I like Arctic Monkeys, especially their later stuff but the best bands around at the minute are all from across the pond. The Gaslight Anthem, FIDLAR, Queens Of The Stone Age, Arcade Fire, even The Strokes still have it although they'll never release another Is This It? again.

The last genuinely great British band were The Libertines. Like I said, Arctic Monkeys are good, but I wouldn't rank them among the greats even though they were pretty much the last huge band. The British press are massively obsessed with comparing new bands to the older greats and when they end up not sounding anything like them at all, they drop off. Look at Palma Violets. Everyone was branding them "this generation's Libertines" just because they have two singers and are from London, yet they sound nothing like The Libertines.

The past six months there's been a batch of new British guitar bands coming through, Palma Violets, Peace, Swim Deep and The 1975 namely, and while they're all decent enough it's obvious none of them are going to be looked back upon as era defining groups in 30 years time.

As for Jake Bugg. What a load of tosh. An annoying whiny voice, gimmicky retrogressive production and a fanbase mainly comprised of 15 year old wannabe mods and football casuals who were into Dizzee Rascal and Rihanna two years ago. I'm no fan of One Direction of course, but that kid from them had it spot on about him when he said "do you think slagging boy bands makes you more Indie?" He doesn't write his own songs either yet people are branding him a genius. Do me a favour.

BUT ARE RADIOHEAD MADFERIT???

Radiohead are fucking brilliant and one of the best live acts around.

Arctic Monkeys cannot be a current/new band though now can they? They're on their 5th Album, thats where Oasis were in 2002.

Jake Bugg is good and an hopefully his next album will be better than the 1st.

Tame Impala are doing some great stuff along with the Alabama Shakes. I saw The Vaccines supporting the stones a couple of weeks ago and thought they were good to, having initially been dissapointed when i saw them at a festival in 2012.

Has anyone heard Jagwar Ma - Howlin? That's a brilliant album.

I'm not the only one who thinks that. That's a pretty large crack epidemic, I must say.

There is an everlasting debate over which of their albums is the best, that's a testament to how seminal they are. It's generally agreed that the best Arctic Monkeys is the first one (although I don't agree, I think it's Humbug) and that the best Oasis album is one of the first two. I'm not saying that either Oasis or Arctics are awful, of course, but I just find Radiohead's music more exciting and innovative. As much as both Oasis and Arctics have proved capable of writing some brilliant songs, both have worn their influences on their sleeves whilst Radiohead have been pushing the boundaries of music.

I found Radiohead boring and hard to get into once too. But then I saw them headline Leeds about five years ago (incidentally on the same weekend Arctic Monkeys put on an abysmal performance) and I haven't looked back since. I felt like an idiot for not "getting" them before and being so dismissive of their music, because it really is wonderful. Only British bands I rate higher are the Manics, Pulp and The Clash.

Just listen to Kid A and tell me it's not more interesting than Favourite Worst Nightmare!

I find that quite sad to be honest, but fair enough mate, it's your life.

Radiohead is great, but also overrated, it's good that they keep trying new thing in their sound, but also their experimentations sounds forced for the most part, doesn't sounds as natural as Blur for exemple, Blur were a natural art rock band, Radiohead seems like they experiment just for the sake of it, what Radiohead did with Kid A, Blur already did with 13.

Blur's experimental phase still had that element of poppiness, whereas Radiohead went fully weird. 13 still had hit songs like Coffee And TV and Tender, both with huge singalong choruses. Kid A never had that. I do like 13 but I can't say that it feels more or less forced than Kid A. An example of an album sounding forced with it's experimentalism is This Is My Truth, Tell Me Yours by the Manics. Maybe their worst album.

Blur properly went through their weird phase with Think Tank, which for me is perhaps their best album after Modern Life Is Rubbish.

I don't see how its any more or less forced than Blur's self-titled and 13 album. The transition from OK Computer to Kid A is a bit more abrupt, but its simply a reflection of what they were listening to. DJ Shadow was a big influence on OK Computer and Kid A is really influenced by Warp records; its just more of a reflection of them moving away from guitars which doesn't seem too odd.

Did you even read what I said? Or did you read it and then choose to respond to the one point you could try to object to?

Point One: His album is not that good, he is very hyped up and successful despite there being many better bands around
Point Two: He didn't write his songs on his own.

Mostly the first, but also the second lead to me thinking that he is overrated, despite what you may think about co-writing songs.

First of all no one is saying he's the best so I don't see why other bands should be mentioned while rating him.

We're talking about whether he's overrated or not and his album is good maybe not great but good and he's a good singer and guitarist. It doesn't matter if others are better or worse than him because no one has said he's the best.

What a complete prick, i had my suspisions but this confirms it. Who the fuck do you think you are mate, you know fuck all about what i like, apart from Oasis and the Arctic's, i don't like ANY new bands whatsoever, none at all. So go fuck yourself.

And anyone who rates Pulp, Manics and Radiohead among the best ever british bands are not worth listening to, IMO, its just laughable. Each to their own though, thankfully.