Most Overrated Music Artist (1 Viewer)

[Tom Ryan]

Ok, this was not something Clapton was expecting to benefit from. The Unplugged concert was a gamble. Who would want to hear Clapton play acoustic? He was just there to play music. It was incidental that the album went diamond and won a ton of Grammys. As for the profits, I don't know where they went. He may have given quite a bit to charity; it wouldn't be surprising considering how generous he's been even recently selling off a lot of his prized guitars to set up a center to help people get off drugs. But I don't know what he actually did with it.

In any event, it isn't the role of the musician or the actor or the author to play the fairy godmother and give everything to charity. I think most celebrities do give to charity, but the ones who don't aren't scoffed it because they've earned that money. It's theirs to give away or to keep. I know if I ever become rich I'll give plenty to charity, but I will not sit in judgment on those who don't.

-Tom

 

[RicP]

MikeAW said:

But you're missing out on some good music in this world, and all in the name of being a little too much above it all.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

 

[Tom Ryan]

Pot. Kettle. Black.

That's concise. I like that .
-Tom

 

[Chas_Michael]

MUHTALICKA THEY SUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Colin Jacobson]

astute marketing, but can you *honestly* say that her *songs* are your favourites? Thought not.

As such, you had decided for me and other Maddy fans that we didn't like her tunes. That went way beyond "personal disagreements"...
And who likes PSB but not Madonna? I thought that was illegal...

 

[Kirk Gunn]

Comment on "Tears in Heaven":

Clapton mentions during the Unplugged MTV interview that he wrote this song for the movie Rush, just before his son died. He wrote "The Circus Came to Town" to grieve for his son, and it is an incredibly powerful song (the last thing he did with his son was a trip to the circus).

This song was performed during the Unplugged concert, but not put on the album or video (to my knowledge). I have a VHS copy, but it's pretty shabby.

 

[Nathan A]

sorry i spelled jimi hendrix wrong...just goes to show how little i care for his playing.

i just don't understand how when you ask ANY average person who the best guitar player is, they quickly answer with "jimi hendrix!" and "santana!". they might as well say "i don't know anything about guitars! but those two are the only one's i've heard of so i'll say them!"

ask any guitar player and you'll get a different answer- except some will still say hendrix. i don't get it.

 

[TheoGB]

Well what makes a great guitarist? Jimi Hendrix - wrote some classic songs involving some innovative and impressive guitar playing.

Some people like a great guitar solo and some like an 'all-rounder'.

I consider Jonny Greenwood of Radiohead to be a premier guitarist - his innovation and style is incredible. But he's not really good on his own, if you see what I mean. He really rate's Blur's Graham Coxon. And he really is more of an all-rounder gets all the sounds going on his own.

But sod it, I am guitarist and I would always rate Hendrix. I'd not rate Santana because of what he does but he's certainly good player technically speaking...

 

[Tom Ryan]

Kirk: You're right, that song wasn't released on the unplugged album. However, it was retouched, titled "Circus" and released on Clapton's 1998 album Pilgrim. Great song.

As for Hendrix, are you really honestly trying to discredit him as one of the greatest guitarists of all time? I've been playing guitar for 4 1/2 years and I have no problem with someone who lists him as the greatest ever. My personal favorite is Clapton, followed by SRV, then Hendrix. But I think your average person or even guitar player might name him because a lot of people start learning the guitar with his stuff. The fact is, he was an incredibly gifted musician with an exuberant stage presence that, combined with his untimely death, has seared his image into the public mind. If you listen to his entire catalog, you realize this is a force that could not be denied.

-Tom

 

[Rutledge]

Is this thread about which artist you don't like personally?

Is it about the artist whose musicianship in your opinion sucks?

Or is it about their songs or songwriting ability.

Judging from the opinions exspressed here it is hard to tell.

i wanted to comment on some of things said about these musicians.

jewel recently said making a pop album is very seductive. It is easy to start writing a song that will be popular.

While many of the artists sound formulaic. They really get criticized when they change direction.

So many artist have a very distinctive sound and should be applauded for that. The jangling guitars of U2. Phil Collins drum sound and they way he plays slightly ahead of the beat. Ringo Starr's simple beats but absolutely perfect tempo counteracting John Lennon's bad time. ZZtop's guitar sound. Mark Knopfler's guitar sound.

Some of you may criticize the Beatles songs for being simple, but they thought it up. How many cover bands have heard trying to sound like the Beatles, and how many actually do?

 

[joe logston]

some of madonna old stuff is real good, i thank she is a little crazy now, but the new santana is lousey. mick jagger new video he looks like he just got out of a coffin, needs to go back.what the hell is wrong with all the rock people.

 

[Chuck L]

I have spent my life loving music that everyone else seems to hate, so I know that I am a bad one to add my two cents in here.

Having spent a decade in radio though, I feel that I would have to say that two of the most overrated groups in my PERSONAL view would be the Beatles and U2.

The Beatles, while I feel were great songwriters, should have stopped there. The performances FOR ME, leave a lot to be desired and I don't enjoy. (Maybe it is because I dated two girls that were so into the Beatles that any interest that I could have in them have been hampered by their memories.)

As for U2...While I will not deny the simple complexity of The Joshua Tree for it's overall performance, everything else from them has failed in it's light.

I would also have to add to the list the oversaturated market of teen pop....acts like Britney, Nsync, Backstreet could only hope to have the talent and the draw to have careers like the legends of music. I doubt that Britney in 40 years will even have the following to perform at sleazist venue in Vegas.

 

[MikeAW]

Nothing about the Beatles is taken into perspective because they occupy a very personal part of our lives, and that they are indeed, so much a part of our psyche.

The Beatles were the Backstreet Boys of their day...most of their songs trite and sophmoric...only they lasted longer than they should have. Maybe that was because of the unique phenomena of their staying power...and that may have more to do with Us, than them, and what they really were.

Time wounds ALL heels.

 

[chris c]

"The Beatles were the Backstreet Boys of their day...most of their songs trite and sophmoric...only they lasted longer than they should have. Maybe that was because of the unique phenomena of their staying power...and that may have more to do with Us, than them, and what they really were."

Well, I guess this post should clear up any debate regarding whether MikeAW is a writer. Aside from the misspelling (sophOmoric) and misuse of words (phenomenON) this is the worst thing I have ever read (I'm not exaggerating here).

 

[MikeAW]

Snnnnorrreee !

 

[chris c]

"Snnnnorrreee !"

Clever!

By the way, does Spin generally hire preteen writers or do you know somebody?

 

[RicP]

Snnnnorrreee !

That was most erudite Mike, and I must say a most impressive way to make a point. :rolleyes
I can respect people with differing opinions, because usually they can at least back them up with some intelligent discussion. There can be no respect for those who simply post inspid rhetoric under the guise of dilettantism.

 

[Mark Lee]

Boy, this thread is gonna get closed real soon.....

 

[Andrew 'Ange Hamm' Hamm]

The Beatles were the Backstreet Boys of their day...most of their songs trite and sophmoric...only they lasted longer than they should have. Maybe that was because of the unique phenomena of their staying power...and that may have more to do with Us, than them, and what they really were.

And I thought we had reached an unreachable low with the comment about Clapton. I wonder if MikeAW lives under a bridge.

Actually, I love comments like this because they let me know just how much stock to put in everything else the poster says.

 

[MikeAW]

As always, it's nice to read contributions to the topic, from RicP and Andrew. Thanks guys !