I was never a KISS fan, but always wanted to see them live for the shows they put on. My boss had an extra ticket to see them this summer, so I went along. I gained a lot of respect for them as musicians. There's no depth to the lyrics, and some of what they did on stage seemed a bit too choreographed, but those guys can play. Each of them did a solo, and none were weak by any means. They combined flawless playing of their music with excellent showmanship - beyond the platform shoes and makeup. I'm not running out to buy their music any time soon, but they're talented musicians. There's more to them than theatrics. If you have a chance, see them live, it give you a different idea of them. |
Corazon, the point about "no good guitar players" parallels similar things I've noticed. We've got several college age interns working in our studio this summer and they've been dominating the iTunes selections pumping through the shop for the last month. Last week I was noticing the paucity of instrumental virtuosity in just about everything they were listening to. (Andrew Bird was pretty much the lone exception.) Of course, the music biz has changed so much. Back in the era of the major labels heydays, they paid for expensive studio musicians to work with artists. Those days are gone, unless you're Beyonce or Justin Timberlake. I think ProTools has had a deleterious effect on a number of aspects of musicianship as well. Somehow, virtuosos have fallen out of favor with the general music listening audience. |
Just read a couple of posts stating there were no good guitar players. Ran across a band called Umphreys McGee. Pretty good I thought. Check them out: http://www.umphreys.com/home/?linkId=101 Saw a performance of theirs on Soundstage, pretty darn good. John Mayer Trio from Where the Light Is DVD.... He exhibits some pretty decent work but seems like its missing soul. |
I usually stay away, far away, from threads of this sort. They are like arguments between Ford vs. Chevy vs. Dodge truck owners at a mud bogging contest. I agree with Fusion10. Very few of these recording artists mentioned are really bad, they have talents of varying degrees. I remember when I was listening to 80's music in the 80's and I thought glam bands were useless no-talents whose appeal was their make-up, hair, and spandex. But as time passed, I realized most of those guys could really play well. In part, rock music appeals to us because of a quasi-tribal sense of belonging to a group we want to count ourselves among. A death metal fan is going to have a hard time admitting to themselves and friends that they think Karen Carpenter can really sing well. Hmm, maybe even Kiss has talents I don't want to admit exist. I suppose at the very least, they are entertaining, if not musically edifying. One thing that really made me lighten up on being musically judgmental was learning to play an instrument myself. It's made me appreciate many artists I used to dislike, at least in an abstract sort of way. They may not emotionally connect with me, but at least I appreciate some aspects of what they are doing. |
Most of the bands named in this thread are nowhere near worst rock band ever. Sure, they may not be your cup of tea but that doesn't mean they don't have talent and haven't realized some of it. For example, I'm not fan of Rush, but that doesn't mean they are the worst band ever. Just not my style. There is no denying they've got talent. The '80s LA glam scene sure led to some of the most superficial music ever, but those guys could actually play and sing and write some catchy tunes. I'd say music of the last 15 years has been some of the worst ever. These pop/punk bands over the last five or ten years, that all sound the same, and some of the so-called alternative genre that was popular in the mid 90s...alternative to what? Good sounding music I guess. Want to blend punk and hard rock, with pop sensibilities and do it right? That's GN'R. A pity what happened to that band, though all those guys are still rocking hard to this day. Saw Axl's (no e) band twice earlier this year, he's moving and singing like he did back in the day. Pretty remarkable considering he's almost 50! |
This won't make me any more popular, but most of the "radio" is "noise" to me. So I would have to say that, Much of what is out there now! IMHO. No substitute for the innovators of music; today, we live in the "sample" era, no imagination in this generation. Remake,remake, remake...It is sad when I tell my grand kids, when they comment on yet another version of one of the "Classics", I tell them, sorry, that group are only the 4th group to copy this song. They did NOT write it! They are NOT even playing ANY instruments? Sorry, Thank goodness for Pandora. I Love Music! |
Dylan...a voice even a mother can't love. Greatful Dead...trust me, I'm greatful alright. Led zepplin...crazy bad Lynyrd Skynyrd...I'd rather be skinned alive. Jimmy Buffet...for heaven's sake, is there no GOD?!?!? The following need no comment: Britney Spears 99.7% of any top 1000 list on radio...from whence time began to the present. that should cover it all. |
I think with Page you have to start in the 60s and go through the Zeppline oeuvre. He had a good solid 15 years there. A good fairly long career. He hadn't really done anything since In Through the Out Door but for the most part he gave us 15 years of good material. But as mentioned not a terrific composer but a unreal good guitarist. Watch It Might Get Loud - a kind of documentary with The Edge and Jack White. He makes them sound like sandlot compared to the majors. |
Hey Chazo, You need to gain some rock 'n roll knowledge about Page. First take a listen to his time with the Yardbirds. Although he's had some misteps Mr. Page is a genuine talent. Then check out his works with Roy Harper as suggested by Loomisjohnson. Many other examples. Have you ever see him play the 12 string? Page is not my hero. No musician is. However, get it right. |
If Jimmy Page is so great, why does he get involved with so many sucky gigs? Remember his super group effort, "The Firm" with Paul Rogers? (I never liked Bad Company, btw, I thought it was one of the worst stoner intertainment bands of the 70s) Oh yea, I almost forgot the Damb Yankees with Ted Nugent, on the the 90's worst offerings. |
Kiss is too self-consciously parodistic for classification as the worst. However, they do qualify to the extent that fans take them seriously. The Rutles and Spinal Tap were on similar ground. What can one say about an album like "Break Like the Wind"? Good or bad? To be truly awful a band must have pretensions. Journey, Rush, Styx, Kansas, are fine examples of the worst of their era. Each era has its own examples. |
I know - the Wurzels... |
This is ez. The worst rock band ever was LA Guns. I saw them open for GNR. Hard core bikers ran for the exits at MSG, their ears literally bleeding. Me? I'd brought along a box of cotton and sold it for 10 bucks a ball; 2 balls for $17.50. I made more money than the notrous oxide vendors. And people say Axel is dumb. Yeah. After these guys, GNR sounded great...which, in fact, they were. |
