Most overrated bands ever?

[scottsy]

Well, that really wasn't my point... It just sounded like something i already knew and loved, so why should i find it interesting? They just really lacked any real bite for me, and their similarity to other people's sound was probably part of it...


... and if you think I am one of those arrogant people who insist music has to be absolutely unique before I'll listen to it, well...


I just finished defending Coldplay on another board....lol...

[boo boo]

Originally Posted by Rainard Jalen

I completely agree. Absolutely terrible band, the most exaggerated, overblown ridiculous rubbish I've honestly ever heard in my life. And it's also some of the most unashamedly pretentious music that's ever been created. I don't get why fans of prog or any other genre eat this stuff up as they do, but then, I suppose logic has little to do with it. To each their own. But for my part, I can't really find a word to describe the disgust with which this band fills me.

For a moment there I thought you were talking about Deerhoof.

[jackhammer]

Arcade Fire...WTF? They have a couple of OK tracks but they just don't do it for me.
Manic Street Preachers- The Holy Bible does nothing for me at all.
Elliot Smith-he was a songwriter who wore his heart on his sleeve? Welcome to the talented deceased solo artist gallery. Many members but very few true greats.

[sleepy jack]

Originally Posted by jackhammer

Elliot Smith-he was a songwriter who wore his heart on his sleeve? Welcome to the talented deceased solo artist gallery. Many members but very few true greats.

Says the Jeff Buckley fan - someone who you consider "great" but only released one album before drowning himself to Led Zeppelin (I'd do the same if I was in his boots though.) Don't you think the irony is far too thick here? Dismissing Elliott Smith off as just another singer/songwriter is absurd when he's far more talented then basically every singer/songwriter your fan of (e.g. John Martyn, Bon Iver) is just retarded. At the end of his career he was producing his own albums, playing virtually all the instruments (occasionally he had a guest, like on Coast to Coast but he could play drums by himself if he had pleased) and crafting songs as intimate and real as air - your post is not only ignorant but just plain fucking stupid.

[boo boo]

Originally Posted by jackhammer

Arcade Fire...WTF? They have a couple of OK tracks but they just don't do it for me.
Manic Street Preachers- The Holy Bible does nothing for me at all.
Elliot Smith-he was a songwriter who wore his heart on his sleeve? Welcome to the talented deceased solo artist gallery. Many members but very few true greats.

I agree with you very much on these. Funeral is a good album, and for a modern indie band to make music I actually like is a grand achievement in itself. But overall I don't get the hype, especially when Rolling Stone said they are surpassing Radiohead as our most important modern band. That I REALLY don't agree with.

The Holy Bible is great, but Manic Street Preachers used to be THE most popular band on the DDD forum, and that really bugged me. Besides, what have they done after The Holy Bible?....... Exactly. Not to mention, Nicky Wire is currently the biggest c*nt and most talentless hack in the music industry. Sorry Pete Doherty.

Elliot Smith? A very talented songwriter who indeed died way too soon. But one of the top 10 best songwriters ever? And a great guitarist? I never got that.

[sleepy jack]

Yeah but you don't really listen to folk or understand that it's a different approach to playing guitar than Gilmoure - this is evident by you trashing Nick Drake and dismissing most acoustic guitarists as "bad."

[Inuzuka Skysword]

Elliot Smith-he was a songwriter who wore his heart on his sleeve? Welcome to the talented deceased solo artist gallery. Many members but very few true greats.

Elliott Smith has just as much passion as John Martyn has which is why I don't understand this comment. Someone doesn't have to be completely groundbreaking or original to be great either. In fact, tons of original bands are considered horrible despite the fact that they are truly original. Elliott Smith puts out something different every album, starting off with the indie folk stuff and then going on to heavily layered rock music. He is by far one of the best lyricists I have ever known and he is actually pretty damn intelligent (Either/Or being a reference to Kierkegaard).

I mean, maybe he shouldn't be called a "great guitarist" but what in the hell does that term mean anyways. Who cares how great of a guitar player you are? Shouldn't the main focus just be what comes out of the speaker? "Great guitarist" no, but Elliott Smith is great at making passionate music.

Of course, you know I am not into all the indie **** that is over-hyped. I dislike the Arcade Fire a lot and find them extremely boring. Never really heard enough of Maniac Street Preachers.

[boo boo]

Originally Posted by sleepy jack

Yeah but you don't really listen to folk or understand that it's a different approach to playing guitar than Gilmoure - this is evident by you trashing Nick Drake and dismissing most acoustic guitarists as "bad."

Since when have I said most acoustic guitarists are bad? There certainly are great acoustic guitarists. But I consider them to be guys like Michael Hedges, Phil Keaggy, Steve Hackett and Leo Kottke. I don't think Smith is in their league at all, granted it's a different style. But his is not a very guitar oriented style and I think if you consider him an excellent guitarist, you should consider Kurt Cobain one too.

Now you could say I'm biased against less technical guitarists, but since you brought up Gilmour, he's far from a technical guitarist. And my personal top 30 includes people like D Boon, Billy Corgan, Kevin Shields and Jonny Greenwood so that's not it either.

He's indeed a good guitarist. But so are most good singer/songwriters, Jeff Buckley was a really good guitarist as a matter of fact. I don't see how Smith stood out in any significant way as a guitarist. It's not because he's simple, Neil Young is simple (and sloppy) yet he's one of my favorite guitarists. But I can recognise Young's guitar playing when I hear it. When I hear Smith, if it weren't for his unique voice, I could confuse his guitar playing with any of the vast amounts of other folk singer/songwriters.

It's just my opinion though. And considering that the man behind King Arthur on Ice is one of my musical idols, you probably shouldn't take my opinions too seriously.

[sleepy jack]

Originally Posted by boo boo

Since when have I said most acoustic guitarists are bad? There certainly are great acoustic guitarists. But I consider them to be guys like Michael Hedges, Phil Keaggy, Steve Hackett and Leo Kottke. I don't think Smith is in their league at all, granted it's a different style. But his is not a very guitar oriented style and I think if you consider him an excellent guitarist, you should consider Kurt Cobain one too.

Now you could say I'm biased against less technical guitarists, but since you brought up Gilmour, he's far from a technical guitarist. And my personal top 30 includes people like D Boon, Billy Corgan, Kevin Shields and Jonny Greenwood so that's not it either.

He's indeed a good guitarist. But so are most good singer/songwriters, Jeff Buckley was a really good guitarist as a matter of fact. I don't see how Smith stood out in any significant way as a guitarist. It's not because he's simple, Neil Young is simple (and sloppy) yet he's one of my favorite guitarists. But I can recognise Young's guitar playing when I hear it. When I hear Smith, if it weren't for his unique voice, I could confuse his guitar playing with any of the vast amounts of other folk singer/songwriters.

It's just my opinion though. And considering that the man behind King Arthur on Ice is one of my musical idols, you probably shouldn't take my opinions too seriously.

Your entire post makes no sense as an argument. You compare Elliott Smith to Kurt Cobain...as guitarists? And then you acknowledge the fact that all your favorite acoustic guitar players are stylistically dissimilar to Smith - meaning they're not logically comparable. You then go on to talk about more guitarists like Neil Young who is far different from Smith and Jeff Buckley who is far different than both of them. Why even add in all that? It isn't relevant.

What is relevant is you saying he's easy to confuse with other acoustic guitarists - who? I can't think of many guitarists who, when he's plugged, are as lush in their arrangements/melodies as him - barring George Harrison but it's easy to distinguish the difference there because of how Smith approaches music - and when it comes to acoustic guitars I can understand saying you can't differentiate him from anyone else but who is anyone else? Also I don't see how you can say guitar isn't important in Elliott Smith's music...seeing as it's the only instrument in the majority of his songs.

[Thrice]

I would take Bon Iver over Elliot Smith anyday, but not for talent reasons, just because he hits me where it counts better, but wouldnt take him over the other E. Smith