I can't stand Coldplay, Radiohead, or Dave Matthews.
I kind of see them as a bunch of trendy hipsters at the forefront of the yuppie movements, which are pretty lame and fake if you want to know the truth. That stuff was cool before it became maint stream and gathered a crowd.
Radiohead is too pretentious and tried way too hard to be an abstract musical canvas, but it just sounds like over done crap.
Coldplay is annoying. enough said. same with the people who listen to them.
Dave Matthews isn't as bad as the former two, but with his annoying voice and the crowd it draws, it's too washed up.
Is it that by its indefiniteness it shadows forth the heartless voids and immensities of the universe, and thus stabs us from behind with the thought of annihilation, when beholding the white depths of the milky way?
Lady Gaga started out cool, until she fully realized that she could use below-average songs, add the craziest outfits ever and some murder and people would be 'going Gaga' over it (pun intended )
So yeah, she is overrated for now.
I'm starting to recognize how pointless this thread is. Every post is just "ZOMG THIS ARTIST DOESN'T MEET MY PERSONAL EXPECTATIONS FOR WHAT GOOD MUSIC SHOULD BE LOL"
which is pretty meaningless. If you're going to critique music, do it as objectively as you can by comparing the artist to other artists in a similar genre during a similar time period.
Frankly, most of you have a very parochial mold for what characteristics you expect "good music" to have and so you end up dismissing the vast majority of music by judging it in terms of some other genre that you like better. If you assume that all good music is supposed to sound like Lynyrd Skynyrd, of course Radiohead doesn't interest you. That doesn't make them bad; it makes you ignorant for saying so.
If you simply don't enjoy an entire genre, your opinion that x prominent artist from that genre is "overrated" or "bad" is just utterly meaningless, because you don't like that genre in the first place and so you have no idea how to evaluate the performance in meaningful terms.
It's like hearing 15 year old metalheads ramble on about how much the Beatles suck because when they listen to music they're looking for one very specific set of characteristics (in this case, fast, technically difficult, aggressive playing, chunky modern production EQd toward drums and guitars, and dark/menacing lyrics) and everything else just gets labeled "bad" because they don't understand how to judge a piece of music in the context of its own genre.
Not fitting your genre preferences doesn't make music bad. Stacking up poorly next to other artists in the same genre from the same time period in terms of objective critique does...if I hear another ISFP whine that "Radiohead sucks" for reasons that boil down to "they don't sound like AC/DC", I'm going to stab someone in the fucking eye.
"I listened to the whole Radiohead record, but I couldn't find one rockin' pentatonic blues riff, super cranked reverb-soaked arena drum beat, rippin' 128th note shred solo or lyric about gettin' drunk and lovin' my girl in my new '68 Chevy! This band SUCKS!" fucking
If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?
INTPs love Radiohead and Tool. I still try to get into Tool, but I don't see the greatness.
Fair enough, I prefer Tool.
Unless there is some reason you can tie it to you can't say that certain types have an innate ability to appreciate certain types of music and some don't. All you can say is that there is a tendency for whatever reason.
There were a lot of intuitives in the thread that also said Radiohead is overrated. I thought playing the sensing card was a cheap shot. That kind of thing gets on my nerves.