Your list of classic over-rated musical performers

[Nostalgiabuff]

I would definately agree on some of those. My list would be:
1. Led Zeppelin - some classic tracks but how many times do we have to listen to Stairway??
2. Kiss -as a kid I liked them because of the image, never got their music though.
3. Guns and Roses - never liked these guys
4. Red Hot Chile Peppers - never liked these idiots either
5. Aerosmith - I like these guys but they are way over rated. I mean a ride at Disneyworld? They only got that because the Stones refused.

[Nostalgiabuff]

I'm sticking with Rock bands only. As far as I am concerned any of these other performers are overrated. Barbara Streisand??? Come on!

[Mikey]

For Guns and Roses, Axel's SCREAMING GRANNY voice always turned me off to their music.

His voice was basically Robert Plant's but more annoying.

[MIB41]

U2 - It should not only be a law to seperate church and state, but also music and state. Writing commercial "fluff" doesn't, in my book, qualify you to be a politician or a representative of those who have social agendas. Geraldo should be their lead singer.

Bruce Springsteen - Here's a man who felt inspired to cover 'Santa Claus is coming to town' and fans jumped on board? That is hype in overdrive. Who doesn't sound like Springsteen when they have a bad cold? The only credit I give him is for writing the song "Blinded by the Light" which was a hit he didn't sing.

New Kids on the Block - Commercialism works. Being timeless is something entirely different.

Britney Spears - The mystery behind her popularity would be easily explained if she was disfigured in a car accident. Paul Stanley once said, "People listen with their eyes." That is about as truthful as anything I have heard in the rock n'roll community.

Tina Turner - Old woman promotes wigs. Her fame proves society can be incredibly naive from time to time.

Carrie Underwood - Ah what a sweet innocent girl next store...that every man in america wants to see...compromised. Yeah, she's popular. Expect more of the same from Idol.

[apes3978]

<<< BTW... in the late 80's & early 90's .. I lived the Music life dubbed the "Grunge Wave" in Seattle. Nirvana was an Unbelievable Band. At a Time when Music was changing & the "Butt Rock Era" Was dying,.. Cobain Helped lead the Charge & throw the Idea of a new form of Music out there that can be not ever associated with a particular time period. >>>

Nirvana's music CAN and WILL be associated with a particular time period, as you stated yourself: The late 80s/early 90s (when music was changing & the "butt rock era" was dying).

[jwyblejr]

I might catch some flak for this but I'm saying Pink Floyd. I just don't get why everyone swoons over them. Every time I hear them I want to fall asleep.

[thunderbolt]

I forgot to mention Billy Joel. And I do think Phil and Genesis are big and huge enough to be considered overrated.

[ctc]

>U2 - It should not only be a law to seperate church and state, but also music and state. Writing commercial "fluff" doesn't, in my book, qualify you to be a politician or a representative of those who have social agendas. Geraldo should be their lead singer.

YES! It's about time I saw some hate for U2. Polticizing aside, their music SUCKS! It's flat, reprtitive, musically simplistic and insanely sanctimonious in the most coarse and obvious way! "War is bad." Thanks U2, I never would have figgered that one out on my own.

I'd also add durned near every 90's grunge/indie rock band. That whole StoneJamChilliGarden era was terrible! Whiney, self-indulgent lyrics, baseline music, and inescapable hype, hype, hype.

And the Doors? Oh man, the Doors.... Had a friend play them for me years ago and it was tough to tell when one song ended and another started. Ol' Jim's singing was one step above monotone and the band sure got a lot of use out of them same three bars of music.

Ironicly, most of the bands that have been considered "influential" over the years really bother me 'cos most of their influence has been in the areas of marketing more than adding anything to music as a whole.

Don C.

[palitoy]

YES! It's about time I saw some hate for U2. Polticizing aside, their music SUCKS! It's flat, reprtitive, musically simplistic and insanely sanctimonious in the most coarse and obvious way! "War is bad." Thanks U2, I never would have figgered that one out on my own.

I've never gotten on the U2 bandwagon either, made college hard sometimes.

The one band I can no longer listen to is the Clash, I like them a lot but my first year room mate only owned one record and played it in constant rotation. i think he was insane.

Also, a lot of Motown stuff makes my skin crawl, I'm so frigging tired of hearing that stuff everywhere.

[huedell]

This post isn't directed just to Don---but to many people commenting in
this thread----where is the "rule" that rock music has to be
something other than simple---or repetitive---- or otherwise
"unimpressive" technically.

It's only rock 'n roll---but I like it.

Y'know?

Alotta you guys seem to mistake "accessible" for "untalented".

I think it's a talent in itself to exploit the basic rock stuff---
and make it work for the masses (or at least a big chunk of it).

I might not like every band's take on doing it----and I voice it from time
to time----but I personally think it's foolish to deride it as being as useless
as you guys are making it out to be.