# 5 bands that shouldnt be given as much credit as they do



## bthoma91 (Mar 24, 2009)

5. metallica
4. ac/dc
3. guns n' roses
2. u2
1. pink floyd

and there is much more where that came from.


----------



## tigerbob (Mar 24, 2009)

bthoma91 said:


> 5. metallica
> 4. ac/dc
> 3. guns n' roses
> 2. u2
> ...



5.  Agree
4.  Disagree
3.  Agree
2.  Agree
1.  Disagree


----------



## strollingbones (Mar 24, 2009)

i agree totally


----------



## Harry Dresden (Mar 24, 2009)

tigerbob said:


> bthoma91 said:
> 
> 
> > 5. metallica
> ...



interesting.....i was watching a Documentary about "The History Of Metal".....one of the commentators said that Metalica is like the Eagles.......the Eagles did not invent Country Rock,were not even their best band,but they sure took that sound and ran with it and became the most successful band in that genre.......he said Metalica did the same with Metal.....hey the guy was just sayin.....


----------



## tigerbob (Mar 24, 2009)

Harry Dresden said:


> tigerbob said:
> 
> 
> > bthoma91 said:
> ...



I know little about Metallica, hence my disagreement. G&R were good for a while, but I think they get too much credit.  U2 are a great band but I don't think they merit the almost godlike status they get.  Everything's relative.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Mar 24, 2009)

1-the pretenders

2-van halen

3-the clash

4-elvis presley

5-dino,desi and billy


----------



## random3434 (Mar 24, 2009)

bthoma91 said:


> 5. metallica
> 4. ac/dc
> 3. guns n' roses
> 2. u2
> ...



5. eh
4.eh
3. agree
2.eh
1.NO WAY!


----------



## Kalam (Mar 24, 2009)

tigerbob said:


> 5.  Agree
> 4.  Disagree
> 3.  Agree
> 2.  Agree
> 1.  Disagree


----------



## Kalam (Mar 24, 2009)

I'd add the Beatles and the Beach Boys.


----------



## Jon (Mar 24, 2009)

Led Zeppelin

OH YEAH I WENT THERE

Also, Def Leppard.


----------



## manu1959 (Mar 24, 2009)

nirvana
beatles
the dead
pearl jam
springsteen
dylan
greenday
coldplay
radiohead

and i agree with this dude's analysis....

http://www.listology.com/content_show.cfm/content_id.25925/Music


----------



## Harry Dresden (Mar 24, 2009)

tigerbob said:


> I know little about Metallica, hence my disagreement. G&R were good for a while, but I think they get too much credit.  U2 are a great band but I don't think they merit the almost godlike status they get.  Everything's relative.



yea i also think U2 is no way near as important as you would think they are with the praise they get,it seems mostly political.....not musical....so they are a great POLITICAL band....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Mar 24, 2009)

Kalam said:


> I'd add the Beatles and the Beach Boys.



you think the Beatles and The Beach Boys are overrated?......


----------



## Kalam (Mar 24, 2009)

jsanders said:


> Led Zeppelin
> 
> OH YEAH I WENT THERE
> 
> Also, Def Leppard.


I think Zeppelin's pretty good. I'll give you Def Leppard.


----------



## Kalam (Mar 24, 2009)

Harry Dresden said:


> Kalam said:
> 
> 
> > I'd add the Beatles and the Beach Boys.
> ...



Yep.


----------



## Article 15 (Mar 24, 2009)

Kalam said:


> I'd add the Beatles



Aww c'mon, man, that's just trolling.


----------



## Article 15 (Mar 24, 2009)

bthoma91 said:


> 5. metallica
> 4. ac/dc
> 3. guns n' roses
> 2. u2
> ...




agree
agree
agree
agree
disagree


----------



## Dr Grump (Mar 24, 2009)

manu1959 said:


> nirvana
> beatles
> the dead
> pearl jam
> ...



I agree with the Dead and maybe Coldplay. The rest are certifiably brilliant...

Oh, and I disagree with Sanders on Led Zep and Harry on the Clash. The Clash??


----------



## Kalam (Mar 24, 2009)

Article 15 said:


> Kalam said:
> 
> 
> > I'd add the Beatles
> ...



I dunno, I've just never liked their music very much. My friends and family all think I'm crazy.


----------



## Article 15 (Mar 24, 2009)

Kalam said:


> Article 15 said:
> 
> 
> > Kalam said:
> ...



S'all good.

To each his own, I guess.


----------



## Article 15 (Mar 24, 2009)

jsanders said:


> Led Zeppelin
> 
> OH YEAH I WENT THERE


----------



## Toro (Mar 24, 2009)

Madonna
Britney Spears
The Back Street Boys

And all of those types...


----------



## tigerbob (Mar 24, 2009)

Kalam said:


> I'd add the Beatles and the Beach Boys.


----------



## tigerbob (Mar 24, 2009)

manu1959 said:


> nirvana
> beatles
> the dead
> pearl jam
> ...



Point 7 on his list undermines the whole list:



> 7. Led Zeppelin - They had some good songs, but Zep II and IV were horrible.


That said, Stairway is overrated with the exception of the drumming and the guitar solo.


----------



## manu1959 (Mar 24, 2009)

tigerbob said:


> manu1959 said:
> 
> 
> > nirvana
> ...



so if you have one bad opinion it invalidates all your opinions......

II and IV weren't all that great and the stairway to heaven album and that song suck.....

and i love zep....


----------



## tigerbob (Mar 24, 2009)

manu1959 said:


> tigerbob said:
> 
> 
> > manu1959 said:
> ...



Nah.  Zep II horrible?  Preposterous.


----------



## Xenophon (Mar 25, 2009)

bthoma91 said:


> 5. metallica


Never cared for them.


> 4. ac/dc


Nonsense, the king of head bangers.


> 3. guns n' roses


A tad over rated, but they were huge when they first hit.


> 2. u2


Insanity. This band has a string of mega hits accross three decades.


> 1. pink floyd


Even more insane, PF set the standard for late 70s acid rock, and their materpiece, 'the wall' is one of the most accliamed albums in history.


----------



## Shogun (Mar 25, 2009)

U2 sucks the giant donkey meat.

Nirvana was (unfortunately) a product rather than artistic.  I'd have hated to be on the mixing board during those sessions.

Bob Dylan..  Let's face it.  He was the justin timberlake of mod to beatnik to hippy to rock folk music.


----------



## Coloradomtnman (Mar 25, 2009)

Metallica is awesome, and if you don't think so, then you don't know heavy metal or you haven't listened to Metallica.  80s Metallica, not sell-out Metallica (everything from and after the Black Album sucks).

Over-rated bands:
Nirvana
Creed
Matchbox 20
Counting Crows
Michael Jackson

If you don't like Led Zeppelin, The Beatles, or the Grateful Dead, then move back to Siberia you commie pinko.

And if you love Top 40, then please contract flesh-eating staphylococcus and die a horrible death.  Its basically the same thing as enjoying commercials, even the bad ones.


----------



## Shogun (Mar 25, 2009)

man, say what you will about how fucking wierd micheal jackson is but I'm willing to bet htat you either had, or wanted, one of those orange jackets back in the mid 80s...

he's got some good songs.. Hell, the entire thriller album is classic.


----------



## HUGGY (Mar 25, 2009)

bthoma91 said:


> 5. metallica
> 4. ac/dc
> 3. guns n' roses
> 2. u2
> ...



My God..well ...your god.   I don't have one..
Man! did you see the zits on the faces and who knows where else on those pink floyd guys.  Totaly turned me off to their music.


----------



## Wolf (Mar 25, 2009)

manu1959 said:


> tigerbob said:
> 
> 
> > manu1959 said:
> ...



IV is overhyped..  cant stand stairway.. but Zep II is a brutally strong album....  IMO


----------



## Luissa (Mar 25, 2009)

bthoma91 said:


> 5. metallica
> 4. ac/dc
> 3. guns n' roses
> 2. u2
> ...


I agree with AC/DC they only know they same three rips, but Slash was good but Guns on a whole is overrated. U2 I can't stand and you are very wrong about Pink Floyd.


----------



## Xenophon (Mar 25, 2009)

Bullshit.

Angus is one of the best ever, and Slash would be the first guy to tell you that.

So, what bands are you folks claiming are not rated high enough?


----------



## Xenophon (Mar 25, 2009)

Coloradomtnman said:


> Michael Jackson


Child loving weirdo fuck he is, but his music is not over rated.

There is a reason we was the king of pop before he lost his mind.


----------



## Coloradomtnman (Mar 25, 2009)

Xenophon said:


> Coloradomtnman said:
> 
> 
> > Michael Jackson
> ...



Except that he is the "self-proclaimed" King of Pop.  He called himself that.

I admit, Thriller is awesome.  But what else did MJ do that was so great that he is crowned King of Pop?  I would think that Elvis Presley has a greater claim.  Or Stevie Wonder.  Or Fleetwood Mac.  Or The Eagles.  Or Aerosmith.


----------



## Luissa (Mar 25, 2009)

Xenophon said:


> Bullshit.
> 
> Angus is one of the best ever, and Slash would be the first guy to tell you that.
> 
> So, what bands are you folks claiming are not rated high enough?


I love Angus but all their songs sound the same. And I don't think Slash would agree with you.


----------



## Xenophon (Mar 25, 2009)

Coloradomtnman said:


> Xenophon said:
> 
> 
> > Coloradomtnman said:
> ...


Look at the pop charts from the 70s through the 80s.

You forget he was also front child for the Jackson five, and many other artists did songs he wrote.


----------



## Xenophon (Mar 25, 2009)

Luissa said:


> Xenophon said:
> 
> 
> > Bullshit.
> ...


And you'd be wrong, Slash has said in interviews one of the guys he admires is Angus.

Angus did some of the more amazing rifs in heavy mettle history, the only guy harder was eddie Van Halen back when VH had Diamond Dave.


----------



## Amanda (Mar 25, 2009)

I don't listen to much heavy music (at least on purpose ) so I don't really know about metallic or acdc but there is no way Floyd should be on the list. No way.

I've never liked u2 it doesn't sound like they're all playing the same song to me.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Mar 25, 2009)

Kalam said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > Kalam said:
> ...



you dont know much about rock music do ya?....weather you like the Beatles or not.....the contribution they made to rock music in the 60's is incalculable.....and the Beach Boys were the embodiment of a whole type of music (Surf)......


----------



## Harry Dresden (Mar 25, 2009)

manu1959 said:


> nirvana
> beatles
> the dead
> pearl jam
> ...



this guys whole list is bullshit.....the reason....its his opinion....if he would argue against the reasons the bands he mentions are famous for,i would give him some credit.....but much of it is...i did not like their music....so they are overrated....the Beatles,just for what they did for rock in the 60's,proves they are NOT overrated....


----------



## Kalam (Mar 25, 2009)

Harry Dresden said:


> you dont know much about rock music do ya?


About as much as most people, I guess. Sincerest apologies for having an opinion that isn't the same as yours... 



Harry Dresden said:


> ....weather you like the Beatles or not.....the contribution they made to rock music in the 60's is incalculable.....


What were those contributions? 

I can hardly stand some of their songs. "Yellow Submarine"... "Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da"... half of their tracks are complete shit as far as I'm concerned. Sure, they had a few good songs, but their music really doesn't do much for me. 

Also, Wings. Good God, what a disaster.



Harry Dresden said:


> and the Beach Boys were the embodiment of a whole type of music (Surf)......


The Beach Boys, IMO, were a pop band who sang a bit about surfing rather than a surf band. If I recall correctly, only one of them actually surfed. Misirlou (Dick Dale's version,) Pipeline, Wipeout... _those _were real surf songs.

The Beach Boys weren't bad even though they aren't my cup of tea, but they're completely overrated. They even stole a song from a far superior and far less appreciated artist, Chuck Berry.


----------



## tigerbob (Mar 25, 2009)

Kalam said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > ....weather you like the Beatles or not.....the contribution they made to rock music in the 60's is incalculable.....
> ...





> Writing in the Rolling Stone Illustrated History of Rock and Roll, Greil Marcus observed that the form of the Beatles contained the forms of rock and roll itself. The Beatles combined the harmonic range and implicit equality of the Fifties vocal groups with the flash of a rockabilly band (the Crickets or Gene Vincents Blue Caps) with the aggressive and unique personalities of the classic rock stars (Elvis, Little Richard) with the homey, this-could-be-you manner of later rock stars (Everly Brothers, Buddy Holly, Eddie Cochran) with the endlessly inventive songwriting touch of the Brill Building, and they delivered it all with the grace of the Miracles, the physicality of Louie, Louie, and the absurd enthusiasm of Gary U.S. Bonds.
> 
> The Beatles


That's the opinion of a well known and respected music journalist and author but, shit, I just like their music.


----------



## Grind (Mar 26, 2009)

u2 is terribad.  radiohead is awesome.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Mar 26, 2009)

Kalam said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > you dont know much about rock music do ya?
> ...



Kalam.....your saying that the Beatles are overrated,because you dont like them,never mind what they accomplished in the 60s.....then you ask..."what were those contributions?".....if you dont know about the subject matter,maybe you should not comment.....GOOGLE the Beatles effect on Rock music and you will get hundreds of pages to go and learn something.....

Kalam quote....
The Beach Boys, IMO, were a pop band who sang a bit about surfing rather than a surf band. If I recall correctly, only one of them actually surfed. Misirlou (Dick Dale's version,) Pipeline, Wipeout... _those _were real surf songs.

also performed by a few NON-surfers....they lived the Beach life style Kalam....John Fogerty was not raised in the Bayou,yet his music makes you think he may have been.....


----------



## Wolf (Mar 26, 2009)

Harry Dresden said:


> Kalam said:
> 
> 
> > Harry Dresden said:
> ...



The list of 25 most overated is.. overated as a list..   many of those band played a major role in the history and evolution of rock n roll and pop music..   

You can say you dont like the Beatles music, influence, style, album covers or whatever.. but their influence on music is still around today, as are many other bands on that list.. so no they are not overated..   are many of their songs overplayed.. yes.. but get an album and listen to the whole thing..  most of their albums have great songs you dont hear on the radio or at parties..  

The list seems like it was made by some high school kid with an internet connection.. or someone who just doesnt like mainstream music and want to show everyone how unique and individual they really are??  

.. and the sex pistols..  wasnt about the sound or 25 minute guitar solos..  it was about anger, rebellion and individualism..  brought the punk movement to the mainstream audience.. so overated??   dont think so..


----------



## Wolf (Mar 26, 2009)

Kalam said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > you dont know much about rock music do ya?
> ...



Chuck Berry is far to underappreciated.. IMO..   and his music still sounds great today..  throw in Maybelline..  still a great song.. 

But I think he was the first step in the bridge from black rythm and blues to the white 'rock n roll' audience..  yeah bill haley and rock around the clock was all over the airwaves..  but Bill doesnt hold a candle to Chuck..  musically or historically..  IMO..


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 26, 2009)

The minute we had some bozos putting the likes of The Beatles, The Beach Boys, and Pink Floyd on a list like this, this thread became completely idiotic


----------



## Meister (Mar 26, 2009)

DiamondDave said:


> The minute we had some bozos putting the likes of The Beatles, The Beach Boys, and Pink Floyd on a list like this, this thread became completely idiotic



Yeah, your right.  It went from subjective to conjecture.  A big difference huh?


----------



## Xenophon (Mar 26, 2009)

Kalam said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > you dont know much about rock music do ya?
> ...


I see you don't know anything about music either.

I bet you think Eminem is da bomb.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 26, 2009)

What the Beatles did with albums like Revolver, Rubber Soul, The White Album, Sgt. Peppers, etc.. What the Beach Boys did with Pet Sounds and Sunflower... What Pink Floyd did with Dark Side of the Moon, Animals, Obscured by Clouds, etc... those contributions are irrefutable and justify their places in the spots as some of the most time changing, influential, innovative, and ingenious bands in modern music history... 

If anything a band like the Beach Boys gets UNDER APPRECIATED because all that comes to mind to the ignorant bashers are songs like Surfin' Safari... Lennon, McCartney, Gillmore, Waters, and Wilson were essential cogs in the machinery that took music into the various generas that we have today... their talent and influence is unquestionable and rightfully deserving of the highest praise


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 26, 2009)

Now.. as for bands that I think get 'overrated' or too much credit...

One would have to be Metallica... They were a face.. ones that 16 year old boys got into because of the beat, the gnashed vocals that they could mimic, and the guttural feel to the music.. meanwhile you have metal greats such as Iron Maiden who don't get the limelight, but were infinitely more talented and complex and actually brought depth and changes to metal in their time...

Another would definitely be U2... a group that pretentious college kids hooked on to (along with other 'alternative' bands like The Cure)... very limited in their talent, and not very ingenious or altering in what they brought to their music..

Another would be Nirvana... the poster boy of the 'You can not feel my pain' movement, and the rest of this band, were not really the pioneers or masters of their craft and genera... much more credit would have to be given to the Screaming Trees, Soundgarden, and Alice in Chains... but again a teen angst movement propelled them... hey were popular, not really great... kind of like the Britney Spears of their genera... a controversial train wreck with limited talent but a whole lot of popular appeal

There could be many more to list.. depending on what I'm thinking of.. the mood I'm in.. etc... You could go down the Bon Jovi path... you could go down the Meat Loaf path... you could go down the Phil Collins Genesis path.... hell, it could piss off some, but there are ways to go down the Bruce Springsteen path... but frankly, I'm sick as a dog and I really don't feel like posting a ton on this right now


----------



## HUGGY (Mar 26, 2009)

Kalam said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > Kalam said:
> ...



Wow..thats says alot more about you than it does them.  I would be the last to critisize or suggest that you are not human but probably some friggin creature from the outer space sent here to destroy all of mankind so I won't.


----------



## Gunny (Mar 26, 2009)

Obviously some people don't a damned thing about the history of music, starting with the OP.


----------



## Grind (Mar 26, 2009)

The problem with the term "overrated" is that the word itself is overrated and it's thrown around much to often as a negetive connotation. Overrated doesn't have to mean bad, something can be overrated and still very good.

As far as the beatles are concerned, I don't think it's possible for a band to be that big and NOT be overrated.  At least as far as their music is concerned, some of it is indeed fluff.  Realistically they should be respected more for paving the way and being an influence on so many bands that followed them.  If the beatles weren't there in that time though, someone else would have stepped in and filled that void, and would be on the top of the pedestal today.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 26, 2009)

Grind said:


> The problem with the term "overrated" is that the word itself is overrated and it's thrown around much to often as a negetive connotation. Overrated doesn't have to mean bad, something can be overrated and still very good.
> 
> As far as the beatles are concerned, I don't think it's possible for a band to be that big and NOT be overrated.  At least as far as their music is concerned, some of it is indeed fluff.  Realistically they should be respected more for paving the way and being an influence on so many bands that followed them.  If the beatles weren't there in that time though, someone else would have stepped in and filled that void, and would be on the top of the pedestal today.



And if they were NOT there.. .music would not be the same today.. .someone else would have been the popular lead at the time.... but nobody else was the Beatles, could have been the same musical impact as the Beatles, or would have really been as important as the Beatles are to us now...

When you have that much music, there is always going to be so called "fluff"... however.. much of the "fluff" of the Beatles was still ingenious in it's day.. and some of that "fluff" has even made it into our culture in many ways and many places... You hear Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da intro-ing for nostalgic TV shows... Yellow Submarine is taught to grade schoolers... Revolution#9 is still thought of continually for it's avant garde influence

Other bands would give almost anything to have the "fluff" of the Beatles as their best musical efforts


----------



## Shogun (Mar 26, 2009)

woa.. hold up the fucking truth trolly a moment...

*
One would have to be Metallica... They were a face.. ones that 16 year old boys got into because of the beat, the gnashed vocals that they could mimic, and the guttural feel to the music.. meanwhile you have metal greats such as Iron Maiden who don't get the limelight, but were infinitely more talented and complex and actually brought depth and changes to metal in their time...*

Iron Maiden would have been nothing more than another british band had Metallica not made heavy metal a household word.  MORE talented?  my ass.  I'll stack iron maiden tunes against metallica (pre-black) all day long if your criteria is technicality, complexness and depth.  Hell, the ONLY thing maiden really had was the vocals of bruce doling out textbook history lyrics.  Maiden has MAYBE three popular songs from their entire cataloge..   Metallica had at LEAST that many on each pre-black album.  Shit, Burton era Metallica  especially kicks the shit out of maiden.  You want to talk about IMAGE being SOLD to TEENAGERS, eh Eddie?


----------



## Grind (Mar 26, 2009)

DiamondDave said:


> but nobody else was the Beatles, could have been the same musical impact as the Beatles, or would have really been as important as the Beatles are to us now...



This is where we disagree.


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 26, 2009)

Shogun said:


> woa.. hold up the fucking truth trolly a moment...
> 
> *
> One would have to be Metallica... They were a face.. ones that 16 year old boys got into because of the beat, the gnashed vocals that they could mimic, and the guttural feel to the music.. meanwhile you have metal greats such as Iron Maiden who don't get the limelight, but were infinitely more talented and complex and actually brought depth and changes to metal in their time...*
> ...



I am a pretty decent fan of Cliffy era Metallica.... but Cliffy don't hold a candle to Steve... and I am not paralleling popularity (which Metallica had) with talent.... James, Lars, etc really are not that great and never were... I'd put Steve Harris and Bruce as 2 of the best in metal ever...

And Maiden had good stuff out before Metallica even formed... 

Yes.. Eddie was a great marketing tool for the album covers.. no doubt.... but unfortunately, they get more credit for that than their musical and lyrical prowess.... 

I've listened to them both and seen 'em both.. and Metallica does not even come close in depth, talent, or performance... now I can listen to a Cliffy era argument, though I may not agree... but everything post-Cliffy has been worthy of the dumpster.. even the lest popular Iron Maiden albums have been worthwhile, if not popular sellers


----------



## Shogun (Mar 26, 2009)

dude, Justice for all was better metal than anything maiden put out during their entire career.  There is not a single iron maiden song that compares to One.  Alone.  And, really.. I'm going to need examples of maiden's apparent virtuosity because the first half of almost every Metallica song on Justice required more musicianship than any maiden song I can think of.  By all means, post examples but...  Maiden < Metallica.


and, regarding musical abilities... how many guiltar players did maiden need again?


----------



## Harry Dresden (Mar 26, 2009)

Grind said:


> The problem with the term "overrated" is that the word itself is overrated and it's thrown around much to often as a negetive connotation. Overrated doesn't have to mean bad, something can be overrated and still very good.
> 
> As far as the beatles are concerned, I don't think it's possible for a band to be that big and NOT be overrated.  At least as far as their music is concerned, some of it is indeed fluff.  Realistically they should be respected more for paving the way and being an influence on so many bands that followed them.  If the beatles weren't there in that time though, someone else would have stepped in and filled that void, and would be on the top of the pedestal today.



yea DINO,DESI & BILLY....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Mar 26, 2009)

DiamondDave said:


> Grind said:
> 
> 
> > The problem with the term "overrated" is that the word itself is overrated and it's thrown around much to often as a negetive connotation. Overrated doesn't have to mean bad, something can be overrated and still very good.
> ...


The other bands with some of the "fluff".......

Songs the Beatles Didn't Do


----------



## Dis (Mar 26, 2009)

DiamondDave said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> > woa.. hold up the fucking truth trolly a moment...
> ...



Everything except ...And Justice For All, you mean.  That was THE last good album Metallica put out.


----------



## Kalam (Mar 26, 2009)

Xenophon said:


> I see you don't know anything about music either.
> 
> I bet you think Eminem is da bomb.



Quit wasting space with posts like that, dipshit. The fact that I disagree with you doesn't mean that I "don't know anything."


----------



## Kalam (Mar 26, 2009)

Harry Dresden said:


> Kalam.....your saying that the Beatles are overrated,because you dont like them,never mind what they accomplished in the 60s.....then you ask..."what were those contributions?".....if you dont know about the subject matter,maybe you should not comment.....GOOGLE the Beatles effect on Rock music and you will get hundreds of pages to go and learn something.....


I wanted to hear your opinion. What contributions did they make that make them so unique and talented? 



Harry Dresden said:


> also performed by a few NON-surfers.... they lived the Beach life style Kalam....John Fogerty was not raised in the Bayou,yet his music makes you think he may have been.....


I wouldn't care about the Beach Boys' origins if I enjoyed their music. I just don't... it doesn't do anything for me. CCR, on the other hand, made music that I think is good. We simply have different opinions.


----------



## Kalam (Mar 26, 2009)

HUGGY said:


> Kalam said:
> 
> 
> > Harry Dresden said:
> ...



Yeah, I've heard it all before. From what I understand, there's a special ring of hell for those who dare blaspheme the almighty Beatles.


----------



## Meister (Mar 26, 2009)

Kalam said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > Kalam.....your saying that the Beatles are overrated,because you dont like them,never mind what they accomplished in the 60s.....then you ask..."what were those contributions?".....if you dont know about the subject matter,maybe you should not comment.....GOOGLE the Beatles effect on Rock music and you will get hundreds of pages to go and learn something.....
> ...




Just because you don't like the groups doesn't mean that they don't deserve the credit.  The Beach Boys influenced a whole genre of music, as did the Beatles.  If you had said the Cowsills, or the Monkee's, or the Partridge Family...you wouldn't have caught any flack on this thread.


----------



## elvis (Mar 26, 2009)

Wings, U2, Duran Duran, Depeche Mode, Sting,


----------



## Kalam (Mar 26, 2009)

Meister said:


> Just because you don't like the groups doesn't mean that they don't deserve the credit.  The Beach Boys influenced a whole genre of music, as did the Beatles.  If you had said the Cowsills, or the Monkee's, or the Partridge Family...you wouldn't have caught any flack on this thread.


They get more credit than they deserve. That was my point. Yeah, they had a few catchy songs. Yeah, their style was innovative (the Beatles' style, at least.) However, people tend to idolize their positive contributions and ignore all of the horrible crap they put out.

I disagree about the Beach Boys. They were Chuck Berry with less guitar, harmonized vocals, and a lot more bubblegum.


----------



## Xenophon (Mar 26, 2009)

Kalam said:


> Quit wasting space with posts like that, dipshit.


Go back to jew baiting you limp dicked moron.

It's clear you don't know shit about music.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Mar 26, 2009)

DiamondDave said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> > woa.. hold up the fucking truth trolly a moment...
> ...



well like that commentator said on the "History Of Metal"......

Metallica did not invent Metal,is not the best Metal band,but they sure took that sound and ran with it......hey its what the guy said......he was just sayin....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Mar 26, 2009)

Kalam said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > Kalam.....your saying that the Beatles are overrated,because you dont like them,never mind what they accomplished in the 60s.....then you ask..."what were those contributions?".....if you dont know about the subject matter,maybe you should not comment.....GOOGLE the Beatles effect on Rock music and you will get hundreds of pages to go and learn something.....
> ...



my thing Kalam is that you are saying a group is overrated because I DONT LIKE THEIR MUSIC.....your the one that says the Beatles are overrated......so why dont you tell us WHY?.....Since the Beatles are considered by a great majority to be NOT overrated.....i would be interested Kalam,to hear why you feel that they are......and please dont say i dont like their music.......what about what they did do you feel is BS or just overrated....


----------



## DiamondDave (Mar 26, 2009)

Shogun said:


> dude, Justice for all was better metal than anything maiden put out during their entire career.  There is not a single iron maiden song that compares to One.  Alone.  And, really.. I'm going to need examples of maiden's apparent virtuosity because the first half of almost every Metallica song on Justice required more musicianship than any maiden song I can think of.  By all means, post examples but...  Maiden < Metallica.
> 
> 
> and, regarding musical abilities... how many guiltar players did maiden need again?



And Justice could not even touch Number of the Beast or Powerslave or Piece of Mind... in their wildest dreams

Metallica even Credits Iron Maiden for influence

And Justice is like a bus load of retards on their way to Chuck E Cheese's


----------



## Dr Grump (Mar 26, 2009)

Iron Maiden kick Metallica's arse. No question. Metallica are Ok at best. In fact, their early stuff is shit (IMO of course). I think they got better as they got older...


----------



## Xenophon (Mar 27, 2009)

You can't claim a band is 'over rated' simply because you don't like what they do.

The beatles own the top spot as even to this day their music is in the top ten in current sales, and is remarkable in it's diversity.

I find it laughable anyone would claim them 'over rated' (the same goes for U2, who owned the charts for decades) and some of the other bands and albums mentioned.

For example, LZ's Stairway to heaven may be the most played out, yet anytime a survey of the top 1,000 rock songs is made it wins. LZ IV was more then that one song, that album is a good as anything else they ever did.

I'm not a huge fan of hip hop yet you have to recognize the impact of bands like Public Enemy had on music tatses ans styles, the way I recognize older music and it's impact, whether i personally like it or not.

Taste is not the only measure of ratings.


----------



## manifold (Mar 27, 2009)

bthoma91 said:


> 5. metallica
> 4. ac/dc
> 3. guns n' roses
> 2. u2
> ...



I agree with all except AC/DC.  Not because I think they're ef'n great or anything, I just don't think they're given a material amount of unneccesary "credit."

The other four absolutely, and I too put Pink Floyd at the top.  I'd probably add the Doors and The Grateful Dead.


----------



## Wolf (Mar 27, 2009)

Grind said:


> The problem with the term "overrated" is that the word itself is overrated and it's thrown around much to often as a negetive connotation. Overrated doesn't have to mean bad, something can be overrated and still very good.
> 
> As far as the beatles are concerned, I don't think it's possible for a band to be that big and NOT be overrated.  At least as far as their music is concerned, some of it is indeed fluff.  Realistically they should be respected more for paving the way and being an influence on so many bands that followed them.  If the beatles weren't there in that time though, someone else would have stepped in and filled that void, and would be on the top of the pedestal today.



I dont think most infuencial or band that changed musical history is a pedestal that one steps on..  that is earned.. the beatles, like them or not, overated or not, were very diverse, popular and made some great tunes that influenced artists to this day.. (yeah they have some songs that.. well.. suck....) that Pedestal is not something that is given.. only a few bands that made it big can really make a claim at that pedestal and i dont see it as if they didnt someone else would have..  perhaps someone else could have.. and there are/were other bands at that time that were great also..   but just cause someone did something like the beatles did, does not means that others would have done the same thing in thier absence..  IMO..


----------



## manifold (Mar 27, 2009)

Xenophon said:


> You can't claim a band is 'over rated' simply because you don't like what they do.



Can you send me a copy of the rule book?  I wasn't aware of this restriction and who knows what else.


----------



## Xenophon (Mar 27, 2009)

manifold said:


> Xenophon said:
> 
> 
> > You can't claim a band is 'over rated' simply because you don't like what they do.
> ...


We can save postage as I just quoted it for you.

You could of course send me yours that explains why some of the greatest bands in history are 'over rated' to you.


----------



## manifold (Mar 27, 2009)

Xenophon said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Xenophon said:
> ...



I was being facetious.  The whole discussion is academic and subjective, so of course there really is no rule book silly. 

And IMO, a band can be both great AND overrated.  It's just a matter of whether one personally believes that their true greatness matches their perceived greatness.  IMO, Pink Floyd's true greatness falls staggeringly short of their perceived greatness.  But that's just one man's wholly inconsequential opinion.


----------



## Xenophon (Mar 27, 2009)

manifold said:


> I was being facetious.  The whole discussion is academic and subjective, so of course there really is no rule book silly.
> 
> And IMO, a band can be both great AND overrated.  It's just a matter of whether one personally believes that their true greatness matches their perceived greatness.  IMO, Pink Floyd's true greatness falls staggeringly short of their perceived greatness.  But that's just one man's wholly inconsequential opinion.


I'm fine with it, I laugh at the high horse crowd that start trying to break down top bands simply because they don't like their music.


----------



## manifold (Mar 27, 2009)

Xenophon said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > I was being facetious.  The whole discussion is academic and subjective, so of course there really is no rule book silly.
> ...



I know what you mean.  When people start to rip apart such commercially successful acts as Britney Spears and the Jonas Brothers, it really gets me steamed!


----------



## Shogun (Mar 27, 2009)

elvis3577 said:


> Wings, U2, Duran Duran, Depeche Mode, Sting,



Aw man I totally agreed until you said Depeche Mode.  their Violator album is classic and, I'd say, deserving of a top 25 place in modern music.


http://music.aol.com/video/halo/depeche-mode/1921261


----------



## manifold (Mar 27, 2009)

Shogun said:


> Aw man I totally agreed until you said Depeche Mode.  their Violator album is classic and, I'd say, deserving of a top 25 place in modern music.



I'm gonna go ahead and just take your word for it on that one.


----------



## Shogun (Mar 27, 2009)

DiamondDave said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> > dude, Justice for all was better metal than anything maiden put out during their entire career.  There is not a single iron maiden song that compares to One.  Alone.  And, really.. I'm going to need examples of maiden's apparent virtuosity because the first half of almost every Metallica song on Justice required more musicianship than any maiden song I can think of.  By all means, post examples but...  Maiden < Metallica.
> ...





dude.  Thats simply retarded.  First, being an influence doesn't really say anything about whose band is musically better.  Hell, the Misfits were also a Metallica influence; do you want to argue that Jerry Only is a groundbreaking bassist?  Of course not.   Second, Your OPINION is one thing...  ALBUM SALES are another.  Sure, sure.. you can sit and be a fanboy all day long.  But, the FACT remains that Metallica sold more records of any three of their albums than Maiden sold any 6 of theirs.  You can't find anyone who is not an 80s throwbacck who can even NAME a songs on each of those maiden albums... But, you think I'll have any trouble finding people who can name at least one song from EACH Metallica album?  Your position on this is simply propostorus from the original point of accusing MEtallica of being a product of marketing, DESPITE EVERY ROLE EDDIE PLAYED FOR MAIDEN, all the way down to whose albums were more popular AND, let's face it, more musically inclined. 


Hell, PM pool master Manifold to set up a poll inthe flame zone and I'll match you song to song so we can let the people of USMB decide who they think was the better metal band.


----------



## Shogun (Mar 27, 2009)

Dr Grump said:


> Iron Maiden kick Metallica's arse. No question. Metallica are Ok at best. In fact, their early stuff is shit (IMO of course). I think they got better as they got older...



well, you are a fucking retard who doesn't know what the fuck he is talking about.  If you think they got BETTER as they got older then you disqualify your opinion from the start.


----------



## Shogun (Mar 27, 2009)

manifold said:


> Xenophon said:
> 
> 
> > You can't claim a band is 'over rated' simply because you don't like what they do.
> ...


----------



## Shogun (Mar 27, 2009)

manifold said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> > Aw man I totally agreed until you said Depeche Mode.  their Violator album is classic and, I'd say, deserving of a top 25 place in modern music.
> ...



I'm telling you.. it's good stuff.  If you are ever kinda pissed off and you like electronic music DM is a good band to reach for.


In 2003, the album was ranked number 342 on Rolling Stone magazine's list of the 500 greatest albums of all time. It is included in the book 1001 Albums You Must Hear Before You Die.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violator_(album)


----------



## manifold (Mar 27, 2009)

Shogun said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Shogun said:
> ...



No offense, but considering that you don't even recognize how much better Maiden is than Metallica (not even close!), I'm disinclined to pursue your musical recommendations.


----------



## Xenophon (Mar 27, 2009)

manifold said:


> I know what you mean.  When people start to rip apart such commercially successful acts as Britney Spears and the Jonas Brothers, it really gets me steamed!


Even they have their fans dude.


----------



## HUGGY (Mar 27, 2009)

manifold said:


> Xenophon said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



What the hell are you talking about? "Britney Spears and the Jonas Brothers" are total crap.  They will be hard pressed to make the top 1000 bands in ten years...let alone the top five.  Selling albums with the full force of the media advertising machine is no gauge of artistic talent.


----------



## Shogun (Mar 27, 2009)

manifold said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



I've got you beat on record sales, popularity and musical ingenuity, homey.  The eddie poster in your bedroom doesn't make it less true that Metallica > Maiden.


Like I said above.. post a poll and i'll match you song for song.  After you maiden fanboys blow your load with three songs I'll still be able to post no less than 10 Metallica songs that people still dig to this day.  So, pot the thread so I can keep pointing out how maiden, though an earlier band, didn't have NARY the slightest impact on bringing metal to the peaks that it enjoyed after Metallica.


----------



## manifold (Mar 27, 2009)

Dream Theater is better than Metallica.


----------



## Shogun (Mar 27, 2009)

see, now you are just trying to piss me off into a trademarked Shogun reaction (tm).


----------



## manifold (Mar 27, 2009)

Have you even listened to Death Magnetic?

Talk about fucking LAME!


----------



## Shogun (Mar 27, 2009)

manifold said:


> Have you even listened to Death Magnetic?
> 
> Talk about fucking LAME!



certainly not their best material but better than the last few albums.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Mar 27, 2009)

manifold said:


> bthoma91 said:
> 
> 
> > 5. metallica
> ...



since the doors influenced a lot of bands.....they are not overrated....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Mar 27, 2009)

manifold said:


> Xenophon said:
> 
> 
> > You can't claim a band is 'over rated' simply because you don't like what they do.
> ...



Mani.....because you dont like a band that gets a lot of credit,they are overrated?.....what about the band in question do you not agree with?....like the band or not,if they have accomplished something,and get accolades for it,what about those accolades do you not agree with.....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Mar 27, 2009)

manifold said:


> Xenophon said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



why?


----------



## Harry Dresden (Mar 27, 2009)

Shogun said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > Shogun said:
> ...



OK guys this is a poll from DDD.....the people who post on their forums vote on these.....and there are quite a few of them......but here is their Great Metal Bands poll

100 Greatest Metal Bands


----------



## Dr Grump (Mar 27, 2009)

Shogun said:


> well, you are a fucking retard who doesn't know what the fuck he is talking about.  If you think they got BETTER as they got older then you disqualify your opinion from the start.



You calling me a retard is like Adolf Hitler calling Mother Theresa a serial killer, so I'll take the complement. 

Even as they got older, Metallica weren't _that _good. Hated their early stuff, thought it was just thrash crap.

And anybody who likes Depeche Mode has no right calling _anybody _a retard...


----------



## Meister (Mar 27, 2009)

Dr Grump said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> > well, you are a fucking retard who doesn't know what the fuck he is talking about.  If you think they got BETTER as they got older then you disqualify your opinion from the start.
> ...



Children, children....settle down, this isn't politics, or religion, it's just a music thread.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Mar 27, 2009)

Meister said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> > Shogun said:
> ...


but he is right about Depeche Mode.......


----------



## Meister (Mar 27, 2009)

Harry Dresden said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Dr Grump said:
> ...




Don't feed the fire, Harry


----------



## Xenophon (Mar 27, 2009)

Maybe he just can't get enough.


----------



## Shogun (Mar 30, 2009)

Dr Grump said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> > well, you are a fucking retard who doesn't know what the fuck he is talking about.  If you think they got BETTER as they got older then you disqualify your opinion from the start.
> ...



Again, this is what makes it clear as the day is long that you don't really have anything to add to this discussion.  First, your outright ignorance regarding metallica's "better with age" crap and second with your opinion of DM.  You canadians of Austrailia might want to develop a better taste in music before you say dumb shit in a thread about metal.


----------



## HUGGY (Mar 30, 2009)

Shogun said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> > Shogun said:
> ...




Hey!  "dumb shit in a thread"!  This thread is not "about metal".


----------



## Shogun (Mar 30, 2009)

a Metallica vs Iron Maiden tangent certainly is.  Do you need the cliff notes or are you phonetically spelling out the words being used?


----------



## Dr Grump (Mar 31, 2009)

Shogun said:


> Again, this is what makes it clear as the day is long that you don't really have anything to add to this discussion.  First, your outright ignorance regarding metallica's "better with age" crap and second with your opinion of DM.  You canadians of Austrailia might want to develop a better taste in music before you say dumb shit in a thread about metal.



Anybody who thinks Metallica is better than Iron Maiden doesn't know their arse from their elbow when it comes to music. Iron Maiden = music. Metallica (especially their early stuf) = White Noise.

I repeat, anybody who even remotely likes Depeche Mode doesn't even have a right to read a music thread, let alone contribute to the discussion. Next thing you know, you'll be quoting Tiny Tim as the great lost icon of the 60s, or that the Monkees gave the Beatles a run for their money.

Stick with Jew-trolling Shoggie - at least you're good for something...


----------



## Dis (Mar 31, 2009)

Dr Grump said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> > Again, this is what makes it clear as the day is long that you don't really have anything to add to this discussion.  First, your outright ignorance regarding metallica's "better with age" crap and second with your opinion of DM.  You canadians of Austrailia might want to develop a better taste in music before you say dumb shit in a thread about metal.
> ...



I think you're cuckoo.. Both old Metallica AND Maiden were extremely good.  Metallica just stood the test of time better than Maiden, because unfortunately, they caved, and went for quantity over quality.

Depeche Mode?  Eh.  I actually like the remakes of some of their songs better than the DM originals.


----------



## Dr Grump (Mar 31, 2009)

Dis said:


> I think you're cuckoo.. Both old Metallica AND Maiden were extremely good.  Metallica just stood the test of time better than Maiden, because unfortunately, they caved, and went for quantity over quality.
> 
> Depeche Mode?  Eh.  I actually like the remakes of some of their songs better than the DM originals.



I was heavily into hard rock and some strands of metal from the ages of 16-22. In fact, my nickname in the police college (I was 21 when I joined) was Metler due to me blasting Iron Maiden, AC DC and G n R from my dorm room. Interesting, all the other recruits thought it was crap, until Friday nights when we got pissed (that's drunk to you Yanks) and then it was back to "Metler's dorm to crank up the sounds". Then I grew up.. 
Bands I was into at that age (as well as the above) included Thin Lizzy, Van Halen, Sabbath, Zeppelin etc. Couldn't stand WASP, Motley Crue and all those big hair bands...


----------



## Shogun (Mar 31, 2009)

Dr Grump said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> > Again, this is what makes it clear as the day is long that you don't really have anything to add to this discussion.  First, your outright ignorance regarding metallica's "better with age" crap and second with your opinion of DM.  You canadians of Austrailia might want to develop a better taste in music before you say dumb shit in a thread about metal.
> ...



Again, your opinion of early metallica is what makes your input such a farce.  If you think Ride the lightening is nothing but white noise then you really have no relevant input to add.  It's hilarious to watch you even continue to make comments after posting something as summarily retarded as that.

And, I repeat, DM is a great band.  Have a gander at our local poll.  Hell, I can cite source after source suggesting the same.  Do't blame me if you've conveyed two reasons why you wouldn't know good music from an excuses for toddler killing jews.  If you think DM equates to Tiny Tim then.. well.. here.. let me laugh at you some more.



Stick with blaming toddler chunks post cast lead, dude.  The mosad may value your arab hating judgment but I sure don't.  Especially when it comes to music.


----------



## Shogun (Mar 31, 2009)

Dr Grump said:


> Dis said:
> 
> 
> > I think you're cuckoo.. Both old Metallica AND Maiden were extremely good.  Metallica just stood the test of time better than Maiden, because unfortunately, they caved, and went for quantity over quality.
> ...



And this is where you convey just how stupid you are... So, YOU think Guns and fucking Roses was METAL, eh?



thats nothing short of awesome.  And, not in a complimentary way.


THIN LIZZY?    VAN HALEN?  



you, sir, simply don't know what the fuck you are talking about.  Espiecially if you call Motley Crue a HAIR BAND... but NOT Van Halen?  As if a single member of Thin Lizzy had short fucking hair!  And, I tellya.. NOTHING SAY METAL QUITE LIKE... uh... led zeppelin  






hilarious.


----------



## HUGGY (Mar 31, 2009)

Shogun said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> > Dis said:
> ...



Don't think Thin Lizzy is anything metal but the guitar solo in "the Cowboy Song" is one of the best.


----------



## Shogun (Mar 31, 2009)

Fuck no Thin Lizzy isn't metal.. but don't tell the jewish Axl that or he might dance around in his leopard skin spandex and say some more stupid shit.


----------



## Dr Grump (Apr 1, 2009)

Shogun said:


> And this is where you convey just how stupid you are... So, YOU think Guns and fucking Roses was METAL, eh?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You're so busy frothing at the mouth trying for the put down, you didn't read my post properly. I said "HARD ROCK and strands of metal" for a reason. And no, even though some consider Led Zep, along with Deep Purple, the original metal heads, I don't. However, I do consider them both in the hard rock category (and in the case of Zep, blues). Ditto Thin Lizzy (whose main man BTW, Phil Lynott DID have short hair - well compared to all the other hairy headed bands., so get your facts straight on that one Dorkus).
And no, I don't put Crue and WASP even in the same class as Van Halen, and if you do, that explains your stupidity over Metallica.

Haven't you got an oven to build, or a gas chamber to renovate?


----------



## Shogun (Apr 1, 2009)

way to backtrack, dr. hook!  





poor guy...  your jewish thresh hold must be pretty fragile these days if all it takes for you to scream jooo hating antisemite is for someone to school your goofy punk ass on the topic of music.  But, your reflexive zionist reaction probably doesn't shock anyone this side of operation Toddler Kill.


----------



## Dr Grump (Apr 1, 2009)

Shogun said:


> way to backtrack, dr. hook!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Where's the back track? It's there in black and white Doofus...


----------



## Shogun (Apr 1, 2009)

You are right.. the outright stupidity of your input really is posted in black and white.


----------



## Meister (Apr 1, 2009)

Shogun said:


> You are right.. the outright stupidity of your input really is posted in black and white.




Geeze, you two still at it?   Just get a room.


----------



## Shogun (Apr 1, 2009)

i'm still waiting for the maiden fans to post a poll so that I can riposte metallica videos at a rate of 6:1


----------



## Gunny (Apr 1, 2009)

Dr Grump said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> > Again, this is what makes it clear as the day is long that you don't really have anything to add to this discussion.  First, your outright ignorance regarding metallica's "better with age" crap and second with your opinion of DM.  You canadians of Austrailia might want to develop a better taste in music before you say dumb shit in a thread about metal.
> ...



Ditto in reverse.  I'll take pre-Load Metallica over Iron Maiden ANY day.  Anyone that thinks Maiden is better probably doesn't know jack about Metallica until they went mainstream.


----------



## Gunny (Apr 1, 2009)

Dr Grump said:


> Dis said:
> 
> 
> > I think you're cuckoo.. Both old Metallica AND Maiden were extremely good.  Metallica just stood the test of time better than Maiden, because unfortunately, they caved, and went for quantity over quality.
> ...



How could you get the nick "Metler" from AC/DC and GNR?  Talk about noise.  ACDC is just that, and GNR is hard rock.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Apr 1, 2009)

Gunny said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> > Dis said:
> ...


myself i cant see what the fuss is all about.....i thought ANYBODY into anything LOUD an HARD already knew that JUDAS PRIEST is the band the others look up too.....


----------



## Gunny (Apr 1, 2009)

Grind said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > but nobody else was the Beatles, could have been the same musical impact as the Beatles, or would have really been as important as the Beatles are to us now...
> ...



I agree with Dave.  What was the next big name Brit band to invade the US after the Beatles?  The Rolling Stones.  You think the impact on music would have been the same since the Stones started out with harder, edgier music than the Beatles?  Hardly.

The Beatles showed up and sucked everybody in with Love Me Do pop music and over the years developed a harder edge to both music and their sound.  They were more musically diverse than the Stones.  The Stones played a sound.  

You'd have had a completely different British Invasion and sound and you can't say where it would have gone.  No one can.  

The fact remains, they did come and they had the impact.  You're what-iffery amounts to the equivalent of "What if Hitler hadn't invaded Russia?"  Fact is, he did.


----------



## Gunny (Apr 1, 2009)

Harry Dresden said:


> Gunny said:
> 
> 
> > Dr Grump said:
> ...



Hardly.  I don't like Judas Priest.  But that's a personal preference.  I'm certainly not going to call them overrated.

Just like I can't even comment on U2.  I just about can't stand U2.  Anything I say about them would be biased.

I don't even remember who had the OP, but dis'n Floyd and Zeplin is sacrilege.  That's just someone in denial.  Obviously someone who doesn't know how to roll, nor have a stereo headset for his turntable.


----------



## LoThunder (Apr 1, 2009)

*Theoretically then- every great band there ever was completely sucks to someone.

I will say this: Elvis Presley is the greatest entertainer ever to die on the toilet...



*


----------



## Gunny (Apr 2, 2009)

LoThunder said:


> *Theoretically then- every great band there ever was completely sucks to someone.
> 
> I will say this: Elvis Presley is the greatest entertainer ever to die on the toilet...
> 
> ...


----------



## Dis (Apr 2, 2009)

Gunny said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > Gunny said:
> ...



 Mine still works...


----------



## Harry Dresden (Apr 2, 2009)

Gunny said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > Gunny said:
> ...



i dont know...i like most music that is loud and has a good SOLID beat.....like Priest and Maiden,Metallica.....etc.


----------



## DiamondDave (Apr 2, 2009)

Shogun said:


> i'm still waiting for the maiden fans to post a poll so that I can riposte metallica videos at a rate of 6:1




Oh... more music videos... that means a lot.. or even worse.. POPULARITY... oh, that means everything in terms of talent  I guess Britney Spears is more talented that SRV ever was 

Maiden was more complex musically, AND lyrically... where Maiden had 2 of the best ever in Bruce and Steve at their respective efforts in metal.. Metallica has none... and the only thing you have going for your argument is popularity

I've been a hard rock and metal head since about 81... and I play bass and have played bass as a paid job.. did that for 4 years before I joined the Army at 22... and I played everything from Metallica, Maiden, Accept, Motorhead, etc.... and I will take ANY Maiden over ANY Metallica every day of the week and twice on Sunday... was Selloutica better before Cliffy died? Yeppers.... but still were not as well rounded or 'good' musically as Maiden...


----------



## Gunny (Apr 2, 2009)

DiamondDave said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> > i'm still waiting for the maiden fans to post a poll so that I can riposte metallica videos at a rate of 6:1
> ...



Your opinion.  I've listened to both, play guitar, have played on stages, and I'll take Metallica any day and twice on Sundays.  I don't dislike Maiden, but they just weren't as good.  That's my opinion.  Agree to disagree and go back to your corner.

And "Selloutica"?  Who are YOU trying to kid?  What is your goal as a musician/musical act?  To be the best and to make LOTS of money.  Are you going to make lots of money on independent labels and playing nightclubs?  Nowhere near as much as with a major label and playing mainstream concert venues.  

"They sold out their fans."  Obviously not if they have MORE fans who STILL pay to hear them and pay LOTS more.  And what do the fans do for them?  Enjoy their music for a piece of the door and $500. cash?  That'll keep 'em warm on a winter night when they're in their 80s.

I get tired of hearing that crap.  They were selling out to begin with when they left their garages and trying to make money.


----------



## manifold (Apr 2, 2009)

Winger is better than Metallica.


----------



## del (Apr 2, 2009)

manifold said:


> Winger is better than Metallica.



wings is better than metallica


----------



## manifold (Apr 2, 2009)

Yep, them too.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Apr 2, 2009)

Gunny said:


> And "Selloutica"?  Who are YOU trying to kid?  What is your goal as a musician/musical act?  To be the best and to make LOTS of money.  Are you going to make lots of money on independent labels and playing nightclubs?  Nowhere near as much as with a major label and playing mainstream concert venues.
> 
> "They sold out their fans."  Obviously not if they have MORE fans who STILL pay to hear them and pay LOTS more.  And what do the fans do for them?  Enjoy their music for a piece of the door and $500. cash?  That'll keep 'em warm on a winter night when they're in their 80s.
> 
> I get tired of hearing that crap.  They were selling out to begin with when they left their garages and trying to make money.



Gunny i have heard this shit from so many Hard Rock guys about Metallica  selling out....yet EVERY FUCKING ONE OF THEM.....have the Album that supposedly sold them out......


----------



## manifold (Apr 5, 2009)

Gunny said:


> And "Selloutica"?  Who are YOU trying to kid?  What is your goal as a musician/musical act?  To be the best and to make LOTS of money.  Are you going to make lots of money on independent labels and playing nightclubs?  Nowhere near as much as with a major label and playing mainstream concert venues.
> 
> "They sold out their fans."  Obviously not if they have MORE fans who STILL pay to hear them and pay LOTS more.  And what do the fans do for them?  Enjoy their music for a piece of the door and $500. cash?  That'll keep 'em warm on a winter night when they're in their 80s.
> 
> I get tired of hearing that crap.  They were selling out to begin with when they left their garages and trying to make money.




Gunny,

I understand what you are trying to say, but I have to disagree.  Rock history is littered with acts that have made LOTS and LOTS of money that *nobody* would ever accuse of having sold out.  You might consider why Metallica isn't one of them.

And btw:  Just because you are tired of hearing something doesn't mean there isn't any truth to it.


----------



## Shogun (Apr 6, 2009)

DiamondDave said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> > i'm still waiting for the maiden fans to post a poll so that I can riposte metallica videos at a rate of 6:1
> ...



yes, actually.. popularity DOES mean a lot.  If you need to compare MEtallica with Spears and Nsync then go for it, dude.  The fact remains that Metallica is the band that put Metal on the popular map.  Like it or not, THEY produced better music and became the icons of metal for damn near an entire decade.  Maiden?  yea right.  I'm sure your Eddieposter having ass can name more than three of their songs.. but, to the REST of us, fanboy, there really is no comparison.

Like I said, 6:1

ps..SRV and Metallica not only write but PLAY their own songs.  It's truly hilarious watching you try and disregard the fact of Metallica using our modern Milli Vanillis.  For real, dude.  YOu don't know what the hell you are talking about.


Maiden had a songwriting bass player and a talented vocalist.  WOW.   How did the Stars not align every night that Maiden put on a show?  

Not only was Cliff, kirk and James paramount in defining the sound of Metal during that time frame but, AGAIN, I guarentfuckingtee that 6:1 people will recognize metallica riffs over maiden riffs.  Guarenfuckingteed.  Put that in your musical ability pipe and smoke it, dude.


Remember, stupid..   Justice didn't have Cliff on it and it rocked exponentially harder than ANY fucking maiden album.. Hell, you can even stack a few maidin albums and have Eddie pissing gasoline on them and they would STILL not kick as much ass as Justice.. letalone the earlier albums.


ps,. i don't really give a fuck how long you've been playing.. uh.. bass.  Hell, I've been playing guitar since 88 and cut my teeth on the peak of metal.  You don't impress me with some early 80s bass playing.  Believe it or not there is a reason why there are so many Bass Player jokes.


----------



## HideTheRum (Apr 18, 2009)

So, I only read the first page. but here is my list of "overrated" bands:

KISS
AC/DC
U2
REM  -  Live (the band)is sooo much better, but gets little recognition.
Green Day
Nickleback
Rolling Stones -  yeah, I went there
Lynyrd Skynyrd - yaaaawn

I know I'm forgetting someone.......


----------



## Meister (Apr 18, 2009)

HideTheRum said:


> So, I only read the first page. but here is my list of "overrated" bands:
> 
> KISS
> AC/DC
> ...



Dude....you suck.


----------



## Said1 (Apr 18, 2009)

My vote goes for Green Day. And Guns and Rose. And APP.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Apr 18, 2009)

looking this over......U2 seems to appear the most.....


----------

