Interesting. I struggle to find a reason to not like her and if we ruled out those we felt we didn’t like as people then our artistic experiences would be severely curtailed.
1 Like
I have nothing by Picasso. It’s out of my price range.
2 Likes
I might get some hate for this, but I have nothing by “The Beatles”. Their music just doesn’t do it for me.
Strangely enough, I really like the music all four of them made as solo artists, after the Beatles disbanded. Photograph by Ringo, My sweet lord by Harrison, Woman by Lennon and Silly love songs by McCartney, just to name a few.
1 Like
Supertramp…pleeeease
God.Awful.
1 Like
Oh, and Celine Dion. I CANNOT stand her!
2 Likes
Yeah right on. I mean name me one decent song they ever gave us.
Eleanor Rigby
1 Like
Yeah but apart from Eleanor Rigby name me one decent song they ever gave us
5 Likes
Shakin Stevens.
I loved him when I was little though.
1 Like
Same for me. Tried it periodically, left me unmoved every time.
1 Like
Probably because they are rubbish.
I bought the first two stones albums at a charity shop. Played them a couple of times and donated them back to the charity shop. Awful.
I also have the album with a cake on the cover. Played it a couple of times, half way through the second listen, I realised why I’d only played it once.
I have an original copy of Sticky Fingers. Can’t be bothered to listen to it.
1 Like
Whilst I like both the Beatles and Stones I find it entirely understandable that some people struggle with them.
Firstly, it’s music. You react favourably to some and otherwise to some. That can’t be helped and is part of the joy.
Secondly, the Beatles are just so over-played that over-familiarity to the point of annoyance is inevitable.
Thirdly, whilst the Beatles had a long run of fantastic singles they had a short run of indisputably great albums from Rubber Soul to Sgt. Pepper. People will make a case for some early albums and for later albums but they’re tenuous at best. The White Album musically is a fractured mess and Abbey Road is MOR dirge central.
It’s fascinating to see the revisionism since the original contemporaneous reviews but it shows how a historically important band are now elevated so far beyond what they actually did that rational discussion is no longer possible. I can’t imagine why that would put some people off 
The Stones had a run of singles which were great but pushed no boundaries. Albums wise in one sense they had a slightly longer run from Beggars to Exile but equally those albums never quite hit the heights of the Fabs and Exile, much as I personally like it, is a shambling mess of a record. They hung around too long and became caricatures of themselves many times over. The legends around Jagger and especially Keith are unbearable tosh. Anyone who’s watched Richards closely will understand that he’s barely been able to play guitar for two decades and yet we can’t bear to do anything to dent his survivor status. Again, why might that put people off?
Max haha!
I can’t stand them either, kitsch yes, but Village People? 
Queen up until News of the World were a great rock band and then patchy thereafter but I’ve never heard them likened to Village People before!
3 Likes
Hmm. Personal taste I know, but I actually saw them live on their first British tour (shows my age!), they were a support band then. One look at the ‘glam’/ kitsch presentation and the first two songs had me scuttling for the bar. Unfortunately, I returned too early and caught an encore as well, shame.
It’s probably been an on-going bugbear of mine, are any band/act in it to express their artistry (which may lead to success), or to employ gimmicks and follow a formula to gain popularity. The latter always puts me off.
For context, when I started this thread I was thinking about the “classic” albums that I don’t own and then realizing I own nothing at all by that artist. I used to own Fleetwood Mac Live but thought it was terrible and Mick’s drumming was just clumsy.
I have never owned any Dylan (he has written some good songs but, that voice, ugh!) or Van Morisson (same reasoning) although I do like a bit of Leanard Cohen (he has more pathos). Classic artists I do like are Yes, Genesis (up to Duke), Beatles (although I think Abbey Road is very overrated), Pink Floyd, King Crimson, Black Sabbath, Queen (up to News of the World) and Led Zep, among many others although I don’t own every album by those artists.
I would say my favorite artists right now are Swans and Klaus Schulze based on the amount of needle time they get.
1 Like
Sorry, it was a paradox, I didn’t really mean to compare them to Village People. To be honest though, Freddy Mercury’s looks… I apologize to all Queen fans. I still doubt that theirs can be called rock..
I don’t own anything by Gary Gliitter.
3 Likes
Brilliant quote but the bit which fascinates me is how we elevate the average to the brilliant.
Nowadays many would take the line about him being a brilliant guitar player as an given and yet… a quick trawl through Rocks Back Pages shows multiple contemporaneous reviews of live Queen which describe him as average or similar. More recently I came across exactly that term used by Chris Charlesworth in a Melody Maker review he quotes in his “Just Backdated” book. This was a bloke who saw now legendary bands when they were both starting out and at their peak. Frankly, if he thinks he’s average I’m happy to go along with his assessment.
1 Like
Status Quo. Could any band name be more appropriate. 