• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

Top 5 Worst Rock Bands

So how do you measure talent?

Talent is very objective, but you have to understand music. You can qualify what is and is not a good voice and what is and is not a good musician. I realize that some people will cry no talent if they don't like the music, and that's wrong. Take the Eagles for instance. Here’s a band with 5 Grammy’s and are member of the rock and roll hof. Glenn Frey, Don Felder, Bernie Leadon, Randy Meisner, and Don Hanley are still some of the best in the business.

Would you say Pavarotti wasn’t talented?

Neil Diamond was one of the most successful singer/songwriters of all time. It might be easy to get a few songs on the charts with little to no talent, but you don’t earn 39 gold, 20 platinum, and 11 multi-platinum records without talent.

I can take of leave the Doors, but there is no way that I could ever say that lacked of talent, at least not with a straight face.

By the way, Journey has 12 gold 10 platinum and 8 multi-platinum records.
 
Talent is very objective, but you have to understand music. You can qualify what is and is not a good voice and what is and is not a good musician. I realize that some people will cry no talent if they don't like the music, and that's wrong. Take the Eagles for instance. Here’s a band with 5 Grammy’s and are member of the rock and roll hof. Glenn Frey, Don Felder, Bernie Leadon, Randy Meisner, and Don Hanley are still some of the best in the business.

Would you say Pavarotti wasn’t talented?

Neil Diamond was one of the most successful singer/songwriters of all time. It might be easy to get a few songs on the charts with little to no talent, but you don’t earn 39 gold, 20 platinum, and 11 multi-platinum records without talent.

I can take of leave the Doors, but there is no way that I could ever say that lacked of talent, at least not with a straight face.

By the way, Journey has 12 gold 10 platinum and 8 multi-platinum records.

I think you're confusing objective vs. subjective. Everything you've described falls under subjectivity.
I do not judge talent on whether I enjoy the music or not. I'm not a fan of country music at all, but some musicians have alot talent. This is just an example.
I based my observations on stage performance and logistical music talent. (Can they play their respective instruments.)
I never once said that I base my observations on whether I like a particular type of music.

I'm a rock girl and there are plenty of shitty bands out there, especially these days. Record companies sign bands based on what will make money and what they think the public wants to hear and what they will buy at the store. They don't give a damn if it's good or not. That, my friend is truely a sad commentary.

American Idol has proven that. It has ruined the integrity of the music business.

In the end, it's all about the money.
 
Talent is very objective, but you have to understand music. You can qualify what is and is not a good voice and what is and is not a good musician.
Qualify, yes. To return to my question, how do you quantify it? If talent is objective and one artist can be objectively said to have more of it than another, then it can be measured. How?

Take the Eagles for instance. Here’s a band with 5 Grammy’s and are member of the rock and roll hof. Glenn Frey, Don Felder, Bernie Leadon, Randy Meisner, and Don Hanley are still some of the best in the business.
That's "Henley". ;) And how exactly are they still some of the best in the business? I'd argue that it takes more than one well-promoted reunion tour - those always sell out.

Would you say Pavarotti wasn’t talented?
I wouldn't. I'm not claiming that there's no such thing as talent, I simply asked how you can tell who has more of it. Was Pavarotti more or less talented than Jussi Björling or Caruso, and by how much?

Neil Diamond was one of the most successful singer/songwriters of all time. It might be easy to get a few songs on the charts with little to no talent, but you don’t earn 39 gold, 20 platinum, and 11 multi-platinum records without talent.
If Neil Diamond has, then obviously you do. :cool: Seriously though, are you arguing that talent can be measured by the number of records one sells?

By the way, Journey has 12 gold 10 platinum and 8 multi-platinum records.
...I guess you are.

Anyway, the thread title wasn't "least talented bands" but "worst bands".
 
Every boy band that has ever existed.
No way! Take That were, and still are, fantastic.

I like Sinead O'Connor, too.

I couldn't even name a 'five worst'... I don't really repeatedly listen to lots of tracks from artists I don't like.

Overrated Bands:
The Beatles
The Eagles
Queen
Status Quo
Nickelback
 
Yeah.. I disagree with The Doors and Neil Diamond having little talent.

I'd say:
All the Red Jumpsuit Apparatus/Fall out boy/Panic at the Disco type bands
Creed
Disturbed
Slipknot
 
This starts with having some hilarious definitions of "rock bands".

I mean, come on – Abba are not a "rock" act and "rock" and 'pop' are not synonymous. ~~LOL~~

As for Oasis – certainly not the best, but What's the Story? is a brilliant album.

Boomtown Rats? Come on, they wouldn't get into a worst five if only for Don't Like Mondays.

Steffee – you cannot call the Beatles and Queen "overrated" in the same post as defending Take Bleedin' That. It's just too funny for words.
 
Eh, I would have agreed with Morgo on Led Zeppelin. They've recorded some good songs but I can't really get into most of their music. I like the other bands in that post (to varying degrees, mind you).
 
I'm amazed that people list bands like that when there are these hideous "boy bands', endless pop-country clones and reality tv graduates that put out the most vile crap imaginable. To me this is a sign of the amount of classic rock radio programming, and their subsequent sickening thereof, they've had to endure than an actual accounting of some of the worst rock bands. Worst has been misread as overrated.
 
I went into those artists when I was younger believing they would be the best thing imaginable for music. They weren't, but I was in some sort of thought process that all good music was that of classic rock... when in reality, in my perspective, 99% of classic rock is just as lame as the music on the radio today.

To redeem myself, I listen to much avant-garde (Rock In Opposition being a particular favorite "genre"), classical (of all forms), certain metal (not the cheesiness that sits on most of the genre, I listen to mainly metal of the experimental persuasion), pop, jazz, electronic music (glitch and sample-based music being my favorite niche), ambient, etc.

GOOD classic music, in my opinion, consists of work by Frank Zappa, Captain Beefheart, Coltrane, Igor Stravinsky, Miles Davis, Sun Ra, Theloneous Monk, among others.
 
I went into those artists when I was younger believing they would be the best thing imaginable for music. They weren't, but I was in some sort of thought process that all good music was that of classic rock... when in reality, in my perspective, 99% of classic rock is just as lame as the music on the radio today.

To redeem myself, I listen to much avant-garde (Rock In Opposition being a particular favorite "genre"), classical (of all forms), certain metal (not the cheesiness that sits on most of the genre, I listen to mainly metal of the experimental persuasion), pop, jazz, electronic music (glitch and sample-based music being my favorite niche), ambient, etc.

GOOD classic music, in my opinion, consists of work by Frank Zappa, Captain Beefheart, Coltrane, Igor Stravinsky, Miles Davis, Sun Ra, Theloneous Monk, among others.

Theloneous Monk is the best.
 
Back
Top