[sonci]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jilgiljongiljing /img/forum/go_quote.gif Ah Bob Dylan, for me, the most overrated artist ever. Oh and Bruce Springsteen's a close second.

Its like, yo`re in my head...

 

[n3rdling]

I forgot all about U2...they probably top my list actually

 

[robm321]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bender Rodriguez /img/forum/go_quote.gif All-time most overrated everything: Led Zeppelin Stole everything they ever did.

From who? Who had a song that sounded like Cashmere or any of the other ones for that matter back then?

 

[Bender Rodriguez]

Quote:

Originally Posted by robm321 /img/forum/go_quote.gif From who? Who had a song that sounded like Cashmere or any of the other ones for that matter back then?

Mostly from Willie Dixon and other bluesmen. Page loved to take other's work and put his own name on it. Stealing takes so much less energy than does actually being original or talented.

Further info: Yardbirds/Led Zeppelin's Dubious Recording History

 

[bakercj93]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bender Rodriguez /img/forum/go_quote.gif Mostly from Willie Dixon and other bluesmen. Page loved to take other's work and put his own name on it. Stealing takes so much less energy than does actually being original or talented. Further info: Yardbirds/Led Zeppelin's Dubious Recording History

That's simply a case of choosing to believe an unsubstantiated rumor. 99 people out of 100 believe Jimmy Page wrote his own unique material, and you have decided to believe the last guy, despite a complete lack of evidence (and no, a link to an obscure website does not count as evidence). No point arguing with such a person.

 

[Bender Rodriguez]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bakercj93 /img/forum/go_quote.gif That's simply a case of choosing to believe an unsubstantiated rumor. 99 people out of 100 believe Jimmy Page wrote his own unique material, and you have decided to believe the last guy, despite a complete lack of evidence (and no, a link to an obscure website does not count as evidence). No point arguing with such a person.

Is your 99 out of 100 statistic "substantiated?" Did you conduct a survey?

A magazine article with actual interviews and factual evidence is "unsubstantiated?" Do you even know what that word means?

There's plenty of evidence out there that Zep stole most of their songs, I just provided one link. Try googling "Led Zeppelin stolen songs" and see what you get. Here is audio proof (admittedly, the Joan Baez and Traffic ones are dead wrong, but the rest is there for all to hear):

Led Zeppelin: Innovators or Plagiarists? Audio of 8 Songs Proving They Might Be the Best Cover Band of All Time*|*Listropolis

of course, no amount of factual evidence can make you believe what you don't want to believe.

 

[dean0]

pink floyd

 

[jilgiljongiljing]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dean0 /img/forum/go_quote.gif pink floyd

FIRE!! FIRE!!! EVERYONE GET OUT NOW

 

[DC2]

In light of some of the thoughtful posts in this thread, I'm not sure exactly what overrated means. All I know is that I am sick and tired

of hearing how great Radiohead is.

 

[wareagle69]

Michael Jackson

 

[DavidMahler]

The Beatles just don't get enough love on this site....

In my opinion.......there is The Beatles

And there's everyone else..... Pink Floyd, The Stones, Led Zeppelin, U2, The Velvet Underground, Black Sabbath.......these guys are minor compared to the beatles and what the Beatles contributed........

The other bands matter to fans of the genre......the Beatles matter in every genre, and in even a cultural aspect. The Beatles are the essence of the whole package of what music can do and what music can mean and still sell and be meaningful and well put together and completely reshape the world. You can either say that's over rating them, or you can see it as the truth which it is......

There'd be no head-fi without the Beatles, i truly believe this.....there'd be no Pink Floyd without the Beatles, i truly believe this, the entire world would be incredibly different had the beatles never existed.....it goes beyond music....... The Beatles reshaped civilization as much as any political figure ever has and this includes any American president or conquerer or king or queen.

If you don't agree and would like to know my reasonings I'd happily explain them.

 

[Duggeh]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidMahler /img/forum/go_quote.gif The Beatles just don't get enough love on this site.... ...

Better than on the Steve Hoffman forums, where if you mention that you don't particularly care for the Beatles, nevermind comments like saying they're over-rated or that they're rubbish, you'll earn yourself a lynching and a bitter and resentful ban from the irate mods.

 

[DavidMahler]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duggeh /img/forum/go_quote.gif Better than on the Steve Hoffman forums, where if you mention that you don't particularly care for the Beatles, nevermind comments like saying they're over-rated or that they're rubbish, you'll earn yourself a lynching and a bitter and resentful ban from the irate mods.

The thing is......The Beatles are kind of why we're all here investing our time and money in music and music equipment. It doesn't matter if you like them or hate them.....the whole industry changed because of them.........I again will say I think more than the music industry was shaped by their existence....I think many details of every day life can attribute The Beatles as an indirect influence. They are a phenomenon.

 

[DrBenway]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tru blu /img/forum/go_quote.gif Here's one for the jazzers: Dave Brubeck Lovely human being that he is (met him a couple of times), he probably thinks this, too.

I'm glad to hear someone say this. He is a fine pianist, but nowhere near as important as say, Thelonius Monk or Bud Powell. Now his alto player, Paul Desmond, on the other hand, was brilliant. I'm not sure how many jazz fans realize that Desmond, not Brubeck, wrote "Take Five." Every time I hear Desmond spin out that lead line, I completely forget whatever I'm doing and just listen. The contour of the melody, the chilled gleam of his tone...

Quote:

Originally Posted by robm321 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Jimmy Hendricks is a perfect example of this. I've learned all his stuff as a teenager, and was amazed. Now-a-days, his stuff seems seriously simple and not difficult at all to play. But before Hendricks there was nothing even remotely that interesting going on and he was truly groundbreaking. So, I have to say Hendricks was the best guitarist of all time.

I think his originality was stunning. The fact that any reasonably good modern guitarist can approximate his sound doesn't diminish his brilliance. It's that way with almost any innovator. Their ideas are dissected, copied, and absorbed into the mainstream.

Consider also that his electronic innovations, especially live, came mostly from his fingers, tone controls and manipularion of his amp. He did have some distortion devices, but little more than just a fuzz box and wahwah peddle. Compare that to modern rock players who show up for a gig with a dozen or more little boxes that produce whatever effect they want with the tap of a foot switch or turn of a dial.

Quote:

Originally Posted by robm321 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hate to do back to back posts, but I HAVE to second this. I cannot stand how pathetic he is and why people are still funding his continuation of music. If anything, the E-street band should get all the praise. They are solid. Bruce sucks IMHO

He was once truly great; he has long since turned into a brand. But he still kicks Bon Jovi up and down the block.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidMahler /img/forum/go_quote.gif The Beatles just don't get enough love on this site....

Easily the greatest rock band ever, in my opinion. But the miracles attributed to them by some Beatlemaniacs are way overstated. They had plenty of help from collaborators. In fact, I would say that their ability to play well with others was central to their brilliance.

 

[Drubbing]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bender Rodriguez /img/forum/go_quote.gif There's plenty of evidence out there that Zep stole most of their songs, I just provided one link. Try googling "Led Zeppelin stolen songs" and see what you get. Here is audio proof (admittedly, the Joan Baez and Traffic ones are dead wrong, but the rest is there for all to hear): Led Zeppelin: Innovators or Plagiarists? Audio of 8 Songs Proving They Might Be the Best Cover Band of All Time*|*Listropolis

It's well known Zep's 1st album didn't credit the writers of the blues numbers they covered. But to say they were unoriginal as per that site, is petty; Willie Dixon played those tunes with a guitar, harmonica and a shoe shuffle.

And did their 2nd, 3rd, 4th 5th etc albums consist mostly of other artists work?

Bringing the Beatles into any discussion/argument about music is always going to polarise. I don't really like their music, but I can appreciate the impact they've had.

How many other bands, 40 years after they spilt, are still discussed, played and widely revered? How many Beatles songs can the current generation name, despite possibly never having owned any of their music?

The fact they're even being discussed demonstrates their legacy; they have become deeply ingrained in popular culture, invoking certain images of the 60s, along with Woodstock, Vietnam and 'Swinging London'. All sterotypical representations of the era in some way, but that is the way modern media cretes things retrospectively. Though some will argue that is all part of the 'overrating'

I also don't hold with the arguments they were better marketed. Promoting music was pretty unsophisticated back then. You had to get huge first, before you got your own movies as promotional vehicles - like Elvis and the Beatles.

Wait til all the baby boomers are dead. Then maybe Britney will be the cultural watermark for the current millenium. You may all take a moment to shudder.