Go to the NEW FORUM
Hey, why not?
For me, it's classic rock. can't stand it. Led Zep, Deep purple etc. next would be jazz. I don't get jazz at all.
well i think its hard to rate a genre as a whole given it can have good and bad stuff. But i would have to say dance music. Everyone my age is obsessed with it. im sick of turning up to parties and hearing the same shit over and over again.
I guess in terms of this site its not really rated, so im gonna go with classic rock. Good call Moeboid. Led Zeppelin are pretty overrated. They made one good song.............................and thats it!
Richard, I think you're confusing Led Zeppelin with The Who. I remember when I was younger, I didn't know much about classic rock or Led Zeppelin, and I thought they were the same as 80s MTV rock, but now I feel they are the best rock band ever. So many bands since try to be like Led Zeppelin, but fail in the worst ways because they think it's all about rocking hard and they end up missing the point that Led Zeppelin covers a lot of ground that it has to be seen as good music & not just good rock.
Critics are always gonna support the genre they specialize in, that it could seem that they're all rated equally, but what I think is overrated is when critics give too much credit to influential sources mainly for historic reasons rather than it being good music. So early Blues is my pick for most overrated genre.
First songs, then artists, now entire genres? This is going to be interesting.
Just albums left, I was thinking of posting it but it'll just bring more rubbish into the forum.
Genres.. I guess I'll go with jazz. I've tried real hard to like some of it, but it's just not my thing.
yeah hahaha. this should have been "genre's you just don't get" but i thought i'd follow the "overrated" trend.
You could post albums if you wanted, but i have a feeling it would just be albums by artists mentioned in the overrated artists topic.
Jorgito, what do you mean by historic reasons? to me, that implies: hugely influential pioneers of a particular genre. and if that's the case, then they deserve a spot. think about it, nothing is hugely influential unless it's good.
By the way, i forgot a genre! "rave". the stuff played at those all night dance parties. if you need to be on drugs to enjoy it, then do drugs and enjoy it... but it's crappy music. can't believe i forgot to mention that. i don't think i can call it overrated though... does rave even appear on AM?
I'll have to go with sub-genres here. So i'll say grunge and britpop (the 90's kind).
Really great stuff to be found in both genres no doubt (as in any genre in my opinion), but amazing amounts of shit as well.
I guess rating genres is kinda silly though..
A lot of my favorite artists have said that the blues gave them the idea that music was easy to learn, and that's how they began playing music. They learned blues chords here & there, then they expanded to playing their own style. Moeboid, to me it's a fact that critics are aware that if they put down certain kinds of music, they'll lose credibility. That's why I say that paranoia comes with being a critic & some can't handle it well. I'm wondering if you saw me as a kind of Hitler when I said critics are useless. I admit that I'm not good at writing & I mostly seem angry even when I'm not.
Jorgito, we may have to agree to disagree here. I believe that the vast majority of critics do their job to the best of their ability. I do not think that they will give an album they like a poor rating because they're scared of losing their credibility (wouldn't you want to use your credibility to help out who you think is a worthy artist?). but hey, i don't know any music critics. so i can't really comment on how they do their job, i'm just guessing that they do their best. This may not be true, however, there may be outside influences, as you say, pressuring them to give good reviews to certain artists. again, i don't know. let's just hope that the good critics outweigh the bad ones.
Moeboid, I'm curious if this will help you understand jazz.