Well, nobody's mentioned Queen. I'll take that as an imlicit endorsement of that band. Knowing you're all such big fans I submit this photo of the full sized statue of Freddie Mercury on the waterfront in Montreux, Switzerland. Go figger.
-
JR -
I thought this would generate a lot of comments, and I was right.
Just a thought--today's music suffers from lack of melody and songwriting. I mean, can anyone remember the words to most top-40 songs, or hum them? Beyonce, Creed, Hootie and the Blowfish (remember them?)--maybe they've got talent, but those are a lot of unmemorable songs.
By contrast, the music of the 60's and 70's had rhythm and melody and soul. Not all of it was great, but a lot of it was fantastic. By coincidence I was listening to a number of 60's records by CSNY, the Byrds, Country Joe and the Fish just as Rolling Stone came out with their 40th anniversary issue (a little too much narcissism and self-indulgence, if you ask me). You can lionize the 60's too much, but there's no getting around the wealth of great stuff that came out of New York City and upstate, Southern California and San Francisco, and London at that time.
Yes, 40 years later, I can hum and sing most of the songs on those albums.Jeff
“Doctors are men who prescribe medicines of which they know little, to cure diseases of which they know less, in human beings of whom they know nothing”--VoltaireComment
-
This might be history or trivia for some of you.
Overrated: Asia, The Firm, Rainbow, Styx, Dam Yankees
and any other mega-all-star-band slapped together for corporate cash in. I hate when they do that. Can't they just come out with a box set or lost songs and pay the mortgage that way?
JR: I was just thinking the other day of Queens influence of the world of music. I used to hate "Flash" but nowadays it makes me nostalgic.
Bill"Why are there Braille codes on drive-up ATM machines?"Comment
-
Queen was one of the many popular bands of my era that I never paid much attention to at the time. It took another 25 years or so to realize that the song writing and performances by that group were very complex, original, and absolutely brilliant. At 17, maybe I couldn't get past the name and "diverse" orientation, but someone or someones in that group had musical genius that astounds me now.
While I'm here...Kansas was another fantastic group of my era that I didn't mention earlier...very moving, deep ballods and a unique tight sound.
I agree with Germdocs assessment of much of the modern music compared to some from a few decades ago. It's so one dimensional and angry now. Maybe the modern musicians are just victims of their time b/c most of the cool stuff has already been done. My teens listen to alot of 60s, 70s, and 80s rock. 50s and 60s were the oldies for me, and even though I now appreciate some of the talent from that era, when I was teen you couldn't pay me to listen to most of it. It's likely that I'm biased, but when I see my kids buying and collecting music from my era, I see at some confirmation that alot of it was darn good.
(I'll try to pretend that disco didn't happen under my watch!
)
Last edited by Knottscott; 07-27-2007, 09:35 AM.Happiness is sort of like wetting your pants....everyone can see it, but only you can feel the warmth.
Comment
-
Homer to Marge: "Remember when we used to make out to this hymn?"
Over-rated is hard because there are a couple different defintions... Bands that lots of people like that I don't, or bands that lots of people like but shouldn't. The first just means that they don't do much for me personally but maybe others see something more...
Of the names on that list for me is the Rolling Stones. Lots of folks have mentioned them, so maybe it is more universal apathy, but I wouldn't pay $25 to go see them, let alone the several hundered bucks per ticket that the aging boomers pay to <shudder> sit through a concert (and those are years ago prices, I'm sure they'd be higher now).Last edited by Kristofor; 07-27-2007, 09:43 AM.Comment
-
There's almost certainly an age correlation here.
At the beginning--and through the middle--of the 70s, people were constantly saying the music just wasn't as good as the 60s.
Some time in the late 80s, the 70s began to look better, and by the mid-90s, there was a '70s revival' and even a couple of 'all 70s' radio station.
Maybe we each have a strip of years--perhaps from when we start listening to music that's "too old" for us (pre-teen, junior high) to when we start worrying about adult stuff (some indeterminate point after we're done with either school or after we start being responsible for other people).
Music that happens after that time-frame has to be really, really good for us to feel it lives up to the quality of the music of the magic period we've left.
Just a theory.Comment
-
you guys are all so critical. Music by its very nature is a highly subjective thing, as well as cultural and generational.
The question asked sort of boils down to what popular music do you think is not good. By definition, popular music has a lot of followers.
When you guys dis a band, it's like the old Yogi Berra quote, "That restaurants no good; People don't go there anymore because it's too crowded."
Hey, I'm impressed the Freddie Mercury has a Statue. Any other Rockers have a statue?
Loring in Katy, TX USA
If your only tool is a hammer, you tend to treat all problems as if they were nails.
BT3 FAQ - https://www.sawdustzone.org/forum/di...sked-questionsComment
-
Comment
-
Many years ago I saw Guns and Roses in a rock club in Long Island, New York. I had been told you must see them live! Well to make a long story short my friends and I were very disappointed and walked out before the first set ended. Even the friend who said we must see them live.
I really enjoy their recorded music and think it is some of the best work of it's time for hard rock. But I'd never go to see them live again even if they had a reunion tour.Opinions are like gas;
I don't mind hearing it, but keep it to yourself if it stinks.
Comment
-
Not a band named here that I don't like. I like Cher too! And the Archies, Monkey's and the Partidge Family Nobody mentioned Heart and I like them too!
Jim in Texas and Sicko Ryobi Cult Member ©Comment
-
I'd have a winner...
if he was a band.
How about Peter Frampton?!JRComment
-
Happiness is sort of like wetting your pants....everyone can see it, but only you can feel the warmth. Comment
-
I have to agree that Kiss was overrated musically. Being a guitar player since the days of hair metal there were many bands in the 80's that were very overrated. Poison, Warrent & Winger were all formulaic.
One of the things that I've noticed though is that once a certain genre becomes formulaic something else comes along and shifts the focus. Take the comment about Van Halen in 78 saving the world from Disco. If you look at any particular genre there will be a point were everything starts to sound the same. This isn't saying that some of these bands didn't have some good songs, but the formula was always the same.
Take punk, Ramones and the Sex Pistols. Great bands, everyone followed their formula.
80's metal, how many of these bands had to have a ballad?
Grunge had Pearl Jam, Soundgarden, Alice in Chains and Nirvana. Name one of the other 40,000 bands that are classified as grunge.
Today's music is so bad. The artists are like they come out of a factory. There are very few original artists that break the formula today. Someone mentioned Nickleback. Some nice tunes, but nothing that will stand the test of time. Very cookie cutter.
I started a thread about underrated bands, but it died. Underrated, you have, Frank Zappa, Thin Lizzy, UFO, Michael Schenker Group, Uriah Heep, I could go on forever.Ted KitchComment
-
I was never a fan of Guy Lombardo. I had to listen to him all the time growing up. Glenn Miller was more my type.A man without a shillelagh, is a man without an expidient.Comment
LCHIEN
Comment