[Josy]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

Do they? I'm not so sure about that.

Well done successfully proving the point of the original post of the thread.....

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

No you didnt get my point. The point was it is EASY to pick artists before your time. I'm, waiting for someone to say Mozart or Bach or Puccini were overrated. Its all a bit easy to pick an artists you dont quite get.

On that note I'm surprised no one picked Radiohead yet.

Nobody's saying they're quite overrated, they're simply saying they don't like their music.

That's the point of the thread, hugely popular artists whose music you simply don't like.

[smeagol]

The problem with not liking a artist you really have to of heard all the music first. most people dislike someone with only hearing a couple of songs or have some misinformed opnion of them.
i bet most of the artists we are not keen on there's actually songs we really like of theirs.
there's always least 2 with most bands whether you like them or not.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by smeagol

The problem with not liking a artist you really have to of heard all the music first. most people dislike someone with only hearing a couple of songs or have some misinformed opnion of them.
i bet most of the artists we are not keen on there's actually songs we really like of theirs.
there's always least 2 with most bands whether you like them or not.

If you don't like the music you hear from a particular band/artist you're not going to go through listening to their entire back catalogue on the off chance there's a couple of decent songs. One or two good songs doesn't make you suddenly a fan of them either if you hate 99% of their output.

[InOne]

Pablo Nutini, Amy Winehouse, Jake Bugg, Adele

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by Josy

Well done successfully proving the point of the original post of the thread.....

My point was its easy to hear people saying how great Jimi Hendrix or the Beatles were then listen to two tracks and say Nah'. Thus I think its unfair to list artists who were before you could fully appreciate music. |If you disagree and want to go wild listing Johnny Cash, Rolling Stones, Charlie Parker and whoever else was way before you were even born then go ahead. Really, truly it doenst mean that much to me but I do personally think its a bit unfair on the artists and their music.

[Vicky.]

Am I allowed to say I dont like the beatles and elvis, given that I am a DJ so have heard possibly more of their songs than people who were alive at their peak have heard?

[smeagol]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

If you don't like the music you hear from a particular band/artist you're not going to go through listening to their entire back catalogue on the off chance there's a couple of decent songs. One or two good songs doesn't make you suddenly a fan of them either if you hate 99% of their output.

yeah but my point is most people they really only know a few songs before they make a opinion. which is pretty unfair. we all do it. so what we might class as a sucky band one day can change the next. or could change if we made the effort to listen more.
i think you got to listen to more than a few songs to really say a artist sucks.

guy a says i hate john lennon he sucks overated garbage lol guy b says yeah but what songs do you know. guy a says err that imagine one and one a bout a turkey lol.
guy b sighs

[Vicky.]

I prefer Lennon on his own to the beatles...

[InOne]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Am I allowed to say I dont like the beatles and elvis, given that I am a DJ so have heard possibly more of their songs than people who were alive at their peak have heard?

Nice try but no.

[Jay.]

I cannot stand Rihanna, just ugh. Everything about her, her songs are crap and so overplayed it just annoys me so much -.-

[Z]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

My point was its easy to hear people saying how great Jimi Hendrix or the Beatles were then listen to two tracks and say Nah'. Thus I think its unfair to list artists who were before you could fully appreciate music. |If you disagree and want to go wild listing Johnny Cash, Rolling Stones, Charlie Parker and whoever else was way before you were even born then go ahead. Really, truly it doenst mean that much to me but I do personally think its a bit unfair on the artists and their music.

I don't think it's unfair at all. A lot of the most popular artists at any given time are where they are through a combination of their music and being able to capture the general public's imagination en masse and sweep that up into a frenzy. Then, once it's all over, people then take the time to reflect back and realise that maybe they weren't as amazing as was thought at the time because some part (perhaps a huge part, perhaps only a little part) of the hype was purely because that was the thing everyone was into. That's why I said I don't think John Lennon is a good solo artist. His solo career got the platform it had because he was a member of The Beatles. He actually didn't have very much of interest to say, his lyrics were uninspired and in my opinion his solo music showed him up to be not a very talented person, pretending to be one. He was long before my time. I have the benefit of being able to listen to his music without being caught up in Beatlemania - an unbiased judgment, I would say.

[Z]

I feel the same way about Beyonce actually. I loved Destiny's Child - Bug A Boo, Bills Bills Bills, Say My Name, Independent Women, Survivor, they had so many incredible force of nature tracks that just jumped out at you on first listen - Beyonce as a solo artist is a fantastic live performer but her music is really average and I preferred her in Destiny's Child.

[GiRTh]

Your examples are not of untalented people they just highlight how much they needed their band. There are numerous examples ie Gary Barlow. Some people are not so great solo but it doesn't mean they are untalented.

[Z]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

Your examples are not of untalented people they just highlight how much they needed their band. There are numerous examples ie Gary Barlow.

Yes, and the point of this thread is to name artists that you're supposed to like but don't. Supposed to like (everyone loves them) but don't (I don't think they're very good for whatever reason).

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

My point was its easy to hear people saying how great Jimi Hendrix or the Beatles were then listen to two tracks and say Nah'. Thus I think its unfair to list artists who were before you could fully appreciate music. |If you disagree and want to go wild listing Johnny Cash, Rolling Stones, Charlie Parker and whoever else was way before you were even born then go ahead. Really, truly it doenst mean that much to me but I do personally think its a bit unfair on the artists and their music.

But that's a different point.

You say people weren't around during these artist's "peak years" therefore can't fully appreciate how fresh or innovative it was and now you're talking about them listening to no more than one or two songs.

You don't have to have been born during Elvis's era to go back and listen to his whole catalogue. It's a separate point.

Saying you don't like an artist or their music is not discrediting their career, popularity or impact, it's simply pointing out that through all of that you don't like the music itself.

You can say you don't like Beatles music (I'm sure many didn't at the time too) but that's not taking away the fact that they were pioneers of pop music. You're looking too deeply into a simple question.

[reece(:]

Elvis, Adele, The Beatles, Celine...etc etc

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

But that's a different point.

You say people weren't around during these artist's "peak years" therefore can't fully appreciate how fresh or innovative it was and now you're talking about them listening to no more than one or two songs.

You don't have to have been born during Elvis's era to go back and listen to his whole catalogue. It's a separate point.

Saying you don't like an artist or their music is not discrediting their career, popularity or impact, it's simply pointing out that through all of that you don't like the music itself.

You can say you don't like Beatles music (I'm sure many didn't at the time too) but that's not taking away the fact that they were pioneers of pop music. You're looking too deeply into a simple question.

Youre right that is a different point. Do you want to discuss that?

[Marsh.]

I just have in that long post have I not?

Not that I see the point because the OP is a straight forward question, it's not about artists in their peak, their impact or anything. It's simply about whether you enjoy their music or not.

Whether someone likes the Beatles music or not is a simple question.
Discussing the Beatles impact and legacy and talent is an entirely separate debate.

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

I just have in that long post have I not?

Not that I see the point because the OP is a straight forward question, it's not about artists in their peak, their impact or anything. It's simply about whether you enjoy their music or not.

Whether someone likes the Beatles music or not is a simple question.
Discussing the Beatles impact and legacy and talent is an entirely separate debate.

Yes the OP is a simple question and I still think its unfair to list an artist that was before you were born. I think my point is also a simple one. As I pointed out a few post ago there are many you can list like Charlie Parker, Billie Holiday etc but whats the point when you werent even around to appreciate their work.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

Yes the OP is a simple question and I still think its unfair to list an artist that was before you were born. I think my point is also a simple one. As I pointed out a few post ago there are many you can list like Charlie Parker, Billie Holiday etc but whats the point when you werent even around to appreciate their work.

Because maybe they've heard their music regardless of when they were born?

My grandmother loved Frank Sinatra and always played his music over and over again and therefore I (someone born after his era) heard his music and formed an opinion.

You don't have to be born years earlier to hear something and form an opinion.

[smeagol]

did i read john lennon was untallented lol haha we have gone from disliking artists to plain lunacy lol

imagine theres no lenon is not easy even if you try lala lol

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Because maybe they've heard their music regardless of when they were born?

My grandmother loved Frank Sinatra and always played his music over and over again and therefore I (someone born after his era) heard his music and formed an opinion.

You don't have to be born years earlier to hear something and form an opinion.

And I wouldn't list an artist as one I disliked if I didnt have advanced knowledge of their work and impact but hey thats just me.

[King Gizzard]

Seeing as it's my favourite genre, I'm suppose to like Green Day, but I ****ing can't stand them

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

And I wouldn't list an artist as one I disliked if I didnt have advanced knowledge of their work and impact but hey thats just me.

What are you referring to?

Someone saying they don't like the Beatles music (or whoever) is presumably because they don't. Where do you get the idea people are listing ones they haven't listened to? You don't need to know their impact to sit, listen and know whether you like the music itself or not.

Maybe you don't like opposing opinions?