Yeah, I could write what I like. What I like. But where's the fun in that? I don't want to come off as a whiny, negative jerk, but if I say "Hey, I like the Beatles!" there really won't be a huge discussion on it, now will there?
Basically, this thread is here to let me vent on what I think a few of the most over-rated (here and elsewhere) artists are, and my take on them.
AC/DC - Really? It bothers me that a band that pretty much bashes power chords constantly can consistently make 'best band ever' charts everywhere and be labeled as hard rock, or worse yet - metal. Each song sounds the same to me - the only highlight are the solos, but they're not powerful enough to make me an AC/DC fan. I'm listening to Hells Bells right now, which is better then most of their stuff - has an actual riff, not just chords! - but still does pretty much nothing for me. I think that they're loud, mindless, and just subversive enough to make them popular among teenagers who want to rebel without doing much work at it.
Coldplay - ...Agh. I love how people label them as alternative or rock when really, they're just a pop band. I like a few of their songs, but nothing is really amazing - I know, let's hit the same note for 16 bars, then a different note for 16 bars, then the first note again for 16 bars. Eh. No thank you. Listening to Viva la Vida, it seems that the only thing that makes them any good at all is Brian Eno and Joe Satriani. They do simple songs and make the radio a lot, that's really all I need to know.
Eric Clapton - This one always seems to land me in trouble. I like Eric Clapton alright, yeah, but I think that he's not the best guitarist ever like so many people will make him out to be. His days with Cream seem fairly disappointing - Sunshine of Your Love is a disappointment of a solo, and all my favourite Cream songs (I Feel Free; White Room; Wrapping Paper) always seem to be more influenced by Bruce and Baker than Clapton himself. Moving onto Blind Faith, I can't stand any of their stuff that I've heard, which is ironic because I like Winwood. His biggest song in his career would be Layla, right? A riff done by Duane Allman, and the song starts out so strong ... then turns into elevator music. Boring. Then the other big hit was Wonderful Tonight, which was nice the first few times but quickly got old to me and everyone else, but still every radio station and jam band will play it. His best stuff is his acoustic work (Let it Grow; Tears in Heaven; unplugged album) and his simpler work (Lay Down Sally; Knockin' on Heaven's Door; etc.); when he starts doing hard rock and blues he just fails to impress nearly as much.
The Flaming Lips - Ah, Wayne Coyne. At times your work really stands out, your voice is perfect, everything comes together to make a wonderful song. But for the most part, as I've heard, his voice wavers in and out of tune, and the music seems a little...boring to me. Lackluster. Maybe I just need to dig deeper, I've only heard At War with the Mystics, Yoshimi, and Bulletin. I only liked the first, and the second two - which I've heard so many good things about, and approached with open ears! - just disappointed me to such degrees. I did like Fight Test, but that may just be because I like Cat Stevens.
John Prine - Wait, no, he's awesome, nevermind.
Mclusky - This is most likely the one that will have me exiled. I really can not, can not stand them. I'm listening to "That Man Will Not Hang" right now, and it's...okay. The vocals are the only good point to this song, and they're a little lost in over-loud drumming and bass. Now, I approached this band with a very open mind and open ears, having heard stories about them, and hearing their titles and album names made me expect an amazing band that would delight and tickle me to the core (sort of how I got into the Books). I got ahold of a copy of "The Difference Between You and Me is I'm Not on Fire" and recoiled. I was expecting a masterpiece with such a title, and instead got largely discordant, atonal, out of tune music with great vocals somewhat lost in the mix. The drumming is damn good, as well, but are far too pronounced and need to be pulled back. The acoustic bit would be pleasant to listen to except for the whole out-of-tune bit. Some people can take discordance and make it sound good, some people can't. Maybe my expectations were just placed too high with the way everyone raved about this band, or maybe I just took the titles to be indications of greatness and judged this book by its cover. Either way - Mclusky is a terribly disappointing band.
The Rolling Stones - The Greatest Rock and Roll Band of All Time? No. No, no, no. I can't think of a single one that would fit that description (Beatles and Zeppelin come close, but still not), but the Rolling Stones definitely would still not be it. Granted, I do like maybe 10 of their songs, but when a band releases so much dreck as the Stones, they're bound to have a few good ones in there. From their early covers of R&B to Brian Jones experimentation to their country work to their 'hard rock', very, very little stands apart. They write fairly simple songs that a lot of people can easily listen to, but that's about it. With the exception of Jagger, each individual member of the Rolling Stones fascinates me, but when they come together to make music I have a tendency to reach for the radio to see what else is on.
That's just about all, for now. Go on, rip my head off.
