Don’t forget “Whoomp! (There It Is)”. That was 1993.
I stand corrected : these two bands were good. I wouldn’t go out of my way to hear their stuff again but they had some strong songs and the latter was definitely distinctive.
Still, if you look at the top hits of 1993 and 1994, the bland to fine ratio is abysmal.
1995 seemed much better and 1992, too.
/nitpick/I’d consider RM much more a 70s than 80s band, and, even with his hugest commercial success coming in the 80s (“Let’s Dance”) I’d still call Bowie more a creature of the 70s than 80s./nitpick/
(totally agree on the whip-smart Attractions that backed up EC.)
Any of the Stones hits in the 80s.
You’re being facetious, but it’s a great sports stadium song. There was nothing quite like hearing a rocking-out United Center with the crowd cheering and stomping to this song during the Bulls multiple championship runs.
I will agree that most 1993 Top 40 music was a bit on the bland side, but I found '91 and '92 even worse in that regard with all the contemporary soul stuff (or maybe it’s just me.) The rock and hip hop music of those years was pretty solid, though.
Would bands like Echo and the Bunnymen, The Cure, New Order, The Jam, The Pretenders, etc., count here, or is that not “pop” enough?
Only a little. I looked up the songs from those years and recognize a lot of them and consider a lot of them to be quite good. And you are right, in a sports stadium, that song was awesome.
I like “Havana” just because it sounds different than most of the rest of the blandly identical pop pap you hear on the radio.
You have to admit that this list is a little skimpy compared with almost any other decade in popular music. They all seem like minor exceptions to a larger theme.
I don’t like Morphine. I never thought it was musical or clever enough, maybe not beige, but certainly a limited palate. no? (I saw them play, seen all the members around, and seen the precursor bands a lot. I actually bought my stratocaster from Marks bandmate from treat her right.)
Weezer and cranberries don’t make a strong case for me. Cranberries are a mixed blessing after that song where she is barking about Ireland. maybe that’s just me. Smashing Pumpkins were the 90s for me and that’s not good. I hated having to hear that guy just because he said he was great and people believed him. Yuk.
Puly: Yes Liz Phair was the album of the decade. But one album don’t make a movement. I could list another half dozen artists from the 90s who were moving rock forward: GBV, Freedy Johnston, Mark Eitzel… But the main motion was throwing a lot of idie against the wall and seeing what would happen. That whole time I was thinking “Someone has a chance to make a great fucking subversive rock single and have it heard all over!” But it turned out to be the foo fighters. It was OK, but not a deep movement.
He was for about the first four albums. Then his music completely shit the bed. Haven’t paid much attention to Billy since Machina onward. But they’re a top 10 band for me during those years, and Siamese Dream definitely is in my top 3 rock albums of the 90s. (“Loveless” will beat it out, of course, but I listen to “Siamese” much, much more often. And if I had to take one single from the 90s on a desert island with me, it’d be “1979.”) It took me a few years to warm to them (1997 is when it all finally clicked for me) but they hold a very dear place in my musical heart (and emotionally)–or at least the 90s Pumpkins do.
I need to listen to Loveless. A few of billys songs are among the good ones of the time as I recall. I didn’t mean to incinerate him. I just felt they were all over the place and overplayed and too conceited.
Not necessarily; his wife might have died, but it looks like she didn’t in this case.
OK, it’s “Spirit In the Sky” by six lengths. I honestly have no idea at all why this song was (and continues to be) so popular. It’s simplistic, sappy, and repetitive. There are no great riffs or solos in it. It’s not profound. It didn’t change music as we know it. It’s not even that irritating on the first listen; it’s just boring and unremarkable.
It’s been almost 50 years and I still don’t get it.
Oh, I can’t stand his public persona – at least not since I’ve been aware of it. I didn’t really pay much attention in the 90s to the persona, just the music. I always knew he was a hard-working perfectionist, but that’s about it. But what I’ve seen since he’s done his poetry stuff and solo projects and whatnot, it’s turned me off enough not to listen to it. That said, the few people I’ve met that have run into him have all had positive experiences with him. My brother went to Columbia college and one of his classmates was working on a photo project when he randomly ran into Billy (this would have been around 2002). He asked Billy if he could work with him for a couple of pictures for his assignment, and Billy was perfectly accommodating and went along with it. So he can’t be all bad. 
Lot of stuff he does makes me cringe, but his early work, at least, was wonderful and I don’t think gets as much credit as it should.
OK, last post on these various asides. I feel I’m drifting a bit far afield from the OP:
As for “Loveless,” it’s really an album that needs to be an immersive experience. It’s the sonic equivalent of abstract expressionism to me. I have no idea what the lyrics are to any of the songs on the album, and I view the vocals more as another instrument than something to be intellectually understood. It’s an album that needs to be experienced, rather than heard. I don’t know if that makes any sense, but it’s more like I mean you just have to lose yourself in the sounds and enjoy the ride, let the right side of your brain take over, that kind of thing. And it may take a few listens to get into it (took me about four or five before my brain could wrap itself around it.) It definitely has a fuzzy, repetitive, trance element to it, but what I especially love about it is when I lose myself in the sounds, everytime I listen to it, I hear something a little different going on in the background, with how the various overtones and sounds interact with each other, creating new melodies and rhythms. It’s kind of hard to explain, but you know how sometimes if you listen to a white noise machine, you can eventually hear melodies and rhythms within it? (Or at least I can with the white noise machine I have, which suggests to me that it’s not truly random noise, but looping in some manner.) Anyhow, something like that.
Anyhow, back to the OP… 
I go way back with it. We used to sing this in 5th grade along with Sloop john B and raindrops keep fallin and others. I just heard it on the radio yesterday and really focused on it, by chance. I said to myself how long have you been hearing this? Why this song? The BG singers are great of course. It’s a great record in that way of craft. It’s a gospel melody that’s catchy, with a little john lee hooker in there. I can’t deny it sounds like a classic to me now. It won the battle and the war. It has a patina of knowing that everyone has heard it and it has stood the test of public affection.
I realized though that saying you never been a sinner or never sinned is either wrong or satirical. But it didn’t ruin the song. That’s the mystery of a hit.
Yeah, he was divorced, sorry if I wasn’t clear.
But he said he still loved that song. I only have mild dislike for it now, but when it was popular my teen age self thought it was deep in that hippy-dippy 70s way.
Better this than “Jesus Is Just Alright With Me” by the (egads) Doobie Brothers. :o
“Seven Years” is easily the worst popular song in the last … well, seven years. Nonsensical lyrics AND tedious plodding music all in the same package! A twofer!
If we’re allowed to nominate covers, then the person who shat all over “Fast Car” by turning it into a dance track (googles - Jonas Blue apparently) also needs a serious thwacking with the clue bat.
Digging back a couple of decades back, “The Greatest Love Of All” is just an ordinary slightly tedious easy listening pile of mush until it gets to the last few lines (leeeeerniiing to loooove yourself!!) at which it plunges headlong into a vile pit of suck, and never emerges.
But “Love Shack” is an awesome fun song and I might go put it on right now…
Dear Jesus, I had forgotten that song existed. Now I know again and will have to take another 20 years to forget.
Maybe putting Love Shack on repeat about 40 times will speed up the process. 
Much more a Harvest/After the Gold Rush Niel fan than a Hey Hey My My/Keep On Rockin In the Free World Niel fan.
Or - I just simply cannot stand those two songs.
Not a hair.
ETA - ok, HHMM is a little more tolerable, but…