Yes! I watched a live DVD and Springsteen was seemingly soloing his ass off while doing his best guitar faces and, and... nothing. It was weird to tell you the truth.
Crikey, I forgot about him! He had some good songs early on, but that's it. The only thing he truly was a master of, was overstaying his wellcome. He used to be on stage for four hours, didn't he... I can't fathom how people were able to endure that, but they clearly did... totally unfathomable.
Darkness was grunge decades early, lyrically far superior to anything the progs laid down. No fairy dust or roundabouts. Nebraska as mean a statement as a performer has offered this side of Skip James or Johnson himself.
To be fair, I think Queen was pretty innovative and experimental combining hard rock with influences from opera, music theater, ragtime, disco, folk etc. The way they orchestrated their music in the studio, mimicked instruments like woodwinds with the guitar or acapella... I think they were more progressive and certainly more unique than most prog-by-numbers bands of the 80's.
I agree, but I still think they’re overrated. Queen has become one of those bands where the reputation has become so outrageously huge that *any* band would be unable to match it. They were, imo, fantastic. But, the way people talk about them is ridiculous.
@@6li8storm40 I agree also . They have become this pop culture greatest band of all time . People constantly say Freddie was the best singer ever in rock . When singers like Rob Halford , Geoff Tate were far more talented than him . Queen was a good band . no doubt . But not to the level they have been placed by critics , and that movie that soared them to iconic status with new fans , as this greatest rock band ever .
They have a drummer who can’t drum, a guitarist who doesn’t know how to rock, a competent bassist who quit years ago, and a front man with a good voice but zero stagecraft. Way overrated in my opinion.
Given Marillion were never on the radar of the general population, kind of hard to say they are overrated. They are a band that got better with every record Fish recorded and became a different band with Hogarth.
IN 1983/4 they were literally one of the very biggest bands in Europe. I'm an American with a mother from Wales. She and my dad visited UK in 1984 and said Marillion t-shirts, posters and such were EVERYWHERE. My mother brought me back a t-shirt, which was impossible to find in the states in that time. They were absolutely huge.
Very concise summary, mate 👍 And yes, Fish and H make for a really huge difference. Love to hear Steve and Mark occasionally still chasing each other in what I consider the band's hallmark lead and solo lines. If you take songwriting and storytelling into account, this ranking might have taken a different turn. Fish and Roger Waters always did great lyrics IMHO, irrespective of any political statements in the latter case.
I liked Queen alot …when I was in grade 6. I thought ‘we are the Champions’ was ‘real rock’! :). Then I grew up and quickly moved on to alot of rock and metal I like better - and still do in my 50’s. There was a brief second to look at them again when Waynes World came out and the stoners in the car with Mike Myers all banged their heads in unison to Bohemian Rhapsody. But I quickly lost interest again. Then Freddie got Aids and passed away, and they had another brief renaissance. I moved on. Then recently, they got a movie made of their careers. Ugh!! I wish all bands got this kind of media exposure (excluding the AIDS thing of course). If the mass media pushes you - you will get big. Simple as that.
Reworded- "I used to think queen were 'proper' music for people with discerning taste, then I realized they were music for the common peasants." In other words you're a snob.
@@RB-oc7ti Through Queen's whole career they were hated by the press and the mass media. Queen never fitted in any of their boxes. Especially Freddie Mercury.
To sum up: 10. You only like them cause he's dead. 9. You only like them cause you're stoned. 8. You only like them cause he was in a better band. 7. You only like them cause of the clothes and makeup. 6. You only like them cause they take drugs. 5. You only like them cause of one album. 4. You only like them cause a critic said you should. 3. You only like them cause you haven't heard my band. 2. You only like them cause you've only heard the singles. 1. You only like them cause of one guy who wasn't in it for very long.
Normally people would include U2, Creed, Nickelback, and Greenday when talking about overrated bands. I'm now curious what your thoughts on them would be.
Green Day. Good point. I did/do consider listening to them more ... maybe even purchase an album. But, I was shocked when they got in the Rock Hall. Already?!
@@BruceWalther-s2l Strangely enough, I don't think any of them are overrated, given how many people flat out hate them. I just find it interesting that Andy Edwards is the only one I've seen who didn't include them in his list. As for me, I think Ghost is overrated. No hate against them. Aside from one song, nothing interesting grabs my attention.
@@BruceWalther-s2l I wouldn't be too shocked about the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, it's a joke now. What's in there despite other great bands which have been left out gives that place no credibility anymore, and that's been a while.
I’m American and was in love with “Misplaced Childhood” when I was a teenager. I thought they had a major Pink Floyd influence, a great vocalist in Fish and many of the songs had emotional resonance.
I think Marillion are an excellent band. I think they are the opposite of overrated- they have always been considered deeply unfashionable and as a PG Genesis/Floyd hybrid clone and the only people who tend to rave about them are the small cult of the neo prog loving IT guys that Andy likes to talk about and middle aged Scottish blokes who worship Fish. Marillion are hardly hyped in the mainstream or even by self-styled ‘prog connoisseurs’ so I don’t agree with this idea of them being overrated at all.
You know how everyone says without the Beatles there'd never have been any other rock band? Without Marillion, there'd never have been any other neo-prog band. IQ, Pallas, Pendragon and co. would have remained unknown and Andy would have remained the resident drummer at the Boilermaker's Club.
@@jimmycampbell78 clearly, they're rated here among prog fans, but I'm with Andy, the reaction people should have had was akin to Beavis and Butthead scowling at a lame music video. It's very light in the loafers type music.
For me the most overrated band is Led Zeppelin. Yeah yeah, I know they were directly and indirectly very influential and prior to them hard rock was a fairly amorphous genre. They managed to distil the essence of it and make it more punchy. I spent most of my late teen years trying to appreciate them, and I've heard all their records many times. But Page is a sloppy guitarist, Plant lost his voice halfway through their career. Bonham is a powerful drummer but I don't listen to a band for drums. Like most people drum solos on live albums are to be skipped, not played. *But it's the plagiarism that really is the sore point* . I'd estimate about 70% of the debut is either based on other people's songs (like Dazed or Confused) or they're blatant rip offs, like Black Mountain Side. The plagiarism continues on and off for most of their career. Even the riff to Whole Lotta Love appears in Hey Joe covered by Hendrix two years earlier. And really I can't understand why anyone would want to listen to a muddy sounding stodgy blues rip off like The Lemon Song in today's age. I wouldn't care so much but all my life I've had people say that Led Zeppelin are the greatest rock band of all time, or the greatest band of all time. Such excessive praise seems unjustified when they relied so much on other people's music for their success. I refuse to bow down before them as musical gods. That's objectively why I think they're overrated. I don't really like them for some subjective reasons. The guitar tone- it's thin, scratchy and cold sounding. For a supposedly heavy rock band I find the guitar unsatisfying. I much preferred Black Sabbath and even earlier bands like Cream and Hendrix I find have a heavier, beefier guitar tone. I just hate those hippy-ish acoustic songs they did. And the fans are really annoying.
I agree with half of what you're saying. True, Zep ripped off a lot of other songs. But they did them better. You may not care about drums but Bonham influenced every drummer who followed. Page can be sloppy and he can be brilliant. John Paul Jones is a monster bass player and overall musical talent. And on that first album Plant is ungodly. Yes, he lost those high notes and was never had beautiful voice so I'd say he's been overrated as a singer in his later years. In fact, I think the last three Zep albums were all forgettable. But you can not refute that they were the first super group of musicians. Like them or not, they are significant.
One thing that makes Zeppelin awful for me is their delusional, semi-ignorant fan base. They're the least knowledgeable music devotees on the planet and seem to think music started with their band.
Musically, I wouldn't say they're "overrated." I think it's an exaggeration. It is undoubtedly true that their admirers, whom I refer to as "LZ Evangicals," are essentially fanatics who resemble cult members. There is no "before LZ" or "after LZ" for them. Essentially, LZ created the musical earth, or it was the "big bang" in music! After them, it's all downhill. People don't talk about it because it's just secondary decoration in rock music, but the lyrics in that band's songs, which were "composed" by R. Plant, are their largest flaw. There is nothing to understand in these tunes. Almost all of their lyrics (not all) are a collection of words with no unifying meaning. After several decades of listening to the songs, I still don't understand what Plant is saying in Stairway to Heaven. The same goes with Black Dog (why is the title Black Dog?) Let us not discuss about Kashmir. It's all word salad. Even a hieroglyph specialist would be unable to interpret the significance of these aborted images. I hardly exaggerate! The other weakness is Plant's signing. He is good at screaming but not singing. Is there any tremolo (or vibrato) by Plant on any of the LZ albums?! Imagine R. Plant singing I Want to Know What Love Is or Piano Man!
23:50 I think you can partially blame The Beatles themselves for that comparison. They were constantly praising The Beach Boys, and listing them as a huge influence on their music, etc, etc.
I actually like early U2 and saw them live, playing with Big Audio Dynamite and Public Enemy back in the '80's. Great concert! But I have to agree; I thought they'd be on this list.
I thought that the Rolling Stones would be n°1. I mean, they were (self-)declared in 1970 as "the greatest rock 'n' roll band in the world", simply because the Beatles had broken up, and 54 years later they're still billed like that . Yet they've been playing more or less the same songs on stage for decades and the most famous thing they've released since then is their logo. They flood the market with countless approximate live albums with nearly the same setlists to compensate for the disappointment caused by each release of a new studio album. The poverty of their production has been excused for 50 years just because they are the Roling Stones, meant to be "the greatest rock 'n' roll band in the world". Which in my opinion they never were, not even in 1970. Otherwise you talk about the Grateful Dead comparing them to other groups, but I think their main "competitor" was the Allman Brothers Band, even if I believe they were on good terms. The ABB didn't produce only great albums and had down periods, but when they were in good form they were inaccessible on stage, regardless of line-up and even in their later years. They never considered themselves a jam band, but their ability to improvise worked wonders. Moreover, it's the only band among which 4 members have been ranked among the 100 greatest guitarists of all time by Rolling Stone Magazine.
Radiohead on my list not due to anything about the band, just that some superfans seem to think of them as history-altering geniuses in a way that I can't call anything but overrating.
Yeah, Radiohead for sure. Of course, the last time I wrote that in a comment section, I get the crazies on me... I mean Rock was dead before they even made an album... They're fine, but rather mid with bright moments.
I think Radiohead are the most impressive band to have ever done it. They are constantly reinventing themselves. Mainstream rock starts to copy them and they’ve already move on. The latest The Smile album, which is basically a Radiohead album under a different name has been such a breath of fresh air.
I find Thom York's singing intolerable, his politics (which wouldn't matter if I hadn't ran into them) intolerable and the band kind of derivative. Running average prog tropes over drum & bass isn't a bad idea, but I'm not blown away or anything. They'd make my list. Frankly, this list features a few more that really get under my skin too- there's some shared prerogatives here.
I laughed through most of this. And I totally agree with the majority of it. Queen failed miserably for me after Night at the Opera. They eventually joined a batch of good/great 70s bands and artists that just went for the mainstream money in the 80s. For me, artists like Aerosmith, Heart, Yes, Elton John, Queen, ZZ Top, Van Hagar, Chicago, Fleetwood Mac, Genesis, Rod Stewart were all safer and extremely boring in the 80s. How do you compare "I Want to Break Free" to "Stone Cold Crazy"? "These Dreams" to "Barracuda"? "Baby What a Big Surprise" to "Make Me Smile"? "Legs" to "Jesus just Left Chicago"? "When It's Love" to "Mean Streets"? "Invisible Touch" to even a song like "Blood on the Rooftops"? It was rough listening 70s bands in the 80s FOR ME.
It is too silly to compare the music in the 70s and 80s. Every decade had/has its changes and its beauty. You need to have ears to find this beauty. Obviously you can't. "Queen failed miserably for me ... went for the mainstream money in the 80s.". This sentence can only show how bad you know Queen history. Queen members became millionaires already in 1977/1978 after their grandiose tour through US, Canada, Europe and Japan. Mainstream money? Bullshit. There was no one band in the 80s who played or sounded like Queen.
10) New Order. I agree that they brought an element of dance music to New Wave. I became a full Metalhead around 1982 or so, but still liked New Order. 9) Grateful Dead. An old friend put it best when he said the Grateful Dead are overrated in terms of their following, but underrated when we're talking about the musicianship. I'm an American with British sensibilities and I like old Status Quo. 8l) I liked a couple of songs early on and I like their Van Halen covers and I thought it was cool of him to invite Rick Astley to jam with them onstage. 7) I like early Kiss. I liked them when I was a kid in the 70s.i stayed home the Saturday Night that NBC aired ",Kiss Meet The Phantom Of The Park" and liked it. My mentor got me the Peter Criss solo album and I liked it. 6) Motley Crue. I liked the first 2 albums, Too Fast For Love and Shout At The Devil were really good. 5) I have no love for Guns.N Roses at all. I heard heavier music on a Bay City Rollers. David Lee Roth was mind blowing. I would be mind blowing,too if I had Steve Vai for a guitarist and Billy Sheehan for a bassist. 4) Beach Boys. I thought Pet Sounds was overrated. The Beach Boys played a free concert in my neighborhood because a guy in my town.is a Billionaire and a Beach Boys fan so he paid them $10,000. 3) I love old Marillion. They never got any love here in the US. "Kayleigh" was a modest hit here, but nothing else. I didn't give them a chance when Fish left. You mentioned Marillion copying Genesis and Greta Van Fleet copying Led Zeppelin, but there was a band in the late 80s called Kingdom Come. They played a Monsters Of Rock tour in 1988 with Van Hagar, Metallica, Scorpions and Dokken. 2) Queen. They are big because of revisionist history. No one ever thought about their Live Aid show until around the time the Bohemian Rhapsody film came out. Before then they were up there with the Black Sabbath reunion and the David Bowie and Mick Jagger video for Dancing In The Streets. 1) pink Floyd. I only like the Pink Floyd material with Roger Waters. I loved the film version of The Wall as well as Pink Floyd Live in Pompeii. An interesting story ; My best friend had a boyfriend who was stricken by a car while crossing a road. When he was in the trauma room, the stereo was playing The Wall. He knew very little about Pink Floyd , but he knew Another Brick In The Wall Part 2. He said that a .guy wearing a plain Black t shirt and Jeans and haid dark Brown shoulder length hair. He was as real as the doctors. Flash forward 7 years, he and my best friend come to visit. I had Pink Floyd Live At Pompeii on DVD was playing. The boyfriend saw Roger Waters on the screen and looked like he saw a ghost. He pointed out Waters, saying that that was the guy in the trauma room. 2)
I don't like ragging on bands, especially because something I don't like could be someone else's favourite, but yes definitely not keen on Coldplay! Too much like U2 for me, and I'm not really keen on U2 but fair play to people who are. They're Marmite bands, Kiss, Mötley Crüe and G'n'R are also Marmite
i have but haven't filmed it yet but you can have a peak 1 Pink Floyd 2 Pink Floyd 3 Pink Floyd 4 Pink Floyd 5 Pink Floyd 6 Pink Floyd 7 Pink Floyd 8 Pink Floyd 9 Pink Floyd 10 Joy Division
Consider this about the Grateful Dead: your perspective is skewed towards the early days when they didn’t turn you on. They started as a psychedelic party band with a mixed bag of talent in the ‘60s, then, blues, Americana, , jazz fusion, then rock/pop, all owing to various influences that stayed with him… and turn them into arguably the most innovative and technically sophisticated bands in terms of composition and improvisation. I won’t write a Wikipedia entry here, but just keep it in mind. And assuming you’re not into straightahead, rock and improvisation, maybe listen to some of the tunes from Blues for Allah tracks like Help on the Way > Slipknot… or find a dead head, who you know and who knows you to recommend some of the best live shows you might relate to. Band was essentially live and studio work was secondary to them.
"and turn them into arguably the most innovative and technically sophisticated bands in terms of composition and improvisation." I see Deadheads try to get away with this line. It's not even ballpark. Just a big ole bag of "nope".
@@colinburroughs9871 We could argue our lives away on this! Just know I’m a music head (probably like you) and not a Deadhead or exclusive jamband type.
I’ve sampled Grateful Dead tracks from throughout their history. I forced myself to sit through a couple of long sessions listening to live recordings. Searching for something good there. I’m not denying the fact that they created a huge following, and that people love the community and the dancing at the shows, etc. But they always remained a sloppy, not very good band.
@@Jeff664Nah. Actually, technically, a very good band. I think you're mistaking their 'sloppiness' with improvisation and innovation. They were never going to be Steely Dan for slickness and tightness. The jazzers at the time like Ornette Coleman and Bradford Marsalis played with them on stage and Miles Davis was a fan which, I think, says something.
I’d almost agree, but Appetite is one of the greatest hard rock albums of the 80’s. It really changed the scene and snd the songs are punky and rock. Plus they’re still touring off those songs.
Ya never saw nirvana live right before they broke big. Saw them three times before they broke huge. The whole place was on fire with buzz all over your body. It was over the top thst little heroin addict could channel so much energy. It felt like the roof was going to blow off. There were no cell phones. It was wild. That dude 😅 could scream that guttural roar beyond what’s human. It was an event that was mind blowing. It was like witnessing a live birth, a snuff film, atomic war in three minute, Christ raising from the dead and getting his head blown off then walking off unusually alive. Usually. It was a what did I just see. We’d drive five hours to see them. It’s was heroic and dangerous. Like seeing Guns N’ Roses 87-88. They didn’t like each other but they had an insane intensity… it’s called you had to be there live in person to get what was going on.
When I discovered KISS in high school, I disliked them immediately and couldn't wrap my head around their fame and massive following. Andy, you nailed it. Gene Simmons was especially a master of marketing. KISS even started selling their own condoms at one point! They are the Rock Kings of "The Brand," but their music is absolute garbage. I agree with you on The Grateful Dead, although I happen to appreciate a lot of their music, at least during the early days prior to 1980 and the immersion of bands into things like Disco and New Wave. Yet, as good as they were, I believe The Grateful Dead were totally overrated. Probably why Jerry retreated from the spotlight eventually - he was just a regular dude who happened to be a very skilled guitarist and songwriter, who didn't want all the fame and noise out there, he preferred to just be a valued member of a fun rock band. As usual, you nailed this one Andy!! Cheers, mate ☺
The funny thing about KISS is that they are basically the definition of "sellout", but somehow people still respect them. They are like the most anti-rock rock band. I actually think they have some great songs. They have a lot of filler, but especially Destroyer and Creatures are IMO pretty good albums.
I remember seeing the first Kiss album on 8-Track in a record store when it came out. I thought they must be a progressive rock band. A lot of the prog rock bands had theatrical elements in the 1970's so I thought they must sound like Genesis or Jethro Tull or Yes or something. A few weeks later I bought the album thinking it would be something like Thick as a Brick or Close to the Edge or Dark Side of the Moon. As soon as it started playing I thought there must have been a mistake. Maybe they put the wrong record in the sleeve...I got ripped off.
Queen as an overated ROCK band? Okay, I can see that. But as an overated BAND? Nah. Imaginative, unique and versatile as any great band. Chemistry too.
Justin Panariello did a discography overview of Queen from their debut up through 'The Game'. The takeaway was that they're not as good a rock band as people think they are (they do seem to have had an intense following in the UK for their live shows), although Freddie Mercury was hands down one of the greatest rock singers ever.
In the music industry, “good” bands are the ones that can influence societal framework. Most of these bands are no better than any other bands, but pop music is a psyop so these are the bands we get.
Kiss being overrated is obvious but that is part of the escence of the band, the way the band was planned, being created as an overrated band from their inception is part of their charm. Still they manage to have great songs with cool guitar, bass and drum parts that everyone can recognize.
@davidbradley2294 Of courrse, but any band would kill to have a War Machine, an Unholy, a Black Diamond,a God of thunder, or a Detroit Rock City in their catalog.
I don't pledge pledge allegiance to any band whatsoever (well, maybe King Crimson and Black Flag), but the first 5 or 6 Kiss albums are really, really good. And it was fresh, too. They took classic 60's and 70's rock/hard rock and stripped down of its folky, trippy elements and delivered pure, undiluted rock n roll..
I don't think Pink Floyd is overrated: I think they are such a big anomaly in the history of rock that it cannot be analyzed in the same way as other bands. Their first works were a search, an experimentation that bore fruit with: dark side Wywh animals the wall I mean, they weren't trying to be "good" with the other albums or sell millions, so they shouldn't be compared to those 4 masterpieces. By the way, 4 albums for which all the other bands in the world - except for The Beatles - WOULD KILL. The piper needs another chapter, for obvious reasons
Piper es una obra maestra, al nivel de las cuatro que has mencionado, solo que suena diferente. Los fanaticos del sonido clasico de la banda en los 70 discriminan el disco. Algunos hasta cometen la estupidez musical de valorar mas discos de bajo perfil como more, obscured by clouds o a momentary lapse of reason, por encima del Piper. Para mi, eso es fanatismo. Ojk man, no te gusta el sonido, te gusta mas el sonido de david gilmour con waters comnponiendo, que el de Barrett, pero cada cancion del Piper tiene algun secrretito musical oculto entre las capas de exoperimntacion, que es muy dificil captar a la primera escucha, pñero que vasa caprtando poco a poco. El disco te envuelve como una telaraña si lesa das varias oportunidades... y es popsiblemente la cosa mas original que haya salido de la inglaterra de lios años 60. Años luz por encima de sus coetaneos ingleses... es una opinion generalizada de la critica musical, no algo que me haya inventado yo. Es un disco MUY CASTIGADO en general por los fanaticos del pink floyd de los 70. Ellos buscan el mismo sioniodo de los que se hiciero9n fans y no van a encontrarlo. Hay que abordarlo dede otro prisma diferente, quizas incluso como una banda diferente. Y realmente casi lo era. Hasta rick wright cambio su estilo al teclado y el piano cuando barrett desaparecio. El saucerful of secrets es un disco de transicion entre las dos bandas distintas... Yo lo veo asi. Luego es unaestupidez decir que gilmour sustituyo a barrett... el que sustituyo a barrett como fueraza creativa fue roger waters. El perfil de david gilmour en pink floyd era mas de ejecutor de ideas ajenas que de fuerza creativa. Waters fue el que tomo el testigo de syd barrett. ademas si te das cuenta en el disco a saucerful of secrets la importancia de la guitarra es casi nula... el bajo y el teclado se imponen sobre ella. a david gilmour le costo ecnontrar su sitio en la banda. tampoco fue inmediato.
@@aprendizdebrujo100 Si, concuerdo con lo que apuntas. Por eso decía que Piper merece un capítulo aparte, ya que es un gran álbum, pero con la formación inicial de la banda y el liderazgo creativo de Barret.No tiene nada que ver con lo que vino después.Piper tiene canciones que me encantan.
Brian Wilson was 23 when he wrote and recorded Pet Sounds. After that they released the albums Surf’s Up and Sunflowers. Both amazing albums. The reason the Beach Boys have released some dross after that is because Brian Wilson basically went insane and, after a brief pretty good interlude led by Carl Wilson, Mike Love took over and he wanted to keep the Beach Boys as a nostalgia band and Brian didn’t have the energy, inclination or ability to stop him as he had basically left the group and only made fleeting appearances with them. But most of their work up until the early 70s was very good.
Marillion?!?!?! Say what you want about their music (I think it’s great), but it’s literally not possible for a band that has to crowdfund its albums to be considered “over-rated”.
The only way you could ever even fathom that Marillion are overrated are if you are either Mick Pointer or someone from IQ. Otherwise it's a very strange take. Marillion are underground heroes in any line-up.
Marillion is 3rate Genesis. Same with Gentle Giant, which meens they were good bands. We never speak about the hundreds and hundreds of bands who strived so hard to make it and never made it. So 3rate is not as derrogative as it may sound. It is just not the top.
I remember Marillion literally funding a tour by asking fans to donate money and let them stay at their houses during the tour. I don't think there is any possible way to over rate a band that most people would say "didn't they have a song in the eighties"? And most likely most couldn't even name the band, they'd just recognize the one song they had a hit with. Clutching at Straws in MY opinion is the greatest concept album ever done. It beats The Wall, The Lamb, and even Amused to Death. The lyrics and melodies are out of this world, and I say that as somebody that pretty much wrote them off after that, so its not like I"m ranking it that highly because I"m a 'fan'. So I don't think you can over rate a band that most people have no idea existed. At a local reseller they've had the Script for a Jesters Tear in vinyl newly wrapped for ten bucks and its been there for two years. I mentioned it to the store owner, he said 'never heard of them, crazy cover though". So I think its safe to say not only is Marillion not 'over rated', they are barely 'rated' by most of the population, and its a tragedy they aren't heard by more people when so much junk gets played. Rheostatics in Canada are like that, original, great songs, bands cite them as an influence, but can't sell an album for love or money.
Don’t agree with Clutching at straws being better than the lamb. Brave is better than clutching at straw and closer to the lamb. I do agree that Marillion were very underrated band. Superb band but not as good as Early Genesis who are the best band ever.
His opinion was somewhat clouded by the fact ‘his band(s)’ didn’t hit the limelight and holds a grudge. Most people 40+ have heard of Marillion but most people below the age of 40 have not - so I find it hard to appreciate anything he has to say about Marillion without feeling he has the green eyed monster in reference to Marillion and 80’s brief success. For the record I dislike Kayleigh for the song is most non-Marillion stuff they have done.
@@ronaldround1072 yeah Kayleigh was a bit of a Pop Chart song although in the context of Misplaced Childhood it's a great track. I don't listen to Marillion much these days but when I do the tracks are timeless. Clutching and Brave are two of my best albums. Did not really get into the later Hogarth stuff after Brave. They were a great 80's band and someone I admire.
@@ronaldround1072 No, most people over 40 have not heard of Marillion. Just like MOST people over 40 have no idea that Peter Gabriel was even IN Genesis. I do find it bizarre when people talk about musicians and sports teams like their personal taste is some moral attribute. Kayleigh I think is a nice enough song, in the context of the album it 'works' and it also helped make them some money because LOTS of poeple liked it. But you could be right, some people dislike bands BECAUSE they had a pop hit, I can sort of understand that because some people feel they are 'backing' up artists who they feel never 'sold out', despite the fact most musicians usually TRY to make music that as many people as possible like. I mentioned Rheostatics and somebody mentioned their lack of success to them and why they don't 'try' to have pop hits and their response was "Of course we're TRYING". They just don't know how. A guy asked Captain Beefheart "don't you want to have hits" and Don Van Vliet said "Of COURSE I do", and anybody listening to Captain Beefheart knows that he and the mainstream were never going to be bride and groom.
When I read all the comments here, I have the strong suspicion that everyone who doesn't like a certain band or bands uses the term "overrated" to describe them. So the term overrated is overated in itself and is used totally wrong. Music is all about personal taste.
Re: Grateful Dead's improvisation being grounded in the blues. You could say exactly the same about Cream, only more so. I've never been a blues fan so it's not a coincidence that I don't much like Cream. They were of their time, it seems to me. Whereas the Dead's music is constantly evolving with new offshoot and cover bands etc. The Dead wrote some great songs that can be interpreted (by other people) in many different ways and still sound good. And also the lyrics by dedicated lyric writers Hunter and Barlow elevated the songs even more. In my opinion... you're welcome to disagree!
I like Cream but the Grateful Dead only became amazing to me after hanging out with some deadheads. At that point I’d only heard 3-4 radio hits and didn’t think anything special. Then the heads played me their concert tapes and I became a huge fan. I was blown away by the massive library of excellent and beautiful songs: not just Dark Star but Wharf Rat, Terrapin Station, Help on the Way/Franklin’s Tower, Uncle John’s Band, That’s It for the Other One, etc. I just recently heard Live Dead and found it to be tedious; they really didn’t hit their stride until the mid 70’s! Then again if you’re into trippin, then the late 60’s were just fine.
Was there another band that can keep 20,000 people dancing for 4 hours. Louis Jordan, the Beatles, Springsteen? Maybe? A lot of the bands you rate highly can't even be danced to. Jerry Garcia is also a true guitar player's guitarist.butyou have to listen and their laid back Vibe fools you into thinking nothing is going on.
@@guywoznicki7847 Totally agree, I don't even like Live Dead. I recently listened to all the original studio and live albums in order (about 15 or so I think). And Live Dead was the one I liked least of all.
@@theshrubberer I read a book about Deep Purple by Martin Popoff and in ‘68 they briefly opened up for Cream. Ritchie Blackmore was such an impressive guitarist that the crowds would actually boo Clapton. After this happened 2-3 times Purple were dropped from the tour. I laughed because Clapton always bored me!
In my teens, I had a close, dead head english friend who had lived in LA for a while. However high we were, when he put GD on - I would turn it off. Their pieces aren't "songs". They are what happens before you have an idea for a song.
@@Dr-Curious The simple fact is that you have not listened! open your mind, open your mind Think think think think think think don’t think think think don’t think think think don’t think
@@Dr-Curious- I don’t know much about Timbaland, but I know Justin Timberlake’s best songs have Timbaland on them. “What Goes Around… Comes Around” & “Cry Me a River”. Those are some poppin’ tunes. You can hear Timbaland’s influence (and voice), but I thought of him as a producer, not a songwriter. But it’s true that many artists produced their most popular songs while they were working with Timbaland.
When Queen is great they'r near the greatest. The problem with them is that every album has filler. Some have a very significant amount of it too. I can't think of a great band that produced more filler than them. Queen was a band that all members were participating song writers. This meant everyone was fighting for credit. The fallout from that is that Brian May for example at times found songs on an album that were less interesting than some of the others. Just using Brian as an example - could have been any of the members, because they all had duds. Everyone fighting for their cut, means equal share - even if the quality is not equal share
Lots of butt hurt fanboys here. 😢Can't disagree with any of your picks except for the Beach Boys. Pet Sounds and Brian Wilson's crazy period are overrated. "God Only Knows" is overrated but not the band itself. Pink Floyd belongs at the top of the list. DSOTM is overrated. You forgot Metallica and the Eagles.
I liked the video but I cannot agree with Queen being there. I love prog but I love all their albums. Outstanding songwriters, outstanding performers, each of them. Did they write pub music? Sure, the best ever. Did they also write neo classical pieces, prog, funk, dance, heavy rock, jazz? They did everything! What didn't they do? I believe you would be hard pressed to find any band with a catalogue as diverse and as accomplished as Queen. And honestly, thank god for their recent rise in public awareness. I can't see any aspect that they lack. And to say that they are not the Mahavishnu Orchestra is just silly. They were better 😊
wow a Marillion genesis comparison, havent heard one of those for about 35 years lol, sour grapes you only played in very unsuccesful, unpopular nerdy bands that could barely fill a ford Galaxy perhaps?
Awesome list, very spot on. I think it boils down to 4 categories: Inconsistency: Their bright moments overshadow their inconsistent discography (Queen, Pink Floyd, GNR, Beach Boys) Style Over Content: The image overshadows the music (Kiss and Motley Crue) Lack of ambition: The band doesn't push boundaries their contemporaries already surpassed or at least tried to (Foo Fighters, Marillion) Overemphasized context: Bands being in the right place at the right time get mistaken for being important for the evolution of the genre. Having your lead singer dying definitely adds to the "being important"-trait (Joy Division, Greatful Dead)
Nice breakdown. I agree. I wouldn’t necessarily make the same choices, but I get where he’s coming from in these. I actually *love* Queen, but I agree that the “Freddie Mercury is a god and Queen were an unsurpassed phenomenon” stuff gets out of hand. I don’t entirely agree about Pink Floyd, but I do think they’ve got some not-so-great stuff out there.
I think even if you make the Spaghetti Incident, if you've made Appetite for Destruction then you are a great band. There is enough good stuff on Lieslieslies and Use your Illusions to show some consistency.
I had a subscription to 'Guitar Player's magazine for a number of years and shook my head in bewilderment at how many featured artists would cite KISS as their big influence. In some cases. I'd say it explained a lot. In others, I can only be glad it was not evident.
Are the Foos so prominent as to warrant potential overestimation? I never owned any of their albums, but I must admit to liking “Everlong” as a tween. 🥴
So just by definition alone this list is silly. The 10th band I never heard of, I've been a musician since I have been a musician since I was 13 and I'm now 63 and I've never heard of them, so they were absolutely not "overrated". I certainly agree The Grateful Dead is overrated, they don't write well and they are not good musicians. I agree the Foo Fighters are overrated, never got the music, never too impressed with their musicianship. And frankly I thought Nirvana was extremely overrated, Alice in Chains, Soundgarden, and STP were IMO were far better bands (again from a song writing and musicianship standpoint) from the Grunge era. Agree with the whole KISS being overrated from a music standpoint. KISS is a novelty act, not that they weren't a band that influenced a lot of people that became great musicians, but based on song writing and musicianship, KISS is overrated. I disagree with Motley Crue being on this list, from a song writing standpoint they bridged a gap between punk and heavy metal and the band has a very good groove. Musicianship...not so much. Disagree with Guns & Roses, you can't rate a band by what they turned into after they imploded, but they are absolutely not "overrated" when they were at their peak. I wouldn't argue one way or the other about the Beech Boys, never liked them, never too impressed by their writing skills, never impressed with their playing skills (the actual Beech Boys, appreciate the Wrecking Crews playing abilities), but I certainly appreciate their ability to write a hook. Just like the band listed at number 10, Marilliion is NOT A WELL KNOWN BAND! I have heard of Marillion (and a mention on The Young Ones) because they warmed up for Rush...but to say they were "overrated" is fucking ridiculous! Good players, generic progressive writing, almost completely unknown in the states...NOT OVERRATED BY DEFINITION! Totally off base with Queen being "overrated" Queen one of the top rock bands in history. Certainly they are better than Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, or several other classic rock bands, but they are closer to the top than they are to the bottom. And for the record, a majority of material from any band is "filler". Nirvana, Metallica, and Lynyrd Skynyrd ARE NOT IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM BETTER THAN QUEEN! Agree with Pink Floyd, way overrated. What was left off this list that should be on it; The WHO! The material is weak and other than Entwhistle the players are weak. Bruce Springsteen; good writer but ever single band that played his material played it better than he did. He did have decent players but they were all "sidemen" that weren't allowed to demonstrate their personality. U2; piss poor material, piss poor musicianship The Kinks; same as above Nirvana; same Poison; same
Queen queen2 and shear heart attack, day at the races, and night at the opera cannot be put in the same music box as elo, later queen stuff prob yes, but still great, elo where also the work of genius, better than today's offerings. IMHO.
I saw IQ supporting Magnum at Newcastle City Hall in December 1985, were you playing with them then? I was with you all the way here until you got to Queen and Pink Floyd, where I didn't entirely agree with your reasoning, although I can see some of the points you're making. I think you have compared Queen with bands that I would not have put in the same category, and I like and have seen several of them, as well as Queen. The Pink Floyd one is difficult. I can think of a few bands that have been influential, but who have just released too many albums, which inevitably include a lot of filler tracks or which just aren't very good. REM comes to mind as an example.
For what it's worth I saw Pendragon at the Student Union at Stirling University circa 1984/85. In 1980 or thereabouts I saw a band at what was then Kingston Polytechnic. They were more or less unknown then and never really went anywhere. What was their name? Oh Yeah! U2 😏
I often say, as someone from the San Francisco area who played drums for the New Riders of the Purple Sage in the 80’s I should have been from Great Britain as I was mainly into British bands as opposed to San Francisco area bands like the Dead. People would come up to me and ask questions about them and that’s how I learned things about them but never really into them. I do respect them and always did.
Miles Davis and Ornette Coleman both had high compliments for The Dead and Jerry in particular. Sometimes I think the rush to dismiss the Dead is simply not wanting to wade into the great tidal wave of the catalogue itself. It’s safer just to listen to a handful of vinyl and dismiss them wholesale. Whatever. At least this gives some perspective on why they haven’t been a part of Andy’s fascinating discussions on improvisation. I would suggest anyone interested in the band owes at least one complete concert a listen.
yeah I love Andy but self selecting Live Dead and then defending the choice poorly is the ultimate cop out..At least consult some people know the catalog. I don't know a single person that would recommend that album as "the one to judge"
Andy hasn't absorbed himself into the Dead, and, that's ok. It's a band that needs immersion. Still then, they're not for everyone. Andy has said his dislikes Americana, and if there is one thing they are, it is that. Love his channel and we know what he likes. I was a massive prog fan until I heard Dylan and then, thank the baby Jesus, the Dead. Dylan tuned me to lyrics that weren't talking about Any Rand, dancing fairies, or King Arthur's court. The Dead brought a wicked warmth and invitability into the extended instrumentations I loved in prog. Warm, organic, terrific songs, spectacular musicianship. The Dead were so many different bands, and so to judge them on one record is like dissing Paris because you had to pay for the loo at the Eiffel Tower.
I agree with you guys, I think if anything the Dead are under-rated. Andy is into hard rock which the Dead didn't do. But jeez, they wrote so many absolutely classic songs, I think their catalog can stand beside pretty much anyone's.
35:31 "I like Queen Bohemian Rhapsody is brilliant, Another One Bites the Dust is a great disco track..." - Lol. And here we go again! People who call Queen overrated are usually the ones who only know the Greatest Hits or some overplayed radio songs and have no clue of their 15 studio albums, but they think they can judge the band.🙂 "tHiS iS a PoP bANd! tHEy'rE noT a rOCk BAnD!" - Aaand thanks for already proving my point! ^^ For example, go and listen to their first 2 albums (you won't find any of those songs on a Greatest Hits... well, only one song) then come back and tell me how they're not a rock band... ^^
But there's nothing wrong with being a pop band. In my opinion, they just can't be tagged. They could do anything, mostly thanks to Mercury's genius, so they did. Queenifying everything they did so it would be them anyway.
A song like 'Death on two legs' nobody knows nowadays, I knew Queen for years before I heard it for the first time and it blew me away. I thought albums like Magic, The Miracle and Innuendo were brilliant. So many great songs in there. And that after so many years of being together. Roger Taylor was not really a great drummer, but the other 3 were just up their with the best, especially Bryan May. BTW I'm not even a Queen fan, hardly listen to them.
Marillion no way. Put it on the other list (underrated). They were very successful during the ending 80s, but they remained a so good band after Fish's departure. The became less successfull despite the quality of their music that improved album after album, reinventing themselves with an new awesome lead singer, Steve Hogarth (underrated singer himself). Ok I'm a fan, so I'm sensitive about such statement. Perhaps they were a little overrated during their period with Fish, selling well, making great success. But this success overshadowed the quality of their misic and skilks from their musicians (like with Genesis when Peter left), Steve Rothery desserve far more admiration as he's nearly at Gilmour's level and emotion in his playing. After Fish's departure they made many masterpieces like Season's end, Brave, Afraid of sunlight, This strange engine, Marbles, Fear, An hour before it's dark (the last one). Those albums were clearly ignored and underrated despite their qualities, but for me they were even better than their 80's albums. Pink Floyd no way. I don't develop. Millions of fans disagree. Agree with Kiss, FF, Motley Crue, G&R, Nirvana, Queen. But why not U2, Coldplay, Oasis???
I haven't even started the video but I can see Kiss are on here - we need a definition of 'overrated' then because as far as I am aware nobody in the rock media ever thought they were any good and they were (and are) treated as a bit of a joke by grownups....
Back in O.C. Calif when I was 30 my wife heard a commercial on the radio about a David Gilmour show coming up. Knowing I am a Floyd fan she called the radio station (KMET - LA, “The Mighty Met”) to get information on the concert, The DJ on live radio Cynthia Fox…. said...."Congratulations, YOU are caller number 10, YOU just won tickets to the show and the Sound Check Party before the show"... I met David Gilmour back stage. He gave us both a signed album that I have in my music room. We talked for 22 minutes. I called him…“The Master Of The Stratocaster” He smiled. I told him his music will stand the test of time with anything from Beethoven or Mozart. He smiled even bigger. I asked if I could shake both his hands that make such great guitar solos, he smiled bigger and said “Sure” and shook both hands at the same time, making a cross between us, I smiled HUGE. Hard to explain how awesome that moment was in my life. I asked him to describe his technique of playing guitar, he replied… “I strike a note, bend it, shake it and then release it”…. Yes, he does that quite well, better than any other guitarist I know. . I told him in my eyes he’s a “Legend“. He thanked me and said “Enjoy the show”…. during the concert after the song “Money” he looked right at me and said…. “On saxophone, another Legend, Mr. Raphael Ravenscroft” … acknowledging my comment to him. It is my favorite moment in over 300 shows I’ve seen. I asked David…. How do you create those awesome solos?… he said….. I sit on a stool and listen to what Roger, Nick and Rick put down and play along. I listen to what I played and pick out what I like, then I put the pieces together into one piece then learn to play it as one. Our fans are fanatics for our shows to sound like the albums so I must play it correctly each time in a show. I have the concert Brochure and album on the wall with David’s picture centerfold.
One hell of a story! I read that twice.....made me feel real nice! Great to hear that our heroes can be well grounded, down to earth people, who seem to really appreciate the success they've achieved! Happy for you to experience such awesomeness! Dave's tone is second to none!
Like getting trapped by the pub bore when you are putting money into a juke box. Obviously no one else would talk to him so he targeted you. RUclips, why do you put this rubbish on my feed?
Queen are one of my favourite acts of all time along with the Beatles... but only their 1974-78 period.... I can't really fathom the rest... it's like a different band. So to some extent I agree they are overrated... I remember seeing Kiss on posters, badges, painted on satchells, iron on patches on denim jackets and even their pinball machine in the local cafe that had the Space Invaders, Galaxians, etc... and was excited to watch the "Attack of the Phantom" film back in 1979/80... as I thought they must be amazing.... but wow... that music did not even register to me and I was dying to get out of the cinema... I was only 10/11 but even I knew it was rubbish and boring.
I HAVE too add 3 comments to this: 1) when I was a kid buying records in the late 60's early 70's, there were 2 distinct genres - Progressive Rock and Art Rock - bands like Pink Floyd and Procul Harum and Moody Blues were "Art Rock". Somewhere since then the Art Rock group has been pushed into the Progressive folder; it still doesn't seem right to me. 2) I am a Dead fan but not enough to be a Deadhead. But I've spent a lot of time with Deadheads and I don't think any of them would argue that The Greatful Dead was a great band. On any given night they might put on an awful show. The next night might be great; to them that was the charm. 3) I remember at a job during break one time we were discussing the best singer, the best guitarist etc. One guy insisted that it was inarguable the Robert Plant was the best singer, Jimmy Page was the best guitarist, John Paul Jones and John Bonnam the best bassist and drummer. He wouldn't even consider to doubt it due to the coincidence factor.
”Somewhere since then the Art Rock group has been pushed into the Progressive folder; it still doesn't seem right to me”. Completely agree. Genesis, Yes, King Crimson, ELP are the real prog of my 70s youth.
Pink Floyd, Procol Harum and the Moody Blues were clearly labelled "progressive" in the Melody Maker in 1968-69. But then, Hendrix was also called "progressive blues" there. Maybe that distinction was made in other publications? Everything that challenged or pushed the boundaries of the established genres was called progressive in the late 60s. The idea of an "art rock" belonged in there since rock had been mostly throwaway teenage entertainment before.
@@Leo_ofRedKeep Indeed, good answer. Prog and progressive aren't the same. I hang out on the Prog Archives board and that's an ongoing discussion there. Prog is a genre, progressive is not.
Don't think Marrlion were overrated because they never become a huge band, Motley Crew are just shit as are Kiss, Pink Floyd overrated hard to justify that one, they have a lot of first class albums, and I saw them live and have to say one of the best.
Motley Crue are legends only because the first album in 81 too fast for love and 82 shout at the devil we’re A grade. Then after that just lame. But if you have two great albums you get to tour forever on that. I don’t think KISS has even one A grade album. But visually it was probably epic in the 70’s
Dude is jealous of Marillions success. Playing neo - prog but they got press, unlike IQ. Cuz who in the actual f are they?? So many other overrated bands out there as in huge but lame.
So you don't get Kiss? Of course, you were born just a little too late. If you were a teenager around 1975 you'd have gotten it. In most parents' eyes they were dangerous and lots of people thought Kiss stood for Knights In Satan's Service. As I hear you talk about your buttons and patches you were obvious into the NWOBHM-Bands. So I can understand why you are not into Kiss. But overrated??? I'd rather say underrated knowing how many bands say they were influenced by them
@@thumper8684But he's way off base on Russia and Ukraine - he doesn't get that some people you just can't seek peace with and you just have to stand up against them. I'm afraid Roger you dad got killed fighting him or trying to but Hitler was one of those so he didn't die for nothing. Putin is another one.
I am a 53-year-old American so that has a bearing on my thoughts. Seriously disagree with the Dead. Kiss truly rock as long as it's live. Early Crue was great anything after shout is overrated. Totally agree with GnR for the same reasons. The Beach Boys shouldn't be near the top 10 but are a very solid band I never see them as overrated but never rated as high as you think they are seen. Since that movie Queen has been overrated for every great so9ng there is 10 garbage songs... Floyd is the greatest ever. Live and on albums. My favorite album has been a Floyd album for the last 40 years. It has changed over the years. The Wall to DSOM to Animals and now at this point in life Wish You Here . The point is there is always some Floyd that will relate to where you are in life. From Meddle on(except Final Cut) has been all solid. Even the first two post Waters.(not including Endless River) You missed the most overrated ever, Bon Jovi.
@@dewdew34 Was about to say the same. In order to be over rated, a lot of people should be praising the band/artist for their influence and over all quality, and I don't see that happening with Bon Jovi. They're a totally indifferent band to most people.
Totally subjective. It could be any famous band you don't like. Though the most overrated artist in the history pf music has GOT to be Prince. But if you love him, you'd think that's crazy.
@@CultoalViniloyalCompacto-bx5mr Of course. I'm not saying he isn't talented. I even covered one of his better tunes. ruclips.net/video/MH9ptLxrYZs/видео.html I just think he's more flashy showman than a great musician
The overrated factor comes a lot by the fact so many people won't let go of their teenage years heroes so they keep sonsuming the music of these bands. They go to the concerts but can't be bothered with new material by these bands or too lazy to discover new music in the vast world we have inf front of us courtesy of the internet. Queen were my favorite band ever as a young man but those years are long gone. Plus the over exposure makes me feel like Alex from A Clockwork Orange when he listened to Beethoven after the treatment...Lol
We have all seen Freddy sing at Live Aid 85. Queen's set was so good that day, they made an Oscar winning movie just so we could all see it again in 4k. That performance alone should be enough to take Queen off this list.
I think the only overrated thing about Queen is precisely that set at Live Aid. They were way better than Deep Purple and indeed all but a handful of other rock, including prog, bands, but they have done better gigs than Live Aid, just less publicized.
I fully agree. Its amazing to me how much gas-lighting there is for the stones, zepplin, and the beatles. When you play song for song...performance for performance, Queen stands head and shoulders *above* the rest.
It's a fun video, I agree with your picks, except Marillion, Hogarth is a tremendous singer and Rothery is a tremendous guitar player. As for Pink Floyd, The Wall may be overrated as an album, but DSOTM and WYWH are untouchable.
I just don't understand Dave Grohl career path, he continues to churn out, middle of the road, grocery store soundtracks, all of his music riding the same cookie cutter recipe......This music coming from a dude who grew up with hardcore punk and extreme metal running through his veins! The first Foos album showed promise, guitars were out front and some cool songwriting, some edge to it, plus he played pretty much all of the instruments on it. The next couple albums showed some bite, some aggressive riffing going on, but then it seems that each successive album was geared for airplay, a slew of samey sounding, vanilla flavored, radio syrup. I have some of these albums, thinking I'm going to like them more than I do, but I rarely play them, they're on the radio every freakin' minute, why reach for em'! Love the guy, the Tom Hanks of rock, but damn surprising that this music he makes is totally satisfying his artistic desires. Does it have to do with stacks of green paper - sadly, looks that way.
Yeah, Colin, I stated at the end of my comment that it's probably all about the bank accounts of Dave and band. We all dig money, but how about some artistic integrity, how much money does Dave really need at this point. At the very least, make a solo punk or metal album to show you still "got a pair!"@@colinburroughs9871
How about a list of top ten Methodone Bands? [note: a Methodone Band is a band a fan turns to when they need a new album from their favorite band, the Heroin band, but that band stopped recording new material for some reason.] Greta Van Fleet is a Methodone Band for Zeppelin. Sweet is a Methodone Band for Queen. Marillion is a Methodone Band for Gabriel-era Genesis. Etc etc.
Yes I agree. That guy makes top ten about everything and nothing...especially nothing. How about a top ten of bands who screw the most groupies? Or a top ten of who's got the most std's?
If anything The Dead are underrated. How many styles they played. Their influence. The sheer amount of concerts, and the culture they developed. So many of the greatest songs of all time came from TGD. They had complete albums where every song was a chapter of the whole - not singles that didn't mesh with the rest of the album like most artist. Such an incredible singular band.
@@nicolasflamel2905how? Did you not attend any Garcia era shows? They were fundamentally different from other rock shows where people just pump their arms in the air and such.Read the Dylan quote for yourself..just google
Don´t worry, I will immediately raise my rating for Blues For Allah and give it one and a half star.....just because I´m such a nice guy. Now back to the 5-star "Visions Of The Emerald Beyond" released the same year.
In 1978 Queens album Jazz was an album they never lived down and despite the damage control people use on it now it was exactly what the critics said then it was derivative. When people like the clash wanted to talk about how messed up rock N roll was at the time they without hesitation pointed out that album Rod Stewart blondes have more fun from the same year. And when they are comparing its head songs in cheesiness to Elton John’s don’t go breaking my heart you know it got bad. In the opening of the review for jazz the Rolling Stone Clinic came right out of the gate to lambaste queen for becoming so lazy and sticking to things so familiar and old. Stop that would sound right at home as part of the grease soundtrack. Or broadway.He wrote for those worried that possibly this new album is queen performing jazz you can rest easy queen does not have the imagination to play jazz. Queen for that matter does not have the imagination to play rock ‘n’ roll.
Based on the warning and the intro….you got an immediate thumbs up and a subscription!!!! Finally someone with an independent thought and opinion and not looking to appease the idiots of the world. Thank you I’m in!
I agree with everything except The Beach Boys. Their 67-73 ear is highly under rated. I love their early 60s songs so much that I forced myself to listen to their albums (cover to cover) from this era. A ton of incredible material.
Agreed, been doing deep dive on beach boys and Ive concluded they are better than the Beatles and I like them as well. Brian Wilson in his prime was better than Lennon and McCartney combined.
Where he went wrong was by ignoring the whole SMILE deal - that, not Pet Sounds, was their amazing moment (and you have to reconstruct it from the Brian solo version and the best of the outtakes).
Oh, man! You actually got me! I was with you all the way up to the very end. I simply cannot call Pink Floyd overrated. They were an influence upon bands that sound nothing like them. Dave Gilmour was the reason half of mine mates picked up a guitar. (I’ve been a bleeding contrarian since birth. Buck Dharma is who inspired me to pick up the guitar, and no, it wasn’t one of BÖC’s 3 radio hits that did it. One of mi DA’s mates gifted him a cassette of *Agents Of Fortune *, and we were listening to it after he picked me up from school. Three minutes after I entered the automobile, I heard weird music playing, and I asked mi Da if he could turn it up, just in time to hear the guitar solo and final verse of ‘Vera Gemini’, which sounded like strange dreams I’d had, then the whole track, ‘Sinful Love’. The latter was an absolute banger. The verse section had this weird, twisting guitar riff all over it, the keyboardist was plinking along, creating this atmosphere of sinister tension, and when the lead guitar solo commences, it just grabs you by the hair and pulls you into another world for some 30-40 seconds. I’d heard brilliant guitar solos before, but I’d never heard ANYTHING like that. Years later, after buying all their records, I realised that if I’d entered that car ten mi utes earlier or five minutes later, I would not have heard what I still consider one of the finest rock guitar solos ever put to tape, and definitely the best studio solo by BÖC. I asked to borrow mi Da’s guitar that afternoon. He obliged, and sowed me major and minor barre chords on the first/second strings, and a heap of cowboy chords to practise changing chords.) Back to the Floyd, though: I’ve grown bored of the 3 BIG HIT RECORDS. It irritates me that my Spotify Playlist doesn’t know to play Pink Floyd songs from ‘73-‘79 in the ORDER AS LISTED ON THE RECORD, when I set a playlist containing Pink Floyd to ‘shuffle’. So I’ve turned to that middle period-the era of *Saucerful* through *Meddle*. Especially *Meddle*. I worshipped Syd Barrett, as an adolescent. I have an unblemished record of staunch heterosexuality, but i may have been a tiny bit in love with 1966-1972 Syd Barrett. I loved him to the point I wanted to absorb and become him. I was a mad acid freak by age 15; dosing nearly daily. HEAVY doses, as well.Being a science nerd with a Ph.D chemist for a father has its perks, as does looking 19 or 20 at 15. Using one of mi Da’s laboratory glassware catalogues, my friend-another chemist-and I set up a laboratory in the basement of an empty warehouse we rented in our little town’s industrial zone. I bought the chemicals and had them sent to a Post Office Box under a false name, and every time I went in to pick things up, I wore a different disguise. in return I got all the top-tier, gelatin wafer acid I could take, for free. I stayed fried for days on end. The world began to feel weird, stifling, and sharp-edged when I was NOT on LSD. However, I learned incredible things about myself-sometimes embarrassing things-, which is why I always took ‘heroic’ doses alone, and either wrote my thoughts, or, if the page became illegible, I had my trusty microcassette recorder.
I am not an expert by any means but it seemed to me that my tolerance for tripping on Acid escalated very quickly such that it really didn't go very far unless I gave it a good month between doses. Then came that one bad trip which ended my acid experiments. I call it a bad trip, but actually everything after that crazy experience was based on "smarten up kid!" so it really was a very good trip. Sent me right on the straight and narrow -school, job, marriage, kids, career. So the lesson is...do acid til it shocks you into reality.
@@Vince-lq3veCan’t possibly. Can’t abide the ‘straight life’. I was married once; woman of my dreams. I used to work as an audio engineer in a suburb of Nashville, called Murfreesboro. She destroyed my trust in women; spent the rest of my life screwing around until I developed symptoms of adult-onset muscular dystrophy. That destroyed my career, and everything else left of my life. You’re right; one had to take large quantities of LSD due to the tolerance, but I had access to free acid by the sheet. And I would take tolerance breaks every month or so. I only took acid in such huge quantities during my teen years, between ~15 and ~19. Now I take it twice per year, if I can find a good source. Now all I believe in is music, drugs, and memories. Different strokes, etc.
@@UTubeHandlesSuckI don’t know who that is. Unless they were an artist or band who released their first record before 1995, I typically don’t know who they are, with a few exceptions. I can’t abide post-‘95 mixing techniques. Everything sounds so clean and sterile. Listening to today’s music for casual enjoyment is like setting your living room up to look like a surgical suite.
How anyone can call Pink Floyd overrated is beyond belief. And Joy Division, are you sure😶🌫️ I never got the foo fighters so spot on there. I hate Kiss with a passion. Their music is awful to my ears. Amazing how you can build a following with a strong image. Never heard of Motley Crue and have no desire to 💤 Guns and Roses poor man's Zepplin. The Beach Boys I see where you're coming from but their best stuff deserves utmost respect Marillion, completly pointless to someone brought up on Geneses.
Wow, I thought it was just me. All these years I thought The Greatful Dead sounded like they forgot to tune their instruments and performed while they were falling asleep. I assumed I simply was not cultured enough to understand them. Also I love The Beach Boys because I also love The Four Freshmen. But Pet Sounds kinda sucked. Also yeah I kinda like Pink Floyd but I am not kinda in love with them.
Funny when you spoke about bands you like as a kid before you discovered Kiss all the bands were British, funny that, then most of the bands in this list are American except amazingly for #1 & #2. It seems so biased and I am not even American. So hard to reconcile.
There was a rivalry between McCartney and Brian Wilson. A big problem with their catalog after that was Wilson's struggle with mental illness and addiction.
I agree with Andy regarding nearly every band in this terrific video. However, there is no way that Marillion are over-rated over here on the left side of the pond, because, sadly, they are nearly unknown in the United States. I'm a lifelong music fan at 50, had barely heard of them until 2018, and then wondered where they'd been all my life. They're managing to continue to make stunning albums as recently as "An Hour Before It's Dark," with no radio airplay. Meanwhile, they play small venues, mainly in Britain and Europe, to a small but intensely loyal fan base. That would actually appear to be the opposite of over-rated.
10) Joy Division - no. great band, whole discography is fantastic, they are right where there should be. 9) Grateful Dead - yes. correct. I also went in with "Dark Star" and "Live/Dead" and was disappointed. if their claim to fame is masters of improvisation, they are bad. however, I did listened to their discography recently and in fact grew to like the band very much. they were very consistent, melodic americana band. except "Anthem" and "Net", they're discography is very consistent, good and even progy in their middle late 70s period. 8) Foo Fighters - yes. absolutely. I like Dave, but FF are bland and boring. I don't understand their popularity. 7) Kiss - yes. absolutely. simple, badly produced, badly played songs. they are not wholly untalented, but they should be a small cult band, their popularity (mostly in America, they were almost unknown in Europe) is completely disproportionate with merit 6) Motley Crue - yes. also case of popularity (also, most of it in America), disproportionate with merit. I'll put their debut as a good, hard 'n' heavy album and Nikki is talented guy, but he didn't have the discipline to be consistent. 5) Guns N' Roses - yes. debut was so great that their legend lived on that album. Illusions were overblown, and Axl is insufferable diva. 4) Beach Boys - yes. they were a great band, no doubt about that, their 2 Summer compilations are must have, but albums were patchy and with lots of dreck, especially after Brian broke down 3) Marillion - no. great band. somewhat inconsistent, 2 fantastic albums, 2 mediocre (we're talking about Fish era). but, Fish was fantastic lyricist and Rothery is a genius. the problem is, no spark of genius from the rest of the band, it's all on these two. they were derivative from Genesis, but their themes and Fish's lyrical approach was much different from Gabriel's. his romantic approach definitely connected them with the public (especially female one) which gave them great popularity boost for a time, but all of it was absolutely deserving. 2) Queen - no. fantastic band, in the top 3 of all time. 4 fantastic musicians and authors. fantastic in studio and live. nobody sounds like them. marvelous synthesis of glam, music hall, hard rock, pop, prog. ton of great singles, fantastic, consistent discography ("Flash" is bad, but it's a soundtrack, "Hot Space" is "worst" regular album, but only half of album was "bad", and even the disco part had few good songs. and if your worst album has "Under Pressure", that's a measure of how great you are.) they stayed strong in the 80s, when most of old bands faltered and ended on high note. even "Made in Heaven" coda was great. there were some filler in the albums, but only a few songs. albums were consistently great thru whole career. they are mega popular and they deserve it. 1) Pink Floyd - no. I see a little of British class envy in the critique. their discography is inconsistent, but it is varied and parts are surprisingly avant-garde. folk, avantgarde, psychedelic, singer-songwriter, smooth prog, arena rock, great production. sound effects and album covers were icing on the cake. there was always strong atmospheric component in the music. comparing to other prog bands, they were probably the least virtuoso (Mason is great and Dave has great sound), as they were probably the most folk rooted from the prog bands. their most popular albums can be critiqued as slow, digestible prog for the masses. but in the end, their peaks very really great, and they are lot of gems in the less known albums. it's great to see such a popular prog band. they had some of popular singles but most of their legend rest in their long forms and concepts.
@@carlos_herrera No, I do like "Live/Dead". It's just, there is this narrative that GD are crazy hippie band which had this epic long songs in concerts and thousand people came to trip to the music. So you come with this kind of expectations. Live, they were not as avant-guard like Pink Floyd or good at jams like Cream or The Allman Brothers or spacy as Hawkwind. I know about their "Drums/Space" parts, but this was excised from most of their contemporary live albums which were pretty conventional song wise. And nothing wrong with that, it's just that their reputation is different.
Whoever is telling people to start with "Live/Dead" or any version of "Dark Star" to get into the band is doing The Dead a great disservice, and that's coming from someone who is a huge deadhead.
Queen are a fantastic band only if you are an occasional listener of mainstream music. You really just need to listen to a handful of albums of the late 60s to realize that they are really mediocre and not original at all
Ian Curtis’ suicide caused many to think that the band was a bunch of psychos. Nothing could be further frim tthe truth. Curtiis was suffering from an early onset neurological disorder that had him in rapid decline with no hope of reversing it. He was a singer who delivered fantastic depths of emotion in a non maudlin way. The rest reformed as New Order and also were quite good. IMNERHO Overall a good & bold take. It would be fascinating to talk with you one on one. “Stoned country band” good one!
I don't know how anyone could listen to Joy Division's best of compilation album and not be blown away by their output in a relatively short amount of time, and just some really intense songs. That's the one I really disagree with on this list. And, Pink Floyd.
I have searched an entire lifetime for that one moment in time where the Grateful Dead had one single lick of anything interesting or just plain good, and I still haven't found what I'm looking for.
Forget about them and watch some of the new live videos with Samantha Fish. She can sing, play guitar and looks cute in her red leather jacket. And sometimes she opens with Kick Out The Jams.
I like Queen up until they started playing all their songs (mostly the same dozen or so) too much on tv and radio about fifteen years ago. I also suspect if Freddie was straight, there wouldn't be such a media love in with them now.
I am new to this channel, and a little RUclips jaded, so when I began watching this video, I was certain that either Led Zeppelin, or The Beatles (or both) were going to be on your list, even if just to stir the pot. So I was pleasantly surprised when you gave both of these bands their due when mentioning them. My current favourite band did end up on this list, and while I do agree that they are somewhat overrated, I think you may not have given them enough of a listen. This is a band that (in my opinion) doesn't have a bad record in their catalog, and while they are best known for the catchy standard rock fare like My Hero, Monkey Wrench, and my personal favourite, Everlong, they also have a wide range of genres in their repertoire, from hard and fast tracks like FFL, Wattershed, and Weenie Beenie, all the way to soulful, sometimes melancholy tracks like Dear Lover, Virginia Moon, and The Deepest Blues Are Black. They also do an excellent cover of Baker Street by Gerry Rafferty. All in all I just think if you listened to a little more of their catalogue, your opinion of them might change. Or it may not ...
Yes they were. But as Andy said. Too many people consider them to be the godfathers of Rock. Which they arent. They have a lot of great great Songs. But there albums mostly are filled with average songs
@@AqualungsBreath Agree. They were more of a singles band. But those singles were incredible! And their live concerts were some of the very best during their active time.
I agree - cannot put the radio on for an hour without hearing 2 or more Queen songs......but yes, the fact that they carried on touring after Freddie's death was - imo - unforgiveable. He was 50% of that band....literally irreplacable.
Like what you want, dislike what you want, but comments like "Springsteen sucks, he's a hack" or "Bruce Springsteen has one good album and can't play guitar" only serve to highlight a glaring ignorance and immaturity in music appreciation. Your opinion of your own feelings is certainly valid, but can we stop making idiotic, blanket statements that try to undo legendary bodies of work that are overwhelmingly seen as pinnacles of rock music.
Peter, that's of course an opinion that can't and shouldn't be argued with. His music doesn't do it for you, but do you ever wonder why he is so revered among millions of other music fans? I've been on this planet a long time, and there are quite a few musicians I absolutely couldn't get into at all, that I now love. Springsteen, Dylan, Bob Seger, Patti Smith, Velvet Underground - I avoided these artists like they were poison, but time changes our tastes and perspectives to some degree. These are all musicians where the lyrics are monumental to their success. Of course, there are some artists/bands that I couldn't give a damn about, and still don't! Like what you like, there's plenty of stuff out there for everybody. The only problem I have is seeing chucklehead statements like: "The Beatles weren't very talented" or "Springsteens success is all images, dude has no talent" these are simply asinine comments that ruin any credibility that person might have. Even strongly disliking a legendary musician, one should be able to at least give some understanding of their talent.
Aside from Piper, The Dark Side, Wish you Were Here and The Wall let's not forget Meddle and Animals. All fantastic albums. Fathers of Prog along with original Genesis and (maybe) E, L & P
I was surprized Oasis weren't on this list. Clapton is overrated whichever band he was in. Always following trends...be it...B.B. King, Hendrix( even getting his hair permed in honour of Jimi), The Band or, nicking wholesale, J.J.. Cale's sound in the 70s...totally agree with KISS & Motley Crue (beyond Spinal Tap parody...how about the most underrated? Little Feat? Thin Lizzy?
You should apply to Harvard University, (and Berkeley in case you are not accepted at Harvard) as you are an incredible rock music analyst. You really are.
Sounds like someone is insanely jealous of Marillion, because they made it and IQ didn't. And Led Zeppelin didnt have tons of tracks. 72 or so to be exact. Six really good albums, the first six, just like Sabbath. And then they went into the toilet with Jimmy's heroin addiction. And they wrote like 4 songs. The rest of their catalogue was written by artists courtesy of Chess records. The one thing Zeppelin had going for them is when their drummer kicked the bucket, they didn't go into 40+ years of fairwell tours like The Who, or rather The Two. And it pains me to say that, because I really like The Who, even though it's about 60 songs written around D,A and G with some sus4/sus2's thrown in. Reduction!! I enjoyed your Pink Floyd rant. Was into them in my 20s, and then stopped smoking pot and being depressed. Maybe I'll take another dive into the IQ catalog at some point.
Bruce Springsteen. I see the band with three guitarists on stage … and yet I still hear no guitars. Weak sauce.
Agree
Yes! I watched a live DVD and Springsteen was seemingly soloing his ass off while doing his best guitar faces and, and... nothing. It was weird to tell you the truth.
Bruce Springsteen made 1 1/2 good albums; the entire Born To Run album and 1/2 of Born In The USA. The rest is pure dreck.
Crikey, I forgot about him! He had some good songs early on, but that's it. The only thing he truly was a master of, was overstaying his wellcome. He used to be on stage for four hours, didn't he... I can't fathom how people were able to endure that, but they clearly did... totally unfathomable.
Darkness was grunge decades early, lyrically far superior to anything the progs laid down. No fairy dust or roundabouts. Nebraska as mean a statement as a performer has offered this side of Skip James or Johnson himself.
Oasis Oasis Oasis Oasis Oasis Oasis Oasis Oasis Oasis Oasis
To be fair, all BritPop, but Oasis are the worst.
@davidmorgan6896 TRUE...although Pulp perhaps get a redemption due to their song "Common People"
@@comfyft Pulp is so much better than Common People. This is hardcore is so good.
Yeah, I'd swap Floyd for Oasis.
Definitely overrated. They are annoying! I watched an entire concert. One long song. Not much going on.
Spot on with the Foo Fighters. The definition of safe, parental approved rock.
I have always felt the band seemed cooler than the music they made.
The Vaccinated Only tour . Never forget never forgive . Flu Pfizers
They are a singles band, nothing more.
Dave Grohl is the Kim Kardashian of rock -- famous for being famous.
Colour and shape is a top to bottom really good album, other than that I’d agree that they are a singles band.
Andy's description of GD Live Dead as "A stoned country band tuning up" and KISS. LMAO. Absolutely Perfect description. 😂
You might go lighter on the jacking
To be fair, I think Queen was pretty innovative and experimental combining hard rock with influences from opera, music theater, ragtime, disco, folk etc. The way they orchestrated their music in the studio, mimicked instruments like woodwinds with the guitar or acapella... I think they were more progressive and certainly more unique than most prog-by-numbers bands of the 80's.
I agree, but I still think they’re overrated. Queen has become one of those bands where the reputation has become so outrageously huge that *any* band would be unable to match it. They were, imo, fantastic. But, the way people talk about them is ridiculous.
Queen did produce five good songs, which is more the I produced.
@@6li8storm40 I agree also . They have become this pop culture greatest band of all time . People constantly say Freddie was the best singer ever in rock . When singers like Rob Halford , Geoff Tate were far more talented than him . Queen was a good band . no doubt . But not to the level they have been placed by critics , and that movie that soared them to iconic status with new fans , as this greatest rock band ever .
They're not fit to shine the shoes of prog band YES or Rush
They have a drummer who can’t drum, a guitarist who doesn’t know how to rock, a competent bassist who quit years ago, and a front man with a good voice but zero stagecraft. Way overrated in my opinion.
Given Marillion were never on the radar of the general population, kind of hard to say they are overrated. They are a band that got better with every record Fish recorded and became a different band with Hogarth.
Ur absolutely right... Their appearance on TOPT confirms their outsider status
yep , never heard of them
IN 1983/4 they were literally one of the very biggest bands in Europe. I'm an American with a mother from Wales. She and my dad visited UK in 1984 and said Marillion t-shirts, posters and such were EVERYWHERE. My mother brought me back a t-shirt, which was impossible to find in the states in that time. They were absolutely huge.
@@junkersish I never heard of them, in Australia. What decade?
Very concise summary, mate 👍 And yes, Fish and H make for a really huge difference. Love to hear Steve and Mark occasionally still chasing each other in what I consider the band's hallmark lead and solo lines. If you take songwriting and storytelling into account, this ranking might have taken a different turn. Fish and Roger Waters always did great lyrics IMHO, irrespective of any political statements in the latter case.
Q: What does a Dead Head say when he runs out of drugs?
A: "Holy sh*t! This music really sucks!"
😂😂😂😂😂
😀
The Grateful Deaf?
I love the dead, drugs or not, warts and all, haha
The way I heard it was the guy asks "where's all that racquet coming from?"
I liked Queen alot …when I was in grade 6. I thought ‘we are the Champions’ was ‘real rock’! :).
Then I grew up and quickly moved on to alot of rock and metal I like better - and still do in my 50’s.
There was a brief second to look at them again when Waynes World came out and the stoners in the car with Mike Myers all banged their heads in unison to Bohemian Rhapsody. But I quickly lost interest again. Then Freddie got Aids and passed away, and they had another brief renaissance. I moved on. Then recently, they got a movie made of their careers.
Ugh!!
I wish all bands got this kind of media exposure (excluding the AIDS thing of course). If the mass media pushes you - you will get big. Simple as that.
Agreed!
Reworded- "I used to think queen were 'proper' music for people with discerning taste, then I realized they were music for the common peasants." In other words you're a snob.
Have you listened to every album? I mean Queen I and II have more great songs than most bands release throughout their whole life cycle.
queen have great stage presence.
@@RB-oc7ti Through Queen's whole career they were hated by the press and the mass media. Queen never fitted in any of their boxes.
Especially Freddie Mercury.
To sum up:
10. You only like them cause he's dead.
9. You only like them cause you're stoned.
8. You only like them cause he was in a better band.
7. You only like them cause of the clothes and makeup.
6. You only like them cause they take drugs.
5. You only like them cause of one album.
4. You only like them cause a critic said you should.
3. You only like them cause you haven't heard my band.
2. You only like them cause you've only heard the singles.
1. You only like them cause of one guy who wasn't in it for very long.
Hilarious. You should probably do this with some other lists.
@@TedStenzhorn Thanks!
You missed "You liked them cause you were 12".
"I should have made it, not THOSE guys! I make REAL music man! ME! "
@RandyHartle Thanks!
Normally people would include U2, Creed, Nickelback, and Greenday when talking about overrated bands. I'm now curious what your thoughts on them would be.
Green Day. Good point. I did/do consider listening to them more ... maybe even purchase an album. But, I was shocked when they got in the Rock Hall. Already?!
@@BruceWalther-s2l
Strangely enough, I don't think any of them are overrated, given how many people flat out hate them. I just find it interesting that Andy Edwards is the only one I've seen who didn't include them in his list.
As for me, I think Ghost is overrated. No hate against them. Aside from one song, nothing interesting grabs my attention.
who tf is creed or nickleback
U2, maybe. Creed and Nickelback aren't rated highly to begin with.
@@BruceWalther-s2l I wouldn't be too shocked about the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, it's a joke now. What's in there despite other great bands which have been left out gives that place no credibility anymore, and that's been a while.
I’m American and was in love with “Misplaced Childhood” when I was a teenager. I thought they had a major Pink Floyd influence, a great vocalist in Fish and many of the songs had emotional resonance.
The concept of The Wall, the voice and keyboards of Genesis (Gabriel & Banks). Not bad, but not great. My opinion.
I think Marillion are an excellent band. I think they are the opposite of overrated- they have always been considered deeply unfashionable and as a PG Genesis/Floyd hybrid clone and the only people who tend to rave about them are the small cult of the neo prog loving IT guys that Andy likes to talk about and middle aged Scottish blokes who worship Fish.
Marillion are hardly hyped in the mainstream or even by self-styled ‘prog connoisseurs’ so I don’t agree with this idea of them being overrated at all.
You mean major Genesis influence Fish was basically a Gabriel knock off.
You know how everyone says without the Beatles there'd never have been any other rock band? Without Marillion, there'd never have been any other neo-prog band.
IQ, Pallas, Pendragon and co. would have remained unknown and Andy would have remained the resident drummer at the Boilermaker's Club.
@@jimmycampbell78 clearly, they're rated here among prog fans, but I'm with Andy, the reaction people should have had was akin to Beavis and Butthead scowling at a lame music video. It's very light in the loafers type music.
For me the most overrated band is Led Zeppelin. Yeah yeah, I know they were directly and indirectly very influential and prior to them hard rock was a fairly amorphous genre. They managed to distil the essence of it and make it more punchy. I spent most of my late teen years trying to appreciate them, and I've heard all their records many times. But Page is a sloppy guitarist, Plant lost his voice halfway through their career. Bonham is a powerful drummer but I don't listen to a band for drums. Like most people drum solos on live albums are to be skipped, not played. *But it's the plagiarism that really is the sore point* . I'd estimate about 70% of the debut is either based on other people's songs (like Dazed or Confused) or they're blatant rip offs, like Black Mountain Side. The plagiarism continues on and off for most of their career. Even the riff to Whole Lotta Love appears in Hey Joe covered by Hendrix two years earlier. And really I can't understand why anyone would want to listen to a muddy sounding stodgy blues rip off like The Lemon Song in today's age.
I wouldn't care so much but all my life I've had people say that Led Zeppelin are the greatest rock band of all time, or the greatest band of all time. Such excessive praise seems unjustified when they relied so much on other people's music for their success. I refuse to bow down before them as musical gods.
That's objectively why I think they're overrated. I don't really like them for some subjective reasons.
The guitar tone- it's thin, scratchy and cold sounding. For a supposedly heavy rock band I find the guitar unsatisfying. I much preferred Black Sabbath and even earlier bands like Cream and Hendrix I find have a heavier, beefier guitar tone.
I just hate those hippy-ish acoustic songs they did.
And the fans are really annoying.
I agree with half of what you're saying. True, Zep ripped off a lot of other songs. But they did them better. You may not care about drums but Bonham influenced every drummer who followed. Page can be sloppy and he can be brilliant. John Paul Jones is a monster bass player and overall musical talent. And on that first album Plant is ungodly. Yes, he lost those high notes and was never had beautiful voice so I'd say he's been overrated as a singer in his later years. In fact, I think the last three Zep albums were all forgettable. But you can not refute that they were the first super group of musicians. Like them or not, they are significant.
Led Zeppelin is great fun to listen to in spite of everything you said.
One thing that makes Zeppelin awful for me is their delusional, semi-ignorant fan base. They're the least knowledgeable music devotees on the planet and seem to think music started with their band.
Agree with most of that.....and the other thing that annoys me is that they seem to take themselves so incredibly seriously.
Musically, I wouldn't say they're "overrated." I think it's an exaggeration. It is undoubtedly true that their admirers, whom I refer to as "LZ Evangicals," are essentially fanatics who resemble cult members. There is no "before LZ" or "after LZ" for them. Essentially, LZ created the musical earth, or it was the "big bang" in music! After them, it's all downhill. People don't talk about it because it's just secondary decoration in rock music, but the lyrics in that band's songs, which were "composed" by R. Plant, are their largest flaw. There is nothing to understand in these tunes. Almost all of their lyrics (not all) are a collection of words with no unifying meaning. After several decades of listening to the songs, I still don't understand what Plant is saying in Stairway to Heaven. The same goes with Black Dog (why is the title Black Dog?) Let us not discuss about Kashmir. It's all word salad. Even a hieroglyph specialist would be unable to interpret the significance of these aborted images. I hardly exaggerate! The other weakness is Plant's signing. He is good at screaming but not singing. Is there any tremolo (or vibrato) by Plant on any of the LZ albums?! Imagine R. Plant singing I Want to Know What Love Is or Piano Man!
I agree completely with you on Foo Fighters. In my opinion they’re the musical equivalent of watching paint dry.
No variation in their music - in my opinion.
@@ronaldelfleet3123 agreed, but not only that, it’s just boring to begin with. So it’s a whole lot of the same boring sound.
Zero range.
@@allthingsclassicrock Very well put indeed !
Too shouty for me
23:50 I think you can partially blame The Beatles themselves for that comparison. They were constantly praising The Beach Boys, and listing them as a huge influence on their music, etc, etc.
True McCartney especially was a huge fan of The Beach Boys.
Yeah, I always thought Pet Sounds was silly. Same with The Beatles, White album.
I'm a huge music fan and play too. I never liked the Beatles and I really do try!
It was mostly a publicity stunt. The feud between the best America and Britain had to offer.
@@clintstryder1131You don't hear anything special going on with the vocals. Nothing strikes you about the melodies and songwriting?
I enjoyed this one. I would have included U2 on my list.
I actually like early U2 and saw them live, playing with Big Audio Dynamite and Public Enemy back in the '80's. Great concert! But I have to agree; I thought they'd be on this list.
I would have replaced Pink Floyd with U2...
U2 we’re good until No Line on the Horizon. I haven’t enjoyed that cd or anything after.
They were done after Achtung Baby. Then Bono became the self-absorbed spokesperson for every global and made up humanitarian cause imaginable.
They've had a lot of decent songs, but it's everything that goes with them, all the media hype, that's the problem.
I thought that the Rolling Stones would be n°1. I mean, they were (self-)declared in 1970 as "the greatest rock 'n' roll band in the world", simply because the Beatles had broken up, and 54 years later they're still billed like that . Yet they've been playing more or less the same songs on stage for decades and the most famous thing they've released since then is their logo. They flood the market with countless approximate live albums with nearly the same setlists to compensate for the disappointment caused by each release of a new studio album. The poverty of their production has been excused for 50 years just because they are the Roling Stones, meant to be "the greatest rock 'n' roll band in the world". Which in my opinion they never were, not even in 1970.
Otherwise you talk about the Grateful Dead comparing them to other groups, but I think their main "competitor" was the Allman Brothers Band, even if I believe they were on good terms. The ABB didn't produce only great albums and had down periods, but when they were in good form they were inaccessible on stage, regardless of line-up and even in their later years. They never considered themselves a jam band, but their ability to improvise worked wonders. Moreover, it's the only band among which 4 members have been ranked among the 100 greatest guitarists of all time by Rolling Stone Magazine.
Thick as
In 71 Zeppelin 4 came out ,goodbye stones
ABB were magic!
I totally agree about Foo fighters. Elevator music.
If I get on an elevator and it’s playing nonstop Foo Fighters, I know it’s final destination is hell.
They suck. I laughed when I heard Paul McCartney was hanging out with him to gain some inspiration
Don’t fucking get that band and I never will.
The vac-cine passport band! How very rock'n'roll was that! Their drummer even died from it.
I don't like the 2000s radio rock sound of theirs, but "Virginia Moon" and "Statues" are great songs imo.
Radiohead on my list not due to anything about the band, just that some superfans seem to think of them as history-altering geniuses in a way that I can't call anything but overrating.
Radiohead is also on my list of 10 best bands of all time. Not overrated, but it is a gloomy sound that is not for everyone.
Yeah, Radiohead for sure. Of course, the last time I wrote that in a comment section, I get the crazies on me... I mean Rock was dead before they even made an album... They're fine, but rather mid with bright moments.
I think Radiohead are the most impressive band to have ever done it. They are constantly reinventing themselves. Mainstream rock starts to copy them and they’ve already move on.
The latest The Smile album, which is basically a Radiohead album under a different name has been such a breath of fresh air.
I find Thom York's singing intolerable, his politics (which wouldn't matter if I hadn't ran into them) intolerable and the band kind of derivative. Running average prog tropes over drum & bass isn't a bad idea, but I'm not blown away or anything. They'd make my list. Frankly, this list features a few more that really get under my skin too- there's some shared prerogatives here.
@@colinburroughs9871 ooh my first Radiohead is Prague post
I laughed through most of this. And I totally agree with the majority of it. Queen failed miserably for me after Night at the Opera. They eventually joined a batch of good/great 70s bands and artists that just went for the mainstream money in the 80s. For me, artists like Aerosmith, Heart, Yes, Elton John, Queen, ZZ Top, Van Hagar, Chicago, Fleetwood Mac, Genesis, Rod Stewart were all safer and extremely boring in the 80s. How do you compare "I Want to Break Free" to "Stone Cold Crazy"? "These Dreams" to "Barracuda"? "Baby What a Big Surprise" to "Make Me Smile"? "Legs" to "Jesus just Left Chicago"? "When It's Love" to "Mean Streets"? "Invisible Touch" to even a song like "Blood on the Rooftops"? It was rough listening 70s bands in the 80s FOR ME.
Everybody went pop in the 80s, as the managers convinced them to make money for a change. Look what happened to Yes or Genesis?
It is too silly to compare the music in the 70s and 80s. Every decade had/has its changes and its beauty. You need to have ears to find this beauty. Obviously you can't.
"Queen failed miserably for me ... went for the mainstream money in the 80s.". This sentence can only show how bad you know Queen history. Queen members became millionaires already in 1977/1978 after their grandiose tour through US, Canada, Europe and Japan. Mainstream money? Bullshit. There was no one band in the 80s who played or sounded like Queen.
Bullseye! All my 70s favourites turned to mush in the 80s. I was gutted.
I couldn't agree with you more. It broke my heart.
Yep. Goodness knows what Jones, Joplin, Morrison, Hendrix would have done in the 80s.
10) New Order. I agree that they brought an element of dance music to New Wave. I became a full Metalhead around 1982 or so, but still liked New Order.
9) Grateful Dead. An old friend put it best when he said the Grateful Dead are overrated in terms of their following, but underrated when we're talking about the musicianship. I'm an American with British sensibilities and I like old Status Quo.
8l) I liked a couple of songs early on and I like their Van Halen covers and I thought it was cool of him to invite Rick Astley to jam with them onstage.
7) I like early Kiss. I liked them when I was a kid in the 70s.i stayed home the Saturday Night that NBC aired ",Kiss Meet The Phantom Of The Park" and liked it. My mentor got me the Peter Criss solo album and I liked it.
6) Motley Crue. I liked the first 2 albums, Too Fast For Love and Shout At The Devil were really good.
5) I have no love for Guns.N Roses at all. I heard heavier music on a Bay City Rollers. David Lee Roth was mind blowing. I would be mind blowing,too if I had Steve Vai for a guitarist and Billy Sheehan for a bassist.
4) Beach Boys. I thought Pet Sounds was overrated. The Beach Boys played a free concert in my neighborhood because a guy in my town.is a Billionaire and a Beach Boys fan so he paid them $10,000.
3) I love old Marillion. They never got any love here in the US. "Kayleigh" was a modest hit here, but nothing else. I didn't give them a chance when Fish left. You mentioned Marillion copying Genesis and Greta Van Fleet copying Led Zeppelin, but there was a band in the late 80s called Kingdom Come. They played a Monsters Of Rock tour in 1988 with Van Hagar, Metallica, Scorpions and Dokken.
2) Queen. They are big because of revisionist history. No one ever thought about their Live Aid show until around the time the Bohemian Rhapsody film came out. Before then they were up there with the Black Sabbath reunion and the David Bowie and Mick Jagger video for Dancing In The Streets.
1) pink Floyd. I only like the Pink Floyd material with Roger Waters. I loved the film version of The Wall as well as Pink Floyd Live in Pompeii.
An interesting story ; My best friend had a boyfriend who was stricken by a car while crossing a road. When he was in the trauma room, the stereo was playing The Wall. He knew very little about Pink Floyd , but he knew Another Brick In The Wall Part 2. He said that a .guy wearing a plain Black t shirt and Jeans and haid dark Brown shoulder length hair. He was as real as the doctors. Flash forward 7 years, he and my best friend come to visit. I had Pink Floyd Live At Pompeii on DVD was playing. The boyfriend saw Roger Waters on the screen and looked like he saw a ghost. He pointed out Waters, saying that that was the guy in the trauma room.
2)
You could add Coldplay. Massive popular with middle of the road shite.
I'd argue they are equally hated by many people as well, so do they count as being overrated?
I don't like ragging on bands, especially because something I don't like could be someone else's favourite, but yes definitely not keen on Coldplay! Too much like U2 for me, and I'm not really keen on U2 but fair play to people who are. They're Marmite bands, Kiss, Mötley Crüe and G'n'R are also Marmite
Rock? 😂😂😂
Same with Radio Head, pseudo intellectual boring nonsense.
Great band! Consistently great!
Love the disclaimer at the beginning.
He should be banished off RUclips for putting The Beach Boys in there. The only great American band.
@@zootsoot2006what about creedence clearwater revival???
That was super fun. Have you done Top 10 Most Toxic Fan Bases yet? That'd be a laff.
i have but haven't filmed it yet but you can have a peak
1 Pink Floyd
2 Pink Floyd
3 Pink Floyd
4 Pink Floyd
5 Pink Floyd
6 Pink Floyd
7 Pink Floyd
8 Pink Floyd
9 Pink Floyd
10 Joy Division
Gasp! My favourites, ya Nazi!
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer Oasis , Tool... read any comments on anything Tool...any emo metal band as well.
@@dewdew34 Malmsteen fans aren't half humourless either, to put it that way...
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer that's cold blooded, bro.
Consider this about the Grateful Dead: your perspective is skewed towards the early days when they didn’t turn you on. They started as a psychedelic party band with a mixed bag of talent in the ‘60s, then, blues, Americana, , jazz fusion, then rock/pop, all owing to various influences that stayed with him… and turn them into arguably the most innovative and technically sophisticated bands in terms of composition and improvisation. I won’t write a Wikipedia entry here, but just keep it in mind. And assuming you’re not into straightahead, rock and improvisation, maybe listen to some of the tunes from Blues for Allah tracks like Help on the Way > Slipknot… or find a dead head, who you know and who knows you to recommend some of the best live shows you might relate to. Band was essentially live and studio work was secondary to them.
"and turn them into arguably the most innovative and technically sophisticated bands in terms of composition and improvisation." I see Deadheads try to get away with this line. It's not even ballpark. Just a big ole bag of "nope".
@@colinburroughs9871 We could argue our lives away on this! Just know I’m a music head (probably like you) and not a Deadhead or exclusive jamband type.
@@BobSperber cheers
I’ve sampled Grateful Dead tracks from throughout their history. I forced myself to sit through a couple of long sessions listening to live recordings. Searching for something good there. I’m not denying the fact that they created a huge following, and that people love the community and the dancing at the shows, etc. But they always remained a sloppy, not very good band.
@@Jeff664Nah. Actually, technically, a very good band. I think you're mistaking their 'sloppiness' with improvisation and innovation. They were never going to be Steely Dan for slickness and tightness. The jazzers at the time like Ornette Coleman and Bradford Marsalis played with them on stage and Miles Davis was a fan which, I think, says something.
G N' R are the most overrated band of all time. It's 2024 and they are still touring Appetite for Destruction, almost as if they only have one album.
Use your Illusions 1 and 2 is fn great.
I agree. Except that Slash is a great guitar player.
I’d almost agree, but Appetite is one of the greatest hard rock albums of the 80’s. It really changed the scene and snd the songs are punky and rock. Plus they’re still touring off those songs.
@@frankfurter63 Absolutely. November Rain is their Stairway. They both kick in with their Brilliant solos but the payoff is too late.
I can't agree that Guns& are the most overrated. Top five most overrated for sure, but not number one.
I agree on every single one on this list except Marillion, a band too few like to be overrated. And I think Nirvana should have the top spot.
My thoughts exactly. Could not agree more.
That's what we all thought in the 90s!! They tried shoving this down our throats, but now they get to write the history books..
Replace Pink Floyd with Nirvana and I have no real issue with the list.
I feel ya on this one. You make a good point.
Ya never saw nirvana live right before they broke big.
Saw them three times before they broke huge. The whole place was on fire with buzz all over your body. It was over the top thst little heroin addict could channel so much energy. It felt like the roof was going to blow off. There were no cell phones.
It was wild. That dude 😅
could scream that guttural roar beyond what’s human.
It was an event that was mind blowing. It was like witnessing a live birth, a snuff film, atomic war in three minute, Christ raising from the dead and getting his head blown off then walking off unusually alive. Usually. It was a what did I just see. We’d drive five hours to see them. It’s was heroic and dangerous. Like seeing Guns N’ Roses 87-88. They didn’t like each other but they had an insane intensity… it’s called you had to be there live in person to get what was going on.
Led Zeppelin crossed with Chas and Dave. I laughed so much I thought I was going to have sheer heart attack.
When I discovered KISS in high school, I disliked them immediately and couldn't wrap my head around their fame and massive following. Andy, you nailed it. Gene Simmons was especially a master of marketing. KISS even started selling their own condoms at one point! They are the Rock Kings of "The Brand," but their music is absolute garbage.
I agree with you on The Grateful Dead, although I happen to appreciate a lot of their music, at least during the early days prior to 1980 and the immersion of bands into things like Disco and New Wave. Yet, as good as they were, I believe The Grateful Dead were totally overrated. Probably why Jerry retreated from the spotlight eventually - he was just a regular dude who happened to be a very skilled guitarist and songwriter, who didn't want all the fame and noise out there, he preferred to just be a valued member of a fun rock band.
As usual, you nailed this one Andy!! Cheers, mate ☺
The funny thing about KISS is that they are basically the definition of "sellout", but somehow people still respect them. They are like the most anti-rock rock band.
I actually think they have some great songs. They have a lot of filler, but especially Destroyer and Creatures are IMO pretty good albums.
I remember seeing the first Kiss album on 8-Track in a record store when it came out. I thought they must be a progressive rock band. A lot of the prog rock bands had theatrical elements in the 1970's so I thought they must sound like Genesis or Jethro Tull or Yes or something. A few weeks later I bought the album thinking it would be something like Thick as a Brick or Close to the Edge or Dark Side of the Moon. As soon as it started playing I thought there must have been a mistake. Maybe they put the wrong record in the sleeve...I got ripped off.
I couldn’t agree more about KISS. All marketing and stage show.
Pig Pen was the Greatful Dead full stop.
How many decades has kiss been around, and they have exactly two songs that just barely make the competent mark of rock composition.
@@frankmarsh1159
I thought the makeup was to hide their ugly mugs. Then I heard them play. It was a distraction from their lack of talent.
Queen as an overated ROCK band? Okay, I can see that. But as an overated BAND? Nah. Imaginative, unique and versatile as any great band. Chemistry too.
Justin Panariello did a discography overview of Queen from their debut up through 'The Game'. The takeaway was that they're not as good a rock band as people think they are (they do seem to have had an intense following in the UK for their live shows), although Freddie Mercury was hands down one of the greatest rock singers ever.
@@yes_headReally? He couldn't sing the blues. Their first and last great album is Sheer Heart Attack 1974. Lost interest after Opera. Period.
In the music industry, “good” bands are the ones that can influence societal framework. Most of these bands are no better than any other bands, but pop music is a psyop so these are the bands we get.
Idiotic having Queen, They were and are one of the best ever.
@@heimomoilanen9654 Freddie could sing any style of music, that is why he is the best.
Kiss being overrated is obvious but that is part of the escence of the band, the way the band was planned, being created as an overrated band from their inception is part of their charm. Still they manage to have great songs with cool guitar, bass and drum parts that everyone can recognize.
@davidbradley2294 Of courrse, but any band would kill to have a War Machine, an Unholy, a Black Diamond,a God of thunder, or a Detroit Rock City in their catalog.
‘Great’ songs? Quite arguable. 🥴
I thought when Kiss first came out, they were like the Monkees. I wasn't sure if they played their own instruments or not.
I don't pledge pledge allegiance to any band whatsoever (well, maybe King Crimson and Black Flag), but the first 5 or 6 Kiss albums are really, really good. And it was fresh, too. They took classic 60's and 70's rock/hard rock and stripped down of its folky, trippy elements and delivered pure, undiluted rock n roll..
Kiss puts on a great live show, you have to see them live to understand them.
I don't think Pink Floyd is overrated: I think they are such a big anomaly in the history of rock that it cannot be analyzed in the same way as other bands. Their first works were a search, an experimentation that bore fruit with:
dark side
Wywh
animals
the wall
I mean, they weren't trying to be "good" with the other albums or sell millions, so they shouldn't be compared to those 4 masterpieces.
By the way, 4 albums for which all the other bands in the world - except for The Beatles - WOULD KILL.
The piper needs another chapter, for obvious reasons
Pink Floyd is one of the greatest bands in history! The first CD that I ever bought back in 1985 was "Dark Side of the Moon".
Piper es una obra maestra, al nivel de las cuatro que has mencionado, solo que suena diferente. Los fanaticos del sonido clasico de la banda en los 70 discriminan el disco. Algunos hasta cometen la estupidez musical de valorar mas discos de bajo perfil como more, obscured by clouds o a momentary lapse of reason, por encima del Piper. Para mi, eso es fanatismo. Ojk man, no te gusta el sonido, te gusta mas el sonido de david gilmour con waters comnponiendo, que el de Barrett, pero cada cancion del Piper tiene algun secrretito musical oculto entre las capas de exoperimntacion, que es muy dificil captar a la primera escucha, pñero que vasa caprtando poco a poco. El disco te envuelve como una telaraña si lesa das varias oportunidades... y es popsiblemente la cosa mas original que haya salido de la inglaterra de lios años 60. Años luz por encima de sus coetaneos ingleses... es una opinion generalizada de la critica musical, no algo que me haya inventado yo. Es un disco MUY CASTIGADO en general por los fanaticos del pink floyd de los 70. Ellos buscan el mismo sioniodo de los que se hiciero9n fans y no van a encontrarlo. Hay que abordarlo dede otro prisma diferente, quizas incluso como una banda diferente. Y realmente casi lo era. Hasta rick wright cambio su estilo al teclado y el piano cuando barrett desaparecio. El saucerful of secrets es un disco de transicion entre las dos bandas distintas... Yo lo veo asi. Luego es unaestupidez decir que gilmour sustituyo a barrett... el que sustituyo a barrett como fueraza creativa fue roger waters. El perfil de david gilmour en pink floyd era mas de ejecutor de ideas ajenas que de fuerza creativa. Waters fue el que tomo el testigo de syd barrett. ademas si te das cuenta en el disco a saucerful of secrets la importancia de la guitarra es casi nula... el bajo y el teclado se imponen sobre ella. a david gilmour le costo ecnontrar su sitio en la banda. tampoco fue inmediato.
@@aprendizdebrujo100 Si, concuerdo con lo que apuntas.
Por eso decía que Piper merece un capítulo aparte, ya que es un gran álbum, pero con la formación inicial de la banda y el liderazgo creativo de Barret.No tiene nada que ver con lo que vino después.Piper tiene canciones que me encantan.
@@aprendizdebrujo100very well said. I agree 100 percent.👍
@@doscwolny2221 👍
Brian Wilson was 23 when he wrote and recorded Pet Sounds. After that they released the albums Surf’s Up and Sunflowers. Both amazing albums. The reason the Beach Boys have released some dross after that is because Brian Wilson basically went insane and, after a brief pretty good interlude led by Carl Wilson, Mike Love took over and he wanted to keep the Beach Boys as a nostalgia band and Brian didn’t have the energy, inclination or ability to stop him as he had basically left the group and only made fleeting appearances with them. But most of their work up until the early 70s was very good.
Marillion?!?!?! Say what you want about their music (I think it’s great), but it’s literally not possible for a band that has to crowdfund its albums to be considered “over-rated”.
The only way you could ever even fathom that Marillion are overrated are if you are either Mick Pointer or someone from IQ. Otherwise it's a very strange take. Marillion are underground heroes in any line-up.
Marillion is 3rate Genesis. Same with Gentle Giant, which meens they were good bands. We never speak about the hundreds and hundreds of bands who strived so hard to make it and never made it. So 3rate is not as derrogative as it may sound. It is just not the top.
@@gillan5They were almost a first rate Genesis when fish was in the Band
@@aminmalik4086 They were always way beyond - like Genesis done right! :)
The Fish albums are all classics. And Pete treweves is a phenomenal bass player.
I remember Marillion literally funding a tour by asking fans to donate money and let them stay at their houses during the tour. I don't think there is any possible way to over rate a band that most people would say "didn't they have a song in the eighties"? And most likely most couldn't even name the band, they'd just recognize the one song they had a hit with.
Clutching at Straws in MY opinion is the greatest concept album ever done. It beats The Wall, The Lamb, and even Amused to Death. The lyrics and melodies are out of this world, and I say that as somebody that pretty much wrote them off after that, so its not like I"m ranking it that highly because I"m a 'fan'.
So I don't think you can over rate a band that most people have no idea existed. At a local reseller they've had the Script for a Jesters Tear in vinyl newly wrapped for ten bucks and its been there for two years. I mentioned it to the store owner, he said 'never heard of them, crazy cover though".
So I think its safe to say not only is Marillion not 'over rated', they are barely 'rated' by most of the population, and its a tragedy they aren't heard by more people when so much junk gets played. Rheostatics in Canada are like that, original, great songs, bands cite them as an influence, but can't sell an album for love or money.
Don’t agree with Clutching at straws being better than the lamb. Brave is better than clutching at straw and closer to the lamb.
I do agree that Marillion were very underrated band. Superb band but not as good as Early Genesis who are the best band ever.
His opinion was somewhat clouded by the fact ‘his band(s)’ didn’t hit the limelight and holds a grudge. Most people 40+ have heard of Marillion but most people below the age of 40 have not - so I find it hard to appreciate anything he has to say about Marillion without feeling he has the green eyed monster in reference to Marillion and 80’s brief success. For the record I dislike Kayleigh for the song is most non-Marillion stuff they have done.
Fair point, funny story.
@@ronaldround1072 yeah Kayleigh was a bit of a Pop Chart song although in the context of Misplaced Childhood it's a great track. I don't listen to Marillion much these days but when I do the tracks are timeless.
Clutching and Brave are two of my best albums. Did not really get into the later Hogarth stuff after Brave.
They were a great 80's band and someone I admire.
@@ronaldround1072 No, most people over 40 have not heard of Marillion. Just like MOST people over 40 have no idea that Peter Gabriel was even IN Genesis.
I do find it bizarre when people talk about musicians and sports teams like their personal taste is some moral attribute.
Kayleigh I think is a nice enough song, in the context of the album it 'works' and it also helped make them some money because LOTS of poeple liked it.
But you could be right, some people dislike bands BECAUSE they had a pop hit, I can sort of understand that because some people feel they are 'backing' up artists who they feel never 'sold out', despite the fact most musicians usually TRY to make music that as many people as possible like.
I mentioned Rheostatics and somebody mentioned their lack of success to them and why they don't 'try' to have pop hits and their response was "Of course we're TRYING". They just don't know how. A guy asked Captain Beefheart "don't you want to have hits" and Don Van Vliet said "Of COURSE I do", and anybody listening to Captain Beefheart knows that he and the mainstream were never going to be bride and groom.
Brian Wilson said that he learned and taught the rest of "The Beach Boys" to sing by listening to "The Four Freshmen."
When I read all the comments here, I have the strong suspicion that everyone who doesn't like a certain band or bands uses the term "overrated" to describe them.
So the term overrated is overated in itself and is used totally wrong.
Music is all about personal taste.
Re: Grateful Dead's improvisation being grounded in the blues. You could say exactly the same about Cream, only more so. I've never been a blues fan so it's not a coincidence that I don't much like Cream. They were of their time, it seems to me. Whereas the Dead's music is constantly evolving with new offshoot and cover bands etc. The Dead wrote some great songs that can be interpreted (by other people) in many different ways and still sound good. And also the lyrics by dedicated lyric writers Hunter and Barlow elevated the songs even more. In my opinion... you're welcome to disagree!
I like Cream but the Grateful Dead only became amazing to me after hanging out with some deadheads. At that point I’d only heard 3-4 radio hits and didn’t think anything special. Then the heads played me their concert tapes and I became a huge fan. I was blown away by the massive library of excellent and beautiful songs: not just Dark Star but Wharf Rat, Terrapin Station, Help on the Way/Franklin’s Tower, Uncle John’s Band, That’s It for the Other One, etc. I just recently heard Live Dead and found it to be tedious; they really didn’t hit their stride until the mid 70’s! Then again if you’re into trippin, then the late 60’s were just fine.
agreed the improv by Cream is nothing compared to the Dead
Was there another band that can keep 20,000 people dancing for 4 hours. Louis Jordan, the Beatles, Springsteen? Maybe? A lot of the bands you rate highly can't even be danced to. Jerry Garcia is also a true guitar player's guitarist.butyou have to listen and their laid back Vibe fools you into thinking nothing is going on.
@@guywoznicki7847 Totally agree, I don't even like Live Dead. I recently listened to all the original studio and live albums in order (about 15 or so I think). And Live Dead was the one I liked least of all.
@@theshrubberer I read a book about Deep Purple by Martin Popoff and in ‘68 they briefly opened up for Cream. Ritchie Blackmore was such an impressive guitarist that the crowds would actually boo Clapton. After this happened 2-3 times Purple were dropped from the tour. I laughed because Clapton always bored me!
In my teens, I had a close, dead head english friend who had lived in LA for a while. However high we were, when he put GD on - I would turn it off. Their pieces aren't "songs". They are what happens before you have an idea for a song.
I guess you better tell the songwriters Hall of Fame they better pull them out
@@joefilter2923 Sure, because Halls of Fame organisations mean art is real, right? I mean, Timbaland is in there.
@@Dr-Curious The simple fact is that you have not listened!
open your mind, open your mind
Think think think think think think don’t think think think don’t think think think don’t think
@@joefilter2923 Acid.
@@Dr-Curious- I don’t know much about Timbaland, but I know Justin Timberlake’s best songs have Timbaland on them. “What Goes Around… Comes Around” & “Cry Me a River”. Those are some poppin’ tunes. You can hear Timbaland’s influence (and voice), but I thought of him as a producer, not a songwriter. But it’s true that many artists produced their most popular songs while they were working with Timbaland.
I think Queen having fans aged 5-85 makes them pretty special. Great in the studio and even better live. What more can you ask for?
Queen is the only group my 80yo mother can tolerate anymore. Queen or Xmas music or nothing.
QUEEN SUCKS i can listen to them in strict moderation. That's not a qualifcation for upper tier.
The Beatles also have fans aged 5-85...good company.
When Queen is great they'r near the greatest. The problem with them is that every album has filler. Some have a very significant amount of it too. I can't think of a great band that produced more filler than them. Queen was a band that all members were participating song writers. This meant everyone was fighting for credit. The fallout from that is that Brian May for example at times found songs on an album that were less interesting than some of the others. Just using Brian as an example - could have been any of the members, because they all had duds. Everyone fighting for their cut, means equal share - even if the quality is not equal share
They have probably five songs. Very good songs, but that’s about it.
Lots of butt hurt fanboys here. 😢Can't disagree with any of your picks except for the Beach Boys. Pet Sounds and Brian Wilson's crazy period are overrated. "God Only Knows" is overrated but not the band itself. Pink Floyd belongs at the top of the list. DSOTM is overrated. You forgot Metallica and the Eagles.
I get it Marrilion didn’t offer you a gig haha !I like Marrilion, and Genesis , ELP Tull PFM Triumvirat , Floyd , so there !
I like them all too. Every last severely overrated one of them. Yeah, them being massively overrated and us liking them are not mutually exclusive.
I liked the video but I cannot agree with Queen being there. I love prog but I love all their albums. Outstanding songwriters, outstanding performers, each of them. Did they write pub music? Sure, the best ever. Did they also write neo classical pieces, prog, funk, dance, heavy rock, jazz? They did everything! What didn't they do? I believe you would be hard pressed to find any band with a catalogue as diverse and as accomplished as Queen. And honestly, thank god for their recent rise in public awareness. I can't see any aspect that they lack. And to say that they are not the Mahavishnu Orchestra is just silly. They were better 😊
So true!
wow a Marillion genesis comparison, havent heard one of those for about 35 years lol, sour grapes you only played in very unsuccesful, unpopular nerdy bands that could barely fill a ford Galaxy perhaps?
I have HATED KISS since I first heard of them in 1973...52 years of HATE x10 to the power of the Elder!
Awesome list, very spot on. I think it boils down to 4 categories:
Inconsistency:
Their bright moments overshadow their inconsistent discography (Queen, Pink Floyd, GNR, Beach Boys)
Style Over Content:
The image overshadows the music (Kiss and Motley Crue)
Lack of ambition:
The band doesn't push boundaries their contemporaries already surpassed or at least tried to (Foo Fighters, Marillion)
Overemphasized context:
Bands being in the right place at the right time get mistaken for being important for the evolution of the genre. Having your lead singer dying definitely adds to the "being important"-trait (Joy Division, Greatful Dead)
Nice breakdown. I agree.
I wouldn’t necessarily make the same choices, but I get where he’s coming from in these.
I actually *love* Queen, but I agree that the “Freddie Mercury is a god and Queen were an unsurpassed phenomenon” stuff gets out of hand.
I don’t entirely agree about Pink Floyd, but I do think they’ve got some not-so-great stuff out there.
I think even if you make the Spaghetti Incident, if you've made Appetite for Destruction then you are a great band. There is enough good stuff on Lieslieslies and Use your Illusions to show some consistency.
The UK didn't get given the build up and hype for Kiss and Motley Crue, so just judged them by therir music, which is clearly not all that.
@@worldofparker Yes Motley Crue was/is a US based hype thing. I didn't understand that until lately. They are HUGE there.
Pink Floyd, Cream and Queen. Anyone naming these clearly uneducated. Regardless of opinions they are not overrated. Annoying accent
I had a subscription to 'Guitar Player's magazine for a number of years and shook my head in bewilderment at how many featured artists would cite KISS as their big influence. In some cases. I'd say it explained a lot. In others, I can only be glad it was not evident.
Shite❤
Are the Foos so prominent as to warrant potential overestimation? I never owned any of their albums, but I must admit to liking “Everlong” as a tween. 🥴
I bought their first album, meh. And I never bought anything else.
They’re in the rock ‘n’ roll Hall of Fame so I guess they’re rated pretty highly by somebody. (Not me.)
@@thirdcoast5755 Don't get excited: Whitney Houston is also in the RnR HoF.
"Medicine at Midnight" was a head-scratcher.
One of the biggest singles in history for a reason
So just by definition alone this list is silly. The 10th band I never heard of, I've been a musician since I have been a musician since I was 13 and I'm now 63 and I've never heard of them, so they were absolutely not "overrated". I certainly agree The Grateful Dead is overrated, they don't write well and they are not good musicians. I agree the Foo Fighters are overrated, never got the music, never too impressed with their musicianship. And frankly I thought Nirvana was extremely overrated, Alice in Chains, Soundgarden, and STP were IMO were far better bands (again from a song writing and musicianship standpoint) from the Grunge era. Agree with the whole KISS being overrated from a music standpoint. KISS is a novelty act, not that they weren't a band that influenced a lot of people that became great musicians, but based on song writing and musicianship, KISS is overrated. I disagree with Motley Crue being on this list, from a song writing standpoint they bridged a gap between punk and heavy metal and the band has a very good groove. Musicianship...not so much. Disagree with Guns & Roses, you can't rate a band by what they turned into after they imploded, but they are absolutely not "overrated" when they were at their peak. I wouldn't argue one way or the other about the Beech Boys, never liked them, never too impressed by their writing skills, never impressed with their playing skills (the actual Beech Boys, appreciate the Wrecking Crews playing abilities), but I certainly appreciate their ability to write a hook. Just like the band listed at number 10, Marilliion is NOT A WELL KNOWN BAND! I have heard of Marillion (and a mention on The Young Ones) because they warmed up for Rush...but to say they were "overrated" is fucking ridiculous! Good players, generic progressive writing, almost completely unknown in the states...NOT OVERRATED BY DEFINITION! Totally off base with Queen being "overrated" Queen one of the top rock bands in history. Certainly they are better than Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, or several other classic rock bands, but they are closer to the top than they are to the bottom. And for the record, a majority of material from any band is "filler". Nirvana, Metallica, and Lynyrd Skynyrd ARE NOT IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM BETTER THAN QUEEN! Agree with Pink Floyd, way overrated.
What was left off this list that should be on it;
The WHO! The material is weak and other than Entwhistle the players are weak.
Bruce Springsteen; good writer but ever single band that played his material played it better than he did. He did have decent players but they were all "sidemen" that weren't allowed to demonstrate their personality.
U2; piss poor material, piss poor musicianship
The Kinks; same as above
Nirvana; same
Poison; same
I'm a Huge Queen fan but when I started to like them I had them in the same group of bands with ELO and 10cc I still think that's about right
Yes,they were a great Rock band in the early-mid 70s,then went downhill after Bo Rap was a big hit and they went Disco/Funk.
Queen queen2 and shear heart attack, day at the races, and night at the opera cannot be put in the same music box as elo, later queen stuff prob yes, but still great, elo where also the work of genius, better than today's offerings. IMHO.
Lol. "Stone Cold Crazy" in the same box as 10cc?
I must have missed 10cc´s speed metal monster hits. Well, I´m not gonna dig for it.
I saw IQ supporting Magnum at Newcastle City Hall in December 1985, were you playing with them then? I was with you all the way here until you got to Queen and Pink Floyd, where I didn't entirely agree with your reasoning, although I can see some of the points you're making. I think you have compared Queen with bands that I would not have put in the same category, and I like and have seen several of them, as well as Queen. The Pink Floyd one is difficult. I can think of a few bands that have been influential, but who have just released too many albums, which inevitably include a lot of filler tracks or which just aren't very good. REM comes to mind as an example.
For what it's worth I saw Pendragon at the Student Union at Stirling University circa 1984/85. In 1980 or thereabouts I saw a band at what was then Kingston Polytechnic. They were more or less unknown then and never really went anywhere. What was their name? Oh Yeah! U2 😏
Voivod! Hell yes! They are underrated for sure.
Amen.
I saw Killing Technology performed in an Indiana dive bar....amazing.
I often say, as someone from the San Francisco area who played drums for the New Riders of the Purple Sage in the 80’s I should have been from Great Britain as I was mainly into British bands as opposed to San Francisco area bands like the Dead. People would come up to me and ask questions about them and that’s how I learned things about them but never really into them. I do respect them and always did.
No matter how many different ways you try to tell people overrated doesn't also mean not great, some people still won't get it.
well ,he didn't actually have much positive to say about most of the bands on his list so that caveat was a bit gratuitous imo
Ppl are super weirdly tribal or religious about bands. Once you step back it all is so incredibly stupid and funny
Miles Davis and Ornette Coleman both had high compliments for The Dead and Jerry in particular. Sometimes I think the rush to dismiss the Dead is simply not wanting to wade into the great tidal wave of the catalogue itself. It’s safer just to listen to a handful of vinyl and dismiss them wholesale. Whatever. At least this gives some perspective on why they haven’t been a part of Andy’s fascinating discussions on improvisation. I would suggest anyone interested in the band owes at least one complete concert a listen.
yeah I love Andy but self selecting Live Dead and then defending the choice poorly is the ultimate cop out..At least consult some people know the catalog. I don't know a single person that would recommend that album as "the one to judge"
the one I would recommend to newbies is Barton Hall 77 now available as an official release. Or some of the Europe 72 shows like Hundred Year Hall
I agree with this and the replies. Live Dead is not a great place to start. live shows from early seventies onward.
Andy hasn't absorbed himself into the Dead, and, that's ok. It's a band that needs immersion. Still then, they're not for everyone. Andy has said his dislikes Americana, and if there is one thing they are, it is that. Love his channel and we know what he likes. I was a massive prog fan until I heard Dylan and then, thank the baby Jesus, the Dead. Dylan tuned me to lyrics that weren't talking about Any Rand, dancing fairies, or King Arthur's court. The Dead brought a wicked warmth and invitability into the extended instrumentations I loved in prog. Warm, organic, terrific songs, spectacular musicianship. The Dead were so many different bands, and so to judge them on one record is like dissing Paris because you had to pay for the loo at the Eiffel Tower.
I agree with you guys, I think if anything the Dead are under-rated. Andy is into hard rock which the Dead didn't do. But jeez, they wrote so many absolutely classic songs, I think their catalog can stand beside pretty much anyone's.
35:31 "I like Queen Bohemian Rhapsody is brilliant, Another One Bites the Dust is a great disco track..." - Lol. And here we go again!
People who call Queen overrated are usually the ones who only know the Greatest Hits or some overplayed radio songs and have no clue of their 15 studio albums, but they think they can judge the band.🙂
"tHiS iS a PoP bANd! tHEy'rE noT a rOCk BAnD!" - Aaand thanks for already proving my point! ^^
For example, go and listen to their first 2 albums (you won't find any of those songs on a Greatest Hits... well, only one song) then come back and tell me how they're not a rock band... ^^
Absolutely agreed with this statement! Ogre Battle rocks hard!
But there's nothing wrong with being a pop band. In my opinion, they just can't be tagged. They could do anything, mostly thanks to Mercury's genius, so they did. Queenifying everything they did so it would be them anyway.
A song like 'Death on two legs' nobody knows nowadays, I knew Queen for years before I heard it for the first time and it blew me away. I thought albums like Magic, The Miracle and Innuendo were brilliant. So many great songs in there. And that after so many years of being together. Roger Taylor was not really a great drummer, but the other 3 were just up their with the best, especially Bryan May. BTW I'm not even a Queen fan, hardly listen to them.
"Dragon Attack" off "The Game" was a great deep track. The solos are excellent.
You are absolutely right. I don’t think Andy has listened to their first two Queen albums they are certainly not pop.
Marillion no way. Put it on the other list (underrated). They were very successful during the ending 80s, but they remained a so good band after Fish's departure. The became less successfull despite the quality of their music that improved album after album, reinventing themselves with an new awesome lead singer, Steve Hogarth (underrated singer himself). Ok I'm a fan, so I'm sensitive about such statement. Perhaps they were a little overrated during their period with Fish, selling well, making great success. But this success overshadowed the quality of their misic and skilks from their musicians (like with Genesis when Peter left), Steve Rothery desserve far more admiration as he's nearly at Gilmour's level and emotion in his playing. After Fish's departure they made many masterpieces like Season's end, Brave, Afraid of sunlight, This strange engine, Marbles, Fear, An hour before it's dark (the last one). Those albums were clearly ignored and underrated despite their qualities, but for me they were even better than their 80's albums.
Pink Floyd no way. I don't develop. Millions of fans disagree.
Agree with Kiss, FF, Motley Crue, G&R, Nirvana, Queen.
But why not U2, Coldplay, Oasis???
I haven't even started the video but I can see Kiss are on here - we need a definition of 'overrated' then because as far as I am aware nobody in the rock media ever thought they were any good and they were (and are) treated as a bit of a joke by grownups....
Back in O.C. Calif when I was 30 my wife heard a commercial on the radio about a David Gilmour show coming up. Knowing I am a Floyd fan she called the radio station (KMET - LA, “The Mighty Met”) to get information on the concert, The DJ on live radio Cynthia Fox…. said...."Congratulations, YOU are caller number 10, YOU just won tickets to the show and the Sound Check Party before the show"...
I met David Gilmour back stage. He gave us both a signed album that I have in my music room. We talked for 22 minutes. I called him…“The Master Of The Stratocaster” He smiled. I told him his music will stand the test of time with anything from Beethoven or Mozart. He smiled even bigger. I asked if I could shake both his hands that make such great guitar solos, he smiled bigger and said “Sure” and shook both hands at the same time, making a cross between us, I smiled HUGE. Hard to explain how awesome that moment was in my life. I asked him to describe his technique of playing guitar, he replied… “I strike a note, bend it, shake it and then release it”…. Yes, he does that quite well, better than any other guitarist I know. . I told him in my eyes he’s a “Legend“. He thanked me and said “Enjoy the show”…. during the concert after the song “Money” he looked right at me and said…. “On saxophone, another Legend, Mr. Raphael Ravenscroft” … acknowledging my comment to him. It is my favorite moment in over 300 shows I’ve seen.
I asked David…. How do you create those awesome solos?… he said….. I sit on a stool and listen to what Roger, Nick and Rick put down and play along. I listen to what I played and pick out what I like, then I put the pieces together into one piece then learn to play it as one. Our fans are fanatics for our shows to sound like the albums so I must play it correctly each time in a show. I have the concert Brochure and album on the wall with David’s picture centerfold.
Pink Floyd music is on the way to gained a place on Classical Music Category. This was told by my classical piano teacher a long time ago.
What? No head or handy j for the man?
One hell of a story! I read that twice.....made me feel real nice! Great to hear that our heroes can be well grounded, down to earth people, who seem to really appreciate the success they've achieved! Happy for you to experience such awesomeness! Dave's tone is second to none!
@@treff9226 My goodness - music is, above all, decades of routine craftsmanship, they are normal humans, not geniuses or gods!
Dude you took the brown acid again?
You really thought Dave was talking to you during songs?
That’s beautiful.
I personally can't stand Dave Grohl, he claims to be a massive punk/metal fan yet starts a butt rock band just to make money. Zero credibility.
Punk means the freedom to do as you want.
He did the Probot project, that’s metal, but yeh Foo’s can be dull overall with some good songs here and there.
@@chetsenior7253he's as punk as my neighbours cat
@fydstar just another vanity project so he could suck up to more artists he was always sniffing Lemmys arsehole.
During the coofid hysteria he was in effect a totalitarian government extention demanding this and that. He stooped low.
Like getting trapped by the pub bore when you are putting money into a juke box. Obviously no one else would talk to him so he targeted you. RUclips, why do you put this rubbish on my feed?
Queen are one of my favourite acts of all time along with the Beatles... but only their 1974-78 period.... I can't really fathom the rest... it's like a different band. So to some extent I agree they are overrated...
I remember seeing Kiss on posters, badges, painted on satchells, iron on patches on denim jackets and even their pinball machine in the local cafe that had the Space Invaders, Galaxians, etc... and was excited to watch the "Attack of the Phantom" film back in 1979/80... as I thought they must be amazing.... but wow... that music did not even register to me and I was dying to get out of the cinema... I was only 10/11 but even I knew it was rubbish and boring.
I HAVE too add 3 comments to this: 1) when I was a kid buying records in the late 60's early 70's, there were 2 distinct genres - Progressive Rock and Art Rock - bands like Pink Floyd and Procul Harum and Moody Blues were "Art Rock". Somewhere since then the Art Rock group has been pushed into the Progressive folder; it still doesn't seem right to me. 2) I am a Dead fan but not enough to be a Deadhead. But I've spent a lot of time with Deadheads and I don't think any of them would argue that The Greatful Dead was a great band. On any given night they might put on an awful show. The next night might be great; to them that was the charm. 3) I remember at a job during break one time we were discussing the best singer, the best guitarist etc. One guy insisted that it was inarguable the Robert Plant was the best singer, Jimmy Page was the best guitarist, John Paul Jones and John Bonnam the best bassist and drummer. He wouldn't even consider to doubt it due to the coincidence factor.
”Somewhere since then the Art Rock group has been pushed into the Progressive folder; it still doesn't seem right to me”. Completely agree. Genesis, Yes, King Crimson, ELP are the real prog of my 70s youth.
Pink Floyd, Procol Harum and the Moody Blues were clearly labelled "progressive" in the Melody Maker in 1968-69. But then, Hendrix was also called "progressive blues" there. Maybe that distinction was made in other publications?
Everything that challenged or pushed the boundaries of the established genres was called progressive in the late 60s. The idea of an "art rock" belonged in there since rock had been mostly throwaway teenage entertainment before.
Shoulda been listening to Television.
@@Leo_ofRedKeep Yes, I was there too.
@@Leo_ofRedKeep Indeed, good answer. Prog and progressive aren't the same. I hang out on the Prog Archives board and that's an ongoing discussion there. Prog is a genre, progressive is not.
Don't think Marrlion were overrated because they never become a huge band, Motley Crew are just shit as are Kiss, Pink Floyd overrated hard to justify that one, they have a lot of first class albums, and I saw them live and have to say one of the best.
Motley Crue are legends only because the first album in 81 too fast for love and 82 shout at the devil we’re A grade.
Then after that just lame. But if you have two great albums you get to tour forever on that. I don’t think KISS has even one A grade album. But visually it was probably epic in the 70’s
David Gilmour is overrated?? What is wrong, must be Gen Z commenting lol
@@autk Yeah right! How can a true great possibly be "overrated"? Not too many have made a bigger impact on music.
@@GrahamSouthorn Because "overrated" and "impactful" aren't mutually exclusive?
Dude is jealous of Marillions success. Playing neo - prog but they got press, unlike IQ. Cuz who in the actual f are they?? So many other overrated bands out there as in huge but lame.
So you don't get Kiss?
Of course, you were born just a little too late. If you were a teenager around 1975 you'd have gotten it. In most parents' eyes they were dangerous and lots of people thought Kiss stood for Knights In Satan's Service. As I hear you talk about your buttons and patches you were obvious into the NWOBHM-Bands. So I can understand why you are not into Kiss. But overrated??? I'd rather say underrated knowing how many bands say they were influenced by them
If Roger Waters ever sees this video, he would probably call you a fascist. Then again he calls lots of people that nowadays. 😂
and he's mostly right
He was right on Israel. That has been his main beef for a while and they have gone out of their way to prove him right.
Haha. Quite. :)
@@Yausbro he's right?! yeah.. ... no.... no.
@@thumper8684But he's way off base on Russia and Ukraine - he doesn't get that some people you just can't seek peace with and you just have to stand up against them. I'm afraid Roger you dad got killed fighting him or trying to but Hitler was one of those so he didn't die for nothing. Putin is another one.
I am a 53-year-old American so that has a bearing on my thoughts.
Seriously disagree with the Dead.
Kiss truly rock as long as it's live.
Early Crue was great anything after shout is overrated. Totally agree with GnR for the same reasons.
The Beach Boys shouldn't be near the top 10 but are a very solid band I never see them as overrated but never rated as high as you think they are seen.
Since that movie Queen has been overrated for every great so9ng there is 10 garbage songs...
Floyd is the greatest ever. Live and on albums. My favorite album has been a Floyd album for the last 40 years. It has changed over the years. The Wall to DSOM to Animals and now at this point in life Wish You Here . The point is there is always some Floyd that will relate to where you are in life. From Meddle on(except Final Cut) has been all solid. Even the first two post Waters.(not including Endless River)
You missed the most overrated ever, Bon Jovi.
Bon Jovi i think might be in the were never rated high to begin with category ... but i hear you.
@@dewdew34 High school in the late 80\s way too much Bon Jovi... middle of the pack band at best.
"give me a large pizza, hold the bon jovis."
Do Kiss truly rock live even when they fake it?
@@dewdew34 Was about to say the same. In order to be over rated, a lot of people should be praising the band/artist for their influence and over all quality, and I don't see that happening with Bon Jovi. They're a totally indifferent band to most people.
Totally subjective. It could be any famous band you don't like. Though the most overrated artist in the history pf music has GOT to be Prince. But if you love him, you'd think that's crazy.
There are ways we can define overated.
Have you ever listened to a Prince album all the way through? I'd say a prog fan could appreciate a Prince album.
@@CultoalViniloyalCompacto-bx5mr Of course. I'm not saying he isn't talented. I even covered one of his better tunes. ruclips.net/video/MH9ptLxrYZs/видео.html I just think he's more flashy showman than a great musician
Wow! A personal list that is totally subjective! Wow!!n
Why don't you give us your criteria so we can all make a purely objective list?
Prince? Lmfao. He was brilliant.
Obscured by clouds.... filler?!? Wots uh the deal, free four, stay, the gold it's in the..., burning bridges.... it's an overlooked gem
Yep. If you don't rate Obscured by clouds, then you really don't get it.
I agree so many people disregard its beauty
The overrated factor comes a lot by the fact so many people won't let go of their teenage years heroes so they keep sonsuming the music of these bands. They go to the concerts but can't be bothered with new material by these bands or too lazy to discover new music in the vast world we have inf front of us courtesy of the internet. Queen were my favorite band ever as a young man but those years are long gone. Plus the over exposure makes me feel like Alex from A Clockwork Orange when he listened to Beethoven after the treatment...Lol
You are a treasure disregard the haters
Sorry, Kiss's image is garbage too!
Maybe cool in the 70s, then they kept doing it and doing it.
What?! No U2? Pink Floyd more over-rated than U2! My faith in you has dropped immeasurably, Andy. [Sad Face]...😉
U2 are underrated if anything. Except to ignorant tools like you.
U2 are, especially Boneo.
G N' R opened for Maiden where I live and Axle was spitting on the audience. Crap. Maiden killed them.
Lol. False.
We have all seen Freddy sing at Live Aid 85. Queen's set was so good that day, they made an Oscar winning movie just so we could all see it again in 4k. That performance alone should be enough to take Queen off this list.
I think the only overrated thing about Queen is precisely that set at Live Aid. They were way better than Deep Purple and indeed all but a handful of other rock, including prog, bands, but they have done better gigs than Live Aid, just less publicized.
I fully agree.
Its amazing to me how much gas-lighting there is for the stones, zepplin, and the beatles.
When you play song for song...performance for performance,
Queen stands head and shoulders *above* the rest.
@@RichWards-Winsahh… nope.
Queen is famous because Freddie was gay. That's it. Overrated asf
Oooh my, I can just imagine eyes across the world welling with tears and some others spitting acid with unreadable remarks! Good luck Andy!
It's a fun video, I agree with your picks, except Marillion, Hogarth is a tremendous singer and Rothery is a tremendous guitar player. As for Pink Floyd, The Wall may be overrated as an album, but DSOTM and WYWH are untouchable.
I just don't understand Dave Grohl career path, he continues to churn out, middle of the road, grocery store soundtracks, all of his music riding the same cookie cutter recipe......This music coming from a dude who grew up with hardcore punk and extreme metal running through his veins! The first Foos album showed promise, guitars were out front and some cool songwriting, some edge to it, plus he played pretty much all of the instruments on it. The next couple albums showed some bite, some aggressive riffing going on, but then it seems that each successive album was geared for airplay, a slew of samey sounding, vanilla flavored, radio syrup. I have some of these albums, thinking I'm going to like them more than I do, but I rarely play them, they're on the radio every freakin' minute, why reach for em'! Love the guy, the Tom Hanks of rock, but damn surprising that this music he makes is totally satisfying his artistic desires. Does it have to do with stacks of green paper - sadly, looks that way.
they make cash. That's how that happens. The general public doesn't want edge, they want their bellies rubbed.
Yeah, Colin, I stated at the end of my comment that it's probably all about the bank accounts of Dave and band. We all dig money, but how about some artistic integrity, how much money does Dave really need at this point. At the very least, make a solo punk or metal album to show you still "got a pair!"@@colinburroughs9871
Crying all the way to the bank....
he's a CIA plant
Dave Grohl never was Hardcore...Kurt was...A real freak of underground bands
How about a list of top ten Methodone Bands? [note: a Methodone Band is a band a fan turns to when they need a new album from their favorite band, the Heroin band, but that band stopped recording new material for some reason.] Greta Van Fleet is a Methodone Band for Zeppelin. Sweet is a Methodone Band for Queen. Marillion is a Methodone Band for Gabriel-era Genesis. Etc etc.
Yes I agree. That guy makes top ten about everything and nothing...especially nothing. How about a top ten of bands who screw the most groupies? Or a top ten of who's got the most std's?
Like the term
I've been looking for a methadone band for Jaxon-era Van der Graaf Generator for nearly fifty years and all I get is paracetamol bands.
Mmmm methadone
@@multi-purposebiped7419 Have you tried Thinking Plague or La Rossa?
If anything The Dead are underrated. How many styles they played. Their influence. The sheer amount of concerts, and the culture they developed. So many of the greatest songs of all time came from TGD. They had complete albums where every song was a chapter of the whole - not singles that didn't mesh with the rest of the album like most artist. Such an incredible singular band.
as Bob Dylan said, in praise, the Dead are a dance band Judging them on other criteria is missing the point
@@theshrubberer A dance band? How are they a dance band? lol
@@nicolasflamel2905how? Did you not attend any Garcia era shows? They were fundamentally different from other rock shows where people just pump their arms in the air and such.Read the Dylan quote for yourself..just google
Don´t worry, I will immediately raise my rating for Blues For Allah and give it one and a half star.....just because I´m such a nice guy.
Now back to the 5-star "Visions Of The Emerald Beyond" released the same year.
In 1978 Queens album Jazz was an album they never lived down and despite the damage control people use on it now it was exactly what the critics said then it was derivative. When people like the clash wanted to talk about how messed up rock N roll was at the time they without hesitation pointed out that album Rod Stewart blondes have more fun from the same year. And when they are comparing its head songs in cheesiness to Elton John’s don’t go breaking my heart you know it got bad. In the opening of the review for jazz the Rolling Stone Clinic came right out of the gate to lambaste queen for becoming so lazy and sticking to things so familiar and old. Stop that would sound right at home as part of the grease soundtrack. Or broadway.He wrote for those worried that possibly this new album is queen performing jazz you can rest easy queen does not have the imagination to play jazz. Queen for that matter does not have the imagination to play rock ‘n’ roll.
Based on the warning and the intro….you got an immediate thumbs up and a subscription!!!! Finally someone with an independent thought and opinion and not looking to appease the idiots of the world. Thank you I’m in!
I agree with everything except The Beach Boys. Their 67-73 ear is highly under rated. I love their early 60s songs so much that I forced myself to listen to their albums (cover to cover) from this era. A ton of incredible material.
Agreed, been doing deep dive on beach boys and Ive concluded they are better than the Beatles and I like them as well. Brian Wilson in his prime was better than Lennon and McCartney combined.
That's my claim its something you can't put a price on. Very important melodic energetic and cool tracks
Where he went wrong was by ignoring the whole SMILE deal - that, not Pet Sounds, was their amazing moment (and you have to reconstruct it from the Brian solo version and the best of the outtakes).
Oh, man! You actually got me! I was with you all the way up to the very end. I simply cannot call Pink Floyd overrated. They were an influence upon bands that sound nothing like them. Dave Gilmour was the reason half of mine mates picked up a guitar. (I’ve been a bleeding contrarian since birth. Buck Dharma is who inspired me to pick up the guitar, and no, it wasn’t one of BÖC’s 3 radio hits that did it. One of mi DA’s mates gifted him a cassette of *Agents Of Fortune *, and we were listening to it after he picked me up from school. Three minutes after I entered the automobile, I heard weird music playing, and I asked mi Da if he could turn it up, just in time to hear the guitar solo and final verse of ‘Vera Gemini’, which sounded like strange dreams I’d had, then the whole track, ‘Sinful Love’. The latter was an absolute banger. The verse section had this weird, twisting guitar riff all over it, the keyboardist was plinking along, creating this atmosphere of sinister tension, and when the lead guitar solo commences, it just grabs you by the hair and pulls you into another world for some 30-40 seconds. I’d heard brilliant guitar solos before, but I’d never heard ANYTHING like that. Years later, after buying all their records, I realised that if I’d entered that car ten mi utes earlier or five minutes later, I would not have heard what I still consider one of the finest rock guitar solos ever put to tape, and definitely the best studio solo by BÖC. I asked to borrow mi Da’s guitar that afternoon. He obliged, and sowed me major and minor barre chords on the first/second strings, and a heap of cowboy chords to practise changing chords.)
Back to the Floyd, though: I’ve grown bored of the 3 BIG HIT RECORDS. It irritates me that my Spotify Playlist doesn’t know to play Pink Floyd songs from ‘73-‘79 in the ORDER AS LISTED ON THE RECORD, when I set a playlist containing Pink Floyd to ‘shuffle’. So I’ve turned to that middle period-the era of *Saucerful* through *Meddle*. Especially *Meddle*.
I worshipped Syd Barrett, as an adolescent. I have an unblemished record of staunch heterosexuality, but i may have been a tiny bit in love with 1966-1972 Syd Barrett. I loved him to the point I wanted to absorb and become him. I was a mad acid freak by age 15; dosing nearly daily. HEAVY doses, as well.Being a science nerd with a Ph.D chemist for a father has its perks, as does looking 19 or 20 at 15. Using one of mi Da’s laboratory glassware catalogues, my friend-another chemist-and I set up a laboratory in the basement of an empty warehouse we rented in our little town’s industrial zone. I bought the chemicals and had them sent to a Post Office Box under a false name, and every time I went in to pick things up, I wore a different disguise. in return I got all the top-tier, gelatin wafer acid I could take, for free. I stayed fried for days on end. The world began to feel weird, stifling, and sharp-edged when I was NOT on LSD. However, I learned incredible things about myself-sometimes embarrassing things-, which is why I always took ‘heroic’ doses alone, and either wrote my thoughts, or, if the page became illegible, I had my trusty microcassette recorder.
I am not an expert by any means but it seemed to me that my tolerance for tripping on Acid escalated very quickly such that it really didn't go very far unless I gave it a good month between doses. Then came that one bad trip which ended my acid experiments. I call it a bad trip, but actually everything after that crazy experience was based on "smarten up kid!" so it really was a very good trip. Sent me right on the straight and narrow -school, job, marriage, kids, career. So the lesson is...do acid til it shocks you into reality.
I'm sure William Hung was an influence on somebody too. 🙄
@@Vince-lq3veCan’t possibly. Can’t abide the ‘straight life’. I was married once; woman of my dreams. I used to work as an audio engineer in a suburb of Nashville, called Murfreesboro.
She destroyed my trust in women; spent the rest of my life screwing around until I developed symptoms of adult-onset muscular dystrophy. That destroyed my career, and everything else left of my life.
You’re right; one had to take large quantities of LSD due to the tolerance, but I had access to free acid by the sheet. And I would take tolerance breaks every month or so. I only took acid in such huge quantities during my teen years, between ~15 and ~19. Now I take it twice per year, if I can find a good source.
Now all I believe in is music, drugs, and memories.
Different strokes, etc.
@@UTubeHandlesSuckI don’t know who that is. Unless they were an artist or band who released their first record before 1995, I typically don’t know who they are, with a few exceptions. I can’t abide post-‘95 mixing techniques. Everything sounds so clean and sterile. Listening to today’s music for casual enjoyment is like setting your living room up to look like a surgical suite.
How anyone can call Pink Floyd overrated is beyond belief. And Joy Division, are you sure😶🌫️ I never got the foo fighters so spot on there. I hate Kiss with a passion. Their music is awful to my ears. Amazing how you can build a following with a strong image. Never heard of Motley Crue and have no desire to 💤 Guns and Roses poor man's Zepplin. The Beach Boys I see where you're coming from but their best stuff deserves utmost respect Marillion, completly pointless to someone brought up on Geneses.
Wow, I thought it was just me. All these years I thought The Greatful Dead sounded like they forgot to tune their instruments and performed while they were falling asleep. I assumed I simply was not cultured enough to understand them. Also I love The Beach Boys because I also love The Four Freshmen. But Pet Sounds kinda sucked. Also yeah I kinda like Pink Floyd but I am not kinda in love with them.
Bob Dylan and Branford Marsalis think your original assumption was correct 😏
@@theshrubberer you must’ve missed Bob Dylan in the mid 80s, with that lovely voice and sense of timing. Fake Jesus is a hell of a drug.
@@joefilter2923not sure what your point is ...are you suggesting he is not a keen observer?
Nope, you just don’t understand it. It’s all good. Not everybody likes improv music.
They did a good cover version of "Dear Prudence" live.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion...even if it's wrong
which, of course, it never is, being an opinion :)
Funny when you spoke about bands you like as a kid before you discovered Kiss all the bands were British, funny that, then most of the bands in this list are American except amazingly for #1 & #2. It seems so biased and I am not even American. So hard to reconcile.
There was a rivalry between McCartney and Brian Wilson. A big problem with their catalog after that was Wilson's struggle with mental illness and addiction.
A big problem with Beatles' catalog is that Paul is dead
I agree with Andy regarding nearly every band in this terrific video. However, there is no way that Marillion are over-rated over here on the left side of the pond, because, sadly, they are nearly unknown in the United States. I'm a lifelong music fan at 50, had barely heard of them until 2018, and then wondered where they'd been all my life. They're managing to continue to make stunning albums as recently as "An Hour Before It's Dark," with no radio airplay. Meanwhile, they play small venues, mainly in Britain and Europe, to a small but intensely loyal fan base. That would actually appear to be the opposite of over-rated.
Yes, they are a super band!!!!
10) Joy Division - no. great band, whole discography is fantastic, they are right where there should be.
9) Grateful Dead - yes. correct. I also went in with "Dark Star" and "Live/Dead" and was disappointed. if their claim to fame is masters of improvisation, they are bad. however, I did listened to their discography recently and in fact grew to like the band very much. they were very consistent, melodic americana band. except "Anthem" and "Net", they're discography is very consistent, good and even progy in their middle late 70s period.
8) Foo Fighters - yes. absolutely. I like Dave, but FF are bland and boring. I don't understand their popularity.
7) Kiss - yes. absolutely. simple, badly produced, badly played songs. they are not wholly untalented, but they should be a small cult band, their popularity (mostly in America, they were almost unknown in Europe) is completely disproportionate with merit
6) Motley Crue - yes. also case of popularity (also, most of it in America), disproportionate with merit. I'll put their debut as a good, hard 'n' heavy album and Nikki is talented guy, but he didn't have the discipline to be consistent.
5) Guns N' Roses - yes. debut was so great that their legend lived on that album. Illusions were overblown, and Axl is insufferable diva.
4) Beach Boys - yes. they were a great band, no doubt about that, their 2 Summer compilations are must have, but albums were patchy and with lots of dreck, especially after Brian broke down
3) Marillion - no. great band. somewhat inconsistent, 2 fantastic albums, 2 mediocre (we're talking about Fish era). but, Fish was fantastic lyricist and Rothery is a genius. the problem is, no spark of genius from the rest of the band, it's all on these two. they were derivative from Genesis, but their themes and Fish's lyrical approach was much different from Gabriel's. his romantic approach definitely connected them with the public (especially female one) which gave them great popularity boost for a time, but all of it was absolutely deserving.
2) Queen - no. fantastic band, in the top 3 of all time. 4 fantastic musicians and authors. fantastic in studio and live. nobody sounds like them. marvelous synthesis of glam, music hall, hard rock, pop, prog. ton of great singles, fantastic, consistent discography ("Flash" is bad, but it's a soundtrack, "Hot Space" is "worst" regular album, but only half of album was "bad", and even the disco part had few good songs. and if your worst album has "Under Pressure", that's a measure of how great you are.) they stayed strong in the 80s, when most of old bands faltered and ended on high note. even "Made in Heaven" coda was great. there were some filler in the albums, but only a few songs. albums were consistently great thru whole career. they are mega popular and they deserve it.
1) Pink Floyd - no. I see a little of British class envy in the critique. their discography is inconsistent, but it is varied and parts are surprisingly avant-garde. folk, avantgarde, psychedelic, singer-songwriter, smooth prog, arena rock, great production. sound effects and album covers were icing on the cake. there was always strong atmospheric component in the music. comparing to other prog bands, they were probably the least virtuoso (Mason is great and Dave has great sound), as they were probably the most folk rooted from the prog bands. their most popular albums can be critiqued as slow, digestible prog for the masses. but in the end, their peaks very really great, and they are lot of gems in the less known albums. it's great to see such a popular prog band. they had some of popular singles but most of their legend rest in their long forms and concepts.
Interesting that you came around to the GD but didn't like Live/Dead.
@@carlos_herrera No, I do like "Live/Dead". It's just, there is this narrative that GD are crazy hippie band which had this epic long songs in concerts and thousand people came to trip to the music. So you come with this kind of expectations. Live, they were not as avant-guard like Pink Floyd or good at jams like Cream or The Allman Brothers or spacy as Hawkwind. I know about their "Drums/Space" parts, but this was excised from most of their contemporary live albums which were pretty conventional song wise. And nothing wrong with that, it's just that their reputation is different.
Whoever is telling people to start with "Live/Dead" or any version of "Dark Star" to get into the band is doing The Dead a great disservice, and that's coming from someone who is a huge deadhead.
Totally agree Joy Division was a great band. Tremendous output for only being around a few years, and they were extremely influential.
Queen are a fantastic band only if you are an occasional listener of mainstream music. You really just need to listen to a handful of albums of the late 60s to realize that they are really mediocre and not original at all
Ian Curtis’ suicide caused many to think that the band was a bunch of psychos. Nothing could be further frim tthe truth. Curtiis was suffering from an early onset neurological disorder that had him in rapid decline with no hope of reversing it. He was a singer who delivered fantastic depths of emotion in a non maudlin way.
The rest reformed as New Order and also were quite good. IMNERHO
Overall a good & bold take. It would be fascinating to talk with you one on one.
“Stoned country band” good one!
I don't know how anyone could listen to Joy Division's best of compilation album and not be blown away by their output in a relatively short amount of time, and just some really intense songs. That's the one I really disagree with on this list. And, Pink Floyd.
I have searched an entire lifetime for that one moment in time where the Grateful Dead had one single lick of anything interesting or just plain good, and I still haven't found what I'm looking for.
Forget about them and watch some of the new live videos with Samantha Fish. She can sing, play guitar and looks cute in her red leather jacket. And sometimes she opens with Kick Out The Jams.
I used to listen to Queen a lot. For some reason, I stopped listening decades ago and don't miss them.
I like Queen up until they started playing all their songs (mostly the same dozen or so) too much on tv and radio about fifteen years ago. I also suspect if Freddie was straight, there wouldn't be such a media love in with them now.
@@TibetanFox68 ''What tangled webs we weave when first...''
At least they are not rap
The same
Im sure Queen wont lose sleep
I am new to this channel, and a little RUclips jaded, so when I began watching this video, I was certain that either Led Zeppelin, or The Beatles (or both) were going to be on your list, even if just to stir the pot. So I was pleasantly surprised when you gave both of these bands their due when mentioning them.
My current favourite band did end up on this list, and while I do agree that they are somewhat overrated, I think you may not have given them enough of a listen. This is a band that (in my opinion) doesn't have a bad record in their catalog, and while they are best known for the catchy standard rock fare like My Hero, Monkey Wrench, and my personal favourite, Everlong, they also have a wide range of genres in their repertoire, from hard and fast tracks like FFL, Wattershed, and Weenie Beenie, all the way to soulful, sometimes melancholy tracks like Dear Lover, Virginia Moon, and The Deepest Blues Are Black. They also do an excellent cover of Baker Street by Gerry Rafferty. All in all I just think if you listened to a little more of their catalogue, your opinion of them might change. Or it may not ...
Queen definitively does not belong on that list. It was a fantastic band.
Yes they were. But as Andy said. Too many people consider them to be the godfathers of Rock. Which they arent. They have a lot of great great Songs. But there albums mostly are filled with average songs
@@AqualungsBreath Agree. They were more of a singles band. But those singles were incredible! And their live concerts were some of the very best during their active time.
@@AqualungsBreath The overly rating is merely a UK thing.
The problem with Queen is that they are overplayed on the radio and kept touring after Freddy died!
I agree - cannot put the radio on for an hour without hearing 2 or more Queen songs......but yes, the fact that they carried on touring after Freddie's death was - imo - unforgiveable. He was 50% of that band....literally irreplacable.
Like what you want, dislike what you want, but comments like "Springsteen sucks, he's a hack" or "Bruce Springsteen has one good album and can't play guitar" only serve to highlight a glaring ignorance and immaturity in music appreciation. Your opinion of your own feelings is certainly valid, but can we stop making idiotic, blanket statements that try to undo legendary bodies of work that are overwhelmingly seen as pinnacles of rock music.
Springsteen sucks.
Peter, that's of course an opinion that can't and shouldn't be argued with. His music doesn't do it for you, but do you ever wonder why he is so revered among millions of other music fans? I've been on this planet a long time, and there are quite a few musicians I absolutely couldn't get into at all, that I now love. Springsteen, Dylan, Bob Seger, Patti Smith, Velvet Underground - I avoided these artists like they were poison, but time changes our tastes and perspectives to some degree. These are all musicians where the lyrics are monumental to their success. Of course, there are some artists/bands that I couldn't give a damn about, and still don't! Like what you like, there's plenty of stuff out there for everybody. The only problem I have is seeing chucklehead statements like: "The Beatles weren't very talented" or "Springsteens success is all images, dude has no talent" these are simply asinine comments that ruin any credibility that person might have. Even strongly disliking a legendary musician, one should be able to at least give some understanding of their talent.
LOL
Dude, sounds like he is trying to deuce when he sings. His “cant shut up about it politics” are also a real bore…
He's right about Springsteen, about three or four good songs
Aside from Piper, The Dark Side, Wish you Were Here and The Wall let's not forget Meddle and Animals. All fantastic albums.
Fathers of Prog along with original Genesis and (maybe) E, L & P
Love PF - creative and genius music
Pink Floyd to me is not Prog. They are a psychedelic art band if you have to label them…
@@78aquamanCorrect. There is nothing "rock" about them. PF is boring asf to me
I was surprized Oasis weren't on this list. Clapton is overrated whichever band he was in. Always following trends...be it...B.B. King, Hendrix( even getting his hair permed in honour of Jimi), The Band or, nicking wholesale, J.J.. Cale's sound in the 70s...totally agree with KISS & Motley Crue (beyond Spinal Tap parody...how about the most underrated? Little Feat? Thin Lizzy?
You should apply to Harvard University, (and Berkeley in case you are not accepted at Harvard) as you are an incredible rock music analyst. You really are.
Great video! Finally found a home for my music opinions 👌
Sounds like someone is insanely jealous of Marillion, because they made it and IQ didn't. And Led Zeppelin didnt have tons of tracks. 72 or so to be exact. Six really good albums, the first six, just like Sabbath. And then they went into the toilet with Jimmy's heroin addiction. And they wrote like 4 songs. The rest of their catalogue was written by artists courtesy of Chess records. The one thing Zeppelin had going for them is when their drummer kicked the bucket, they didn't go into 40+ years of fairwell tours like The Who, or rather The Two. And it pains me to say that, because I really like The Who, even though it's about 60 songs written around D,A and G with some sus4/sus2's thrown in. Reduction!! I enjoyed your Pink Floyd rant. Was into them in my 20s, and then stopped smoking pot and being depressed. Maybe I'll take another dive into the IQ catalog at some point.