Hype Backlash in Music

Simple thread topic: let's talk about the artists in music that, for you, suffer from Hype Backlash.

For me, the Beatles suffer from it greatly. I hold them in a high regard, of course, but their material never really appealed to me that much. I always preferred the Rolling Stones.

Well, it's going to be brought up some time: PITCHFORK.

Animal Collective and Sufjan Stevens are too weird for me, I don't really get Grizzly Bear, and I just CANNOT STAND Joanna Newsom. And that's only the tip of the iceberg with regard to artists that Pitchfork has hyped outrageously and made me listen to, only for me to find it not that good.

^ It probably says a lot that I like all of the aforementioned artists. However, although Pitchfork occasionally hits the nail on the head, it can also give some high scores and unwarranted hype to some absolute drivel, and low scores to some very good albums. So, just like every other music reviewing site on the internet, then.

Also, it's worth bearing in mind that Pitchfork, although they are the arbiters of hipster tastes world wide, are not directly to blame for causing the hype, or the inevitable backlash that follows. The blame, if we are to use such a loaded word, for that lies with the bloggers who take the likes of Pitchfork at its word and regurgitate its opinions. Maybe if the music Blogosphere (God I hate that word) actually had some opinions of its own and investigated things for itself, then hype and hype backlash would not be so prevalent in the Indie music world.

In short: It's okay to trust Pitchfork etc, but use your own brain as well.

On topic: Some bands from last year that I failed to get the hype for were The xx, Fuck Buttons and The Pains Of Being Pure At Heart.

I have expressed my Hype Aversion for the Beatles previously.

However, The Rolling Fucking Stones. These are the people who sued Verve because they sampled an unrelated original riff from a cover of one of their songs.

More clearly, the Verve sampled a song by an orchestra, the song was an instrumental cover of a Rolling Stones song, but the part that The Verve sampled was not part of the original Rolling Stones recording.

Metallica and Megadeth both.

^^That, and Rolling Stones made a carreer out of ripping off blues musicians.

^^^ I was unaware of that until now. My opinion of the Stones has gone down thanks to that. I don't think I even need to make a pothole to Wall Banger to emphasize how annoyed I am at that incident.

^ I was aware of this, though for some reason I let it slide. Similar case with Led Zeppelin; IIRC, they actually got sued because they stole lyrics from a blues(?) song.

Every rocker stole from Blues musicians.

The Rolling Stones are -in my opinion- an inferior imitation of every other band of their era.

The Strokes. When it got famous the hype was so big I was really curious to listening to it... And then I found out I absolutely hate post-punk.

I haven't listened to that much of London Calling, but what I've heard doesn't impress me.

For underground hip-hop (which is kinda my genre) I never understood the hype around Esoteric. Especially his whole thing with El-P.

I'm gonna go ahead and put down every single band that falls under the pretentious "indie" umbrella.

That's probably the biggest overgeneralization I've ever seen.

It's definitely the biggest overgeneralisation I've ever seen. Especially since I have no idea what the fuck "indie" means.

Anyway, another band that I feel suffers from Hype Backlash: Mastodon. They're a great band, don't get me wrong, but you'd think they were like "Jesus: the band" with the amount of praise they got. Still a band I would recommend, of course.

It was; I don't care.

More in the spirit of the topic, Anthrax. I'm a fan of them, but I don't really understand why they're considered the one of the "Big Four" of thrash metal. Compared to the others, it seems as if they were thrown in there just to include a band from the East Coast. I mean, Metallica and Megadeth were practically dueling for top metal band and Slayer has an impressive legacy, what with being a huge influence on death metal. Is it simply because they were the first prominent metal band to try rapping?

edited 27th Apr '10 3:06:25 PM by Kitsune Inferno

I thought it was because their guitarist had a cool goatee.

Scott Ian's just the rhythm guitarist! Then again, Kerry King's also a rhythm guitarist and he's the Face Of The Band as far as most people are concerned. Must be the hair. Or lack thereof.

edited 27th Apr '10 3:10:47 PM by Kitsune Inferno

Scott is the only band member I know of, and that's only because he occasionally shows up on those VH 1 "I love the [X]ies" shows.

Metal's not my genre.

Personally, I'd say most recent winners of the mercury music prize and BBC's sound of 200#. I think I may just be walking Hype Backlash though, I typically don't respond well to it.

Lady Gaga. Everyone praised her as the "anti-pop", when she sounds almost exactly like her predecessors.

For me, Anthrax suffer from having only made two really classic albums. Those being Spreading the Disease and Among the Living. And their music has aged the least well of the Big Four, in my opinion.

I agree that the Rolling Stones are overrated, although they do have some classic songs.

It would be too easy to just pick any current overhyped pop music act.

Wait, what? No one's mentioned Persistence of Time yet? And anyways, IMO, Anthrax is usually included as part of the big 4 of thrash because they were one of the first metal bands to experiment with their music (even before Bring the Noise... I'm the Man, anyone?)

Funny, Anthrax is the only band I actually like from the big four.

What sort of idiot says Lady Gaga is anti-pop.

Meanwhile, hearing that about the Rolling Stones. *Low whistle*

Lots of people, or that she's "rebelling against pop" or what have you.