Most Overrated Bands / Artists

RedNome said:
Depends on your meaning of shit guitarist, If you mean someone that can strum a few chord and keep in time to a beat then yes they can, just as a certain piece of software called Autotune can make a shit vocalist sound amazing.

As for your other post, I really can't be bothered argueing with you about how good the Edge is, he is an average guitar player at best, but has the ability to co-write very popular and catchy tunes that sell to lots of people who don't give a shit about decent music.
Click to expand...

1/In my experience a poor technical guitarist and one who has little imagination can make his work sound shall we say 'lifted' by outside additional help. Clearly if you play the instrument in any way at all you'd know that is not the case with the Edge or any excellent player, sure his trademark sound may utilise the delay pedal reverb but he's still got to play good things into it.

You'd also know if you've listened that even a "shit" singer cannot sound great utilising even the most advanced software, as good as autotune is, it does need some kind of 'performance' before it can really enhance anything

There is hardly any piece of audio hardware / software technology that will make any shit singer or instrumentalist "great". They can maybe 'save' a poor vocal here and there but as for sounding great - that's a myth - the digital changes required ( formants) to make changes wider than a whole tone affect the end result so much on a bad vocal it becomes unusable.

2/ As for my other post you wont argue about the Edge being excellent because I've outlined to you with examples that Greenwood although stylistically different does in fact often do the very same things. As I said I'm no U2 fan but this...

..."the Edge is, he is an average guitar player at best,...."

to quote your mate further up the board is one of the stupidest things I have heard .....ever
 
spinoza said:
It can add complexity where there's none though. The Edge never struck me as someone who put texture into his music - how can he, when he doesn't play that many notes?
Click to expand...

theres more texture in one of neil young two note solos than in the entire output of steve vai or yngwie wanksteen.....fretboard wankery has its place, but then again so does simplicity...and i dont think one lends itself to texture more than the other.
 
sammymc said:
theres more texture in one of neil young two note solos than in the entire output of steve vai or yngwie wanksteen.....fretboard wankery has its place, but then again so does simplicity...and i dont think one lends itself to texture more than the other.
Click to expand...

No I don't mean fewer different notes in the solo, I mean fewer notes. As in C-C-A has fewer notes that C-C-C-A-C-A-C.
 
tomorrow never knows is just C....still one of the greatest songs ever written though.
 
Good to see you stick up for U2 Jobup

My favourite band
 
Nearco said:
I thought it was a rule in life that unless one actually specifically says they like Sting it is automatically assumed one hates him. What with the guy being a talentless,smug, boring cnut etc etc.
Click to expand...

I didn't want to take the risk of being confused as someone who might have any sort of time for him at all.

At school i used to get into arguments with the pro sting bregade. They tried to say he was better than Bowie. I stabbed them with a fork in the forehead.
 
sidsutton said:
Great vocals but a hell of a lot of her songs were cover versions. She`s the best karaoke artist ever. ;)
Click to expand...

Yeah she is more of an singer than an artist, still cant take anything away from her as she has one of the greatest voices ever
 
Jopub said:
1/In my experience a poor technical guitarist and one who has little imagination can make his work sound shall we say 'lifted' by outside additional help. Clearly if you play the instrument in any way at all you'd know that is not the case with the Edge or any excellent player, sure his trademark sound may utilise the delay pedal reverb but he's still got to play good things into it.

You'd also know if you've listened that even a "shit" singer cannot sound great utilising even the most advanced software, as good as autotune is, it does need some kind of 'performance' before it can really enhance anything

There is hardly any piece of audio hardware / software technology that will make any shit singer or instrumentalist "great". They can maybe 'save' a poor vocal here and there but as for sounding great - that's a myth - the digital changes required ( formants) to make changes wider than a whole tone affect the end result so much on a bad vocal it becomes unusable.

2/ As for my other post you wont argue about the Edge being excellent because I've outlined to you with examples that Greenwood although stylistically different does in fact often do the very same things. As I said I'm no U2 fan but this...

..."the Edge is, he is an average guitar player at best,...."

to quote your mate further up the board is one of the stupidest things I have heard .....ever
Click to expand...

So how come Ian Brown sounds great on record but cannot hold as note in concert?
 
probably has a million takes to get the vocal right...probably edits the good bits together.....live he gets one go and therefore sounds shite.
 
Plechazunga said:
So how come Ian Brown sounds great on record but cannot hold as note in concert?
Click to expand...

As sammy says mate

He has the studio time and money to sit there all day hitting ten takes and then the producer will comp all the best bits together. Tbh autotune can help here and there but it'll never make a shite vocal sound great - it'll only correct the odd bit and then only if its mildly out of tune. Comping vocal takes together from singers that cant sing in tune most of the time is a right fking palava I can tell you, they expect to come in never hit a right note and you to then edit it all together !

Mind you if they pay enough you're not gonna argue !

As for singing live Brown is one of the worst, cant sing a fking note

____

Normal studio practice is good vocalist comes in does a really good / great take take but you take two or three more anyway and often find having done a good one they relax even more and then do a corker which you have often as an entirety and thats the one you end up using
_____

Its worth mentioning that 'singing in tune' as such, is not the be all and end all anyway. You can often sacrifice the odd tuning problem if the vocal has a great 'vibe' and feel to it - take Rotten - Pistols were often all over the place but if you started getting 'picky' about his tuning you'd never have put anything down on tape at all

Brown however is so poor tuning wise it makes getting the right 'vibe' a bit redundant with him - you'd just be hoping he can sing bits in tune from various takes and get something from it

Also depends on the musical genre - Rotten singing out of tune as opposed to Mariah Carey is a different ball game altogether - in music where the vocals are crystal they have to be in tune ...end of
 
It's funny cos it's not just that he hits the right notes on record, I really like the quality of his voice. Of course it's not like a great voice, but it's lovely to listen to (I'm talking about the Roses, don't know much of his solo stuff). But in concert it just sounds abysmal... the fecker cannot sing.
 
I saw Ian Brown supporting the manics a few years back, he was so bad the crowd got pretty restless and started throwing insults his way, his response was great though, kept shouting "i've got more than you in my pocket", we never found out what was in said pocket as they turned the house lights up and security removed him. Good times.
 
Plechazunga said:
It's funny cos it's not just that he hits the right notes on record, I really like the quality of his voice. Of course it's not like a great voice, but it's lovely to listen to (I'm talking about the Roses, don't know much of his solo stuff). But in concert it just sounds abysmal... the fecker cannot sing.
Click to expand...

Funny subject this cos there are some 'artists' who although they can't sing they 'don't sing anyway. I've sung in covers bands half my life and the people I never ever touch are what I call the 'semi singers'. Great examples are Mark Knopfler and Lou Reed they 'speak-sing'. Although being kind of in tune they drawl into talk throughout and trying to imitate it accurately is nigh impossible. Ian Brown although not in there league veers towards this stuff and true his voice although hardly ever in tune will have a 'quality' that some people like. (Those people tend to be deaf:D)

Trouble is when the others need to vocalise they do manage to pitch it-just, Brown never even gets onto a note in the first place - fking rubbish imo
 
Ivor Ballokov said:
I saw Ian Brown supporting the manics a few years back, he was so bad the crowd got pretty restless and started throwing insults his way, his response was great though, kept shouting "i've got more than you in my pocket", we never found out what was in said pocket as they turned the house lights up and security removed him. Good times.
Click to expand...

thats not a great response...its one of the shittiest responses there is.

Loadsamoney/im considerably richer than yow......aye great Ian...well done mate...idve fecked a pint glass at him if id been there....just for that.
 
Jopub is right that autotune (made by Antares) can only do so much to correct a vocal without producing the 'Cher-effect'. I personally like Melodyne as a plug-in, which can do much more to correct pitch and phrasing issues whilst retaining a natural sound.

There are other techniques for improving the vocals though, some common ones are:
* Record many takes and cut them up to piece together an acceptable version. The downside is the time it takes and the fact it often looses the natural flow.
* Copy the best vocal take to two channels and pitch shift one of them slightly sharp and one slightly flat. The ear tends to compensate for this by believing the vocals are in tune.
* Double track the vocals. ie. Record the whole thing twice and so that any mistakes in one are blurred by the other.
* Record a sample vocal line with a session singer and have the actual singer perform with the session singer's performance in their headphones.

Nothing beats having a great vocalist and some quality recording gear though.
 
MikeUpNorth said:
Jopub is right that autotune (made by Antares) can only do so much to correct a vocal without producing the 'Cher-effect'. I personally like Melodyne as a plug-in, which can do much more to correct pitch and phrasing issues whilst retaining a natural sound.

There are other techniques for improving the vocals though, some common ones are:
* Record many takes and cut them up to piece together an acceptable version. The downside is the time it takes and the fact it often looses the natural flow.
* Copy the best vocal take to two channels and pitch shift one of them slightly sharp and one slightly flat. The ear tends to compensate for this by believing the vocals are in tune.
* Double track the vocals. ie. Record the whole thing twice and so that any mistakes in one are blurred by the other.
* Record a sample vocal line with a session singer and have the actual singer perform with the session singer's performance in their headphones.

Nothing beats having a great vocalist and some quality recording gear though.
Click to expand...

I solved this problem though Mike by playing down the quality of the tech gear I had and making the 'editing' side of things ( time )so expensive it put the emphasis on the musicians to do the stuff they were meant to be good at ! ie playing / singing. This actually works well - if they think they cant get stuff edited / corrected they more often as not concerntrate on doing a decent take - saves a zillion hours of tedium listening to vocalists who can't be arsed to get it right

As for tuning software I just don't use it - they have not got it right yet even the best. Thats a lie - a few times when a guitarist has left the building and done a brilliant take but his guitar went slightly out then it has been useful ....but for anything else .....

___

Oh and Westlife overated to fk .......fking hell they are bollocks , never done a single original song of their own, never done a song that went quicker than adagio?!! talk about sticking to your comfort zone - laughing all the way to the bank

Absolute rubbish
 
sammymc said:
thats not a great response...its one of the shittiest responses there is.

Loadsamoney/im considerably richer than yow......aye great Ian...well done mate...idve fecked a pint glass at him if id been there....just for that.
Click to expand...

Twas sarcasm Sammy, he got more than a shower of bottles thrown at him so don't worry yourself on that count ;)
 
MikeUpNorth said:
Not necessarily bad, but overrated...

1. Led Zeppelin - Great session musicians that got famous stealing other people's songs. Tarnishes their best recordings for me.

2. Oasis - Living off their first album, which in retrospect isn't all it's cracked up to be. All image, little substance, no innovation.

3. Red Hot Chili Peppers - Have done some classic stuff, but albums often filled out with rubbish. Generally poor live.

4. Arctic Monkeys - Treated like the second coming, but in reality nothing out of the ordinary or special at all.

5. Muse - Decent band, especially live, but no way near what some people make them out to be.
Click to expand...

? They are known for the fact that it's painstakingly difficult to choose the best tune from given album. Let's take Californication or By the way. Every single song is the bollocks. Don't know about them being poor live, their performance at Slane Castle was magic, though. It used to be subdued, mainly due to being too stoned to sing/play on the highest level. It was before californication album, though.

They were proper junkies back then.

Ah, and Frusciante is a god, such a shame they split up.
 
I don't think you have a very complex or developed music taste if out of that list you disagree with the Red Hot Chilli Peppers selection.

The problem with that band is that they exist somewhere between kitsch and twee, of course Frusciante and Flea are good musicians, but for god sake he is called 'Flea'.

Anthony Keidis (or however you spell his name) is a painfully poor songwriter which taints them a lot in my eyes, his lyrics are cliche and contrived and his range can be grating.
 
I cannot agree with anyone who is saying that Muse are overrated. If nothing else, I think that they are pretty much underrated and are better than many bands who are given more respect.

About their performances live, I don't know a band who is better at it then them.
 
Don't have taste or knowledge? these are two completely different things, strangely enough misused all the time.

I've played guitar and drums in my life, I've done this for pure joy, never wanted to became a musician. Red Hot Chili Peppers are for me THE band from that list that gives, or rather was giving me what I've always wanted from music/art.

Not an expert on other bands, for the mentioned reasons, so no need for jumping on a high horse. If something doesn't give me joy, I don't do that unless I have to. Simple. If you feel offended I didn't include those legendary bands in my contemplations, then this is your problem - not mine.

As for Peppers, Kiedis while not being in the pantheon of vocalists, is massively underrated. He showed his quality in songs like Warm Tape and Don't forget me - this was when many critics took to him. Frusciante is, like I mentioned, God. Balzary is terrific, and Chad Smith, like Kiedis used to be underrated until 2008/09 I think.

And actually, RHCP's lyrics have always had their fans and critics, but they're certainly deeper than you put it.

EDIT: Do you even know why is he called Flea? or is it one of your exquisite arguments for their shitness?
 
Kitsch and twee my arse. Very comfortable thing to say, nobody will prove you wrong as it's what you 'think'. I believe they've accepted this 'problem' throughout the years, though.
 
Please don't raise the issue of subjectivity when you are the one who bumped a four year old thread to lambast someone for having the sheer audacity to call the Red Hot Chilli Peppers overrated.

The point is that the musical cannon will place the RHCP in the same category as bands like Kiss, Cream, Eagles etc. What else can we accept but the critical cannon as a fair bench mark for objective truths of the quality of art.

The RHCP are one of many bands that have failed to reach the upper echelons, I appreciate they mean a lot to you, I really do. But I would hazard to guess that as time goes by you will realise what I mean, that sounds awfully arrogant I know.
 
FortBoyard said:
Please don't raise the issue of subjectivity when you are the one who bumped a four year old thread to lambast someone for having the sheer audacity to call the Red Hot Chilli Peppers overrated.

The point is that the musical cannon will place the RHCP in the same category as bands like Kiss, Cream, Eagles etc. What else can we accept but the critical cannon as a fair bench mark for objective truths of the quality of art.

The RHCP are one of many bands that have failed to reach the upper echelons, I appreciate they mean a lot to you, I really do. But I would hazard to guess that as time goes by you will realise what I mean, that sounds awfully arrogant I know.
Click to expand...

The only person who initially lambasted anyone concerning the topic was you. I didn't lambast anyone, correct me if I'm wrong. I expressed my disbelief at how can one consider them being a band of few good songs, while the two albums I've mentioned are full of hits in their own right.

I also weren't sure about the opinion of them playing shit concerts, because I've seen a couple of crap ones, one of them here in Poland, so it could be grounded. Apart from the fact I've seen them giving fantastic performances as well.

Ironically enough, the last bit you wrote is the least arrogant in its nature from all you came up with towards me. I don't think however, that their lack of positive, non-commercial fame (if you can call it) is due to too little quality. It's massively strange, unique, different whichever way you call it, band. First of all, the period where they could really go onto become, and would have in my opinion, one of true greats was tainted by Frusciante not seeking fame and popularity. Now the longevity may stop them. 'Only' 3 of their albums have reached the greates heights and it may prove to little. I don't think they will go on to have another two or three great albums, however. Josh isn't half the master Frusciante is, and in my opinion doesn't suit RHCP. Or maybe my vision of them is meagre, or simply wrong.

There were many turmoils in the course of time, Frusciante in and out, death of Slovak, departure of Irons. However, having been bombarded with funk and rock throughout the years, I stand to my opinion they're the most unique band in that respect I've ever heard. That's not saying much considering my age, but when I see my old man's friend, painter and ex-musician, who despite possessing whole flat scattered by discographies of every sorts of music still holds peppers in the highest of regards I know I didn't choose wrong.
 
RHCP were shit for me, in my opinion and massively overrated. Take By The Way for example which you lavished praise on, which is a really catchy chorus filled with verses of shite, just spitting out random words.

Plus his voice grates on me, as said already his range wasn't that impressive.
 
The age their are at now should be where they blossom - looking at all the greatest bands in history. Unfortunately, it looks more like their decline. That's why they will never be mention in the same sentence with those.

Not that I give a feck about it, obviously. But from my point of view it would be nice if they could come up with one yet another stunner.
 
Zarlak said:
RHCP were shit for me, in my opinion and massively overrated. Take By The Way for example which you lavished praise on, which is a really catchy chorus filled with verses of shite, just spitting out random words.

Plus his voice grates on me, as said already his range wasn't that impressive.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the By the Way album is about chorus, spitting random words and other shit. Just as Warm Tape and Don't forget me are... wait, there are different songs?
 
As for the lyrics - basically everything seems pointless and shallow unless one knows the context, circumstances etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.