Artists that Defined the 00's

[domotime2]

on a recent road trip, me and a pal were discussing muuuuuuuusic and we started to talk about what artists are going to be looked at 20 years from now as "00 defining bands". Like the 90s was the decade of alternative rock, pop, dance, grunge, etc. so you could say artists like (Radiohead, Nirvana, Spice Girls, Rancid, Snoop Dogg, RHCP etc.) could be the bands that defined that decade, or whatever..... what acts would you think define the 00s. The 00s has seen a major transformation in the way people obtain and listen to music, so I feel as if its hard to pin-point what bands or what genres can be used to describe this decade.


so far all i could think of...
- Rhianna/JT (hip hop-pop has dominated the radio past 3-4 years)
- Linkin Park (the all incomposing radio ROCK band of the decade, giant act)
- Incubus/RHCP (as the stoner/jam band...that have also remained popular on the airwaves)
- Kelly Clarkson/Britney (pop female acts were large in the 00s)
- Death Cab/Shins/Arcade Fire/Radiohead (im a bad judge, but the wave of "popular" indie music)
- Green Day (i was thinking NFG, sum 41 too as the pop punk representatives that was popular in the early 00's)
- FOB/TBS/MCR (AP.net, bamboozle...)
- Strokes/Killers (not sure)
- Outkast/Usher/Soulja Boy (the rap hip hop artists)

input? who cares? idk...i like to think about stuff like this.

[friskycurtain]

I think Hawthorne Height (yes yes, I know) should also be added to go along with MCR

[LaDiabla]

No Amy Winehouse no care.

[Paulb-182]

FOB/TBS/MCR (AP.net, bamboozle...)

Since when were My Chemical Romance a defining band for most the people on this website?

Blink and Brand New are obviously the main ones for this scene.

Eminem and Kanye and the defining rap artists.

But put simply, there has been no one defining sound of this decade, its all been a bunch of different genre's getting reasonably popular, but nothing like Nirvana or Oasis did in the 90's.

[LamarVannoy]

you forgot Coldplay. their probably one of the biggest bands in the world right now.

[Regards]

It always feels like people are trying to pit the 00's with the 90's. Just because that's how it went down in the 90's doesn't mean the next 10 year span of time is going to have defining music or artists.

[ablueskytragedy]

Screaming became increasingly popular in a realm of music that isn't restricted to a basement.

[Hamlet]

What defines this decade is the internet. Instead of everyone listening to the same radio stations and Top 40 countdowns, people can go and get whatever sound they want online, which has led to a wider breadth of popular genres.

For me, the ones that will be remembered are the ones that sold:

Hip hop:
Eminem
Kanye West
Possibly 50 Cent and Jay-Z

Rock:
Coldplay
The Killers
Linkin Park
Nickelback (unfortunately)

R&B:
Chris Brown

Pop:
Britney Spears
Justin Timberlake
Kelly Clarkson
Avril Lavigne

Hip-hop/R&B was big in the early 2000s (Nelly, Ja Rule, Ashanti, Usher etc). Hip-hop/pop still dominates most of the radio, although I have observed it moving towards more electronic elements (Timbaland/Justin Timberlake/some Chris Brown and Ne-Yo)

[3mpire]

/\ Pretty much spot on.

[xJesusFreakx]

What defines this decade is the internet. Instead of everyone listening to the same radio stations and Top 40 countdowns, people can go and get whatever sound they want online, which has led to a wider breadth of popular genres.

For me, the ones that will be remembered are the ones that sold:

Hip hop:
Eminem
Kanye West
Possibly 50 Cent and Jay-Z

Rock:
Coldplay
The Killers
Linkin Park
Nickelback (unfortunately)

R&B:
Chris Brown

Pop:
Britney Spears
Justin Timberlake
Kelly Clarkson
Avril Lavigne

Hip-hop/R&B was big in the early 2000s (Nelly, Ja Rule, Ashanti, Usher etc). Hip-hop/pop still dominates most of the radio, although I have observed it moving towards more electronic elements (Timbaland/Justin Timberlake/some Chris Brown and Ne-Yo)

Good list. Others could fit as well, but I think you got all the important ones.

[BryterJonah]

E5GNwCITd9g

[domotime2]

Since when were My Chemical Romance a defining band for most the people on this website?

Blink and Brand New are obviously the main ones for this scene.

Eminem and Kanye and the defining rap artists.

But put simply, there has been no one defining sound of this decade, its all been a bunch of different genre's getting reasonably popular, but nothing like Nirvana or Oasis did in the 90's.
you need some sort of representative for the (sorry for the word)....the pop emo scene, no?

thats why i dont put Coldplay on the list that much.....yes they're big...but that sound defines our decade?

[love_american_style]

glassjaw, i guess.

[Genuma]

None of those artists are defining. They're the most popular of the decade, but did most of them really accomplish anything musically that was special?

[IWasaCamera]

Defining artists don't need to write anything special, they merely have to embody the sonic direction of a certain period. Quality/innovation/etc. has no bearing on the matter.

Not mentioning the garage rock revival acts for the 00s is a glaring omission. Massive trend that continues to influence bands today.

[zonto]

encompassing, not incomposing

[BryterJonah]

Jack White has been the shit this past decade.

[Losing Streak]

Green Day took half the decade off. I'd put them in the defined the 90's category.

[Genuma]

Yeah, but if they define a genre, they're a defining artist. Bands like Taking Back Sunday or Kelly Clarkson didn't make a genre prominent.

[UnderMyDreams]

Blink-182 over Sum41 and NFG for sure.

[BryterJonah]

Could Weezer be considered a crossover since they're pretty much considered the godfathers of the whole "emo" genre?

[mena]

I don't know if it's just me, but looking back at past decades it doesn't seem like the 00's really had any musical act that did what Nirvana did in the 90s or The Beatles in the 60s.

[BryterJonah]

I'll just give a personal nod to Sigur Ros.

[liar23]

Radiohead. Maybe the Killers or Artic Monkeys

[Truman122]

Could Weezer be considered a crossover since they're pretty much considered the godfathers of the whole "emo" genre?

I've heard this stated several times by dozens of people, but I could never really understand this myself. What exactly about them influenced emo? Albums? Songs? What bands were influenced by them? (I'm not saying you're wrong, I'd just like to get where you are coming from.)

[chipdip18]

Radiohead
Fall Out Boy
Bright Eyes
Explosions In the Sky
Jimmy Eat World
Thursday
Groundation
Spoon
Wilco
Common Market
Sigur Ros

There's a handful that represent a good chunk of popular music.

[BryterJonah]

Animal Collective, Grizzly Bear, and The National put out some heavyweights.

[chipdip18]

Animal Collective, Grizzly Bear, and The National put out some heavyweights.

Mmmm i'd definitely add them to my list, though i'm not a huge Grizzly Bear fan.

[Genuma]

Animal Collective, Grizzly Bear, and The National put out some heavyweights.
Again, for this genre they didn't really define it. Bright Eyes would be more defining for the 00s. Maybe the National, of those three.

[IWasaCamera]

Bright Eyes
Explosions In the Sky
Spoon
Wilco

Disagree with these.
Animal Collective, Grizzly Bear, and The National put out some heavyweights.
Of those, only Animal Collective comes close.

[chipdip18]

Disagree with these.

.

Explosions in the Sky would personify how stale a lot of Post-Rock has become. The transition from 90s Post-Rock to straight up four piece crescendo-core.

I think Wilco does a good job of capturing artists who followed in Kid A's wake and started to experiment and branch out. I guess that could just be covered by Radiohead, so scratch out Wilco.

Spoon is like a better Foo Fighters, and covers what Death Cab would cover but better in my opinion. Pop-rock/indie-rock. I think Spoon would take the driver's seat for bands the series of "The" bands that came out like The Strokes.

Bright Eyes does a pretty good job of covering popular genres. They're considered like a staple for indie-rock and folk-rock, and released some albums that are highly regarded by peers and critics alike, Lifted and I'm Wide Awake. (Not a very good explanation, but i just don't see how they wouldn't be)

[x togepi x]

way to ignore the underground guys.

[chipdip18]

A) I'm not super knowledgable about the underground guys. I go as deep as Title Fight, Crime In Stereo, and Bellingham's local favorite Crossfox

B) It's hard to define a decade with underground artists. At least for me.

edit: Could you tack The Lawrence Arms on that list? or Andrew Jackson Jihad?

[punk89]

I'm finding it so much harder to think of bands that defined the 00's rather than the 90's. It seems that the songs played in the 90's were a bit more anthemic and accessible to everyone. The internet and the furthering of the underground music scene really kind of changed that.

[matchbox202006]

Jimmy Eat World (Still prominent on modern rock an pop radio)
Eminem (Come on, he's a staple in Music Ed classes around here)
Kelly Clarkson (From Idol icon to a star in her own right)
Rob Thomas (Showing that going solo can be just as rewarding as stayin with your band, he is still bringing the hits as both)
Shinedown (Hard rock is again profitable, but more importantly, it's got the old spirit back. Rock gods.)
Tim McGraw (From 90's to the '00s, he is still essential)
Lifehouse (debuting in 2000 with "Hanging By A Moment". LH hit a hiccup in 2002-2003 with Stanley Climbfall but returned to form with the 2005 monster single "You and Me". Now, they dominate airplay with three more huge its "First Time", "Whatever It Takes", "Broken". Also, the tearjerker "From Where You Are" is enough to put them in this list)

[IWasaCamera]

Explosions in the Sky would personify how stale a lot of Post-Rock has become. The transition from 90s Post-Rock to straight up four piece crescendo-core.
I don't feel that post-rock particularly embodies the current decade so I'd disagree with any band from the genre.
Spoon is like a better Foo Fighters
Wait, what?
and covers what Death Cab would cover but better in my opinion. Pop-rock/indie-rock.
Death Cab takes the cake for faux-indie, uncontested.
I think Spoon would take the driver's seat for bands the series of "The" bands that came out like The Strokes.
The Strokes are far more representative of the garage rock revival than Spoon. The White Stripes are another easy pick.
Bright Eyes does a pretty good job of covering popular genres. They're considered like a staple for indie-rock and folk-rock, and released some albums that are highly regarded by peers and critics alike, Lifted and I'm Wide Awake. (Not a very good explanation, but i just don't see how they wouldn't be)
Only mainstream publications (the same ones who dubbed Conor this generation's Dylan) would call Bright Eyes a staple of any movement. They wrote some good music this decade for sure, but that's irrelevant. None of my favorite bands from 2000 onward should cut this list either.

[herestolifepat]

im not really into the whole mainstream thing so

Gaslight anthem
against me!
the bouncing souls
chuck regan
the weakerthans
b.o.t.a.r.
are just a few that come to mind but i agree with you on bands like tbs, mcr, green day, and the rap i know nothing about

[chipdip18]

I don't feel that post-rock particularly embodies the current decade so I'd disagree with any band from the genre. I suppose you do bring up a good point here. If Post-Rock had been a tad bit more organized then it'd be relevant. I suppose Post-Rock then would just tie into the marketing of experimented music, which falls under Radiohead again.

Wait, what?
Anthemic rock-oriented groups? Has enough grit to keep them out of the limelight for long? That's my take on it. I understand that Foo Fighters draws from different influences but i say that the music has the same end goals in terms of a genre.

Death Cab takes the cake for faux-indie, uncontested.
I can see how Transatlanticism, Plans, and Narrow Stairs wins them that title. But it's really only Transatlanticism that gives them that.


The Strokes are far more representative of the garage rock revival than Spoon. The White Stripes are another easy pick. Mmmm The White Stripes. They'd take it for sure.

Only mainstream publications (the same ones who dubbed Conor this generation's Dylan) would call Bright Eyes a staple of any movement. They wrote some good music this decade for sure, but that's irrelevant. None of my favorite bands from 2000 onward should cut this list either.

Hahaha i guess i can only argue Bright Eyes so far. I guess they might not be defining, but this is the one decade that they'll for sure be remembered for, and in the future their name comes up in discussions about the 00s.

[x togepi x]

B) It's hard to define a decade with underground artists. At least for me.


i don't know what you mean by this, i mean if i were to talk about 80s music and ignore punk/hardcore and alternative, i'd be making a big mistake. i mean can you talk about albums that defined the 80s without mentioning Sonic Youth's Daydream Nation?

I mean there are various trends in underground music that help define the decade in that sense, like post-rock (i'd say godspeed! more than explosions in the sky) or bands like Isis and Neurosis (who tons of metal bands decided to rip off).

Obviously the mainstream of the most mainstream like nickleback or coldplay are deserving of nods for this thread, but I'm just saying (probably because of what i listen to) that it doesn't make sense to leave out the bands that weren't mainstream but did have some sort of impact. I mean the sound of Isis/Neurosis spawned just as many derivatives in the underground as Nickleback did on mainstream "alternative" radio.

but to answer that second question, I guess you could say the larry arms make the list (though i wouldn't put them there because pop punk has been done to death) if you want to talk about orgcore's place as a definitive style, though i think it's more of a trend.

[x togepi x]

and mars volta needs to be on the list

[chipdip18]

i don't know what you mean by this, i mean if i were to talk about 80s music and ignore punk/hardcore and alternative, i'd be making a big mistake. i mean can you talk about albums that defined the 80s without mentioning Sonic Youth's Daydream Nation? I meant that i just don't know this decade's underground scene as well as i do past decades. Mostly because it's easier to reflect over time and see where music trends went. You bring up a great point here, looking at the 80s, completely ignoring the scene that housed Dinosaur Jr., Sonic Youth, etc. would be a pretty awful when describing the 80s.

I mean there are various trends in underground music that help define the decade in that sense, like post-rock (i'd say godspeed! more than explosions in the sky) or bands like Isis and Neurosis (who tons of metal bands decided to rip off). Well it'd be hard to put Godspeed on this list just due to the fact that they were only a part of this decade for two or three years. Yanqui U.X.O. certainly wasn't their album to use a great reference point for Post-Rock in the way that they presented it. You could make a statement for Lift Your Skinny Fists, but that was really just one album that you'd be going for. I picked Explosions in the Sky mainly because they made their debut in 2000, and throughout this decade have become one of the more popular Post-Rock groups, and give a pretty easy example of a Post-Rock band. They're band that do it better for sure, but i think that they and Sigur Ros are the only one who'd stand out on a decade defining list. So far at least.

Obviously the mainstream of the most mainstream like nickleback or coldplay are deserving of nods for this thread, but I'm just saying (probably because of what i listen to) that it doesn't make sense to leave out the bands that weren't mainstream but did have some sort of impact. I mean the sound of Isis/Neurosis spawned just as many derivatives in the underground as Nickleback did on mainstream "alternative" radio.
Here is where my lack of the underground is going to come in. I couldn't tell you the first thing about the sound of Isis or Neurosis. I suppose that's why they have teams of people making these lists instead of relying on one mind alone.

but to answer that second question, I guess you could say the larry arms make the list (though i wouldn't put them there because pop punk has been done to death) if you want to talk about orgcore's place as a definitive style, though i think it's more of a trend.
Yeah, i'd agree it's more a trend than decade defining, but if i were to label it at all The Lawrence Arms would be my first pick.

[BryterJonah]

im not really into the whole mainstream thing so

Gaslight anthem
against me!
the bouncing souls
chuck regan
the weakerthans
b.o.t.a.r.
are just a few that come to mind but i agree with you on bands like tbs, mcr, green day, and the rap i know nothing about
:rolleyes:

[mrjoe815]

Linkin park
Kanye West
Nickleback...
Most have been mentioned above

[GuitarR0cker1]

Fall Out Boy
Death Cab For Cutie
Kanye West
Godspeed You Black Emperor!
Radiohead
Thursday
Eminem
The Killers
Hot Water Music
Rihanna
Lil Wayne
Animal Collective
Bright Eyes
The National
My Chemical Romance
Botch

This is my attempt at a list. I don't think it is very good.

EDIT: shit I forgot Sigur Ros, Blink-182 and Iron & Wine.

[BryterJonah]

http://www.rgravity.com/albums/KidA.gif

[x togepi x]

just because you guys started listening to animal collective this year doesn't make them a band that defined this decade.

[oddwithoutend]

Haha

[BryterJonah]

Arcade Fire was pretty swingin'

[Broclee]

just because you guys started listening to animal collective this year doesn't make them a band that defined this decade.
I still think that someone (not me) could argue that Animal Collective in some way define this decade. I'm not a big Animal Collective fan (never have been), but I'm sure someone could put it together.

Most of what I'd say has already been mentioned. Part of me thinks that The Postal Service should be mentioned, but I'm not sure.

[nlo13]

ANGELS and AIRWAVESSS!!
they have to be on this list!!
they are a rock n' roll revolution; best rock group in the last 25 years!!! So says Thomas DeLonge himself!


... sorry, had to haha.

[x togepi x]

I still think that someone (not me) could argue that Animal Collective in some way define this decade. I'm not a big Animal Collective fan (never have been), but I'm sure someone could put it together.

Most of what I'd say has already been mentioned. Part of me thinks that The Postal Service should be mentioned, but I'm not sure.

make that argument then. I don't see many bands getting any influence from them in this decade.

[BryterJonah]

TV On the Radio added a nice coating to this decade.

[El_Jeffe]

i agree with some artists mentions, but the most glaring omission so far is tinariwen. completely reinvented guitar driven music & have a ridiculously huge following worldwide (including the western world, even today's artists like coldplay, etc already list them as a strong influence). some others (not yet mentioned) may be:

the roots
beck
ben harper & the innocent criminals
the mars volta
erykah badu
outkast

[GuitarR0cker1]

just because you guys started listening to animal collective this year doesn't make them a band that defined this decade.
Now that I think about it animal collective really hasn't done much to define this decade. I would guess they will heavily define the next decade but they haven't had much of an impact yet.

[GuitarR0cker1]

i agree with some artists mentions, but the most glaring omission so far is tinariwen. completely reinvented guitar driven music & have a ridiculously huge following worldwide (including the west, even today's artists like coldplay, etc already list them as a strong influence). some others (not yet mentioned) may be:

the roots
beck
ben harper & the innocent criminals
the mars volta
refused
outkast
Definitley Outkast, I can't believe I forgot about them.

[hockeyguitar99]

The White Stripes
Eminem
Coldplay
Radiohead
Death Cab For Cutie
The Roots
Outkast
TV On The Radio
Animal Collective

I can't really think of any others right now.

[El_Jeffe]

there's many artists who have made a tremendous difference to music cultures with or without mainstream play. in the internet age especially, we need not be too concerned with only considering mainstream or mainstream "crossover" bands, as the amount of fans or radio familiarity don't necessarily mean they will automatically be remembered. trends come & go, especially in today's musical climate with fickle disposable mp3 listeners. some trends may be remembered, most probably will not. leaving behind a legacy or a statement on the musical history pages has nothing to do with how quickly you can convert & follow a trend from a mainstream pop-punk to a dance-rock band

another big one i forgot, saul williams

[Kid B]

Animal Collective, Grizzly Bear, and The National put out some heavyweights.
Definitely

[IWasaCamera]

I suppose you do bring up a good point here. If Post-Rock had been a tad bit more organized then it'd be relevant. I suppose Post-Rock then would just tie into the marketing of experimented music, which falls under Radiohead again.
It's my view that the genre didn't have enough of a splash to be considered. Does this thread's results cater to "ordinary" listeners? Probably, but I suspect that's the point.
Anthemic rock-oriented groups? Has enough grit to keep them out of the limelight for long? That's my take on it. I understand that Foo Fighters draws from different influences but i say that the music has the same end goals in terms of a genre. That's a remarkably vague description that could be applied to countless bands. Spoon is Evanescence done right.
Mmmm The White Stripes. They'd take it for sure. Definitely one of the style's frontrunners.
Hahaha i guess i can only argue Bright Eyes so far. I guess they might not be defining, but this is the one decade that they'll for sure be remembered for, and in the future their name comes up in discussions about the 00s. Only time will tell obviously, but I wouldn't expect his work to figure prominently in future discussions.
i don't know what you mean by this, i mean if i were to talk about 80s music and ignore punk/hardcore and alternative, i'd be making a big mistake. i mean can you talk about albums that defined the 80s without mentioning Sonic Youth's Daydream Nation?
Agreed. I can't think of anything similar to that happening right now on that type of scale though.
Bright Eyes
The National
Iron & Wine.
I get that these are the trendy artists to like now but I'm curious as to what your reasoning is for including them.
just because you guys started listening to animal collective this year doesn't make them a band that defined this decade.
If this is directed at me to some degree, that's not what I was suggesting (and I quite dislike them). I was just stating that they are far more "defining" than Grizzly Bear or The National.
Arcade Fire was pretty swingin'
Solid nomination. Huge band that took part in the rise of mainstream "indie".

[x togepi x]

If this is directed at me to some degree, that's not what I was suggesting (and I quite dislike them). I was just stating that they are far more "defining" than Grizzly Bear or The National.".

nope, this is directed to all the people that heard MMP and suddenly decided it was the end all be all to music in 2009.

[Kid B]

Battles probably isn't defining but I think they're a landmark band.

[BryterJonah]

Antony and the Johnsons was a solid band for the gay community.

I guess that fits into this.

[IWasaCamera]

nope, this is directed to all the people that heard MMP and suddenly decided it was the end all be all to music in 2009.
So basically everyone who hadn't heard an AC album beforehand. Everyone I talk to seems to believe 09 is some phenomenal year because of MPP, Veckatimest, and so on but I'm not finding much to be excited about.

[x togepi x]

So basically everyone who hadn't heard an AC album beforehand. Everyone I talk to seems to believe 09 is some phenomenal year because of MPP, Veckatimest, and so on but I'm not finding much to be excited about.

i really don't know anyone who listened to animal collective before this year who thinks they are what everyone on this site says they are.

[oddwithoutend]

nope, this is directed to all the people that heard MMP and suddenly decided it was the end all be all to music in 2009.

What do you think of MPP?

[BryterJonah]

I've spent too much time with ambient and instrumental crap lately, so my opinions hardly define the whole of a decade.

But AC fans love aren't just ga-ga over MPP. I love things like Spirit and Feels for their atmosphere and wackiness.

[x togepi x]

What do you think of MPP?

it's okay. i like the last panda bear record and strawberry jam from AC a lot better than it.

[IWasaCamera]

i really don't know anyone who listened to animal collective before this year who thinks they are what everyone on this site says they are.
Exactly. It's been weird/amusing to watch.

[thespearkid]

To me, the garage rock revival is probably the most important thing that has happened to music in this decade. With that in mind, I would say The White Stripes and the Strokes should be very high on such a list. Also, I'd LOVE to say the Killers but their music hasn't been consistent enough to warrant a spot on such a list. Hip-Hop's transition back into sampling was pretty major (although brief, now that autotune seems to be taking back over) so Kanye West has got to be on this list, whether you like him or not, considering his production techniques were mimicked across the industry for a solid three-four years. Even then, hip-hop has gone through a lot of trends this decade so it would be tough to make that call.

Eh, I really don't think we have an aritst to defien this decade. Can't we just say the 00's were defined by how much amazing music was instantly avalailable to anyone who wanted it?

[thespearkid]

Also, it feels nice to finally be in that weird minority of people who don't like a really popular artist (Animal Collective).

[BryterJonah]

Can't we just say the 00's were defined by how much amazing music was instantly avalailable to anyone who wanted it?
Definitely.
It corrupted my values as much as it helped define my tastes.

[oddwithoutend]

it's okay. i like the last panda bear record and strawberry jam from AC a lot better than it.

I still want to try out Panda Bear's solo material. I do fall into the category of people that hadn't listened to AC before MPP came out, but I do not fault myself over it because I wasn't even following music releases at the time Strawberry Jam was released. I've only been really paying attention since 2008, so I also can't really say how good 2009 has been for music (given that I only have one other year I can truly compare it to) either. What I can say is that I have MPP as my album of the year so far, and I know that makes me a conformist by default, but I really feel like I could explain why it is superior to any other 2009 release that I've listened to. Is Animal Collective a defining artist of this decade? Not that I know of...

Edit: Also, I think MPP's biggest weakness is in its lyrics, and I think that's what keeps me from wanting to call it a great release.

[x togepi x]

I'm not sure garage rock revival would be the most important trend but it was really important.

[thespearkid]

As per my current listening habits, I have to say that whoever the 00's defining artist is, the 90's defining artist is at least three times better than them in every way.

[x togepi x]

the 90s might be the most overrated decade in music besides the 60s.

[IWasaCamera]

I dig Panda Bear far more than AC but don't really care for either.

As for this notion of readily available tunes, interesting duality. On one hand, having this vast sea of releases a few clicks away is remarkably convenient, especially for those who can't always afford to buy records. On the other, music consumption seems to have become a competition of sorts rather than pure enjoyment. I'd venture to say it has cheapened listener appreciation for some as much as it has opened doors for others.

[BryterJonah]

I'd prefer defining albums over this.

[boxingwithstars]

To me, the garage rock revival is probably the most important thing that has happened to music in this decade. With that in mind, I would say The White Stripes and the Strokes should be very high on such a list. Also, I'd LOVE to say the Killers but their music hasn't been consistent enough to warrant a spot on such a list. Hip-Hop's transition back into sampling was pretty major (although brief, now that autotune seems to be taking back over) so Kanye West has got to be on this list, whether you like him or not, considering his production techniques were mimicked across the industry for a solid three-four years. Even then, hip-hop has gone through a lot of trends this decade so it would be tough to make that call.

Eh, I really don't think we have an aritst to defien this decade. Can't we just say the 00's were defined by how much amazing music was instantly avalailable to anyone who wanted it?

i think that's a fair conclusion to make. it's hard to come up with a single artist to define this decade, and that's because there was more music available to the masses than ever before. everyone's definitive artist is going to be different just because there was so much more to choose from.

[oddwithoutend]

I'd venture to say it has cheapened listener appreciation for some as much as it has opened doors for others.

This is something I've considered a lot, and I agree with it. I think that music enthusiasts as of late all seem to have a great interest in album reviews, likely because both the music and the reviews come from the same place (internet). This striking interest in reviews, and the ability to view the consensus of large groups of people have on certain music, have lead to the "sheep" you referred to earlier. And of course, as a sheep, you can't enjoy what you're listening to near as much as if you ventured a more individualistic path.

[Broclee]

make that argument then. I don't see many bands getting any influence from them in this decade.

I never said I could. I don't really care for any of Animal Collective's material at all, so I'm in no position to defend them as definitive.

I'd prefer defining albums over this.

I think I would, too.

[thespearkid]

the 90s might be the most overrated decade in music besides the 60s.
Couldn't disagree more. Maybe the nineties are overrated but not by much.

[x togepi x]

Couldn't disagree more. Maybe the nineties are overrated but not by much.

like every party i've been to recently i've heard some dude either going on and on about how the 90s were the best decade in music or seen some dude playing 90s pop songs on their guitar unironically. it's getting played out to me.

[thespearkid]

like every party i've been to recently i've heard some dude either going on and on about how the 90s were the best decade in music or seen some dude playing 90s pop songs on their guitar unironically. it's getting played out to me.
I've just been on a bit of a B.I.G. kick recently so I'm extra up the nineties ass but it's got a kick ass variety of music, the majority of it really honest and lacking the pomp that the two surrounding decades have.

[IWasaCamera]

90s are way overrated because of Nirvana, Radiohead, Weezer, Elliott Smith, etc. All acts that receive far too many accolades. Still great music to be found as with any decade but it is seldom represented in the bloated praise.

[thespearkid]

I can agree with most of those (Elliott Smith being the obvious exception) being between somewhat overrated (Weezer) and ridiculously overrated (Nirvana) but you're leaving out bands like REM, Neutral Milk Hotel, B.I.G., and Sunny Day Real Estate who made really great, influential music whose effects are still hugely represented in today's music.

Edit: I've had to edit this post like three times. My typing is really sucking tonight.

[x togepi x]

sunny day real estate is a perfect example of what i was talking about when i said the 90s are one of the most overrated decades.

[thespearkid]

You've got to at least give them credit for their influence.

[x togepi x]

i'm not entirely sure how influential they really are.

[thespearkid]

As I understand it, they were the first band to combine indie rock with first-wave emo to create modern day emo. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[IWasaCamera]

I can agree with most of those (Elliott Smith being the obvious exception) being between somewhat overrated (Weezer) and ridiculously overrated (Nirvana) but you're leaving out bands like REM, Neutral Milk Hotel, B.I.G., and Sunny Day Real Estate who made really great, influential music whose effects are still hugely represented in today's music.

Edit: I've had to edit this post like three times. My typing is really sucking tonight.
I assign greater value to quality than influence when being overrated is the issue. Smith's work is held in far too high regard for a decent songwriter while NMH released one good album everyone creams themselves over because not understanding Mangum's lyrics is apparently tantamount to profundity. If you're going to pitch the 90s as a wonderful decade for music, do it on the strength of Will Oldham or Gas instead.

[chipdip18]

i agree with some artists mentions, but the most glaring omission so far is tinariwen. completely reinvented guitar driven music & have a ridiculously huge following worldwide (including the western world, even today's artists like coldplay, etc already list them as a strong influence). some others (not yet mentioned) may be:

the roots
beck
ben harper & the innocent criminals
the mars volta
erykah badu
outkast

I think togepi mentioned Mars Volta too and you both could be on to something there, what exactly i couldn't say. The Roots and Beck might be fair game as well, but i know that Beck's bigger albums have been in the 90s i think, so maybe not this decade.

It's my view that the genre didn't have enough of a splash to be considered. Does this thread's results cater to "ordinary" listeners? Probably, but I suspect that's the point. Well i think it can't be considered as a genre in the mainstream's eye but in the underground's eye it could be recognized. Explosions in the Sky, Sigur Ros, Mogwai are all fairly recognizable and respected names.

That's a remarkably vague description that could be applied to countless bands. Spoon is Evanescence done right.
I'm out of what i'm trying to say. Spoon is Evanescence done right did me in haha.

Only time will tell obviously, but I wouldn't expect his work to figure prominently in future discussions.
My thoughts too. I tend to be a pessimist in this sort of thing anyway.

[x togepi x]

As I understand it, they were the first band to combine indie rock with first-wave emo to create modern day emo. Correct me if I'm wrong.

fugazi did the "combining indie with emo (i don't know what the waves nonsense means)" way before sunny day real estate. while sdre has a couple good albums, their influence is mainly in people name dropping them to look like they know what they're talking about (not accusing you of this).

[theguy77]

lets just go ahead and get the shitty scene trends' influences out of the way:

fall out boy and the subsequent FBR hype-wave
taking back sunday, thursday, and the ensuing victory records hype-wave

[theguy77]

the 90s might be the most overrated decade in music besides the 60s.

i would say both decades definitely had better music on mainstream radio than the 00's and possibly the '80s. the radio is so, so bad these days. i will admit, though, that my perception of the '80s is very possibly skewed by the fact that all i can remember about the 80s is crappy pop-ballads by ex-classic rock bands, and people playing with synthesizers and singing in very annoying voices.

[BryterJonah]

How about dedicating this to Artists that defined the strengths of the 00's.
Everyone benefits that way.

[theguy77]

sweet idea man. lets also give this site some rainbow wall paper and develop a program that makes bunnies jump out of your computer screen and cuddle with you.

[chipdip18]

i would say both decades definitely had better music on mainstream radio than the 00's and possibly the '80s. the radio is so, so bad these days. i will admit, though, that my perception of the '80s is very possibly skewed by the fact that all i can remember about the 80s is crappy pop-ballads by ex-classic rock bands, and people playing with synthesizers and singing in very annoying voices.

It took me forever to dig anything from the 80s, but there are some solid gems worth looking into. the better half of the Pixies' discography, Sonic Youth, Bruce Springsteen's Nebraska (only album on his i really enjoy). And that's still the decade with the least amount of space in my itunes.

[theguy77]

It took me forever to dig anything from the 80s, but there are some solid gems worth looking into. the better half of the Pixies' discography, Sonic Youth, Bruce Springsteen's Nebraska (only album on his i really enjoy). And that's still the decade with the least amount of space in my itunes.

oh right, yeah im sure springsteen for example was on the radio in the 80s. i wasnt writing off all the music of the 80s, just what generally got played on the radio, but im probably wrong there too. also, the only reason i probably enjoy 90s radio music for the most part is becuase thats what i grew up with before i paid attention to music in the "underground".

i still stand by saying the 90s and 60s were both better than the 00's though.

[BryterJonah]

sweet idea man. lets also give this site some rainbow wall paper and develop a program that makes bunnies jump out of your computer screen and cuddle with you.
:sadangel:

[theguy77]

:sadangel:

hahaha aww, i cant be mean to the sadangel. its just so... sad!!!

[Paulb-182]

I can quite clearly tell everyone here, that Nirvana are not overrated

[BryterJonah]

Yup.

In Utero >>>>> Nevermind
There, I said what had to be said about the so called greatest album of the 90's.

[fadedmemories]

How about The Get Up Kids? Something To Write Home About was released during the late 90's but that album was and still is very influential nowadays. By being a huge influence to many pop punk/pop rock bands that arrived on the scene after them, they helped define this decade.

[Paulb-182]

Yup.

In Utero >>>>> Nevermind
There, I said what had to be said about the so called greatest album of the 90's.

In Utero > Everything else I've ever listened to!!

[deanster321]

Yup.

In Utero >>>>> Nevermind
There, I said what had to be said about the so called greatest album of the 90's.
I also agree.


Being as I'm here I'll try and contribute to the discussion:

Radiohead
Coldplay
Linkin Park
Thursday
Glassjaw
Arcade Fire
The Strokes
The Dillinger Escape Plan
Isis
Converge
Deftones
Kanye West
Green Day*

*I noticed that they'd been dismissed already in this thread but I'd still include them. They've released three albums since 2000, so they have been reasonably active during this decade.

There are probably more that I could come up with, but those are what I could think of off the top of my head. I think at least four or five of them haven't been mentioned yet.

[Paulb-182]

Basically I'd put it down to :

The Strokes (maybe The Libertines will be looked at in higher regard in the future, but The Strokes started it all)
Linkin Park
Coldplay

As the biggest bands of this decade. When people look back they will look at those bands as the ones that defined the decade soundwise

[chipdip18]

oh right, yeah im sure springsteen for example was on the radio in the 80s. i wasnt writing off all the music of the 80s, just what generally got played on the radio, but im probably wrong there too. also, the only reason i probably enjoy 90s radio music for the most part is becuase thats what i grew up with before i paid attention to music in the "underground".

i still stand by saying the 90s and 60s were both better than the 00's though.

Haha 80s pop like Hall and Oates is a guilty pleasure of mine.

Yeah, i don't think you'll get a lot of disagreement there haha.

[Troggy]

If you are going by sales numbers, the artists that define this decade are stuff like Nickelback, Daughtry, Linkin Park, Green Day, Carrie Underwood, Kelly Clarkson, Taylor Swift, Coldplay, Kanye West, 50 Cent, etc. Go wikipedia the top sellers, I can't think of them all off the top of my head.

[kearn1tm]

Vijay Iyer and Rudresh Mahanthappa have both been among the most innovative and inspiring names in contemporary Jazz, which hasn't received the attention it once did in decades past. Both have incorporated various other elements of sounds and genres into their mut-style Neo-Jazz that's been highly refreshing. They're among the defining artists of this generation.

Both The Rapture and LCD Soundsystem had such a profound and unmeasurable impact on, and aided in making the Dance-Punk/Post-Punk revival fad so desirable in the New York club scene and, later, co-opted by the mainstream. Say what you will, but Echoes made it much easier for artists like Franz Ferdinand to find a label.

[IWasaCamera]

Well i think it can't be considered as a genre in the mainstream's eye but in the underground's eye it could be recognized. Explosions in the Sky, Sigur Ros, Mogwai are all fairly recognizable and respected names.
None of those strike me as acts that epitomize a decade's musical output. It's akin to The National being mentioned here. Sure, they do what they do remarkably well. Doesn't make them a "defining" band.
Vijay Iyer and Rudresh Mahanthappa have both been among the most innovative and inspiring names in contemporary Jazz, which hasn't received the attention it once did in decades past. Both have incorporated various other elements of sounds and genres into their mut-style Neo-Jazz that's been highly refreshing. They're among the defining artists of this generation.

Both The Rapture and LCD Soundsystem had such a profound and unmeasurable impact on, and aided in making the Dance-Punk/Post-Punk revival fad so desirable in the New York club scene and, later, co-opted by the mainstream. Say what you will, but Echoes made it much easier for artists like Franz Ferdinand to find a label.
I couldn't chime in with worthwhile input where Iyer is concerned because I'm of the many that don't follow contemporary jazz as much as I'd like (recs are welcome) but agreed on The Rapture/LCD.

[x togepi x]

i would say both decades definitely had better music on mainstream radio than the 00's and possibly the '80s. the radio is so, so bad these days. i will admit, though, that my perception of the '80s is very possibly skewed by the fact that all i can remember about the 80s is crappy pop-ballads by ex-classic rock bands, and people playing with synthesizers and singing in very annoying voices.

and how much is this opinion based on the fact that it's really easy to cherry pick from the 60s since we don't have to sit through all the shitty radio songs because nobody cares about them anymore?

90s radio was fucking terrible. it gave us shitty "alt rock" pop bands, boy bands, and nu metal. I'm just not sure how one can retroactively make the claims that you're making. Every decade seems to have their shitty mainstream musicians.

[Five-Star]

Linkin Park
Cold Play

[IWasaCamera]

Doesn't every decade have poor radio acts? To assess a period's worth on that basis alone is ridiculous.

[Five-Star]

Doesn't every decade have poor radio acts? To assess a period's worth on that basis alone is ridiculous.

Yea, there's always shitty music on the radio no matter what decade. Also some good music.

[chipdip18]

None of those strike me as acts that epitomize a decade's musical output. It's akin to The National being mentioned here. Sure, they do what they do remarkably well. Doesn't make them a "defining" band.

Mmm i see. I'll just swallow the fact that Post-Rock isn't a defining part of this decade.

[x togepi x]

Doesn't every decade have poor radio acts? To assess a period's worth on that basis alone is ridiculous.

I'm not. I just think the 90s are overrated. Even the bands I like from the 90s tend to be overrated. except fugazi.

[IWasaCamera]

Mmm i see. I'll just swallow the fact that Post-Rock isn't a defining part of this decade.
It can be, just not within the perceived confines of this thread.
I'm not. I just think the 90s are overrated. Even the bands I like from the 90s tend to be overrated. except fugazi.
I was addressing theguy's post actually, should have clarified. He responded to your claim that the 90s are overrated by citing how superior radio was then compared to now which seems like an awfully tenuous argument to me. Ben Folds Five > One Republic so the 90s prevail?

[chipdip18]

It can be, just not within the perceived confines of this thread.

Maybe my perceptions were off. I'll go back and double check. The Eternal is finished by the way.

[kearn1tm]

None of those strike me as acts that epitomize a decade's musical output. It's akin to The National being mentioned here. Sure, they do what they do remarkably well. Doesn't make them a "defining" band.

I couldn't chime in with worthwhile input where Iyer is concerned because I'm of the many that don't follow contemporary jazz as much as I'd like (recs are welcome) but agreed on The Rapture/LCD.

Iyer and Mahanthappa's collaboration Raw Materials is required listening and probably my second or third favorite albums of the decade. I stumbled on it almost two years ago when reading back issues of Time for a media course and found this seven page expose on how they were essentially redefining Jazz in a time where it's no longer embrassed by anyone other than fellow musicians. I listened, thinking I'd never find it pentrible to someone like me. I was wrong.

Miguel Zenon's Awake is also a very good album from the last decade, as is all of Ambrose Akinmusire's work on various albums and as a band leader for his own album, '07's Prelude to...Cora.

[kearn1tm]

It can be, just not within the perceived confines of this thread.

I was addressing theguy's post actually, should have clarified. He responded to your claim that the 90s are overrated by citing how superior radio was then compared to now which seems like an awfully tenuous argument to me. Ben Folds Five > One Republic so the 90s prevail?

Yeah, that seemed like an incredibly odd argument.

Mainstream music being marginally better in the '90s (which I don't even find to be true, per se. Was DJ Shadow and Smog and Will Oldham and The Sea and Cake in the Top 40 ever? Nirvana and Radiohead circa-The Bends does not a "good mainstream" make) means nothing in the greater context of music as an artform and medium.

I wouldn't necessarily claim that the best music of the '90s (and it certainly wasn't in the mainstream) is inherently superior to the best music of the '00s (and it certainly wasn't in the mainstream).

Oh, and Umbrella trumps Smells Like Teen Spirit, so that argument is negated anyway.

[theguy77]

and how much is this opinion based on the fact that it's really easy to cherry pick from the 60s since we don't have to sit through all the shitty radio songs because nobody cares about them anymore?

this is probably true, but i was assessing my claim based on the fact there were more bands on the radio that deserved praise in the 90s and 60s than now.

90s radio was fucking terrible. it gave us shitty "alt rock" pop bands, boy bands, and nu metal. I'm just not sure how one can retroactively make the claims that you're making. Every decade seems to have their shitty mainstream musicians.
Doesn't every decade have poor radio acts? To assess a period's worth on that basis alone is ridiculous.

yes, absolutely, but i am arguing against the notion that the 90s and 60s were the most "overrated" decades in music. what im doing by comparing the mainstream radio of each time period, is pooling the most highly rated music of each decade (operating under a potentially flawed parameter of how many people rate these bands highly; how widely each act is praised). once that's done, its clear to see that some bands are far more deserving of such widespread appraisal than others. to use a term togepi coined, i can "cherry pick" the beatles and bob dylan among others from the 60s who were good popular artists, and just as well from the 90s i can "cherry pick", for example, radiohead and beck. im not necessarily saying that these acts are not overrated, but i am saying they are good artists whose music warranted some of that praise. to use an example, in a realm where a band like blink 182 is prasied as obscenely as a band like radiohead, while both bands are highly overrated its clear to see the latter is more deserving because theyve done better things with their music while also exhibiting far more diversity. so now having explained my approach, i can say i dont know of a single band who's been featured in top 40 radio this decade who could hold a candle to any of the four artists i mentioned, and thats a very small sample of all the great music that has been lauded historically in the mainstream. in fact the best i can think of is jimmy eat world (maybe coldplay?), and it's laughable to compare a cookie-cutter pop-rock band to the musical innovations of the beatles, the lyrical prowess and subversion of bob dylan, or even the relative diversity and technicality of bands like radiohead and beck.

It can be, just not within the perceived confines of this thread.

I was addressing theguy's post actually, should have clarified. He responded to your claim that the 90s are overrated by citing how superior radio was then compared to now which seems like an awfully tenuous argument to me. Ben Folds Five > One Republic so the 90s prevail?

not quite, my point is not intended to contribute to the main debate of which decade is better, but rather, which one's mainstream is most overrated (and i make a concession for the fact that the mainstream is always overrated). also, ben folds five >>>> not just one republic, but just about anything you can hear on the radio today.

[IWasaCamera]

Iyer and Mahanthappa's collaboration Raw Materials is required listening and probably my second or third favorite albums of the decade. I stumbled on it almost two years ago when reading back issues of Time for a media course and found this seven page expose on how they were essentially redefining Jazz in a time where it's no longer embrassed by anyone other than fellow musicians. I listened, thinking I'd never find it pentrible to someone like me. I was wrong.

Miguel Zenon's Awake is also a very good album from the last decade, as is all of Ambrose Akinmusire's work on various albums and as a band leader for his own album, '07's Prelude to...Cora.
Not familiar with Zenon, will check out. Thanks.
Mainstream music being marginally better in the '90s (which I don't even find to be true, per se. Was DJ Shadow and Smog and Will Oldham and The Sea and Cake in the Top 40 ever? Nirvana and Radiohead circa-The Bends does not a "good mainstream" make) means nothing in the greater context of music as an artform and medium.

I wouldn't necessarily claim that the best music of the '90s (and it certainly wasn't in the mainstream) is inherently superior to the best music of the '00s (and it certainly wasn't in the mainstream).
Basically my thoughts. Callahan and Oldham on the radio would have been awesome/frightening though.
yes, absolutely, but i am arguing against the notion that the 90s and 60s were the most "overrated" decades in music. what im doing by comparing the mainstream radio of each time period, is pooling the most highly rated music of each decade (operating under a potentially flawed parameter of how many people rate these bands highly; how widely each act is praised).
This is an incredibly specious analysis for two reasons:

1. Many of the highest rated albums of the 60s were not even played on pop radio. Easiest example of this is jazz which produced some of the most enduring and respected works the medium has ever seen. You'd be omitting that entire genre, effectively rendering this a "which period created the best accessible rock 'n' roll?" debate.

2. When Togepi made his initial claim that the 90s were given far too much credit, I doubt (he can correct me if I'm mistaken) that he was basing that assertion solely on mainstream garbage as he's already conceded that every decade features dismal radio acts. Moreover, he's always been a fervent proponent of the underground so it stands to reason that he would factor this into the matter.
once that's done, its clear to see that some bands are far more deserving of such widespread appraisal than others. to use a term togepi coined, i can "cherry pick" the beatles and bob dylan among others from the 60s who were good popular artists, and just as well from the 90s i can "cherry pick", for example, radiohead and beck. Radiohead still counts (I'd say far more so at the moment since they were quite boring in the 90s) now and I'll match Beck with Arcade Fire. Done. Cherrypicking achieves little to nothing since every decade bears a selection of interesting artists. You'd need a far wider array of styles and artists to draw any sort of cogent conclusion.
not quite, my point is not intended to contribute to the main debate of which decade is better, but rather, which one's mainstream is most overrated (and i make a concession for the fact that the mainstream is always overrated). also, ben folds five >>>> not just one republic, but just about anything you can hear on the radio today. Strange that you'd argue in favor of the 90s when Bright Eyes, Death Cab, Radiohead, and a handful of others are current mainstream outfits.

[Bobby Tucker]

I would love to say that Sufjan Stevens has done enough to be a staple of our decade. I feel he accomplishes an uncharacteristically symphonic feel throughout his music in an era where thousands of garage bands are started daily by four kids who can play their guitars and drums adequately at best; the result is the exact opposite of this symphonic sound, replaced instead by a very cheap and shallow sound. But Stevens really hasn't delivered outside of Illinoise and Seven Swans, and even on those the musicianship is not as stellar as the arrangements would allow, especially in some of the string parts on Illinoise. Another album and a marginally wider fanbase definitely could have sealed it for him, given the quality of the arrangements he composes and the accessibility of his albums, but as it stands he is simply a very good artist in this decade who falls below the radar for far too many.

[theguy77]

This is an incredibly specious analysis for two reasons:

1. Many of the highest rated albums of the 60s were not even played on pop radio. Easiest example of this is jazz which produced some of the most enduring and respected works the medium has ever seen. You'd be omitting that entire genre, effectively rendering this a "which period created the best accessible rock 'n' roll?" debate.

fair.

2. When Togepi made his initial claim that the 90s were given far too much credit, I doubt (he can correct me if I'm mistaken) that he was basing that assertion solely on mainstream garbage as he's already conceded that every decade features dismal radio acts. Moreover, he's always been a fervent proponent of the underground so it stands to reason that he would factor this into the matter.

fair, but then what is the parameter for "overrated"? who gets rated highly on ap.net? in a broad spectrum its the top 40 radio that gets rated the highest the most frequently.

Radiohead still counts (I'd say far more so at the moment since they were quite boring in the 90s) now and I'll match Beck with Arcade Fire. Done. Cherrypicking achieves little to nothing since every decade bears a selection of interesting artists. You'd need a far wider array of styles and artists to draw any sort of cogent conclusion.

1) true but i attribute radiohead to the 90s becuase thats where they got their mainstream footing and thats where they were initially rated so highly. by the 2000s they'd already been established; they're a defining artist of the 90's who just carried over into the 00's, albeit that they only released one good album in the 90s.
2) while im aware of the popularity of arcade fire, and agree that their music is just as deserving of praise as beck's is, ive never heard them on the radio ever.

Strange that you'd argue in favor of the 90s when Bright Eyes, Death Cab, Radiohead, and a handful of others are current mainstream outfits.

havent heard bright eyes on the radio either. i somehow forgot about death cab but disregarding my emotional bias to their sound, when viewing their music through an objective eye i cant possibly say what theyve accomplished and aspired toward in their music is comparable to the bands in question, and are therefore not as deserving as praise. however im pretty sure they arent rated as highly as a band like radiohead either.

[theguy77]

I would love to say that Sufjan Stevens has done enough to be a staple of our decade. I feel he accomplishes an uncharacteristically symphonic feel throughout his music in an era where thousands of garage bands are started daily by four kids who can play their guitars and drums adequately at best; the result is the exact opposite of this symphonic sound, replaced instead by a very cheap and shallow sound. But Stevens really hasn't delivered outside of Illinoise and Seven Swans, and even on those the musicianship is not as stellar as the arrangements would allow, especially in some of the string parts on Illinoise. Another album and a marginally wider fanbase definitely could have sealed it for him, given the quality of the arrangements he composes and the accessibility of his albums, but as it stands he is simply a very good artist in this decade who falls below the radar for far too many.

i love sufjan but arcade fire create baroque arrangements as well, but within a more accessible and structured songwriting template. becasue of this, they do receive the popularity that you believe sufjan should receive, for a vaguely similar incorporation of symphonic instruments. sufjan seems overall more concerned with the technicality of the arrangements and with the content of his lyrics than a sense of structure and pop sensibility, and thats what turns a lot of people off (i personally love it more than almost anything though). his songs are not necessarily inaccessible but they are dense, and the casual listener doesnt tend to have the patience to sift through the sporadic nature of his songwriting; it takes awhile to establish a sense of familiarity with it. he got plenty of praise for his material though, especially illinoise.

[headlightspavem]

Most of the artists we're excluded from mentioning in this started to hit it big in like 98-99. And I think most bands who define generations have to span over the course of a couple of decades... look at Blink. I know Dude Ranch is a lot of people's favourite Blink album but they only really hit the winning formula with Enema (in 99), and they cemented themselves as influence for a generation with Take Off in 01.

You need have a certain amount of subjectivity when dismissing when someone stopped or started being influential. I think it's all about relevance. i.e., Radiohead are still a relevent, groundbreaking band, therefore are defining this decade. Oasis, while still releasing albums, are not matching up to the likes of Definitely Maybe and What's The Story (Morning Glory), and therefore defined the 90's and not the 00's. Anyone with me on that?

[IWasaCamera]

fair, but then what is the parameter for "overrated"? who gets rated highly on ap.net? in a broad spectrum its the top 40 radio that gets rated the highest the most frequently.
General consensus among "true" music enthusiasts. Overrated on AP means jackshit in the grand scheme and I think it's fair to state that no one assigns any importance to the views of pop fans.
1) true but i attribute radiohead to the 90s becuase thats where they got their mainstream footing and thats where they were initially rated so highly. by the 2000s they'd already been established; they're a defining artist of the 90's who just carried over into the 00's, albeit that they only released one good album in the 90s. When they first made a splash is trivial. Radiohead has written its best music in the 00s and to dismiss these releases simply because the band's contributions span two decades is inane. If anything, they're more relevant/important now.
2) while im aware of the popularity of arcade fire, and agree that their music is just as deserving of praise as beck's is, ive never heard them on the radio ever. Always on the radio.
havent heard bright eyes on the radio either. i somehow forgot about death cab but disregarding my emotional bias to their sound, when viewing their music through an objective eye i cant possibly say what theyve accomplished and aspired toward in their music is comparable to the bands in question, and are therefore not as deserving as praise. however im pretty sure they arent rated as highly as a band like radiohead either. Of course Death Cab doesn't receive the amount of undue praise that Yorke and company do, how many bands do? That plays right into Togepi's initial statement.

One simply can't gauge the quality of an entire decade on the merits of pop music.