Unpopular Alt/Indie Opinions

The_Captain

The Beatles are amazing. I find that the people who don't like them are the types who hear I Wanna Hold Your Hand and think everything they've done is like that.

If a band released Helter Skelter today, it would be considered the best song of the year.

Swiper the fox

roll wrote: »

i just don't get the whole fawning over the beatles thing! this is a thread for unpopular opinions, right?!

Absolutely, I completely disagree with you but it most certainly fits the bill of the unpopular part of the thread title, although I'm not so sure the most popular band ever belong in an alternative/indie thread.

Birneybau

Anesthetize

roll wrote: »

today the beatles are meh.....

What about today? Are The Beatles meh today?

Dandelion6

fleet_admiral wrote: »

I love Blur but hate the album Think Tank

I love Blur but hate The Universal.

lordgoat

tbh i've never had much love for the beatles. i do their weird songs like bungalow bill and rocky racoon but overall they never do much for me. Despite some of my fav bands being hugely influenced by them.

Oh and I can't stand Macca, he's just a pain in the hole everytime i hear him speak.

Rothko

roll wrote: »

I just find it a bit weird that 18 year olds still say that the beatles are their favourite band....

Why?

The Wild Bunch

Placebo get a raw deal

iamanengine

Revolver/White Album/Abbey Road/Sgt. Peppers are amazing. First got into them when I was 18 too

S.M.B.

The Wild Bunch wrote: »

Placebo get a raw deal

Go on.....

Anesthetize

The Wild Bunch wrote: »

Placebo get a raw deal

I dig their debut, Without You I'm Nothing and Black Market Music, but Placebo haven't done anything of worth in over a decade. Their time is long over.

Corholio

Anesthetize wrote: »

I dig their debut, Without You I'm Nothing and Black Market Music, but Placebo haven't done anything of worth in over a decade. Their time is long over.

Nahh definitely not, still a quality live band and 'Battle for The Sun' was mostly pretty good, with a few misteps admittedly. Lot more bands worthy of the 'time long over' tag.

MyPeopleDrankTheSoup

the national and wilco are two of the most boring bands i've ever heard. i feel like a fraud 'working' to like them just because everyone i respect likes them.

'fun' bands get a raw deal in the indie space. case in point, chromeo are cracking live and have fantastic songs but I don't think they get the respect they deserve because they're so goofy.

roll

Anesthetize wrote: »

What about today? Are The Beatles meh today?

fraid so!

The_Captain

georgiecasey wrote: »

the national and wilco are two of the most boring bands i've ever heard. i feel like a fraud 'working' to like them just because everyone i respect likes them.

'fun' bands get a raw deal in the indie space. case in point, chromeo are cracking live and have fantastic songs but I don't think they get the respect they deserve because they're so goofy.

Swings and roundabouts really. You don't have to go back too far to remember when bands like CSS, New Young Pony CLub or Test Icicles were wearing neon-coloured clothes, dancing and dropping Nintendo references

Now you've got a lot of bands adhering to what Noel Gallagher thinks is cool: jeans, dark clothes from Urban Outfitters and maudlin 'serious' music.

iamanengine

georgiecasey wrote: »

the national and wilco are two of the most boring bands i've ever heard. i feel like a fraud 'working' to like them just because everyone i respect likes them.

'fun' bands get a raw deal in the indie space. case in point, chromeo are cracking live and have fantastic songs but I don't think they get the respect they deserve because they're so goofy.

I'd agree while Yankee Hotel Foxtrot is a good album it is completely overrated.

The National on the other hand, ever since I seen them live they have a special place in my heart.

seachto7

The_Captain wrote: »

Swings and roundabouts really. You don't have to go back too far to remember when bands like CSS, New Young Pony CLub or Test Icicles were wearing neon-coloured clothes, dancing and dropping Nintendo references

Now you've got a lot of bands adhering to what Noel Gallagher thinks is cool: jeans, dark clothes from Urban Outfitters and maudlin 'serious' music.

But let's face it though, CSS were sh*t. All ironic bermuda shorts, skater caps, and trainers.

I saw a bunch of people walking around Dublin once who were dressed like them. It could have been them for all I know. Twats.

seachto7

iamanengine wrote: »

I'd agree while Yankee Hotel Foxtrot is a good album it is completely overrated.

The National on the other hand, ever since I seen them live they have a special place in my heart.

I'd be the opposite. I think that once you've heard one National album, you're heard them all. So I just picked one good one!

Wilco, on the other hand, are quite excellent. But it's all subjective.

Mike Guide 69

georgiecasey wrote: »

the national and wilco are two of the most boring bands i've ever heard. i feel like a fraud 'working' to like them just because everyone i respect likes them.

'fun' bands get a raw deal in the indie space. case in point, chromeo are cracking live and have fantastic songs but I don't think they get the respect they deserve because they're so goofy.

I wouldnt classify Wilco and The National are boring, i like some of their stuff, however i do think they are overrated by the the luvvies in the press media, sort of jump on the band wagon persona as they say!!!

RichFTW

The Ramones are the most bland overrated band ever. They had one song structure which they beat to death for every song.

They were more of a brand with a really cool t-shirt but nothing creative to back it up with.

Anesthetize

RichFTW wrote: »

The Ramones are the most bland overrated band ever. They had one song structure which they beat to death for every song.

They were more of a brand with a really cool t-shirt but nothing creative to back it up with.

They had two songs actually - the fast, catchy punk tune and the slow girl group inspired ballad.

I still enjoy them in small doses.

Tombo2001

Anesthetize wrote: »

They had two songs actually - the fast, catchy punk tune and the slow girl group inspired ballad.

I still enjoy them in small doses.

Rock / pop is strewn with "you had to be there to appreciate it" artists. No doubt the Ramones made a big cultural statement at that particular time, and meant a lot to the hipsters of the day.

I'd agree with you that their music never did a thing for me.

I'd say the same for example about T-Rex and a lot of Glam Rock.

Tombo2001

Mike Guide 69 wrote: »

I wouldnt classify Wilco and The National are boring, i like some of their stuff, however i do think they are overrated by the the luvvies in the press media, sort of jump on the band wagon persona as they say!!!

Almost any top-rated band are over-rated..... in this sense....

Its a winner takes all market. A band gets to a certain scale - the scale the National are at, or Coldplay, or U2 or whatever. And then they are mainstream, and they just automatically get airplay. It mightn't be that they are that much better than other bands, its that they have a brand (or more specifically, the public knows who they are) and other bands don't.

The Frames were always a brilliant band, but they never hit the mainstream for whatever reason. I'd be hardpushed to say which is a better band - The National or The Frames - as an example, but The National is the one that hit the bigtime. Does that mean The National are over-rated......more that's just the way the public consumes music.

Mike Guide 69

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Almost any top-rated band are over-rated..... in this sense....

Its a winner takes all market. A band gets to a certain scale - the scale the National are at, or Coldplay, or U2 or whatever. And then they are mainstream, and they just automatically get airplay. It mightn't be that they are that much better than other bands, its that they have a brand (or more specifically, the public knows who they are) and other bands don't.

The Frames were always a brilliant band, but they never hit the mainstream for whatever reason. I'd be hardpushed to say which is a better band - The National or The Frames - as an example, but The National is the one that hit the bigtime. Does that mean The National are over-rated......more that's just the way the public consumes music.

Great post that, you could add other Irish bands such as Whipping Boy, Turn and That Petrol Emotion to that list as well.

Its funny that when you see a band/artist getting carried on a wave of fanfare and adulation especially in the media with the likes of The National. It normally happens years down the line, when you look back and say "well, yeah they were allright, released some decent but hardly groundbreaking stuff, but they definitely were'nt great". You sometimes wonder what all the fuss was about, and in the light of day think, well distinctily average.

I think you could have applied that to The Verve, I mean back in the day round 1996/1997, with the release of "Urban Hymns" , a band that definitely were carried on a huge savvy hype by media/music base journos , they were everywhere. I suppose at that time, with the whole Britpop movement there was so many bands coming out and releasing stuff, it was a case of so much quantity over quality.

But with The Verve,they became so huge in the market, that they headlined Slane back in 97? (i think or 98, correct me if Im wrong) , they defintely did become mainstream and so big, but looking back, were they really any good??, I dunno.......

RichFTW

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Almost any top-rated band are over-rated..... in this sense....

Its a winner takes all market. A band gets to a certain scale - the scale the National are at, or Coldplay, or U2 or whatever. And then they are mainstream, and they just automatically get airplay. It mightn't be that they are that much better than other bands, its that they have a brand (or more specifically, the public knows who they are) and other bands don't.

The Frames were always a brilliant band, but they never hit the mainstream for whatever reason. I'd be hardpushed to say which is a better band - The National or The Frames - as an example, but The National is the one that hit the bigtime. Does that mean The National are over-rated......more that's just the way the public consumes music.

I have an irrational hatred of The Frames ever since the QOTSA set was cut short for an another 45 mins of The Frames back in Oxegen one year but I still wouldn't put them anywhere near The National. Sometimes the mainstream gets it right on which band should get more coverage.

Corholio

RichFTW wrote: »

I have an irrational hatred of The Frames ever since the QOTSA set was cut short for an another 45 mins of The Frames back in Oxegen one year but I still wouldn't put them anywhere near The National. Sometimes the mainstream gets it right on which band should get more coverage.

I'm a huge fan of The National and would probably just about put them above The Frames. I say just about because I think The Frames are actually an underrated band for one reason or another. I don't know if it's the dislike a lot of people have for Hansard, some of it understandable I admit. They had an amazing habit of leaving everything they had out on stage.

Also The Frames cutting short QOTSA sounds a perfect world to me :pac:

roll

i hate glen hansard

IamNotNumber

roll wrote: »

i hate glen hansard

This is Unpopular Alt/Indie Opinions not popular ones:pac:.

Irish_rat

Here is an unpopular opinion:

"Is This It" does absolutely nothing for me.

I don't get the ridiculous hype on this forum. Most of the songs were played to death at the time which didn't help. Casablancas voice is detestable.

Different strokes for different folks .......

Anesthetize

RichFTW wrote: »

I have an irrational hatred of The Frames ever since the QOTSA set was cut short for an another 45 mins of The Frames back in Oxegen one year.

That was 2005. I enjoyed The Frames set far more than QOTSA, and I was a big fan of QOTSA at the time. Compared to the QOTSA set at Slane in 2003, their set at Oxegen 2005 came across as safe and tame.

RichFTW

Anesthetize wrote: »

That was 2005. I enjoyed The Frames set far more than QOTSA, and I was a big fan of QOTSA at the time. Compared to the QOTSA set at Slane in 2003, their set at Oxegen 2005 came across as safe and tame.

Ya that sounds about right. Was my first time seeing them so that added to why I got so pissed off that their set was way shorter than The Frames. Never felt so many different emotions at the same time between the joy of seeing QOTSA and the despair and anger watching The Frames prance around knowing that I should be watching more of the QOTSA instead! I just stood at the back of the pit, stone faced with the anger building up with every Frames song. They could bring out the best album ever and I still wouldn't listen to it because of that day. :pac:

K4t

Irish_rat wrote: »

"Is This It" does absolutely nothing for me.

You have no soul.

Different strokes for different folks .......

iomega

Irish_rat wrote: »

Here is an unpopular opinion:

"Is This It" does absolutely nothing for me.

I don't get the ridiculous hype on this forum. Most of the songs were played to death at the time which didn't help. Casablancas voice is detestable.

Different strokes for different folks .......

I've always liked the way he sings.

iomega

Irish_rat wrote: »

Here is an unpopular opinion:

"Is This It" does absolutely nothing for me.

I don't get the ridiculous hype on this forum. Most of the songs were played to death at the time which didn't help. Casablancas voice is detestable.

Different strokes for different folks .......

I've always liked the way he sings. He slurs the words.

The Wild Bunch

James Dean Bradfield is the most under-rates guitarist in Alt Indie history

The_Captain

Manic Street Preachers were one of those bands that had massive critical acclaim but no mainstream appeal.

They were streets ahead of Oasis/Blur/Suede/Pulp/The Verve, and their work still holds up today.

I always wonder was it because they were Welsh that the media didn't get behind them as much as they got behind the English guys

Pighead

The_Captain wrote: »

Manic Street Preachers were one of those bands that had massive critical acclaim but no mainstream appeal.

They were streets ahead of Oasis/Blur/Suede/Pulp/The Verve, and their work still holds up today.

I always wonder was it because they were Welsh that the media didn't get behind them as much as they got behind the English guys

Doubt it. The media loved the Super Furry Animals and even Catatonia were all over the music mags for a year or so at their height.

I'd say the Manics unwillingness to play the media game hindered their mainstream appeal somewhat although they were pretty big during the Everything Must go period. Also, point of order- Suede were better than the Manics.

The_Captain

I don't think Super Furry Animals were ever as big as they should have been.

Dog Man Star is the best Suede album, but Holy Bible will always trump it for me

mosstin

The_Captain wrote: »

I don't think Super Furry Animals were ever as big as they should have been.

Dog Man Star is the best Suede album, but Holy Bible will always trump it for me

Funny that - was listening to Dog Man Star just the other day and was struck by the fact that their debut was the band being themselves whereas, DMS was them trying to live up to the image they'd created for themselves.

Dandelion6

The_Captain wrote: »

Manic Street Preachers were one of those bands that had massive critical acclaim but no mainstream appeal.

I thought they were awful.

Suede too.

mzungu

Mike Guide 69 wrote: »

But with The Verve,they became so huge in the market, that they headlined Slane back in 97? (i think or 98, correct me if Im wrong) , they defintely did become mainstream and so big, but looking back, were they really any good??, I dunno.......

Never got the appeal of them myself. When Bittersweet Symphony was released the music press went nuts over them and it snowballed from there. Ashcroft is a woeful singer too, he makes Ian Brown sound like Pavarotti.

Regarding unpopular opinions. I really don't get the Smiths at all. Tried to get into them but no, it never happened despite having a few go's. I just can't see why they are so highly regarded.

Spiritualized's Ladies and Gentlemen we are Floating in Space was the greatest album of the 1990s and was far superior to OK Computer. Both of which were released on the same day.

Not only is POP U2's best album, Discotheque is their finest single. They should have called it a day after that album rather than carry on as a MOR stadium rock outfit.

The Libertines were utter muck.

MGMT are actually rather decent. Took a bit of cojones to go down the avant garde / psychedelic route.

Brian Jonestown Massacre are one of the best bands of the past 30 years. Their Satanic Majesties' Second Request is up there with the best of them.

IamNotNumber

mzungu wrote: »

Never got the appeal of them myself. When Bittersweet Symphony was released the music press went nuts over them and it snowballed from there. Ashcroft is a woeful singer too, he makes Ian Brown sound like Pavarotti.

Regarding unpopular opinions. I really don't get the Smiths at all. Tried to get into them but no, it never happened despite having a few go's. I just can't see why they are so highly regarded.

Spiritualized's Ladies and Gentlemen we are Floating in Space was the greatest album of the 1990s and was far superior to OK Computer. Both of which were released on the same day.

Not only is POP U2's best album, Discotheque is their finest single. They should have called it a day after that album rather than carry on as a MOR stadium rock outfit.

The Libertines were utter muck.

MGMT are actually rather decent. Took a bit of cojones to go down the avant garde / psychedelic route.

Brian Jonestown Massacre are one of the best bands of the past 30 years. Their Satanic Majesties' Second Request is up there with the best of them.

The verve forgetable really sortta thrust upon us along with the darkness and other music I didnt get..never got never will..Spirtualized seem them a few times times ..do I wanna see them again in kilhkamim with a crowd who have no idea who they are much less Pattis Smyth ..dunno much about her myself ..after seeing spirtualized in the NCH that was the pinnacle
Benji sun kill moon mark whats his name over-rated?

Anesthetize

The first Verve album and their self-titled EP are really great. I prefered them when they were a darker psychedelic outfit than the britpop band that became famous.

Cosmicfox

I like Funeral the least out of Arcade fire's albums. Neon Bible is the best one, followed by Reflektor.

sweetie

foo fighters are a bit crap.

roll

sweetie wrote: »

foo fighters are a bit crap.

they are awful?! doesn't qualify!

Rabo Karabekian

The_Captain wrote: »

Manic Street Preachers were one of those bands that had massive critical acclaim but no mainstream appeal.

They were streets ahead of Oasis/Blur/Suede/Pulp/The Verve, and their work still holds up today.

I always wonder was it because they were Welsh that the media didn't get behind them as much as they got behind the English guys

I don't understand how you can think they had massive critical acclaim but that the media didn't get behind them. And they also had mainstream appeal (they had a number one single, and a few of their albums reached quite high in the charts.

Rothko

Rabo Karabekian wrote: »

I don't understand how you can think they had massive critical acclaim but that the media didn't get behind them. And they also had mainstream appeal (they had a number one single, and a few of their albums reached quite high in the charts.

I think they had two number one singles.

mzungu

Manic Street Preachers were one of those bands that had massive critical acclaim but no mainstream appeal.

They were streets ahead of Oasis/Blur/Suede/Pulp/The Verve, and their work still holds up today.

I always wonder was it because they were Welsh that the media didn't get behind them as much as they got behind the English guys

From what I recall the Manics headlined Glastonbury and all the main festivals back in their heyday, and albums like Everything Must Go sold massively. Its not that they didn't have mainstream appeal, back in the day they certainly did. Granted these days they would not be the big draw they once were.

The_Captain

Rabo Karabekian wrote: »

I don't understand how you can think they had massive critical acclaim but that the media didn't get behind them. And they also had mainstream appeal (they had a number one single, and a few of their albums reached quite high in the charts.

Sonic Youth had massive critical acclaim but the media never got behind them like they got behind other bands of the era
My Bloody Valentine had critical acclaim but weren't bigged up as much as Happy Mondays or Stone Roses
Psychocandy is better than anything The Cure ever did, but JaMC were never written about as much as The Cure.

The bands with huge critical acclaim have never had the mainstream appeal of their tamer contempories.