YOGI'S Top 10 ALL TIME WORST BANDS/Singers

by **yogi** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 12:22 am

10. John(Throw my As s in a Cornfield Cause I Cant Sing a Lick) Melloncamp
9. Bruce( I am a Poet( bad one) that cant sing) Springsteen & The West Side Story Band
8. Jim (Mr. Ed) Morrison & The Doors - (Light my albums on fire)
7. Smellvis Presley
6. The Grateful( I could not name 3 songs of theirs) Dead
5. Jimi Cant sing, Jimi is mad at Kramer, Jimi was AWEFUL Hendrix
Here comes the Euro trash:
4. U (are soooooo bad stick to your causes and please stop singing) 2
3. Horton Hears (The Who) & Dies they are sooooooooooo damn aweful
*2. The Beatles
*1. The Beatles

* So bad they take up 2 spaces

by **Keiferb** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 12:34 am

yogi wrote:10. John(Throw my As s in a Cornfield Cause I Cant Sing a Lick) Melloncamp
9. Bruce( I am a Poet( bad one) that cant sing) Springsteen & The West Side Story Band
8. Jim (Mr. Ed) Morrison & The Doors - (Light my albums on fire)
7. Smellvis Presley
6. The Grateful( I could not name 3 songs of theirs) Dead
5. Jimi Cant sing, Jimi is mad at Kramer, Jimi was AWEFUL Hendrix
Here comes the Euro trash:
4. U (are soooooo bad stick to your causes and please stop singing) 2
3. Horton Hears (The Who) & Dies they are sooooooooooo damn aweful
*2. The Beatles
*1. The Beatles

* So bad they take up 2 spaces

Are you looking for a fight or something?!?!

Frankly, I'm not a fan of any one of those listed either, except for Melluncamp (what can I say, I like his blue collar and jeans music). Beatles and U2 are OK in my book as well, but don't own anything except greatest hits collection from either.

by **bugsymalone** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 12:42 am

yogi wrote:10. John(Throw my As s in a Cornfield Cause I Cant Sing a Lick) Melloncamp
9. Bruce( I am a Poet( bad one) that cant sing) Springsteen & The West Side Story Band
8. Jim (Mr. Ed) Morrison & The Doors - (Light my albums on fire)
7. Smellvis Presley
6. The Grateful( I could not name 3 songs of theirs) Dead
5. Jimi Cant sing, Jimi is mad at Kramer, Jimi was AWEFUL Hendrix
Here comes the Euro trash:
4. U (are soooooo bad stick to your causes and please stop singing) 2
3. Horton Hears (The Who) & Dies they are sooooooooooo damn aweful
*2. The Beatles
*1. The Beatles

* So bad they take up 2 spaces

Ok, Yogi, that is hilarious. I don't agree with The Who or The Beatles on your list, but Jeebus that was funny!

#6 ^ Yeah. Me either.

Bugsy

by **Archetype** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 12:58 am

The Beatles are fucking terrible all around. Disgusting display of blatant overratedness. Horrible singing, mediocre insrument playing, very uninspired and dull lyrics.

by **froy** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 1:00 am

Archetype wrote:The Beatles are fucking terrible all around. Disgusting display of blatant overratedness. Horrible singing, mediocre insrument playing, very uninspired and dull lyrics.

The BEATLES best band ever. 3 Great song writers Never to be beaten

Add Tom Petty and Bill Joel and take away U2 and the Beatles then your list is spot on Yogi

by **yogi** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 1:03 am

So then why do you keep playing The Mr. Ed led Doors & Horton Hears The Who ( and dies).

Secretly hoping DDY is listening huh???? Hero will LOVE your taste in music!!!

by **froy** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 1:15 am

yogi wrote:So then why do you keep playing The Mr. Ed led Doors & Horton Hears The Who ( and dies).

Secretly hoping DDY is listening huh???? Hero will LOVE your taste in music!!!

I did not see The Doors or THE WHO on your list. Another kick ass bands.
Saw them a few years ago with Ian Astbury on vocals
KILLER SHOW..

The Who on freakin Fire in 89 saw 3 shows in the front row 3 days in a row.
Awesome

by **Ehwmatt** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 1:28 am

Man the people on these boards are fucking dumb. Good lord

by **brywool** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 1:48 am

Archetype wrote:The Beatles are fucking terrible all around. Disgusting display of blatant overratedness. Horrible singing, mediocre insrument playing, very uninspired and dull lyrics.

Okay, I'll grab the troll...

Horrible Singing?? What are you talking about?
Listen to the harmonies on "Because". Beautiful and beats any harmony I ever heard outta Journey or Styx (also bands with killer vocals).

Now listen to McCartney vocally shred on "I'm Down" then turn around and do "Yesterday"- they were recorded in the same session. Listen to "Oh! Darling". That is some seriously great singing.

Mediocre Instrument playing- Hmm, McCartney was one of the most innovative bass players out there and is constantly cited as an influence. Same with Ringo's drumming (yeah, I know!). I have yet to meet anybody that can nail that weird swing/rock beat (Help!) that he does. Lennon and Harrison were great for their time and George was an especially good slide player later on. John, an adequate rhythm guitarist, though his "All My Loving" triplets were really brilliantly played. But John's rhythmic sense could be pretty funky sometimes.

What do you consider good singing?

The Grateful Dead? horrible band.

by **brywool** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 1:52 am

froy wrote:

The BEATLES best band ever. 3 Great song writers Never to be beaten

YUP. Their music is timeless. One of the only bands that can still be played today without going "Wow, that's way dated" (though sure, some of it is). They can be played on a pop station. They can be played on a rock station. Some of their stuff could even be played on a country station.

Not many other bands have done that.

Hey Froy- I wasn't a huge Petty fan either, but watch the documentary film on him that came out last year (?). It really changed my perspective.

by **Ehwmatt** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 1:58 am

brywool wrote:
Archetype wrote:The Beatles are fucking terrible all around. Disgusting display of blatant overratedness. Horrible singing, mediocre insrument playing, very uninspired and dull lyrics.

Okay, I'll grab the troll...

Horrible Singing?? What are you talking about?
Listen to the harmonies on "Because". Beautiful and beats any harmony I ever heard outta Journey or Styx (also bands with killer vocals).

Now listen to McCartney vocally shred on "I'm Down" then turn around and do "Yesterday"- they were recorded in the same session. Listen to "Oh! Darling". That is some seriously great singing.

Mediocre Instrument playing- Hmm, McCartney was one of the most innovative bass players out there and is constantly cited as an influence. Same with Ringo's drumming (yeah, I know!). I have yet to meet anybody that can nail that weird swing/rock beat (Help!) that he does. Lennon and Harrison were great for their time and George was an especially good slide player later on. John, an adequate rhythm guitarist, though his "All My Loving" triplets were really brilliantly played. But John's rhythmic sense could be pretty funky sometimes.

What do you consider good singing?

The Grateful Dead? horrible band.

Dude, you're defending The Beatles on a fucking Styx board. You needn't justify a thing about The Beatles.

by **bugsymalone** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 2:07 am

I agree about not needing to defend the Beatles. Who and what they were to an entire music industry speaks for itself. I do think younger people have no clue how they changed the music landscape because they came along much later, long after the influence of the Beatles informed the music of many of the very bands (StyxStyxStyx) they love.

I do find it surprising that those who love melodic rock, which most of the bands who are subjects of this site play, do not like some of the music the Beatles produced. There are so many similarities.

But tastes in music can be as varied as the names on Yogi's list.

Jeeze. We would only have one kind of music if everyone liked the same thing!

Bugsy

by **Ehwmatt** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 2:10 am

bugsymalone wrote:I agree about not needing to defend the Beatles. Who and what they were to an entire music industry speaks for itself. I do think younger people have no clue how they changed the music landscape because they came along much later, long after the influence of the Beatles informed the music of many of the very bands (StyxStyxStyx) they love.

I do find it surprising that those who love melodic rock, which most of the bands who are subjects of this site play, do not like some of the music the Beatles produced. There are so many similarities.

But tastes in music can be as varied as the names on Yogi's list.

Jeeze. We would only have one kind of music if everyone liked the same thing!

Bugsy

Youth isn't an excuse... I was born in 86 and I full well understand what The Beatles have meant to music. I can understand not liking The Beatles, that's anyone's prerogative (I don't like the Stones, Dylan, Grateful Dead etc), but saying they are "terrible" is absurd.

by **brywool** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 2:27 am

Ehwmatt wrote:
brywool wrote:
Archetype wrote:The Beatles are fucking terrible all around. Disgusting display of blatant overratedness. Horrible singing, mediocre insrument playing, very uninspired and dull lyrics.

Okay, I'll grab the troll...

Horrible Singing?? What are you talking about?
Listen to the harmonies on "Because". Beautiful and beats any harmony I ever heard outta Journey or Styx (also bands with killer vocals).

Now listen to McCartney vocally shred on "I'm Down" then turn around and do "Yesterday"- they were recorded in the same session. Listen to "Oh! Darling". That is some seriously great singing.

Mediocre Instrument playing- Hmm, McCartney was one of the most innovative bass players out there and is constantly cited as an influence. Same with Ringo's drumming (yeah, I know!). I have yet to meet anybody that can nail that weird swing/rock beat (Help!) that he does. Lennon and Harrison were great for their time and George was an especially good slide player later on. John, an adequate rhythm guitarist, though his "All My Loving" triplets were really brilliantly played. But John's rhythmic sense could be pretty funky sometimes.

What do you consider good singing?

The Grateful Dead? horrible band.

Dude, you're defending The Beatles on a fucking Styx board. You needn't justify a thing about The Beatles.

Well, thing is, I like Styx too for a lot of the same reasons I like the Beatles. Good vocalists, well-written pop tunes for the most part. Hey Matt, I'll defend em anywhere, any time!

by **Ehwmatt** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 2:31 am

brywool wrote:
Ehwmatt wrote:
brywool wrote:
Archetype wrote:The Beatles are fucking terrible all around. Disgusting display of blatant overratedness. Horrible singing, mediocre insrument playing, very uninspired and dull lyrics.

Okay, I'll grab the troll...

Horrible Singing?? What are you talking about?
Listen to the harmonies on "Because". Beautiful and beats any harmony I ever heard outta Journey or Styx (also bands with killer vocals).

Now listen to McCartney vocally shred on "I'm Down" then turn around and do "Yesterday"- they were recorded in the same session. Listen to "Oh! Darling". That is some seriously great singing.

Mediocre Instrument playing- Hmm, McCartney was one of the most innovative bass players out there and is constantly cited as an influence. Same with Ringo's drumming (yeah, I know!). I have yet to meet anybody that can nail that weird swing/rock beat (Help!) that he does. Lennon and Harrison were great for their time and George was an especially good slide player later on. John, an adequate rhythm guitarist, though his "All My Loving" triplets were really brilliantly played. But John's rhythmic sense could be pretty funky sometimes.

What do you consider good singing?

The Grateful Dead? horrible band.

Dude, you're defending The Beatles on a fucking Styx board. You needn't justify a thing about The Beatles.

Well, thing is, I like Styx too for a lot of the same reasons I like the Beatles. Good vocalists, well-written pop tunes for the most part. Hey Matt, I'll defend em anywhere, any time!

I like Styx too, otherwise I wouldn't be here. But come on, the Beatles' place in music history is justtt a tiny bit more revered than Styx's.

by **brywool** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 2:35 am

Ehwmatt wrote:
brywool wrote:
Ehwmatt wrote:
brywool wrote:
Archetype wrote:The Beatles are fucking terrible all around. Disgusting display of blatant overratedness. Horrible singing, mediocre insrument playing, very uninspired and dull lyrics.

Okay, I'll grab the troll...

Horrible Singing?? What are you talking about?
Listen to the harmonies on "Because". Beautiful and beats any harmony I ever heard outta Journey or Styx (also bands with killer vocals).

Now listen to McCartney vocally shred on "I'm Down" then turn around and do "Yesterday"- they were recorded in the same session. Listen to "Oh! Darling". That is some seriously great singing.

Mediocre Instrument playing- Hmm, McCartney was one of the most innovative bass players out there and is constantly cited as an influence. Same with Ringo's drumming (yeah, I know!). I have yet to meet anybody that can nail that weird swing/rock beat (Help!) that he does. Lennon and Harrison were great for their time and George was an especially good slide player later on. John, an adequate rhythm guitarist, though his "All My Loving" triplets were really brilliantly played. But John's rhythmic sense could be pretty funky sometimes.

What do you consider good singing?

The Grateful Dead? horrible band.

Dude, you're defending The Beatles on a fucking Styx board. You needn't justify a thing about The Beatles.

Well, thing is, I like Styx too for a lot of the same reasons I like the Beatles. Good vocalists, well-written pop tunes for the most part. Hey Matt, I'll defend em anywhere, any time!

I like Styx too, otherwise I wouldn't be here. But come on, the Beatles' place in music history is justtt a tiny bit more revered than Styx's.

I'm not comparing them at all, just that there are commonalities to both.
Beatles will always Rule in my mind.
Yeah, I musta pissed Yogi off somewhere along the line...

by **yogi** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 3:37 am

No ONE has pissed me off other than Froy for stiffing me the Styx CD that he promised me.

I rarely get mad. I just cant stand the bands that I posted. I truly dont like them. At ALL.......

Thats it!!

Me posting the lyrics to Mr. Ed should entitle me to a day of Froy radio free of these bands that I hate.

If it doesnt, I will just chalk it up to me living in an O'bama nation.

by **bugsymalone** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 5:16 am

Ehwmatt wrote:Youth isn't an excuse... I was born in 86 and I full well understand what The Beatles have meant to music. I can understand not liking The Beatles, that's anyone's prerogative (I don't like the Stones, Dylan, Grateful Dead etc), but saying they are "terrible" is absurd.

Kudos to you for appreciating what came 20 plus years before you were even born. I think I was simply trying to put into perspective the viewpoints of some people who may not understand what all the fuss is about re the Beatles.

Bugsy

by **froy** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 5:22 am

yogi wrote:10. John(Throw my As s in a Cornfield Cause I Cant Sing a Lick) Melloncamp
9. Bruce( I am a Poet( bad one) that cant sing) Springsteen & The West Side Story Band
8. Jim (Mr. Ed) Morrison & The Doors - (Light my albums on fire)
7. Smellvis Presley
6. The Grateful( I could not name 3 songs of theirs) Dead
5. Jimi Cant sing, Jimi is mad at Kramer, Jimi was AWEFUL Hendrix
Here comes the Euro trash:
4. U (are soooooo bad stick to your causes and please stop singing) 2
3. Horton Hears (The Who) & Dies they are sooooooooooo damn aweful
*2. The Beatles
*1. The Beatles

* So bad they take up 2 spaces

Lets set the record straight

Bon Jovi
Aerosmith
Tom Petty
Bruce Springsteen
Billy Joel
The Hooters
The Greatfull that there Dead
Current Styx
Current REO
Guns and Roses
Nirvana
The Cars

by **yogi** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:34 am

Cars -- GREAT- AWESOME - Top 10
Bon Jovi - GREAT
Nirvana - GREAT
Guns & Roses - GREAT
Tom Petty - Very Good

The Hooters - They dont even count. How boudt Men Without Hats & Quarterflash the Hooters are in a doesnt exist category.

I almost forgot David Bowie, Bob Dylan - el barfffarama

Am I hearing Im a Blue Bat - Oh My god is this bad Paul McCartney can be soooooooooooo damn horrible

by **froy** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 8:45 am

yogi wrote:Cars -- GREAT- AWESOME - Top 10
Bon Jovi - GREAT
Nirvana - GREAT
Guns & Roses - GREAT
Tom Petty - Very Good

The Hooters - They dont even count. How boudt Men Without Hats & Quarterflash the Hooters are in a doesnt exist category.

I almost forgot David Bowie, Bob Dylan - el barfffarama

Am I hearing Im a Blue Bat - Oh My god is this bad Paul McCartney can be soooooooooooo damn horrible

Max Bacon
This guy blows Gowan away STYX should have picked him instead

by **Boomchild** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 4:22 pm

Ehwmatt wrote:Man the people on these boards are fucking dumb. Good lord

You couldn't put it any better regarding this thread. Trying to change someone with opinions like this is like trying to convince someone who is in Amway that it's a scam.

by **hoagiepete** » Sun Oct 31, 2010 3:18 pm

Why the Billy Joel hatin' Froy? The Stranger and 52nd Street were pretty solid albums.

by **froy** » Mon Nov 01, 2010 2:06 am

hoagiepete wrote:Why the Billy Joel hatin' Froy? The Stranger and 52nd Street were pretty solid albums.

If I ever heard Piano Man again I will puke,

by **Babyblue** » Mon Nov 01, 2010 4:43 am

yogi wrote:No ONE has pissed me off other than Froy for stiffing me the Styx CD that he promised me.

I rarely get mad. I just cant stand the bands that I posted. I truly dont like them. At ALL.......

Thats it!!

Me posting the lyrics to Mr. Ed should entitle me to a day of Froy radio free of these bands that I hate.

If it doesnt, I will just chalk it up to me living in an O'bama nation.

You are out of your fucking on mind on ELVIS.HE WAS & STILL IS THE KING OF ROCK.No one will ever take his place.I work with a kid that is 21.He loves the Beatles & has read just about everything on them you can fine.

by **Boomchild** » Mon Nov 01, 2010 3:53 pm

Babyblue wrote:
yogi wrote:No ONE has pissed me off other than Froy for stiffing me the Styx CD that he promised me.

I rarely get mad. I just cant stand the bands that I posted. I truly dont like them. At ALL.......

Thats it!!

Me posting the lyrics to Mr. Ed should entitle me to a day of Froy radio free of these bands that I hate.

If it doesnt, I will just chalk it up to me living in an O'bama nation.

You are out of your fucking on mind on ELVIS.HE WAS & STILL IS THE KING OF ROCK.No one will ever take his place.I work with a kid that is 21.He loves the Beatles & has read just about everything on them you can fine.

Elvis is no more the King of Rock as Micheal Jackson was the King of Pop. That just marketing bullshit. They were talented in their own ways but the whole King of this and King of that is marketing spin. The promoters, managers, record companies and sometimes the artists themselves start making those statements over and over and over that it sticks. It isn't the fans that start that silly "King of" shit.

by **Babyblue** » Wed Nov 03, 2010 12:51 am

Boomchild wrote:
Babyblue wrote:
yogi wrote:No ONE has pissed me off other than Froy for stiffing me the Styx CD that he promised me.

I rarely get mad. I just cant stand the bands that I posted. I truly dont like them. At ALL.......

Thats it!!

Me posting the lyrics to Mr. Ed should entitle me to a day of Froy radio free of these bands that I hate.

If it doesnt, I will just chalk it up to me living in an O'bama nation.

You are out of your fucking on mind on ELVIS.HE WAS & STILL IS THE KING OF ROCK.No one will ever take his place.I work with a kid that is 21.He loves the Beatles & has read just about everything on them you can fine.

Elvis is no more the King of Rock as Micheal Jackson was the King of Pop. That just marketing bullshit. They were talented in their own ways but the whole King of this and King of that is marketing spin. The promoters, managers, record companies and sometimes the artists themselves start making those statements over and over and over that it sticks. It isn't the fans that start that silly "King of" shit.

No matter what you think he will always be the KING to me. So as i always say whatever

by **Rockwriter** » Wed Nov 03, 2010 1:36 am

Boomchild wrote:
Babyblue wrote:
yogi wrote:No ONE has pissed me off other than Froy for stiffing me the Styx CD that he promised me.

I rarely get mad. I just cant stand the bands that I posted. I truly dont like them. At ALL.......

Thats it!!

Me posting the lyrics to Mr. Ed should entitle me to a day of Froy radio free of these bands that I hate.

If it doesnt, I will just chalk it up to me living in an O'bama nation.

You are out of your fucking on mind on ELVIS.HE WAS & STILL IS THE KING OF ROCK.No one will ever take his place.I work with a kid that is 21.He loves the Beatles & has read just about everything on them you can fine.

Elvis is no more the King of Rock as Micheal Jackson was the King of Pop. That just marketing bullshit. They were talented in their own ways but the whole King of this and King of that is marketing spin. The promoters, managers, record companies and sometimes the artists themselves start making those statements over and over and over that it sticks. It isn't the fans that start that silly "King of" shit.

That's absolutely true. My favorite example is how the Rolling Stones are always called "The Greatest Rock and Roll Band in the World." They put that out in a press release themselves, and it got picked up and repeated so many times that people have forgotten it originated with them. And hey, they had some great stuff . . . an awfully long time ago. Not much in the way of good new music from that band in decades, literally.

If Chuck Berry had been white, people would have recognized that he was actually the main progenitor of rock and roll. Elvis was the default media guy because he was white. You can't listen to one rock band to this very day whose guitarist is not spouting recycled Chuck Berry licks, often without even being aware of it because whomever they nicked it from took it from someone else, who learned it from someone else, who took it from Chuck Berry. Elvis could barely play a few open chords.

That's not to say that Elvis and Michael Jackson weren't great, because they were both very talented, albeit in ways that aren't my personal taste. Elvis when he was young was unbelievable, he was on fire. When he got older he was just a sad shell of himself. Michael had some really, truly off years as well, but my uncle was a stage manager for the 'Victory' tour when I was about 13, and we went to one of the shows and even though it's not my kind of thing at all, it was still phenomenally good for what it was. Michael was the entire show; his brothers might as well have been the Pips, LOL. The one song Jermaine sang was pre-recorded. I'll always remember that.

Sterling

by **Babyblue** » Wed Nov 03, 2010 1:39 am

Rockwriter wrote:
Boomchild wrote:
Babyblue wrote:
yogi wrote:No ONE has pissed me off other than Froy for stiffing me the Styx CD that he promised me.

I rarely get mad. I just cant stand the bands that I posted. I truly dont like them. At ALL.......

Thats it!!

Me posting the lyrics to Mr. Ed should entitle me to a day of Froy radio free of these bands that I hate.

If it doesnt, I will just chalk it up to me living in an O'bama nation.

You are out of your fucking on mind on ELVIS.HE WAS & STILL IS THE KING OF ROCK.No one will ever take his place.I work with a kid that is 21.He loves the Beatles & has read just about everything on them you can fine.

Elvis is no more the King of Rock as Micheal Jackson was the King of Pop. That just marketing bullshit. They were talented in their own ways but the whole King of this and King of that is marketing spin. The promoters, managers, record companies and sometimes the artists themselves start making those statements over and over and over that it sticks. It isn't the fans that start that silly "King of" shit.

That's absolutely true. My favorite example is how the Rolling Stones are always called "The Greatest Rock and Roll Band in the World." They put that out in a press release themselves, and it got picked up and repeated so many times that people have forgotten it originated with them. And hey, they had some great stuff . . . an awfully long time ago. Not much in the way of good new music from that band in decades, literally.

If Chuck Berry had been white, people would have recognized that he was actually the main progenitor of rock and roll. Elvis was the default media guy because he was white. You can't listen to one rock band to this very day whose guitarist is not spouting recycled Chuck Berry licks, often without even being aware of it because whomever they nicked it from took it from someone else, who learned it from someone else, who took it from Chuck Berry. Elvis could barely play a few open chords.

That's not to say that Elvis and Michael Jackson weren't great, because they were both very talented, albeit in ways that aren't my personal taste. Elvis when he was young was unbelievable, he was on fire. When he got older he was just a sad shell of himself. Michael had some really, truly off years as well, but my uncle was a stage manager for the 'Victory' tour when I was about 13, and we went to one of the shows and even though it's not my kind of thing at all, it was still phenomenally good for what it was. Michael was the entire show; his brothers might as well have been the Pips, LOL. The one song Jermaine sang was pre-recorded. I'll always remember that.

Sterling

I do agree somewhat with you.OMG the 68 speical was on fire.. He had that beautiful voice till he passed away.That was giving to him by God.

by **yogi** » Wed Nov 03, 2010 2:38 am

I am 'The KING of the Assembly Line'

MR

YOGI'S Top 10 ALL TIME WORST BANDS/Singers

YOGI'S Top 10 ALL TIME WORST BANDS/Singers

Re: YOGI'S Top 10 ALL TIME WORST BANDS/Singers

Re: YOGI'S Top 10 ALL TIME WORST BANDS/Singers

Re: YOGI'S Top 10 ALL TIME WORST BANDS/Singers

Who is online