Which "cool" band do you detest the most?

Recommended Videos

CovertCell

New member
Nov 4, 2009
132
0
0
Bring me the horizon.

And I thought Cradle of Filth were bad, but they just take it to a new level.
 

Nigh Invulnerable

New member
Jan 5, 2009
2,500
0
0
I'm really not a fan of Muse. They've done a few good tunes, but they just don't capture my interest beyond the moments the song is playing. Likewise with Dragonforce (though they've really only done one good song and recycled it to oblivion), the Beatles, and Radiohead. Most pop stars fall into this category, but they don't really advertise as "bands" so I'm not addressing them.
 

Arsen

New member
Nov 26, 2008
2,705
0
0
SonicKoala said:
Arsen said:
Radiohead.

This is proof that the 1990's added nothing to the evolution of music. The trends still continue on today. Thank God for European Metal.
Wow you just failed so hard there buddy it's not even funny. The 1990s added nothing to the evolution of music? HOW CAN ANYONE SAY THAT and not be clinically retarded? Nirvana, The Flaming Lips, Neutral Milk Hotel, Built to Spill, Pavement, Pearl Jam, Alice in Chains, Soundgarden, Jane's Addiction, My Bloody Valentine, Smashing Pumpkins, AND FUCK YES RADIOHEAD. All of these artists were unique and brought originality to music after a somewhat depressing drought in the 1980s. Seriously, you clearly don't like Indie or Alternative Rock, and that's fine, but don't litter these forums with your musical ignorance and metal fan-boy idiocy. You're entitled to your opinion, and that's fine if you don't like Radiohead, but claiming the 1990s added nothing to the evolution of music is absolute bullshit.

Oh, and to make my post relevant to the OP, I'm sort of unclear about what you meant by "cool" - "cool" as in trendy, underground indie music, or "cool" in the sense that it's on the radio? I'm going to assume you mean the latter and say the Jonas Brothers, or maybe the Black Eyed Peas.
Alice in Chains, Built to Spill, and Soundgarden are worthy of mention, but overall it just shows the lack of musical composition, energy, emotion, and everything else we lost from the 1970's. Like it or not bands like Iron Maiden, Helloween, Slayer, Metallica, Emperor, Bathory, etc...are the true evolution of the rock bands from back in the day.

The Who, The Rolling Stones, Pink Floyd, The Jimi Hendrix Experience, Creedence Clearwater Revival, etc etc. It shows the true ignorance (from my point of view at least) that so many bands are shunned in the modern day spotlight because they don't cater to the masses like the Nirvana children did back in the day.

But overall the people who worship Radiohead and consider them to be an innovative band make me roll my eyes. That rebellious spirit of rock of roll wasn't meant to become an output for semi-college educated, musical theory loving, artsty-nerd-angst bands who all the "intellectual kids" considered to be the reincarnation of Pink Floyd out of ignorance.

"Indie Rock" means they are trying to copy the 1970's but don't have the balls to actually play anything meaningful or write significant music.

Iron Maiden - Any song.
Immortal - At the Heart of Winter
Bathory - A Fine Day to Die
Anything from Opeth, Dark Tranquility, or Therion.

These bands prove it is criminal that so many good artists are still going undiscovered because they weren't in with in the in crowd so to speak.
 

Aunel

New member
May 9, 2008
1,927
0
0
zen5887 said:
Ooh and Dragonforce..

Now theres a band I hate for every reason ever!
Ditto!
vasudean said:
and SOAD because I think they have absolutely no sense of rhythm whatsoever and their songs about as dumb as Uwe Boll movies if not dumber (which I think is pretty hard to do).
I call a vendetta out to you!
(rabid system fan here, sorry)

OT: MCR, let's hope they fuck up their eyeliner and commit suicide.
 

Masochist

New member
Dec 10, 2008
7
0
0
Ahh...didn't Opeth come into prominence in the 90's? And Dark Tranquility, as well. And bands like Dream Theater and Porcupine Tree, who were HIGHLY influential in modern Progressive music, made their mark in the 90's. Then you turn to Hip-hop, and while it arguably had its best moments in the 80's, it's evolution was definitely furthered (and perhaps even pinnacled) by 90's output (we won't talk about millennium-era mainstream rap...). I would definitely have to disagree with your opinion that the 90's did nothing for the evolution of music.

That being said...a lot of bands I don't like today are simply boring, pre-processed cash cows: Nickelback, Stain'd, Panic! At the Disco, the Jonas Bros. and most other Disney-propagated music artists, most mainstream hip-hop (note the word "mainstream"), most mainstream pop, Papa Roach nowadays...etc.

Strangely enough, I don't mind a lot of the other bands that were listed by people: I really enjoy the Foo Fighters, I like My Chem (in terms of music, they aren't in the emo genre whatsoever), don't mind Fall Out Boy or Paramore (girl can sing, plain and simple), and I really like Muse, Coldplay and Radiohead.

Just my opinions...
 

Arrers

New member
Mar 4, 2009
759
0
0
SonicKoala said:
Arsen said:
Radiohead.

This is proof that the 1990's added nothing to the evolution of music. The trends still continue on today. Thank God for European Metal.
Wow you just failed so hard there buddy it's not even funny. The 1990s added nothing to the evolution of music? HOW CAN ANYONE SAY THAT and not be clinically retarded? Nirvana, The Flaming Lips, Neutral Milk Hotel, Built to Spill, Pavement, Pearl Jam, Alice in Chains, Soundgarden, Jane's Addiction, My Bloody Valentine, Smashing Pumpkins, AND FUCK YES RADIOHEAD. All of these artists were unique and brought originality to music after a somewhat depressing drought in the 1980s. Seriously, you clearly don't like Indie or Alternative Rock, and that's fine, but don't litter these forums with your musical ignorance and metal fan-boy idiocy. You're entitled to your opinion, and that's fine if you don't like Radiohead, but claiming the 1990s added nothing to the evolution of music is absolute bullshit.
Man, you owned that guy. Escpecially the shout out to The Flaming Lips.

On topic, I'd have to go for the Disney Channel stuff. I mean Christ why do the tweens like that stuff.
 

whycantibelinus

New member
Sep 29, 2009
997
0
0
Programmed_For_Damage said:
3 words - Fall Out Boy
Indeed.

I agree with OP also, Red Hot Chili Peppers irritate the shit out of me and I cannot for the life of me see why they became so popular.
 

FranzTyphid

New member
Apr 10, 2009
1,156
0
0
Saphatorael said:
slyder35 said:
This question is based around the fact that I absolutely cannot stand any Red Hot Chilli Pepper songs. I can't stand their music or his voice, despite everyone around me loving them, it's just a fact.

So which (just pick 1) "cool" or "in" band can't you stand?

[ps - bands such as backstreet boys, the wiggles, or roxette are not cool or in, and are hence to be excluded from this discussion]
Well... I agree with RHCP.
RHCP are amazing well they're earlier stuff is
 

cuddly_tomato

New member
Nov 12, 2008
3,404
0
0
Jamariquai, or whatever it is called these days. A ***** queen from hell old girlfriend loved them so much that I kind of got jealous and it never went away.

Oasis. Liam Gallagher is one of the worlds biggest toss pots, and all that band basically did was try to be The Beatles.

Beck. I just think he's crap.

Nine Inch Nails. Every damn song of theirs is the same.

*quiet music, Trent Reznor sings*
Lots of flowers,
And bunnies,
And I love you,
And everything is nice.

*Loud music suddenly crashes, Trent Reznor starts yelling as if a wasp just entered his trousers*

PAAAAAAIN!!!!!!!
EVERYTHINGS DEAAAAAAAAAD!!!!!
I KILLED EVERYTHING!!!!!!!!!

Get a new damn act, dammit!
 

ohgodalex

New member
May 21, 2009
1,094
0
0
Cool as in lots of people like them, or bands that it's hip to like?
I fucking hate The Decemberists. Indie music should have ended with the "mostly acoustic guitar" phase, so I never would have had to deal with art rock and experimental bands.
 

SonicKoala

The Night Zombie
Sep 8, 2009
2,266
0
0
Arsen said:
SonicKoala said:
Arsen said:
Radiohead.

This is proof that the 1990's added nothing to the evolution of music. The trends still continue on today. Thank God for European Metal.
Wow you just failed so hard there buddy it's not even funny. The 1990s added nothing to the evolution of music? HOW CAN ANYONE SAY THAT and not be clinically retarded? Nirvana, The Flaming Lips, Neutral Milk Hotel, Built to Spill, Pavement, Pearl Jam, Alice in Chains, Soundgarden, Jane's Addiction, My Bloody Valentine, Smashing Pumpkins, AND FUCK YES RADIOHEAD. All of these artists were unique and brought originality to music after a somewhat depressing drought in the 1980s. Seriously, you clearly don't like Indie or Alternative Rock, and that's fine, but don't litter these forums with your musical ignorance and metal fan-boy idiocy. You're entitled to your opinion, and that's fine if you don't like Radiohead, but claiming the 1990s added nothing to the evolution of music is absolute bullshit.

Oh, and to make my post relevant to the OP, I'm sort of unclear about what you meant by "cool" - "cool" as in trendy, underground indie music, or "cool" in the sense that it's on the radio? I'm going to assume you mean the latter and say the Jonas Brothers, or maybe the Black Eyed Peas.
Alice in Chains, Built to Spill, and Soundgarden are worthy of mention, but overall it just shows the lack of musical composition, energy, emotion, and everything else we lost from the 1970's. Like it or not bands like Iron Maiden, Helloween, Slayer, Metallica, Emperor, Bathory, etc...are the true evolution of the rock bands from back in the day.

The Who, The Rolling Stones, Pink Floyd, The Jimi Hendrix Experience, Creedence Clearwater Revival, etc etc. It shows the true ignorance (from my point of view at least) that so many bands are shunned in the modern day spotlight because they don't cater to the masses like the Nirvana children did back in the day.

But overall the people who worship Radiohead and consider them to be an innovative band make me roll my eyes. That rebellious spirit of rock of roll wasn't meant to become an output for semi-college educated, musical theory loving, artsty-nerd-angst bands who all the "intellectual kids" considered to be the reincarnation of Pink Floyd out of ignorance.

"Indie Rock" means they are trying to copy the 1970's but don't have the balls to actually play anything meaningful or write significant music.

Iron Maiden - Any song.
Immortal - At the Heart of Winter
Bathory - A Fine Day to Die
Anything from Opeth, Dark Tranquility, or Therion.

These bands prove it is criminal that so many good artists are still going undiscovered because they weren't in with in the in crowd so to speak.
Okay, I'm going to try go point by point. For one, it's painfully obvious that you HAVE NOT listened to many of the bands I've listed, because the emotion and musical energy contained within those bands' work is undeniable, and the originality of these bands is INCREDIBLE. There is absoloutely NO precedent for bands like My Bloody Valentine, or The Flaming Lips. Hell, even Nirvana's brand of alternative/punk rock had rarely been touched upon in the past. And don't give me that shit that Nirvana was "catering" to the mainstream, because that's absoloute bullshit. People just happened to connect with Nirvana's music - you know, because it's GOOD.

Another point I'd like to make is that within your comment is a PROFOUND musical bias - Metal is not the ONLY true evolution of rock - seriously, I LOVE early Metallica, and "Reign in Blood" is an amazing album, but to claim that is the only evolution of rock is bullshit. You're blatantly ignoring the heroes of indie/alternaive rock who came up in the late 70s/early 80s - the likes of Husker Du, Joy Division, Sonic Youth, or Pixies, which led to the thriving alternative rock scene of the 1990s. Fine, you don't like bands like Radiohead, but to deny the rich and atmospheric nature of their compositions, or overall power of their music is ludacris. On another note, Iron Maiden is SO overrated - yes, they are very talented musicians, but as Nirvana demonstrated (just as The Beatles did 3 decades prior, and many other bands have) you do NOT need complicated musicality in order for a song to be great. Iron Maiden's good songs are GREAT, but their albums have a lot of filler.

Also, "Indie Rock" is NOT copying the 1970s in anyway whatsoever - the whole indie scene emerged AFTER the 1970s and received such a label because of the disparities between their music and the music of the past decade. And finally, please withold your bullshit "the rebellious spirit of rock n roll wasn't meant to be an output for etc etc etc". Music is meant to be an output for anybody who has something to express, whether it be angst, or anger, or anything in between. You realise that Pink Floyd were a band consisting of educated, music theory-loving artsy nerds? So were The Beatles.... oh wait, so were a lot of great musicians. Metal is a fine genre of music (for the most part), but it is not the only genre. Seriously, try to be more open-minded.

And one more note - Pink Floyd, The Who, or The Rolling Stones are not "shunned" in the modern day spotlight, people just don't talk about them anymore because they ARENT MAKING MUSIC - there are still PLENTY of people, however (such as you and me) who go around talking about how great these bands were. Oh, and please take CCR out of that list - they are SO not worthy of being among the likes of Floyd and Hendrix.