Customer Discussions > Music forum

Are The Beatles any more "overated" than Elvis Presley, Micheal Jackson, Led Zeplin, Jimmy Hendrix, The Doors, Nirvana, .. .


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 187 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Jan 6, 2012 1:53:22 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Apr 20, 2014 7:06:52 AM PDT
.. . or any other overtly famous and exonerated musical act one could name ??

Posted on Jan 6, 2012 4:43:37 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 6, 2012 4:44:10 PM PST
Probably not. People just like to ...

"Hey Micheal! Get out of that little boys bed! Don't make me tell you again!"

Sorry, I'm babysitting.

Ok, where was I?

Oh yes, I was saying people just like to cause trouble.

Posted on Jan 7, 2012 4:37:45 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Sep 26, 2012 3:32:24 PM PDT
Hinch says:
It's Michael, Zeppelin and Jimi.

No. The Beatles are not more overrated than any of those.

Posted on Jan 7, 2012 5:59:49 AM PST
Spelling errors aside, they are probably all equally over-rated. (I could point out great things and not-so-great things about each artist you mentioned.) But many of them put out some of the best music of all time as well.

Posted on Jan 7, 2012 6:09:13 AM PST
Why do we have to label any band or artist as "overrated." You either like a band or you don't. We all try to share the music we like with people who haven't heard them, and not everybody is going to get into what we like. I think it's more a case of the listener being a little overzealous in their sharing and taking exception to someone not sharing their passion. And, others being a little too heavy-handed in their criticism.

Posted on Jan 7, 2012 6:19:30 AM PST
DavidH1964 says:
Nirvana was VERY over rated. Michael Jackson is not in the same class or status as Beatles, Lennon, Hendrix, Morrison, The Who, Rolling Stones, etal. Not just because of genre. Those I mentioned MADE music. MJ was a dancer and performer, a far cry from actually being a musician, composer, writer, lyricist.

Posted on Jan 7, 2012 6:26:38 AM PST
[Deleted by the author on Jan 7, 2012 11:12:01 AM PST]

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 7, 2012 6:39:27 AM PST
Not true about MJ. He composed a LOT of his own material.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 7, 2012 8:35:08 AM PST
F n funny Ap!

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 7, 2012 9:52:05 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 7, 2012 10:29:14 AM PST
Needles says:
You are correct. MJ is not in the same class or status as anyone. All the groups mentioned have given us some beautiful music. Labeling them into a negative classification is pointless. If you don't like them, don't listen to them.

In all fairness, you are wrong about MJ. You don't have to like him and you have the right to your opinion. I'm just asking you to educate yourself before stating it. Did you know that Elvis wrote very little of his music?

MJ was a brilliant musician, composer, writer and lyricist... as well as a dancer and performer. He MADE beautiful music that crossed all genres. He was also an artist, an author and a humanitarian...in case you were unaware of that, too.

Posted on Jan 7, 2012 10:38:43 AM PST
Working Man says:
None are overrated if you like the bands. If you don't then, of course they are overrated. Of the ones mentioned:

Led Zeppelin - Led Zeppelin is one of my favorite bands of all time so they are not overrated in my eyes.

The Beatles - The Beatles were a band I grew up with as a young boy so they are extremely influential for me.

Hendrix - Hendrix is a great, probably the greatest guitarist and his albums are all good. I am not a fanatic, but I am fan.

The Doors - I really like the Doors, but I have to be in the mood to listen to them.

Elvis - I respect Elvis and let's just leave it a that.

Michael Jackson - I am not a fan. The Jackson 5 were okay for a pop band and Thriller was a cool video, but beyond that he does nothing for me. Factor in his bizarre factor and I can do without him altogether.

Nirvana - They were okay. But then again, I was already in my 30's during the 90's so they didn't speak to me as much as they did to those ten years or so younger than me.

Why were the Rolling Stones, U2, Queen or Bruce Springsteen not included in this overrated list? Or the Who for that matter? All bands/artist that have their fare share of fanatic followers. Dylan is another that can be added to the list.

It all depends on what you like. For me none of them are overrated, at least to their fans.

Posted on Jan 7, 2012 11:05:47 AM PST
dlb says:
Nooo I don't think so, they were so popular as a band, then had very successful careers of their own, all of them. Now if you look on oh say Itunes and see the younger generation seeing and hearing them and seeking them out, well I think that they are that much of an idol to so many people and generations, with lasting appeal.

Posted on Jan 7, 2012 11:13:38 AM PST
dlb says:
I think so many single individuals or groups were spectacular in their own territory, I'll never say Hendrix, Zeppelin, Cream, Clapton, Janis, and then folk rock, oh there are too many that were greats in their own Genre, such as Hendrix, how can you honestly compare them. There is a video on you tube separated here on purpose, that shows when Eric Clapton heard Jimi Hendrix for the first time, they show how visibly shaken up he was at how spectacular Hendrix was on the guitar, the band members said oh no he just killed God! Clapton they meant, on the Guitar and Clapton asked him, is he really that good? Am I really any good? LOL Hendrix was playing the guitar with his teeth, between his legs, in back of himself, over his head and it all sounded GREAT! I wonder what would have happened if he and Janis had not died at the age of 27, both of them. so sad, such as with Amy Winehouse this past year.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 7, 2012 11:17:25 AM PST
Freaking A! I happen to think The Beatles are the greatest thing that ever happened to rock 'n' roll and pop music. Others may disagree, but that's their prerogative. Stonehenge is right. The Beatles are up there and the Rolling Stones are right on their heels.
---Jose R. Gonzalez

Posted on Jan 7, 2012 2:00:33 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 7, 2012 2:01:16 PM PST
Michael Jackson is definitely being overrated when you hear people being interviewed calling him, "the greatest entertainer of all time." He was a gifted R & B performer -- but no more so than James Brown, Aretha Franklin, Ray Charles, Otis Redding or Stevie Wonder. In fact, I would go so far as to say that he was not as great as they were (or still are, in some cases).

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 7, 2012 2:45:45 PM PST
Hinch says:
DavidH1964

4 of the 7 top 10 hits on THRILLER were written by Michael. He also wrote a couple on OFF THE WALL including "Don't Stop 'til You Get Enough". He wrote 8 out of the 10 songs on BAD. He either wrote or co-wrote most of the songs on his last 2 albums.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 7, 2012 2:47:19 PM PST
Hinch says:
>Elvis wrote very little of his music<

Sorry! Elvis wrote 0 songs.

Posted on Jan 7, 2012 2:52:59 PM PST
Hinch says:
"Overrated" and "underrated" depend on how much a person likes an artist's music. If you don't like Elvis, you'll probably say he's overrated. Many Elvis fans say The Beatles are overrated.

Posted on Jan 7, 2012 3:51:08 PM PST
Elvis came on the scene at a time when singers did not typically write their own music. There were vocalists and there were songwriters. Usually, a recording artist was told how to sing a song by managers and producers. Elvis was unusual for a young artist back then in that he, allegedy, tinkered with a song so much that it was often unrecognizable from the songwriter's original. He had no musical training but was amazingly knowledgable about music.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 7, 2012 4:28:38 PM PST
Hinch says:
>There were vocalists and there were songwriters.<

Very true. I've made that point many times. I like many artists who didn't write all, or any, of their songs. Billie Holiday, Tony Bennett, Nat King Cole amd Bobby Darin are examples.

I love Elvis, especiallly his '50s RCA recordings. I was just making a point to someone.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 7, 2012 5:33:23 PM PST
I don't think musician is a word to apply to him.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 7, 2012 5:43:09 PM PST
Hinch says:
according to the Merriam-Webster online dictionary

Definition of MUSICIAN: a composer, conductor, or performer of music; especially : instrumentalist

Posted on Jan 7, 2012 6:57:38 PM PST
To answer the initial question: no, they are certainly not more overrated than any of the other artists you mentioned. In fact, they were far greater, more diverse and more musically consistent as far as staying at a level of excellence than any of the artists you mentioned. To examine further:

Elvis -- a great singer and a major cultural force, without a doubt. And the body of work he recorded from 1954-59 was tremendous and still holds up well today. He even made two great films with 'Kid Creole' and 'Jailhouse Rock'. But after 1960, he made a ton of lousy, degrading movies for someone of his stature, and only had a brief period of greatness again musically from 1968-69 with the NBC TV comeback special, the 'From Elvis in Memphis' album, and his first year of Vegas shows. After 1969, he became a total self-parody and never recovered.

Michael Jackson -- his music was good but not brilliant, he was a solid entertainer, but the entire weirdness of his persona simply overshadowed everything else about him.

Led Zeppelin -- I know they're beloved, but I never got them. And I tried many, many times. For me, so much of their music sounds like a deep, foreboding horror movie, with a singer that sounds like his genitals were being pierced with a pitchfork.

Jimi Hendrix -- the greatest rock guitarist of all time, but after the Experience disbanded, his musical direction was quite erratic. I have no doubt there was brilliance still to come from him, but there's no way he could compose with the melodic diversity of Lennon and McCartney.

The Doors -- very great musicians, but Jim Morrison's pomposity and the way he treated people like crap ruins the whole thing for me. Maybe I've seen Oliver Stone's movie 'The Doors' too many times.

Nirvana -- there was nothing that they did that the original great punk and new wave bands of the late '70's and early '80's didn't do before -- and did better. Nirvana's material just had a more manic-depressive tone to the music and lyrics, that's all.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 7, 2012 7:34:45 PM PST
Robert Bykowski,

Excellent analysis. I would add to the disclaimer on Led Zeppelin their reputation for plagiarism.

Posted on Jan 7, 2012 7:37:54 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 7, 2012 7:39:37 PM PST
Hinch says:
>Maybe I've seen Oliver Stone's movie 'The Doors' too many times.<

There were some distortions in the movie. For instance, The Doors' perfomance of "Light My Fire" on The Ed Sullivan Show. In the movie when he sings the line "girl we couldn't get much higher" he screams "higher! yeah!" and moves his face closer to the camera, as if to be in the face of the producers who didn't want him to sing that line.

In the actual performance, the only time he screams "yeah!" is after the line "try to set the night on fire" at the end of the song. When he sings "girl we couldn't get much higher" he does it pretty non chalantly. Not in-your-face at all. Minor distortion? Maybe, but it's only purpose was to make Morrison look like an axxhole.

Here's a clip of the actual performance

http://youtu.be/2euBN3gbKc8
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Music forum

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Music forum
Participants:  46
Total posts:  187
Initial post:  Jan 6, 2012
Latest post:  Feb 12, 2014

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 3 customers

Search Customer Discussions