Most underrated band?

[RuseBalaxin]

I'm assuming that "Underrated" means band that everyone knows but doesn't get the credit they deserve from the rock community, and by that definition, it is definitely Creed. Listen to something other than Higher and Arms Wide Open and you'll see they're way better than everyone makes them out to be.

Completely agree - Creed is also my pick for most underrated band
when they have so many awesome songs to choose from.
Why aren't they in Rock Band!? Come, on Harmonix!
Never Die, Say I, Beautiful, Illusion, In America, My Own Prison,
What's This Life For-- All would work on so many levels!

[brdnowellrip]

I have to disagree with this. Incubus is one of the more popular bands on these forums and I think they get quite a lot of critical acclaim. They are a very good band, and I think they get about that much credit.

However, what Shipwrck86 is saying is that they are a great band. If they would get more peoples benifit of the doubt, they would be on people top artist list more often. I would 100 % agree with that. They get shafted all the time by the critics. Mostly because their fan base gets confused by their changes.

[exploder]

I'd say Limp Bizkit,but their new album is highly critically acclaimed,and IMO,their best.

[Cubecubed]

I'd say Limp Bizkit,but their new album is highly critically acclaimed,and IMO,their best.

http://www.metacritic.com/music/gold-cobra

[exploder]

http://www.metacritic.com/music/gold-cobra

Well,duh it's Metacritic

[killer_roach]

Well,duh it's Metacritic

Which is an average of various critical reviews, some positive, some negative. It's just an average. Shooting the messenger is uncalled for here.

That being said, the negative reviews do drag the average down, but not especially so. Throw out the highest and lowest scores, and that raises the average to 55. Take simply the median 50% of the reviews, you're now up to a 59. Still short of the 60 score needed to get a green category label on Metacritic for music, and way short of the highest reviewing albums of the past few months (Archers of Loaf's new album averaged a 94, and REM's averaged a 93).

[Mega-Tallica]

I can't really picture Limp Bizkit as being underrated since they have always been considered one of the pioneers of nu-metal and have always had a strong backing of diehard fans, right up there with Korn and Linkin Park in nu-metal's heyday.

Their new album was alright, but of course with every Limp Bizkit album, people are going to give it very bad reviews while the fans are going to give it great reviews and eventually it all evens out to an average score for every one of their albums which makes their reviews almost pointless to read since it's rare to actually come across an open minded review of Limp Bizkit. /run-on sentence

Mostly what I'm reading about the album is of the, "nu-metal is dead, why do these guys keep trying" variety which I praise them for sticking to it this long when we all know nu-metal long gone from the forefront of music. I was just waiting for Limp Bizkit to jump on the post-grunge train like so many other nu-metal bands have, but they didn't, so +1 for them even though I do find their new album to be mediocre, but there's nostalgic value in listening to new Limp Bizkit. It's like a blast from the past, but still not enough to give their new album many replay listens on my iPod.

[Cubecubed]

I dunno, i feel like anybody is going to feel like their favorite band is underrated. I certainly have a higher opinion of Coheed and Cambria than most people and feel that they are underrated in a few ways, but that doesn't mean they are, necessarily.