New topic
Printablethesexofit said: More like greatest POP band ever.....beatles ain't rock, no way! If the Beatles aren't rock then why do they get played to death on classic rock stations? They are rock 'n' roll just like Elvis, The Stones, Dylan, Hendrix, etc. | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
sextonseven said: thesexofit said: More like greatest POP band ever.....beatles ain't rock, no way! If the Beatles aren't rock then why do they get played to death on classic rock stations? They are rock 'n' roll just like Elvis, The Stones, Dylan, Hendrix, etc. ? Anyway I say they r way more pop then rock, but labelling is stupid anyway | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
VanitySixx said: Carmen Electra!!!
Halle Berry (although, I do love her) Queen Latifah would have been much more believable in Monsters Ball. I don't understand the idea Halle should've been in that movie she just couldn't carry it off. Britney Spears definitely over rated. Jennifer Lopez as an actress. She's not a good singer butlooks good in videos and on stage. Carmen Electra? Really? You mean you don't think she deserves all that accliam for her acting and music and all those awards? Way overrated! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
sextonseven said: jacktheimprovident said: Someone can be great AND overrated (like the Beatles for example; perhaps the greatest AND most overrated rock band ever).
How can The Beatles be the greatest rock band ever and overrated? The Beatles aren't overrated. Most people consider them the greatest rock band ever and they are. So they are rated quite accurately. I don't see why this is so hard to understand. I agree that the Beatles are one of, and perhaps THE best band of the rock n roll age. HOWEVER, their music isn't as far above the music of every other rock n roll group/artist as everybody thinks, but that's just my opinion. Secondly, I don't think that the value of art can be quantified anyway so it's pointless to try and claim who's the "greatest" anyway. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
jkj10 said: Pagey said: Different strokes...right? 6 out of 7 on this list I consider to be all time favorites of mine. The Dead, Elvis, Dylan & Zep are all musical legends and are loved by MILLIONS and has influenced GENERATIONS. So you are definitely in the minority on THAT opinion. Green Day has just released the best album of the year imo. Lenny, while a classic rock copy cat, is undoubtably talented and is a hook/riff master. ...and one more thing about you dissn my Zep... 
Even Snoop...while not a huge fan...I give him respect on having one of the longest careers in hip-hop. Doesn't he have a # 1 song now? I can't believe someone thinks Elvis and Dylan are overrated!!Then Prince is,too!! Like Lennon said:"Before Elvis there was nothing..."and he was right!! And Dylan is the greatest songwriter...Ever!!  I have to respectfully disagree with John Lennon. Little Richard, Chuck Berry an Bill Haley all came before Elvis. Without the former two there would be NO rock n roll and the later was among the first and best caucasians to play rhythm and blues and he actually wrote ANd recorded prolifically. Once again, I'm not disputing Elvis' worth as a performer or a cultural icon, but as an artist, he made virtually no contributiont to rock n roll. Also, Dylan is ONE of the greatest songwriters, but the value of his music is primarily in his lyricism, not his singing or his melodies and for that reason he is SOMEWHAT overrated. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
thesexofit said: More like greatest POP band ever.....beatles ain't rock, no way! rock IS pop. duh. and they certainly knew how to rock. Tomorrow Never Knows, Revolution, Get Back, Helter Skelter, and on and on.... "Awards are like hemorrhoids. Sooner or later, every asshole gets one." | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
jacktheimprovident said: jkj10 said: I can't believe someone thinks Elvis and Dylan are overrated!!Then Prince is,too!! Like Lennon said:"Before Elvis there was nothing..."and he was right!! And Dylan is the greatest songwriter...Ever!! I have to respectfully disagree with John Lennon. Little Richard, Chuck Berry an Bill Haley all came before Elvis. Without the former two there would be NO rock n roll and the later was among the first and best caucasians to play rhythm and blues and he actually wrote ANd recorded prolifically. Once again, I'm not disputing Elvis' worth as a performer or a cultural icon, but as an artist, he made virtually no contributiont to rock n roll. Also, Dylan is ONE of the greatest songwriters, but the value of his music is primarily in his lyricism, not his singing or his melodies and for that reason he is SOMEWHAT overrated. well Elvis did mke quite a contribution to rock and roll. he didn't invent rock & roll (little r, little r), but he did invent Rock & Roll (big R, big R). and took it from an (relatively) underground phenomenon and turned it into the norm. without Elvis, we'd all be wasting our time on message boards dedicated to Bing Crosby and Connie Francis, rather than Prince. "Awards are like hemorrhoids. Sooner or later, every asshole gets one." | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
jacktheimprovident said: sextonseven said: How can The Beatles be the greatest rock band ever and overrated? The Beatles aren't overrated. Most people consider them the greatest rock band ever and they are. So they are rated quite accurately. I don't see why this is so hard to understand. I agree that the Beatles are one of, and perhaps THE best band of the rock n roll age. HOWEVER, their music isn't as far above the music of every other rock n roll group/artist as everybody thinks, but that's just my opinion. What does everyone think? I just know that on several polls the Beatles usually come out on top. Therefore, if mostly everyone thinks and agrees you're number one, you can't be overrated. Minutia like how far above everyone else you are is silly. #1 is #1. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
GrayKing said: andyman91 said: Is she really a musician though? she sings, plays drums, plays guitar. sure. but that's not really what the thread's about, is it? And she doesn't do any of it very well! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I'd like to add Mary J. Blige to the list...Even her fans have admitted she can't sing... especially live! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
sextonseven said: jacktheimprovident said: I don't see why this is so hard to understand. I agree that the Beatles are one of, and perhaps THE best band of the rock n roll age. HOWEVER, their music isn't as far above the music of every other rock n roll group/artist as everybody thinks, but that's just my opinion. What does everyone think? I just know that on several polls the Beatles usually come out on top. Therefore, if mostly everyone thinks and agrees you're number one, you can't be overrated. Minutia like how far above everyone else you are is silly. #1 is #1. It's not a matter of minutia, it's just that I think the extent to which the Beatles are proverbially fellated for everything they ever recorded is a tad excessive. It's like this one reviewer I remember who said that "If I were rating their albums in comparison to what everbody else was releasing they'd all get four or five stars" which I think is absurd. The Beatles were great, but not everything they recorded was SO much better than all of their peers, predecessors, contemporaries or successors. In fact, their early stuff doesn't even compare to their later work, even though I've warmed up to it a lot more over time. The Beatles were great, sure. The Beatles were innovative, eventually. The Beatles made a huge impact, definitely. The beatles are the undisputably best act in rock history...MAYBE. There's just so many criterion by which one can judge the greatest of anything and even if they were it doesn't make their music WAY more valuable than everybody else's. It's like when you compare any artist or any work to the Beatles it becomes blasphemous because nobody think anybody else could ever touch them EVER. and THAT's what I'm talking about, the fact that you get flack for saying anybody might even be in the same league as the Beatles. Forgive my rant, this is just what I think: The beatles are held slightly higher above everybody else than they should be. [Edited 12/12/04 23:59pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
thesexofit said: More like greatest POP band ever.....beatles ain't rock, no way! Beatles pre-Dylan are pretty pop, yeah. But the Beatles post-Dylan? No way in hell were they pop. "A Watcher scoffs at gravity!" | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
jacktheimprovident said: jkj10 said: I can't believe someone thinks Elvis and Dylan are overrated!!Then Prince is,too!! Like Lennon said:"Before Elvis there was nothing..."and he was right!! And Dylan is the greatest songwriter...Ever!! I have to respectfully disagree with John Lennon. Little Richard, Chuck Berry an Bill Haley all came before Elvis. Without the former two there would be NO rock n roll and the later was among the first and best caucasians to play rhythm and blues and he actually wrote ANd recorded prolifically. Once again, I'm not disputing Elvis' worth as a performer or a cultural icon, but as an artist, he made virtually no contributiont to rock n roll. Also, Dylan is ONE of the greatest songwriters, but the value of his music is primarily in his lyricism, not his singing or his melodies and for that reason he is SOMEWHAT overrated.  Man, I love Elvis, but I'll be the first to say the guy was really just a one man boyband, when you get down to it."A Watcher scoffs at gravity!" | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
jacktheimprovident said: sextonseven said: What does everyone think? I just know that on several polls the Beatles usually come out on top. Therefore, if mostly everyone thinks and agrees you're number one, you can't be overrated. Minutia like how far above everyone else you are is silly. #1 is #1. It's not a matter of minutia, it's just that I think the extent to which the Beatles are proverbially fellated for everything they ever recorded is a tad excessive. It's like this one reviewer I remember who said that "If I were rating their albums in comparison to what everbody else was releasing they'd all get four or five stars" which I think is absurd. The Beatles were great, but not everything they recorded was SO much better than all of their peers, predecessors, contemporaries or successors. In fact, their early stuff doesn't even compare to their later work, even though I've warmed up to it a lot more over time. The Beatles were great, sure. The Beatles were innovative, eventually. The Beatles made a huge impact, definitely. The beatles are the undisputably best act in rock history...MAYBE. There's just so many criterion by which one can judge the greatest of anything and even if they were it doesn't make their music WAY more valuable than everybody else's. It's like when you compare any artist or any work to the Beatles it becomes blasphemous because nobody think anybody else could ever touch them EVER. and THAT's what I'm talking about, the fact that you get flack for saying anybody might even be in the same league as the Beatles. Forgive my rant, this is just what I think: The beatles are held slightly higher above everybody else than they should be. [Edited 12/12/04 23:59pm] I gotta agree with you here. Especially in terms of their earlier work. It was cute and fun, but maybe only a little better than their peers."A Watcher scoffs at gravity!" | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
sdekm1 said: I'd like to add Mary J. Blige to the list...Even her fans have admitted she can't sing... especially live!
Don't think so..! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Define your question. Overrated by who?
Overrated by the musiccritics or the fans? The musiccritics mainly overrate alternative artists. Not all alternative artists are that good musicians, some only are able to play 3 accords. There's nothing wrong with that cause it might give some enjoyable music, but there's nothing great about the musicianship. The fans always overrate the artists they admire. We definately overrate Prince. Prince isn't the great songwriter anymore, he once was. He wants to be in control to much, that makes his music overproduced IMHO. I hear more feelings in his old work, of his last albums only Rainbow Children gave me some great vibes. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Elvis had a LOT to do with his music. He didn't write the songs, but he produced them. "Don't Be Cruel" is an all time classic because of the production and feel to the record. Elvis created that. Otis Blackwell wrote the song, but Elvis crafted it into what it is. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
