Music Junkies...Stone Temple Pilots

[Steve]

My vote goes to Chicago.

Chicago wins by a score of 25 or 6 to 4!

[revo]

I prefer to define worst bands
And it is a formula
Amount of crappyness multiplied by years of successful career
So a lousy band for a few years gets beaten by a long term mediocre band
And STP is neither great not junk (if that is what you really want to know)

How about Mungo Jerry?

Who?

Mungo Jerry. You know, the guys who had a major hit with "In the Summertime" during the summer of 1970 and then were never heard from again?

Well, I was updating my iTunes database and pulled them up to get the album name, and was horrified to learn that these guys have been putting out albums since 1970. And I don't mean one comeback album in 1982 and then another half-hearted "let's do it for old times sake" effort in 1998. I mean they have put out albums consistently since 1970.

These guys, who had their biggest (and in the US, only) hit in 1970 have put out 19 studio albums in total (this doesn't count compilations or live efforts).

That's a lot of consistent mediocrity!

[Fresno Bob]

Bullshit. The Eagles were solid.

says you....

[DMT]

How about Steve Miller? Or Chicago after first 3 albums?
Battling for second place

Yea, Steve Miller 1B.

[DMT]

How about Mungo Jerry?

Who?

Mungo Jerry. You know, the guys who had a major hit with "In the Summertime" during the summer of 1970 and then were never heard from again?

Well, I was updating my iTunes database and pulled them up to get the album name, and was horrified to learn that these guys have been putting out albums since 1970. And I don't mean one comeback album in 1982 and then another half-hearted "let's do it for old times sake" effort in 1998. I mean they have put out albums consistently since 1970.

These guys, who had their biggest (and in the US, only) hit in 1970 have put out 19 studio albums in total (this doesn't count compilations or live efforts).

That's a lot of consistent mediocrity!

But considering their obscurity, I don't ever have to hear them on the radio, other than "In the Summertime" which I like.

Chicago is a heavyweight too but again I hear Miller and the Eagles way more often.

[senorsheep]

Critics are pointlessly cruel to STP. For whatever reason, they feel compelled to compare them with Pearl Jam/ Soundgarden/ Alice in Chains/ whatever other grunge bands they revere. STP was more a classic hard rock band than a grunge band, so blasting them for being something they weren't doesn't make much sense to me. Judged on their own merits, STP was a fine band before Scott Weiland went off the cliff. Core was a very good hard rock record. Purple was a great one. I even liked Tiny Music a lot; I thought it was good "departure" album.

Weiland's embarrassing addiction-fueled spiral overshadowed STP's accomplishments, making it easy for critics to dismiss them. I think categorizing them with post-grunge ripoffs is silly; they're a lot closer to Pearl Jam/ Soundgarden/ Alice in Chains than to Bush/ Creed/ Nickelback, in terms of the quality of their recorded output.

"Great" is probably generous. I rate them as a solid band who made a one great album, and a couple of very good ones.

[senorsheep]

Chicago died when Terry Kath died. From 1979 onward, they basically became Peter Cetera project, and the feces foisted upon the public in their name was all on him.

[revo]

Chicago died when Terry Kath died. From 1979 onward, they basically became Peter Cetera project, and the feces foisted upon the public in their name was all on him.

"Foisted Feces" would be a good name for a band.

[Gregg]

I didn't like Chicago when they first started out and they got worse for me from there. Blah.

[Gregg]

yes - but how many years WERE they solid and how many more years ARE they mediocre?

and who do you pick for my silly formula?

Using your formula, I would say Super Tramp. A couple of really good albums followed up by pop schlock.

REO may be in that category as well.

[revo]

Using your formula, I would say Super Tramp. A couple of really good albums followed up by pop schlock.

REO may be in that category as well.

It's basically naming most/all of mid-to-late 1970s rock bands. Let's toss in Kansas, Bob Seger, Dire Straits, the Doobies, Steely Dan, J. Geils, Jimmy Buffett, ELO, Foreigner, etc. We all should just be listening to a select few artists and chuck the rest!

[Gregg]

It's basically naming most/all of mid-to-late 1970s rock bands. Let's toss in Kansas, Bob Seger, Dire Straits, the Doobies, Steely Dan, J. Geils, Jimmy Buffett, ELO, Foreigner, etc. We all should just be listening to a select few artists and chuck the rest!

Dire Straits does not belong on this list. While formed in 1977 their best was 1985's Brother's in Arms. They broke up and reformed in 1991. While their follow up album was not as successful as Brother's in Arms, it still sold 8 million copies.

It does not appear that they ever mailed it in. In fact one of Knopfler's reasons for breaking up the band is that he felt it should be more about the music and not popularity. He also felt that it got just too big. He seems to have backed up his story by his actions.

While I very much liked Dire Straights, I can't say they are in the top 10 of my favorites. It may be partly due to the timing of their fame happened when I was too busy growing up and music was less a part of my life on a daily basis. They would still make my list of "Great" bands.

[TranaGreg]

It's basically naming most/all of mid-to-late 1970s rock bands. Let's toss in Kansas, Bob Seger, Dire Straits, the Doobies, Steely Dan, J. Geils, Jimmy Buffett, ELO, Foreigner, etc. We all should just be listening to a select few artists and chuck the rest!

I'd make a case for Steely Dan not belonging here as well. This goes back to the personal taste comments at the start of this thread but I can listen to most of their stuff & see a lot of artistry & talent there. Maybe just me.

[swampdragon]

I'd make a case for Steely Dan not belonging here as well. This goes back to the personal taste comments at the start of this thread but I can listen to most of their stuff & see a lot of artistry & talent there. Maybe just me.

agree with both

neither Steely Dan or Dire Straits is dreck - and neither group emabarasses themselves as a performer still

This is a pretty cool documentary - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfS5zCCZGWI

[senorsheep]

It's basically naming most/all of mid-to-late 1970s rock bands. Let's toss in Kansas, Bob Seger, Dire Straits, the Doobies, Steely Dan, J. Geils, Jimmy Buffett, ELO, Foreigner, etc. We all should just be listening to a select few artists and chuck the rest!

Eh, I don't see much dreck on this list. Probably just Jimmy Buffett. Even the bands I don't care for made some quality music. It was just quality music I that didn't happen to like.

The true dreck period came in the 80's, when every washed up/ failed rocker sold their souls to get on VH-1. The gloopy, formulaic schmaltz of that era was thoroughly unlistenable. Peter Cetera, Michael Bolton, Phil Collins, Elton John, Rod Stewart, Bryan Adams... ugh, just an endless death march of horrific, nut-shrinking power ballads. Listen to that crap for an hour, and you'll be begging for the Doobies and Stone Temple Pilots.