I noticed in many of the discussions on here (especially in the Beatles vs Floyd by mr. gill ) that 'happy', 'fun', 'simple' etc are adjectives that somehow diminish the worth of artists. And similarly several bands are praised for being innovative, experimental etc despite the fact that the songs are so bad that it doesn't hold good for even a second listen. Genres that especially do this seems to be post-rock such as GY!BE and prog. stuff(now don't tell me that all that bullshit on TMV's new album was really necessary). And wtf is zeuhl or whatever its called?

Now, I'm not trying to pick a fight with fans of any of the bands mentioned. I realize that music needs to be invenitve to stop it from being stale and I really do appreciate complexity in songwriting, but still the question remains.

i don't think simplicity is underrated. but i would say that complexity simply for the sake of being complex is quite overrated.

Simplicity is a very good thing, as long as it is still creative/original/good. If you can write a simpler song with all those elements, its better than writing a complex song.

Most people think Nirvana is to simple and makes their music horrible :-P. But I thought it was great that they used simplicity to create their songs. So I do think simplicity is underrated. Theres my thoughts on it.

Like panbient said, complexity for complexities sake is a waste of energy... in my opinion.

But you can often pick this. If you look at some of the legendary classical composers, the complexity in their music only appears because it was necessary for what they were trying to achieve.

If you have many ideas and you want to use them all, chances are you are going to create some complex music. If all you want is some music to back some lyrics, then maybe complexity isn't so important. [Edit: I probably shouldn't say not so important, but more, complexity is probably not going to arise]

What I enjoy in music is innovation and an abundance of ideas. What I like more is maybe a small number of ideas used in creative ways. This can end up sounding complex, but when it is analysed you can find that it isn't as complicated as it first appeared. I prefer not to listen to simple three chord rock songs, but hey, there's a time and place for everything

I enjoyed the 'crazy' sections of TMV's new album. At first, it did appear to be unnecessary, but I realised later that they were actually working with some material, some concepts and musical ideas, that is, it wasn't random, and I can appreciate that.

When John Lennon got criticized for his really simple lyrics in "I want you (she´s so heavy)" he said sth like: "When you´re about to drown, you don´t say "would somebody perhaps be kind enough to help me outta here?" but simply "Help!".
So, it depends on what a song is trying to express. Simplicity works very well, if a song´s message (musically or lyrically) is meant to be very direct, clear or sth like that. That´s why I consider simplicity to be underrated.

there is some kind of chess term about the eloquent power of simplicity or something like that. the point is that simple, clearly presented arguements are generally more valid than florid, byzantine ones, and generally more beautiful. the same is true in pop music, probably more true in fact than in weighier pursuits like religion, or um chess. an unembellished song, played honestly, succintly and astutely, will always surpass longer more elaborate songs if they lack those qualities.

now, you do encounter occasionally songs where the song length and embellishments are totally essential and valid. its rare of course, the only thing rarer than a short song with those qualities. does simple mean that it only says what it must? in that case, simple is the only thing worth listening to.

I don't see how simplicity could possibly by underrated, even on this board. If you look at the threads that get the most replies here, hardly any of the bands in question are noted for complexity. The rock forum seems to be the most visited by far, judging from the last reply when I log in.

I'd say simplicity is celebrated more than underrated. I don't think that's bad at all, but I don't see how its values are at all getting overlooked, here or anywhere.

*sigh*...I am going to risk the wrath of many radiomuters for this one...

So my brother just called from Michigan (where I lived for many years before heading west) and he mentioned a party he is playing with a cover band he is in. he also mentioned that a man of "legendary" talent is assembling his band and playing there as well.

Jim Morris is a very nice person, and so is his wife. He um, knows his way around a guitar's fretboard as well as anyone I've heard, more or less. He also spends over an hour a week treating his hair with hot oil, but that's another story entirely. His site is http://www.jimmorrisband.com/

As he is part of my extended musical family, I've little choice but to see if even one person can make it over there. He'd do it for me, after all.

Um, oh yeah, we were talking about simplicity...I could also add that some people in the Midwest didn't get the memo that 1985 is long gone.

It was pointed out to be the other say that there was a major division in rock.
The Beatles v Rolling Stones - that is the division....
The Beatles (Lennon espicially) lead to the more expansive and complex music of Pink Floyd etc
Rolling Stones lead to a more raw music such as the Who, punk movements, etc etc...