Billy Corgan I Know You Rider

1. Sid Vicious
Will any fence that this non talented, drug fond, pathetic human being doesn't deserve to exist on this list? Let break information technology downwards: he couldn't play bass, he couldn't sing, he murdered his girlfriend, and he was so fucked up most the time, he would wear swastika t-shirts equally some sort of punk rock statement. For some reason, legions of fans of the Sex Pistols have glorified and deified this man into some Godfather of the Punk Movement while greats like Iggy Popular, Joe Strummer (who had more talent in his left donkey cheek than Sid had in his entire body), and Joey Ramone, though get their ante, are no where virtually the legend that Sid is. The almost he ever contributed to music was an attitude.

2. Jim Morrison
Every bit a friend recently told me, "Jim Morrison is a drunk stripper who was somehow romanticized into the greatest rock poet of a generation". No one is questioning his abilities as a forepart homo (behind Mick Jagger and David Lee Roth, it doesn't go much ameliorate than Morrison). Merely to have movies fabricated nigh his life, and book after volume written about his lyrical genius is absurd to me. I dearest the Doors and their music. But lets face up it, he wasn't even close to beingness the best lyricist of his generation (can anyone say "Dylan"?), and his vox was a drunken howl at best. Though The Doors influence can yet be heard throughout mod music, and Morrison truly was i of the outset rock-due north-roll clichés, I cant aid just retrieve that if non for Rolling Stone magazine, classic stone radio, and Oliver Stone, Jim Morrison would be about as popular as John Densmore (don't know who he is? Exactly)

3. Eric Clapton
At present earlier you get all up in arms most Wearisome Manus permit me first say that Clapton is i of the greatest BLUES guitar players ever. The dude can apartment out rip it up. Merely, to hear people say he is God or the "Greatest Guitar Player Ever" makes me desire to brand them sit down down and listen to "Tears in Heaven" then "Voodoo Chile". Now I realize that Clapton got bored of being the guitar god and ventured off into more songwriting excursions, simply lets face it, the dude plays blues scales and that's nearly it. As for songwriting, Jimmy Page and Townsend blow him away. Technical skill: Carlos Santana, John McLaughlin, Stevie Ray and Jeff Beck are much meliorate. Creativity: Hendrix, Richards, Zappa, The Edge were far more groundbreaking with their styles. Clapton is a great dejection guitar player. Just he does not deserve to even me mentioned equally one of the top 5 guitar players of all fourth dimension. If for nil else, considering he simply wrote and recorded way too many wack popular songs.

four. The Beatles
Earlier yous accept a complete shit fit and first screaming at the screen nigh how insanely wrong I am with this one, let me try and justify it with a few points. The Beatles changed the face of modern music-at that place is no doubting that. The Beatles wrote some of the greatest songs always, songs that will be good l,100, 500 years from now. The Beatles changed the way music is recorded by being the first band to apply the studio equally an instrument. That all being said, I'm ill of the utter and full blind hype that critics, writers, musicians, and just about everyone else gives them. They were a horrible alive band (when they actually did play, which was never or on meridian of roofs), their ratio of skilful to bad songs isn't too high percentage wise, they lacked the soul, style, and grit of The Rolling Stones, the were very formulated when writing their songs, they didn't use George Harrison enough throughout their careers, they had a robotic drummer, and their starting time few albums were aught merely chimera gum pop songs. I think there is a mass conspiracy to educate every upwards and coming musician that The Beatles are the be-all-end-all of mod music. Imagine this: The Beatles played Woodstock. What functioning would have been more than noted on musical terms (not the hype, only based on the music): Santana, the Who, Sly and Family Stone, shit, fifty-fifty CSNY or The Beatles? You can't tell me that "Get By With Help From My Friends" would have vanquish Santana's "Soul Sacrifice".

five. The Grateful Dead
I've said it all along, the Dead are the greatest cover band ever. Expect at any given set listing of theirs and tell me how many songs on that list are covers versus originals? At best, the Dead were a stone/country/jazz/ fusion ring that could rock as difficult every bit they could play. At worst, well, nosotros all know what they were at their worst: doodling dissonance. Jerry is an unbelievable guitar player (which is why his solo stuff is far better than anything the Dead ever put out) and Phil Lesh plays bass like a cannonball being fired into your stomach, simply with even more depth. The Dead were successful crusade they created an anti-establishment counterculture that kids could escape to for a few weeks, take drugs, party, dance, and sell veggie burritos to pay for the fake tickets they were about to scalp. If you're merely a coincidental Dead fan (exercise whatever of those exist?) and then y'all can probably name no more 4 Expressionless songs ("Truckin", "Uncle John's Band", "Casey Jones" or "Touch on of Gray"). The fact that to this day this band still sells millions of dollars worth of merchandise, bootlegs are notwithstanding traded similar stocks, and tour without Jerry (that's similar Crazy Horse touring without Neil) shows me that it's all based upon the hype right now and has nothing to do with bodily band. How many actual studio records does this band take? How many are good takeAmerican Dazzler andWorkingman's Dead? Exactly.

half-dozen. Nirvana
Tell me, if MTV never played the "Smells Like Teen Spirit" video, would you know whom Nirvana is? Would frat boys be diggings "In Bloom" singing "He's the 1 who likes all the pretty songs, merely he don't know what it means" without realizing the song is about them? Kurt Cobain was an amazing musician, and deserves a lot of the credit he gets for changing modern music from glam rock to good stone. But the never-ending hype around this band has got to cease. They put out a few astonishing albums that volition stand the test of fourth dimension. The abiding avalanche of Nirvana clone bands even so saturates today'due south marketplace (can you say Pool of Mudd?). But for writers (y'all know who you are Rolling Stone), and VH1 talking heads proclaiming Nirvana as the second coming of The Beatles is absurd. Alice in Chains was harder, Soundgarden was more talented (member for member) and Mudhoney was just simply put, cooler. Kurt owes a lot of his guitar style to Neil Immature, J Mascis, Thurston Moore and Lee Renaldo. He would probably tell you that too, if he didn't determine to off himself considering of what? The over hyping of his band.

vii. Billy Joel
I'll be honest, I can' think of one vocal of his that I actually like. If I want to hear nifty songs about New York City, so I'll listen to Lou Reed. If I desire to hear great singer songwriter piano piece of work, Ill heed to Elton John (well, I actually wont listen, but you know what I hateful). If I want to hear overly pretentious, purposefully poetic yet non-poetic lyrics, then ill heed to Billy Joel. No doubt the guy can handle the keys, and his vocalization isn't too shabby either. But talk about someone really riding a career off 1 song, "Pianoforte Man". Does anyone nether 30 similar Billy Joel? Why does classic stone radio (which I'thou starting to realize is basically responsible for ALL over hyping on this list) play his music to decease? I'yard starting to remember that it wasn't Robert Johnson that sold his soul at the crossroads, or fifty-fifty Ralph Machio (which by the manner, at that place is NO Mode Steve Vai looses to the Karate Kid in a "guitar-off") merely information technology was actually Billy Joel who sold it. This guy deserves nothing, and what he gets is simply being taken abroad from who actually deserves the credit: Elton John.

eight. Billy Corgan
Whiney voice, arrogant attitude, ugly bald head, low ratio of good-to-bad songs, and an air of self importance makes Baton Corgan a much deserved fellow member of this list. I had the chance to see the Dandy Pumpkins play once. They were ok, and I even liked some of their songs. But that dude needs to go. Never have I seen a front man insult the audience like him (someone threw a hackey sack on the phase to which Corgan replied "what is this? A Grateful Dead bear witness? Equally if a Dead head couldn't also like the Pumpkins?) and never accept I seen a musician admit their inabilities. Going on after the Beastie Boys, Corgan asked the crowd "Wow, playing later on them we must really sound bad. Do we suck?" What do you lot think the crowd said? After Kurt Cobain, I call up many consider Corgan next in line as the defining musician of a generation. His gloomy, depressing songs, hard-edged metal-yet-not-metal riffs, and thought provoking lyrics are easy to catch on to. But people act similar this guys' shit don't stink. I have one give-and-take for you: ZWAN.

9. Phish
Now before you pseudo hippies become out your devil sticks and throw them in my face, call up this listing is near overrated. I'm not at all proverb I don't similar any of the artists. Equally a thing of fact, I like well-nigh if not all of them. My concern is the hype that people put on these musicians. Phish, I like to say, are almost Likewise good. They make music for musicians (something I hear a lot of people say near Coltrane and Zappa). But permit'due south face it folks, if Jerry didn't die Phish would still exist the college playing, mid-level band they were before 1995. Their mix of sense of humour and music (something I'one thousand non really a fan of unless y'all ARE Zappa) and their long, extended "show off jams" fifty-fifty to a musician like myself, tend to be quite self indulgent. OK Trey, we know you can play guitar, now try writing One skilful vocal. I never blame a band for the hype around them, that'south for Publicists, MTV, Rolling Stone, and KROC. But none of those are hyping Phish, which lends me to believe its all their fans doing it. Similar the Dead, tin can you proper noun me a good Phish studio anthology? There is more than to music than just showing off your playing abilities. There is something chosen songwriting. And believe it or non, in that location is a fashion to mix farthermost musical skills, sense of humour, and skilful songwriting and making it work. Its chosen Frank Zappa and the Mothers of Invention.

ten. The Eagles
If y'all bulldoze one 60 minutes in your car whatsoever solar day of the week, anywhere in America, and listen to any rock station, you lot volition no incertitude be hearing one, if not four Eagles songs. They have 2 greatest hits releases that are basically the same songs. They haven't written a new song in 20 years yet still tour and accuse $150/ticket. "Hotel California" needs to be banned from rock radio forever. The Eagles were a mediocre ring at all-time. Their laid dorsum California grooves struck a notation with millions of fans yet even Lebowski knew that "the Eagles suck. Put on some Creedence". Another ring that roughshod prey to a low ratio of expert-to-bad songs. For some reason, legions of rock critics accept decided that the Eagles were a significant band from the seventy'south. I suppose if you compare them to other 70'due south acts similar Journey, Supertramp, Boston, Kansas, ELO, etc. they were The Stones. Just I'm non sure at that place has ever been another band that is strictly kept alive due to classic rock radio. At least kids today will buy Hendrix, Floyd, Zeppelin, and the Stones. Do yous think some 16-twelvemonth-old kid is running out to buy "Desperado"?

wenzhambir.blogspot.com

Source: https://bumslogic.wordpress.com/2004/09/08/top-10-most-overrated-musicians-of-all-time/