Bands that should not have been as big as they are or were

[walksalone]

you guys are makin' me run outta +1's

 

oh, and I forgot "Oasis"

[JJ Husker]

Ok, I'll risk the ridicule. I like some of Nirvanas stuff now, not when it was new though. And the Beatles- it's easy to say they were too big because they were huge. I like some of their stuff but really think it has more to do with familiarity rather than being musically impressed. If forced to choose between them and the three blues legends mentioned, I'd have to go with the blues no question.

[strigori]

Ok, I'll risk the ridicule. I like some of Nirvanas stuff now, not when it was new though. And the Beatles- it's easy to say they were too big because they were huge. I like some of their stuff but really think it has more to do with familiarity rather than being musically impressed. If forced to choose between them and the three blues legends mentioned, I'd have to go with the blues no question.

My beef with Nirvana is how they overshadow the rest of the 90's Seattle scene. While they have some good stuff, the albums are very hit and miss. Soundgarden, Alice in Chains and Pearl Jam (from that time anyway) put out better albums. Maybe in Layne Staley would have gone out with a gun instead of a needle a decade later AiC would be idolized like Nirvana.

 

I have heard a lot of the Beetles, and I am never impressed. And I just might donkey punch the next fool who sits and makes the argument that rock music would not exist without them. There were plenty of contemporaries who made music that was as god or better, and more influential, but since they were not as 'cute' and radio friendly with the lovey dovey songs. The Beetles are pop, not rock.

[walksalone]

Ok, I'll risk the ridicule. I like some of Nirvanas stuff now, not when it was new though. And the Beatles- it's easy to say they were too big because they were huge. I like some of their stuff but really think it has more to do with familiarity rather than being musically impressed. If forced to choose between them and the three blues legends mentioned, I'd have to go with the blues no question.

My beef with Nirvana is how they overshadow the rest of the 90's Seattle scene. While they have some good stuff, the albums are very hit and miss. Soundgarden, Alice in Chains and Pearl Jam (from that time anyway) put out better albums. Maybe in Layne Staley would have gone out with a gun instead of a needle a decade later AiC would be idolized like Nirvana.

 

I have heard a lot of the Beetles, and I am never impressed. And I just might donkey punch the next fool who sits and makes the argument that rock music would not exist without them. There were plenty of contemporaries who made music that was as god or better, and more influential, but since they were not as 'cute' and radio friendly with the lovey dovey songs. The Beetles are pop, not rock.

 

Exactly, and they weren't even close to being the best band to come out of Seattle. Soundgarden and AIC are miles ahead of Nirvana, but what bothers me is that the Seattle bands that don't get mentioned ahead of Nirvana like Mudhoney, Green River, Skinyard, and most importantly, Tad.

[walksalone]

Ok, I'll risk the ridicule. I like some of Nirvanas stuff now, not when it was new though. And the Beatles- it's easy to say they were too big because they were huge. I like some of their stuff but really think it has more to do with familiarity rather than being musically impressed. If forced to choose between them and the three blues legends mentioned, I'd have to go with the blues no question.

 

Thanks to you bozo's and this thread, I think i've burned through my allotment of +1's for the day...

[HUSKER 37]

Ok, I'll risk the ridicule. I like some of Nirvanas stuff now, not when it was new though. And the Beatles- it's easy to say they were too big because they were huge. I like some of their stuff but really think it has more to do with familiarity rather than being musically impressed. If forced to choose between them and the three blues legends mentioned, I'd have to go with the blues no question.

 

Thanks to you bozo's and this thread, I think i've burned through my allotment of +1's for the day...

 

Same here..

 

I know we all tend to take music tastes personally, so I'll try to disreguard those of you dissing Floyd, Nirvana, Beatles (I started listening to them when I was 3 and were my favourite band until my oldest Brother introduced me to Zeppelin and Yes)..Not sure why I like Oasis, but I do.

 

Doors...Most of their music seemed amaturic? if that's a word...But I do still like "Crystal Ship" and maybe a couple of their other songs I can't remember at the moment.

 

Never liked the "Big Hair Bands" unless you count Nugent and Van Halen, but I started liking the Scorpions a decade ago for some odd reason..or not.

 

When it's my boss's turn to pick the radio station, I usually try to ignore the awfull "Wimp Rock/ Pop" stuff unless the song is so bad, I try to learn the name of the band so I can send them hate mail, (I'm talking to YOU Maroon 5!!!!).

 

I'm still gonna have to say bands/individuals like Lady Gag-me, Culture Club, Faith No More, Living Colour, Volbeat, Nickelsback and any band that sounds like them, Foxy Shazam, and all HIPty Hop in general..Oh..And Pakistani/India music.

 

 

And just to piss off my best friend in the whole world...Fleetwood Mack (Except "Ebony Eyes", "Magnet & Steel" and the Peter Green years, of course)

[HUSKER 37]

There are way too many to name. 95% of what's on the radio (well, the "80s, 90s, and Today" stations at least).

 

SO TRUE!!!

 

and walks... you weren't paying attention when listening to the last 8 Beatles albums (if you've even done that). Just because they were popular and people screamed at them, doesn't mean they weren't great. Even their early albums were great when compared to other bands of that time.

 

 

Anyhoo... I have to agree with Nirvana. A huge part of their appeal was that they weren't a hair band.

 

The thing I liked about the Beatles..Besides their catchy tunes for my gradeschool sensibilities, was their constant attempt to try something different..And different genera(s)..I can name about 4 different albums that were my fav, by them..Lately it's been "Rubber Soul"

 

And Nirvana...They made it possible for me to believe music still had a chance at a future arround the same time they started cutting music departments in school and all you could hear on the airwaves was Rap and mindless Big Hair...I still get chills from "River of Fire" ( I know..It was written by Mother Lovebone or ?)..Pearl Jam was the first Seattle band I'd heard since Heart, and between my Son and I, we've probably collected everything Alice In Chains has ever done, as well as Soundgarden..Still trying to decide whether or not I like the new release..But We're counting down another 8 days until the new AIC..even without Layne.

[Moiraine]

and walks... you weren't paying attention when listening to the last 8 Beatles albums (if you've even done that). Just because they were popular and people screamed at them, doesn't mean they weren't great. Even their early albums were great when compared to other bands of that time

 

I have listened to the Beatles records, then I heard Led Zepplin and Sabbath, and realized how garbage the Beatles really were...

 

edit: Not too mention, the Beatles aren't even on the same field as Muddy Waters, John Lee Hooker, Howlin' Wolf

 

The Beatles were one of Ozzy Osbourne's biggest influences.

 

There are way too many to name. 95% of what's on the radio (well, the "80s, 90s, and Today" stations at least).

 

and walks... you weren't paying attention when listening to the last 8 Beatles albums (if you've even done that). Just because they were popular and people screamed at them, doesn't mean they weren't great. Even their early albums were great when compared to other bands of that time.

 

 

Anyhoo... I have to agree with Nirvana. A huge part of their appeal was that they weren't a hair band.

Threw your panties on the stage didn't ya.

 

Ya. Right after you threw these:

 

[walksalone]

The Beatles were one of Ozzy Osbourne's biggest influences.

 

And this is the case in point for the phrase, "nobody's perfect"

[HUSKER 37]

I'm still not convinced Ozzy wasn't lip syncing to Bette Davis (AFTER her stroke).

[TonyStalloni]

Ok, I'll risk the ridicule. I like some of Nirvanas stuff now, not when it was new though. And the Beatles- it's easy to say they were too big because they were huge. I like some of their stuff but really think it has more to do with familiarity rather than being musically impressed. If forced to choose between them and the three blues legends mentioned, I'd have to go with the blues no question.

 

Thanks to you bozo's and this thread, I think i've burned through my allotment of +1's for the day...

 

Same here..

 

I know we all tend to take music tastes personally, so I'll try to disreguard those of you dissing Floyd, Nirvana, Beatles (I started listening to them when I was 3 and were my favourite band until my oldest Brother introduced me to Zeppelin and Yes)..Not sure why I like Oasis, but I do.

 

Doors...Most of their music seemed amaturic? if that's a word...But I do still like "Crystal Ship" and maybe a couple of their other songs I can't remember at the moment.

 

Never liked the "Big Hair Bands" unless you count Nugent and Van Halen, but I started liking the Scorpions a decade ago for some odd reason..or not.

 

When it's my boss's turn to pick the radio station, I usually try to ignore the awfull "Wimp Rock/ Pop" stuff unless the song is so bad, I try to learn the name of the band so I can send them hate mail, (I'm talking to YOU Maroon 5!!!!).

 

I'm still gonna have to say bands/individuals like Lady Gag-me, Culture Club, Faith No More, Living Colour, Volbeat, Nickelsback and any band that sounds like them, Foxy Shazam, and all HIPty Hop in general..Oh..And Pakistani/India music.

 

 

And just to piss off my best friend in the whole world...Fleetwood Mack (Except "Ebony Eyes", "Magnet & Steel" and the Peter Green years, of course)

 

To let you know, "Magnet and Steel was done by Walter Egan. Even less to like Fleetwood Mac for.

[knapplc]

I like Pink Floyd because I'm a fan of great lyrics as much as great music, and they've written some of the best lyrics around, ever. Brilliant stuff.

 

I never understood why Nirvana was as big as they are, or why they're considered a seminal rock band when they were pretty mediocre for the Seattle scene. Give me Alice in Chains or Soundgarden over Nirvana. I always laugh when someone describes Kurt Cobain as "the voice of a generation" when you couldn't understand a word he sang. Maybe that's the lyric-lover in me coming out. But while I like a few Nirvana songs, I can't understand the raging popularity they enjoy.

 

Same goes for Pearl Jam. They had one good album and promptly crapped the bed with everything else. WAY more bad music than good, but they're still a "big" band.

 

I've always hated AC/DC. I cannot stand that screeching. That is the single biggest station-change band on my list. Would rather listen to a boy band than... that. Why gazillions of people love them is beyond me.

 

Add George Thorogood to that list of horrible singers. He's second on my station-change list. Cannot stand that man's voice and he sings nothing I want to hear. Bad to the Bone? You got that right. You're awful.

[TonyStalloni]

While I was never a huge Beatles fan, unless you grew up in the mid to late 50's and early 60's, their music was a radical change from what was being played on the radio. I remember a steady diet of Frank Sinatra , Judy Garland and Elvis. I never understood the hysteria surrounding them however. The Doors for all their musical limitations moved the bar as well. The radio stations didn't know what to do with them.

 

The bands that to me should have never had more than a song or two were Bob Dylan ( an early rapper), Bachman Turner Overdrive, Rush and as mentioned Pink Floyd.

[JJ Husker]

I was pretty much with ya knapp, until that blood clot started moving and you went all goofy about AC/DC and George. Thorogood is just blues based, good time drinkin college party music. I will admit that bad to the bone makes me change stations tho. Gotta listen to his stuff they don't play on the radio. But AC/DC? *walks away incredulous shaking head*

[JJ Husker]

Rush? Tony my man, say it isn't true. The moving pictures album alone puts them in a whole other category.