Bands with a big reputation that are (musically) shite

[Wilf]

I think with a lot of punk/hardcore we get into territory where lyrics and some notion of lets say political integrity become equally important as a band's actual music in why they're popular. Also the role of a good band name / logo combo for t-shirts cannot be overstated.

... well, I was wondering when Crass might make a showing on the thread. They sort of fit in to my starting point for the thread, certainly got the 'reputation', but I remember hearing them the first time and thinking, hmm, that's a bit basic and shouty, but not in a good way. Having said that and going straight into reverse, whilst I wouldn't ever sit through a full Crass album, I do now like a good few of the songs as songs. Even Steve Ignorant's reimagining Crass as heavy metal.

 

[1927]

The Who are rubbish.

As a follower of the mod revival in the 70s i never understood the classification of them as a mod band.

 

[hitmouse]

Born To Run is an extraordinary album, replete with some of the best musicians of the era. Jungleland, the last song on the album, is a tour de force of epic blues rock, with so much going on. However, the album as a whole is a varied and crafted work of music as storytelling. Again, you don’t have to like it but to say it is somehow “not musical” is preposterous.

That's the point of the thread, innit? The thread would be very dull if it was just people going "I don't like Coldplay", and if we really want to get into it I'm sure you could probably make some argument for why Oasis or Starsailor or whoever are not Objectively Musically Bad. But, in my entirely subjective opinion, Springsteen is an artist with a big reputation who did not slap.

 

[kabbes]

That's the point of the thread, innit? The thread would be very dull if it was just people going "I don't like Coldplay", and if we really want to get into it I'm sure you could probably make some argument for why Oasis or Starsailor or whoever are not Objectively Musically Bad. But, in my entirely subjective opinion, Springsteen is an artist with a big reputation who did not slap.

You’ll have to ask Wilf. However, I thought this thread wasn’t just about taste but about musicality. And that is something you can analyse, not just leave to reckons and opinion.

 

[mojo pixy]

a full Crass album

Penis Envy would be my choice, probably because iirc Steve Ignorant isn't on it

 

[The39thStep]

I would happily garotte anyone who put a Crass album on tbh

 

[Bus Honeygun]

Having grown up being really intrigued by the whole Crass package of visuals, artwork and principles, I remember being similarly disappointed when I finally heard them. Stodgy, plodding punk by numbers.

 

[krtek a houby]

Men bands

Men lists

Not many women bands/ artists/lists

Mostly white artists

Why is that?

 

[Kevbad the Bad]

Men bands

Men lists

Not many women bands/ artists/lists

Mostly white artists

Why is that?

This thread is about bands/artists which people think are crap. Maybe non-white female bands are better.

 

[Kaka Tim]

pretty much agree with the OP about the New York Dolls. And - at the risk of starting a shooting war - Id put the Ramones in the same sort of box - their impact and importance is significently geater than the actual quaility. By "Quality" - well music deifneintly does not have to be complex or demand a high degree of technical skill to be interesting, but I dont find the Ramones have anything very interesting going on- theres not much in the way of compelling musical dynamics or killer guitar lines or sonic imagintation - and for me there just arent any really stand out songs. There is not much charisma/personailty in the singing. The lyrics do a job without having any zingers.
Compare with the Pistols - whilst musically the pistols arugably had a bit more going on - what really hits home is Johnny Rotten's voice and delivary as he snarls out the incendiary lyrics like a man posessed - its cuts through like napalm on Bodies, Holiday in the Sun, God Save the Queen. In a "blind test" - Id imagine the pistols would still very much stand out. I can still remember standing open mouthed the first time I heard the "fuck this and fuck that" bit on Bodies.
Or you could compare The Ramones to their CGBG contemparies - Talking Heads, Blondie, Television - and again,without the context, they seem even less interesting.

 

[Kaka Tim]

oh and another vote for Crass - Im mean Im glad they existed and how they did their thing and what they were saying was all spot on - but the music ..... well to me it just sounded like dismal dirge - in no way did it match the imagination, vision and inteligence of everything else about them. I suppose - like a lot of other anarcho punk stuff - the music (permanently set to ANGRY!!) is just a medium for your polemic and criticising it is like slagging off a political pamphlet on the basis of the layout, font and paper quality.

 

[Steel Icarus]

The Manics. Not exactly rubbish but so uninspired musically compared to their obvious intelligence.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Rules wanker.

Dire Straits.

One of my favourite bands, play them most weeks.

Saw them at Hammersmith Odeon in1979 just as Communique was released, they played both albums and were utterly awesome. Saw them again in Berlin in 20th May 1981 at the Eissporthalle. Brothers in arms was both a cracking track and a cracking album, it was the end of their creativity really, unfortunately.

For the duds list:

Genesis
Supertramp
Zappa

 

[Sasaferrato]

Any tracks you suggest particularly other than Pinball Wizard?

Behind Blue Eyes.

 

[moomoo]

Bjork. And Kate Bush. Both bobbins and painful to listen to. All that wailing. Ugh.

 

[Sasaferrato]

I'll give this a pass. There's room on any thread for hating Dire Straits.

Wilf There is a list!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You are on it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[planetgeli]

Bjork. And Kate Bush. Both bobbins and painful to listen to. All that wailing. Ugh.

Kate Bush had her first two albums (and then some) written by the time she was 16. She's then successfully gone on to have complete control over her career. She's a genius.

You might be right about Bjork. Never got her.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

Kate Bush had her first two albums (and then some) written by the time she was 16. She's then successfully gone on to have complete control over her career. She's a genius.

You might be right about Bjork. Never got her.

I can’t like this due to the last line.

 

[AverageJoe]

I also never got the hype around Sigue Sigue Sputnik

Tony James is 70.

 

[CNT36]

I was thinking, for genuinely sacrilegous opinions, anyone want to have a go at knocking Black Flag? They certainly had their moments, but I think there's a lot of other early hardcore LPs I'd probably rate above Damaged. And then the whole "let's do something radically new and different and alienate our audience" thing was great and laudable in principle, but then a lot of the music that came out of that was just slow boring heavy metal?

That Frank Ocean can fuck right off for a start, not sure I ever saw the point of Drake either. I think one of my big contrarian opinions about contemporary music is that it feels like both Tyler the Creator and Lana Del Rey have got more and more critically lauded as their careers go on, but in both cases it's the early stuff (that's often quite lyrically horrible in both cases) that works for me, and they both seem to have got musically blander as they've grown up and become more sensible and less objectionable.
Other than that, I suppose my dislike of Future Islands is probably slightly too niche to qualify for this thread, but there was a moment in the mid-2010s when it felt like you couldn't move without hearing the dull fuckers.
Anyone want to do Idles next? Oh, and I've still not listened to enough Mitski to decide if I think she's over-rated or if she actually is as good as everyone says she is.

I mean I like them and being musically shit is probably part of it but Minor Threat full short of their reputation. Totally forgettable and probably provide the weaker part of Fugazi.

 

[Knotted]

I think the way to analyse music is to ask the questions a) what is going on in it b) why is it working or not? and in particular c) if it's popular why is it working for people? If you're asking the question is it meeting a certain standard? eg. is the singer hitting the notes or whether opining about whether it does anything for you then you aren't saying anything very interesting.

Just with respect to Beefheart, the blues tradition he was obsessed with doesn't emphasise vocal accuracy but does emphasise gritty delivery see



Or



Though it should be said Beefheart was a lazy, cocky sob who wouldn't bother with rehearsals while the Magic Band practiced day and night. I think this is sometimes to the detriment to the music see Spotlight Kid (the song) where the band are playing way too slow just so he could keep up.

 

[hitmouse]

I mean I like them and being musically shit is probably part of it but Minor Threat full short of their reputation. Totally forgettable and probably provide the weaker part of Fugazi.

I suppose that another big part of this is that a band can be meh on record but amazing live, which I think is often the case with punk and hardcore, just like there's a lot of dance music that might be boring if you're not dancing to it.

 

[Kaka Tim]

I also never got the hype around Sigue Sigue Sputnik

Tony James is 70.

I recall that everyone thought they were shit at the time. The hype came from the band themsevles and a couple of thier hack mates in the music press.

 

[petee]

Because he was an abusive psycho who wouldn't let them leave?

he was an abusive psycho, but alot of those players stayed with him for his next records and they had substantial careers afterwards. i also think they knew they were creating something legendary (which it is - i'm not saying it's all good, but the album is a legend).

that BBC documentary is fascinating.

 

[Gerry1time]

I always thought the strokes sounded like someone’s first attempt at a band hastily put together for their sixth form battle of the bands competition.

 

[RainbowTown]

If you’re talking about groups or artists where the “actual product is way behind their relevance/importance” then for me it’s The Beach Boys. A handful of OK tunes, some decent harmonies and clever production values, but other than that, all very twee-like and vanilla and pretty forgettable. Very overrated group I think.

 

[stavros]

Here's a hypothesis I'm sure I've posted on here before, but will do so again anyway: an early death can assist reputational status.

Compare Lennon and McCartney, and public perceptions of the people, rather than the music. You could also compare the RIPs to their living contemporaries, e.g. Notorious BIG vs Nas, Nirvana vs Fugazi, Marvin Gaye vs Curtis Mayfield, and suggest that those that died young-ish have more legendary statuses.

There are exceptions: I'd say Aaliyah's output was better than Beyonce's, yet she's not hugely remembered outside RnB-watchers.

 

[Spandex]

pretty much agree with the OP about the New York Dolls. And - at the risk of starting a shooting war - Id put the Ramones in the same sort of box - their impact and importance is significently geater than the actual quaility. By "Quality" - well music deifneintly does not have to be complex or demand a high degree of technical skill to be interesting, but I dont find the Ramones have anything very interesting going on- theres not much in the way of compelling musical dynamics or killer guitar lines or sonic imagintation - and for me there just arent any really stand out songs. There is not much charisma/personailty in the singing. The lyrics do a job without having any zingers.
Compare with the Pistols - whilst musically the pistols arugably had a bit more going on - what really hits home is Johnny Rotten's voice and delivary as he snarls out the incendiary lyrics like a man posessed - its cuts through like napalm on Bodies, Holiday in the Sun, God Save the Queen. In a "blind test" - Id imagine the pistols would still very much stand out. I can still remember standing open mouthed the first time I heard the "fuck this and fuck that" bit on Bodies.
Or you could compare The Ramones to their CGBG contemparies - Talking Heads, Blondie, Television - and again,without the context, they seem even less interesting.

You're talking crazy talk.

The Ramones are a pure rush of energy, basic rock'n'roll played fast, an exemplar of technicality and ability not mattering, chuggachuggachugga + catchy shout along chants for choruses. Blitzkrieg Bop, I Wanna Be Sedated, Sheena is a Punk. Strip away any cultural significance, the history, the personalities (such as The Ramones even had recognisible personalities), all the baggage and there's a bunch of excellent tunes that put a smile on my face and make me want to jump up and down.

And that's the problem with this topic: music is so subjective, one person's drab and dreary is another person's heart stopping awesome.

 

[mojo pixy]

And that's the problem with this topic: music is so subjective, one person's drab and dreary is another person's heart stopping awesome.

Yes, but in a way also no because if an act is massive, there are so many possible reasons why that don't relate to the actual music they write and play. Almost anyone could take the chords C G Am F and fashion a stirring tune around them. The number of "great songs" that use exactly those chords is insane, but most of them would probably end up in this little big reputation but musically shite group because most people recognize that beyond taste and preference and musical style and subjectivity, there's probably more to really great music than a couple of 8-bar phrases repeated over and over till you can't forget them (viz. Nirvana)

 

[Ming]

One of my favourite bands, play them most weeks.

Saw them at Hammersmith Odeon in1979 just as Communique was released, they played both albums and were utterly awesome. Saw them again in Berlin in 20th May 1981 at the Eissporthalle. Brothers in arms was both a cracking track and a cracking album, it was the end of their creativity really, unfortunately.

For the duds list:

Genesis
Supertramp
Zappa

Zappa totally. I love his pioneering approach to the DIY business approach which i suspect had a big influence on US indie punk but the music is shite. Hard to play shite.

And i've expressed this other opinion to other players (especially guitarists)...i think Hendrix isn't very good either. Give me Van Halen as a game changing guitarist any day.