »

I never got any similarities... And David Byrne is a fantastic singer!

Win Butler and Isaac Brock of Modest Mouse both sound identical to David Byrne. They're all yelpers
P.S. And Paul Noonan of Bell X1 as well !

jill_valentine

El Pr0n wrote: »

I never got any similarities... And David Byrne is a fantastic singer!

It's not so obvious in more recent stuff, Butler's voice settled a lot after he had sinus surgery, and I suspect he had some manner of vocal training too in the meantime. But yeah, he and Byrne both sing for effect, rather than for a note, so there's a lot of nervy, wavy hollering.

Byrne guested on an AF track a while back and all.

rcaz

Alright, but I still don't get the Isaac Brock comparison at all :pac:

MrStuffins

Big Arcade Fire fan but Butler isn't much of a live singer.

Possibly adds to the uniqueness of the live show though

Rothko

Led Zeppelin
Queen
U2

NIMAN

Saw Noel Gallagher and his new band on Jools Holland last week.

Poor effort by them. Lacks emotion, excitement and any passion. Hardly very 'rock and roll'.

Plus Noel himself is a pretty poor singer.

ad92

Glee kids.. ugh..

karaokeman

NIMAN wrote: »

Saw Noel Gallagher and his new band on Jools Holland last week.

Poor effort by them. Lacks emotion, excitement and any passion. Hardly very 'rock and roll'.

Plus Noel himself is a pretty poor singer.

I saw that performance too, I reckon its this video you're referring to.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fgXgOxY6Ms

The problem is, Noel isn't renowned for his vocal ability Liam is.

Noel is and always will be a greater songwriter and musician than Liam but his younger brother will always have the upper hand as a singer.

Noel admitted it himself that he will never play any of the big stadium rock anthems he wrote for Oasis as a solo artist because he could never do them justice like Liam does.

I am a huge Noel fan but I agree that the singing will hurt his solo career and probably the reason he will never do as good as he did in Oasis.

Temaz

These days Noel is miles ahead of Liam when it comes to singing. Liam 1994-2000 was brilliant but since then it's steadily downhill. Liam can pull it off now and again but he's mostly awful these days to my ears.

Liam's live vocals have earned him the nickname 'Kermit' on many fan sites.