U2 were brilliant first 4 albums or whatever. Can't stand them now.

oasis, bogan **nts

Led Zep - Pretentious, overblown, college rockers.

ooooh yes, and those F#$kin Foo Fighters are sh!t too!

I'd agree with that for all albums after Led Zep IV, however the first four albums have completely shaped rock ever since

OK, I'll give you that. Like most bands, their earlier stuff is OK.

....with the exception of a few songs from those later albums (Kashmir, Achilles Last Stand, Custard Pie & Fool in the Rain)

Love Kashmir. Not a fan of the album Presence or In through the Out Door.

I hate Bryan Adams.

Went to a Robert Palmer concert once (only because someone bought me tickets) was incredibly boring.

Only Elvis song I really like is Suspicious Minds.

I'm a drummer, so most of Bonham's really good stuff is on those later albums, but other than that the albums are pretty average

And Status Quo doing the Coles ad.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdV4pr4frd4

Hmmmm.... people I dont rate who are generally highly rated?:

J.S. Bach? Genious - Perhaps, certainly *interesting* music (given his historical context) and very very cerebral.... but I find it emotionless. I'll play Bach from time to time - but in the same way as I'll play scales, arpegios and Kreutzeror Hannon studies and excercises - if it doesnt grab the soul its not Music.... Too much of Bachs music is like complex algebra - intriguing, unquestionably well thoguht out but exhausting to 'think through; without any real emotional pay-off. (I've heard stuffy 'died-in-the-wool' baroque freak musicians claim that I must be a completely uneducated philistine to not realise that Bach *is* god when it comes to music... pfffft)

W.A. Mozart - Far far lesser extent than JSB above - but still I dont get the 'genius' of Mozart beyond that fact that his output was prolific even from a silly young age. Some of his stuff is quite nice... some even moderately powerful - but Mozarts music will never have the emotional pull for me that he clearly manages to evoke in other people.... For me musicians really woke up in the 19th century and started to make *real* MUSIC!

Charlie Parker - Ok so I'm no Sax player... and really no Jazz freak either, but when Miles Davis was being the coolest guy in town and making timelessly awesome cool jazz, Parker (who is revered as a god in the jazz world) - seems to me to be just bubbling away with stuff that spoils the mood.... I guess that "Be-bop" jazz thing just isnt my scene?


.... and then of course plenty of other mentioned above in the thread
Clapton - a LOT of very dull output - but a couple of OK songs over the years. Totaly agree he needed the drugs to do anything even vaguely interesting.
Oasis - Massively overrated in my opinion, far less creative and compelling than their peers Blur, who managed to be quite entertaining.
....could probably think of plenty of others who I regard as a disappointment across a wide variety of styles if I put my mind to it.



Obviously aussie bogan rock is trash - but nobody other than aussie bogans tries to pretend otherwise.....

Queen.....No not you Commonwealth

They're good if you fancy a kip

You can't include U2, a lot of there stuff must be good as they cover absolutely everybody!

Any list with overblown rockers, must include Rush

Cooler