Quote:
Originally Posted by kellychaos
Case in point: The guy who had both Kiss and the Rolling Stones on his overrated list. How could you even put those two bands on the same list? The Stones have an archive of hits in the dozens, tons of budding musicians who still site them as an influence after 30 plus years in the biz and millions of fans that still continue to listen to their music. They must be doing something right. Kiss is a poser band that have always been about image and album sales as evidenced by their sellout behavior, particularly in the past 10 years or so.
|
just because i said i thought they were both over-rated it doesn't mean that i think they are remotely similar bands.
yes the rolling stones were influential. i'm not saying they weren't.
i'm saying i think they recieve more credit and praise than is warranted. not everything they have released has been equally good.
i think the beatles are over-rated also, but i won't deny their influence on music. can i think of a band that is "better" than the beatles? i don't know, but i don't think _I_ am going to say that the beatles are the best band ever, like a lot of people do.
over rated != suck.