The Beatles, Nirvana and Led Zeppelin to me are over-rated, but that is partially because they are "clique-bands". They are the type of bands that YOU HAVE TO LIKE, whether it's your parents peer-pressuring you or friends. But don't get me wrong, I've listening to many Zeppelin, Beatles and Nirvana songs, and while they are good, they aren't exceptional, but rather, cliche'd.
I don't think they compare well to their contemporaries as far as songwriting, and musicianship goes. I'll definitely take AC/DC, Thin Lizzy, UFO, Uriah Heap over Zeppelin. Bon Scott was definitely a much better vocalist and front man than Robert Plant will ever be, and Thin Lizzy's guitarist had a lot more going on than Page. As far as Beatles, I'll take the Who over them any day. the Beatles, while catchy, tend to be nilly frilly most of the time, while the Who, whom had some pop-rock songs like the Beatles, seemed a lot more versatile. And Nirvana... well, Alice in Chains and Pearl Jam put Nirvana to shame. Jerry Cantrell is an amazing guitarist and backup singer, Layne Staley was such an amazing and versatile vocalist, his vocals could go from mellow, to grudgy to a very primal and powerful scream. I mean, he just puts Kurt Cobain to shame. And I will say, Pearl Jam has a very solid guitarist and vocalist. Very good band for sure.
And about Metallica. I wouldn't say they are over-rated as much as I would rather say Kirk Hammett is over-rated. James Hetfield is a hell of a rhythm guitarist, and he is, in essence, Metallica. However, that being said, Metallica doesn't deserve to go into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame before bands such as KISS, Rush, The Stooges, Def Leppard and such go in. But then again, Blondie was just inducted in the Hall of Fame a few years ago, so that shows you how legit the Hall of Fame really is.
I don't think they compare well to their contemporaries as far as songwriting, and musicianship goes. I'll definitely take AC/DC, Thin Lizzy, UFO, Uriah Heap over Zeppelin. Bon Scott was definitely a much better vocalist and front man than Robert Plant will ever be, and Thin Lizzy's guitarist had a lot more going on than Page. As far as Beatles, I'll take the Who over them any day. the Beatles, while catchy, tend to be nilly frilly most of the time, while the Who, whom had some pop-rock songs like the Beatles, seemed a lot more versatile. And Nirvana... well, Alice in Chains and Pearl Jam put Nirvana to shame. Jerry Cantrell is an amazing guitarist and backup singer, Layne Staley was such an amazing and versatile vocalist, his vocals could go from mellow, to grudgy to a very primal and powerful scream. I mean, he just puts Kurt Cobain to shame. And I will say, Pearl Jam has a very solid guitarist and vocalist. Very good band for sure.
And about Metallica. I wouldn't say they are over-rated as much as I would rather say Kirk Hammett is over-rated. James Hetfield is a hell of a rhythm guitarist, and he is, in essence, Metallica. However, that being said, Metallica doesn't deserve to go into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame before bands such as KISS, Rush, The Stooges, Def Leppard and such go in. But then again, Blondie was just inducted in the Hall of Fame a few years ago, so that shows you how legit the Hall of Fame really is.