Top 5 "Good, But Never Did A Thing For Me" Bands

by **T-Bone** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 8:20 pm

I got into a long discussion the other night at work over this subject. We were listening to someones I-Pod and it shuffled to Aerosmith. The song Last Child was playing and I sighed. My Co-worker glared at me and says, "You're a music freak and you don't like Aerosmith?!?!?!?!?" It was almost like it was sacrelige to think so.

We started discussing bands that we had respect for, but never really got onto the bandwagon for some odd reason or another. Again, these are bands that I couldn't really "get in to" for some reason. Not based on their looks, image, location, etc..... Their MUSIC just never grabbed me for some reason.

I'm NOT using the term "OVERRATED", because it causes too much debate. Like I said, I respect these bands for their contribution to the Rock Scene, they were just not the "It" bands for me

Aerosmith: The definition of Rock Icon, but they never did a thing for me. I like a few select songs, but radio killed them for me very early. I'll still listen as background noise, but not on purpose.

Led Zepplin: Another definition of a Rock Icon, but also never really did a thing for me musically.

Black Sabbath: Like a few select tunes from both the Ozzy nd Dio eras, but not much more

Metallica: Wasn't into their early stuff other than a few select tunes off Ride The Lightning. Didn't like much else until the Black Album, but then it got played too much.

Motorhead: Again, Metal ICONS, but they did nothing for me. Again, I liked a tune or two off most of thier releases, but I never would go out of my way to listen to them on purpose

by **Saint John** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 9:51 pm

My 5:

The Beatles- Nothing more than souped up elevator music. Great harmonies and nothing more. Musically redundant.

Led Zep- Just a bunch of noise centered around some good guitars, a great drummer and an awful singer. Great music to replace water-boarding yet maintain an equal amount of torture.

Rush- Talk about a singer that makes suicide seem like a rational thing. 10 minutes of these guys and I'm looking for a tall building or a sharp object. Great drummer, though.

Aerosmith- Liked a few of their 80's hits, but that's about it. Hard to like a band when the lead singer looks like the lost Jackson. He and Michael could've collaborated and made "Love In An Oxygen Chamber" a big hit!!!

Nirvana- A bunch of strung out weirdos from Seattle that revolutionized music...for the worst. Talk about garbage. I'm quite certain Cobain was sober and heard his music for the first time in a non-induced state right before he shoved that shotgun in his mouth. He was about 4 years too late.

by **NealIsGod** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 10:27 pm

The Rolling Stones

Metallica

Yes

Judas Priest

Styx

by **Behshad** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 10:33 pm

Bryan Adams
Bruce Springsteen
Celine Dion
Backstreet Boys
Just kiddin Dean,,,I know theyre all in your 5 faves

Here are my choices:

* Aerosmith

* AC/DC

* Rainbow

* Queen

* Van Halen

by **Jeremey** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 11:01 pm

Aerosmith
The Beatles
Nirvana
Rush
Iron Maiden

by **Ehwmatt** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 11:31 pm

Interesting to see Aerosmith make everyone's list... they're in mine too. Just never really got them, with the exception of a few songs.

Aerosmith
The Police (select few songs again... drab live show too, despite the sales/prices)
Bob Dylan - "Singer/songwriter" or whatever you want to call him shouldn't be an excuse for a terrible voice, little to no musicianship, and arrogance. Granted, he can pen some decent lyrics (Hurricane is a fine song), but for me a true "singer/songwriter" is someone like Jackson Browne or Dan Fogelberg. Someone who can turn the melodies and lyrics into something appealing, yet still relatively simple
David Bowie - Ziggy and Changes are great, the rest of it can be flushed down the toilet as far as I'm concerned. If I ever have to endure the full length Suffragette City again I might just kill myself
Radiohead - Just don't get the hoopla. If I want experimental/progressive music, I'm going to listen to Dream Theater, Opeth, Tool, Yes, Rush, ELP, King Crimson, Starcastle etc etc. Anything but this avant garde crap.

by **mikemarrs** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 11:42 pm

radiohead
REM
yes
bob dylan
bruce springsteen

by **Saint John** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 11:47 pm

mikemarrs wrote:radiohead
REM
yes
bob dylan
bruce springsteen

Forgot about those 2 fuck heads.

Nice calls.

by **ScarabGator** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 12:04 am

Saint John wrote:
mikemarrs wrote:radiohead
REM
yes
bob dylan
bruce springsteen

Forgot about those 2 fuck heads. Nice calls.

Yeah, I never knew what the fascination is with Springsteen and Dylan...not for me for sure!

by **Ehwmatt** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 12:05 am

Springsteen is good, Dylan is not. I can certainly understand the tendency to lump them together though. Springsteen's voice is still a helluva lot better and the instrumentation on his songs obviously is.

by **X factor** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 12:14 am

Survivor- Absoloute shit
Dream Theatre- Masterbatory shit
Toto- Borrrrrrrrrr-ingggggggg shit (first three albums notwithstanding)
Eric Johnson- ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Warrant- Crap on SO many levels! You wanna blame NIRVANA for the ruination of hard rock? Uh-uh. Blame these douche bags...Seattle was just picking up the mess!

BTW- It ASTOUNDS me that ANYONE can think Robert Plant is a bad singer and that the Beatles aren't musically relevant. Wow...I mean...just...wow!

by **Vladan** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 12:27 am

Saint John wrote:My 5:

The Beatles- Nothing more than souped up elevator music. Great harmonies and nothing more. Musically redundant.

Led Zep- Just a bunch of noise centered around some good guitars, a great drummer and an awful singer. Great music to replace water-boarding yet maintain an equal amount of torture.

Rush- Talk about a singer that makes suicide seem like a rational thing. 10 minutes of these guys and I'm looking for a tall building or a sharp object. Great drummer, though.

Aerosmith- Liked a few of their 80's hits, but that's about it. Hard to like a band when the lead singer looks like the lost Jackson. He and Michael could've collaborated and made "Love In An Oxygen Chamber" a big hit!!!

Nirvana- A bunch of strung out weirdos from Seattle that revolutionized music...for the worst. Talk about garbage. I'm quite certain Cobain was sober and heard his music for the first time in a non-induced state right before he shoved that shotgun in his mouth. He was about 4 years too late.

Lol I couldn't agree more! that's awesome.

Alright.

1 - Nirvana (the above post sums it up nicely)
2 - Bob Dylan (crap, crap, crap)
3 - Robbie Williams (over rated, sings the same in every song, doesn't have much range and versatility, boring vocalist, one trick pony)
4 - Red Hot Chili Peppers (again, I cannot get into this music, it doesn't sound big enough for me, they sound like they are playing in a garage, empty lyrics, no substance, thin, cheap sounding)
5 - Led Zepplin (I never got into them to be honest, might try alittle more, although they are highly rated and along with the Beatles always regarded by most as their inspiration - like the Beatles, not my thing!)

by **Saint John** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 12:42 am

X factor wrote:BTW- It ASTOUNDS me that ANYONE can think Robert Plant is a bad singer and that the Beatles aren't musically relevant. Wow...I mean...just...wow!

Another funny story. I called the Beatles "musically retarded" one night at a bar and this girl (probably 25 years old) overheard it and went fucking ballistic on me. I was really scared she was gonna hit me over the head with her beer bottle. I actually backtracked and semi-retracted the statement out of fucking fear. :oops:

She was hot, too.

by **bluejeangirl76** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 12:59 am

Saint John wrote:
X factor wrote:BTW- It ASTOUNDS me that ANYONE can think Robert Plant is a bad singer and that the Beatles aren't musically relevant. Wow...I mean...just...wow!

Another funny story. I called the Beatles "musically retarded" one night at a bar and this girl (probably 25 years old) overheard it and went fucking ballistic on me. I was really scared she was gonna hit me over the head with her beer bottle. I actually backtracked and semi-retracted the statement out of fucking fear. She was hot, too.

You sound like my ex. He absolutely hated the Beatles and would agree about the "musically retarded" comment. In fact that sounds like something he'd say. Then again he hated Journey too so there's no credibility here. We were forced to agree to disagree on music, though he did take extra care in trashing the Beatles for no other reason than he knew I liked them.

by **Rockindeano** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 1:02 am

Jeremey wrote:Aerosmith
The Beatles
Nirvana
Rush
Iron Maiden

Ditto

and those flaming fags Queen in there too.

by **Maui Tom** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 1:03 am

I don't know about five...but Aerosmith and Rush are at the top by a country mile with me...

by **X factor** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 1:17 am

Saint John wrote:
X factor wrote:BTW- It ASTOUNDS me that ANYONE can think Robert Plant is a bad singer and that the Beatles aren't musically relevant. Wow...I mean...just...wow!

Another funny story. I called the Beatles "musically retarded" one night at a bar and this girl (probably 25 years old) overheard it and went fucking ballistic on me. I was really scared she was gonna hit me over the head with her beer bottle. I actually backtracked and semi-retracted the statement out of fucking fear. She was hot, too.

Good times!
Don't get me wrong. I have ALWAYS thought the Who and the Kinks far superior to the Beatles. And it does get old hearing all the Age of Aquarius folk go on and on about how great the fab four were. I just think they deserve maybe a "teensy" bit more respect than that.

Okay...so myabe RINGO was musically retarded...

by **The Sushi Hunter** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 1:18 am

This is a hard one simply because if I didn't feel the band did anything for me, I simply wrote them off as being bad...though I know other's feel they are good.

Restricting the number to just 5, here are mine:

Huey Lewis and the News
Dire Straights
Men At Work
Hootie and the Blow fish
Red Hot Chili Peppers

by **jrnychick** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 1:20 am

Let's see...
Pink Floyd: I don't hate them or anything, but they don't really do anything for me. My husband loves them. He thinks I don't like them because I've never gotten impaired and listened to The Wall.
Yes: boring
Asia: boring
Duran Duran: I never understood their popularity.
Thinking of Duran Duran just made me think about Kajagoogoo. I was introduced to them one summer in England by my cousin who loved them. They were huge there for a year or two. I was grateful that they were not popular in the US, then I started seeing them on MTV a few months later. Horrible. Now I'm going to have to listen to some good music all day to help me forget about them again.

by **Rockindeano** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 1:49 am

jrnychick wrote:Let's see...
Pink Floyd: I don't hate them or anything, but they don't really do anything for me. My husband loves them. He thinks I don't like them because I've never gotten impaired and listened to The Wall.
Yes: boring
Asia: boring
Duran Duran: I never understood their popularity.
Thinking of Duran Duran just made me think about Kajagoogoo. I was introduced to them one summer in England by my cousin who loved them. They were huge there for a year or two. I was grateful that they were not popular in the US, then I started seeing them on MTV a few months later. Horrible. Now I'm going to have to listen to some good music all day to help me forget about them again.

I think it's safe to say your top 5 shit bands have one thing in common: Euros.

by **mistiejourney** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 2:05 am

X factor wrote:
Saint John wrote:
X factor wrote:BTW- It ASTOUNDS me that ANYONE can think Robert Plant is a bad singer and that the Beatles aren't musically relevant. Wow...I mean...just...wow!

Another funny story. I called the Beatles "musically retarded" one night at a bar and this girl (probably 25 years old) overheard it and went fucking ballistic on me. I was really scared she was gonna hit me over the head with her beer bottle. I actually backtracked and semi-retracted the statement out of fucking fear. She was hot, too.

Good times!
Don't get me wrong. I have ALWAYS thought the Who and the Kinks far superior to the Beatles. And it does get old hearing all the Age of Aquarius folk go on and on about how great the fab four were. I just think they deserve maybe a "teensy" bit more respect than that.

Okay...so myabe RINGO was musically retarded...

Ahem, you are correct. Those of us who were THERE (meaning alive and able to understand) in 1964 and who knew what was going on in the music scene at the time will NEVER forget what the Beatles did. You can look at them now in retrospect and say Blech! but they turned what we now know as music on its HEAD!

And Ringo has one of the most consistent backbeats ever.

The Beatles were not allowed to BE edgy, btw. That came later post-Epstein. There would be no Zombies, Kinks or Rolling Stones - the Beatles paved the way for these bands (including the Dave Clark Five). Hell, Robert Stigwood worked for Epstein and wanted his own "Beatles" and found the Bee Gees.

History class is over. I just remember the Beatles first Sullivan show in '64 (I was SIX) and I had my first Beatle album the same year. Been into rock and roll ever since. My favorite was John.

by **The Sushi Hunter** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 3:07 am

mistiejourney wrote:
X factor wrote:
Saint John wrote:
X factor wrote:BTW- It ASTOUNDS me that ANYONE can think Robert Plant is a bad singer and that the Beatles aren't musically relevant. Wow...I mean...just...wow!

Another funny story. I called the Beatles "musically retarded" one night at a bar and this girl (probably 25 years old) overheard it and went fucking ballistic on me. I was really scared she was gonna hit me over the head with her beer bottle. I actually backtracked and semi-retracted the statement out of fucking fear. She was hot, too.

Good times!
Don't get me wrong. I have ALWAYS thought the Who and the Kinks far superior to the Beatles. And it does get old hearing all the Age of Aquarius folk go on and on about how great the fab four were. I just think they deserve maybe a "teensy" bit more respect than that.

Okay...so myabe RINGO was musically retarded...

Ahem, you are correct. Those of us who were THERE (meaning alive and able to understand) in 1964 and who knew what was going on in the music scene at the time will NEVER forget what the Beatles did. You can look at them now in retrospect and say Blech! but they turned what we now know as music on its HEAD!

And Ringo has one of the most consistent backbeats ever.

The Beatles were not allowed to BE edgy, btw. That came later post-Epstein. There would be no Zombies, Kinks or Rolling Stones - the Beatles paved the way for these bands (including the Dave Clark Five). Hell, Robert Stigwood worked for Epstein and wanted his own "Beatles" and found the Bee Gees.

History class is over. I just remember the Beatles first Sullivan show in '64 (I was SIX) and I had my first Beatle album the same year. Been into rock and roll ever since. My favorite was John.

I got interested in the Beatles when I was a teen, though they had been broken up for years by then and Lennon was dead already. My mother thought it was interesting that I was into the Beatles and she mentioned about the time when she watched them on the Sullivan show when she was a kid too. Paul McCartney, she says, was her favorite one of the four.

Website · by **FishinMagician** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 3:14 am

X factor wrote:Survivor- Absoloute shit
Dream Theatre- Masterbatory shit
Toto- Borrrrrrrrrr-ingggggggg shit (first three albums notwithstanding)
Eric Johnson- ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Warrant- Crap on SO many levels! You wanna blame NIRVANA for the ruination of hard rock? Uh-uh. Blame these douche bags...Seattle was just picking up the mess!

BTW- It ASTOUNDS me that ANYONE can think Robert Plant is a bad singer and that the Beatles aren't musically relevant. Wow...I mean...just...wow!

you obviously don't listen to guitar do you

by **youkeepmewaiting** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 3:25 am

X factor wrote:Survivor- Absoloute shit
Dream Theatre- Masterbatory shit
Toto- Borrrrrrrrrr-ingggggggg shit (first three albums notwithstanding)
Eric Johnson- ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Warrant- Crap on SO many levels! You wanna blame NIRVANA for the ruination of hard rock? Uh-uh. Blame these douche bags...Seattle was just picking up the mess!

BTW- It ASTOUNDS me that ANYONE can think Robert Plant is a bad singer and that the Beatles aren't musically relevant. Wow...I mean...just...wow!

LOL, havnt you just listed bands that you hate?

by **Ehwmatt** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 3:38 am

FishinMagician wrote:
X factor wrote:Survivor- Absoloute shit
Dream Theatre- Masterbatory shit
Toto- Borrrrrrrrrr-ingggggggg shit (first three albums notwithstanding)
Eric Johnson- ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Warrant- Crap on SO many levels! You wanna blame NIRVANA for the ruination of hard rock? Uh-uh. Blame these douche bags...Seattle was just picking up the mess!

BTW- It ASTOUNDS me that ANYONE can think Robert Plant is a bad singer and that the Beatles aren't musically relevant. Wow...I mean...just...wow!

you obviously don't listen to guitar do you

Haha yeah X factor, you're entitled to your opinion, but I have to say ouch! I love those first 4 artists and everything related to them (side projects, solo etc)

by **StyxCollector** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 3:59 am

Why just 5?

ABBA
The Carpenters
Bob Dylan
Grand Funk Railroad
Led Zeppelin
John Lennon (solo, not Beatles)
Metallica
Motley Crue
Nirvana
Pearl Jam
Elvis Presley
Red Hot Chili Peppers
Rolling Stones
Simon & Garfunkel
CSN/CSNY/Neil Young

by **Ehwmatt** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 4:01 am

StyxCollector wrote:Why just 5?

ABBA
The Carpenters
Bob Dylan
Grand Funk Railroad
Led Zeppelin
John Lennon (solo, not Beatles)
Metallica
Motley Crue
Nirvana
Pearl Jam
Elvis Presley
Red Hot Chili Peppers
Rolling Stones
Simon & Garfunkel
CSN/CSNY/Neil Young

Good call on Lennon and The Stones... terrible call on CSN :lol:

by **StyxCollector** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 4:05 am

Ehwmatt wrote:Good call on Lennon and The Stones... terrible call on CSN

To each his own

The Stones are arguably #1 on my list. Worlds most popular bar band is more like it. WAY overrated. I like some of their stuff, but I don't get how they remain to play stadiums. Talk about a band that is living on former glory (and yes, I am aware they've released new albums). Saw 'em in '89 and was bored to tears. Mick's Wandering Spirit album is more entertaining than anything the Stones have done since 1986.

by **brandonx76** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 4:05 am

Top 5:

Pearl Jam (Real popular in High School, along with several other shitty bands of the 90s)
Metallica - I remember playing 'one' in a band in high school. I wasn't able to play the double bass part fast enough. The song and band still sucked.
Lynard Skynard (why are they more popular than 38 Special??)
Bon Jovi (Ok, who doesn't like Slippery When Wet, and 'Runaway', aside from that, not sure why they're so friggen popular)
Red Hot Chilli Peppers (Anthony, stop ....please stop trying to sing.)

by **Saint John** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 4:06 am

StyxCollector wrote:Why just 5?

ABBA
The Carpenters
Bob Dylan
Grand Funk Railroad
Led Zeppelin
John Lennon (solo, not Beatles)
Metallica
Motley Crue
Nirvana
Pearl Jam
Elvis Presley
Red Hot Chili Peppers
Rolling Stones
Simon & Garfunkel
CSN/CSNY/Neil Young

I love Abba and Motley Crue. The rest of the list I can pretty much roll with.

MR

Top 5 "Good, But Never Did A Thing For Me" Bands

Top 5 "Good, But Never Did A Thing For Me" Bands

Who is online