Is Nickelback the Least Talented Band in History?

  • Thread starter Thread starter RiseAgainst
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Band
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the perceived talent of various music bands, with a particular focus on Nickelback. Participants express their opinions on what constitutes talent in music, the classification of bands within genres, and comparisons to other artists. The conversation includes elements of personal taste, genre definitions, and critiques of specific bands.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that Nickelback is completely lacking in talent, while others contend that they must possess some level of talent to have secured a record deal.
  • There is a debate about whether Nickelback should be classified as a rock band or a pop band, with some asserting they are more aligned with pop due to their sound.
  • Participants express that many of Nickelback's songs sound similar to each other and to other pop bands, leading to a perception of them as derivative.
  • Some participants mention other bands, such as Coldplay and Maroon 5, as contenders for being talentless or overrated, with varying opinions on their music quality.
  • There is a discussion about the genre of emo music, with some participants expressing disdain for it and others acknowledging they have enjoyed certain emo bands.
  • Critiques extend to other genres, including dance music and screamo, with participants expressing strong negative opinions about these styles and their associated bands.
  • Some participants reference historical bands like Fleetwood Mac, discussing their evolution and contrasting their earlier work with later iterations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

The discussion features multiple competing views regarding the talent and classification of Nickelback and other bands. There is no consensus on which band is the least talented, and opinions vary widely on what constitutes musical talent.

Contextual Notes

Participants express personal preferences and biases, which may influence their assessments of talent. The discussion includes subjective interpretations of music genres and the criteria for evaluating bands.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in music criticism, genre classification, and subjective evaluations of talent in the music industry may find this discussion engaging.

RiseAgainst
Messages
46
Reaction score
0
It has to be Nickelback. I know there are other talentless bands out there but Nickelback is completely lacking any form of talent.
Plus they're Canadian.
 
Science news on Phys.org
Nickleback aren't talentless, if you are talentless you don't get a record deal generally. It might work in the pop world but rock tends to be more discerning. What they are is appealing to the soft core metal fans, that don't want to muddy their shoes.

Worst band ever, probably the bands coming to a garage near you, that never made it because they were diabolical and pointless.
 
The Dagda said:
Nickleback aren't talentless, if you are talentless you don't get a record deal generally. It might work in the pop world but rock tends to be more discerning.

They are in the pop world, you can't tell me that Nickelback is a rock and roll band. The people with "talent" are the song writers because they know what will sell.
 
RiseAgainst said:
They are in the pop world, you can't tell me that Nickelback is a rock and roll band. The people with "talent" are the song writers because they know what will sell.

Unfortunately they are rock. And as always the ones with the talent are the song writers, in a perfect world they would also be the band members. Pop rock maybe **** IYO but it's still rock.
 
The Dagda said:
Unfortunately they are rock. And as always the ones with the talent are the song writers, in a perfect world they would also be the band members. Pop rock maybe **** IYO but it's still rock.

Pop rock doesn't make any sense, you're either pop or you're rock, and they are definitely pop. All of their songs sound the same and they all sound like many other pop bands. When I hear them it doesn't remind me of bands like AC/DC and Led Zeppelin, I think of stereotypical pop bands.
 
RiseAgainst said:
Pop rock doesn't make any sense, you're either pop or you're rock, and they are definitely pop. All of their songs sound the same and they all sound like many other pop bands. When I hear them it doesn't remind me of bands like AC/DC and Led Zeppelin, I think of stereotypical pop bands.

Pop as in popular.

I feel your pain fellow rock fan though. :smile:

Putting Back in Black next to whatever insipid Album they have recently released seems a traversty. But I don't define the genre.
 
Hands down...Maroon 5
 
RiseAgainst said:
It has to be Nickelback. I know there are other talentless bands out there but Nickelback is completely lacking any form of talent.
Plus they're Canadian.

I don't know about talentless, but certainly one of the most overrated. There are a lot of bands out there that really suck.
 
  • #10
Coldplay has far less talent.

"Oh look at me, I can dress in a sexually ambiguous way and sing softly as to cater towards thirteen year old girls! Give me a record deal!"

Nothing makes my blood boil faster than to know that Coldplay could release a CD with one track on it, a recording of them telling their fans off, and it'd still sell a million copies.
 
  • #11
All that emo garbage. They're all so bad it's hard to pick the worst.
 
  • #12
green day, master of the quarter and eighth note.
 
  • #13
I don't follow groups; I hear what I hear and only find out who it is weeks or months later.


I was right at the head of the line at the "Nickleback is such derivative crap" festival.

I liked 'Ruled the World' but then found out it was Coldplay, and tried to bite my own head off (OK, I had a preconception about this band).

Green Day I find actually has some music-writing talent.
 
  • #14
Dave, search Utube to find really old Fleetwood Mac videos, back when the band was headed by Peter Green. 1970 on, the pretty much sucked after the principals were MIA.
 
  • #15
turbo-1 said:
Dave, search Utube to find really old Fleetwood Mac videos, back when the band was headed by Peter Green. 1970 on, the pretty much sucked after the principals were MIA.
Name me some sucking FWM songs.
 
  • #16
I agree with daveyinaz, maroon 5 always was pretty bad, though id rather listen to it rather than any emo music, that stuff is terrible.

Most of my friends love rap and a few even like the emo stuff, I wish I could get them into the good stuff like Pink Floyd and the Eagles, but as of now they seem hopeless lol.
 
  • #17
What about the all the bands that play music that sounds like a blender or other small applicance, and singing that sounds like a combination of yelling and vomitting? What's it called, screamo? Ugh. I nominate every band that plays in that style.
 
  • #18
lisab said:
What about the all the bands that play music that sounds like a blender or other small applicance, and singing that sounds like a combination of yelling and vomitting? What's it called, screamo? Ugh. I nominate every band that plays in that style.

Mercifully those have never been on any playlist I've been subjected to.

And I have listened whole albums of John Cage. So I do have a reasonably high pain threshold.
 
  • #19
lisab said:
What about the all the bands that play music that sounds like a blender or other small applicance, and singing that sounds like a combination of yelling and vomitting? What's it called, screamo? Ugh. I nominate every band that plays in that style.

I second that.

Putting it in words like that makes me sound old, though. Haha.
 
  • #20
DaveC426913 said:
Name me some sucking FWM songs.
Compared with the stuff Fleetwood Mac was puting out in the '60's, you can just about take your pick. I should mention that after Peter Green and Jeremy Spencer had both flaked out and left, Danny Kirwan did as well as could be expected, resulting in the Kiln House album with its many Buddy Holly - inspired songs. If you want to see why Fleetwood Mac of Rumours fame (or shame) sounded the way it did, you must pick up a copy of Buckingham - Nicks. That album was a work in progress when Mick, John, and Christine were searching around California looking for somebody new to front the band. Cue up any song from Buckingham - Nicks, and I will guarantee you that people will say "Fleetwood Mac" if they are less than 50 years old or are entirely uneducated about British rock/clues of the '60's. BTW Black Magic Woman was a cover song, as was Green Manilishi, decades later.

Fleetwood Mac of the '70's and later was nothing like Fleetwood Mac of the '60's. Peter Green succeeded Eric Clapton in Mayall's Bluesbreakers, and after Mayall gave Green some studio time for Christmas one year, Green persuaded Mick Fleetwood to jump ship and form a new band. He had already named the band after the rhythm section, despite the fact that John Mac Vie had elected to stay with Mayall. Mac Vie relented and history was born.
 
  • #21
You guys need to get out more, and expand your horizons of badness. Think "The Shaggs" for pop and the "Portsmouth Sinfonia" for classical. For opera, little can compare to Florence Foster Jenkins.

Once you've listened to them, then you can talk.
 
  • #23
turbo-1 said:
Compared with the stuff Fleetwood Mac was puting out in the '60's, you can just about take your pick.
Yeah, I just don't know any but their popular ones.
 
  • #24
Nabeshin said:
All that emo garbage. They're all so bad it's hard to pick the worst.

daveyinaz said:
Hands down...Maroon 5

Both you are so right! Maroon 5 is over rated and emo... well...
 
  • #25
Code:
All that emo garbage. They're all so bad it's hard to pick the worst.

I think My Chemical Romance and Simple Plan are emo are they not?

I liked both enough to buy an album, which is saying a lot for me.
 
  • #26
The only music type with no redeeming features for me is dance (and even then there are one or two bands that put the effort in), particularly hardcore, trance, flip-flop, skance, and all that crap.

The worst bands are the remixers, put a drum beat in the background and re-release someone else's song, genius; now that is talentless, even the drum beat is done by a computer. :rolleyes:
 
  • #27
The Dagda said:
The only music type with no redeeming features for me is dance... particularly hardcore

What does hardcore have to do with dance music? H2O, Rise Against, and Minor Threat are hardcore. I do agree with the emo and dance bands/people. They are equally as bad as nickelback.
 
  • #28
RiseAgainst said:
What does hardcore have to do with dance music? H2O, Rise Against, and Minor Threat are hardcore. I do agree with the emo and dance bands/people. They are equally as bad as nickelback.

Hardcore dance, it's rubbish honestly. Not hardcore metal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardcore_techno
 
  • #29
Lol I listened to the sample on that wikipedia page and it sounds to me like a lot of the music released with the older DDR games.
 
  • #30
DaveC426913 said:
Code:
All that emo garbage. They're all so bad it's hard to pick the worst.

I think My Chemical Romance and Simple Plan are emo are they not?

I liked both enough to buy an album, which is saying a lot for me.

No not really either of those. Simple Plan is a 90s punk band and MCR, while odd and dramatic, they're not emo.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K