BimboBob
Well-Known Member
squirtyflower said:
Mmmm pie.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Awful bands
- Thread starter Banned Tosspot
- Start date
Mmmm pie.
Clevers
Well-Known Member
ickle~blue said:Nirvana and Radiohead
Can't believe it took this far to get to the dire Nirvana.
Does that mean I can't say steps?ImAwesome said:davymcfc said:One direction
Boybands don't really count as actual bands. Take That were probably the best boyband ever which pretty much confirms that there never has been nor ever will be a good boyband.
Bigg Bigg Blue
Well-Known Member
Pet shop boys.
End of thread.
End of thread.
ConnorD110
Well-Known Member
Does 'awful bands' equate to 'bands i don't like' ?
Deftones.
Deftones.
BimboBob
Well-Known Member
N Dubs.
What do I win?
What do I win?
MCFC BOB
Well-Known Member
Just to pitch in. I rather dislike:
Mumford & Sons. As a listener, nothing bothers me quite like insincerity. Mumford & Sons - the band that grew up in middle-class detached houses and went to Eton because their parents could afford it insist on making pop music with boring and uninspiring lyrics about heart and hardship - something they've probably never experienced. Not to mention that they only seem 'different', 'alternative' and 'unique' to people that think banjos are exotic instruments.
Alternatives: Fleet Foxes, Simon & Garfunkel, Laura Marling
--
The Vaccines. Another band that were seen as the "saviours of rock & roll" because they wrote a song that doesn't reach two minutes. I find them incredibly uninteresting and boring and would honestly much rather to be listening to bands that have tried this sort of sound before and actually got it right. There's nothing I find exciting about another British band trying to be American.
Alternatives: The Drums, The Strokes, Arctic Monkeys (between 2004 and 2007).
--
The Killers. I do rather like their first album Hot Fuss, but since then I feel like they've become another band on the conveyor belt of stadium-filling rock bands that write wishy-washy stadium rock with loads of boring reverb and shit metaphors about clouds and tears, or something, that leave them sounding like an over-produced pop act that lost direction.
Alternatives: U2 (before the 90s), Coldplay (before X & Y), Elbow.
--
Oasis. I really enjoy their first album, I sort of enjoy their second album, but I can't get on with their third at all. They wrote a sound in the 90s and thought it would still sound interesting towards the back end of the 00s. A one-dimensional band that Noel did well to get out of before Liam threw it into the ground.
Alternatives: Radiohead, Pulp, Blur - all around at the same time and all much better.
Some special mentions:
Bon Jovi
Kings of Leon (after Because of the Times)
Muse (after Black Holes and Revelations)
Green Day
All Time Low
You Me at Six
Nickelback
The Enemy
The Ting Tings
Mumford & Sons. As a listener, nothing bothers me quite like insincerity. Mumford & Sons - the band that grew up in middle-class detached houses and went to Eton because their parents could afford it insist on making pop music with boring and uninspiring lyrics about heart and hardship - something they've probably never experienced. Not to mention that they only seem 'different', 'alternative' and 'unique' to people that think banjos are exotic instruments.
Alternatives: Fleet Foxes, Simon & Garfunkel, Laura Marling
--
The Vaccines. Another band that were seen as the "saviours of rock & roll" because they wrote a song that doesn't reach two minutes. I find them incredibly uninteresting and boring and would honestly much rather to be listening to bands that have tried this sort of sound before and actually got it right. There's nothing I find exciting about another British band trying to be American.
Alternatives: The Drums, The Strokes, Arctic Monkeys (between 2004 and 2007).
--
The Killers. I do rather like their first album Hot Fuss, but since then I feel like they've become another band on the conveyor belt of stadium-filling rock bands that write wishy-washy stadium rock with loads of boring reverb and shit metaphors about clouds and tears, or something, that leave them sounding like an over-produced pop act that lost direction.
Alternatives: U2 (before the 90s), Coldplay (before X & Y), Elbow.
--
Oasis. I really enjoy their first album, I sort of enjoy their second album, but I can't get on with their third at all. They wrote a sound in the 90s and thought it would still sound interesting towards the back end of the 00s. A one-dimensional band that Noel did well to get out of before Liam threw it into the ground.
Alternatives: Radiohead, Pulp, Blur - all around at the same time and all much better.
Some special mentions:
Bon Jovi
Kings of Leon (after Because of the Times)
Muse (after Black Holes and Revelations)
Green Day
All Time Low
You Me at Six
Nickelback
The Enemy
The Ting Tings
Clevers said:ickle~blue said:Nirvana and Radiohead
Can't believe it took this far to get to the dire Nirvana.
I named nirvana earlier in the thread,complete shite.
BlueHammer85
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 13 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 36,994
Seosa said:Have people actually branded Oasis, Radiohead, The Smiths & Led Zep as "awful bands"? For the love of Christ...
Basically bands that have worked there way to the top and now have a huge following
MCFC BOB
Well-Known Member
Oasis are not an awful band. As much as I dislike their unadventurous, borderline adult-contemporary, one-dimensional material after What's the Story? they are by no means an awful band.