Top 3 Most Overrated Artists contest in R&R.

I nominate
#1 KISS (What is R&R hall of fame after all?)
#2 Jonn Bon Jovi (actually can share same spot with Kiss)
#3 Rolling Stones (mostly they just don't make sense and hardly ever I can note of anyone being any good there)

You must have misread the title of this thread. They’re asking for “overrated bands,” not legendary performers that are the epitome of what rock and roll is all about. The three you mentioned are in my top ten of favorite groups. One man’s ceiling is another man’s floor.
If Jagger wasn't Rock and Rock then why would he say, I know, it's only Rock and Rock?

The Rolling Stones after Brian Jones. Whatever Jagger is, he is not Rock and Roll. Their output has been dire for decades.

Prince. Apart from a mild Hendrix influence, his whole career has been based on scandal and hype. Ultimately only the songs remain, and I can't find a single one I like. Even Raspberry Beret runs out of ideas too soon.

Can't think of a third act, but have to admit that Adelle and Mariah Carey have the ability to induce pain whenever they open their mouths.

I saw Grand Funk Railroad by accident at the Fillmore East when their 1st album came out. They were 2nd billing to Fat Mattress 3rd (Noel Reddings' band), and Jethro Tull top billing. I say by accident 'cause I went to see Tull and had no idea who they were. They were amazing! Their 1st 2 albums were ton's of fun!
Aerosmith was a 3rd rate rock band in the 70's. They became a 1st rate band after all the great bands died out. Compared to what came later, Aerosmith is great. 3 Dog Night was so big in the late 60s early 70s that Stevie Wonder opened for them at the Garden. Hall of Fame? It is what it is.
Three Dog Knight was okay--I mean, they were talented guys but basically a cover band.
Dweller - I included Grand Funk solely and expressly for their pretentious faux magnum opus "I'm Your Captain". I feel revulsion just typing it. Unforgivable.

Czarivey - It's the Hall of Everybody. Early inductees were entirely worthy but as time has passed, standards have lowered. Is Lulu in there yet?
Was 3-dog ever rated any descent?
Only last year they were inducted to R&R hall of Fame hek knows for what reason. This Hall of Fame really turns into Hall of Shame.
Tostadosunidos drives home a good point, artists you may think are overrated may still be really good performers. I can think of many that fit that bill. Rod Stewart was one of the best performers I've ever seen (when he was young.)
Someone swapped me Aerosmith tickets for guitar lessons (I would not have gone otherwise) in the late 80's. It was one of the best live shows I've seen. I was surprised and totally knocked out by their performance.
True about Aerosmith regardless of their trips and wrists full of crack-cocain. Rod Stewart is unique performer sucked anywhere he's ever been weather as side performer or solo. He's often or even always out of key (problems with hearing for music I guess). I'd say same about Mick Jagger that spoils Rolling Stones. Instrumentally they're OK.
+1 lowrider. it's great that aerosmith gave up the crack pipe and got healthy, but it unfortunately didn't help their music. not sure if anyone mentioned rod stewart, another once-great who sunk to the lowest form of pop drivel
Has anybody said Aerosmith yet? God awful, yet so popular. They were a great hard rock band in the 70s, but the 2nd version of the band sucks. "Love in an Elevator," what crap.
Cz- didn't you start this thread by saying that the Stones were overrated? And now you are saying that those who don't listen to them have bad taste in music? I'm lost....
All folks who don't listen or don't like Stones, Dylan and Beatles usually have very bad taste in music and in rock'n'roll in particular. How come you don't listen to the most recorded music in the World?
07-04-14: Czarivey
Wildoats, I just realized recently I have bad taste!----I agree
There's good taste, bad taste and no taste at all. Then there's plain ignorance.
A good bit of that on display in this thread.
Just 3? I could go on for days with a list. Here are my hard rock/metal choices.

Mötley Crüe
Def Leppard
Okay, this may get some folks P.O.'d, but:

Guns 'n' Roses
Foreigner, Journey, Toto, REO Speedwagon, Boston
Bon Jovi

and all-time favorite overrated band: Skid Row
Robert Zimmerman (aka Bob Dylan), now I know this thread is getting ridiculous! Thank you Dayglow, for mentioning the Red Hot Chili Peppers. They would certainly be in my top ten of overrated groups (R&R Hall of Fame, notwithstanding).
Loomisjohnson-You nailed the qualifying explanation regarding critical acclaim but sales are just as important. I would include...1.Robert Zimmerman, just too many poor recordings with rambling/silly lyrics. 2.Red Hot Chili Peppers not because there a "chick" band but do they even have one decent song? 3.White Stripes, does making quirky noises on guitar qualify as talent? Speaking of talent Meg White is probably the worst drummer ever on a platinum(sales) rock recording!
The reality is though, some people have very bad taste in music. Not me of course.
Any band's most enthusiastic fans can be off-putting and make them seem over-rated. Never more true than with the Dead. I've been to live shows of theirs that seemed fantastic but later the tape of the same show seemed lackluster. You gotta be there.
("In what way are the Dead over rated? "

Probably not really, at least in terms of studio recordings.

I've just never been a fan of their live performances for the most part. Reckoning is good though. Saw them live once in 1981 after looking forward to it quite a bt, it was a huge disappointment and I was bored to death actually. It was a free concert though, so maybe we got what we payed for.)

I have been one who always felt their live concert far exceed their albums......but then again I enjoy jazz, bluegrass, blues, Americanna and improvising......I can understand one being bored with drums and space, since at times they were less than attention grabbing for me, too.

Get "One from the Vault" on sounds great and offers the listener a good idea of what it was all about on a good night.

On a bad night......the hype of a live show was over-rated....but there never has been a band that toured as much as the Dead. Sure they had some "less than", tours, years or shows......but an off night of the Dead beats an on night of work anytime!!!!! And, for that matter.....most live concerts in general.
Given Loomis' observation that (to paraphrase) - in order to be overrated, you've got to be highly rated - I found this. It's just one rating of rock bands, but a fun one that someone went to a fair bit of trouble to cook up. So, for your consideration:
"In what way are the Dead over rated? "

Probably not really, at least in terms of studio recordings.

I've just never been a fan of their live performances for the most part. Reckoning is good though. Saw them live once in 1981 after looking forward to it quite a bt, it was a huge disappointment and I was bored to death actually. It was a free concert though, so maybe we got what we payed for.
Martykl, in my comment about being defensive I thought it's clearly visible that you're not on this picture being defensive, but rather informative and argumentative. It's totally different.
Many people believe certain artists are overrated for certain reasons, but bottom line is that practically any popular artist including R&R artist is somewhat overrated and not as good as one actually is.
Let's see...

1. Bloaty and the Hooterfish
2. Anything with Gene Simmons
3. Anything with David Lee Roth (Post VH)
4. Anything with Axl Rose (Post Appetite for Destruction)
5. Anything with Scott Weiland (Post STP)
6. Anything involving Nude Pictures of Yoko Ono
So someone doesn't like the Stones and someone doesn't like the Beatles. So what? History has already judged them to be great.
Lindisfarne, great reply, thank you, I mistakenly thought you named the boy Ronnie! This thread is amusing, predictable, and funny. Paul Simon said it, one mans ceiling is another mans floor. Where's the beef I say? There is no accounting for taste, and I could write a sociology paper on the responses to the initial posting. If I were a sociologist. I'm not.
i submit that to qualify as overrated, you have to be a real critic's pet, which would exclude some of the aforementioned nominees (bonjovi, kiss, etc.). my own candidates:
u2--as seth rogen immortally opined with respect to steely dan (who i quite like), they gargle my balls. noone who trumpets his own sincerity should wear sunglasses indoors
eric clapton--much beloved on these pages, but nothing he's done since layla has grabbed me. and layla was all the way back in '70
tom waits--seems like a lovely guy, but the appeal of the hipster-growl thing completely escapes me. his numerous records earn hyperbolic critical praise, tho i don't know anyone who actually listems to 'em

For the record, I wasn't being defensive when I pointed out that Keith Richards, Charlie, Watts and Ron Wood all display far more technical skill than their counterparts in The Velvet Underground, which you cited as a more skilled group of musicians in your original post.

Of the Velvets, only John Cale can reasonably be deemed as technically proficient relative to their RS counterpart. None of Sterling Morrison, Lou Reed, and Mo Tucker ever demonstrated much technical skill, probably because it was not remotely important for them to do so, given the music that they wanted to play.

You can certainly prefer the Velvet's songwriting (if that's your cup of tea) vis a vis The Stones. For better or worse (maybe better and worse), the VU really abstracted the rock n roll rhythmic conceit into something very different and spawned a major branch of rock music that included Brian Eno, David Byrne, and many prog rock luminaries. No question that they were creative and innovative, but it would be very tough to make a case for their playing.

In the end, I think much of the response here was anything but defensive, it was simply an attempt to address the misinformation in your original post regarding the technical skills of The RS as instrumentalists.

Incidentally, none of this means that The Rolling Stones are/are not underrated. In my view, that's just a function of personal taste.
No mention of The Grateful Dead yet?

I'd hold them in higher regard overall if they spent more time innovating like with Terrapin Station and less time doodling mindlessly while someone left the mike on.

As it is I do respect them and like a lot of their stuff, but yeah, maybe overrated from my perspective.

Jerry Garcia did also design some nice ties though!

On teh flip side, New Riders of the Purple Sage and The Outlaws are underrated. :^)
Dylan, maybe overrated. Mostly because so many including myself tend to hold him in highest regard over many years, not because he does not deserve it.