2. music
  3. 1300895838

Band with highest success/talent ratio?

Which bands do readers thinks have the highest success to quality ratio? In other words, which bands have been very successful yet deserve little success since their music is terrible?
I'll stir the pot right away with my #1 choice: Kiss. They were around for a while, made millions, dressed up in makeup because no one would've listened to them otherhwise, and maybe had one good song (but probably not).
My next choices would be Aerosmith and Dream Theater, although I'm not sure the latter were very successful. I hope not.
achilles
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,402 posts
 
The Monkees?

The Partridge Family?

The Jonas Brothers?
achilles OP
135 posts
 
Kurt tank, I agree Aerosmith was a stretch. Their 70s work was very good. I love Walk This Way and Back in the Saddle. But what have they for us since? Nothing!
Of course I'm letting my musical tastes get "in the way". This whole exercise is about taste. You should put radiohead on your list if you don't like them. They're very successful. I love them. But I think they're super talented. Is that what you're saying, that if I can see someone is talented they shouldn't make this list, even if I can't stand their music?
I suspect I don't have respect for the talent behind the music I dislike, but it's possible I guess. Like Yngwie Malmsteen is arguably talented, but he's awful. So should he not be included in this discussion because of his guitar talent? I would argue no, guitar talent is irrelevant if he's got no songwriting talent.
Thanks for the discussion!!!
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,402 posts
 
The Chipmunks?
dekay's avatar
dekay
5,661 posts
 
Pebbles and Bamm Bamm were way overated, IMO.
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,402 posts
 
The Archies?

Betty carried the band IMHO.

She could really whack that tambourine!
More to discover