NWB - Community Blog

don't get me started on "kiss".....or "rush"!!! ;-P

+1 for rush, just dont get it at all, although im going with never say never

i know theyre all talented musicians, but i just do not understand the devotion they inspire, mainly from geddys voice point of view, although i do think neil peart is amazing

i like a handfull of led zep songs tbh[ rock n roll is great], the doors about 3, stones ok but not arsed, and hendrix even less.

give me AC/DC, Whitesnake, van halen, any day.

coldplay apart from a couple of early tunes off the big 2 albums, yawn..

pretty much any dance music blaring out of someones car

Bruce Springsteen for me and Bryan Adams.

Funnily enough, I've just downloaded albums by Rush and Van Halen - two bands I've never paid much attention to. Thought I'd give them a blast.

But in the context of this blog - The Beatles are overrated, The Smiths are shite and Pink Floyd is just pretentious nonsense. There, I said it...again. Last time I almost got strung up.

(And never trust anyone who doesn't like Led Zep)

Hell yeehaw !! ya can't beat some twang ;-)

Pink Floyd, Genesis, Coldplay, Rush, Hendrix, Rolling Stones, Stone Roses, Kiss, Def Leppard, Cliff Richard, Culture Club, The Comunards, Take That...and loads, loads more...
I just dont like them, for varying reasons...
Although to be fair, I imagine every band/singer, has probably written at least one good song, no matter what genre...even Take That ???
But I bet I like stuff most would hate so I suppose it's all down to taste, or lack of it...
Each to their own though, wouldn't it be boring if we all liked the same things...

the weird thing is, i can see me getting into rush , already kinda dont mind about 3 songs.. oh dear

Rob thats at least 30 minutes worth then...haha

with you on that Al - went a bit different after Signals didnt it?!

THE BEATLES - massively overrated, never got them.

PINK FLOYD - good musicians I'm sure but just boring.

BLUR - what was all the hype about in the 90s, Oasis clearly stole that show.

Just my opinion of course...

......Can;t do with .ACDC, GUNS & ROSES, BON-JOVI - they're all the same, only the words have changed! (sung to dead or alive) or METALICA, ...love everything else

Ive never got the Beatles they wrote some good songs and 1 or 2 truly great ones but so do hundreds of bands...

Oasis the same wrote some good tracks but they were so overated its untrue. Sound the bloody same alllll the time even Noels new band when i heard them on the telly i thought it was an old song from "whats the story..." but nope brand new single!

Hendrix had his moments but the same story again seriously talented people all around him and yet he's still called the greatest in the world? Django beats him on all fronts as far as I'm concerned and that was years before Hendrix.

I'm of the opinion that its never the fault of the artists. Its always other people who big them up so much for years and years and then when you actually sit down and listen properly they just dont live up to the hype people have created around them!

tough crowd!!

:0)

Al - never said I liked Oasis, just that I think they dominated Blur in the day. And I know loads of people who like Oasis but don't like The Beatles.

Oh just thought of another...U2 (sorry Wez)

Gunz and Roses
U2
Oasis
The Doors
Bruce fucking boring bastard Springclean.

Can't include Yes, Rush, Bon Jovi and so on 'cos I don't think I've heard more than three songs by the lot of them.

emerson lake and palmer


fancy going to a gig to hear their greatest hits to be told "we're gonna give you pictures at an exhibition???"

I know it's all opinion but The Beatles were the first to write fantastic songs to perform themselves, others followed.

Yes they wrote some shit too but they experimented, you don' t always get it right do you?

It's matter of taste but I gotta stick up for the fab four on this one :0)

Skip

PS not reet fond of Yes or Floyd tho

i feckin love the beatles, but i agree they wrote some shit too like anyone, but a gazillion awesome tunes

Queen - I don't get it

Oh my!! Bruce Springsteen- I really really Agree!! No idea why he's even successful- DULLARD

Beatles- I love but I think only because they were the first of their kind- but GENIUS all the same

Pink Floyd- never got em- think they are poo- I do Wish You were here in my set but thats all

Led Zep- Dont get but again first true Rock band- and followed by and influenced many

am a chronic KISS fan- they cant do wrong- I wont listen to critics of them - they are comic book superheroes :-)

Massive Oasis fan one time contemporary of mine but they knew what they were doing!

There's plenty of huge bands for whom the jury is out for me still (i.e. I like the odd song), these would include people like The Rolling Stones, U2 and Rush. But then there's the camp of bands I detest:

I think I'm the only Mancunian who loathes Oasis. I can genuinely say I hate everything they've done. I've really, really tried to like them but I just can't see the appeal.

Coldplay are purveyors of the most moribund music in the world.

Muse - for me they're just a self-indulgent diluted version of Radiohead.

Good call.

The votes from the Widnes jury........

The Rolling Stones ( Out of tune and just dreadfull)
Gunz and Roses ( A Rose is a SINGER)????
Oasis/Blurt/Pulp/ (Dull as dishwater)
Stone Roses ( Poo)
Bryan Adams (Insipid)
The Doors (One great song ((Riders On The Storm)) does not a great band make)
Bruce Springsteen ( Yawn )
ALL (C)rap music (Ok for USA but why over here???)

That is why I love music though as it is all subjective

Best wishes

John

On the Led Zep thing, they do so many different styles from heavy rock to
Folk, blues, indian, synth (on later albums) to atmospheric tunes like
No quarter. If you've heard a handful of their songs on t'wireless then it possible that you are missing a lot of their stuff.

Can't argue with you finding Plants voice grating. Personally I love it, he's got great range and oozes rock n roll sleaziness.

The more I listened to the albums the more they grew on me.

The Beatles have loads of brilliant songs but there is a lot of pop and experimental shit in there. Same with the stones and I find it harder to put a full album on except
Let it bleed.

I have a list of bands I can't listen to that coincides with a number of the above. No point me posting it as most of them have been mentioned.

I have to say something about the Beatles though.

I can't stand the Beatles. I've never liked them.

BUT

I think it is a little misguided to use the word "overrated" in their case. The impact they had on music when they started out, and even later in their career cannot be denied. I can't think of a bigger worldwide music phenomenon than them. Even I, someone who despises the sound of that horrible Rickenbacker guitar jangly din, recognise the impact they had on music.

Just a little food for thought :o)

@Mick - I agree that the Beatles impact was massive. But that impact was more to do with marketing than music. When people comment that The Beatles have influenced almost every band ever since, that's when they become overrated in my opinion.

@Asa, I agree that they were brilliantly marketed, but the question I always ask myself when thinking about this is how much does marketing go in sustaining a bands popularity? After the initial Campaign? If you think about it, I bet there are very few, extremely remote places where people haven't heard of the Beatles even to this day. That's worldwide.

I believe that good marketing can make a hell of a difference on a bands career in the early stages, but I would be hard pressed to imagine that "glow" lasting over the 40+ years since the band were launched if the music wasn't strong enough.

In fact: Sigue Sigue Sputnik. A prime example of substantial marketing on a weak product. People voted with their ears. lol.

I disagree with the idea that their impact was more to do with marketing than music! Look at the journey they made as musicians from their early Mersey Beat days of With The Beatles to Abbey Road. On albums like Revolver and Sgt Pepper they redefined just what a band can do in the studio too, placing the producer on an equal pedestal to the musician. Just listen to something like "A Day in the Life" or "Eleanor Rigby" compared with "Twist and Shout", that's immense progress. They were at the cutting edge of music in the day whilst still producing brilliant, timeless pop songs, that everyone could sing along to. I can't think of any other act that've managed that before or since. That's the power of the Beatles. Call it hype but they were fantastic at what they did. I'm not even a Beatles elitist either, I don't particularly like their early stuff or the White album onwards but Rubber Soul, Revolver and Pepper are just ace.

I do agree that the idea they influenced every band that's ever existed afterwards is absolute nonsense though! I find that opinion does tend to go hand in hand with a postcode beginning with the letter "L".

@ST - I agree that the Beatles impact was massive. But that impact was more to do with marketing than music. When people comment that The Beatles have influenced almost every band ever since, that's when they become overrated in my opinion

What The Beatles did was create the 'rock band'. They were four lads who played more original, louder, heavier and with more attitude than anybody else. Only those who saw them know this, their marketing people did not promote this too much because The Stones took that angle. In actual fact The Beatles started it. I think that you need to give them a little more credit.