Underrated Overrated

Two terms used quite a bit in OT in music threads.

Underrated bands would undoubtedly be bands that are not known. The bands that perhaps play around your hometown. No band that is recognizable by name to people living in vastly different areas of the world can be underrated. They have popularity. Perhaps you think they deserve more notice but when a band has a career that spans decades and is still selling arena shows it can hardly be underrated.

I'll use Rush as an example merely because I recently got into a discussion here where Rush was called underrated. Now I have no doubt the person that mentioned Rush was a big fan. That's fine. Rush IS a talented band. And it may be true that the small percentage of the population he is familar with is not into Rush. That fact, however, does not make Rush an underrated band. No one band in existence is going to popular with everyone. We all have different preferences.

Overrated bands are a bit different to me. In and of themselves a band cannot be overrated. However, when they become worshipped by media and fans alike they enter that stratsophere. Not because they are popular or influence new generations of bands....that is part of the process. But it's when a rabid fan base can't understand why everyone in the world DOESN'T love band X that overrated comes into play. Saying a band is overrated is not saying a band has no talent. It means that the band has been given larger than life status.

For example...The Beatles. The Beatles are fine. I have no problem with that band. They created some catchy music. They had talent. But The Beatles did not single handedly create the music industry. They play a specific styIe of music. Not everyone will love said music. And had the band never formed music would have continued to exist. It may have taken a slightly different route but it would be here nonetheless. And let's give credit to all the bands that influenced The Beatles. And yes, they were influenced.

Too many here seem to equate overrated with band they hate and underrated with band they love.

What is your definition of underrated and overrated? And more importantly.....do you understand my thoughts on this?

Note: If you think I bashed Rush or The Beatles then the answer to the latter is no.

I completely agree.

Two terms used quite a bit in OT in music threads.

Underrated bands would undoubtedly be bands that are not known. The bands that perhaps play around your hometown. No band that is recognizable by name to people living in vastly different areas of the world can be underrated. They have popularity. Perhaps you think they deserve more notice but when a band has a career that spans decades and is still selling arena shows it can hardly be underrated.

I'll use Rush as an example merely because I recently got into a discussion here where Rush was called underrated. Now I have no doubt the person that mentioned Rush was a big fan. That's fine. Rush IS a talented band. And it may be true that the small percentage of the population he is familar with is not into Rush. That fact, however, does not make Rush an underrated band. No one band in existence is going to popular with everyone. We all have different preferences.

Overrated bands are a bit different to me. In and of themselves a band cannot be overrated. However, when they become worshipped by media and fans alike they enter that stratsophere. Not because they are popular or influence new generations of bands....that is part of the process. But it's when a rabid fan base can't understand why everyone in the world DOESN'T love band X that overrated comes into play. Saying a band is overrated is not saying a band has no talent. It means that the band has been given larger than life status.

For example...The Beatles. The Beatles are fine. I have no problem with that band. They created some catchy music. They had talent. But The Beatles did not single handedly create the music industry. They play a specific styIe of music. Not everyone will love said music. And had the band never formed music would have continued to exist. It may have taken a slightly different route but it would be here nonetheless. And let's give credit to all the bands that influenced The Beatles. And yes, they were influenced.

Too many here seem to equate overrated with band they hate and underrated with band they love.

What is your definition of underrated and overrated? And more importantly.....do you understand my thoughts on this?

Note: If you think I bashed Rush or The Beatles then the answer to the latter is no.

LJS9502_basic

the Clash -underrated

the Police -overrated

Smashing pumpkins-overrated

Two terms used quite a bit in OT in music threads.

Underrated bands would undoubtedly be bands that are not known. The bands that perhaps play around your hometown. No band that is recognizable by name to people living in vastly different areas of the world can be underrated. They have popularity. Perhaps you think they deserve more notice but when a band has a career that spans decades and is still selling arena shows it can hardly be underrated.

I'll use Rush as an example merely because I recently got into a discussion here where Rush was called underrated. Now I have no doubt the person that mentioned Rush was a big fan. That's fine. Rush IS a talented band. And it may be true that the small percentage of the population he is familar with is not into Rush. That fact, however, does not make Rush an underrated band. No one band in existence is going to popular with everyone. We all have different preferences.

Overrated bands are a bit different to me. In and of themselves a band cannot be overrated. However, when they become worshipped by media and fans alike they enter that stratsophere. Not because they are popular or influence new generations of bands....that is part of the process. But it's when a rabid fan base can't understand why everyone in the world DOESN'T love band X that overrated comes into play. Saying a band is overrated is not saying a band has no talent. It means that the band has been given larger than life status.

For example...The Beatles. The Beatles are fine. I have no problem with that band. They created some catchy music. They had talent. But The Beatles did not single handedly create the music industry. They play a specific styIe of music. Not everyone will love said music. And had the band never formed music would have continued to exist. It may have taken a slightly different route but it would be here nonetheless. And let's give credit to all the bands that influenced The Beatles. And yes, they were influenced.

Too many here seem to equate overrated with band they hate and underrated with band they love.

What is your definition of underrated and overrated? And more importantly.....do you understand my thoughts on this?

Note: If you think I bashed Rush or The Beatles then the answer to the latter is no.

LJS9502_basic

Nice disrespect on the Greatest band of all time

. [QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

What is your definition of underrated and overrated? And more importantly.....do you understand my thoughts on this?

Note: If you think I bashed Rush or The Beatles then the answer to the latter is no.

DrCoCoPiMp

Nice disrespect on the Greatest band of all time

There may be flaws in considering a band overrated or underrated... and there may be flaws in saying that they are not. I feel the same way with fashion.Welkabonz

Which is why I don't pick any "name" band as underrated nor chose a band as overrated due to personal taste. It's only when fans get vehement in mass about bands that I'd consider a band "overrated". But that is on the perception and not the actual talent/music.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

Two terms used quite a bit in OT in music threads.

Underrated bands would undoubtedly be bands that are not known. The bands that perhaps play around your hometown. No band that is recognizable by name to people living in vastly different areas of the world can be underrated. They have popularity. Perhaps you think they deserve more notice but when a band has a career that spans decades and is still selling arena shows it can hardly be underrated.

I'll use Rush as an example merely because I recently got into a discussion here where Rush was called underrated. Now I have no doubt the person that mentioned Rush was a big fan. That's fine. Rush IS a talented band. And it may be true that the small percentage of the population he is familar with is not into Rush. That fact, however, does not make Rush an underrated band. No one band in existence is going to popular with everyone. We all have different preferences.

Overrated bands are a bit different to me. In and of themselves a band cannot be overrated. However, when they become worshipped by media and fans alike they enter that stratsophere. Not because they are popular or influence new generations of bands....that is part of the process. But it's when a rabid fan base can't understand why everyone in the world DOESN'T love band X that overrated comes into play. Saying a band is overrated is not saying a band has no talent. It means that the band has been given larger than life status.

For example...The Beatles. The Beatles are fine. I have no problem with that band. They created some catchy music. They had talent. But The Beatles did not single handedly create the music industry. They play a specific styIe of music. Not everyone will love said music. And had the band never formed music would have continued to exist. It may have taken a slightly different route but it would be here nonetheless. And let's give credit to all the bands that influenced The Beatles. And yes, they were influenced.

Too many here seem to equate overrated with band they hate and underrated with band they love.

What is your definition of underrated and overrated? And more importantly.....do you understand my thoughts on this?

Note: If you think I bashed Rush or The Beatles then the answer to the latter is no.

delol

the Clash -underrated

the Police -overrated

Smashing pumpkins-overrated

Just curious, but why do you think Radiohead is underrated?

Most people will state that "the most overrated band" is whatever popular band they hate the most. Music is subjective - so there's obviously not going to be a concrete answer. It's just all opinions.

As for The Beatles, I think they were incredibly influential. Sure, they wrote great pop songs, but they were also relentlessly experimental.

Most people will state that "the most overrated band" is whatever popular band they hate the most. Music is subjective - so there's obviously not going to be a concrete answer. It's just all opinions.

As for The Beatles, I think they were incredibly influential. Sure, they wrote great pop songs, but they were also relentlessly experimental.

Forever_Changes

I didn't say they weren't. But when an opinion thread exists and someone speaks negatively of The Beatles...they tend to get insulted. Thus, the fans are overrating the importance of the band by stating that one can't have a divergent opinon. Clear that up for you?LJS9502_basic

Nope. What are you trying to say, that I insulted you? Are you trying to say that all fans of the Beatles think everyone should enjoy them? Really I have no idea what you're talking about.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]I didn't say they weren't. But when an opinion thread exists and someone speaks negatively of The Beatles...they tend to get insulted. Thus, the fans are overrating the importance of the band by stating that one can't have a divergent opinon. Clear that up for you?Forever_Changes

Nope. What are you trying to say, that I insulted you? Are you trying to say that all fans of the Beatles think everyone should enjoy them? Really I have no idea what you're talking about.

I don't think there's a need for using either term. If they're noticed, that's to their credit. If they're not, then people just don't care and they therefore don't play good music.SolidSnake35

[QUOTE="delol"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

Two terms used quite a bit in OT in music threads.

Underrated bands would undoubtedly be bands that are not known. The bands that perhaps play around your hometown. No band that is recognizable by name to people living in vastly different areas of the world can be underrated. They have popularity. Perhaps you think they deserve more notice but when a band has a career that spans decades and is still selling arena shows it can hardly be underrated.

I'll use Rush as an example merely because I recently got into a discussion here where Rush was called underrated. Now I have no doubt the person that mentioned Rush was a big fan. That's fine. Rush IS a talented band. And it may be true that the small percentage of the population he is familar with is not into Rush. That fact, however, does not make Rush an underrated band. No one band in existence is going to popular with everyone. We all have different preferences.

Overrated bands are a bit different to me. In and of themselves a band cannot be overrated. However, when they become worshipped by media and fans alike they enter that stratsophere. Not because they are popular or influence new generations of bands....that is part of the process. But it's when a rabid fan base can't understand why everyone in the world DOESN'T love band X that overrated comes into play. Saying a band is overrated is not saying a band has no talent. It means that the band has been given larger than life status.

For example...The Beatles. The Beatles are fine. I have no problem with that band. They created some catchy music. They had talent. But The Beatles did not single handedly create the music industry. They play a specific styIe of music. Not everyone will love said music. And had the band never formed music would have continued to exist. It may have taken a slightly different route but it would be here nonetheless. And let's give credit to all the bands that influenced The Beatles. And yes, they were influenced.

Too many here seem to equate overrated with band they hate and underrated with band they love.

What is your definition of underrated and overrated? And more importantly.....do you understand my thoughts on this?

Note: If you think I bashed Rush or The Beatles then the answer to the latter is no.

dreamdude

the Clash -underrated

the Police -overrated

Smashing pumpkins-overrated

Just curious, but why do you think Radiohead is underrated?

Because they are one of the biggest rock bands ever and seldom recognized as they desearvedelol

[/QUOTE Because they are one of the biggest rock bands ever and seldom recognized as they desearve

Yes......:roll:

over-rated= I love this band, there would be no said genre, or it wouldnt be popular without them

underrated- Almost noone knows/listens to this band, I like em, but not many would.

I understand where you are going, but I find everyone you know by name is overrated, and those who you say who is that is underrated... so it makes it hard to gauge that.

Note: If you think I bashed Rush or The Beatles then the answer to the latter is no.LJS9502_basic

...but yes to the former?

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Note: If you think I bashed Rush or The Beatles then the answer to the latter is no.Oleg_Huzwog

...but yes to the former?

[QUOTE="Forever_Changes"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]I didn't say they weren't. But when an opinion thread exists and someone speaks negatively of The Beatles...they tend to get insulted. Thus, the fans are overrating the importance of the band by stating that one can't have a divergent opinon. Clear that up for you?LJS9502_basic

Nope. What are you trying to say, that I insulted you? Are you trying to say that all fans of the Beatles think everyone should enjoy them? Really I have no idea what you're talking about.

ah right, I see.

although I like the Beatles and believe the were incredibly influential I think they were overrated. Any band that is blindly accepted as the "greatest" band ever is going to be overrated.

BTW, while we're talking about underrated/overrated bands, I'd like to say that the Velvet Underground are incredibly underrated. They are a band that deserve to be respected as much as the Beatles yet hardly anyone even knows who they are. They broke so much ground, were way ahead of their time and yet are barely recognised. That, IMO, is an underrated band.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Forever_Changes"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]I didn't say they weren't. But when an opinion thread exists and someone speaks negatively of The Beatles...they tend to get insulted. Thus, the fans are overrating the importance of the band by stating that one can't have a divergent opinon. Clear that up for you?Forever_Changes

Nope. What are you trying to say, that I insulted you? Are you trying to say that all fans of the Beatles think everyone should enjoy them? Really I have no idea what you're talking about.

ah right, I see.

although I like the Beatles and believe the were incredibly influential I think they were overrated. Any band that is blindly accepted as the "greatest" band ever is going to be overrated.

BTW, while we're talking about underrated/overrated bands, I'd like to say that the Velvet Underground are incredibly underrated. They are a band that deserve to be respected as much as the Beatles yet hardly anyone even knows who they are. They broke so much ground, were way ahead of their time and yet are barely recognised. That, IMO, is an underrated band.

I wouldn't call the VU underated. They have alot of critical acclaim. I'd say more underappreciated

I wouldn't call the VU underated. They have alot of critical acclaim. I'd say more underappreciated

zepman71

If a band is underrated, doesn't that mean that they don't receive the recognition they deserve? IMO, The VU are up there with the Beatles in terms of importance/influence.

[QUOTE="zepman71"]

I wouldn't call the VU underated. They have alot of critical acclaim. I'd say more underappreciated

Forever_Changes

If a band is underrated, doesn't that mean that they don't receive the recognition they deserve? IMO, The VU are up there with the Beatles in terms of importance/influence.

I always think of underrated as something that doesn't get alot of critical accolades which it deserves, whereas underappreciated is something that doesn't get the recognition it deserves despite being critically acclaimed...

Not goin' to argue with ya about the VU though - amazing band and hugely influential