Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Wyld Card

Which of these bands is highly Over-Rated?

Recommended Posts

I'm just answering from my perspective...

that means, since I don't subject myself to certain media, I seldom hear anything about some which otherwise could be considered overrated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

answering from your own perspective, that's the meaning of a poll Martin :P

I'd say Nickleback, from the bands I really know on that list.

They made and make some good songs, but many bands make better songs and get less 'rate'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't classify Nickleback as overrated. I have never met someone who actually liked their music. I don't think I've even ever met someone who admitted to being able to tolerate them, actually. On this list I'd say the most overrated are Coldplay and RHCP (not to say they're the worst, or even bad at all)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're all overrated really... I'd give my topmost votes to Coldplay and RHCP. However, in the poll, I ticked everyone except Beck and the Beastie Boys.

My highest vote goes to (the unlisted) Radiohead obviously... a more blatant example of pop pretending to be alt. rock I have never seen. :/

My next highest vote would be Nirvana, for more sympathetic reasons. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I only voted for two. I'll let you guess which ones.

Also, Radhi, I'm going to have to strongly disagree with you on Radiohead being overrated, and while I see where you're coming from with Nirvana, I'm going to disagree there too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait... allow me to explain.

Radiohead is not a bad band. They just do not appeal to me. I can understand them appealing to other people and it's fine :thumbsup:

HOWever, Radiohead is a very complex band. They make complicated songs. They're intense. They really should be incredibly difficult to like and to understand and to 'get'. But no... no, no... they're #1 most played on last.fm. What?! They're not easy! They're not universally appealing! They're not pop! Well they weren't, they are now.

Nirvana - similar logic, explained so - The number of fans they actually have =/= the number of fans they should have.

So by overrated I don't mean they suck... I just mean that a disproportionate number of people like them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I don't know... at least with your explanation of why Radiohead is overrated, that doesn't make them overrated, that just means that some of their fans actually do get their music, and the rest just pretend to in order to appear cool and sophisticated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, yeah - that's where a substantial amount of the 'rating' comes from. The ones who just pretend. They're the ones who'll download In Rainbows for free, realise they're listening to an (ex) alternative band, feel very cool, buy/download OK Computer in an attempt to be part of the crowd and before you know it, Radiohead's at #1 and there are strange people partying in their last.fm shoutbox. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a large number of people that buy Radiohead albums and nothing else

really the reason they sell so many albums is because of this incredibly dedicated base of about 750,000 people.

Now, when 750,000 people buy your album at once when it is first released, then you have the #1 album for a week

which, makes you famous.

Then there's a trickle of people who buy it, simply because of marketing, or they've heard a little radiohead before (Karma Police or High and Dry....) or they saw that it was the number one album and picked it up.

Or it could be hold over from OK Computer, an album that was very appealing to everybody, and continues to make new Radiohead fans today.

But, there numbers come down to that dedicated core of people.

Secondly, it's kind of snobbish to say that the average person cannot 'understand' or 'enjoy' radiohead, they make music, very nice, very good music, something that anyone can enjoy.

And it's those kinds of 'You can't get it' attitudes that (help) prevent people from either listening to Rdiohead or enjoying it.

On the other hand

sometimes people don't take the time to listen to anything that falls out of their paradigm.

It's unfortunate, but it happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'scuse me, I don't get Radiohead. It's just 'nice' music to me. Which is nice, enjoyable, tra la la, :headphones: etc. (if you're into that sorta music in the first place). But if that is all there is to it, then I retract my alt. rock classification all together and call them 'pop' straight out.

There's more to music (theirs or anyone else's) than just 'tra la la, :headphones:' - always something to 'get'. I think so, anyway. Like - some types of music just 'speak' to more people and some to less. I'd expect Radiohead to be in the 'less' category and it surprises me to see them so POPular.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but they are pretty exclusive and independent, they just get a lot of press.

Their core fan base is about the same size as Pavements.

And technically anything that isn't classical, jazz, or folk is pop music

so be it 'indy' 'alt' 'shoegaze' it's all pop music.

But technically

since radiohead has some jazz stuff, they would be a jazz group that plays pop songs

or a pop group that plays jazz songs

either/or.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But Pavement doesn't have this massive non-core fanbase that overrateifies them. So they're, like, not... overrated. They may have their share of in-it-to-be-cool fans, but that number is smaller. So they're normal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and

just because one doesn't understand the theory behind a song,

doesn't mean they don't get the song

see, theory is meant to be tool to help the musician write a song, using a set of guidelines (never really rules... guidelines)

Then those guidelines help write a song

the end product

is a song, a melody

some harmony

a piece

a work of art.

It is not theory begetting theory.

That's where jazz has it's downfall, as some compositions will get kind of up inside itself, and they become something for someone to 'get' that the point of the song is that a minor A with a sharp five is modulating to a major C# with a flat nine.

The song may still sound great, but the musician and some in the audience will insist that the listener must discern the flat nine and know that it is, in fact, a flat nine to understand the true intent or beauty of the piece.

Where music is more reactionary,

the listener should take whatever bits of composition out of the whole

that's why those romantic symphonies were so large and complex, little bits of goodies hidden in the subtext to be picked out and enjoyed

for individuals to listen to individual parts

dissect them

put them back together into the whole

be blown away.

I mean,

regardless of the knowledge of the specific tonality of a chord

or the major-minor quality of it

the listener is going to hear the same tone

it may be harder for the un-theoried listener to replicate said chord, but it's not impossible

but it's definitely not impossible

but they can definitely 100% listen to the music and enjoy it.

If music was all masturbatory, and required a musician to listen to it and 'understand' it

then the audience for music would be very small.

It's an unfortunate crossroads we stand at

See, we have so many people that don't know anything about music

and don't take the time to even listen to it

they don't play it

they don't listen

instead they make the choice to listen to bottom of the barrel top 40 Clear Channel radio cuts.

Then we have the 'educated' (whatever)

who play, listen, seek out

but have turned it into kind of a contest

a kind of 'elitism' off, that turns off the average 'radio group' from listening to the prime-rib this group is doling out.

Then you have the middle of the road, the people that don't really know much about what goes into a song, the terms, the formulas, the modulations, but they've taken the time to listen, and listen a lot.

This is the most important group, without them those that study and play would have no continuation, they would die out without any sort of support

and that would be sad.

Unfortunately this group seems to be shrinking.

As of this moment, there are plenty of players, loads, thousands, not in short supply.

But those who listen, that precious middle group, is waning.

And the large, easily satisfied, mass grows and grows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Ok Computer is their biggest selling album

and it's 2X platinum,

which means it has sold over 2 million, but less than 10.

Kid A and Pablo Honey are both platinum, meaning between 1 and 2 million

those numbers are purely the result of OK Computer fever, as Amnesiac on are gold albums

The Bends is a Gold album

meaning it's sold less than a million

So, if we ignore the huge success that was OK Computer, then the Radiohead fanbase (those that are dedicated enough to buy albums) is pretty much exactly the same size as pavements.

OK Computer's sales would be roughly 2.5 to three times bigger than Pavements fanbase.

So, Radiohead is not very large at all

it's just that their fanbase is incredibly active and not as....lazy.... as say Pavements.

There's also an illusion created by the fact that Radiohead receives an a**load of press

Edited by Guest
naughty word.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, but isn't it the press that qualifies them for overratedness? What is 'overrated' if not a massive fan base (core and especially non core) and a ton of media coverage? Commercialisation, sales, and all that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the fan base isn't massive

it's the same size as pavement

only slightly larger in the grand scheme of things if one includes the Ok Computer phenomenon in the equation.

The press is simply because they're awesome, the purpose of a critic is to take music they think is awesome, in relation to all the music they sit around and listen to all day (it's their job) and tell people

"Hey, this is awesome"

Pavement also receives pretty favorable press, and when the opportunity arises the music journalists give Malkmus as much time as they can get him.

Now of course Pavement isn't the smallest band I can think of, but I think they set things in perspective pretty nicely.

Oh, and Malkmus opened for Radiohead for the Hail to the Thief tour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and as far as definition of 'overrated' I would say that in terms of music, it would be a group or individual being given undeserved credit for what they create and how they play.

Nothing more.

To get into 'trendiness' or 'how hip' or 'fanbase' is a distraction, a non-musical, non-sensical musical rational.

That's where we run into the indie-rock quality math dillema, where it appears that the quality of the band is inversely related to the number of listeners.

So the best indie band in the world is some piece of poo garage band that is completely unknown to everyone but themselves.

So, for a band, such as Radiohead to be overrated, one would have to say

"Johnny Greenwood is a better composer than Beethoven"

That would be overrating

"Thom Yorke is a better Composer than Tchaikovsky"

again, false

"Radiohead's compositions are on the level of Aaron Copland"

Fair to say

"Radiohead have made some of the best music of the last twenty years"

Fair to say

"Amnesiac as a jazz records stands up very highly in the modern jazz era"

I would say yes,

Now, those above statements are all debateable, and not set in stone,

but

what's important is that I am 'rating' Radiohead by their musical merits, not by how many fans they have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The pseudo-fan base is massive, then. You can't just ignore the OK Computer/In Rainbows phenomenon... that's what's causing their popularity to skyrocket... more than it should. The real fanbase - the one with The Bends - is outnumbered by the pseudo fanbase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...