"Great" bands from the past.

Gauss

Generally speaking I believe great bands from the past should be still fairly mainstream in the public's consciousness like say The Beetles. However there are bands who are regarded as great at the time but forgotten about in years to come. I believe these bands were probably not great and were in fact a fad at the time.

Take for instance The Darkness in 2003, they were regarded as great by many laqapeople at the time but now they have fallen out of the mainstream. Take the Arctic Monkeys in 2005 or maybe even the Ramones in 2004. They were all highly regarded at the time but know they have been largely forgotten about by the public.

What other examples can you think of from from various years?

ballsymchugh

the Ramones in 2004? how old are you?

Lenin Skynard

Oasis were like the second coming of Christ at one point. The world went Oasis-mad and they were being talked about as one of the greatest bands ever. No one listens to them now and I rarely hear their stuff on the radio.

Guns 'n' Roses to an extent too. Though they are still fairly popular, they're not put in the same league as the Beatles/Stones. The Killers would be another one.

Israel_Dagg

Why is great in " ", does this mean great actually means bad?

optimistic_

Gauss wrote: »

Generally speaking I believe great bands from the past should be still fairly mainstream in the public's consciousness like say The Beetles. However there are bands who are regarded as great at the time but forgotten about in years to come. I believe these bands were probably not great and were in fact a fad at the time.

Take for instance The Darkness in 2003, they were regarded as great by many laqapeople at the time but now they have fallen out of the mainstream. Take the Arctic Monkeys in 2005 or maybe even the Ramones in 2004. They were all highly regarded at the time but know they have been largely forgotten about by the public.

What other examples can you think of from from various years?

What are laqapeople?
I don't think The Darkness were ever considered to be great? And discussing them, The Beatles and The Ramones (2004? Wtf?) in the same building should be disallowed, never mind the same paragraph.

I refuse to partake until the above issues are rectified.

optimistic_

Ugh this thread is making me feel dirty.

Too many mediocre bands being described as great. I'm off for a wash.

Napper Hawkins

The Darkness were a novelty band. Not a great one by any stretch either, good for a laugh but that's it.

Stavro Mueller

The Strokes perhaps?

Celly Smunt

The beatles are shite.

Donnielighto

Bon Jovi

Gauss

Israel_Dagg wrote: »

Why is great in " ", does this mean great actually means bad?

I used quotes as I mean bands which were referred to as great at the time but weren't actually great as indicated by being forgotten about unlike say a true great band like the beetles who pass the test of time.

Celly Smunt

Gauss wrote: »

I used quotes as I mean bands which were referred to as great at the time but weren't actually great as indicated by being forgotten about unlike say a true great band like the beetles who pass the test of time.

i'll say it again.The beatles are crap.

Gauss

Napper Hawkins wrote: »

The Darkness were a novelty band. Not a great one by any stretch either, good for a laugh but that's it.

I know they weren't great, but if my memory serves me correctly they were highly regarded around 2003.

Celly Smunt

Gauss wrote: »

I know they weren't great, but if my memory serves me correctly they were highly regarded around 2003.

your memory doesn't serve you well.

Spiritual

I love threads that give off an air of pretentiousness.
Music Forum

---

>

Celly Smunt

Spiritual wrote: »

I love threads that give off an air of pretentiousness.
Music Forum

---

>

wrong

<

---

music forum

optimistic_

pmcmahon wrote: »

i'll say it again.The beatles are crap.

Thanks for illuminating this for us.
Can you please tell me which noises I should listen to because I'm listening to the wrong noises?.

Celly Smunt

optimistic_ wrote: »

Thanks for illuminating this for us.
Can you please tell me which noises I should listen to because I'm listening to the wrong noises?.

you can start here

Extinction

The Ramones in 2004? I'm pretty sure at least one band member was dead by 2004.

Plumpynutt

The Beetles are savage alright

optimistic_

pmcmahon wrote: »

you can start here

Can you explain to me why The Beatles are crap? I mean giving technical examples?

I happen to be a fan of Sigur Ros so I started there a very long time ago thank you.

You see, it's called having a broad taste and not being dismissive of an entire careers worth of musical output. And anyone who would describe the likes of Elanor Rigby, Strawberry Fields, or even Come Together as "crap", I mean technically speaking, not in their tastes genre-wise, has no chance of being taken seriously.

If anything, I would say you're being contrary - disregard what's regarded as very highly simply because its regarded so highly by the majority. A juvenile and very limiting approach to enjoying music, that really only inhibits your own exposure to great compositions.

If we're going to get snotty about it, go and listen to Beethoven's sonatas, as you'll find a wealth of pieces there far greater than anything Jonsi or Sigur Ros have ever composed.

optimistic_

Plumpynutt wrote: »

The Beetles are savage alright

The Solver Beetles

Spiritual

Extinction wrote: »

The Ramones in 2004? I'm pretty sure at least one band member was dead by 2004.

Johnny Ramone died in 2004. They officially split in 1996.

pablomakaveli

Gauss wrote: »

I know they weren't great, but if my memory serves me correctly they were highly regarded around 2003.

I also remember a few people in the media bigging them up when they released their first song. I couldnt stand them though so im glad they disappeared.

optimistic_

optimistic_ wrote: »

The Solver Beetles

Silver, damnit. Phone post.

Pottler

Rammstein.. Sisters of Mercy... that's all I have.

Rothko

The Ramones are forgotten?

Lenin Skynard wrote: »

Oasis were like the second coming of Christ at one point. The world went Oasis-mad and they were being talked about as one of the greatest bands ever. No one listens to them now and I rarely hear their stuff on the radio.

Yes they do and I still hear Wonderwall being played the whole time, unfortunately.

Spiritual

I'll link my Itunes account, it is all that anyone will need.

Yes, I pay for music :eek:

Gauss

The red hot chilli peppers spring to mind from around 2002 as do the killers around 2004.

Bipolar Joe

Pretty much all of the stuff you'd hear by The Beetles on the radio would be terrible. You can't discount such a massive, diverse discography based on, what I think, the rubbish tracks. They have some really bizarre experimental songs that must have been mind-blowing back in the day.

Donnielighto

optimistic_ wrote: »

Can you explain to me why The Beatles are crap? I mean giving technical examples?

I happen to be a fan of Sigur Ros so I started there a very long time ago thank you.

You see, it's called having a broad taste and not being dismissive of an entire careers worth of musical output. And anyone who would describe the likes of Elanor Rigby, Strawberry Fields, or even Come Together as "crap", I mean technically speaking, not in their tastes genre-wise, has no chance of being taken seriously.

If anything, I would say you're being contrary - disregard what's regarded as very highly simply because its regarded so highly by the majority. A juvenile and very limiting approach to enjoying music, that really only inhibits your own exposure to great compositions.

If we're going to get snotty about it, go and listen to Beethoven's sonatas, as you'll find a wealth of pieces there far greater than anything Jonsi or Sigur Ros have ever composed.

A lot of the beatles early stuff is 45 seconds of a ditty on repeat. their later stuff is all over the shop, their later middle material is decent but they werent a great bad, different at the time but not great.

Also arent sigur ros generally highly rated? doubt hes being contrary by that.

Big Nasty

Stereophonics would be another exapmple and The Thrills maybe.

Also The Stones > The Beatles - FACT!

Capt'n Midnight

pmcmahon wrote: »

The beatles are shite.

Ben: Who's Wings?
Alan: They're only the band The Beatles could have been.

smash

Queen

/thread

magma69

Nine Inch Nails.

Head The Wall

The Fat Lady Sings

Battleflag

Arctic Monkeys are still fairly big, those who listened to their first album generally don't like their new stuff - I love it though

Chilis Pepper spring to mind, haven't released anything decent since Californication

Fat Boy Slim, MGMT, Modest Mouse, Daft Punk

The King of Moo

The Be Sharps. They were huge for a while in the mid-eighties, but you never hear any of their stuff anymore.

Looking back, they weren't anything special. I don't see how they were any different from any other barbershop quartet.

Da Shins Kelly

MCMLXXV wrote: »

Also The Stones > The Beatles - FACT!

No.

Lads, the definition of 'great' is being seriously violated here tbh.

The Darkness? The Thrills? Stereophonics? Some nice tunes, but nobody, not even at the time, ever considered them up there with the 'beetles'.

kincsem

Creedence Clearwater Revival

Gauss

stunner dunner wrote: »

Lads, the definition of 'great' is being seriously violated here tbh.

The Darkness? The Thrills? Stereophonics? Some nice tunes, but nobody, not even at the time, ever considered them up there with the 'beetles'.

They were considered great bands though, not as great as the beetles though.

The one band that I think has never been great but still has people thinking they are great is Coldplay.

kincsem

Canned Heat

Roadtrippin

The title of this thread reads 'Great bands from the past' so I'm gonna go a bit further than The Strokes here...

Nirvana
The Cure
Led Zeppelin
The Who
Fleetwood Mac
The Doors

demanufactured

Audioslave in the not too distant past

Birneybau

Gauss wrote: »

They were considered great bands though, not as great as the beetles though.

The one band that I think has never been great but still has people thinking they are great is Coldplay.

It's the fcuking "BEATLES"

Hitchens

kincsem wrote: »

Canned Heat

Roadtrippin

Lenin Skynard wrote: »

Oasis were like the second coming of Christ at one point. The world went Oasis-mad and they were being talked about as one of the greatest bands ever.

I preferred Blur :P

Gmol

Nirvana, Frankie goes to Hollywood

Big Nasty

Gauss wrote: »

They were considered great bands though, not as great as the beetles though.

The one band that I think has never been great but still has people thinking they are great is Coldplay.

+1

However I still think The Beatles are sh1te!

Roadtrippin wrote: »

The title of this thread reads 'Great bands from the past' so I'm gonna go a bit further than The Strokes here...

Nirvana
The Cure
Led Zeppelin
The Who
Fleetwood Mac
The Doors

Is the thread not supposed to be about once great bands who are now almost forgotten?

Tony Soprano.

Gauss wrote: »

The one band that I think has never been great but still has people thinking they are great is Coldplay.

Give me Arcade Fire any day! Or The White Stripes.

Radiohead will still be considered great in 50 years time. OK Computer was every bit as ground-breaking as Sgt Pepper. Their music will stand the test of time - whereas the likes of say Nirvana is already sounding a bit tired.

PJ Harvey will be considered as a Rock goddess of this era (the only artist to win the Mercury twice), when the likes the pop queen Lady Gaga will be long forgotten.