| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
The T 
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
|
 Posted: March 20 2009 at 13:11 |
 Alberto Muñoz wrote:
No band is overrated.
Prog is overrated music??
Ask yourselves |
Oh yes my good Alberto, is extremely overrated. By us who make it sound like the reason why the earth spins.
And we love it. That's what matters.
|
|
|
 |
debrewguy
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 30 2007
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 3596
|
Posted: March 20 2009 at 20:07 |
The T wrote:
AlbertMond wrote:
1. Nirvana
Kurt Cobain didn't invent Grunge, and Nirvana wasn't the best Grunge band. Grunge itself isn't all that original. As far as I'm concerned, their only album worth its salt is "Bleach". Their two biggest songs had stolen riffs, and Cobain admitted this in his journal.
Ok wise one. Who invented grunge then? And who was the best band? You seem to know it. 
DB says - I don't think that Cobain ever made either claim, and neither did their fans. As far as Originality, after Oog invented the rock n roll chord E, John Barleycorn and Nicotine, everything else was second hand. And stealing riffs ? Wow, imagine a musician taking a chord sequence or melody from somewhere else. Like, there still tons of ways that I IV V hasn't been played yet, and even Robert Fripp had to tune his guitars differently just to see if he could play or write something "new". Yet their most recent albums haven't come up with anything completely original. Subdivide notes, beats, whatever music or noise into whatever you want, there are only so many combinations. And humans have been writing music for milleniums. You hit a brick wall after a while.
2. Slayer
As far as I'm concerned, Slayer has two songs. One is "Raining Blood", the other is everything else they ever did.
Just like every other band in the world. Have you heard the Rolling Stones? All their songs are the same!
Or is it that we're not fans therefore we haven't really heard their songs enough to see how different they are.
DB intrudes - Any non-fan will not find any differences. I can sit down with someone who says that AC/DC & Motorhead are limited to 3 chords, and show them most are actually made up of more. They won't care. It also won't matter to them that some rock bands are able to write the simplest song that doesn't really rip off every country, blues, boogie, and metal stereotype ... and they'll still see no difference. The same way that some can't hear the difference between Beethoven's 5th or 6th. They just don't like it enough to take notice. As if that mattered to those who do like that type of music.
3. Metallica
When people think "Whiskey in the Jar" was written in 1998, you know there's something wrong. Metallica had some pretty good Thrash in the '80s, but it wasn't that long before they sold out. People kiss their ass seemingly without actually knowing what they did. None of the Big Four actually invented Thrash, so other than being the most popular of the Big Four, what makes Metallica so great? |
Oh so YOU know what they did. Please un-dumb us.
It would seem anything with the label "popular" is not so good for you...
Which is not that bad logic anyway! If something's popular, it generally is well-rated, therefore, overrated!!
DB - If the biggest worry this world has is people thinking that WHiskey in the Jar was written in 1998, well then I would ask that you consider reading up on some of the news that has happened in the past decade.
That, and get a life. And as far as kissing ass, who's do you kiss ?
Mind you it seems that you're using yours to spread opinions that are about as worthy as what usually comes out of there.
Get a life. It's free.
|
|
|
"Here I am talking to some of the smartest people in the world and I didn't even notice,” Lieutenant Columbo, episode The Bye-Bye Sky-High I.Q. Murder Case.
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: March 20 2009 at 21:05 |
debrewguy wrote:
The T wrote:
AlbertMond wrote:
2. Slayer
As far as I'm concerned, Slayer has two songs. One is "Raining Blood", the other is everything else they ever did. |
Just like every other band in the world. Have you heard the Rolling Stones? All their songs are the same!
Or is it that we're not fans therefore we haven't really heard their songs enough to see how different they are. |
DB intrudes - Any non-fan will not find any differences. I can sit down with someone who says that AC/DC & Motorhead are limited to 3 chords, and show them most are actually made up of more. They won't care. It also won't matter to them that some rock bands are able to write the simplest song that doesn't really rip off every country, blues, boogie, and metal stereotype ... and they'll still see no difference. The same way that some can't hear the difference between Beethoven's 5th or 6th. They just don't like it enough to take notice. As if that mattered to those who do like that type of music.
|
Actually Raining Blood could be said to be a further exploration of ideas they had touched upon on Necrophiliac. Hell Awaits was, at the time of its release, one of the most interesting and challenging thrash metal albums - and arguably still is - but of course, RIB is the one all the mags talk about it so pay a cursory listen to it and diss Slayer, that's the assured ticket to coolness, is it not?  I agree with DB, in fact, for a serious fan of thrash metal to claim that he can't make out any differentiation in Slayer's songs is quite ridiculous because their paradigm is a much sought-after one in thrash metal, particularly thrash of the more brutal and aggressive variety.
Edited by rogerthat - March 20 2009 at 21:06
|
|
AlbertMond
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 27 2008
Location: Namibia
Status: Offline
Points: 139
|
Posted: March 20 2009 at 22:03 |
debrewguy wrote:
The T wrote:
AlbertMond wrote:
1. Nirvana
Kurt Cobain didn't invent Grunge, and Nirvana wasn't the best Grunge band. Grunge itself isn't all that original. As far as I'm concerned, their only album worth its salt is "Bleach". Their two biggest songs had stolen riffs, and Cobain admitted this in his journal.
Ok wise one. Who invented grunge then? And who was the best band? You seem to know it.
DB says - I don't think that Cobain ever made either claim, and neither did their fans. As far as Originality, after Oog invented the rock n roll chord E, John Barleycorn and Nicotine, everything else was second hand. And stealing riffs ? Wow, imagine a musician taking a chord sequence or melody from somewhere else. Like, there still tons of ways that I IV V hasn't been played yet, and even Robert Fripp had to tune his guitars differently just to see if he could play or write something "new". Yet their most recent albums haven't come up with anything completely original. Subdivide notes, beats, whatever music or noise into whatever you want, there are only so many combinations. And humans have been writing music for milleniums. You hit a brick wall after a while. |
Grunge wasn't invented by any single band. However, Green River and Melvins were clearly more important to it than Nirvana and Pearl Jam. Also, there's a difference between copying and getting two superhits through copied material. It makes me doubt that they could have gotten so big without doing it. And best Grunge band? I dig Alice In Chains.
| 2. Slayer
As far as I'm concerned, Slayer has two songs. One is "Raining Blood", the other is everything else they ever did.
Just like every other band in the world. Have you heard the Rolling Stones? All their songs are the same!
Or is it that we're not fans therefore we haven't really heard their songs enough to see how different they are.
DB intrudes - Any non-fan will not find any differences. I can sit down with someone who says that AC/DC & Motorhead are limited to 3 chords, and show them most are actually made up of more. They won't care. It also won't matter to them that some rock bands are able to write the simplest song that doesn't really rip off every country, blues, boogie, and metal stereotype ... and they'll still see no difference. The same way that some can't hear the difference between Beethoven's 5th or 6th. They just don't like it enough to take notice. As if that mattered to those who do like that type of music. |
Either way, Slayer bores me. Also, "The Non-Fans just can't understand" is the retreat of the weak. Non-fans just can't understand The Jonas Brothers, Limp Bizkit, and Nitro.
[QUOTE]3. Metallica
When people think "Whiskey in the Jar" was written in 1998, you know there's something wrong. Metallica had some pretty good Thrash in the '80s, but it wasn't that long before they sold out. People kiss their ass seemingly without actually knowing what they did. None of the Big Four actually invented Thrash, so other than being the most popular of the Big Four, what makes Metallica so great?
Oh so YOU know what they did. Please un-dumb us.
It would seem anything with the label "popular" is not so good for you...
Which is not that bad logic anyway! If something's popular, it generally is well-rated, therefore, overrated!! |
No. First off, I didn't say I didn't like Metallica. I said they were overrated, and they are. Metallica wouldn't have gotten as far as they have had they not severely sold out.
[QUOTE]DB - If the biggest worry this world has is people thinking that WHiskey in the Jar was written in 1998, well then I would ask that you consider reading up on some of the news that has happened in the past decade.
That, and get a life. And as far as kissing ass, who's do you kiss ?
Mind you it seems that you're using yours to spread opinions that are about as worthy as what usually comes out of there.
Get a life. It's free. |
I never said it was the 'biggest worry'. As far as 'getting a life', I'm not the one whining about how someone else thinks Metallica is overrated.
|
Promotion so blatant that it's sad:
|
|
AlbertMond
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 27 2008
Location: Namibia
Status: Offline
Points: 139
|
Posted: March 20 2009 at 22:08 |
rogerthat wrote:
debrewguy wrote:
The T wrote:
AlbertMond wrote:
2. Slayer
As far as I'm concerned, Slayer has two songs. One is "Raining Blood", the other is everything else they ever did. |
Just like every other band in the world. Have you heard the Rolling Stones? All their songs are the same!
Or is it that we're not fans therefore we haven't really heard their songs enough to see how different they are. |
DB intrudes - Any non-fan will not find any differences. I can sit down with someone who says that AC/DC & Motorhead are limited to 3 chords, and show them most are actually made up of more. They won't care. It also won't matter to them that some rock bands are able to write the simplest song that doesn't really rip off every country, blues, boogie, and metal stereotype ... and they'll still see no difference. The same way that some can't hear the difference between Beethoven's 5th or 6th. They just don't like it enough to take notice. As if that mattered to those who do like that type of music.
|
Actually Raining Blood could be said to be a further exploration of ideas they had touched upon on Necrophiliac. Hell Awaits was, at the time of its release, one of the most interesting and challenging thrash metal albums - and arguably still is - but of course, RIB is the one all the mags talk about it so pay a cursory listen to it and diss Slayer, that's the assured ticket to coolness, is it not? I agree with DB, in fact, for a serious fan of thrash metal to claim that he can't make out any differentiation in Slayer's songs is quite ridiculous because their paradigm is a much sought-after one in thrash metal, particularly thrash of the more brutal and aggressive variety.
|
Since when am I a 'serious fan of thrash metal'. I seldom listen to the more 'brutal and aggressive variety', because, frankly, there's very little variety in it. I've heard enough to know what I think of it. I can make out differentation in the songs. Some are even more pretentious rubbish than the others.
|
Promotion so blatant that it's sad:
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: March 20 2009 at 22:12 |
AlbertMond wrote:
Since when am I a 'serious fan of thrash metal'. I seldom listen to the more 'brutal and aggressive variety', because, frankly, there's very little variety in it. I've heard enough to know what I think of it. I can make out differentation in the songs. Some are even more pretentious rubbish than the others. |
I didn't say YOU are. If you read the whole post, it's clear what exactly I implied. Only a serious fan of thrash metal can know what he's talking about and a serious fan saying Slayer songs sound exactly the same would be ridiculous. As for the opinions of those who don't listen to much thrash metal and then single out Slayer from multitudes of thrash metal bands, it's like somebody listening to mainstream pop rock listening to 2 minutes of Karn Evil 9 and saying it's nonsense.
|
|
AlbertMond
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 27 2008
Location: Namibia
Status: Offline
Points: 139
|
Posted: March 20 2009 at 22:18 |
rogerthat wrote:
AlbertMond wrote:
Since when am I a 'serious fan of thrash metal'. I seldom listen to the more 'brutal and aggressive variety', because, frankly, there's very little variety in it. I've heard enough to know what I think of it. I can make out differentation in the songs. Some are even more pretentious rubbish than the others. |
I didn't say YOU are. If you read the whole post, it's clear what exactly I implied. Only a serious fan of thrash metal can know what he's talking about and a serious fan saying Slayer songs sound exactly the same would be ridiculous. As for the opinions of those who don't listen to much thrash metal and then single out Slayer from multitudes of thrash metal bands, it's like somebody listening to mainstream pop rock listening to 2 minutes of Karn Evil 9 and saying it's nonsense. |
Yeah. If Slayer weren't so mainstream, that would be a perfect comparison. Plus, I've listened to more than one Slayer song. I can dig groups like Venom, Bathory, and Celtic Frost. Even so, Slayer strikes me as rubbish.
A better comparison would be saying it was like a Prog Fan listening to a few minutes of "Burnin' Up", and saying it's generic garbage. Try that one next time.
|
Promotion so blatant that it's sad:
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: March 20 2009 at 22:24 |
AlbertMond wrote:
Yeah. If Slayer weren't so mainstream, that would be a perfect comparison. Plus, I've listened to more than one Slayer song. I can dig groups like Venom, Bathory, and Celtic Frost. Even so, Slayer strikes me as rubbish.
A better comparison would be saying it was like a Prog Fan listening to a few minutes of "Burnin' Up", and saying it's generic garbage. Try that one next time. |
Back to the old chestnut again, mainstream = overrated = bad. Many times that equation may hold true, but many other times it doesn't. You have to remember that Slayer weren't mainstream until RIB succeeded. Oh, you HAVE listened to more than Slayer song? Congratulations, here's some  for you, then!  Oh, and your comparison doesn't hold because Slayer is as representative of thrash metal as ELP is of old prog, maybe Metallica is more representative, but they are the only other band with more influence on the sub genre than Slayer. And by the way, Bathory is not thrash metal, better luck next time! 
|
|
AlbertMond
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 27 2008
Location: Namibia
Status: Offline
Points: 139
|
Posted: March 20 2009 at 22:26 |
rogerthat wrote:
AlbertMond wrote:
Yeah. If Slayer weren't so mainstream, that would be a perfect comparison. Plus, I've listened to more than one Slayer song. I can dig groups like Venom, Bathory, and Celtic Frost. Even so, Slayer strikes me as rubbish.
A better comparison would be saying it was like a Prog Fan listening to a few minutes of "Burnin' Up", and saying it's generic garbage. Try that one next time. |
Back to the old chestnut again, mainstream = overrated = bad. Many times that equation may hold true, but many other times it doesn't. You have to remember that Slayer weren't mainstream until RIB succeeded. Oh, you HAVE listened to more than Slayer song? Congratulations, here's some for you, then! Oh, and your comparison doesn't hold because Slayer is as representative of thrash metal as ELP is of old prog, maybe Metallica is more representative, but they are the only other band with more influence on the sub genre than Slayer. And by the way, Bathory is not thrash metal, better luck next time! |
I know Bathory isn't Thrash. And, no, I never said I didn't like Slayer because they were popular. Seriously, get a clue.
Oh. Also, Pink Floyd wasn't truly mainstream until DSOTM. Unlike Slayer, they distinctively didn't suck. I enjoy Pink Floyd.
Edited by AlbertMond - March 20 2009 at 22:29
|
Promotion so blatant that it's sad:
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: March 20 2009 at 22:32 |
AlbertMond wrote:
I know Bathory isn't Thrash. And, no, I never said I didn't like Slayer because they were popular. Seriously, get a clue. |
If you KNEW, then it begs the question why you mention them in the same sentence as Slayer and say you can listen to bands like Bathory, duh, they are not in the same sub genre!  And dude, you may not have put it in as many words, but taking into account the specific band and specific song and something else you wrote in your original post about the Big four, I can see where you're coming from. Or maybe I can't, because you'll deny and backpedal. Fine, I'll leave it here because my intention was not pick an argument, just to show that you basically plucked Slayer as the lucky one out of like a 100 bands without rhyme or reason. Since you have not been able to come up with any strong arguments for this,"All Slayer songs sound the same" other than that you think so, my point stands.
|
|
AlbertMond
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 27 2008
Location: Namibia
Status: Offline
Points: 139
|
Posted: March 20 2009 at 22:38 |
rogerthat wrote:
AlbertMond wrote:
I know Bathory isn't Thrash. And, no, I never said I didn't like Slayer because they were popular. Seriously, get a clue. |
If you KNEW, then it begs the question why you mention them in the same sentence as Slayer and say you can listen to bands like Bathory, duh, they are not in the same sub genre! |
Because Black Metal was heavily influenced by Thrash, and is considered an "extreme metal". Seriously, quit trying.
rogerthat wrote:
And dude, you may not have put it in as many words, but taking into account the specific band and specific song and something else you wrote in your original post about the Big four, I can see where you're coming from. Or maybe I can't, because you'll deny and backpedal. Fine, I'll leave it here because my intention was not pick an argument, just to show that you basically plucked Slayer as the lucky one out of like a 100 bands without rhyme or reason. |
The point of posting about overrated bands is that they're overrated. Slayer is overrated.
rogerthat wrote:
Since you have not been able to come up with any strong arguments for this,"All Slayer songs sound the same" other than that you think so, my point stands. |
The title of the thread has 'opinionated' in it. Also, "you're not a fan, so you can't tell" is not a real argument, so your 'point' is no more valid than mine.
|
Promotion so blatant that it's sad:
|
|
manofmystery
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 26 2008
Location: PA, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 4335
|
Posted: March 20 2009 at 22:43 |
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:
manofmystery wrote:
could go all day on overrated bands but I'll just go with prog's biggest:
Genesis - unless you like playing dress up I don't see what makes them worthy of such fawning praise and such high ratings. |
I honestly laugh when I read that genesis is overrated...Why?
- Genesis was part of an unpopular genre.
- Genesis was more unpopular than most of the pioneer Prog bands until they became Pop
- Genesis started as schoolboys, when all the members of all the other big bands were altready proffesionals, in some cases former members of other big groups
- Suffered the stigma of the worst POP era.
- Two of the three most important members left the band in the 70's to never return
- They don't release a Prog album since 1977
- They don't exist anymore
- Are accused of lack of virtuosism by the ones who don't like them.
- Are the Prog pioneers with less epics and one with the smallest number of conceptual albums.
- Genesis is the only one of the big 5 or 6 Prog bands with no official Prog Betamax, VHS or DVD
- The Lamb is consider one of the most important tiours and there's no fiilmof it, not even the band members have one.
- Their fiorst two Prog albums are top 100 here, despte the technical production is probably the worst in a big band.
|
None of which matters if you don't consider their music all that special ("all that special" doesn't mean bad, it means not all that special).
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:
They had everything against them, but still after that and instead of being a bunch of nobodies:
- They are by far the most popular prog band in most of the important Prog sites.
- The two Prog members who left, are icons of the genre
- Are mentioned in every piece of Prog literature as fundamental.
- Are by far in Prog Archives the band with best average in comparison with any other Prog band.
- Are one of the bands more mentioned as influence by later bands.
So why call them overrated? Because they are more respected than most of the bands you love?
And are we a bunch of ignorants for loving a mediocre band (According to most of the members who call them overrated)?
Is your taste so precise that must be considered superior to the one of the vast majority of Prog listeners in the world?
Iván |
Your spirited defense makes my point that they are overrated for me; first you list all the bands problems (which really don't matter to me, as I stated above, this is about music), then you go ahead and list everything that makes the band overrated. This isn't about me or who I think is more special, this is about a band with more praise being heaped down upon them here than any band could ever live up to. Don't you think it might be a little excessive? Ridiculous Peter Gabriel costumes and vocals seem to be what seperates them from others in their era so it seems to be image that lifts them to hights undeserved by any band. Gabriel is not a God, he is musician with a poor voice and silly onstage behavior. The scorn given in prog circles to anyone that merely suggests that Genesis might be any less than pure musical ambrosia means to me that the line between the honest judgement of their music and an obediant group mentality has been crossed (yes, they are the obama of prog  ). The point is: No band is as good as Genesis is made out to be by those in the prog world and they are not above having that said about them.
Edited by manofmystery - March 20 2009 at 22:45
|
 Time always wins.
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: March 20 2009 at 22:46 |
AlbertMond wrote:
Because Black Metal was heavily influenced by Thrash, and is considered an "extreme metal". Seriously, quit trying. |
Now what's AN extreme metal, hmmm.... anyway, care to tell me what exactly makes Heathen and Immortal so similar sounding? I know very well that black metal was influenced by thrash metal, but they are widely divergent sub genres and not everybody who likes one likes the other. What you said is like suggesting that one can compare ELP and Camel just because both were influenced by ITCOCK. 
AlbertMond wrote:
The point of posting about overrated bands is that they're overrated. Slayer is overrated. |
Yes, yes, I know, I have been asking this question for some time in this thread, do you call a band overrated just because they are popular. Show me a band that's generally considered overrated and yet have no popularity within even niche audiences like prog fans or extreme metal fans. Overrating is basically the business of getting pissed off that some people like a band that you don't.
AlbertMond wrote:
The title of the thread has 'opinionated' in it. Also, "you're not a fan, so you can't tell" is not a real argument, so your 'point' is no more valid than mine. |
Of course I have an argument because unless made entirely in jest, the allegation that Slayer have only two songs - Raining Blood and everything else - is serious and is just begging to be objected to.
|
|
AlbertMond
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 27 2008
Location: Namibia
Status: Offline
Points: 139
|
Posted: March 20 2009 at 22:53 |
rogerthat wrote:
AlbertMond wrote:
Because Black Metal was heavily influenced by Thrash, and is considered an "extreme metal". Seriously, quit trying. |
Now what's AN extreme metal, hmmm.... anyway, care to tell me what exactly makes Heathen and Immortal so similar sounding? I know very well that black metal was influenced by thrash metal, but they are widely divergent sub genres and not everybody who likes one likes the other. What you said is like suggesting that one can compare ELP and Camel just because both were influenced by ITCOCK. |
I wasn't relating each of those bands to eachother by much in the first place other than as Extreme Metals.
If you want to get deep into genres, Venom's Blackened Thrash, and Celtic Frost is Avant-Garde Metal, Thrash Metal, and (later) Gothic Metal. Really, quit trying. Your emoticons have more value here than your actual words.
AlbertMond wrote:
The point of posting about overrated bands is that they're overrated. Slayer is overrated. |
rogerthat wrote:
Yes, yes, I know, I have been asking this question for some time in this thread, do you call a band overrated just because they are popular. |
I've said 'no' at least three times. Quit bloody asking it.
rogerthat wrote:
Show me a band that's generally considered overrated and yet have no popularity within even niche audiences like prog fans or extreme metal fans. Overrating is basically the business of getting pissed off that some people like a band that you don't. |
So you're here to say that no bands are overrated. Seriously. Get out of this thread, please.
AlbertMond wrote:
The title of the thread has 'opinionated' in it. Also, "you're not a fan, so you can't tell" is not a real argument, so your 'point' is no more valid than mine. |
rogerthat wrote:
Of course I have an argument because unless made entirely in jest, the allegation that Slayer have only two songs - Raining Blood and everything else - is serious and is just begging to be objected to. |
It's a casual exaggeration. Honestly, I used to like Slayer. The more I listen to them, the less I like them, as it all sounds the same. There are plenty of people, even in the Metal community, who agree with me.
|
Promotion so blatant that it's sad:
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: March 20 2009 at 23:11 |
AlbertMond wrote:
I wasn't relating each of those bands to eachother by much in the first place other than as Extreme Metals.
If you want to get deep into genres, Venom's Blackened Thrash, and Celtic Frost is Avant-Garde Metal, Thrash Metal, and (later) Gothic Metal. Really, quit trying. Your emoticons have more value here than your actual words. |
But that's the point: how would you basically relate extreme metal bands when on the topic of thrash metal?  Maybe it makes a lot of sense to you but it's very confusing for me.
AlbertMond wrote:
So you're here to say that no bands are overrated. Seriously. Get out of this thread, please. |
I didn't say that, just show me some basis other than that the band is popular for calling them overrated. By the way, in your bout of - god knows directed at what! - aggression, you ended up proving my point! I say show me a band that's not popular and is called overrated and you say "get out of this thread" ,s o bingo! Only popular bands are overrated and so people compile lists of bands they don't like that are popular and call them overrated. You can say for the fourth time that that's not what you are saying, but then what exactly do you want to say, I am all ears.
AlbertMond wrote:
It's a casual exaggeration. Honestly, I used to like Slayer. The more I listen to them, the less I like them, as it all sounds the same. There are plenty of people, even in the Metal community, who agree with me. |
Ok, that's more like an opinion, fair enough. Although, that there are plenty of people who agree with you doesn't necessarily confer validity on it, because there are plenty still who can't stop dissing Metallca for selling out, an event that happened 18 or so years ago. Or better yet, who still can't stop accusing Metallica of stealing from Mustaine, an "alleged" event that happened 25 years ago. You think there are better bands out there, fine, and I agree with that myself, but how many people like a band and what they did or did not do in their commercial phase is not very relevant.
Edited by rogerthat - March 20 2009 at 23:12
|
|
AlbertMond
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 27 2008
Location: Namibia
Status: Offline
Points: 139
|
Posted: March 20 2009 at 23:34 |
rogerthat wrote:
AlbertMond wrote:
So you're here to say that no bands are overrated. Seriously. Get out of this thread, please. |
I didn't say that, just show me some basis other than that the band is popular for calling them overrated. By the way, in your bout of - god knows directed at what! - aggression, you ended up proving my point! I say show me a band that's not popular and is called overrated and you say "get out of this thread" ,s o bingo! Only popular bands are overrated and so people compile lists of bands they don't like that are popular and call them overrated. You can say for the fourth time that that's not what you are saying, but then what exactly do you want to say, I am all ears. |
You very obviously implied that you were saying no bands were overrated. This thread is about overrated bands, and if you don't believe any are overrated, you have no business being here. It wasn't anger, it was a matter-of-fact request that you leave. Yes. A band has to have some fans to be overrated. If nobody rates it, it can't be over rated. What you're saying is essentially "That's your opinion", which is an inherently pointless statement as most everything anyone ever says is their opinion. Good job pointing out the obvious, Sherlock. 
AlbertMond wrote:
It's a casual exaggeration. Honestly, I used to like Slayer. The more I listen to them, the less I like them, as it all sounds the same. There are plenty of people, even in the Metal community, who agree with me. |
rogerthat wrote:
k, that's more like an opinion, fair enough. Although, that there are plenty of people who agree with you doesn't necessarily confer validity on it, |
O rly, now? You don't say.
rogerthat wrote:
because there are plenty still who can't stop dissing Metallca for selling out, an event that happened 18 or so years ago. |
And everybody knows old stuff is never still bad stuff.
rogerthat wrote:
Or better yet, who still can't stop accusing Metallica of stealing from Mustaine, an "alleged" event that happened 25 years ago. |
Yeah. They borrowed a Mustaine riff. Actually, I think they used the song when he was in the band, unless you're talking about a different one.
rogerthat wrote:
You think there are better bands out there, fine, and I agree with that myself, but how many people like a band and what they did or did not do in their commercial phase is not very relevant. |
To how overrated a band is? Yes, it is relevant. Again, you're implying that a band that gets big is inherently worthy of getting big. Your argument can be used for any band of any genre, and since music is an eye-of-the-beholder thing, your argument is irrelevant to this subject. I know plenty of bands better and more original than Slayer which haven't gotten as big. Before you again redundantly spout "That's your opinion!" like some sort of broken record (or Reign in Blood), I will again say that there are plenty of popular bands I like.
Edited by AlbertMond - March 20 2009 at 23:36
|
Promotion so blatant that it's sad:
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: March 20 2009 at 23:49 |
AlbertMond wrote:
You very obviously implied that you were saying no bands were overrated. This thread is about overrated bands, and if you don't believe any are overrated, you have no business being here. It wasn't anger, it was a matter-of-fact request that you leave. Yes. A band has to have some fans to be overrated. If nobody rates it, it can't be over rated. What you're saying is essentially "That's your opinion", which is an inherently pointless statement as most everything anyone ever says is their opinion. Good job pointing out the obvious, Sherlock. |
How do you know what I obviously implied or didn't, do you like psych-read across thousands of miles, the horror! Yes, a band has to have some fans to be rated, agreed, but that doesn't necessarily follow that only popular bands have to be overrated and yet I have not seen evidence pointing in any other direction. I am not saying,"That's just your opinion" or anything of the sort, I am asking you to disprove that people simply mention popular bands they don't like as overrated because how exactly does one determine how much popularity is commensurate to quality of the music, people don't say, "This is the best band or that is the best band", they say,"This is my favourite band or I like this band", how does it make a band overrated if many people LIKE a band, there's nothing to suggest that people like only the best bands in the world.
AlbertMond wrote:
Yeah. They borrowed a Mustaine riff. Actually, I think they used the song when he was in the band, unless you're talking about a different one. |
There are some songs to which Mustaine is given credit on KEA and RTL but some people - usually Megadeth fans - claim even upto MOP, they were stealing EVERYTHING from what they did with Mustaine.
AlbertMond wrote:
To how overrated a band is? Yes, it is relevant. Again, you're implying that a band that gets big is inherently worthy of getting big. Your argument can be used for any band of any genre, and since music is an eye-of-the-beholder thing, your argument is irrelevant to this subject. I know plenty of bands better and more original than Slayer which haven't gotten as big. Before you again redundantly spout "That's your opinion!" like some sort of broken record (or Reign in Blood), I will again say that there are plenty of popular bands I like. |
No, no and no, prove to me the relation between getting big and overrated. Is commercial success or lack of it the measure of overrating, or shall we say, the sole measure? Better and more original bands did not get as big as Slayer, yes, agreed, Watchtower for starters. So? Not fair to Watchtower? Why, are they in it only for the money then? Now I will give you one good reason why Slayer could be said to be overrated. RIB is widely proclaimed as the best thrash metal album of all time and I don't agree, so I think it is overrated and since most people carry forward this assertion to also call Slayer the best thrash metal band, I think Slayer is overrated. See, I respect an opinion! And not just mine! I hope this brings out the distinction between popularity and the rating of quality, the two things are not at all inseperable contrary to popular - oops, the dreaded word again! - perception.
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: March 20 2009 at 23:51 |
AlbertMond wrote:
And everybody knows old stuff is never still bad stuff.
|
|
|
AlbertMond
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 27 2008
Location: Namibia
Status: Offline
Points: 139
|
Posted: March 20 2009 at 23:53 |
rogerthat wrote:
No, no and no, prove to me the relation between getting big and overrated. Is commercial success or lack of it the measure of overrating, or shall we say, the sole measure? Better and more original bands did not get as big as Slayer, yes, agreed, Watchtower for starters. So? Not fair to Watchtower? Why, are they in it only for the money then? Now I will give you one good reason why Slayer could be said to be overrated. RIB is widely proclaimed as the best thrash metal album of all time and I don't agree, so I think it is overrated and since most people carry forward this assertion to also call Slayer the best thrash metal band, I think Slayer is overrated. See, I respect an opinion! And not just mine! I hope this brings out the distinction between popularity and the rating of quality, the two things are not at all inseperable contrary to popular - oops, the dreaded word again! - perception. |
Again, if a band has no fans, it cannot be overrated. The band can suck, but if nobody expresses a positive opinion about it whatsoever there's no chance in heck that it can be overrated.
Popularity is inseperable from the concept of overrating for this reason. I never once said it was the only aspect of being overrated, but it's essential to it.
|
Promotion so blatant that it's sad:
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: March 20 2009 at 23:59 |
AlbertMond wrote:
Again, if a band has no fans, it cannot be overrated. The band can suck, but if nobody expresses a positive opinion about it whatsoever there's no chance in heck that it can be overrated.
Popularity is inseperable from the concept of overrating for this reason. I never once said it was the only aspect of being overrated, but it's essential to it. |
It would only be inseperable IF the many fans also called them best, better, something like that. If they say they simply like their music, where's the question of overrating? Do Britney Spears fans say she's the best singer ever? If you showed them a better singer, they'll say, "I don't care, I still LIKE Britney." I am not saying that fans never ever talk up a band but it's not as universal as some people would think.
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Overrated Bands (Opininonated!)
