At their best they are one of the most melodic and harmonious bands out there. If you listen to this new song of theirs and it has absolutely no effect on you, you don’t have a pulse (and note I am not concerned about the political side of the video).
The Who have always been high on my shit list. As have: Rush, Styx, ELO, Yes, Steely Dan, Grateful Dead, Doobie Brothers, Crosby Stills Nash & Young, Chicago, Eagles, Kiss, Boston, Kansas, Heart, Fleetwood Mac, Carol King, … the list goes on and on. 70’s were a dismal decade for music.
Nope, sorry. Can’t stand Bono’s constant whining about saving the world with love.
Some weird choices here but I gotta go with Coldplay as the worst band of all time.
Depressing, uninspired, derivative, clichéd BS. There’s nothing redeeming about them at all.
As a lifelong musician who tries to be as open as possible, this is one of the only bands that I can actually say that I don’t get their popularity.
ETA - there’s also Bjork who in my mind is another Yoko Ono but I think of them as more performance art than music per se.
Eagles. I like about two of their songs. The rest I’m at best indifferent to or actively despise. In the latter category is “Hotel California,” the song at the very top of the chart that measures the gap between popularity and worthiness. Here are Eagles, who have all the dope, all the booze, all the money and all the women in the world at their disposal…and what do they do? They whine about it, and moan about how awful their lives are. Poor, poor Eagles…my heart bleeds for you.
Rush. For Geddy Lee’s voice, but more than that…for infecting legions of so-called music fans with the notion that if you can play eight thousand notes a second on your instrument, then you must be great, and don’t have to be able to do anything else…for example, write and perform listenable songs.
Billy Joel. I know, it’s supposed to be bands. Sorry. Hey, Billy at least beats Eagles. I like three of his songs! Otherwise, I find him generally to be repellant.
I actually thought Yes’s first three albums were pretty good. Yeah, some of the ones on The Yes Album were drawn out, but at heart they were melodic and uplifting, with good harmonies. The rot began setting in with Fragile, and by the time of Close to the Edge they were unlistenable.
Not a big fan of Rush; their music has never impressed me and certainly is not up to the adulation of their fans. And anyone who calls them “Progressive rock” has no idea what the term means.
Chicago. First two albums were fine, but after than, nothing but dreck.
I don’t much care for Creedence Clearwater Revival, though I do respect them and understand their appeal. Their music just doesn’t move me.
There are some groups who I like at one point in their career, but can’t stand in others. Blood, Sweat and Tears’s first album (with Al Kooper) is amazing, and their next is pretty good, but it became a law of diminishing returns with them.
First in with REM. Good god they suck. I can barely stomach two of their songs, and the rest are terrible. And I was in college in the early 90s. I think I was the only one on a campus of 12,000+ that hated REM. They’re awful… just awful.
Hey! I like Men Without Hats. Rhythm of Youth is a wonderful synth pop album!
I’m having difficulty coming up with an original addition. I whole-heartedly agree with Kansas. I’ll give Boston a pass because of the technical achievement that first album was. Coldplay I enjoyed for about one or two songs before they became too boring and whiney for my tastes. Most of the other stuff mentioned I can tolerate to varying degrees, although Billy Joel comes close to crossing the line.
Oh, what about Poison? They were huge when I was in grammar school, and everybody seemed to love them except for me. I can sort of tolerate some of the stuff today in a nostalgia sort-of-way, but, otherwise, I can’t stand them.
I honestly do not get the universal love for this guy. He’s supposedly a great live performer, and sure he has some catchy melodies, but his lyrics are ridiculously bad and I find him to be extremely overrated.
I can’t stand Led Zeppelin. I know it’s because my ex from many years ago LOVED Led Zeppelin, to the point of getting tattoos of their stuff, but I also really don’t like their music. So much that when they come on the radio I have to turn the station immediately while thinking “OMG MAKE IT STOP.”
**Rush **- Obvious but it was at least somewhat balanced by the music.
**Styx **- Chipmunk fronting the band 38 Special - please clear the snot out of your throat before you start singing. REM - good lord that stuff is whiny
**Guns and Roses **- Love every note of their stuff when Axle isn’t singing.
Then it’s the style -
Paul McCrapney, Wings, Beatles - I admit it. Sir Paul is a musical genius. But most of his stuff is still filler melodies wrapped around commercial jingles. I’m just sick of his voice. Creed - Oh shit, just slit your wrists already and get it over with. Staind - See Creed
The Doors - See Creed, Staind and I’ll join you if I have to listen to Manzarek play those nasty organ chords for more than 1 minute
Then it’s the theme -
**Kiss **- I could never take them seriously in their clown outfits
Red Hot Chili Peppers - At least, whenever they started making soulless, corporate rock-by-numbers songs where the lead singer is pretty much just saying “Yabba Dabba Doo” the whole time.
I listened to the song. There’s a line “the same wind will take care of you and I,” which was a strike against it (the object pronoun is “me”!). I also despise the voice, though in general I really like what a friend calls “whiny rock.” Mostly, though, I just can’t stand the music. Every band has a sound, and U2’s is like a band made of Sting without the poetry.
Another vote for the Grateful Dead. They are one of my last ‘gofer’ bands - as soon as they come on, I have to gofer the dial and change the station.
Almost everyone else for me has something I can like. Used to hate Duran Duran with a white hot fire when they were new, but really liked the 1993 eponymous album. But not the 'Dead! Never!