Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Fleet Foxes, Bon Ivor, Seasick Steve, Franz Ferdinand, Kaiser Chiefs, any and all of that emo nonsense, uh, run out of modern overrated t#ss from the top of my head.


The Verve, Smiths, Clash and Blur, four of the most hideous nauseating migraine inducing frontmen in the history of forever, held aloft by the genius of their respective guitarists (McCabe, Marr, Jones and Coxon).


And Hendrix, overrated and Dull? WFPAYO? Rob Wyatt commented that he saw 'em play every day for a year and was blown away every single day. Rather defer to his opinion over, well, anyone else. Even you.

For me it's all about the tunes beefy. You can twiddle away on guitars all day long if you want but to me it is dull dull dull. Hendrix isn't overrated as a guitarist but his recorded output is patchy, some killer tracks and a lot of filler.


Joe Strummer was the biz.


Bang on re. Kaiser Chiefs though.

I was watching that documentary on prog last night and it set me thinking about the ephemeral nature of 'overrated'.

It's a strange sliding scale based upon a relationship between a personal subjective opinion of music and a sort of wider perceived quality fed by the press, media, music festivals, perceptions of cool and a host of other factors.


Prog in the mid 70s was undoubtedly overrated. It was enjoying huge worldwide success and had gone into stratospheric levels of ego and pomposity. The press still raved about it, Americans came in their millions to watch the likes of Emerson Lake and Palmer, and yet people here were being turned off by the pretentious noodling that had lost sight of the original experimentation and boundary pushing that defined early prog.


As Rick Wakeman said at the end, prog is now the under-the-counter porn of the music world, but there is of course some fantastic music within it's canon and it undoubtedly is now underrated.


Likewise when fans feel some possession over a band they will always be underrated, and for the fans gratefully so. Take Modest Mouse with their legion of loyal fans, and then Moon & Antarctica came out with all those 10/10s from the press and they got signed up and produced the marvellous Good News For People Who Love Bad News with it's number one hit Float On and those fans soon disowned them and accusations of overrated abounded.


As *Bob* suggests it's easy to snipe at success. I've been coming at this strictly from this hard to pin down ratedness, for the record I love My Bloody Valentine and the Pixies and loved the Doors when I was younger, and totally overkilled Pink Floyd in my late teens, enjoyed Oasis, etc etc, but the fact remains that some bands are deemed untouchable and I understand when it provokes a strong response such as with Keef and the Pixies.


Failing to see what Beef's list has in common other than ti's new music. How can Fleet Foxes be overrated, hardly anyone's heard of it and they're simply enjoying the fruits of success from the momentum the alt-country/alt-folk scene has been building up over the last decade.

Seasick Steve, perhaps not quite my thing, but it seems harsh to begrudge this chap a bit of success late-on in a really hard life!! He's just doing what he did to eat for many years, and some record mogul offered him some cash, good luck to him I say!!

Is there really any point in declaring, eg, The Beatles are overrated? I mean - really?


Under(rated) is far more interesting than over.


Underrated?

I just bought 'Leggy Mambo' by Cud on Amazon, an album so underrated you couldn't even buy it on CD for a decade because no-one could be arsed to press some more up.

Blimey, you really are a negative nancy aren't you.


I'm sticking with *Bob*'s underrated stuff.


I might nominate Flowered Up, practically ignored during the skippy period (we hated the term Madchester down south you see) and reflecting the press's love affair with Manchester as alluded to earlier by someone.


Great songs, good music, a bit of nuttiness in to the mix, never emerged from their northern cousins' shadow and only one album :(

For underrated, I vote for Madness. Often dismissed as chirpy throwaway pop... but some seriously good songs, great arrangements and even some very relevant lyrics in there. They carved out a distinctive and accessible sound which separated them from their 2-Tone peers, but paid homage to their roots. And still pretty influential 30 years after their debut release, I would say.
*Bob* Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Or - to put it another way, between Shayne Ward


Who??



I think he won x-factor or pop stars a few years ago.


Under rated, Crash Test Dummies. Everyone just knows Mmm mmm mmm mmm, but they had some brilliant, and very funny songs.

Mockney - it was me on Manchester and I agree. The reason that the press went mad with Madchester and worshipped the Stone Roses et al is that the average music press journo is largely a middle class, white, rock fan and they couldn't get an angle on dj led Aciiiieeeed house until a few bands that until then had been pretty average, dirgy, indie combos (Primal Scream/Stone Roses/Happy Mondays) started taking on influences from the house scene...."oh now we have bands we can go to town on this".....the northern and southern soul/funk scenes which were massive in the 70s were largelly ignored by the music press mainly becuase they were primarily working class and 'record'/dj based youth cultures...

On the "good but over-rated" category I'm beginning to think my teenage infatuation with Bob Dylan was a definite.


He's undoubtably good. He's written some genre-defining music and constantly evolved over nearly 50 years. I own over 50% of his output and enjoy most of it.


BUT - dear god some of his fans and a lot of the old-man music press seem to think he's the messiah himself. And as someone who has listened to his born-again Christian guff of "Slow Train Coming" and "Saved" I can say he is merely a very naughty boy.

Kings of Leon.


Yeah Capt B, a fool twiddling on guitar all day is a little tedious, but in all of the cases I mentioned it was guitarist coming up with the killer tunes/riff and the singer boring us all with his tone deaf poo-etry.


Paul Weller. The Jam.


Joe strummer was the biz, as in Foxtons is a biz. Mick Jones was the heart, soul and passion.

giggirl Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The Specials and all things SKA - dull dull dull


No no no.



bon3yard Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Motown a Label??? Well, well, well...and yes. Overated.


No no no no...



beef Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The Jam


No no no no no no no no no no no no NO!!!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • V interesting ArchieCarlos.   The UK is #1 at blocking and delaying investment (per the article I linked to above).  This means we have pretty much the lowest gross fixed capital formation in the developed world and the economic results are there for all to see (this led to the nihilistic political environment that enabled Brexit which made things even worse). Some of this blocking and delaying is well intentioned and aimed at a better outcome but much of it a smokescreen to prevent any investment at all and is a money-spinner for consultants and lawyers. According to the FT the new Kent tunnel has cost £1.2bn so far even before construction starts of which £800m has been on consultants, planning and legal fees.  359,080 pages of documentation!  This does not compare favourably with much more complex tunneling projects in countries like Norway or Germany.
    • Hello We've been let down by our surveyor who didn't look at the loft as they said their ladder wasn't tall enough - we're about to exchange but are keen to check the loft/roof before! Does anyone near to Melbourne Grove have a tall ladder we could borrow for an hour tomorrow around 3?   Thanks so much! This forum is the best, secured in 15 minutes! 
    • Trump is driving a wedge between the UK and EU. 
    • I am delighted to hear the development was approved.  In my opinion, the UK is building far too little housing. And unless we build on green belts, the only solution is to increase the density of our cities, which is exactly what this scheme achieves.  Where I'm from (France), planning is generally looser and in my home city it's common to see single dwellings being razed to make way for a 5-6 story block of flats, even in city centres. Does it change the character of the local area? For sure! But I don't see another way to provide the supply to meet demand and provide ample supply of housing for a growing population. My personal experience is that in the UK, there is a lot more time spent on consultations, on achieving a perfect outcome for everyone. This results in generally better and more harmonious building than in France, but it makes things slower and more costly, with the need to coordinate many consultants.  It's interesting to compare France and the UK as they have similar populations and population growth, with an economy centred on a huge capital city. When you look at the number of houses/flats built in France and the UK over the past 10 years, the result is pretty striking. # France UK Difference 2023 298,100 150,370 -147,730 2022 392,100 182,070 -210,030 2021 410,000 177,160 -232,840 2020 368,800 129,440 -239,360 2019 387,700 153,000 -234,700 2018 401,200 168,610 -232,590 2017 434,700 164,110 -270,590 2016 370,000 155,150 -214,850 2015 341,000 148,150 -192,850 2014 336,900 140,760 -196,140 2013 357,900 124,790 -233,110 2012 382,300 101,020 -281,280 Total 4,480,700 1,794,630 -2,686,070 Average 373,392 149,553 -223,839 When HS1 was built, the French engineers (it was built with the French high-speed signalling) were surprised at how Brits wanted to "gold-plate" everything. The UK arguably has the best, most effective, more reliable, more well-equipped high-speed line in the world, but we've only got 68 miles of it and it cost 2.5 times what it cost the French to build a line extension at the same time.  In my view, there's no magic wand: just deciding who will be the losers. In France, people in established neighbourhoods my lose out as they see them change dramatically, while the new entrants benefit from a much higher supply of housing (and thus cheaper housing). In the UK, we give greater priority to preserving the lifestyle and amenity of the established dwellers over the new entrants who lose out as the supply is choked and prices are higher. A final point of comparison would be the price per square foot of property in Greater Paris is £467 while in Greater London it's £667 - 30% cheaper!
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...