Leave it to Rolling Stone to come up with another "list", and because they did it, it must be right (not). As far as being "immortals", some of these are no-brainers. Some (like Nirvana), well let's just say I would be interested in knowing if people will still be talking about them 25 years from now. They have Dr. Dre listed over HANK WILLIAMS, who pretty much invented the word "legendary" for country music. They even have Eminem on this list...spare me!!!

We're talking "immortals" here! Do these idiots even know what that word means? Forever is a long time, and I don't think there are a total of 100 modern artists who can be deemed "immortal"!!! I'm surprised "Jann The Man" didn't put his name on this, too!!!

Sorry, Steve Perry wasn't on the list.

Posted by Gitarzan on Friday, 07.18.08 @ 20:58pm

Nirvana and Prince 12 spots higher than The Doors??

Out of 159 total performer inductees-35 or 22% have been voted in following their 1st year of eligibility. (Rock & Roll royalty)

Yet not on this list of "Immortals" are 6 out of those very 35 Hall Of Famers inducted in their 1st year of eligibility:

REM, The Pretenders, Talking Heads, Tom Petty & the Heartbreakers, Creedence Clearwater Revival, Sam & Dave.

??????

Posted by classicrocker on Friday, 07.18.08 @ 23:35pm

A few things here: First, this list was created in 2004-2005, when Eminem still had a career going (I've heard rumor of a new album, but...). Not quite sure how a lot of people view him now.

Second - Nirvana. Since the first publication of the list, there was a box-set released in 2005("With The Lights Out") + a film was made that year by G. Van Sant. "Last Days" I believe it was called. It was a fictional job. In 2006 an additional "Best of the Box" (whatever that's really supposed to mean) was released, and in 2007 the documentary film "About a Boy" came out. The man's profile actually expanded in these intervening years, so if anything the notion that they have somehow been forgotten is ridiculous. We're at the 20 year point for Nirvana, and they're still present w/in the culture. You could even argue that 27th is actually far too low!

If you were going to do a revision to this list for now, Radiohead & NIN would have to shoot up several places, due to the effects of their Internet ventures w/ the latest albums. In terms of the old I & I, I'd personally have NIN up at 85-87, and Radiohead at maybe 63-66.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Saturday, 07.19.08 @ 04:55am

Cheesecrop...I guess the one thing that really bugs me about it is the word "immortal"...seems to get punched out there as much as the word "diva", which no longer has a reverant meaning nowadays. Labeling someone "immortal" is a very strong statement. There are artists on that list who will still be discussed 100 years from now, and some who will probably fall by the wayside soon, as you stated is already happening a bit.

Heck, who knows if Rolling Stone magazine will still be around or discussed in 100 years...something to think about!

Posted by Gitarzan on Saturday, 07.19.08 @ 05:11am

Holy shit was that list predictable.

Posted by Liam on Saturday, 07.19.08 @ 05:44am

Cheesecrop...It's okay to agree to disagree about Nirvana. It kind of gets back to that argument of them being "the big new thing" to some, and others thinking "I've heard this before"...they just weren't very relevent to me (or most of my musician friends, for that matter) compared to what I've witnessed or heard previously in my life. Do I think people will be talking about them in 100 years? Not a chance! Will people beg to differ? Absolutely...and that's okay. As to who is actually right, only time will tell...

Like I stated before, "immortal" is a pretty powerful word.

Posted by Gitarzan on Saturday, 07.19.08 @ 07:41am

To tell you the truth, I'm not sure anyone on that list will be relevant in a hundred years! If it's still around, rock will be going on it's 9th or 10th generation roughly. They may look back and laugh at how we sought to presume that our hideously outdated 20th century artists would last forever, and then had the gall to even debate it! I do agree w/you that "immortal" is a cliche'd term, though.

By and large I think they got some of the people right, but like everyone out there I know I'd remove a few and make some changes, even in the top 20. The problem here is that despite the still functioning careers of some of these artists, the list as RS would see it is probably not fluid. That's the real issue here, to get as amny people as possible across the board to start thinking fluidly, and w/out the rigidity that has affected a lot of folk.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Saturday, 07.19.08 @ 14:46pm

You know, I checked my writing and could swear I didn't misspell a thing, yet I now notice that somehow the word "many" is messed up. Is this some sort of plot to make me look foolish here?

For the record, I have perfected the art of sounding like an idiot on my own time. I don't need any help, thenk you.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Saturday, 07.19.08 @ 14:50pm

Gitarzan, The Doors aren't as important as you think. Most people listen to them all the time for a few months and then forget about them entirely. Way too much cheese.

I can't believe R.E.M. didn't make the list. Had RS asked more indie artists to participate in this polling, they'd have easily been Top 40. Also, CCR has a claim to being the greatest American rock act yet is absent. Hmm....

Posted by Casper on Saturday, 07.19.08 @ 15:47pm

Casper...didn't say anything about The Doors, dude!

Posted by Gitarzan on Saturday, 07.19.08 @ 16:14pm

Ah, I was responding to classicrocker. My bad.

Posted by Casper on Saturday, 07.19.08 @ 19:32pm

Casper, when Oliver Stone does a movie about you you're important! The only bands from the 60's that are played on mainstream rock radio where I live besides the Doors are the Stones, The Kinks and Jimi Hendrix, The Doors are actually played more than the Beatles on the one station that plays old and new muusic. The Doors and the Whisky a Go Go scene were WAY more crucical to the development of rock than Nirvana and the Seattle grunge scene in the late 80's. I think if Nirvana had been around at the same time as The Doors in the late 60's Nirvana might have been pretty big on a regional basis like in the Pacific Northwest, and even if they did make it nationally by now would be pretty much forgotten.

Posted by classicrocker on Saturday, 07.19.08 @ 20:35pm

"The Doors and the Whisky a Go Go scene were WAY more crucial to the development of rock than Nirvana and the Seattle Grunge scene..."

True, they were impt. to the "development" of rock. Could you not say that Nirvana wasn't impt. to the perpetuation of rock - this being another thing I remember from the criteria.

The more I read the comments the more it becomes apparent how badly they did misjudge Nirvana. In a way you've addressed the issue for me when you mentioned how the Doors are played more than the Beatles. You're right about that. Think about it though... who helped get rid of those bands and alter the radio into the format we know today? The alternative brigade not only nudged 80's metal off the page, they also dispensed of the Allmans/REO SPeedwagon/J. Starship/Moody Blues, and a host of others who had worn out their welcome on rock radio. You are quite right when you say the Doors are still influential, because they are. They deserve to probably rate a few spots higher(I might move them up from 41 to around 36-38). I realize now though, from reading these posts, just how off the mark they are on Nirvana.

Nirvana at 27 - up to at least 15-20 - DEFINITIVE!

Posted by Cheesecrop on Sunday, 07.20.08 @ 04:53am

(Anthony DeCurtis, Bob Hilburn, Lenny Kaye, Jon Landau, Joe Levy, Kurt Loder, Seymour Stein, Jann Wenner, etc.). [The committee]

No wonder this Hall is a half a joke. What a dumbass list.

Yardbirds - 88. I think that is a little too low on the list.

Question for backers of Nirvana. I am in no way going to try and diminish their importance, but they were neither the first or the best that came out of the Seattle scene. They were the first to have a song go into heavy rotation on MTV. Perhaps if AIC got a song into heavy rotation on MTV first, it would be them who would be on this list. IMO, they were the better band. Anyway, just wondering.

As for the Doors issue, I never thought them to be as special as all the DJ's and writers thought they were. Who was the writer that called them noting but drunks? Lester Bangs? As for their music which is still played on the classic rock radio stations - it is the same f'n 5 songs.

Posted by Dameon on Sunday, 07.20.08 @ 09:44am

Cheesecrop...The thing about the "grunge" era, from my point of view anyway, is that I can see where it perpetuated things on the music scene. The "hair metal" scene was getting a little redundant, and rock music needed a breath of fresh air. At that particular time I had resorted to listening more to "classics" and left the popular stuff alone. If you look back at that time, "classic rock" stations started popping up all over the place and became very popular. I guess as far as rock goes, you could've gone one way or the other. Being a "guitar man", I actually liked Pearl Jam and Soundgarden (I really liked Kim Thayil) a little better...I learned to play "Smells Like Team Spirit" after hearing it once...not much of a challenge. On the video box set "History Of Rock & Roll", Johnny Rotten said of Kurt Cobain "If you don't want to be a rock star, simply quit being one". I think it stinks if you have everything going for you in the world and have brought a new baby into it then you decide to commit suicide. IMO, that's a total cop-out, so my lasting memory of him isn't exactly favorable. If things are bothering you that bad, go get some help...or do what Johnny Rotten said.

Please remember, my young and impressionable years were post-50's Elvis (which to me was the only Elvis that mattered), The Beatles and subsequent British invasion, the psychedelic era, the perpetuation into Sgt. Peppers, Dark Side Of The Moon, Hendrix, etc...straight into the disco era (where a lot of R&B groups were making some pretty good music...not everything you heard in clubs was popular on the radio...go figure) and punk, which was kind of where I heard the likes of Nirvana before. Then came New Wave...that brings me up to my upper 20's. I don't know if we will see that sort of perpetuation in music again. It seemed to happen year after year for 20 years.

I'm not saying Nirvana is bad, to me they were just nothing really new or special. Back then I listened to everything, trying to establish my own playing style (still trying, by the way...lol), so I'd like to think there wasn't a lot that got past me. They kind of ran parallels with Garth Brooks, who was essentially doing the same thing pretty much at the same time in country when it was getting a little stale. Listing Nirvana in a group of "immortals"...maybe in Rolling Stone's book, but too much happened before that.

You're definitely right about 100 years from now...people then might listen to this music we love and think WE were the cavemen!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 07.20.08 @ 09:50am

I do like the conversation that this "list" has created. To me, this is a really GOOD way to discuss Rock music...with experience and rationale. The thoughts concerning this have all been good...really diverse! No "such a beautiful voice" or "they're so dreamy"!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 07.20.08 @ 10:25am

Allow me to re-phrase a previous statement...Elvis from the 50's...IMO..was the only Elvis that mattered (his material after his stint in the army until he died was, for the most part, not so good).

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 07.20.08 @ 10:44am

I think just about everyone on that list who hasn't been inducted yet, eventually will be. The only exceptions I can imagine is Lee Scratch Perry and N.W.A./Dr. Dre (I don't think Dre will get in twice).

R.E.M.'s absence is unfortunate, but their career was at its low point in 2004 when this list was made. They unquestionably deserve a spot.

Eminem is the "youngest" on the list. Is there anyone else who has come along since 1996 who should be on there? It's a risky proposition, but I'll offer up LCD Soundsystem/James Murphy for consideration.

Posted by mel on Sunday, 07.20.08 @ 12:59pm

I'm surprised Curtis Mayfield made the list. I'd have thought the Impressions would have made the list before solo Mayfield. Of course there are a few other surprises on the list. All I can say though, is that I'm glad Martha & the Vandellas placed higher than the Supremes.

I gotta admit though, the omission of Queen is a little surprising. I think they could have been on the list just as easily as some of the others that did make the list.

Posted by Philip on Sunday, 07.20.08 @ 22:53pm

The omission of Queen renders the whole list useless.

Posted by Dameon on Monday, 07.21.08 @ 02:51am

Amazingly enough, I think RS did get the better portion of the top 20 correct. I might yank two or three out of the top 20 & replace them, and I know I might alter the rankings a bit.

Hip-Hop: If your using this to predict who's heading for the Hall, the artists should have more than a passing touch of rock in their work. Most of this list doesn't. Run D.M.C.(yes)/Beasties(yes)/P. Enemy(perhaps) - Eminem/Dre/Tupac - NO. In a hip-hop hall it would fly, but not here.

I've already mentioned Nirvana enough. Beyond them, the act I feel is most criminally underappreciated is the Byrds. Some acts can't even muster the ability to define & influence 1 kind of music, but these guys had a heavy influence on 2 - folk rock & country rock. You'd have to juggle the list a bit, but they deserve at least a 10 spot jump (45-35) - perhaps more.

As for moderns: they already made a mistake when they put NIN on the list in 05. Luckily, Reznor & co. saved the list some grief w/ the Year Zero/Ghosts I-IV double whammy. Perhaps - PERHAPS - Pearl Jam (80-100). Too hard to define "immortal" over just the last 5-10 yrs. though.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Monday, 07.21.08 @ 05:17am

Dameon, where you would you slot Queen? Pink Floyd is another huge omission -- they should be around 50-60.

Cheesecrop, whether you like it or not, the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame has chosen to include hip hop under the "rock & roll" umbrella. The rappers they listed are among the best, so they deserve induction.

And how is NIN a mistake? Trent has had a tremendous career. And I tend to agree with you on Pearl Jam.

Posted by mel on Monday, 07.21.08 @ 07:04am

mel...even though it's purely subjective, we're talking about names that will live forever,the modern day classical musicians. I'm of a mind to think that there's not 100 out there. Heck, I don't know if there are 20.

Forever is a very long time. It makes you wonder how people like Mozart, etc...have stood the test of time. They didn't record anything themselves, weren't on TV, etc... The only thing that survived is their music. Pretty amazing...

Posted by Gitarzan on Monday, 07.21.08 @ 07:27am

Gitarzan, if you're going to take the term Immortal literally, then of course it will be a short list -- it will have zero names. We're just talking about the 100 greatest artists of the last 50 years.

Posted by mel on Monday, 07.21.08 @ 07:48am

Simply put - Queen should be in the top 15. My personal opinion is top 10. You could not ask more from a band. They were never afraid to try something new (good or bad); they never got stale even though they lost some momentum here in the states. I still don't know of an album that can touch Queen II. They dominated the charts at a time when they were competing against the likes of Led Zep, The Who, Aerosmith, The Stones, Pink Floyd and other bands that might be considered "immortal". There live show was freakin' amazing. I first saw them when they opened for Mott The Hoople at the Uris Theatre. No front man, not Plant, Jagger, Davies, Daltrey, etc. could hold an audience in the palm of his hands like Freddie Mercury. Hands over fist, IMO, the greatest front man in the history of RnR. Brian May is one of the most unheralded guitarist ever and Deacon and Taylor were just amazing. IMO, The song "Stone Cold Crazy" is what turned Lemmy, Metallica and Megadeath into speed demons. And as campy as Bohemian Rhapsody may seem to us now, there wasn't a person between 14-21 in the 70's that didn't go ape-shit when that song came on the radio. The promo video for Bohemian Rhapsody was a major influence on what was to become MTV. Can you imagine how Queen would have ruled if MTV came out in 1971 instead of 1981. And here is the best part - I dare anyone to attach a genre to them. What were they; Glam, Metal, Hard Rock, Pop, Top 40, Jazz Rock, Prog Rock.? Musically, they could cross genres without skipping a beat. Another One Bites The Dust (not one of my favorites) crossed into the dance scene without ever sounding like a sell-out song, (unlike Rod Stewart's Do You Think I Am Sexy). I can go on and on about Queen. Simply put, they were a band of 4 different songwriters and personalities that blended together to give us something amazing. Sorry, I didn't mean to rant.

I think lists are stupid and this list by Rolling Stone is as stupid as it gets. That list has nothing to do with musical immortals, it has to do with selling magazines. And yes, Pink Floyd not being on the list is ridiculous as is the omission of Alice Cooper. But maybe Rolling Stone can continue to preach objectivity.

Posted by Dameon on Monday, 07.21.08 @ 07:53am

I'm not willing to make Rolling Stone the scapegoat here. The voters are pretty diverse, including a lot of artists. And the voting was tallied by Ernst & Young, so it is likely a legit reflection of the voters will (unlike the Rock Hall vote LOL). And each person was only asked to pick 20 artists. That seems like that would leave it open to the possibility that there were a lot of #25's that simply never made it to anyone's list.

Posted by mel on Monday, 07.21.08 @ 08:11am

The bigger question is; what is the purpose of these lists?

Posted by Dameon on Monday, 07.21.08 @ 08:57am

The purpose? History, education, selling magazines, food for debate.

Seriously, I bet lists like these make younger people want to find out more about these bands. That's a good thing.

Posted by mel on Monday, 07.21.08 @ 09:04am

l7VaUL htdioghrdeioh uerhuy h3oh iohgdfiogho isdfhio sdjhdf

Posted by flow1800 on Monday, 07.21.08 @ 10:35am

Where the heck is Pink Floyd??? They need to be on this list. Shame on RS!

Posted by toby on Monday, 07.21.08 @ 11:20am

Mel

As much as I would like to believe that, I have a feeling it only holds true for a small percentage of the younger listening audience. Kids who are really turned onto more than just their generation's music will look to explore on their own. They won't need some list as a springboard.

And in my opinion, this Immortals list is so far off that all it does is give a somewhat distorted view.

Posted by Dameon on Monday, 07.21.08 @ 11:40am

"Artists" like John Mayer and that prick from Coldplay.

Posted by Liam on Monday, 07.21.08 @ 12:43pm

Gitarzan brought up an interesting point in relation to what is considered "immortal" when he mentioned Mozart. Truth be told, when you look at it, the classical composers of the past do resemble a certain area of rock, namely the indie scene. In some ways Brahms/Beethoven/Mozart, etc. are the equivalent of an act like the Velvet Underground, only their particular patron isn't Andy Warhol but rather the royal courts of Europe.

Mel - I flubbed when I mentioned NIN as not being worthy. What I was trying to say was that in 05 I did not believe they were top 100. The innovative use of the internet to promote "Year Zero" artistically + the sales end for "Ghosts I-IV" more than put them into the top 100.

Queen and P. Floyd - Yes to both. I didn't even realize Floyd had been left off the list. I'm not a major fan, but I definitely see where they should have been slotted in somewhere.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Monday, 07.21.08 @ 18:50pm

Ok, here's one good one that has not been elected yet. RUSH!!!! I mean come on, Madonna was elected before Rush. Yeah...... right! Someone give me a good reason why Rush isnt in there!

Posted by Bobobrowns on Monday, 07.21.08 @ 19:26pm

Cheesecrop...that's a very good analogy! I was thinking about as time goes by, certain artists' contributions are lessened for some reason, even if it's just because people simply forget. Look at the 50's version of Elvis, for instance. People nowadays think of the white jumpsuit and having one concert be the mirror image of the next, etc..., but his contribution to Rock music was enormous in the 50's. A lot of legendary performers would've never been heard on mainstream radio if he hadn't bridged that gap. It wasn't that the songs were masterpieces, but essentially where they came from...anywhere from obscure country to R&B. He took the brunt of the criticism from the public and kept shoving it back in their faces, on national television to boot. Bono from U2 called his performance on The Milton Berle Show "The big bang of rock & roll". If you ever get a chance to watch it (youtube has it), you'll see one of the most defining moments in rock history...for 1956 it was unheard of!!

Music is a very powerful tool for cultural change, and those were events that constituted a major cultural overhaul to a degree that probably had never been witnessed before, and very few since. This is why I don't like the word "immortal" used so flippantly. These kinds of "explosions" just don't happen very often, and some people try to discredit those times like they never happened.

Of course, some people don't think that man went to the moon either...

Posted by Gitarzan on Monday, 07.21.08 @ 20:14pm

One thing about Rap/Hip-Hop...whether you like it or hate it (doesn't seem to be a middle ground here), it did change things. This list doesn't mention people who were the true pioneers of that genre, though. I think N.W.A. were about the first to bring "shock" value into it. Eminem as has a fair amount of success, but to suggest that he's one of the "immortals" is truly absurd, considering some of the names on that list. I like a little of it, and I really prefer the stuff that's truly original. I'm not so much into the anger part of it, though. There are more positive ways of getting a point across...

This is just one man's opinion...

Posted by Gitarzan on Tuesday, 07.22.08 @ 11:46am

Cheesecrop...you're not the only one who needs to proofread occasionally. "as has"??? Oh, brother!! I meant "has had". Understand, I type 100 words...a day!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Tuesday, 07.22.08 @ 11:49am

THE MIRACLES (as a GROUP) should have been inducted BEFORE at least 3/4th of the artists on this list. There have been many successful inducted artists in music history , but VERY FEW who can lay claim to being THE VANGUARD ACT OF AN ENTIRELY NEW MUSICAL GENRE !!! THE MIRACLES WERE THE GROUP THAT INTRODUCED THE WORLD TO THE "MOTOWN SOUND", long before THE SUPREMES, THE TEMPTATIONS, AND THE FOUR TOPS were even HEARD of !!! So, WHY are those artists inducted , while THE MIRACLES ARE NOT ? You want "influence" ? Go to Wikipedia,look up "THE MIRACLES" particularly the "cover versions" section , and just SEE just how many artists have covered their songs....from ALL different music genres.... They're probably the most influential non- inducted group EVER !!!,and , they WROTE OVER 90% OF THEIR OWN MATERIAL. (All of them, not just Smokey).I guarantee that few of the inducted "IMMORTALS" even come CLOSE !!! THE MIRACLES will be be recieving their long-overdue STAR on the HOLLYWOOD WALK OF FAME IN EARLY 2009...Maybe this will FINALLY cause the RRHOF to PAY ATTENTION.

Posted by Bill G. on Wednesday, 07.23.08 @ 00:03am

k, Eminem deserves to be on the list. He's probably the best RAPPER ever, that's not saying he's talented musically. But to rap, you have to rhyme well, and he does very cleverly. That being said, how is Queen not on the list, and Dr. Dre is? Cmon. Dr. Dre is the most worthless guest rapper of all time. And, Led Zeppelin is too low. They should be higher than 14. Way higher than 14. They should be like, 5. Rolling Stone magazine needs to stop making these stupid lists. No one gives a damn what Rolling Stone says anyways, because they keep fence hopping. Isn't Rolling Stone the magazine that gave the album "Led Zeppelin" a 2 star when it came out, and then it was ranked above some 5 star ones, on there "500 greatest albums ever made"?

Posted by Calzone on Wednesday, 07.23.08 @ 13:59pm

Good rapper? Yes. Best ever? Christ no. Get some Eric B. and Rakim or some Public Enemy or some Dizzee Rascal or something.

Rolling Stone mag are a hypocritical bunch of pr*cks, and sellout whores as well. I'm honestly surprised anyone is still listening to them. You don't think it was Nirvana's well-masked artistic brilliance that got Nevermind's rating go from its initial three-star rating changed to five-star, do you? (But to their credit, three stars is probably the right grade for that boring piece of pap.)

Posted by Liam on Wednesday, 07.23.08 @ 14:17pm

Liam, Liam... you're at it again. Quit trying to make everybody go Brit.

I've got to laugh about how the U.K. has tried to hijack rock from America. Recently I watched portions of a show called "Seven Ages of Rock". I say portions because I have had to get into it slowly to keep myself from laughing. The show opened in the mid-60's, and they couldn't do enough to hide 1950's America from the proceedings. They attempted to hide Elvis/Little Richard/Berry/Jerry Lee, and all the rest while pretending that they invented rock. Oh, I forgot, ROCK is different from rock & roll (LOL!!!). One of the biggest cons ever perpetrated.

I willingly admit that I do not agree w/ everything RS tosses in, and like many who see this list, they want to change it. What gets me is that you haven't even offered any vision of your own list. Instead I watch you attack Nirvana (& on another post, the Chili Peppers). Most likely it's because you inherently lack the ability to connect w/ rock in any real way, and like that show you feel the need to try to rewrite the past to suit it for yourself. All you're answers are perfectly crafted, as though we were reading an indie rock book instead of listening to a real person. I'm not going to say "get a life" or some such drivel. What I will say is this: Become a person and les of a fact machine, will you. Put some of your actual personality into this, and stop being fact-spouting Wonder Machine of Rock.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Wednesday, 07.23.08 @ 15:28pm

whoa now, mel. an honest to goodness immortal list would not have zero names. it might have like, 10, but that's it. The Beatles are definatley for shiz immortal. No one will ever, nor could ever, forget about them. Same with Zeppelin, Stones, The Who, Elvis, people like that. And, to the having no queen or pink floyd, calm down silly fan boys. Queen and Pink Floyd will be remembered for a considerable amount of time, regardless of what these so called "Music Critics" have to say about it. NO one should listen to this magazine anyway, because they don't know shit. That's it.

Posted by Calzone on Wednesday, 07.23.08 @ 15:54pm

"Instead I watch you attack Nirvana (& on another post, the Chili Peppers). Most likely it's because you inherently lack the ability to connect w/ rock in any real way, and like that show you feel the need to try to rewrite the past to suit it for yourself."

Yeah, because aside from the hundreds of rock albums I do like, I mostly hate rock. The reason I detest Nirvana and the Red Hot Chili Peppers is because they have always struck me as deeply mediocre bands; Nirvana's *legacy* relying more on their being the final (yes, final) push for alternative rock to be accepted mainstream, and RHCP basically using their instrumental prowess as a distraction for their clearly sub-par song-writing capabilities. And yes, that's my opinion; feel free to argue against it.

Yes, I was wrong about RS giving it a five star review, but I was only getting it mixed up with an other album. However, I was right in that RS has contradicted its original opinion of the album by placing it at #17 in their terrible Greatest Albums list, quite evidently to do with its commercial success.

You tell me to become "les [sic] of a fact machine" when almost all my last comment was devoted to my opinion. Funny, that.

Posted by Liam on Wednesday, 07.23.08 @ 16:00pm

If you hate rock music, Liam, then what the hell are you doing here? I do agree with you about RS magazine, but Nirvana deserves better treatment then they are getting for you. And about the RHCP, this isn't country music, dude, The lyrics don't need to be "inspirational and good". It's all about the music here man. And the Red Hot Chili Peppers deliver, so go complain the the "Future Homosexual Hall .com" At least you might get someone who agree with you. Cause here, we all love music.

Posted by Calzone on Wednesday, 07.23.08 @ 16:23pm

Does sarcasm not work with you or something?

I love music too, and I hate the RHCP. Do you know how opinions work?

Go and get Gang of Four's first few records. You'll be surprised at how shitty RHCP start sounding when you listen to them.

Posted by Liam on Wednesday, 07.23.08 @ 16:30pm

Dude, i like the Gang of Four. I like the CHili Peppers too though. Go play some Blood Sugar Sex Magik, that whole album is great. I have to admit, everything after Californication kinda sucked, but before this crappy new stuff, the chili peppers were good. And, if you want to respect Nirvana, buy "Unplugged in New York" Because that album proves that they are more than just some crappy grunge band from Seattle, that proved that they were musicians, and could sound great live, without amps and crap.

Posted by Calzone on Wednesday, 07.23.08 @ 16:38pm

I'v bought and listened to both. They're both average, in my eyes.

Posted by Liam on Wednesday, 07.23.08 @ 17:35pm

Leon Russell? Nicky Hopkins? How soon they forget....King Crimson.

Posted by bluepno on Friday, 07.25.08 @ 07:34am

"so go complain the the "Future Homosexual Hall .com" At least you might get someone who agree with you."

LOL!! Sooo funny!!!!

Posted by Bebe on Friday, 07.25.08 @ 09:23am

Time for a break in music:

Yanks - Red Sox

3 game series in Fenway. Sweet!!!!

go Yanks!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by Dameon on Friday, 07.25.08 @ 10:15am

I'm still having trouble justifying Roxy Music. If someone knows, please explain. Thanks!

Posted by Joe on Friday, 07.25.08 @ 16:01pm

I'm having trouble with loads, especially Gn'R.

Posted by Liam on Friday, 07.25.08 @ 17:09pm

It does bring up an interesting point--what of the now-current music will be played hundreds of years from now, as Beethoven, Mozart, Brahms, Tsichiavkosky, et. al. are played now? Some classical music is very popular now; while some is all but forgotten.

WIth that, I could see a case for the Beatles, Bob Dylan, perhaps the Eagles, and a few others. But Guns n' Roses? Eminem? If anything, it is much too early to tell how their music will affect MODERN music history, much less how it will be in the year 2208.

Posted by Joe on Saturday, 07.26.08 @ 08:21am

I'm still having trouble justifying Roxy Music. If someone knows, please explain. Thanks! (joe)

It might have to do with the fact that performers across the board including David Bowie cite Bryan Ferry and company as a major influence.

Personally, I think they were a great band that could not be pigeon-holed by any specific genre.

Posted by Dameon on Saturday, 07.26.08 @ 08:26am

None of this stuff is going to be remembered in 2208. I brought it up earlier that the kids down the line might laugh at what we thought was great. The proof can be found in listening to 50's rock as compared to today. The connections are almost all gone, and in another couple years I'm willing to bet the connections to the 60's will have faded badly as well. Anybody turning sweet sixteen in 2020 will have been born the year this "immortal" list came out.

This list is RS's "state of rock as we think it is" for that moment of time. The top 20 is all 50's/60's, w/2 concessions to the 70's. The 1st 80's act is at 22, 1st 90's is at 27. The interesing parts are what lay outside the top 30. RS is fighting a rear guard action against encroaching youth, w/ the majority of the top 75 being 50's-70's. The 50's-70's acts who show up between #50 & #75 represent the desperate attempt to plug up a dam w/ a finger. What happens when the kids of today start feeling nostalgic in 2020 for MCR/Fall Out Boy, etc.? By that point will this list have been revised to move some 80's & 90's folks up the ladder? There are a lot of kids out there today, and nostalgic feelings will still be the same in 2020 as they are today. Will the kids of today sweep away everything in 2020, while the kids of that moment cry that their own bands are not heard?

You will perhaps reecall in the film "Interview w/ the Vampire" it is noted that the vampires stay trapped in their own mental time frame while the world keeps moving forward. The only way to stay alert is to stay aboveground in essence. This list, outside the top 30, is the mental fortification/complaint list of a vampire at the moment it has begun to really drift out of touch w/ the passing universe.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Saturday, 07.26.08 @ 09:45am

Cheesecrop said: "What happens when the kids of today start feeling nostalgic in 2020 for MCR/Fall Out Boy, etc.? By that point will this list have been revised to move some 80's & 90's folks up the ladder? There are a lot of kids out there today, and nostalgic feelings will still be the same in 2020 as they are today. Will the kids of today sweep away everything in 2020, while the kids of that moment cry that their own bands are not heard?"

I think the point of the list isn't neccessarily to cater to whatever the "youth" of the day happens to think is relevant. It's to highlight the artists that have the most signifigance for ALL time not just the PRESENT time. If they do what you're suggesting then that would be Casey Kasemizing the list to make it like a longer term version of Billboard's Hot 100 with newer stuff higher up and older stuff that peaked in popularity falling down and off. That would do a disservice to the intended purpose of the list which is to show the artists who've made the most impact over time-not just in perpetuating but developing rock as well.

Posted by classicrocker on Saturday, 07.26.08 @ 11:18am

Didn't notice that the Floyd wasn't on the list...perhaps the rumors of RS's prog bias aren't unfounded?

Posted by Casper on Saturday, 07.26.08 @ 16:42pm

The last thing I wish to do is "Casey Kasemize" a list in any manner. Rock & Roll itself has, and will always have, a built-in Kasem complex to itself. If you wish to use the classical music frame of reference, anything considered immortal would, by some implication, have to be finished. Rock is far from finished. Let me use a different example. I have an old videotape from 99 that featured the 100 top baseball players according to the Sporting News. At the time they had Barry Bonds listed at 37, I believe, and the commentary(pre-steroid accusation) noted that when he was finished his career he'd probably be in the top 10. The list in question is meant to rank him for the century, yet it acknowledges his mobility, due to his career not being over. Later on, Bob Costas (host) notes that the list is fluid, and that the names could change, but that he couldn't picture anyone but Babe Ruth at the top. Think about the contradictions in listing the top 100 players of the 20th century, yet acknowledging the list could change throughout the 21st. I'm saying the same thing is possible here.

Let me ask this: since you post under "classicrocker", and I do believe the list is fluid, what do you think of Dylan's chances of surpassing the Beatles? Would there ever be a time he surpassed them? After all, this list was put together before his album "Modern Times" came out. I know I've argued about Nirvana/NIN/Radiohead, but they aren't the only ones still active here. Is Dylan's last album enough to put him over the top? How bout' the Stones? Has U2 or Springsteen ade the top 20, in your mind (or anyone's out there, for that matter)?

Posted by Cheesecrop on Saturday, 07.26.08 @ 18:12pm

It's a horrendous list; it really is the more I look at it.

Bob Marley #11???!!!!! Most of what he did wasn't really rock in the traditional sense. Stevie Wonder has no business in the top 30. Neither does Sam Cooke or Ray Charles. Velvet Underground should be up to around 12 and The Who should be at least 10 notches higher. The Doors and CCR should be top 25 and the other prog stuff like Floyd, Traffic, ELP, King Crimson should be at least 50. As well as Brian Eno/Robert Fripp.

Posted by classicrocker on Saturday, 07.26.08 @ 18:14pm

Cheesecrop:

I don't think Dylan could surpass The Beatles unless he has some more top 10 songs like his heyday in the 60's. The college kids today aren't really into him. The only stuff from the 60's you hear on college radio today really is The Velvet Underground and Love.

The Stones-no way. They are the butt of too many Jay Leno jokes.

U2's got a chance of making the top 15 and Springsteen will probably stay about where he is....

Posted by classicrocker on Saturday, 07.26.08 @ 18:24pm

The Kinks are way too low, and U2 are too high (i.e. included on the list).

RS has really gone and stereotyped itself with it's newer group picks. Radiohead? Check. NIN? Check. Eminem? Check....

Posted by Liam on Saturday, 07.26.08 @ 18:29pm

That has to be one of the worst lists I've ever seen. I mean, Madonna? that high up? Isn't part of the criteria being able to sing?

And this isn't the first time Rolling Stone Magazine has shafted Pink Floyd. I have no more respect for Rolling Stone. I thought they knew what they were talking about!!

Posted by That Guy on Saturday, 07.26.08 @ 18:31pm

How is Bob Dylan ahead of Elvis and The Rolling Stones? And how are Prince and Nirvana ahead of Johnny Cash. I'm getting tired of RS overrating Bob Dylan, Nirvana, and The Beatles (Although they actually deserve it).

And where is Pink Floyd?

Posted by Slinky on Saturday, 07.26.08 @ 18:40pm

With Rolling Stone, they always seem to want to add the "band du jour" (who's popular now or in the recent past) to most of their lists. When speaking of Nirvana, I recently saw a video of "She's Lost Control" by Joy Division. I immediately thought of "All Apologies" by Nirvana. Now, Joy Division didn't have a very long career, but I think they are more influential than Nirvana, yet they aren't on the list. If you listen to Joy Division, they really started something, people hadn't heard anything quite like it, and it bridged the gap between punk and New Wave...IMO. Nirvana was more of an exclaimation point to the whole grunge thing.

Once again, just one man's observation...feel free to comment.

Posted by Gitarzan on Saturday, 07.26.08 @ 18:51pm

By the way, can someone explain to me what exactly is so great about Stevie Wonder?

Posted by That Guy on Saturday, 07.26.08 @ 19:55pm

To all of you geniuses who are blaming this list on "Rolling Stone": only 20% of the voters have ties to the magazine.

Posted by fact check on Saturday, 07.26.08 @ 20:52pm

If you think Rolling Stone doesn't have the final say in these matters or what they print, all I have to say is "think again!!!"

Posted by Gitarzan on Saturday, 07.26.08 @ 21:01pm

"Immortal" is such a wrong word. it makes me laugh.

Posted by Shit Face on Saturday, 07.26.08 @ 21:53pm

So here's a break on the whole immortals argument. We're all music enthusiasts here, so i just have a question. Do you think folk rock, like the eagles and bob dylan, and all those guys, will be the most poplular genre next decade, and alternative will finally die down? Cause, let's look at history, The most popular genre of the nineties: Alternative. Underground genre of the eighties: Alternative. Most popular genre of the eighties: New Wave. Underground genre of the 70's: New Wave. And so, Most popular genre of the 00's: Alternative. Underground genre of the 00's: Folk Rock. So, if history repeats itself, won't folk be the most popular next decade? Just a guess. Reply back, want to see your opinions

Posted by Calzone on Sunday, 07.27.08 @ 12:26pm

I can't say it would surprise me...

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 07.27.08 @ 12:39pm

Calzone - I have to disagree with your analysis of the 80's. The only way you can measure most popular is sales and I think the Hair Metal/Hard Rock scene of the 80's outsold just about all other genres.

Posted by Dameon on Sunday, 07.27.08 @ 15:26pm

Dameon...I think if you're throwing Culture Club, Duran Duran, the Eurythmics, Tears for Fears, Depeche Mode, etc...into that New Wave mix, you're talking a whole lot of record sales. I don't know that anyone kept track of those sub-genres sales totals, but it could've been pretty much of a push.

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 07.27.08 @ 16:22pm

You really think alternative is THE sound of today? Interesting. I'd actually like to know where you're coming from here. The old Pearl Jam sound is simply modern commercial hard rock these days. Are you referring to the Seether's & Breaking Benjamin's of the world? For all the derision it has received, Emo is at least different from this. I'm probably more inclined to accept 80's metal in the popularity column.

This may sound way out, but my vision of the next wave of the future is a mix of 80's metal and 90's electronica - picture if you can Yngwie Malmsteen & the Chemical Bros. (I hope that image hasn't given you nightmares)

Posted by Cheesecrop on Sunday, 07.27.08 @ 19:35pm

Not at all Gitar - when discussing popularity, the only measuring stick is sales and concert attendance. If you look at the actual numbers, I think you will find that the Hair Band/Hard Rock scene wins decisively in these two categories.

That means nothing to me when discussing immortal bands. I am certainly not going to put Twisted Sister in the same company as Dylan and the Beatles. I was just commenting on Calzones analysis of New Wave being the dominant genre.

Understand that I actually hate the pigeonholing of bands into these little groups. Grunge was nothing more than Hard Rock. I was living and breathing the punk scene in Alaphbet City in Manhattan in the mid 70's and enjoyed what I thought was Punk/New Wave. It took Liam and Shawn to clearly explain to me the post-punk scene and how it is different. I thought it was all the same. At least that is how the clubs in Manhattan treated it.

The bands I played in during the 70's and early 80's were influenced by Aerosmith, Led Zep, ALice Cooper and the Ramones. Plus we added a bit of Sweet, Queen and Mott The Hoople into the mix. Obviously it didn't work out for us. It is probably why I will scream until I am blue in tyhe face about the NY Dolls, Alice Cooper, Cheap Trick and The Stooges. It is a travesty that these three bands are not in the Hall, because in my opinion, they should all be on the immortal list.

Posted by Dameon on Sunday, 07.27.08 @ 22:25pm

Ooops - it seems that I forgot how to count. That would be four bands. And I will throw ELP and King Crimson and Procul harum into this mix.

Posted by Dameon on Sunday, 07.27.08 @ 22:28pm

Gitar

I'm with Dameon on the hair/metal/rock bands ruling the charts/sales/attendance in the 80's. You've got Motley Crue, Def Leppard, Ratt, Quiet Riot, Poison, Whitesnake, Van Halen,Twisted Sister, Bon Jovi. Not to mention all the lesser bands that even were popular like White Lion, Winger, Enuff Znuff, Sleez Breeze, Giufarri and of course the band that I have inducted into my own peronsal HOF (since no one else will!! Ha! :) Danger Danger!!!!!!!!

Posted by dano on Sunday, 07.27.08 @ 22:52pm

It'd be hard to call today's Mainstream Rock "alternative" for reasons besides it's not really alternative, but mainstream. It sounds more like they're trying to be like Metallica. Doesn't really have the same feel as Pearl Jam or Nirvana.

Posted by Philip on Sunday, 07.27.08 @ 23:15pm

No, it doesn't have the same feel as Nirvana or Pearl Jam, or Smashing Pumpkins, or R.E.M, or any of those guys. But, it's the same style, taken after these guys. And Coldplay, this decade's megastars, are basically just taking after Radiohead. So, everything this decade has done, is influenced on 90's alternative rock. So i don't know how else to describe this decade's music, other than alternative. And, alternative was never meant to be a genre, is was just a way to describe the movement that was coming in the late eighties that wasn't hair metal, or New wave, so they had to describe it simply as alternative. But once it hit the mainstream, in the 90's, it became a genre. So that's how i'm going to describe it. But, back to my real question, Do you think that folk rock will be the most popular genre next decade? please respond, want to see opinions.

Posted by Calzone on Monday, 07.28.08 @ 07:13am

This may sound way out, but my vision of the next wave of the future is a mix of 80's metal and 90's electronica - picture if you can Yngwie Malmsteen & the Chemical Bros. (I hope that image hasn't given you nightmares)

Posted by Cheesecrop on Sunday, 07.27.08 @ 19:35pm

THAT DOES give my nightmares. God help us all.

Posted by The Chief on Monday, 07.28.08 @ 13:45pm

Ooops - it seems that I forgot how to count. That would be four bands. And I will throw ELP and King Crimson and Procul harum into this mix.

Posted by Dameon on Sunday, 07.27.08 @ 22:28pm

It's PROCOL HARUM btw ;)

Posted by The Chief on Monday, 07.28.08 @ 13:50pm

Thanks for the correction teacher. I also forgot to capitalize the "H". Shame on me!

I have no idea what will be the next dominant genre. But then I just don't care anymore. Although I still like to touch base every now and then with the new stuff that is coming out, at this point in my life, I have pretty much accepted the fact that when I want to sit back and relax, I am going to put on the music that I know and love. Their are 5 discs in my CD player right now: The NY Dolls, Lovin Spoonful, Cheap Trick, Golden Earring and The Kinks. I guess I am old.

FYI -Moontan by Golden Earring is a very under-rated album. Radar Love is not even the best song on the LP. Candy's Going Bad and Vanilla Queen are great tracks.

I must admit that except for ELP's music, I prefer hard-driven electric guitar music.

Posted by Dameon on Monday, 07.28.08 @ 16:05pm

Well, I'm a little confused as to what constitutes popular. I may be wrong, but I didn't think Alternative was as popular as Adult Contemporary, Country, or R&B/Rap.

I think folk rock is trying to manifest itself now in the likes of Colbie Caillat, John Mayer, etc. They haven't quite nailed it down yet, so maybe it will be. But if it does, it means Mayer and Caillat will have been seen as major influences upon the movement. Oy vey.

Posted by Philip on Monday, 07.28.08 @ 16:53pm

What no Ludicris? ..That's ludicrous

I predict in 25 years he'll be just as influential and popular as some of these turkeys and mre than some.

Tells you how good the Rolling Stones opinion is.

Help find me a life!

Posted by laz on Friday, 08.1.08 @ 14:12pm

dudee, where's Bon Jovi?

Posted by Jessie on Tuesday, 08.5.08 @ 08:19am

Where they deserve to be. That is, not on this list.

Posted by The_Claw on Tuesday, 08.5.08 @ 08:42am

oh yah, and madonna and prince deserve to be there? dumbass.

Posted by jessie on Tuesday, 08.5.08 @ 11:28am

I see no problem with Prince on that list. He is abso f'n lutely one of the great musicians of the last 50 years. He has traveled through every musical genre and always gave us something refreshing to listen to.

Madonna - who cares? I don't!

Bon Jovi should not be on some list for immortals! They are not even in the top 5 bands of their genre (of course that is assuming you are placing B.J. in the Hard Rock genre):

Def Leppard
Motley Crue
Tesla
Guns And Roses
Hanoi Rocks (My guilty pleasure)

Let's accept Bon Jovi for what they were and are. A well rehearsed RnR band who knew what their audience was and what they liked. They made their fans happy, and there is nothing wrong with that. They broke no new ground! They didn't even reinvent an older genre. They were excellent students of the trends and did nothing to mess that up. They inspired many teenagers and everyone had a good time.

Like I said, I am not a hater. I actually own their first 3 albums - I stopped after listening to SWW.

Posted by Dameon on Tuesday, 08.5.08 @ 12:21pm

"oh yah, and madonna and prince deserve to be there?"

Yep. I'd even say, more than most other acts from the 80s.

Posted by The_Claw on Tuesday, 08.5.08 @ 12:57pm

hunnie, the only problem with your comment are there are far too many past tensed verbs...they're still doing it man. yah maybe not on this list but i believe 100% that they should be inducted they are a class act, like no other. And their live show is an experience worth a lifetime. im sick of all the people saying that they had their day and they are not worthy they are the most worthy deserving boys ever! i am only 16 but i know my music. and the fact that you stopped listening after their most successful album dumfounds me. but its all good, sorry i called you s dumbass claw, i was a little heated.

Posted by jessie on Tuesday, 08.5.08 @ 21:38pm

Man - I wish I was 16 again! And by the way, SWW was not their best album, it was just their most popular album. In my opinion, 7800 Faranheit was a far superior recording, both musically and lyrically. And I have seen BJ live - they do play for their fans. There can be no disputing that fact. But trust me, if their show was an experience worth a lifetime, then you missed a thousand other lifetimes by missing out on so many other great bands that were the big influences behind BJ.

Posted by Dameon on Wednesday, 08.6.08 @ 08:38am

well ive only been around for so long, i havent gotten a chance to see the greats of the oldies. i have seen, clapton, boston, styx, police,bruce and the e street band, metallica, and yah they all bloww you away, but its like they dont have a connection with fans, its like just another concert, but for me anyway bon jovi, is just an amazing experience, maybe not a wholee lifetime but maybe a half one! I dont know maybe im just some chick that doesent know what im talking about, but i love them! i didnt say best album, i just said most successful, its kind of they really got on their feet in the music world you know? in my opinion, "this left feel right" is their best. but it's all good man.

Posted by jessie on Wednesday, 08.6.08 @ 08:55am

Jessie - enjoy them with all your heart. If they have touched your soul, then keep them forever. And believe me, you are not just some chick. You love music and that is what will keep the spirit of youth alive. So don't just be some any chick. Be the one that makes all the little boys close their eyes a little harder and wish a little stronger. Then go out there and rule the world. Us old people keep f*cking it up anyway; someone has got to fix our mess.

Posted by Dameon on Wednesday, 08.6.08 @ 11:59am

Dameon, thank you! you are such a sweet guy. Most "older" people think the youth is pretty much composed of dumbasses, the fact that you said that means a lot, and i will continue to love them, and music all together. thank you for your kind words. i will not be some chick, i will be a kickass chick! promise! and I know i keep talking about bon jovi but, they have a song called "just older" and it says your not "old" just "older" and thats what you are, just older. Probably wiser,and more intelligent, and i hope to be as wise and smart as you one day! and once again thanks man!

Posted by jessie on Wednesday, 08.6.08 @ 12:16pm

I was young once too. I ruled NYC streets and now it is your turn. I just hope to God you are all smarter than we were.

Hey Liam - you are still young. Same goes for you dude.

Posted by Dameon on Wednesday, 08.6.08 @ 14:18pm

I think if you're younger you should take advantage of the resources available to you and check out artists from the "bygone" era of Rock & Roll...don't get stuck on any one artist. I'm a firm believer of "you can't know where you're going if you don't know where you've been".

As an example, Dame Kiri Te Kanawa, one of the foremost opera singers ever was asked who she thought was the greatest singing voice ever. She bluntly replied, "That's easy...Elvis Presley." Now why would a singer of her stature say that? Take a trip back to the 50's and listen. You may not agree with her, but you'll have an understanding of what made him what he was. Do that with a lot of artists from a lot of eras. Listen to songs that made a generation. You'll have fun in the process. Also, rent the 5 DVD set of "The History Of Rock & Roll", covers everything from the beginning to rap/hip-hop, and the people who were interviewed read like a who's who of Rock music...great stuff.

I think Dameon and I have some things in common...sounds like we both either played in or frequented our fair share of smoky bars, small venues, and "interesting" nightclubs!

Posted by Gitarzan on Wednesday, 08.6.08 @ 19:23pm

I still am!

Posted by Dameon on Wednesday, 08.6.08 @ 21:58pm

thats really great advice gitarzan, i mean i think im so persistant on bon jovi, because i just recently went to their concerts last month, and i suppose im still on a post-concert high...if that makes sence, they're like all i listen to now. but i know what you mean.they're certainly not the only great band out there. i lieke you "older' guys here, things you say sound so wise and smart, i mean im still in my i just wanna do the stupidest meaningless shit ever just cause im still a kid, but i wouldnt mind wising up like ya'll a little bit.

Posted by jessie on Wednesday, 08.6.08 @ 22:02pm

These lists drive me insane. I have so much to say about it that I want to explode. They are too diverse. Black Sabbath are rock immortals and would be at the top of that list. The Sex Pistol are punk immortals and would top that list, maybe. But it is my opinion that the Sex Pistols are borderline musicians at best and a flash in the pan act whereas Black Sabbath are very talented and produced one great album after another. Black Sabbath 85 on the list and the Sex Pistols 58, that is crazy. Frank Zappa, he is supposed to be this great composer but how many people own his cd's and pop them in and listen. His music is some bizarre comedy music, to me it is unlistenable. Bob Dylan #2. Come on it's time to put down the beads and take the flower power sticker off your car. Bob Dylan is a poet, he sucks as a musician and is probably the worst singer ever! What is the big deal about Bob Dylan that was like 100 years ago. Their are so many bands and artists on this list that don't even know what rock and roll is, Aretha Franklin, Madonna, Hank Williams are you kidding.

Posted by Space Trucker on Wednesday, 08.6.08 @ 23:51pm

Dameon...I'm hip to that...lol!!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Thursday, 08.7.08 @ 07:08am

A big ten-four to the Truckin Man... I hear you on Dylan. Bobby D at #2 over Presley at #3 or even the Stones at #4 is a bit out there to me. Earlier on this page I tried to gauge if anyone thought Dylan could top the Beatles, considering he was still producing new work. It was out of interest in regards to the list being fluid in terms of movement. You say you've a lot to say in regards to the list. Let's hear it. You've no room for a full 100, but just list a few you might move around. That goes for anybody just discovering this site and this particular page of postings as well.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Thursday, 08.7.08 @ 16:19pm

Exactly how is dylan ahead of elvis and the stones?!

Posted by the on Friday, 08.8.08 @ 14:09pm

Okay Cheesecrop I'm going to really shake this list up and probably piss a lot of people off.

As I said in a post on RRHOF Criteria, Rock and Roll is guitar driven with a few exceptions Little Richard, Jerry Lee Lewis, Elton John (I think) and maybe a few others. Below is who is not in my Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.

Aretha Franklin
James Brown
Marvin Gaye
Ray Charles
Bob Marley
Otis Redding
Fats Domino
Johnny Cash
Madonna
Micheal Jackson
Simon and Garfunkel
Sly and the Family Stone
Parliment
Louis Jordan (Who?)
Joni Mitchell
Etta James
Al Green
The Temptations
Jackie Wilson
Carl Perkins
Hank Williams
The Shirelles
The Four Tops
The Drifters
James Taylor
Ricky Nelson
Martha and the Vandells
Diana Ross

I think the founders of the Rock and Roll Hall Of Fame got in way over their heads when they started this and they really should change the name to the Music Hall of Fame because they don't seem to have a clue what rock and roll is. But I know we do.

Give The Power Back To The PEOPLE!

C-YA
SpaceTrucker

Posted by SpaceTrucker on Friday, 08.8.08 @ 18:12pm

Well, now you went and done it. The page on voting statistics was interesting, but possibly the worst thing you could have done was to put up who posted the most. You may find yourself inundated w/ fanboys (and girls), spammers of all sorts, and anyone who simply falls in the general idiot category.

Like the #'s in general, though. Who would have thought... Senses Fail??!!

Posted by Cheesecrop on Sunday, 08.10.08 @ 05:00am

The Digital Dream Door website lists eligible artists for the Rock Hall into 10 categories.

QUALIFICATIONS (on a scale of 1-10)

1 - Non-existant
2 - Mostly Insignificant
3 - Recognizable, But Minor Artist
4 - Modest Accomplishments
5 - Worth Examining, But Will Often Fall Short
6 - Strong Case To Be Made
7 - Solid Choice
8 - Unquestioned Credentials
9 - Dominant Artist
10 - The Immortals


Posted by Roy on Thursday, 08.14.08 @ 18:23pm
--------------------------------------------------

I took the liberty of moving this over to the "Immortals" section.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 05:58am

I just took a quick look at this site. Here are some observations:

On the guitarist list, where is Mick Ralphs from Mott and Bad Company, and Jake E. Lee from OZZY and Badlands? Jonny Marr should be rated much higher.

Drummer List: Peart and Bonham are not in Carl Palmer's league. And Keith Moon was a much better drummer that Bonham.

Bass Guitarist. With all due respect to Jamerson, there is no way in this or any life that he tops Entwistle.

Keyboardists: Ray Manzarek needs to be dropped down big time on this list.

Vocalists: At least they got number one right. There will never be another Freddie Mercury again. Daltrey needs to be moved into the top 10 and Geoff Tate into the top 5. (For some reason, they only have Freddie as #5 on greatest frontmen - he should be number 1 there as well.

Greatest Rock Vocal Performances: They definitely got the top 4 correct.

Greatest Rock Songwriters: Townsend and Ray Davies need to be in the top 5.

Posted by Dameon on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 06:42am

Drummer List: Peart and Bonham are not in Carl Palmer's league. And Keith Moon was a much better drummer that Bonham.

Bass Guitarist. With all due respect to Jamerson, there is no way in this or any life that he tops Entwistle.

Ar far as drummers go Hal Blaine is the # 1..
in a leauge of his own.. Next rock drummer is Charlie Watts.. Keith is cool #3


Jamerson is as hot as Entwistle.. Maybe even hotter.. Both good no doubt..

Posted by mrxyz on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 06:56am

With all due respect mrxyz - I do love Hal Blaine, but Charlie Watts is definitely not in the top 5. And Carl Palmer still tops my list. If you are really interested in the actuality of a drummer, check out Ringo. People don't realize how good of a drummer he really is.

As for the Most Influential Artist list: Can someone please explain to me how the Who is not in the top 10?

Posted by Dameon on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 07:05am

I've always been a big Jaco Pastorius fan. With bands, I look at how good the drummer and bass player interact, so it's hard for me to say. Some very talented people have been brought up.

Posted by Gitarzan on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 07:14am

With all due respect mrxyz - I do love Hal Blaine, but Charlie Watts is definitely not in the top 5. And Carl Palmer still tops my list. If you are really interested in the actuality of a drummer, check out Ringo. People don't realize how good of a drummer he really is.

As for the Most Influential Artist list: Can someone please explain to me how the Who is not in the top 10?

Posted by Dameon on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 07:05am


LOL I like Ringo the "Luckest Drummer in the WORLD"
Having said that.. Charlie Watts and Hal Blaine have the best timming.. It is not how much you lay down it is where you lay it down...

Posted by mrxyz on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 07:14am

It is not always timing, especially when you are doing music that is past a normal 4/4 beat.

The perfect example of this is Keith Moon and I will bring Gitar's statement of interaction between the drummer and bass guitarist. Bill Wyman is a Bass Player, not a guitarist so what Watts did had more to do with being synchronized with Watts the backbeat. And we also must take into account that the Stones had a second guitarist. What Keith Moon did was allow the fullness of Townsends ideas to come to fruitation while maintaining the backbeat. If you look at footage of the Who live, you will see Townsend and Entwhistle constantly looking at Moon and visa versa. It was like an orchestra with three instruments. Now we move to Carl Palmer and the enormous complexity of ELP's music. What he had to do with the backbeat was bring it to a whole different level.

Some musicians have cited Ward and Butler from Black Sabbath as the greatest rythem section in all of Rock. They were a great tandum.

Like I said, all respect to Blaine and Watts, but they are not, IMO, the drummers that Moon and Palmer are.

My Pop's who hated RnR and was a big Gene Kruppa and Buddy Rich fan would actually ask me to play Moon and Palmer for him. He had great respect for ELP and although he hated the Who, he loved to hear Moon play. Many musicians from the 60's all the way to present day have cited Keith Moon as a genius on drums. One of the Gallagher Bros from Oasis has been quoted as calling Moon the Hendrix of drummers. That says a lot.

As for Ringo; the Beatles couldn't exist without him. There is a video of Hello/Goodbye out there somewhere. Check out his drumming.

I wish someone will explain to me the importance of The Doors. I still don't see it except in the context of Morrison's antics. Although, The End is one of the great songs of all time. What did Lester Bangs call them; a bunch of egotistical drunks or something like that?

Posted by Dameon on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 08:26am

Like I said, all respect to Blaine and Watts, but they are not, IMO, the drummers that Moon and Palmer are.

As for Ringo; the Beatles couldn't exist without him. There is a video of Hello/Goodbye out there somewhere. Check out his drumming.


I would agree Blanie and Watts are not Palmer.Plamer is great but no Watts or Blaine..

Ringo is the Beatles drummer for the most part.. The Beatles would not of sounded like they did ith out Ringo ..He did a great job.. I would put him in the top 20 maybe even top 10...That is why he is the Luckiest drummer in the world.. I did find it funny that Payboy named him jazz drummer of the year a long time ago lol ya got to love the HYPE...!!
Blaine and Watts have the pocket and their kick work there is no better...The Best rock stuff out there in my opinion . Blaine is the "ROCK DRUMMER" with over 20,000 recorded and released songs.. that is a fact !!!

Posted by mrxyz on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 08:50am

I would never discount Watts or Blaine on any greatest list. Musical opinions are all subjective and I would rank both of them very high; but I will always rank Palmer and Moon as 1 & 2.

Personally, I love Psychedelic Percussion. It was a great piece of work. One of the best.

Here is the thing with Blaine - out of all these drummers, he is the one who has had a chance to work with so many artists. He was never confined for any long period of time to just one type of music. He is definitely the greatest session drummer of all time. (The Beach Boys wouldn't have been squat without him in the studio half the time.) So I think this freed him up a bit to do so many different things.

Posted by Dameon on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 09:10am

Here is the thing with Blaine - out of all these drummers, he is the one who has had a chance to work with so many artists. He was never confined for any long period of time to just one type of music. He is definitely the greatest session drummer of all time. (The Beach Boys wouldn't have been squat without him in the studio half the time.) So I think this freed him up a bit to do so many different things.

Posted by Dameon on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 09:10am

The reason he is the best session drummer of all time is becauce he is the best drummer of all time lol When your going for "GOLD" you take no chances.. that is why it is called the music "BUSINESS"

HE IS ON MORE STUFF THAN HE EVER WOULD LET ON IN PRINT...that is a FACT lol

Posted by mrxyz on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 09:22am

I got it mrxyz!

but he is still not better than Moon or Palmer ;-) And on this, I won't budge.

Posted by Dameon on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 09:44am

got it mrxyz!

but he is still not better than Moon or Palmer ;-) And on this, I won't budge.

Posted by Dameon on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 09:44am


I like MOON a great drummer one of the best and a fun guy...
It all depends on what you think the best is..
Moon had one style for the most part and did it perfect.. I can't see him doing Country ,Jazz Hendrix , Beach Boys , Sam Cook .... in one day and sound different and perfect in each session . Doing 1 - 2 takes and bye see ya later can you...?

Posted by mrxyz on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 09:52am

Agreed mrxyz. But the list I commented on was "Greatest Rock Drummers", not "Most Skilled Drummer".

Posted by Dameon on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 10:34am

Someone above inquired as to the importance of the Doors while denigrating them as "egotistical drunks" (a term you could apply to at least half the Hall )

"The Doors were never part of any movement. Indeed, during an era of very high fliers, their visionary trajectory sought an orbit positioned well outside of the rock norm. Their journey was driven by a unique group vision and a determination to push the envelope of poetry, spirituality, intellect and psycho-sexual exploration in popular music as far as possible." -classicbands.com

As for the drummers, Carl Palmer will always be my pick as #1 for his unsurpassed technical ability as well as his versatility in terms of musical styles.....

Posted by classicrocker on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 11:01am

Agreed mrxyz. But the list I commented on was "Greatest Rock Drummers", not "Most Skilled Drummer".

Posted by Dameon on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 10:34am

lol Well with 20,000 recorded and release songs with God only know how many gold hits ,the most hits of all drummer and most skilled..what make them the greatest Hollywood hype? If you are Elvis, Sinatra, Lennon, Denver, Diamond, Sam Cook, Grass Roots , Byrds , Hendrix, Bufflo Spring Fields, Beach Boys, Fith Dimension, Donavan,Carpintors, Mama and Papas, Monkeys, Diana Ross ,Phill Spector, George Harrison,Ray Charles, Jan and Dean, Dick Dale,Streistand ,Herb Albert.. Paul Reeve and the Raiders, Jonny Rivers Associations ,Roy Oberson ,Cystrials, Cohen,gee about a 100 more lol What makes the greatest..??I think all of these bands /musicians think he is the greatest!!!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by mrxyz on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 11:34am

CR - I respect your opinion on the Doors and I am sure most people agree with you, but I agree with Lester Bangs. "The End" & "Alabama Song"are the only songs I will play by them, ever!

Posted by Dameon on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 12:18pm

I love the Doors
Can't think of a song I do not enjoy.. Must be 1 I don't like but skips my mind

Posted by mrxyz on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 12:27pm

About the only thing I can say about Hal Blaine is...Is there anyone he HASN'T played with (LOL)!! When I think of bands, I usually do think of the drum/bass interaction. I mean, Fleetwood Mac wouldn't exist without Mick Fleetwood AND John McVie...they're definitely one of the best backbeats around, and they're very basic. I compare Keith Moon to Ginger Baker in style...both incredible drummers. Another drummer I've been impressed by is Terry Bozzio, especially with Jeff Beck.

Outside of Entwistle (who always dazzled me when I watched him, even though I'm not the biggest Who fan in the world), a lot of the great bass players are soloists themselves (people like Stanley Clarke, Louis Johnson, etc...).

Anyway, that's why I think of rhythm sections as one entity (well, usually...).

Posted by Gitarzan on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 19:54pm

When I think of bands, I usually do think of the drum/bass interaction. I mean,

I think of the bass and drums locked all the time when I hear the music..

Watts and Wynman were great .. Blaines kick is what hold most of the bands together..
Some one got to hold it..LOL

Posted by mrxyz on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 20:17pm

mrxyz...wasn't Tommy Tedesco a member of the "Wrecking Crew" too? It seems I heard that he was somewhere. As far as playing sessions, he was to guitar what Hal Blaine is/was to drums...a really great player who adapted to just about everything!

Posted by Gitarzan on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 20:19pm

Whoa Now!

I try not to get too caught up these "who is the best at a certain instrument" lists but they are fun and being a drummer (amateur at best) I felt compelled to chime in.

As soon as I saw Neil Peart is not in Carl Palmers league I dropped my sticks and fell off my drum stool...LOL. Come on Carl Palmer is a top Rock Drummer no doubt but “not in his league” what is his league? He does not stand in a league all his own that is ridiculous.

I believe you have to have levels of drummers. I know this defeats the whole idea of who is the best which to me is a silly conversation anyway so I would like to offer groups or levels of Rock Drummers.

Group A: Best of the Best for technical ability, diversity in style and equipment (can you image Charlie Watts sitting at Neil Peart’s kit) in no particular order:

Carl Palmer
Neil Peart
Greg Bissonette
Terry Bozzio

Group B: Rock Solid, hard hitters and not that technical in no particular order:

John Bonham
Keith Moon
Ginger Baker
Tommy Aldridge
Don Brewer

Group C: Good time keepers, Got in with the right bunch of fellows.

Ringo Starr
Charlie Watts
Mick Fleetwood
Nick Mason

John Entwistle kept time for The Who not Keith Moon, he was all over the place. The reason Townsend and Entwistle were looking at him all the time is because they were wondering when he was going to fall off his drum stool…LOL.

SpaceTrucker

Posted by SpaceTrucker on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 22:01pm

(can you image Charlie Watts sitting at Neil Peart’s kit) in no particular order:


I don't think Watts needs IT.. He seem to do fine with his 4 pc.. !!!
ya should hear him in his jazz group...

Posted by mrxyz on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 22:36pm

mrxyz...wasn't Tommy Tedesco a member of the "Wrecking Crew" too? It seems I heard that he was somewhere. As far as playing sessions, he was to guitar what Hal Blaine is/was to drums...a really great player who adapted to just about everything!

Posted by Gitarzan on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 20:19pm


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes he is a wrecking crew.. Beside Guitar he plays other strings ya should hear him on the sitar...

Posted by mrxyz on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 22:45pm

Hal was just inducted to the Hollywood rock walk..of fame
As you know Jim Fuller of the Surfaris is also there .. The "Godfather of Surf Guitar"..
Seems some folks know the real players PS don't worry !!__ King Dick is there also LOL

Posted by mrxyz on Friday, 08.15.08 @ 22:55pm

The Digital Dream Door website lists eligible artists for the Rock Hall into 10 categories.

QUALIFICATIONS (on a scale of 1-10)

1 - Non-existant
2 - Mostly Insignificant
3 - Recognizable, But Minor Artist
4 - Modest Accomplishments
5 - Worth Examining, But Will Often Fall Short
6 - Strong Case To Be Made
7 - Solid Choice
8 - Unquestioned Credentials
9 - Dominant Artist
10 - The Immortals

Posted by Roy on Saturday, 08.16.08 @ 06:11am

Another top notch drummer I thought of is Nigel Olsson, who played with Uriah Heap briefly and played with Elton John during his incredible run in the 70's. From what I understand he rejoined John some time ago. He also tried a cereer as a singer, but didn't have much commercial success.

Posted by Gitarzan on Saturday, 08.16.08 @ 10:25am

Your right mrxyz, Charlie Watts does fine on his four piece kit and thats it, he just does fine. He is a great time keeper with a ledgendary band.

I don't care about Jazz this is supposed to be the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Future ROCK Hall, are you telling me jazz is now rock and roll? Then we better start inducting jazz drummers, country drummers, big band drummers, rap drummers, oh ya they don't actually play their instruments.

I think a lot of people (not you XYZ) that paticipate on these forums don't have a clue what Rock and Roll is, Back Street Boys, Mariah Carey, 50 Cent come on, that is not Rock and Roll! I've asked for your definitions of Rock and Roll but only got one response from Dameon, anyone else care to chime in.

SpaceTrucker

"Long Live Rock"
The Who

Posted by SpaceTrucker on Saturday, 08.16.08 @ 11:41am

Rock & Roll is a melting pot of nearly all modern day music, only with a harder edge (and more volume, in most cases). It is probably the first genre to actually have what we call "attitude", and probably runs the gamit of emotions more than all other forms of music COMBINED!

There, ST...that's pretty much how I'd defne it.

Posted by Gitarzan on Saturday, 08.16.08 @ 12:20pm

Left the "b" out of "gambit"...oh, well...

Posted by Gitarzan on Saturday, 08.16.08 @ 12:23pm

Your right mrxyz, Charlie Watts does fine on his four piece kit and thats it, he just does fine. He is a great time keeper with a ledgendary band.

I don't care about Jazz this is supposed to be the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Future ROCK Hall, are you telling me jazz is now rock and roll? Then we better start inducting jazz drummers, country drummers, big band drummers, rap drummers, oh ya they don't actually play their instruments.

I think a lot of people (not you XYZ) that paticipate on these forums don't have a clue what Rock and Roll is, Back Street Boys, Mariah Carey, 50 Cent come on, that is not Rock and Roll! I've asked for your definitions of Rock and Roll but only got one response from Dameon, anyone else care to chime in.

SpaceTrucker

"Long Live Rock"
The Who



Posted by SpaceTrucker on Saturday, 08.16.08 @ 11:41am

Nigal is a great drummer ..
As far a Watts goes, my point is he can cover it all with a 4 piece kit..
Hal Blaine and Watts can do with 1 bass drum where most need 2 bass drums..lol
The reason I brought up Watts as and jazz drummer is he has a lot of fills when needed, more than most drummers. It is not how much it is how. Most times less is more..
All ya need is EARS

Posted by mrxyz on Saturday, 08.16.08 @ 12:33pm

SpaceTrucker

"Long Live Rock"
The Who



Posted by SpaceTrucker on Saturday, 08.16.08 @ 11:41am


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When you get a chance listen to the Surfaris Point Panic on "youtube"
I know for a fact, that Keith Moon loved Ron Wilsons of the Surfaris drumming ...He and the Van Halens Loved the Surfaris early roots of a wild guitar riffs and kick ass drums.. Bare in mind, when the Surfaris did it,, It had not been done in rock and there was no over dubbing {1963}etc {all 2 track live recordings }very ,very low recording budget also ..lol The Who and Van Halen built on the Surfaris primal roots of breaking the rules of rock..!!!! Even Wipe Out has it.. Point Panic really has it..! lol
ALL YA NEED IS EARS...{SMILE}

Posted by mrxyz on Saturday, 08.16.08 @ 12:46pm

Dameon...quick question. Do you recall a group called The Ocean Blue? They had a pretty good song called "Between Something And Nothing" in about '89 or so, and then vanished (from around here, anyway). I came across their self-titled CD buried in a box and listened to it again. It really wasn't too bad...

Posted by Gitarzan on Saturday, 08.16.08 @ 14:30pm

"Most times less is more.."-mrxyz

...ain't that the truth!!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Saturday, 08.16.08 @ 14:33pm

Hey, mrxyz...I did some snooping, and discovered there's a film coming out about The Wrecking Crew. Looks like it could be cool...a bali hai (did I just say that???). Anyway, check out this attachment. I guess Denny Tedesco put it together...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzShxEa1LMo&feature=related

Posted by Gitarzan on Saturday, 08.16.08 @ 14:51pm

Mrxyz,

I totally respect your opinion of Mr. Watts as a great drummer. I don't have a problem with a good solid straight-up rock drum beat, I love a good solid groove and sometimes less is more. But we are talking about the best drummers and I don't think less is more applies here

As I stated in an earlier post I play the drums (amateur at best). I don't know if you play. I gage a drummer by my ability to play what they do. I can play most everything Charlie Watts plays with the Rolling Stones, I don't know about his ability to play jazz. Now when I attempt to play Neil Peart's or Carl Palmer's parts I can only dream of doing some of the things they do, so naturally to me they are better drummers.

So maybe my opinion is skewed because I play. If someone forms their opinion based on entertainment value thats fine. Thats why there is no absolute with these discussions so if you think Charlie Watts is the best thats cool. Enjoy!

SpaceTrucker

"Rock you Like A Hurricane"
Scorpions

Posted by SpaceTrucker on Saturday, 08.16.08 @ 18:03pm

"I can only dream of doing some of the things they do, so naturally to me they are better drummers"-ST

Maybe someday they'll look at you and say "now why didn't I think of that???"...that's what growing as a player is all about.

"KEEP LAYIN' DOWN THE THUNDER!!!!!"

What, I can't hear you!!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Saturday, 08.16.08 @ 18:30pm

Gitarzan,

AWESOME!

Now we are getting somewhere. Harder edge, more volume and played with an attitude. ROCK and ROLL!

Dameon agrees with the attitude and so do I.

I also agree with the harder edge and more volume.

Now what if we say Rock and Roll is harder edged guitar driven music that is played louder and with more attitude. Anyone else want to add to that?

I know the piano played a big part early on but was quickly replaced with the electric guitar for the most part. Without the electric guitar it just doesn't have the balls, the crunch, the sustain, the feedback and of coarse the volume. I think the electric guitar is essential for any good rock song.

The emotion you mentioned is also a big part of it. Rock music is very powerful stuff.

If you apply our description of Rock and Roll to current inductees and nominated inductees many of them don't add up to Rock and Roll and should not be in the so called Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.

Have you ever thought about a Rock Hall of Fame that truly represents Rock and Roll? I know I have. If you could create your own what would be your criteria, how would pick nominees and how would they get elected? I would love to hear everyones thought on this.

Of coarse if you think that the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is doing a great job this topic is not for you.

SpaceTrucker

"Well they call me the working man'
Rush

Posted by Space Trucker on Saturday, 08.16.08 @ 19:51pm

Elton John and Billy Joel have made a case for the guitar not being the only instrument. Wakeman, Jon Lord and Keith Emerson also showed that heavier music did not have to have the guitar leading the way. There is also Kraftwerk on the techno side. But of course, the Electric guitar will always be the instrument of choice.

Rock was always about attitude and angst. It can go political at times, but in the end, it amounts to teenage hormones that drive the sound. But it all comes through in the song, and the true meaning of Rock comes out through the songwriter and most songs are usually written on the accoustic guitar, piano or small casio keyboard. It is in the studio where the Electric Guitar rules.

Posted by Dameon on Saturday, 08.16.08 @ 21:13pm

Dameon,

I get the keyboard Rock and Roll thing, I know there are exceptions. But out of the thousands of rock bands there have not been that many keyboard lead bands. Jon Lord had Ritchie Blackmore, Rick Wakeman had Steve Howe. Elton John and Billy Joel's hardest rocking songs were powered by guitar.

I push Rock and Roll is guitar driven because I truly belive for the most part that it is, at least good Rock and Roll is.

I am trying to make my case because I believe it was a huge blunder on the part of The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame to induct Madonna and Grand Master Flash that just opens the door for boy bands, rap, pop music everthing not Rock and Roll.

Rock and Roll is about the music, pure hard rocking music.

SpaceTrucker

"Long Live Rock and Roll, Long Live Rock and Roll"
Rainbow

Posted by SpaceTrucker on Saturday, 08.16.08 @ 22:52pm

Hey Dameon, you forgot to mention Jerry Lee Lewis and Little Richard.

Honestly though, I mean, Jethro Tull showed that even a flute could be a rock 'n' roll instrument. Yeah, guitars are a huge part of it, but really, any instrument can be a part of the fun.

Posted by Philip on Saturday, 08.16.08 @ 23:09pm

Hey Philip - I didn't mention JLL and LR because their's is a complete given. No one can deny them. And any instrument can be taken and brought into the mix. Long before Kansas, Mott The Hoople used the violin in spots that were different than the usual string arrangements.

ST - as much as I am not a fan of Madonna or pure dance music, I understand the need and love for the genre. Remember, RnR was also an expression of dance back in the 50's and like all other forms of RnR, "dance" always had an audience and always will. As for Rap; again not my favorite, but it certainly has its place in the RnR Hall. Music evolves in so many different directions and because bands started incorporating rap into Rock, you can easily see the importance of placing the early pioneers of Rap into the Hall. We will see in the future if Rap has a continuing effect on Rock and Roll.

I am of your mind that I prefer straight up power chord driven Rock, but believe me, you need all forms for the continued perpetuation of the artform.

The RnR Hall of Fame is named as such because that is what music of the 50's was called in its earliest form (Alan Freed). But it has grown into so much more.

Posted by Dameon on Sunday, 08.17.08 @ 05:17am

Dameon...don't forget that Buddy Holly used violins on songs like "You Don't Matter Anymore"...lots of pizzicato in that track. There are a lot of great keyboard and piano players in rock history, because they could create a mood, in my opinion. The introduction of synthesizers made it a little easier to create a mood or emotion. A good example would be "Summer Madness" by Kool & The Gang (for those of you not familiar, go to youtube and listen...CLASSIC song). Tell me what that song would've been without the synthesizer.

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 08.17.08 @ 08:26am

Okay Dameon,

I think we just need to agree to disagree. I do not care to add dance bands and rap to my Rock CD collection and I certainly don't want to honor them as Rock and Roll Hall of Famers but than who am I? The big corporate money machine will keep rolling along.

I have to tell you though, it seems very ironic to me that I am rebelling against an entity that is trying to honor Rock and Roll music which is based on a form of rebellion.

SpaceTrucker

"I Love it, I need it, I want it, I'm a Highway Star"
Deep Purple

Posted by SpaceTrucker on Sunday, 08.17.08 @ 11:30am

And who do we have to thank for the use of the Synth? The first known RnR recording using a Synth was the Monkees (at least according to several music sources). So much for them not having anything to do with the progression of RnR.

Posted by Dameon on Sunday, 08.17.08 @ 11:31am

Wow... I ducked out for a day or two, and did you guys ever take off here! There are so many things I want to get to, but it's impossible. Maybe later down the line some of these topics will get thrown back out there (i.e. the importance of the Doors/ what can be thrown into the pot when it comes to musical instruments, etc.), but for now I want to mention the Truckin Man's comment about setting up your own Hall. He brought it up, but it's just floating out there.

I'll be honest here... I don't think I'd have a Hall of Fame. I'm on this site because I want some intelligent conversation regarding rock in general. The Hall as it is now is really only a vague concern (though I do enjoy the occasional arguments that break out over a particular artist - Perry, the Backstreets, Kiss, etc.).

If I really had to come up w/something, it might go like this - No real official waiting period for induction. A committee would be set up that would contact 12 large size clubs a year. Each month a popular modern band (Green Day/Foos/Metallica, etc.) would be paid to spend a month at the club. They would choose a music format that they liked - psychedelic/country rock/grunge, and the like - and in essence they would become a cover band, playing anyone else's song's except their own. It would all be requests from the audience. At the end of each month the top three artists requested would be put into an online pool, and after 12 months had passed, the 36 artists names would be eligible for a giant online/texting/phone/mail campaign. This would take place from the beginning of the new year till a week before the ceremony was to take place. Everyone would be up against each other, w/the top 12 in total overall votes (regardless of age, genre, etc.) going in. The venues for the committee-voted cover bands would change from year to year, so everyone had a chance to toss in a name.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Sunday, 08.17.08 @ 16:59pm

No Hall of Fame - EXCELLENT! Burn that ugly IM Pey building down. I will light the match myself. Elvis and Lennon must be turning over in their graves.

Posted by Dameon on Sunday, 08.17.08 @ 17:34pm

Dameon...they could put that building to good use...how about a DISCO?????

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 08.17.08 @ 17:59pm

Uhhhhhhhhhhh - NO! But we do need a new CBGB's.

Posted by Dameon on Sunday, 08.17.08 @ 22:11pm

Great post Cheesecrop,

A very unique and fresh post about an alternate way to honor bands or artists.

After I read your post I realized I was never interested in a Hall of Fame for all the great rock bands I have enjoyed for about 40 years...damn I'm getting old but I still love to rock.

Since the Rock and Roll Hall has continuously screwed up for the most part with who they have and haven't inducted it has made me mental. I am almost obsessed with it because I believe they are doing the music I love an injustice.

I am desperately trying to come up with a legitimate alternative. Something Rock and Roll fans can sink their teeth into.

As far as Rock and Rock being guitar driven. I am not saying it is exclusive to the guitar. I love Jethro Tull (flute) J. Geils Band (harmonica) Kansas (violin) and all the great bands with piano, organ, synthesizer but you now they are all driven buy the guitar with a solid rhythm section...that is Rock and Roll to me.

Anyone else want to take a shot at the meaning of Rock and Roll or their version of an alternate Rock and Roll Hall of Fame?

SpaceTrucker

"Hey, Hey, My, My, Rock and Roll will never die"
Neil Young

Posted by SpaceTrucker on Monday, 08.18.08 @ 18:54pm

iron maiden, and modorhead shoud be on this list , especialy PINK FLOYD

Posted by mars on Friday, 08.22.08 @ 00:12am

Perhaps this comment was earlier in the list--if so, my bad--but how is this list a "predictor" of the future inductees of the Hall of Fame when most of the acts are already inducted in said Hall?

Any and all insight is appreciated. Thank you.

Posted by Joe on Monday, 09.1.08 @ 18:27pm

Looks to me like about 10% of the artists on the list don't qualify as rock by even the broadest sense of the term (Louis Jordan, Hank Williams, Miles Davis??). Honoring pioneers and great non-rock musicians is fine but they don't belong on a rock list.

As for who's missing:

RHCP
Pink Floyd
CCR
Queen
The Jackson 5
Jefferson Airplane
CSNY
Fleetwood Mac
Jackson Browne
Van Halen
Pearl Jam
Pretenders
Talking Heads
The Replacements
Camper Van Beethoven/Cracker

And if we're honoring forerunners and near-rockers, where the hell are Frank Sinatra and Burt Bacharach?

Posted by hoopoe36 on Friday, 09.5.08 @ 15:48pm

Leonard Cohen
Chicago
Elton John

Posted by Roy on Friday, 09.5.08 @ 16:03pm

Rock Hall Inductees with an "AND" in their name:

Jerry Leiber and Mike Stoller
Gerry Goffin and Carole King
Holland, Dozier and Holland
Herb Alpert and Jerry Moss
Kenny Gamble and Leon Huff

Simon and Garfunkel
Ike and Tina Turner
Sam and Dave

Booker T. and the M.G.'s
Frankie Lymon & the Teenagers
Sly and the Family Stone
Martha and the Vandellas
Gladys Knight and the Pips
Crosby Stills and Nash
The Mamas and the Papas
Bob Wills and His Texas Playboys
Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers
Elvis Costello & the Attractions
Earth, Wind & Fire
Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five

Posted by Roy on Monday, 09.8.08 @ 11:40am

Was there a point to this comment and why do we care?

Posted by Dameon on Monday, 09.8.08 @ 13:23pm

How many inductees have a "Z" in their name?

Posted by interviewer on Monday, 09.8.08 @ 14:32pm

It took me two days, but I read every post... I think, but its just refreshing to see a good honest debate and discussion about music without name calling or insult throwing.

I just love the fact that the RS people included Muddy Waters and Howlin Wolf on the list. I love it when the blues guys get a little love in the RnR world.
Queen should be on the list so should CCR, but these lists are great over all. They do help the younger kids. Its so easy now to go to type in a name on youtube and hear a band like the Byrds or Kinks.

Posted by Odin29 on Thursday, 09.11.08 @ 14:22pm

Odin29 -

Stick around. There are some very smart folks on this site. The fact that I lower the intelligence factor by several points shouldn't frighten you in any way.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Thursday, 09.11.08 @ 15:24pm

Where the Hell Is Sonny Boy Williamson?

Posted by Stan on Saturday, 09.13.08 @ 10:01am

Where is Rush!!!! come on they are the living ledgends! There are a lot that are missing like... : Rush (DUH), Kiss, Alice Cooper, Alice in Chains, The Ozzman!!!!, T-rex, and Metallica (but yes they WILL be inducted in 2009)

Posted by sebastian on Monday, 09.22.08 @ 19:00pm

Where the hell are the Smashing Pumpkins?!?!?!?!

there is a hand full on that list that billy corgan wrote or contributed to there most famous or best stuff.

And it is an absolute insult to ROCK N ROLL that PINK Floyd is not on the list.

Posted by Mr. Pumpkin on Tuesday, 09.23.08 @ 07:47am

Again, no Stevie Ray Vaughan on this list.
I'm beginning to understand why SRV was snubbed by the RRHF Nominatimg Commitee. Rolling Stone magazine has too much influence on these selections. Their editors really are biased against Stevie Ray. I wonder why? I'm just gonna cancel my subsription. F*#* them!

Posted by Mosey Long on Wednesday, 09.24.08 @ 13:02pm

No Pink Flotd either. Guess Roger Waters pissed Rolling Stone off too. Politics shouldn't come into play when compiling these lists. Too bad they do.

Posted by Mosey Long on Wednesday, 09.24.08 @ 13:06pm

"No Pink Flotd either. Guess Roger Waters pissed Rolling Stone off too. Politics shouldn't come into play when compiling these lists. Too bad they do."
Posted by Mosey Long on Wednesday, 09.24.08 @ 13:06pm

Rolling Stone I use to line my cats litter box.
European music mags. papers such as Mojo are far superior in EVER way.

Posted by Dale on Wednesday, 09.24.08 @ 13:12pm

What? No Crosby, Still, Nash, & Young? No Loggins & Messina? No Paul McCartney? I thought this was the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame! There are folks out here who like the classics, and I am one. In addition to the above, please consider Bon Jovi, the Doobie Brothers, America, Curtis Mayfield, and yes, Little Anthony & the Imperials.

Posted by Spauldo on Wednesday, 09.24.08 @ 15:38pm

Not to hate, but why in the hell is eminem on this list?

Posted by Fred on Friday, 09.26.08 @ 09:59am

Not to hate, but why in the hell is eminem on this list?

Posted by Fred on Friday, 09.26.08 @ 09:59am
--------------------------------------------------
This list was dreamed up in 2004. At the time Mathers was still a dominant figure, and RS didn't want to be seen as giving him the shaft. I think we're getting a better picture down the line here of Eminem's musical staying power. He could make a comeback of sorts, but I'm not so sure how popular he'd still be.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Friday, 09.26.08 @ 16:54pm

Took a look at the VH1 list from 98. The list is more problematic than this one, inasmuch as it's from 1998. At the time, any influences from the 90's could not be measured properly, since the decade wasn't even finished. It's questionable how much the 80's benefitted from that list as well. It's nice to see that musicians created that list, but then again, didn't musicians take part in RS's as well? At least theoretically? I know VH1 asked more musicians, but in the end run are they any different from RS in their choices? What would be nice is to see both lists sitting side-by-side, so we could really get a clue as to where they stand 9musicians vs mag). I also agree w/the site in suggesting a list be created of everyone post-1980. No fair assessment can be made w/out this as well.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Tuesday, 10.7.08 @ 05:09am

The VH1 list is now listed next to the "Immortals."

Posted by Future Rock Hall on Tuesday, 10.7.08 @ 21:52pm

Site Admin. - Thank you for putting them together in such a manner.

The lists obviously clash in many respects. I'm trying to figure out the aesthetic gulf on the lists between the Doors, Led Zeppelin, and the Who. I can understand RS having a bias against Zep to a degree; they admitted so in an issue last year that had them as a feature story. W/the Who & the Doors, that's really strange. These are two acts that RS has usually pumped pretty often. To see a gap of about roughly 20 artists separating the bands on both lists is amazing. I know there's a six year gap were dealing w/but neither act did anything to radically alter their image in any way. I'd like to suggest that maybe RS was more open to considering modern acts, but this could just be a trend jumping phenomenon. Strange.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Wednesday, 10.8.08 @ 05:05am

In my opinion, if Eminem is included, so should The White Stripes. I mean, Eminem is a great rapper and all, and you guys should stop complaining about is presence on the list, but cmon. The White Stripes are, in my opinion, the second best artist of the 00's. (Radiohead Taking the top spot of course), So where are they? And Coldplay perhaps too. Eminem deserves to be on the list, but not without these other great artists of the now listed on there too. The Marshall Mathers LP was a great album, go check it out if your still in denial about the Eminem thing.

Posted by Calzone on Wednesday, 10.8.08 @ 15:51pm

Well, you know of my preferences, so here is a revised comment.

I do think that the VH1 list is more preferable not only because more favored acts are on the list. There are other reasons. For one, there is actually an artist ranked #101 on the VH1 list.

The most important reason, I think, that the list that VH1 gave is more preferable can be summed up in two words: Pink Floyd. Really, could Rooling Stone Magazine make a list of 1000 Immortals and not include Pink Floyd. For me, that negates and deligitimizes the whole list. The only agreable comparison both have is rightly ranking the Beatles as #1. For myself, I would include their solo ventures as equal; that is another topic not prone to this.

Here is a theoretical question: if Rolling Stone were to revise the list today, even knowing that Richard Wright and Syd Barrett are no longer with us, would Pink Floyd be on the list?

By the by, the artist ranked #101 on the Vh1 list was Dire Straits. A fine band, yet I am not sure of their induction; no individuality came about.

Peering into the machine,

Lax25

Posted by Lax25 on Wednesday, 10.8.08 @ 17:58pm

Okay...let me throw you all for a loop. First of all, Rolling Stone's "immortals"...immortal what? Artists, performers, belly-dancers...what??? Now we have VH-1's 100 greatest "performers". Are all great artists great "performers"? Take Elvis...he (allegedly) never "performed" in front of an unpaid empty seat...yet VH-1 has him listed at #8...seems a little bit silly, if you ask me!!! He was probably one of the best 2 or 3 best musical "performers" ever...but not so much for being artistic.

As far as that "immortals list goes, Rolling Stone wqas obviously doing some "butt-muzzling" to appease certain factions. "As Forrest Gump would say..."and that's all I've got to say about that".

Posted by Gitarzan on Wednesday, 10.8.08 @ 18:28pm

Web Adm. ...is there any way we can come up with an unabridged Future Rock Hall 100 Greatest Artists list? Say, give everyone a vote of their top ten, and go from there?

People...if this is possible, be objective. No one cares who your favorites are, just who you think are the best!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Wednesday, 10.8.08 @ 18:46pm

Awesome idea, but fraught w/confusion here. How would we go about voting for this? I'm not so sure we could have everyone bombard the site w/100 artist lists.
--------------------------------------------------
Web Adm. ...is there any way we can come up with an unabridged Future Rock Hall 100 Greatest Artists list? Say, give everyone a vote of their top ten, and go from there?

Web Adm. ...is there any way we can come up with an unabridged Future Rock Hall 100 Greatest Artists list? Say, give everyone a vote of their top ten, and go from there?

Web Adm. ...is there any way we can come up with an unabridged Future Rock Hall 100 Greatest Artists list? Say, give everyone a vote of their top ten, and go from there?

Posted by Gitarzan on Wednesday, 10.8.08 @ 18:46pm
--------------------------------------------------
I think a good way to do this would be gradually, like having everyone who wants to vote on this submit their votes once a week. Do the first ten spots on week 1, #11-20 on week 2, etc. Obviously folks like Elivs, the Beatles, the Stones, Zep, would already be listed, so this would allow peole to focus in on who's not already there. If it is done at least remotely naturally, the artists will appear as we somewhat expect them to. If anyone else has a better way of acheiving this (or if I mis-read anything in the post) please let me know.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Thursday, 10.9.08 @ 05:35am

BTW - Sorry about that repetition - something goofy on the computer.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Thursday, 10.9.08 @ 05:36am

Yea Cheesecrop you miss read one part of the post, Gitarzan said everyone submit a top 10 list not top 100. I think he means then take a top 100 from everyone's top 10 list, a consensus if you will.

Posted by Brian on Thursday, 10.9.08 @ 13:26pm

I cannot do a top 10 - so here is 20. These are not in any specific order after The Beatles and I have purposely omitted all Blues artists and other early influences:

Beatles
Dylan
The Who
Kinks
Queen
Led Zeppelin
The Clash
The Alice Cooper Band
Cream
Jimi Hendrix Experience
The Ramones
ELP
Black Sabbath
Neil Young
Alice in Chains
Buddy Holly and the Crickets
Bo Didley
Chuck Berry
REM
Zappa and the Mothers of Invention

I admit that this is mostly a subjective point of view.

Posted by Dameon on Thursday, 10.9.08 @ 17:08pm

Regretabbly, I'm not sure you could really pull this off. For one thing, I know as I mentioned earlier on this page, you'd have to keep the list fluid. If you don't have that, then this list is no better than RS & VH1, and we've really accomplished nothing. It's just a closed cliquish society tossing in their take on it. I am definitely interested, and I'd give you a list of 10, 20, 50, 100, whatever you're looking for, but describe what you're really looking for first.

I'll give you ten TENTATIVE choices I'd put in a top twenty, but none in order till I get a better clue of what you want:

Beatles/Presley/Nirvana/M. Jackson/Ramones

B. Holly/Zeppelin/Van Halen/Radiohead/C. Berry

Posted by Cheesecrop on Thursday, 10.9.08 @ 19:45pm

I have been following and reading the great post's on this site but have not been posting myself.

After much thought on how to create a better way to honor great rock bands and artist's other than the current Rock and Roll Hall Of Fame I have found this to be very difficult.

I have thought about a way to eliminate emotion and use numbers or statistics similar to how a sports hall of fame does it like using record sales or gold and platinum records or concert attendance. I quickly realized this would not work because of the longevity of a group or artist or the fact that record sales of the sixties can't be compared to today, it's a different world (downloads, file sharing, MP3's etc.) and tours are bigger and last longer. And the fact that there are a whole lot more people on this earth of ours today.

So back to emotion, which I realize is what music is all about it is everything that music is about.

Gitarzan wrote and I quote "People...if this is possible, be objective. No one cares who your favorites are, just who you think are the best!!!

It is impossible to be objective. It is all about who are your favorites and who you like and don't like. I read post's all the time from people trying to convince each other that a band is good or not. Tell Liam Rush is great. He can't be objective he hates Rush and I'm sure has not even heard all of their material and never will but thats okay I probably hate some bands he thinks are the greatest and I have never heard all of their material. Try to convince LAX that Genesis sucks. That is not going to happen they are probably one of his favorites. I don't really care for them and I have never heard all of their material and never will. You can't be objective.

How about this, when you were a teenager there was some band that you thought was the greatest ever and when you listen to them now you think to yourself "what was I thinking this band sucks" I'm sure everyone has experienced that. It's about emotion, how a band makes you feel not how good the musicians are or the quality of their song writing or who they may or may not influence.

I thought about the Rolling Stone List vs the VH1 List and what my list would look like. Then I quickly realized that my list would not include some groups or artists that should definitely be on there just because I don't like them or have just not heard their material. It's about emotion and can't be objective.

As I said in my very first post on this site these lists make me mental. If I am not mistaken Rush is not on either list and Black Sabbath is not on the VH1 list and to me that makes these lists worthless. I think everyone puts Elvis and Bob Dylan at the top because you are supposed to. They wouldn't even be on my list, I hate their music.

There is no science or formula to music it just happens. People like it or hate it or are indifferent to it. What makes a great band? Who knows? It is obvious that everyone on this site is passionate about music, thats for sure. But I bet if you really think about it the opinions are based on emotion and are not objective.

Try making a list that is not safe or what you think everyone else would do. Make a list based on emotion and favorites. Really put some thought into it. What is truly inside you. Don't even refer to the Rolling Stone list or VH1 list. See what you come up with.

SpaceTrucker

"Sweet Emotion"

Aerosmith

Posted by SpaceTrucker on Friday, 10.10.08 @ 15:35pm

spacetrucker, that was one of the best comments I have ever read on all the posts here on this site. very well done

Posted by Brian on Friday, 10.10.08 @ 16:09pm

I concur with you also SpaceTrucker. You strike a good chord, sir. If I were to list just my personal Top 10 of Rock, half the readers here would probably laugh at me. I might not list Elvis, Chuck Berry, or the Stones. And I can't even remember a single Rush song either, so immediately I would have a problem with SpaceTrucker.

What is unbearable(?) is the politicking and hype that goes on. This is not emotion for the music, its ego-driven emotion. Suppose thats the inevitable result of human nature at work. But the end result of that is putting marginal artists in the RRHoF while obviously great ones are left out.

The so-called "Immortals" list has validity to the extent that rock afficionados (yes I used that word) had input to it. But consider the source, any motives, whose axe is being grinded, etc. I like to see it as a draft, then do my own personal (emotional) editing of it.

Posted by telarock on Friday, 10.10.08 @ 16:43pm

As per SpaceTrucker - revised list:

Beatles
The Who
Queen
Aerosmith
Cheap Trick
NY Dolls
Led Zep
Def Lep
Alice In Chains
David Bowie

Posted by Dameon on Friday, 10.10.08 @ 17:38pm

Spacetrucker...I understand that for a lot of people it's nearly impossible to be objective. But if you have a lot of people giving their lists, within a list of 100 artists you're going to develop a consensus...some artists are going to keep popping up over and over again, and the cream, whether it's an objective or emotional vote, is going to rise to the top. Some might have a list that every one they mentioned might get perpetually weeded off the top 100 list, while others might have all theirs in the top 10 (not likely, but it could happen).

Posted by Gitarzan on Friday, 10.10.08 @ 18:20pm

OK,Let's be CLEAR HERE . #61 on your list is INCORRECT. Vh-1 did NOT choose SMOKEY ROBINSON, (The SOLO artist), as one of it's TOP 100 ARTISTS OF ALL TIME . THEY CHOSE Smokey Robinson and THE MIRACLES !!! YOU'RE MAKING THE SAME MISTAKE AS THE RRHOF , AND DOING MOTOWN'S LEGENDARY FIRST GROUP THE SAME INJUSTICE. THE MIRACLES are NOT "SIDE MEN", "BACKUPS", "ET AL" OR "ETC"!! THEY ARE THE MIRACLES , PLAIN AND SIMPLE . I RECORDED THIS TELECAST. I KNOW WHAT IT SAID . YOU ARE GUILTY OF DOING THIS GROUP THE SAME INJUSTICE AND INDIGNITY THAT THE RRHOF IS DOING !!! THE MIRACLES SHOULD NOT , CAN NOT, AND WILL NOT BE RELEGATED TO THE FOOTNOTES OF HISTORY . THEY DESERVE BETTER. Smokey Robinson's name WAS NOT ORIGINALLY PUT IN FRONT OF THIS GROUP . THEY WERE , FOR THE FIRST 10 YEARS OF THEIR EXISTANCE, called "THE MIRACLES", PLAIN AND SIMPLE !!! You included THE PIPS, THE SUPREMES, THE HEARTBRAKERS,and THE FAMILY STONE on your list... and they're "BACKUPS" FOR THEIR STAR LEAD SINGERS !!! THE MIRACLES DESERVE THE SAME CONSIDERATION !!! NOW YOU SEE WHY MIRACLES FANS ALL OVER THE WORLD ARE SO UPSET OVER THEIR OMISSION!!! STOP BASHING THE MIRACLES AND STOP EXCLUDING THEM !!! PUT THEIR NAME ON THE LIST WHERE IT BELONGS...AND GO BACK AND WATCH THE PROGRAM.... AGAIN !!! P.S. OH....And ONE MORE THING... unlike some artists...THE MIRACLES ARE ON ROLLING STONE'S, BILLBOARD'S, AND VH-1'S "TOP 100" LISTS... ALL 3 OF THEM !! SO WHY ARE THEY STILL NOT IN THE HALL AFTER OVER 20 YEARS ???

Posted by Bill G. on Friday, 10.10.08 @ 18:47pm

This is the reason I suggested that it be done in stages of 1-10, 11-20, 21-30, etc. We all kind of know whose going to wind up in the top 10, top 20, etc. if we're all honest w/each other. The fact is, seeing an already agreed upon top 10 would make everyone recognize who not to vote for over & over again. As the weeks rolled on, you'd be able to see how the consensus opinion does play out. The interesting part will be to see who makes it after the top 30 or so, and how everyone feels about it.

I still suggest that the list (if there is one) be kept open for anyone who comes across it later on. If not, all we did was play an ego game w/ourselves. My suggestion seems both noble & democratic. Of course, Errol Flynn was both noble & democratic when he played Custer in "They Died With Thier Boots On', and he still ended up dead at the end anyway.

With that I remain (sincerely) the noble & democratic Errol (Cheesecrop) Flynn

Posted by Cheesecrop on Friday, 10.10.08 @ 19:16pm

Who thinks the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Committee is being objective?

It reeks of politics and favorites.

For some reason the popular opinion is that Rock and Roll started with Elvis and that he was the greatest ever. Elvis didn't start Rock and Roll, it was around long before he became popular. He was just a tool for getting black music played on white radio. He didn't even write his own material and to me that is a main criteria to consider someone a hall of famer.

How can you ask a 30 year old to consider Elvis and Bob Dylan as being the greatest ever? They were not even born yet.

How many of you that put Elvis and Bob Dylan at the top of your list consistently pop in their CD's and give them a listen?

For me Rock and Roll started in the late 60's. Don't get me wrong, I'm well aware of Elvis, Buddy Holly, The Beatles and so on. But I don't choose to listen to them. For me it starts with the Doors, CCR, Cream, Jimi Hendrix, Led Zeppelin, Grand Funk Railroad, Black Sabbath, Deep Purple and continues from there. These are the groups that are in my CD collection as well as Soundgarden, Alice In Chains, Collective Soul, Queens Of The Stone Age, Priestess, etc. The current Indie Music doesn't rock hard enough for me so it has kind of slowed down for new music for me.

So far the few list's that I have seen from you guys seem to be more honest than politically correct. Look at Dameons list when he was honest with himself Dylan was no longer on it.

I'm not head hunting Elvis or Dylan I am just sick of these list's that have them near or at the top every single time.

My Top 20 List:

Rush
Grand Funk Railroad
Led Zeppelin
Black Sabbath
U.F.O.
Deep Purple
Jimi Hendrix
Creedence Clearwater Revival
Blue Oyster Cult
Captain Beyond (1st Album)
Alice In Chains
Aerosmith
The Cult
Black Label Society
Soundgarden
Jethro Tull
Scorpions
Smashing Pumpkins
Montrose (1st Album)
Rainbow

Posted by SpaceTrucker on Saturday, 10.11.08 @ 12:59pm

SpaceTrucker...I'm asking you this question in an "objective" way...how much do you really know about Elvis or any of the other true originals? How much have you really looked (and listened) into that particular era of popular music? Granted, Elvis didn't write much...but could it have been HOW he sung the song and put his own totally original brand on it?

You need to go back further and listen to Elvis, Buddy Holly, Chuck Berry, Little Richard, etc...and find out what made them tick, what it was that made them great. A while back you wanted to define "Rock & Roll"...go back to that era and listen to those songs...you might get your answer.

Posted by Gitarzan on Saturday, 10.11.08 @ 14:01pm

Gitarzan,

I get it, the bands you mention, Elvis, Buddy Holly, Chuck Berry, Little Richard were all a part of the birth of Rock and Roll in some form. The bands you mention are from the 50's, 60 years ago. Do you expect generation after generation to keep thinking Elvis is king? That is just not going to happen. Every generation has it's own music that they believe to be the best for them.

I don't want to listen to Elvis his music does nothing for me. That's the emotion that liking or disliking a band is all about. This is not a science experiment.

This is what I talked about in another post. You want me to go back and listen to Elvis and like him, I have heard enough Elvis to know that I don't care for his music, what's the problem. If you don't like my list that's okay, I am not going to try to convince you to like it.

I listen to and love music that moves me in some way or another. Maybe I pump my fist or sing along or play air guitar, or drums or bass. If I here Elvis or Buddy or Bob it does nothing for me and that is the beauty of music, different bands affect people differently and to me that is awesome.

To me Rock and Roll is my list.

Would it be better if my list was more like everybody else.

My top 10 list that is safe:

Elvis
The Beatles
Bob Dylan
Buddy Holly
Chuck Berry
The Rolling Stones
Led Zeppelin
Little Richard
The Who
Jimi Hendrix
Aretha Franklin

BORING!

SpaceTrucker

"Long live rock, I need it every night"

The Who

Posted by SpaceTrucker on Saturday, 10.11.08 @ 16:07pm

SpaceTrucker...you're missing my point, I don't like all of it either! It's not a matter of liking it, it's a matter of learning from it. Back then, it wasn't a matter of "Gee, I think I'll sit down and write a Rock & Roll song". There wasn't a specific template for it. Popular music at the time didn't move certain artists...they looked for a sound that they FELT, way down deep in their soul. It didn't matter what the cost was (ridicule, harsh criticism, etc...), they were going to do it their way. They're the reason the music you love today even exists.

Now, you've got certain artists that you think are more fitting, which is great. I'm glad that the music you love has been able to evolve and perpetuate over the last 50+ years. Every generation or so, an artist or two pops up that everyone knows people will be talking about for generations to come, and there's always a distinct reason why. Artists who reach that status, regardless if I like them or not, will always have my respect. Take the Rolling Stones and Bob Dylan...I've never cared for them much, but I respect what they've accomplished and appreciate their contribution to the music I love. Would they be in my top 10 list...absolutely!!

The history of Rock & Roll is a fascinating subject, so much so it is offered as a course at some colleges. I think a lot of artists today look back on that history and realize they've got some huge shoes to fill. Some are up to the challenge, some aren't. THAT'S what makes it fun...the lists that you've made all make sense, my friend! The lists everyone has made make sense because it moved them...and that's awesome!!!

"Have you heard the news...there's good rockin' tonight"- Elvis

"Hail! Hail, Rock & Roll"- Chuck Berry

"If you can play Rock & Roll, none of it sucks"- "Dimebag" Darrell Abbott

Posted by Gitarzan on Saturday, 10.11.08 @ 17:27pm

Okay Gitarzan,

Really what you are saying is that the immortals list is already set. There are groups or artists that have to be on the top because thats just the way it is. Then why are we asked to make a list?

Really the immortals list is just a historical time line about rock and roll. I just have to decide if Elvis, The Beatles or Bob Dylan should be on top.

Now if you say that one group or artist does not exist without the other than the list should be done in chronological order. How can the Beatles be higher than Elvis if he was first. Doesn't that mean that Rolling Stone liked The Beatles better than Elvis. How can that be because Elvis was first? Isn't it who you like and don't like. If I say Rush is the greatest ever I can't because many other bands came before them.

Top 10 List by who was first:

Muddy Waters (1st recording 1942)
Hank Williams (1st recording 1947)
Fats Domino (1st recording 1949)
Howlin' Wolf (1st recording 1951)
Little Richard (1st recording 1951)
Ray Charles (1st recording 1953)
Elvis Presley (1st recording 1954)
Chuck Berry (1st recording 1955)
Roy Orbison (1st recording 1956)
James Brown (1st recording 1956)
Buddy Holly (1st recording 1957)

SpaceTrucker

"Have you heard the news, there's good rockin' tonight"

Wynonie Harris

Posted by SpaceTrucker on Saturday, 10.11.08 @ 19:05pm

SpaceTrucker...did I say the people who did it first did it best?? Who anyone thinks is the best is purely subjective. Did I not say that everyone's list made sense? I personally look at the whole history simply because it all counts!! You're the one saying the early rockers are insignificant simply because you don't like them. I'm a 52 year old guitar player, and over the years my list has changed probably 10-15 times for a variety of reasons, so I guess I'm not so stuck in the 50's, am I? Some artists importance have waned over the years, others have persisted. Like I said before, the Beatles were my first big influence in listening to rock and playing it. I have parents and other relatives who were big-time Elvis fans in the 50's, I was a young teen in the psychedelic era, Hendrix, through Woodstock, and into the era of Led Zeppelin. I grew up with rock & roll, and being a player I was probably more involved that a lot of people. Over the years my musical tastes and interests kept evolving so my "list", if you will, kept changing, but there are a select few who have stood the test of time with me. I can give you a list, but it wouldn't be in any particular order.

Another thing you could say about me is after everything I've experienced in my musical life, I do expect more from today's artists than I seem to get from most of them...their significance will be decided over time, just like everyone who came before them.

Wynonie Harris...yep, THERE'S the version of that song everyone remembers!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Saturday, 10.11.08 @ 20:48pm

Gitarzan,

I did not say the early boys are not important and of coarse they have their place in history, they are just not my immortals, does that make sense?

My list reflects bands that have moved and influenced me. I wasn't even born when Elvis, Buddy Holly and the rest of these stars were creating all this great music, so I will never know what it was like to be there and feel their influence first hand. Heck Buddy Holly died the year I was born.

You asked me to go back and listen to Elvis. Here is the problem with that. After experiencing amazing, powerful music from Jimi Hendrix, Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, Rush and so on, when I listen to an Elvis or Buddy recording it seems so innocent and weak that I just can't relate. Again I respect their innovation, pioneering and achievements in Rock and Roll history they are immortals just not my immortals.

The first time I heard Good Rockin' Tonight it was done by Montrose on their first album and I thought it was an original for the longest time. But after some research I realized how wrong I was. I was blown away when I found out it was first recorded in 1947 by Wynonie Harris.

Maybe I will dust off my 1972 Ludwig Drum Kit and we can kick out some jams.

SpaceTrucker

"What can this strange device be? When I touch it, it gives forth a sound, it's got wires that vibrate and give music, what can this thing be that I've found?

Rush

Posted by SpaceTrucker on Saturday, 10.11.08 @ 22:22pm

Awesome dialogue here, and I want to get in on it. Trucker's completely right when he says a thirty year old can't be expected to say Presley should even be considered amongst the immortals, inasmuch as they never engaged his work in any palpable way. The same can be said about everyone in the 60's and 70's as well, though. In fact, a thirty year old today would have no real active memory of rock until the mid-to-late 80's, technically. Their frame of reference would start probably w/the back end of hair metal, run through Seattle in the teen yrs., rap-rock/nu-metal in college, and emo in their mid-to-late 20's (if they were still bothering to listen). Someone whose ten years younger doesn't even have the 90's as a frame of reference. For those folks it's all modern, and that's the way it should be.

Should young folk go back & listen to the decades of the past? Absolutely. However, they should have the right to call it as they see it as well. If they see something that we didn't they've the right to say it, even if it upsets us to any degree. In their minds, Edison Lighthouse might be better than Sabbath, Taylor Dayne might be better than Def Lep, and Ace of Base might be better than Alice in Chains. More power to them if they frustrate the heck out of us. We might end up w/a diff. take on it ourselves.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Sunday, 10.12.08 @ 07:54am

Cheesecrop & SpaceTrucker...that's all I'm saying really. It really is hard to understand things like the social atmosphere and so on unless you were actually there. when I was in my early teens I didn't realize what all the fuss was about the early rockers, either. I was a big-time Beatles fan. I'm in total agreement with the idea that everyone should have their artists they consider immortals.

Music and social consciousness have gone hand in hand since the advent of recorded music. I think Rock music was probably the first form of music that actually had a social impact, instead of music adapting to the social climate, and it has continued to do so. It wasn't until later in life that I really became aware of that. Elvis, Buddy & Co. may seem bland and innocent today, but back then...yikes!!! Shoot, Led Zeppelin & AC/DC seem bland compared to some of the real hard rockers today.

The wonderful thing about it is there are 6 billion people on this planet and we're all different. My idea of a "greatest rockers" list was to have everyone throw 10 names in...in no particular order. Now, if we were all the same, the list wouldn't get past 10...THAT would be boring! after all the perpetual "weeding out" and so on, after a length of time I'd simply be curious to see what names ended up in the top 10...whose names popped up the most. I think with people like us adding out input, that list would be vastly different than VH-1's or Rolling Stone's....and I think that would be cool!!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 10.12.08 @ 08:57am

Thanks for jumping in Cheeseman, I was beginning to think this was only important to Gitarzan and myself and I truly think our conversation is the meat and bones of this website and the Rock and Roll Half of Fame.

The history of Rock and Roll is set in stone it can't be ignored and isn't but when someone has a favorite group or artist, that is their own history that they lived through and will relate to the rest of their life, it is the most important musical history to them. The most awesome thing is the history of Rock and Roll is still being written.

Even though I have said these list's make me mental, I do love them.

My point being lets be totally honest about our choices and don't just pick the top ten because that is what you think everyone else will pick. Choose with your heart and emotion. There are no rules as to who you think your musical immortals are. If everyone participates honestly the list may blow our minds, who knows maybe a whole new top ten will emerge and to me that is exciting and refreshing.

Power To The People!

SpaceTrucker

"He knows changes aren't permanent, but change is"

Rush

Posted by SpaceTrucker on Sunday, 10.12.08 @ 11:24am

okay guys, yor wearin yorselves out with this back and forth stuff. and I've actually read most of yor dialague, so I'm gettin worn as well. Lemme sum this up for yall.

SpaceTruck, yor a dude who subscribes purely to feel/emotion when appraising great music - call you an "emotionalist" for lack of a term.

Gitarman, you put give weight to the historical aspects - call you a "historogist"? You think there's something in it for being an early pioneer, one of the founding movement.

Heres what Telarock sez - neither one of you is wrong. (argh, that's weak!) I already voiced support for SpaceTrucker earlier - see: (telarock on Friday, 10.10.08 @ 16:43pm) but now I'm gonna disagree with him somewhat. Gitar is right about the need to respect history. You may not personally dig Elvis or Chuck Berry, but millions of fans from their era were not wrong. And let Rush go "back to the future" and folks back then might not have understood them a wit.

I say let the early pioneers have more "weight." That's the way of things - its historical. You wanna compare any modern US president to Lincoln? forget it. Compare Rush to Elvis? forget that too. Common sense and practice is to recognize more strongly the work of the early masters.

Posted by telarock on Sunday, 10.12.08 @ 18:35pm

I say let the early pioneers have more "weight." That's the way of things - its historical. You wanna compare any modern US president to Lincoln? forget it. Compare Rush to Elvis? forget that too. Common sense and practice is to recognize more strongly the work of the early masters.

Posted by telarock on Sunday, 10.12.08 @ 18:35pm
--------------------------------------------------
Ironically enough, I go in the completely opposite directon here. When it comes to what is in essence a youth music, the work of the early masters should be constantly questioned. It is the reason I suggest a fluid list - new generations MUST have the opportunity to re-evaluate those from the past. Rock & Roll is the only place in modern culture where historical "weight" runs backwards.

Perhaps I should clarify my take on the Beatles to explain this fully. Despite what I said, I really do believe the Fabs are THE #1 band - right now. I believe in theory that any day could produce the band that will top them, but for right now they are still numero uno. I do not believe their influence is nearly as big today as some might make it out to be - in my book they have been losing that at a steady rate (ex. 100% down to 90% down to 80% as the years have rolled on). There sum influence today is well below 50%. That being said, they WERE the central point of reference for longer than any other band till this minute, and as such should be given the #1 spot. This is why I dislike being pinned down to a single list - I mentioned some acts to calm Mike down, but that was really it. When I put down ten potentials out of 20, I really meant that - some of them weren't in my own top 10. I'm not sure I like the idea of pinning myself down to anything so open as this.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Sunday, 10.12.08 @ 20:46pm

"Rock & Roll is the only place in modern culture where historical "weight" runs backwards." -Cheesecrop
================================================
I understand yor rationale for this. And btw, I agree, Beatles are still #1 on the list. Still, lets keep in mind the RRHoF is a museum. Its a means of preserving rock history. Washington was 1st US president, so his place in US history should always be secure. Schoolkids today only know who he is because they look at History, not the other way around.

If music history was reckoned backwards, we probly wouldn't even be talking bout "rock", the operative word might be "hip-hop". Then the argument would be that rock was born out of hip-hop? I know it gets convoluted.

Its not up to succeeding generations to rewrite history, the idea is they need to learn from it.

Posted by Telarock on Monday, 10.13.08 @ 07:54am

Tela -

I can see where I completely messed up in what I wrote yesterday. First, I was under the impression we were talking about a potential list for this site. When it comes to the museum, I couldn't say anything about that, even if I wanted to.

Let me toss out an example or two of what I meant when I talked about rewriting history. In the 70's rock critics savaged Zep and Sab, saying that the stuff would never hold up compared to Elton John, Fleetwood Mac, The Eagles, Jackson Browne, and the like. Yet the Gen X kids proved them wrong. Much of the layout for the Sunset Strip and Seattle came from music viewed as a cipher in the past, and older critics just got grumpy over it while wondering how the genius that was mainstream 70's rock could be ingnored.

I was equally caught off-guard when it became obvious in this decade that Green Day & Weezer were the two bands that kids were drawing inspiration from. If you asked me this 15 yrs ago I would have said Nirvana & Pearl Jam would still be the mainstays for that. I've nothing against either act, but I know whatever mysterious infatuation running through the kids regarding these acts is, it escaped my notice the first time round. It's quite clear I am in the same boat as the critic who saw the clear superiortiy of Stevie Nicks as opposed to Robert Plant, but couldn't get it through my thick skull circa 87 as to why this was.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Monday, 10.13.08 @ 17:28pm

Well, I do not have a listing of whom I think are the 100 Greatest Rock Artists in my personal opinion.

I do want to state, however, that of the two lists given, I have albums, DVDs, and downloaded songs from the following:

The Beatles
John Lennon
Sir Paul McCartney
Sir Elton John
Pink Floyd
The Police
Sting
Peter Gabriel
Patti Smith
Earth, Wind and Fire
Roxy Music
Public Enemy
Neil Young
David Crosby, Stephen Stills, and Graham Nash
Queen
The Band
The Beach Boys
Tom Waits
Frank Zappa
The Byrds
Radiohead
The Beastie Boys (despite no individuality)
Traffic/Steve Winwood

And that is just a main sampling. I am certain to think of others as the times go on.

Make of this what you will,

Lax25

Posted by Lax25 on Monday, 10.13.08 @ 17:58pm

Lax, your not serious about McCartney, Elton John and Patti Smith?

Posted by Mr. Octagon on Monday, 10.13.08 @ 18:21pm

To Cheesecloth:
Not wanting to have the "last word", but just to clarify - yor right, the topic is really these Top 100 lists, not the RRHoF per se. But the listmakers do presume also to be writers of rock history.

And I agree also, history is dynamic. It doesn't change, but each succeeding generation adds their own pieces, and then we must go back and re-sort things. The sands of time begin to show some groups left bigger "footprints" (e.g. Led Zep) than people realized at the time.

My main point is that the later footprints should not wipe out the earlier ones - at least not if we value the history. Do you know it was only recently that a 3rd photo of Robert Johnson was found - there had only been 2 before. Fortunately he did leave behind many recordings before his mysterious death (circa 1939). Clapton got hold of those recordings and was so impressed by them he proclaimed Robert Johnson "the most important blues musician who ever lived" - and Eric Clapton has a lot of credibility in that regard.

I certainly don't claim to be an expert. I guess we are all the world's greatest experts on "What I Like", which is why we can each make up our own lists and claim to be right. But remember Robert Johnson never had a Fender electric guitar, and never "stood on the shoulders of giants" (men who came before him) to see how to refine his craft. "Crossroads" was a Johnson song - you know he was a big-time influence on Clapton. That's why I think the old-timers should be given slightly more weight when making these lists.

Posted by Telarock on Tuesday, 10.14.08 @ 21:29pm

y main point is that the later footprints should not wipe out the earlier ones - at least not if we value the history. Do you know it was only recently that a 3rd photo of Robert Johnson was found - there had only been 2 before. Fortunately he did leave behind many recordings before his mysterious death (circa 1939). Clapton got hold of those recordings and was so impressed by them he proclaimed Robert Johnson "the most important blues musician who ever lived"


I agree Telarock... Johnson and many of the other "OLD TIMERS".. It is not always how much you did or sold but what you did. From the one hit wonders to the old timers and the true rocks of rock and roll..Many other Rock Stars were at best just copy cats with Hollywood Hype $$$$$$$$$$

Posted by mrxyz on Tuesday, 10.14.08 @ 21:56pm

And I agree also, history is dynamic. It doesn't change, but each succeeding generation adds their own pieces, and then we must go back and re-sort things. The sands of time begin to show some groups left bigger "footprints" (e.g. Led Zep) than people realized at the time.

My main point is that the later footprints should not wipe out the earlier ones - at least not if we value the history.

Posted by Telarock on Tuesday, 10.14.08 @ 21:29pm
--------------------------------------------------
Finally! Somebody got where I was going w/this. I DO agree w/you that earlier footprints should not be wiped out. I've always felt that it should be noted how succeeding generations of fans felt about an act in relation to their (the fans) future times. I do value the history; that's never been my argument. It was always about future interpretations, and the fear of any re-assessment being plowed over by frightened fans who forgot that rock should un-settle their notions over time.

btw - I loved the Cheesecloth bit.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Wednesday, 10.15.08 @ 05:55am

THE MIRACLES are RANKED HIGHER than ALL OF THE OTHER TOP MOTOWN GROUPS on BOTH OF THESE LISTS.... THE SUPREMES, THE TEMPTATIONS, THE FOUR TOPS, GLADYS KNIGHT & THE PIPS, AND MARTHA & THE VANDELLAS....SO, WHY ARE ALL OF THESE GROUPS INDUCTED...WHILE THE MIRACLES ARE NOT ??

Posted by Bill G. on Wednesday, 10.15.08 @ 07:07am

Bill G.,

You are very determined on behalf of the Miracles, which is noble and right. But you surely know yourself the hard answer to your question. The RHOF deemed to separate Smokey from the Miracles. Then they inducted him as a solo artist.

I checked and 8 of 10 of Smokey Robinson's "essential" songs are songs done while lead singer in the Miracles. But I doubt if the RHOF would now be inclined to make a separate induction of the Miracles. Think your best strategy is to get the RHOF to amend(?) Smokey's induction to include "& The Miracles." If you were able to get Smokey himself onboard with that idea, it should certainly be possible. Would he?

I think you should take your case directly to Smokey Robinson. You could write 50,000 words on this site and might just be wasting your time (sorry, people might agree, but nobody here can actually DO anything). If yor serious about this, go straight on to Smokey and convince HIM to do what you think is right.

Posted by Telarock on Wednesday, 10.15.08 @ 16:42pm

Hi, Telarock. I understand and agree what you're saying, but consider this:
The RRHOF inducted THE IMPRESSIONS and Curtis Mayfield separately;

THE JACKSON FIVE and Michael separately;

THE BEATLES and 3 of their individual members separately

....And ERIC CLAPTON 3 times.

and this comimg year, if LITTLE ANTHONY & THE IMPERIALS are inducted...

SAMMY STRAIN will be a DOUBLE INDUCTEE...HE STARTED with THE IMPERIALS many years ago(LATE 50'S / EARLY 60'S)...SANG WITH,AND WAS A MEMBER OF THE O'JAYS from '76 until 1992...WAS INDUCTED AS A MEMBER...
AND THEN, RETURNED TO THE IMPERIALS IN 1992...AND SANG WITH THEM UNTIL HE RETIRED IN '04.
JOHNNY CARTER WAS ALSO INDUCTED TWICE...AS A MEMBER OF THE DELLS... AND THE FLAMINGOS.

So as you can see, the RRHOF has ALREADY set precedents for artists to be inducted more than once YEARS AGO. All they have to do is induct SMOKEY TWICE....This time WITH the MIRACLES.
Smokey recieved a star on THE HOLLYWOOD WALK OF FAME many years ago....Now , in early 2009, THE MIRACLES as a GROUP wil be honored....which means he'll be a DOUBLE HONOREE.
There's no reason the RRHOF can't do the SAME THING.

Posted by Bill G. on Thursday, 10.16.08 @ 03:01am

Bill G.,

You got me caught up in this thing now, but thats okay, cause its an interesting case.

You essentially are going for a dual induction of Smokey (one w/Miracles, one w/o), and there are several precedents for that. The Impressions and Curtis Mayfield is a good example (so I looked into it). The major difference is that The Impressions went in first as a group (1991), then Curtis went in as a soloist (1999). That's the order that should have gone down with The Miracles and Smokey. But having Smokey go in first as a soloist (1987) makes it now difficult to get The Miracles to complete the dual induction. Of course you know all that (but readers here maybe dont).

Now there is one other major hitch. ICO The Impressions, the 10 "essential" songs listed are all different ones than the 10 given for Curtis as a soloist - altogether 20 different songs given ICO that dual induction.

Of the 10 essential songs given for Smokey Robinson, 8 of them are with The Miracles, 2 of them w/o. Its a jumbled situation. I still think you should go and work this out with Smokey Robinson - when they get together for the Star on Hollywood Walk of Fame, that would be a good opportunity?

Posted by Telarock on Thursday, 10.16.08 @ 11:30am

On afterthought, there one more important variable. The Miracles continued on with new lead singer after Smokey left, and had at least one major hit song "Love Machine." So when you bring up the dual induction idea, perhaps you mean to induct The Miracles as a free-standing group (not with Smokey Robinson's name in front)? That makes the problem even more difficult.

Posted by Telarock on Thursday, 10.16.08 @ 11:55am

for once in my life, i agree with rolling stone magazine OVER another publication. VH1's list is clearly not as good as rolling stone's... because the Velvet Underground is much too low, and Crosby Stills and Nash are much too high. Plus, how could the sex pistols top the Ramones? They are both great bands, but Ramones win for me. Now, the one thing VH1 got right, is they at least listed Pink Floyd. The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, and Rolling Stone Magazine, seem to skip over the entire Prog. Movement in the seventies, like it never happened. All in all, no, that movement wasn't that influential, and didn't start up a bunch of new bands and it kind of got old, hence why punk had to come out and save us all from monotony. But, They were great artists in that group of drab bands (rush, Pink Floyd, Yes) who all deserve induction, and at least pink Floyd should be mentioned on this list.

Posted by Calzone on Thursday, 10.16.08 @ 17:42pm

....Not really, Telarock. Because "THE MIRACLES" (minus Smokey's name up front), was the group's ORIGINAL NAME ANYWAY ....for the first 10 years !! If you can, pick up a copy of THE MIRACLES' MOTOWN 2006 "Definitive DVD".(It's available on AMAZON & EBAY.). 3 of the Miracles are interviewed, Smokey,Bobby ,and Pete. During the 70 minute interview,they mentioned that the only reason Motown head BERRY GORDY changed ther name was because MOTOWN'S market research revealed that whenever a lead singer's name was put in front of a group, that group made more money for performance fees,because the audience could more greatly identify with that lead singer.The SUPREMES and VANDELLAS NAMES WERE CHANGED FOR THE SAME REASON. However , Smokey made it clear during the interview that, while the group's earnings increased, he NEVER made any MORE OR LESS money than the other MIRACLES. All of the group members made an EQUAL SHARE for royalties and personal appearences.As to your other question , their song "DO IT BABY" was also a million-seller and peaked at #13 pop on the BILLBOARD HOT 100 (YOU CAN SEE THEM PERFORMING IT ON THE DVD ,AND ON YOUTUBE) .AND "DONT'CHA LOVE IT" went Top 10 R&B .They had six other charting singles as well.Smokey had MORE AND BIGGER HITS WITH the MIRACLES, than he did by himself . Also ,Their song LOVE MACHINE (featuring Smokey's replacement ,BILLY GRIFFIN hit #1 POP. Smokey HASN'T hit #1 as a solo artist....The closest he came was with "BEING WITH YOU",which reached #2. Please do me a favor. When you get a chance, go to WIKIPEDIA, and look up "THE MIRACLES" (Yes, that's how they're listed) Read the article...and let me know if what you read , in your opinion,qualifies them for RRHOF induction or not. Then look up THE RONETTES and PERCY SLEDGE (both inducted)...compare them to THE MIRACLES ... AND LET ME KNOW WHAT YOU THINK. Thanks.

Posted by Bill G. on Thursday, 10.16.08 @ 18:34pm

Okay, have done the research. Forget the comparisons to other groups (only gets you sidetracked).

Let's say you are right, and The Miracles deserve to be nominated as a free-standing group, which probably will necessitate a rewrite of Smokey Robinson's solo induction - because you are NOT advocating for a group called "Smokey Robinson and The Miracles" your case is for the group called "THE MIRACLES." (Hope that at least defines your argument correctly.) What would be the steps needed for that outcome?

We both would allow that Smokey Robinson does belong in the RHOF as a solo inductee. He did 25 solo albums and had solo hit songs, as well as doing a lot of writing and production work with Motown.

If the committee nominated The Miracles, you would have it be on the same basis as say, The Temptations, w/o any lead billing. You want both Smokey and Billy Griffin listed simply as individuals of the one group. There's no problem with that logic that I can see.

The problem is that induction is a voting process. Smokey Robinson was already voted in with 8 of 10 of his essential songs being the group's songs. How you gonna reset that? Just getting ONCE through the nominating committee is like running a gauntlet of rottweilers, and having to wear bacon pants! (something I heard ... mayby not funny?) Point is, you need to look for a way around that whole process. The only way I know is to get Smokey Robinson involved. Get HIM on board.

Posted by Telarock on Thursday, 10.16.08 @ 21:13pm

The fact of the matter is ,the RRHOF violated THEIR OWN RULE by inducting SMOKEY as a SOLO ARTIST IN 1987. SMOKEY NEVER RECORDED A SINGLE SONG AS A SOLO ARTIST PRIOR TO 1972. His ENTIRE RECORDED OUTPUT from the beginning of his career (1957) until 1972 was as a member of THE MIRACLES.Counting forward from that year ,the year of his first solo recording ,25 years forward, he WOULDN'T HAVE QUALIFYED AS A SOLO ARTIST UNTIL 1997, NOT 1987, the year he WAS inducted. This is what happened to CURTIS MAYFIELD, which is why THE IMPRESSIONS were inducted FIRST, THEN CURTIS LATER . THE MIRACLES as a GROUP,however, qualified in the VERY FIRST YEAR of RRHOF inductions,1987,as they had been around 30 years by then. This controversy concerning THE MIRACLES and the RRHOF has recieved significant attention on SIRIUS radio in recent weeks. The question is...are they going to do the right thing ,and AMEND their mistake...or are they going to continue to ignore MOTOWN'S legendary FIRST GROUP...AND REFUSE TO INDUCT THEM AT ALL ? SMOKEY DIDN'T WRITE ALL OF THOSE HITS BY HIMSELF...one look at the records will prove THAT. (Robinson,Rogers,Moore,White, Tarplin)...AND..The OTHER inducted MOTOWN groups DIDN'T WRITE ANY....but THEY'RE IN...and THE MIRACLES ARE NOT ?? What distorted logic dictated THAT ? It's not like The Miracles were BACKUPS OR SIDEMEN...like THE E-STREET BAND OR THE COMETS. They were all one cohesive group... and SMOKEY WAS JUST A MEMBER , LIKE ALL OF THE OTHERS. Even the decision to make him lead singer in THE FIRST PLACE WAS A GROUP DECISION !! THE RRHOF VIOLATED ALL OF THEIR OWN RULES IN ORCHESTRATING THIS FARCE...Maybe one day they'll make it right. I don't know if SMOKEY can do it all himself,but ,if he has any power at all to do so , he should . He has nothing to lose, and everything to gain. At the very least, the other Miracles,BOBBY,RONNIE,PETE, CLAUDETTE,MARV, AND BILLY,WILL BE IN. At the very MOST, HE'LL BE A DOUBLE INDUCTEE. Not a bad feather to put in your cap, right ?

Posted by Bill G. on Friday, 10.17.08 @ 13:45pm

THE RRHOF VIOLATED ALL OF THEIR OWN RULES IN ORCHESTRATING THIS FARCE...Maybe one day they'll make it right. I don't know if SMOKEY can do it all himself,but ,if he has any power at all to do so , he should . He has nothing to lose, and everything to gain.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Bill, now you/we r at least coming near a solution, which is good - this thread has gotten very long. (FYI, I have my own particular favorite artists to promote.) Now if indeed Smokey Robinson has nothing to lose, may in fact gain from it, he should speak up. Afterall, he is on the inside. He's a member of the RHOF club. He is empowered "to make it right."

If HE comes forward and says The Miracles should be in the RHOF, the governors will certainly listen. If he stays mute, that ironically speaks loud (against yor cause). The easiest thing would be to amend Smokey Robinson's induction to be "Smokey Robinson & The Miracles." (what happens then with Billy Griffin?) Any other solution is harder because it would likely require the whole vote process. I can't imagine Smokey would agree to remove his name? And I don't think you can just instate The Miracles as a new entity - not without voting? True, Smokey Robinson shouldn't mind because he would then be as you said a double inductee. But this latter option, the one you favor, doesn't go down well. At least not with me. Because then you would have two separate entities inducted by virtue of only one election.

Its a hard knot. But what I suggest (humbly) for you to do is to define a clear-cut course of action. Take into account what is reasonable and what is feasible. (Don't curse the darkness, light a candle.) Put together a plan and get after the people who can DO something. I'm not saying you will have your way in the end. I haven't even heard the other side of the story in this case. Does anybody out there have another side to this?

No more railing here please, Bill. We've covered this and now we understand your whole point. Go and crash down your argument on the right people!

Posted by Telarock on Friday, 10.17.08 @ 16:34pm

Bill, as usual, am having an afterthought. Because its a fresh new induction of "The Miracles" you seek, you probably need to get that through the nominating committee. I've had some experience in doing that - its a tuff nut to crack! Even if you could get The Miracles nominated in the regular way (a real Miracle it might be), you still need to get them elected. That's why it makes sense (to me) to go for the amendment "& The Miracles". Seems to be that's what you wanted back in 1987?

Posted by Telarock on Friday, 10.17.08 @ 17:12pm

I stand corrected on a great deal of the facts, Bill G.

I need to poitnout, though, a few things. Gladys Knight and Martha Reeves were essentially inducted on their own: it just felt right to include the Vendellas and the Pips as well considering the inseperable nature presented. As well, there is a difference of opinion in regards to if it is the Supremes or Diana Ross and the Supremes as it became widely known. On that matter, Diana Ross may already be inducted on her own accord then.

Regarding the Miracles, it is possible that the ship has sailed for a seperate induction. We all know that Smokey Robinson is inducted; it therefore entails that his entire works and writings are included. And that does include the Miracles songs and albums.

Why, then, would Robinson need to be inducted again, only this time with a group? As well, I doubt the induction in 1987 of Smokey Robinson would be amended to include the Miracles 21 years after the fact.

Look, if you get one singular individual inducted into the RRHOF, either as only themselves or after a group induction, that ends all matters of induction. For instance, Eric Clapton is not going to be inducted for the fourth time to accomodate Derek and the Dominoes. That was for all purposes Clapton, and Eric Clapton was inducted on his own in 2000.

Likewise, my lobbying efforts have been used to campaign for the eventual induction of Peter Gabriel on his own accord primarily. I am of the inference that Gabriel will be inducted liekly in a special acheivement format for the Class of 2009: this would include the classic lineup of Genesis and each members' individual works, particulary Gabriel, Steve Hackett and Tony Banks. Now, Gabriel could also go in as a non-performer which may be a stretch. If not this time, then Gabriel is a shoo-in for 2010 in the Performers Category.

Now then, when Peter Gabriel does get inducted on his own accord, that will be the end of the matter for his induction. By every inference and knowledge given, Gabriel is the lock for induction in the Genesis tree. Now, my preference would be for a special acheivement induction format that would include the Genesis works and the entire individual works of the classic lineup, or at least its main figures. Yet, even if an induction goes only for Peter Gabriel, his Genesis songs and recordings are included for induction. Thus, Genesis from inception through 1975 will be inducted: it will be either with Peter Gabriel, or in the special acheivement format.

In another point, Lionel Richie may likely be inducted in the near future, hopefully by 2010. A Richie induction will include the songs and recordings of the Commodores from inception through 1981. Much like the Smokey Robinson edict, the Hall of Fame has more reason to induct Lionel Richie on his own, and eschew inducting the Commodores in the group format. And frankly, Richie would in all likelihood prefer it this way; it is his own induction eventually.

To note, it is a great honor to be inducted into the RRHOF with a group. To be inducted as an individual, notably after a group induction, is much sweeter and revered. And to be inducted with a group after being inducted on your own is rather odd. Neil Young, for instance, was inducted in 1995, then with Buffalo Springfield was inducted again in 1997. Young was at the ceremonies in 1995. He was not there two years later. In the next two or so years, Sting will be considered and likely inducted for his individual works. I can guarentee you that Sting might look forward to that induction, as opposed to being content with going in with the Police.

Thus, Smokey Robinson, in my belief, is more content being inducted on his own. Lionel Richie will be inducted on his own. And out of all branches of the Genesis tree, Peter Gabriel will be the one that is certain to be inducted, likely in a special acheivement form with his bandmates in 2009; though other processes may take place.

Hope this clarfies some words,

Lax25

Posted by Lax25 on Friday, 10.17.08 @ 19:14pm

R.I.P. to LEVI STUBBS...The powerhouse original lead singer of Motown Superstar group (and RRHOFamers THE FOUR TOPS , died yesterday at the age of 72 (1936-2008) The man whose lesd voice gave us several million selling hits, such as:
"BERNADETTE"
"BABY I NEED YOUR LOVING"
"SUGAR PIE HONEY BUNCH (I CAN'T MYSELF)"
"AIN'T NO WOMAN LIKE THE ONE I'VE GOT"
"IT'S THE SAME OLD SONG"
"STANDING IN THE SHADOWS OF LOVE"
"KEEPER OF THE CASTLE"
"REACH OUT ILL BE THERE"
"WHEN SHE WAS MY GIRL"
"STILL WATERS RUN DEEP"
"SHAKE ME , WAKE ME"...and many more. this leaves DUKE FAKIR as the only surviving original member , as REYNALDO "OBIE" BENSON died 4 years ago, and LAWRENCE PAYTON back in 1996.
THE FOUR TOPS stayed together for an incredible 44 years WITH ALL OF THE ORIGINAL MEMBERS...A RECORD STILL UNMATCHED TODAY.
Condolences to THE STUBBS FAMILY, TO DUKE, AND TO THE ENTIRE MOTOWN FAMILY.

Posted by Bill G on Saturday, 10.18.08 @ 09:17am

have put up this comment on the "Blender top 100 albums" discussion, but its worth repeating.

since futurerockhall is putting up lists, here's another for consideration: Billboard Hot 100 Artists of All-time?

the list has a LOT of credibility given that it is based on 50 years of what people actually listened too! ... as opposed to Jann Wenner imposed ideas of who is "Immortal", or, who he and his toadies deem "important". having hit songs should NOT be a knock on any artist.

no wonder Hall & Oates are mad at the Hall ... btw, do you know John Hall & Darryl Oates gave the induction speech for Smokey Robinson?

Posted by benny on Monday, 10.20.08 @ 11:03am

benny -- we're actually planning on highlighting the Billboard list next. Should be up this week.

Posted by Future Rock Hall on Monday, 10.20.08 @ 11:30am

Benny, I'm sure it was just a brain fart, but rather than: ' btw, do you know John Hall & Darryl Oates gave the induction speech for Smokey Robinson?'

It is Darryl Hall & John Oates.

Posted by Paul in KY on Monday, 10.20.08 @ 12:18pm

8) haha ... thanks for the correction Paul.
and thanks Future Rock for the new posting, have already checked it out.

Posted by benny on Tuesday, 10.21.08 @ 10:47am

Benny,

There is a musician named John Hall who became a New York Congressman. John Hall was a founding member of the band Orleans ("Dance With Me," "Still The One") and wrote "Half Moon" which appeared as the fourth track on Janis Joplin's "Pearl" (All three aforementioned songs were co-written with his wife Johanna) In addition, John Hall was the organizer for the "No Nukes" concerts.

Posted by Aaron O'Donnell on Tuesday, 10.21.08 @ 14:11pm

The only artists on Future Rock Hall that have a written explanation to why they have not been inducted:

Quincy Jones, The Monkees and KISS! Anyone else?

Quincy Jones:

Arguably the Rock Hall's biggest "Non-Performer" snub. Amazing he hasn't been enshrined yet.

The Monkees:

While the Monkees have legions of fans to this day, it seems unlikely that they will ever be inducted into the Rock Hall since they have been eligible since 1991. Critics never afforded the Monkees much respect since they were basically put together for a tv show. I wonder what this could mean for all of the American Idol winners?

KISS

Most fans are able to recognize the impact that KISS has made on rock and roll, so it's puzzling that they have yet to even be nominated for the Rock Hall. A big reason they're on the outside could be music critic and Rock Hall nominating committee member, Dave Marsh, who once said:

Kiss is not a great band, Kiss was never a great band, Kiss never will be a great band, and I have done my share to keep them off the ballot.
With that kind of prejudice, it's no wonder that Paul Stanley has become bitter about the Rock Hall in general:

The beauty of America is that you can basically start any kind of private club you want to. This one happens to be called the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. It's a very impressive name for a club but it's an illusion. It's the creation of a group of industry people and critics who decide who they deem as qualified to be in their little admiration society. It's their Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, but it's not the people's Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. Have you ever voted? I know I haven't. That's why the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, besides having people who very much belong in there, have an abundance of people who most people will scratch their head and not even have a clue who they are. I don't have anything against anybody who's been inducted, but more than a couple of them are a joke. A band or musician's impact is measured by how they change and influence society and other musicians. That and how many albums and concert tickets they sell should be what gets them into the Hall of Fame. As far as I'm concerned it's a private club with a misleading name. It's a sham.

KISS are one of those bands that have gone through their entire career without much critical acclaim or industry awards, but have legions of fans who couldn't care less.

Fans can rest assured that the KISS legacy will live on whether they are recognized by the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame or not. (7.19.06)

Madonna (Inducted in 2008)

Madonna released her first single, "Everybody", back in 1982, which makes her eligible for the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame next year. Since she's a virtual lock for induction, it's really just a matter of which year the Nominating Committee will submit her name for a vote.

The closest parallel to Madonna's worldwide stardom could be Michael Jackson. Michael released his first solo material in 1972 and he didn't get inducted as a solo artist until 2001, a full 4 years after he was first eligible. Jackson did get in the first time he was nominated, but what took the Nominating Committee so long? Okay, so maybe there were some other outside factors involved with Michael. Let's use Prince as an example. Prince was eligible in 2003, but he didn't even make the ballot that year for some unknown reason. The following year, he was promptly inducted.

So what does all this mean for Madonna? Well, unless she has told the Nominating Committee that she is unavailable next March for the induction ceremony (and let's not forget the TV show), because she's on tour or has a Kabbalah lesson scheduled for that night, she should be one of the 2007 inductees.

But wait, you say that Madonna isn't "rock", so she shouldn't even be eligible in the first place? Well, the Rock Hall doesn't say in it's eligibility rules that you must play rock music, just that you "have had a significant impact on the evolution, development and perpetuation of rock and roll." And I doubt anyone would deny Madonna that. (07.16.2006)

Posted by Roy on Wednesday, 10.22.08 @ 08:35am

the Rock Hall doesn't say in it's eligibility rules that you must play rock music, just that you "have had a significant impact on the evolution, development and perpetuation of rock and roll." - Roy

Roy, hope you meant that tongue-in-cheek. to be in the RHOF Performer category it goes w/o saying you must perform rock music.
Q: did Madonna?
A: I wouldn't argue against her, but would have made her at least wait a few years.

Posted by benny on Wednesday, 10.22.08 @ 16:17pm

Lax25,

Dire Straits have never been discussed by the Nominating Committee, though eligible since 2003/2004. (I must state it is a remarkable coincidence that the highest never-discussed artist on the VH1 list is #101)!

Posted by Julien Peter Benney on Wednesday, 10.22.08 @ 17:24pm

Talk about a popularity contest. Pioneers get the shaft, imitators get the gold. Where are The Replacements??? Paul Westerberg is the greatest songwriter on the planet right now. The Replacements were playing "alternative" music 15 years before it was popular and influenced about every "alternative" band in the 90's.

Posted by Mike on Thursday, 10.23.08 @ 00:22am

Thanks a lot, dude :)

Posted by Diggo on Wednesday, 10.29.08 @ 00:57am

Thanks a lot, dude :)

Posted by Diggo on Wednesday, 10.29.08 @ 01:03am

Thanks a lot, dude :)

Posted by Diggo on Wednesday, 10.29.08 @ 01:08am

Thanks a lot, dude :)

Posted by Diggo on Wednesday, 10.29.08 @ 01:15am

Thanks a lot, dude :)

Posted by Diggo on Wednesday, 10.29.08 @ 01:20am

Thanks a lot, dude :)

Posted by Diggo on Wednesday, 10.29.08 @ 01:26am

I'm familiar with a certain band Rolling Stone might of heard of them. What's their name again? Oh yeah... PINK FLOYD!!! Why aren't they on the list?

Posted by Grey on Tuesday, 11.4.08 @ 13:19pm

nivarna!!!!!
HA!!

they were a one hit wonder ... mainly because their guitarist could only that one song before he went and died

Posted by DeeJay on Friday, 11.7.08 @ 09:58am

"nivarna!!!!!
HA!!

they were a one hit wonder ... mainly because their guitarist could only that one song before he went and died"-DeeJay

Firstly, if you're going to talk about a band, spell it correctly. Secondly, look up the definition of a "one hit wonder" (you were off by about eight). Thirdly, please try to remember what you're typing and don't blank out mid-sentence and then pick back up a few words later (I'm referring to the lack of what was likely intended to be the word "record" between "only" and "that"). Fourthly, make an attempt to capitalize and punctuate properly. Fifth and finally, don't post it twice.

Thank you for your time.

Posted by William on Friday, 11.7.08 @ 13:06pm

Anyone seen the retarded Rolling Stones Top 100 Rock and Roll Singers of all time?

Holy Shit!

Rolling Stone Magazine and it's Rock and Roll Hall Of Shame has lost all credibility.

Wenner and the boys are in an acid laced pot smoking haze of the 60's.

Aretha Franklin #1

What a joke! Anything for publicity I guess.

SpaceTrucker

"Waiting for the winds of change to sweep the clouds away, waiting for the rainbows end to cast it's gold your way"
Rush

Posted by SpaceTrucker on Wednesday, 11.12.08 @ 11:20am

So, spacetrucker, who should be number 1 in your opinion? Aretha is not a bad choice.

Are you suggesting Geddy Lee with your signatuer? good luck there.

Posted by Adam on Wednesday, 11.12.08 @ 11:33am

Geddy Lee, not a chance. I love Rush but Geddy is not a great singer.

You think after all the great rock singers that have been around since Aretha that she is the best ever?

She doesn't even perform rock, she sings R&B and Soul, but that is another topic.

These list's are stupid thier is no greatest rock singer ever.

This list is so dumb they put Bob (I couldn't sing if my life depended on it) Dylan at #7.

SpaceTrucker

"If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice"
Rush

Posted by SpaceTrucker on Wednesday, 11.12.08 @ 13:12pm

I just got a look at the 'greatest singers" list, and I am shocked, to say the least. I have no problem w/Aretha Franklin being in the top ten - I'm not sue about #1, but anythings debatable. What gets me is the listing of three singers in particular - Lennon, Dylan, and Brown - in the top ten. We all know RS has their favorite pets, but if you're going to talk about straight out simple vocal quality, there are others who have to be mentioned.

I might put the man at #13, Roy Orbison, at #1. I'm not a fan of everything he did, but his voice is so awesome that outside of Chris Isaak's attempt at imitation? emulation? I cant think of anyone else trying to match him.

Some others not in the top 10, who could, for my money, be thereif you wanted to play around with this:

Freddy Mercury - 18
Jackie Wilson - 26
Howlin Wolf - 31
Bono - 32
Jim Morrison- 47
John Fogerty - 72

In addition, Janis Joplin (lol) is in the 30's, and Grace Slick is nowhere! I don't care about the image, the hype, the whole story that goes around her, Slick could sing her under the table any day of the week! I don't say Joplin didn't have a voice - she did, but it had limitations. To put it in perspective, Cobain is at 45, and Axl's at 64, I believe. Many complain Kurt had a limited voice, yet he's ahead of Axl, who has often been referred to right alongside Joplin, style wise. Yet Grace Slick, who has a better pure voice, is nowhere to be found. Are people ahead of one another cause they've got a better story? If it is, maybe that explains Lennon, Dylan, and Brown at the beginning.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Wednesday, 11.12.08 @ 17:21pm

The best pure rock & roll singer ever, in my opinion, had to be Elvis Presley...I can't even think of anyone who comes close. He could get down and dirty, he could be soulful, and he could sing exceptional ballads. Take songs like "Hound Dog" and "Jailhouse Rock" and compare them to a song like "It's Now Or Never"...just incredible range.

Cheesecrop...Roy Orbison was a great singer, but he was pretty much a tenor. His range simply didn't compare to Presley's. For that matter, Aretha Franklin doesn't have much range, either. Ray Charles...he was NEVER known for his vocal quality. I really wish RS would quit having nightmares and coming up with these silly lists...!!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Wednesday, 11.12.08 @ 20:29pm

This is "greatest" singers, not most technically perfect singers. If it were all about vocal range then why not put Andrea Bocelli at #1? He's a far more talented singer than Kurt Cobain but I know whose voice I enjoy more.

Posted by MBI on Wednesday, 11.12.08 @ 22:40pm

Gitar - No issue w/Elvis at #1. I'd gladly modify.

MBI - I just caught the sitelisting under "News & Analysis" & it was noted that not all are rock singers. This leaves the door wide open to punch a hole through the whole list. My own top ten now has Pavarotti, Domingo, Frank, Dean, Sammy, Bing, Ella, Johnny Desmond, Ginny Simms (not well known, but very good), & Peggy Lee. Along w/Elvis, Orbison, & a few others, they're all fighting for a spot. This one really backfired on RS!

Posted by Cheesecrop on Thursday, 11.13.08 @ 04:48am

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images ... 163&sr=1-1

THE BILLBOARD 200 ALBUMS CHART
By Joel Whitburn, 6th Edition, 2005 (1956-2005)

TOP 100 CHARTING ARTISTS ON THE BILLBOARD 200 ALBUMS CHART AS OF 2005

01. Elvis Presley
02. Frank Sinatra
03. The Beatles
04. Barbra Streisand
05. The Rolling Stones
06. Johnny Mathis
07. Elton John
08. Bob Dylan
09. Neil Diamond
10. The Temptations
11. The Beach Boys
12. Eric Clapton
13. Ray Conniff
14. Willie Nelson
15. Ray Charles
16. Rod Stewart
17. Mantovani
18. Aretha Franklin
19. Paul McCartney
20. David Bowie
21. Prince
22. James Brown
23. Pink Floyd
24. Andy Williams
25. Lawrence Welk
26. Neil Young
27. Bee Gees
28. Chicago
29. The Supremes
30. Henry Mancini
31. The Kingston Trio
32. Jimmy Buffett
33. Herb Alpert
34. Kenny Rogers/First Edition
35. Jimi Hendrix
36. Aerosmith
37. Stevie Wonder
38. Grateful Dead
39. Roger Williams
40. Fleetwood Mac
41. The Ventures
42. Led Zeppelin
43. Van Morrison
44. George Strait
45. Nat "King" Cole
46. Kiss
47. Linda Ronstadt
48. Metallica
49. Johnny Cash
50. Billy Vaughn
51. Bruce Springsteen
52. Diana Ross
53. Barry Manilow
54. Queen
55. Santana
56. The Who
57. Garth Brooks
58. Madonna
59. Jefferson Airplane/Starship
60. U2
61. Dionne Warwick
62. Billy Joel
63. John Denver
64. Rush
65. Mitch Miller
66. Michael Jackson
67. James Taylor
68. Harry Belafonte
69. The Isley Brothers
70. Alabama
71. The Lettermen
72. The Eagles
73. AC/DC
74. Nancy Wilson
75. Marvin Gaye
76. The Doors
77. Jethro Tull
78. Dolly Parton
79. Tony Bennett
80. The Kinks
81. Dean Martin
82. The Monkees
83. Joan Baez
84. Journey
85. Tom Petty and The Heartbreakers
86. Glen Campbell
87. Gladys Knight and The Pips
88. Earth, Wind & Fire
89. The Moody Blues
90. Frank Zappa
91. Mariah Carey
92. Anne Murray
93. Steve Miller Band
94. Enoch Light
95. Cher
96. Carole King
97. Daryl Hall & John Oates
98. Elvis Costello
99. Carly Simon
100. Bob Seger

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 11.18.08 @ 05:12am

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/0898201667/ref=dp_image_0?ie=UTF8&n=283155&s=books

THE BILLBOARD 200 ALBUMS CHART

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 11.18.08 @ 05:26am

Okay, I'm the new President of the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame and the following artists receive automatic induction!:

2010 Rock Hall

The Remaining Top Charting Artists on the Billboard 200 Albums Chart:

02. Frank Sinatra
04. Barbra Streisand
06. Johnny Mathis
09. Neil Diamond
14. Willie Nelson
28. Chicago

2011 Rock Hall

50s-60s Folk and Surf Music

Joan Baez
Judy Collins
Peter, Paul and Mary
The Kingston Trio
Fairport Convention
Buffy Sainte-Marie
Phil Ochs
Laura Nyro
Melanie
Jan and Dean
The Surfaris
Dick Dale

2012 Rock Hall

Artists that the Public Complains About the Most

Chubby Checker
The Monkees
Genesis
Rush
KISS
Alice Cooper
Ozzy Osbourne
Quincy Jones
Bernie Taupin

2013

Blood, Sweat & Tears
Kool & The Gang
The Commodores
The Doobie Brothers
Cheap Trick
Heart
The Cars
Hall & Oates

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 11.18.08 @ 06:01am

2014

Prog-Rock

Jethro Tull
King Crimson
Deep Purple
Emerson, Lake and Palmer
Iron Maiden

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 11.18.08 @ 06:06am

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 11.18.08 @ 06:06am

YOU FORGOT ONE!

2012 Rock Hall

Artists that the Public Complains About the Most

Chubby Checker
The Monkees
The Moody Blues
Genesis
Rush
KISS
Alice Cooper
Ozzy Osbourne
Quincy Jones
Bernie Taupin

Posted by RAKER on Tuesday, 11.18.08 @ 07:27am

TOP 100 CHARTING ARTISTS ON THE BILLBOARD 200 ALBUMS CHART AS OF 2005
(Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 11.18.08 @ 05:12am)
=====================================================
that is a very nice list to work with ... I find 20 artists not already in (below), who arguably deserve consideration for the RHOF:
y 09. Neil Diamond
y 23. Pink Floyd
? 27. Bee Gees
y 28. Chicago
? 46. Kiss
y 47. Linda Ronstadt
y 48. Metallica
y 54. Queen
y 63. John Denver
y 64. Rush
y 77. Jethro Tull
? 82. The Monkees
y 84. Journey
y 86. Glen Campbell
y 89. The Moody Blues
y 93. Steve Miller Band
? 95. Cher
y 96. Carole King
y 97. Daryl Hall & John Oates
? 99. Carly Simon

the "y" are my personal choices (like them or not) ... obviously all these artists had some depth and longevity to sell so many albums. of my 15 y's, I feel very STRONGLY about Diamond, Chicago, Tull, Moody Blues.

btw: Michael Jackson probably should be up near the top, not #66. Thriller alone sold over 50 million worldwide. his work with Jackson 5 is not counted (but he's already in RHOF anyway). also, am surprized we don't see 3 Dog Night on this list?

Posted by benny on Tuesday, 11.18.08 @ 09:53am

The Bee Gees are already in, BENNY

Posted by GHYU on Tuesday, 11.18.08 @ 10:49am

and Pink Floyd, and Queen! All already in!

Posted by GHYT on Tuesday, 11.18.08 @ 10:50am

benny, I'm pretty sure Pink Floyd is in.

Posted by Paul in KY on Tuesday, 11.18.08 @ 12:36pm

Roy -

Normally I like this neat lists you print, but this Billboard chart has got me a bit confused. It's not that I don't know what it is, but what precisely is your point in printing it?

This list has to do w/artists with the most charting albums. Are you trying to signal us as to looking at someone in particular (i.e. Chicago)? Just what's up here?

Posted by Cheesecrop on Tuesday, 11.18.08 @ 17:33pm

Someone has probably already posted this, but alluding to the new RS 'Top 100 Singers' list, the RS website has links to the ballots filled out by various Rock personalities. Seems like they all had to do a top 20 list (those who voted).

Some of their selections are interesting. Courtney Love completed a legit list, with exception that she put herself as #1. Some dude named James Blunt only wrote himself in as #1 and didn't list anyone else (he must be a dick).

It's worth a lok.

Posted by Paul in KY on Thursday, 11.20.08 @ 06:56am

Another stupid list from R.S.

Freddie is not number 1, therefore the list is useless.

Posted by Dameon on Thursday, 11.20.08 @ 19:32pm

Air Suppleee:

Metal fan, huh? Are we talkin' straight 80's or all metal in general? Obviously you really didn't read what I wrote about the Crue, or you'd realize I was joking around. No offense to anyone who can't stand 80's metal either; I've never been hung up on the metal vs grunge thing. My 20 favorite metal songs, no preference here, all-time:

1. Zeppelin - Communication Breakdown
2. Sabbath - Paranoid
3. Purple - Highway Star
4. Aerosmith - Toys in the Attic
5. Kiss - Shout It Out Loud
6. VH - Atomic Punk
7. AC/DC - Shoot to Thrill
8. Priest - You Got Another Thing Comin'
9. Maiden - Run to the Hills
10. Def Lep - Armaggedon It
11. Ratt - Round & Round
12. Dokken - Unchain the Night
13. GNR - Nighttrain
14. Winger - Seventeen
15. Skid Row - Youth Gone Wild
16. Megadeth - Peace Sells
17. Alice In Chains - Angry Chair
18. Soundgarden - Outshined
19. White Zombie - Black Sunshine
20. Godsmack - Voodoo

Posted by Cheesecrop on Friday, 12.19.08 @ 05:44am

Cheese....why are you even indulging this piece of crap with an attempt at civilized conversation. Piss on him and his thoughts and be done with it.

Posted by Blah-blah-blah on Friday, 12.19.08 @ 07:01am

I was not aware that Mercedes-Benz made a bicycle....

Posted by Gitarzan on Friday, 12.19.08 @ 07:21am

Cheese....why are you even indulging this piece of crap with an attempt at civilized conversation. Piss on him and his thoughts and be done with it.

Posted by Blah-blah-blah on Friday, 12.19.08 @ 07:01am
--------------------------------------------------
I don't blame you for thinking this way, and I ask you not to dump on me because I am attempting a vaguely civilizied conversation.

It's the reason I always promise not to jump on people's cases, even when there pumping the Backstreets or New Kids. Well, most of the time I don't bash them. I can't help but be interested. When I was growing up I was into old time comedy acts, and tried to get as much info on them as possible. At one point I purchased the autobiography of Harpo Marx, and there was a passage in it in which he described himself as "a professional listener", hence his ability to float into different social circles.

A part of me was that way growing up, and even though I talk a heck of a lot more now, a part of me can't help but remain that way. In a world where everyone's screaming over each other, a part of me is still the professional listener.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Friday, 12.19.08 @ 16:54pm

Cheesecrop, I think you jumped the track here? Your reply s/b to the airhead on Motley Crue page. I like your live & let live outlook. I makes for peace. Also to 'listen' is a good thing, but there is a time tune out. But, Blah is right. Don't respond nicely to any banal boob who talks trash about peoples' mothers.

Somewhere else I read your post on Nirvana and agree with you there. Even if Cobain was not Clapton (on guitar), the Nirvana grunge style allows for that. As to Yes or No on Nirvana, I really am conflicted. They only had 3 albums I think. Is that really enough? (I should get on the right page, then comment.)

Posted by Telarock on Friday, 12.19.08 @ 18:13pm

The Late, great LEVI STUBBS of THE FOUR TOPS. One of the most POWERFUL, most EMOTION-PACKED vocalists EVER.... and NOT EVEN ON THE LIST !!!

Posted by Bill G. on Tuesday, 12.23.08 @ 07:39am

Actually, the 4 Tops are on the list - #93

RIP Levi - you are truly remembered by all.

Posted by Blah-blah-blah on Tuesday, 12.23.08 @ 07:47am

I'm sorry . I meant the listing of the 100 Greatest Singers. Levi is not there.... and he SHOULD be !!

Posted by Bill G. on Tuesday, 12.23.08 @ 19:19pm

Only 20th Century artists should be inducted into the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame!

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 01.6.09 @ 09:49am

Would that be because artists who started their careers in the 21st century would not be eligible until 2026 and after?

Posted by Dameon on Tuesday, 01.6.09 @ 15:04pm

Only 20th Century artists should be inducted into the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame!

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 01.6.09 @ 09:49am
--------------------------------------------------
I'd like to cast a vote for Enrico Caruso then. He was rockin' the opera house turn of the century style.

Don't fear the 21st century, cause there's no going back to the 20th (at least not yet, anyway). There will be a few acts from this decade who get in when their time comes. Let the 21st century have a chance to settle in before you pull a Mr. Wizard on everybody and show us your time machine.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Tuesday, 01.6.09 @ 15:41pm

Why are the Byrds on any list?

Posted by Gitarzan on Monday, 01.19.09 @ 00:33am

Wow that is a good question!!!
They should of been in years ago !

Posted by mrxyz on Monday, 01.19.09 @ 07:55am

Regarding The Byrds: already were inducted in 1991.

Posted by Worm on Monday, 01.19.09 @ 14:47pm

I ask this question on the immortals page cause whoever is the answer to this question should be considered immortal, at least by this site's standards:

Does anyone know what artist has the most comments?

I just wandered over to the Coven page for a minute. They have 689 comments as I write this. That's over double the Beatles. It would be impossible for one person to look at every page, but I'm wondering, does anyone have more than Coven?

Posted by Cheesecrop on Sunday, 01.25.09 @ 17:32pm

At 662, Bon Jovi is closing in fast. After that Madonna has 449. The bigger the argument, the more response there is. On Coven's, it is wild how "all over the map" those posts are...some of it pretty interesting.

As for Dick Dale, that's gotta be close to being a good call (mrxyz won't like it, though...LOL).

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 01.25.09 @ 17:49pm

Coven, Bon Jovi, Rush, Kiss, Madonna, Stevie Ray Vaughan, Nirvana, Metallica, Tom Jones, Steve Perry and the Beatles.

Posted by Future Rock Hall on Sunday, 01.25.09 @ 21:04pm

All i'm going to say is No. 1 should be Elvis, and No. 2 should be the Beatles, period !!!
They are most immortal than any of the others on these 2 lists or any other lists. If it wasn't for Elvis there would not be the Beatles. Elvis started it all, for all the other generations (decades)of artists who came after him.

Posted by cricket on Tuesday, 01.27.09 @ 11:22am

How does Queen not make the Rolling Stone's Immortals list??? Come on!! Freddie Mercury is Rolling over in his grave right now! Madonna made the list!!! She sang like a virgin and material girl!! Those song are much better than lets say Crazy little thing called love, killer queen, Bohemian Rhapsody, and not to mention Under Pressure the collaboration with David Bowie!

Posted by Wendy on Thursday, 01.29.09 @ 07:25am

Wendy...You scared the crap out of me. Queen is number 33 on this list.

Posted by Blah-blah-blah on Thursday, 01.29.09 @ 08:26am

This list is a joke without Todd Rundgren on it.

Posted by Bob on Wednesday, 02.4.09 @ 08:10am

AGREE OR NOT THIS LIST WAS MADE BY SOME PEOPLE WHOSE OPINION IS PROBABLY THIS. OF COURSE IS SILLY OF THEM TO BE SO ABSOLUTE AND SAY "THESE ARE THE IMORTALS"
WHAT ARE THE CRITIRIA? WHY DID PUT NIRVANA IN NUMBER 27 OF ALL AGES. WHY ARE THEY IGNORING LEGENDS SUCH AS SCORPIONS AND DEEP PURPLE?

Posted by JUIAVA on Thursday, 02.5.09 @ 15:55pm

Since when are The Scorpions legendary? Come on! I don't know why Deep Purple is excluded (they probably where #101), but why The Scorpions aren't on it is quite obvious. They are not thát important, people!

Posted by The_Claw on Friday, 02.6.09 @ 04:17am

Very nice site!
[LINK http://training.cvc4.org/pharm1/14286/3.html]cheap tramadol[/LINK]

Posted by Pharm6 on Wednesday, 02.11.09 @ 16:24pm

Rolling Stone's list....Bob Marley, Nirvana, The Velvet Underground, Jerry Lee Lewis BEFORE The Who? Need anyone say more what a piece of crap RS's list is. Who even listens anymore to anything Madonna produced?

The VH1 list isn't any better. David Bowie and The Police before the Kinks?

Seiously, in 25, 50 or 100 years, what will people be listening to? I can guarantee they'll still be listening to The Who, The Kinks, Elvis, The Beatles. Madonna, Michael Jackson - No

Posted by Z. Roe on Monday, 02.16.09 @ 17:43pm

Etta James and Dinah Washington have already been inducted. So should all the other casino/lounge/crooners/hollywood actors with hits from the 40s and 50s.

EARLY INFLUENCE CATEGORY

Bing Crosby
Frank Sinatra
Tony Bennett
Dean Martin
Sammy Davis Jr.
Mel Torme
Peggy Lee
Ella Fitzgerald
Harry Belafonte
Eartha Kitt
Barbra Streisand

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 02.17.09 @ 14:50pm

Ok, first off, why should ALL lounge crooners be inducted? How were they all influential to the development of Rock And Roll? Two, you left Perry Como off your list. Three, Barbra Streisand didn't have any hits at all until 1964, I believe. She should never be inducted anyway.

Posted by Philip on Tuesday, 02.17.09 @ 14:52pm

I think when deciding upon the biggest influences of rock and roll, it should be decided upon whom has inspired music artists themselves. This is not a popularity contest among fans, but is a contest between actual devoted music artists themselves regardless the genre. Just tally 'em up.

Posted by Cam Eisen on Sunday, 02.22.09 @ 20:56pm

THE ROCK AND ROLL HALL OF FAME

NON-PERFORMER CATEGORY INDUCTEES

1986 Alan Freed
1986 Sam Phillips
1987 Leonard Chess
1987 Ahmet Ertegun
1987 Jerry Leiber and Mike Stoller
1987 Jerry Wexler
1988 Berry Gordy, Jr
1989 Phil Spector
1990 Gerry Goffin and Carole King
1990 Holland-Dozier-Holland
1991 Dave Bartholomew
1991 Ralph Bass
1992 Leo Fender
1992 Bill Graham
1992 Doc Pomus
1993 Dick Clark
1993 Milt Gabler
1994 Johnny Otis
1995 Paul Ackerman
1996 Tom Donahue
1997 Syd Nathan
1998 Allen Toussaint
1999 George Martin
2000 Clive Davis
2001 Chris Blackwell
2002 Jim Stewart
2003 Mo Ostin
2008 Kenny Gamble and Leon Huff

LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT CATEGORY INDUCTEES

1986 John Hammond
1991 Nesuhi Ertegun
2004 Jann Wenner
2005 Frank Barsalona
2005 Seymour Stein
2006 Herb Alpert and Jerry Moss

Posted by Roy on Monday, 03.2.09 @ 17:22pm

The justification for Roxy Music is easy -- see the analysis by The Guardian (one of the world's most respected papers on music) -- Roxy is the 2nd most influential UK band after the Beatles (at worst they are in the top 5). http://arts.guardian.co.uk/fridayreview/story/0,,1487397,00.html
On induction U2 said Roxy is in their Hall of Fame, to embarrass the biased Hall voters. Morrissey states that For Your Pleasure is the best British Album. Roxy's debut is considered the best Brit debut in history by NME. They were one of the most creative bands ever on Planet Earth, inspiring tons of others to form bands in the 70s and 80s and 90s. And of course Avalon is the pinnacle of Rock elegance - per Rolling Stone. And founding member Eno has more representation in the RS top 500 than anyone else (Roxy, solo, and production credits).

Posted by M Rourke on Saturday, 05.2.09 @ 03:36am

Agreed regarding Roxy Music. Acclaimed Music has them as the best band not in the hall. Rumor is that Bill Flanagan on the nominating committee will finally make a big push for Roxy next year given the heat his has gotten from U2, Bowie, Johnny Marr, Gilmour and tons of other top artists to bring respect back to the Hall by at least correcting their biggest mistake.

Posted by A Pennsean on Saturday, 05.2.09 @ 03:52am

Do The Strand...

Posted by Joe-Skee on Saturday, 05.2.09 @ 09:59am

Yes Roxy Music should defintely be in the Rockhall - if creativeness, influence, and groundbreaking versatility mean anything. Roxy was even a relative commercial powerhouse outside of America - with many #1 and Top 10 albums in the UK, continental Europe, Japan, Australia and New Zealand. Their last album Avalon even went platinum in the US, and produced millions of pregnancies as a result.

Posted by Mtomei on Saturday, 05.2.09 @ 21:06pm

Yes, Roxy Music should be in as Bowie has often said. No use stepping inside the hall in Cleveland until Roxy and Ferry are in. If artists were on the committee, they would have made it the year. Likewise The Smiths should make it their first year. Slam dunks.

Posted by ER Wood on Saturday, 05.2.09 @ 21:19pm

And meant to say, that Guardian article on Roxy was very interesting. Thanks for posting.

Posted by ER Wood on Saturday, 05.2.09 @ 21:20pm

Why No fleetwood Mac? Surely Tusk,Rumours and fleetwood mac(white album) are considered immortal. And then theres Tango in the night which is a great 80's record. The Dance which is one of the best live albums and Say you will one of the best albums of the last ten Years. And thats only the Buckingham Nicks era of the band if you include Peter Green and to a lesser extent Bob Welch surely they deserve to be on the list. As for Eminem on the list dont make me laugh. At first i taught it was hilrious that people were geting roped in by what is basically a R Rated Vanilla Ice. His appeal i presumed was down to young kids thinking is profanity was cool. There is nothing sadder than a grown man or woman lisitening to this garbage. If you threw him on saturday night live as a quick comedy sketch perhaps it could be amusing but to seriously consider it immortal music is a joke and a sick one at that. Luckily it appears most of his 'Fans' have grown up and rejected his comic stylings. His first song slim shady or my name is or whatever its called is a travesty and sums him up for me.
Rolling Stone as far as i know has zero respect from the majority of both music fans and musicians themselves. It has sold out far to many times before and i wont even go into some of the legends it initially dismissed.

Posted by Lindsey Buckingham on Monday, 05.11.09 @ 05:00am

ONE WORD RUSH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by MWRRUSH on Thursday, 05.14.09 @ 09:39am

where are the chili peppers??????

Posted by john westwood on Saturday, 06.20.09 @ 20:09pm

Nirvana? HAH!!

God, talk about all p!ss and wind. They were influential, but immortals? and WOLRDWIDE?

Posted by ...... on Sunday, 06.28.09 @ 02:54am

I've always wondered about Nirvana's worldwide appeal...did they ever tour outside the states? I agree that grunge might have impacted "hair metal" (which some groups have been unjustly accused of being), but they certainly didn't push metal totally out of the way because it fizzled out and metal is still hanging in there...

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 06.28.09 @ 08:43am

In my opinion thrash and other more rougher-edged forms of metal had more to do with hair metal's death.

Let's not forgot that Metallica had a top 10 album with ...And Justice for All before Nirvana even released an album.

Posted by Dude Man on Sunday, 06.28.09 @ 09:10am

In my opinion thrash and other more rougher-edged forms of metal had more to do with hair metal's death.

Let's not forgot that Metallica had a top 10 album with ...And Justice for All before Nirvana even released an album.

Posted by Dude Man on Sunday, 06.28.09 @ 09:10am
--------------------------------------------------
...And Justice For All was released in 88. Afterwards, you still had both Warrant & Poison come down the line w/hit records, &, depending on you count them, Motley Crue and Skid Row.

Whatever effect thrash was having, it wasn't enough to unseat glam metal at the top. Consider also acts like Slaughter & Firehouse from 90/91 as well.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Sunday, 06.28.09 @ 18:29pm

I've always wondered about Nirvana's worldwide appeal...did they ever tour outside the states? I agree that grunge might have impacted "hair metal" (which some groups have been unjustly accused of being), but they certainly didn't push metal totally out of the way because it fizzled out and metal is still hanging in there...

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 06.28.09 @ 08:43am
--------------------------------------------------
Check out '1991: The Year Punk Broke" to see Nirvana/Sonic Youth/Dinosaur Jr./The Ramones, etc. overseas.

You're absolutely right about that. Nothing will push metal away for good, cause there'll always be that group of peole who want something extremely loud and at least slightly out of the mainstream. Metal adapted to grunge and just got heavier & ditched the solos. Amped up the riffs and produced nu metal & rap rock. Another move in a different direction.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Sunday, 06.28.09 @ 18:35pm

If you look at some bands bands that started out as hair bands like Skid Row(first album) and Pantera(first 4 albums) they didn't put on flannel and startplaying grunge. Thosebands went into more grittier forms of metal. Skid Row went in the speed direction and Pantera with groove metal.

Also, the thrash bands had already gained an underground popularity and were begining to crossover. Megadeth had So Far, So Good... So What! that hit #28 on the charts and Rust in Peace hit #23 a year before Nirvana released Nevermind.

Thrash and the other forms of extreme metal had more to do with the end of hair metal, not grunge!

Posted by Dude Man on Sunday, 06.28.09 @ 19:00pm

If you look at some bands bands that started out as hair bands like Skid Row(first album) and Pantera(first 4 albums) they didn't put on flannel and startplaying grunge. Thosebands went into more grittier forms of metal. Skid Row went in the speed direction and Pantera with groove metal.

Also, the thrash bands had already gained an underground popularity and were begining to crossover. Megadeth had So Far, So Good... So What! that hit #28 on the charts and Rust in Peace hit #23 a year before Nirvana released Nevermind.

Thrash and the other forms of extreme metal had more to do with the end of hair metal, not grunge!

Posted by Dude Man on Sunday, 06.28.09 @ 19:00pm
--------------------------------------------------
First, I'm not questioning which direction Skid Row/Pantera went AFTER grunge. Whatever way they went, it didn't work that well, at least in Skids case. I was questioning whom you felt was glam between "And Justic" & Nirvana.

Secondly, your comments about Megadeth only go to prove my point about Nirvana even more. Thrash WAS breaking through, though on a very slow level. For what it's worth, grunge sped up the process about five times faster. Had we been forced to rely solely on thrash, glam would've been still around in 1996, for goodness sakes!

Posted by Cheesecrop on Monday, 06.29.09 @ 18:43pm

I'm sure grunge had something to do with the end of hair metal, but thrash IMO really had more to do with it's downfall.

Metallica and Megadeth were playing in hair metal central(LA) and starting to win over larger crowds. When Nirvana and company were under-the-radar were playing in Washington, far from a place that they could win over the hair metal crowds.

Also, Metallica's smash crossover Black Album hit in August of 1991. Nevermind would not be released until later the next month.

Posted by Dude Man on Monday, 06.29.09 @ 20:23pm

Well, I think what you have to consider here is the mainstream rock radio format and what MTV was programming. What replaced hair metal as the popular rock of the time? Nirvana and their contemporaries as well as anything else generally called "alternative" followed by Nirvana clones and the post-grunge bands. Metallica and Megadeth became very popular but that kind of heavy music as a whole was still a niche. Metallica, Megadeth, and Pantera were exceptions. Heavy music didn't really take over again until the late 90s and the music of that era was very much a product of the post-grunge stuff that preceded it, Alice in Chains being the major template.

The kinds of kids who were turned on to the metal of the 90s were very different from those who listened to hair metal who had come of age long before the sea change occurred. The latter were set in their ways and weren't going to change with the times (like baby boomers and 60s music.) Metallica may have converted some of the hair metal crowd but that alone couldn't kill the entire popular culture of hair metal. Like all things, it had naturally run its course. It was a new generation of kids that came into a new sound at the precise time.

From my perspective as someone who used to be a hardcore metal fan and who is now just a hardcore music fan, it seems like the rejection of the "Nirvana killed hair" notion is out of some issue of musical superiority. Let it be said that post-grunge was as bad as hair metal. It's interesting to note that many fans of the 80s alternative music viewed the post-grunge stuff as inauthentic and artless just as metal fans viewed the concurrent hair metal with disdain. It was all with good reason. Alternative/indie guy of the 90s: You didn't like Bush, you liked Pavement. Metal guy of the 80s: You didn't like Winger, you liked Voivod. It's one type of cruddy music replaced with another in the popular sphere - the best stuff usually ran beneath the surface (of course, there are always exceptions.) It happened again with metal in the late 90s: Limp Bizkit? No, no, no. Dark Tranquility? Yes, yes, yes.

Posted by Elastic Man on Tuesday, 06.30.09 @ 03:50am

Metallica and Megadeth were playing in hair metal central(LA) and starting to win over larger crowds. When Nirvana and company were under-the-radar were playing in Washington, far from a place that they could win over the hair metal crowds.

Also, Metallica's smash crossover Black Album hit in August of 1991. Nevermind would not be released until later the next month.

Posted by Dude Man on Monday, 06.29.09 @ 20:23pm
--------------------------------------------------
You may also be forgetting where a great deal of the metal crowd went during 89/90, namely to hip-hop. The bandwagon jumpers of 86-88 went to dance and rap when they tired of metal. I can still recall in 90 the day I ran into a friend who used to have long hair & always seemed to be wearing the same Whitesnake shirt day in & day out, only this day he had cut his hair. Within a few months he was hooked on M.C. Hammer. If anything, people were slowly leaving metal behind, so I'm not sure the M & M boys geography had a lot to do w/it.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Tuesday, 06.30.09 @ 05:18am

It is almost impossible to say that one genre kills off another genre. Different generations of teenagers have different environments in which they grow up and the music of the times tends to reflect this. You usually see this in the small clubs before you hear it on the radio or see it in the concert halls.

In general, I would seriously doubt that in 1992, some kid decided while listening to the radio one afternoon that he will no longer like Poison and will instead like Megadeth or Nirvana. This taste would tend to be acquired in school or the local pub over a couple of years time. Sometimes it is based purely on peer pressure. What are the cool kids listening to? I will listen to the same. Or sometimes a kid will say to himself, I want to be different than everyone else, so I will listen to something different. And hopefully in some cases, a kid hears music and it really connects.

Then you have band issues. As the 80's came to a close and 90's began, the biggest bands were Def Leppard, Guns And Roses, Poison, Motley Crue, Whitesnake, Dokken and sadly Bon Jovi. Looked what happened?

Steve Clark (DL) died
Izzy Stradlin left GnR
C.C. DeVille left Poison
The Crue imploded on each other
George Lynch kept leaving Dokken
W.S. could not repeat it's success because the other talent in the band, John Sykes along with the rest of the band that recorded the self-titled album were all replaced.

This had a major impact on the music that these bands recorded. The second tier bands, although many of them were good to excellent, did not have the following or popularity that the big bands had. So what happened?

Metallica added some basic melody into the music and started crossing over. Nirvana's music was all about melody only with a slight punk edge to it and crossed over.

And what does this all mean - nothing except that music magazines started writing more articles on them then they did on the previous generations bands and the 80's then became washed up poseur music.

As I see it, it is all of the same basic genre. Hard Rock with different twists which is why I listened to all of it. It's just music people. Listen to what you like and don't listen to what you hate. As long as we have music, our lives are better.

Posted by Dameon on Tuesday, 06.30.09 @ 08:47am

Agreed, we'll never know for sure what ended hair metal. For all we know it could have been Beavis and Butt-head!

Posted by Dude Man on Tuesday, 06.30.09 @ 10:18am

"Nirvana's music was all about melody only with a slight punk edge to it and crossed over."

This isn't entirely accurate. Bleach (their only grunge record) certainly isn't that way and much of In Utero isn't either. What made Nevermind so compelling was that it was essentially a mix between The Stooges' Funhouse and the melodic prowess of the early Beatles. It was cathartic and different. This was all funneled via Kurt's love of The Pixies and early twee and noise pop like Beat Happening and The Vaselines. So really, it was more than just a tinge of punk...they were the culmination and embodiment of that entire preceding decade and tradition of underground music; punk, post punk, noise, melodic Brit guitar pop, Black Flag's take on hard rock - it was all in Nirvana. This is something all of their illegitimate ancestors (anything called post-grunge) missed. This is why groups like Sonic Youth heralded and fostered their potential. They were the only band that could have done what happened that year.

Posted by Elastic Man on Tuesday, 06.30.09 @ 22:07pm

Elastic Man - you are right except that it was the melody filled "Nevermind" that broke them into the mainstream. And that is the point I was making.

Posted by Dameon on Wednesday, 07.1.09 @ 04:37am

I didn't know where else to put this, so I'm writing it here. What exactly is "The Hot List" that appears on the side every time you click on the "Latest Comments" button? I don't know what the point of this list is but right now this is what it says:
The Hot List:
This week's active artists
Steve Perry
Coven
The Troggs
Guns N Roses
Red Hot Chili Peppers
INXS
Journey
Celine Dion
Alice Cooper
Kiss

If it has Steve Perry and Celine Dion on it I don't know if I want anything to do with it!!

Posted by Keebord on Monday, 07.6.09 @ 20:20pm

"A purist is one who desires that an item remain true to its essence and free from adulterating or diluting influences."- Wiki Wiki

Hmmmm.....!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Monday, 07.6.09 @ 21:16pm

I pretty sure the "Hot List" is a list of the artists who are recieving the most votes at a certain time. The higher you are the more votes you are currrently getting or something like that.

Posted by Dude Man on Monday, 07.6.09 @ 21:28pm

Philip...Are you working tonight? If so, have a good one...if not, have a good one anyway! You'll have to let us know your station sometime, so we can be overly critical of your show...LOL!!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Monday, 07.6.09 @ 21:56pm

I figured that might have something to with it, but I don't see what's so "Hot" about it

Posted by Keebord on Monday, 07.6.09 @ 22:30pm

What's wrong with being a rock purist? I'd wear that label proudly

Posted by Oberon on Wednesday, 07.8.09 @ 19:04pm

Oberon, actually, "You've Lost that Lovin' Feeling" is the song with the most airplay ever, follwed by "Never My Love", "Yesterday", "Stand By Me", and "Dock Of The Bay"...and whatever song Philip plays when he needs a "break"!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Wednesday, 07.8.09 @ 19:09pm

Secondly, your comments about Megadeth only go to prove my point about Nirvana even more. Thrash WAS breaking through, though on a very slow level. For what it's worth, grunge sped up the process about five times faster. Had we been forced to rely solely on thrash, glam would've been still around in 1996, for goodness sakes!

Posted by Cheesecrop on Monday, 06.29.09 @ 18:43pm

Nirvana is a terrible group

Posted by Marty on Thursday, 07.9.09 @ 15:28pm

I could never understand the Nirvana thing and the following paragraphs about Nirvana that i found on-line more or less summarizes my views:

"One thing I have never understood is why Nirvana is so loved by writers/critics. To me, the influence Nirvana had is majorly overrated. They are continually hailed as having brought music away from teen pop and hairbands. Huh? Does no one remember Guns N Roses having hits in the late 80s and paving the way for other rock acts to get radio play? Does no one remember alternative acts like R.E.M. and Red Hot Chili Peppers having hits in the late 80s and early 90s? Do these writers not remember Mariah Carey saangin' and writing her own songs before Nirvana hit? So-called "manufactured" acts were on their way out before Nirvana hit.

Also, "grunge" music died out in about 3 years. It's not like Cobain started a whole new movement in music. By the late 90s we had teen pop again and also assembly-line rock by Limp Bizkit, Linkin Park, etc. - acts who owed more to hip-hop (with the rap verses and beats) than grunge.

In my opinion, Nirvana/Cobain are hugely overrated. What do you all think?"

I think Soundgarden was a grunge act that predated Nirvana by a full year. I'll add that I was never into grunge.

Posted by Keebord on Thursday, 07.9.09 @ 15:33pm

Keebord -

Read your immortals bit on Nirvana. If you were never into grunge, then why do you bother commenting on it? I'll be the first to admit I made a mistake commenting on the Small Faces, a band I knew little of and probably could have cared less about.

Some people liked Nirvana's stuff. So sorry if you didn't get it. In addition, only the truly narrow minded would assume grunge was the only thing that made up the alternative rock field, even at it's commerical peak. Whomever you quoted has something of a narrow viewpoint in this regards. Whether you cared for them or not, they got the credit. Don't like it? Tough.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Thursday, 07.9.09 @ 20:16pm

Well yes Cheesecrop, you have a point. Mind you, I hardly think grunge was what mostly made up the alternative scene. I realize now I made a bit of a mistake quoting that individual. I plan on expressing my views about Nirvana at a later time when I can get more thoughts around them seeing as I've never given Nirvana that much thought (maybe I should have)

Posted by Keebord on Thursday, 07.9.09 @ 23:36pm

The individual I quoted was on another site and I asked him how old he was. He said he was 21. This means that he was very young when the grunge scene unfolded so I'm unaware of how familiar he is with it or how vast his musical knowledge is

Posted by Keebord on Friday, 07.10.09 @ 12:21pm

THE VH1 LIST IS GARBAGE ELVIS AT 8 SHOULD BE 2 CHUCK BEERY AT 26 SHOULD BE IN TOP 5 NOTICE WHERE MICHAEL JACKSON IS ON THE BOTH LISTS INTRESTING.

Posted by GEORGE on Friday, 07.10.09 @ 20:19pm

GEORGE...what "list" are you talking about? I'm thinking that the people at VH-1 didn't know that rock existed before the 80's...

Posted by Gitarzan on Friday, 07.10.09 @ 20:23pm

Simon & Garfunkel were 'artists'? lol

Posted by Holstein4Kramer on Friday, 07.10.09 @ 20:27pm

Simon & Garfunkel were artists in just about every sense of the word...some absolutely brilliant music...

Posted by Gitarzan on Friday, 07.10.09 @ 20:55pm

Yes, Gitarzan, you are so wise,

Simon & Garfunkel, sure they are, they are brilliant

They were great, The Beatles were great, Elton was great, Journey were great, they are are all great, with only one exception: Madonna, she is the worst, she is nothing, nada, zit

Beatles may have sold zillions of records,u're a big fan of them, but

who has the biggest selling album of all time? Jackson
what generation made that album the biggest of all time, selling in 2 years, 1983&1984, a staggering 20 million in copies in USA?
yours, your country
who supported that album in becoming the biggest selling in USA,on the long run, as a title of pride?
the black community, in your country, dumbsuck
who said that he owns 2 albums by Jackson and not one album by Madonna?
you gitarzan, coz u are a smart dumbsuck

Posted by Gaven on Friday, 07.10.09 @ 22:54pm

And you, G., are indicative of many of ur generation

Coz in 1986, this white chick, Madonna, released a perfect pop album, better than Thriller, with 5 amazing lead singles, this Madonna showed herself as a performer and artist better than Jackson (which was unthinkable at the time, and maybe still is)


but nooo, people like Gitarzan went back to their Beatles, Rolling Stones, Led Zeppellin IV and (like u confessed) Jackson album,

Posted by Gaven on Friday, 07.10.09 @ 22:58pm

The black community did their duty, they bought that Thriller crap not once, but 30 times all over again, so that you don't forget it

Posted by Gaven on Friday, 07.10.09 @ 23:14pm

But millions like you, Gitarzan, did you support
Madonna, as she rightfully deserved? No, coz she was nothing, coz you see:

"Simon & Garfunkel were artists in just about every sense of the word...some absolutely brilliant music..." ....

Dumbsuck, shut up, u're a retard, with all ur music knowledge, u don't get it, dumbsuck

Posted by Gaven on Friday, 07.10.09 @ 23:15pm

By 1984, Jackson with his album has basically killed the music industry forever, right?

The Beatles can sell 3 billion album, can release as many compilations they want, remastered or not,

but the big prize, the biggie, belongs to Sir Michael Jackson, King Of Pop, right?

Get it, dumbsuck?

Posted by Gaven on Friday, 07.10.09 @ 23:41pm

And guess who helped Michael Jackson achieved those unmatched 20 million album sales in 2 years- 1983&1984?

Yep, you guessed it, it's Sir Paul Mc Cartney, ex member of the Beatles, first with a song on Thriller, The Girl Is Mine, then with a collaboration "Say Say Say".
Paul Mc Cartney was basically saying to the big Beatles fan base, come on boys, buy the Thriller, it will help Jackson burry us, the Beatles, forever...
Isn't that nice?

And then what did Sir Michael Jackson do? He bought all the Beatles catalog, as the ultimate HUMILIATION

This is your reward....

Posted by Gaven on Friday, 07.10.09 @ 23:50pm

WHAT country made 'Thriller' without point of return the biggest selling album ever worldwide?

UK? No
Germany?
France? No
Japan? No
Canada? No
Australia? No
Brazil? No

Only one country, USA - 28 Platinum, with the combined worldwide sales, far, far away from any competition. Is Thriller 28 Platinum in any of the biggest music markets mentioned above? No, far from it
What country made Thriller bigger than any Beatles album on worldwide level? USA, not UK, not Europe, not the world.
In what only country has Garth Brooks sold more than Elvis, a paranormal event? USA

Posted by Gaven on Saturday, 07.11.09 @ 00:15am

How was Jackson as an artist and performer and human being:

- he did plastic surgery to his nose and facial features to become more beautiful >>> to sell more records
-he did plastic surgery to become white, for commercial purposes (black artists don't sell much worldwide) >>> to sell more records
-charities and showing all his love for all the children out there >>> to create a better image and sell more records
-always claiming he sold 750 million records, when he didn't sell even 1/3 of that >>> to create the image he is invincible and sell more records
-sexual predator to white children

Does a true artist would ever act like that? No. Does thriller deserve to be the biggest selling album, by so much advantage? No

No, only 3 good songs on it, the rest of songs fillers, like most of his songs are on all his albums.
Some good riffs, some good movements and choreography and that's it

Posted by Gaven on Saturday, 07.11.09 @ 01:03am

R the rest of Jackson albums disappointments? Yes,Bad, Dangerous etc. Off the Wall is an average album also, songs like Rock With You or Don't Stop till, or Off The Wall you get enough, are good, but not that good, are average
Favorite hobby among the black community in USA. buying the Thriller album over and over again, for months and years, until the Beatles choke for good

Posted by Gaven on Saturday, 07.11.09 @ 01:17am

He's a gimmick!
The lyrics, the beats on Thriller song, Beat It or Billie Jean are for kids
Why was thriller album even that successful?

Posted by Gaven on Saturday, 07.11.09 @ 01:25am

Thriller is a good album, but the following work that MJ did is not onlu in therm of quality inferior, but also embarrassing and destroyed all his Thriller legacy, i can't even be a fan, he was, mostly, disturbed!

Posted by Gaven on Saturday, 07.11.09 @ 01:37am

But what Thriller legacy? Billie Jean is, in all fairness crap and at times macabre, Thriller song is recycled crap also, drum n' bass gimmick, Beat It seems the only somewhat good song on Thriller album
I jsut don't get it how that album was so successful, 37 weeks at nr. 1?

Posted by Gaven on Saturday, 07.11.09 @ 01:46am

And what was so innovative about the Thriller video? Half of the video he walks around the girl, the final half dances with the zombies, and that's it?
Man I just don't get it...

But, if in the pop field, crap like Britney Spears, Baby One More Time, sold over 14 million in USA, then it's normal for thriller to have sold over 20 million,
but what about Madonna, she was huge in USA, but her album sales have never been that good there, must be all the scandals, those 1979 pics published in Playboy magazine in 1985, when she was just beginning being a megastar with LAV (33 weeks in top 10)

So it's not about the body of work, where Madonna is clearly better, the general american public like more those type of entertainer, Britney, Michael, N Sync, Backstreet boys, Bruce Springsteen, Journey, ... they never liked Madonna, the person...

Posted by Gaven on Saturday, 07.11.09 @ 02:17am

But u can't never tell if they didn't like her, because of those pic and scandal u can't really tell, it's a mistery, maybe they could have loved her more, but with those pics, not that much

Posted by Gaven on Saturday, 07.11.09 @ 02:47am

Not to mention that the Billie Jean' bass line is stolen from Hall and Oates - 'I Can't Go for That' (1980 song), the beginning is almost identical!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwarCieO1dc&feature=related

Posted by Gaven on Saturday, 07.11.09 @ 03:15am

"Not to mention that the Billie Jean' bass line is stolen from Hall and Oates - 'I Can't Go for That' (1980 song), the beginning is almost identical!"-Something called "Gaven"

It's painfully obvious that there's a lot that you don't know about the making of that album, let alone popular music knowledge. The bass lines might be a little similar, but there's a lot of great songs where the backbeats are similar...backbeat is no big deal! On top of it, you get on here and start bashing people, which makes your ignorance just that much more evident. It's usually best to "be quiet and let people think you don't know what you're talking about"...

Don't we have enough mindless rambling on here?

Posted by Gitarzan on Saturday, 07.11.09 @ 05:11am

Anyone care to fill me in if I missed anything over the last few days?

Posted by Dude Man on Saturday, 07.11.09 @ 12:53pm

Whassup, Dude Man...there was just some "individual" named "Gaven" on here last night ranting and raving and for some reason started in on me (there's a new one...LOL!!!). Basically just a bunch of mindless drivel, if you know what I mean...!!! It had all the feeling of a fanboy/girl/Cousin Itt.

It was the first time that I'd heard that "I Can't Go For That" and "Billie Jean"'s intros sounded the same, though. I've played both of those songs, and the similarities are vague, at best. Those are two pretty good bass players, though (Louis Johnson and I believe "T-Bone" Wolk was playing for Hall & Oates at the time).

Posted by Gitarzan on Saturday, 07.11.09 @ 13:50pm

Do you think I should change my handle to "dumbsuck"...???

Posted by Gitarzan on Saturday, 07.11.09 @ 14:03pm

There was a bit of conversation on here about the differences between Elvis' and the Beatles influence...

Posted by Gitarzan on Saturday, 07.11.09 @ 14:26pm

Thanks for the info Gitarzan.

Posted by Dude Man on Saturday, 07.11.09 @ 14:40pm

Gaven- who are you arguing with?

Posted by Keebord on Saturday, 07.11.09 @ 16:34pm

Keebord...I don't know, but he sure lit into me...LMAO!!! I may be peranently scarred, being informed that I'm a "dumbsuck"...I didn't know I was so narrow-minded...!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Saturday, 07.11.09 @ 16:41pm

Wow - I fear Gaven has some unresolved issues.

Posted by Dameon on Sunday, 07.12.09 @ 08:23am

Lol, Gitarzan, he's so funny

Posted by Gaven on Sunday, 07.12.09 @ 11:28am

I'm not saying Thriller wasn't a good album, but the fact remains: 6 tracks out of 9 are fillers
The other 3 songs made it sell 20 million copies in USA, making it the best selling album of 2 consecutive years: 1983, 1984
Billie Jean, Beat It and Thriller are the 3 songs that stand out, along with their videos. The rest of the material on the album is the same boring 'Motown' stuff, all forgettable

What Billie Jean, Beat It and Thriller did, they offered the whole package, maybe the greatest, 3 in one:

- sound (great songs, great bass lines)
- image (a young, attractive MJ)
- performance (MJ's electric dance moves, groovy choreography, moonwalk)

Posted by Gaven on Sunday, 07.12.09 @ 12:17pm

In my opinion, from a strictly artistic point of view, there is only one other 'package' in the whole history of (popular) music, that rivals the one delivered by MJ
It's Madonna's True Blue, 9 songs on the album, 5 great songs and 4 fillers:

Live To Tell
Papa Don't Preach
True Blue
Open Your Heart
La Isla Bonita

In terms of sound, image and performance, no other female artist has delivered from one album the quality on Madonna's True Blue. The songs are some of the greatest pop tunes ever, the image was perfect (Madonna looking amazing, at her best), the performance quality is there - the dance moves in Papa Don't Preach, the iconic presentation in La Isla Bonita and Open Yout Heart)
In my opinion, it was conceived and thought to be Madonna's big album. In a way it succeeded, it remains her biggest studio album, with worldwide sales of over 24 million, still my impression is that the eventual sales were somewhat of a disappointment, especially in USA
It's all down to demographics and those 1979 pics published against Madonna's consent in Playboy (1985), when Madonna was at the height of her success then, with Like A Virgin. Because of those pics, Madonna's best album, True Blue, failed to reach its full commercial potential and deserved mega-success.
It became 7 Platinum in USA, but with a 'clean' image it would have sold way more, even W. Houston's first album reached 13 Platinum, and the overall quality there is nowhere near Madonna's True Blue

Posted by Gaven on Sunday, 07.12.09 @ 13:01pm

With those 1979 pics revealed in Playboy (1985), Madonna turned from the 'it' female artist in music into national shame, no matter what she made of it.
In terms of demographics, she lost big time from her audience and potential audience:

- the girls that were looking up to her, one way or another
- the neutral audience (rock fans, etc) started to look down on her
- the parents that bought the albums for the kids

Basically, Madonna was at the time in a middle of a paradox: though being the best mainstream artist, the bulk of the mainstream audience had their their back against her for good

Let's say I was an MJ fan at the time, middle of 80's. I'm down with MJ, Beat It baby, huge fan, my MTV is on, MJ's videos and music are so great, he's the best, baby, he's my idol! But, as it happens, I listen to his songs, over and over, and I eventually get bored, I also feel the need for another artist, another persepective maybe...
Who would that other artist/alternative be? Prince, why not?, Whitney, why not?, George Michael? why not? U2, why not and so on and so forth,
but Madonna? hmm, she's good man, she's cool, but those pics, everyone knows them, my parents, my friends, she's cool but she's so over, can I shar mine being an MJ fan with 'someone' like Madonna? Not really, too much headache...

Posted by Gaven on Sunday, 07.12.09 @ 13:29pm

Seven of the 9 cuts on "Thriller" were released as singles...all reached the top 10. The musicians involved were a "who's who" of great studio musicians, including Paul Jackson Jr. (one of the most accomplished session guitarists ever), Steve & Jeff Porcaro and Steve Lukather from the band Toto, Louis Johnson of the Brothers Johnson, Rod Temperton (keyboardist for Heatwave), and Eddie Van Halen (Vincent Price was even involved). Temperton wrote "Thriller", while Steve Porcaro co-wrote "Human Nature". As of right now, it has re-entered the Billboard Top 100 albums at No. 2.

Being produced by Quincy Jones for the Epic label, the album (along with "Off The Wall") had very little, if any "Motown" influence at all...

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 07.12.09 @ 13:40pm

What is a pop idol, at its essence? Someone who you admire and love, someone WHO YOU LOOK UP TO
With those 1979 pics revealed in 1985, Madonna lost all the reasons why people were looking up to her: beautiful, confident, outspoken, cool, great songs and presentation, a true female idol that deserves to be up there, to the top. Those pics revealed exactly the opposite of what Madonna was supposed to be: poor, unglamorous, uncool, not taking care of herself, the opposite of the pop idol and image that she created for herself.
It was another Madonna that the public never knew about, and now that they knew, they gave up on Madonna
As for being an MJ fan or any other artist's fan at the time, Madonna lost, with those pics, most importantly from a commercial point of view, the possibility to be the second best, the second choice: Ok, I'm A Prince fan but I also love Madonna, she's cool, I'm gonna buy her knew album or single. With those 1979 pics, Isuppose people were more like: Ermmm, I'm not even going there, are you kidding?
That why Madonna was put into the odd position as a pop idol and artist to continually prove herself, again and again, that she is not was most thought of her, one of the hardest position to be in, especially when she so talented and beautiful, that's she continually began to run from her past, into the vogue, the glamuorous, the erotica, the ray of light, she had nothing to celebrate, nothing to look back in the past and be happy about, an heart- breaking journey

Posted by Gaven on Sunday, 07.12.09 @ 13:54pm

Anyone who thinks Madonna didn't know about those pictures or doesn't think they were part of her "master plan" is crazy. She obviously got on that horse and rode it, otherwise she would've disassociated herself with anything considered "vampy".

Around the same time, Vanessa Williams had some "revealing" pictures pop up...and it cost her the "Miss America" crown. She struggled to show people that she "needed the money", and everything she's done musically and in films since are a far cry from those infamous pictures...

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 07.12.09 @ 14:09pm

"Seven of the 9 cuts on "Thriller" were released as singles...all reached the top 10. The musicians involved were a "who's who" of great studio musicians, including Paul Jackson Jr. (one of the most accomplished session guitarists ever), Steve & Jeff Porcaro and Steve Lukather from the band Toto, Louis Johnson of the Brothers Johnson, Rod Temperton (keyboardist for Heatwave), and Eddie Van Halen (Vincent Price was even involved). Temperton wrote "Thriller", while Steve Porcaro co-wrote "Human Nature". As of right now, it has re-entered the Billboard Top 100 albums at No. 2."

I'm not talking about Top 10s, thousands of songs have reached Top 10, and nobody knows about them. They were good songs, but nothing special, and I was referring to them as 'Motown' crap, metaphorically. Thriller album appealed not only to all audiences, but to all audiences and from them to the black audience more than anything else. For all audiences and all ages, was the Thriller
Madonna, with those pics, lost the possibility to appeal to all audiences. Her stuff was more than good, but the national shame could not be forgotten or forgiven, she continued to appeal to the cool folks, but only with them you don't sell album blockbusters. You must have all the audiences and ages, youngsters, parents, grandpas, grandmothers etc, you don't need the parental advisory stuff etc
With those pics, Madonna lost the possibility to enter into the people's house, to be openly admired, raved, talked about and celebrated. My English is very poor, i don't know exactly to say what i want to say...
She lost the market credibility, the respect of the masses, the credibility as a powerhouse artist

Posted by Gaven on Sunday, 07.12.09 @ 14:14pm

"Anyone who thinks Madonna didn't know about those pictures or doesn't think they were part of her "master plan" is crazy. She obviously got on that horse and rode it, otherwise she would've disassociated herself with anything considered "vampy"."

Gitarzan...

When you're the biggest female star in USA, have the first album ever from a female artist (LAV)to sell over 5 million, you really, really don't need that kind of bad publicity, never, Modanna tried to stop those pics from being published, a backlash was inevitable, but she couldn't do anything about it
the rights to the pics belonged to the photographer, not Madonna..And that veanessa is not MAdonna

Posted by Gaven on Sunday, 07.12.09 @ 14:24pm

Madonna didn't try to stop the publication of those pictures, if she would've Hugh Hefner wouldn't have published them for the same reason he didn't publish Williams'...because she didn't want him to (he didn't want to ruin someone's career and understood the impact of her being the first black Miss America)). Bob Guccione from Penthouse quite frankly didn't care...and earned a lot of money from it. In Madonna's case, they both both published them, and she was both defiant and unapolgetic about it.

As for Vanessa Williams being no Madonna...you got that right...!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 07.12.09 @ 14:41pm

Gaven...even though I've given you a fairly accurate account of what happened with those pictures, I'm really the wrong person for you to be discussing Madonna with (for reasons that people who frequent this site already know). There are people who will arguably agree with your point of view, and I wish you luck and enjoyment on your conversations with them. If you'd like to discuss pretty much any other artist but her (or Steve Perry), I'd be happy to contribute...

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 07.12.09 @ 14:52pm

If MJ would have had naked pics revealed in 1980, would thriller had sold that much? 20 million, at the time, in USA? Doubtfully, 10 million at max...

Still True Blue, the magic, continued to live on, through The Immaculate Collection, the world's best selling GH album from a female artist, with over 30 million in sales. Madonna's 80's magic continues to sell through The Immaculate Collection, all over the world is a strong catalog seller, from UK to India, to USA, despite the scandals, the noise, Madonna has become the world's biggest selling female artist ever.

'Blender' named 'The Immaculate Collection' the best american album ever, and yes, the stuff right there, is pop perfetion, never matched

Posted by Gaven on Sunday, 07.12.09 @ 14:54pm

'earned a lot of money from it'..u got that right, they followed the money, not Madonna's reputatiom
She was unapologetic coz she didn't have a choice...
Steve Perry, Joutrey lol, your garbage from the 80's, unbearable garbage at its 'best'...

Posted by Gaven on Sunday, 07.12.09 @ 15:04pm

In USA, Journey's beat selling album - 15 Platinum, 15 million, lol, their best selling album is higher than Madonna's best selling. This is ducking outrageous, of coourse outside USA, they are nobodies, not like Madonna, the biggest selling American artist that USA has given to the world

Posted by Gaven on Sunday, 07.12.09 @ 15:14pm

Without Moddana being the lioness that she is, even if u go by the zodiacal sign, she would have never made it so far...Queen Of Pop

Posted by Gaven on Sunday, 07.12.09 @ 15:24pm

WHile a commercial act, Madonna also straddled the underground, and she showed that even more with how she chose to express herself in her work. She obviously didn't take the easy, safe route that many pop acts do- she had many points of view and interests in controversial topics, and that's what often drove her. Thank goodness, otherwise the music world would have been quite dull all those years. :) She had the music to back it up, though, so that's alsp what led to her being as revered and important as she is.

In terms of male and female over the last 25 years, its Madonna and Michael Jackson (even though his artistic greatness had suffered in the last 15 years). MJ addressed some things in his work, but not like Madonna; and in turn, one could say that Madonna wasnt' as naturally a gifted musician as MJ (but he also worked with collaborators like she has, so we'll never really know).

The two of them both have enjoyed incredible amounts of acclaim, so I just say to enjoy them both for their great contributions- they'll never be another like either, no matter how much the wanna-bes would like.

Posted by JR on Sunday, 07.12.09 @ 16:45pm

I'm here on the IMMORTALS page to address a truly terible discrepancy. Simply put...


I searched on this site and I CANNOT FIND RIGHT SAID FRED!!!


There has never been a more immortal song than "I'm Too Sexy", & everyone on this site knows it, yet I languish here in pain, seeking to vote for them, but they are nowhere to be found.


I have to go do my little twirl on the catwalk now...

"I'm, too sexy for my cheese,
Too sexy for my cheese,
I'm the bee's knees"

I'm, too sexy for my crop,
Too sexy for my crop,
Cause you know I'm the tops"

Posted by Cheesecrop on Sunday, 07.12.09 @ 19:21pm

I'm too sexy for my...CHEESE??????

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 07.12.09 @ 20:11pm

JR...that was a pretty decent post...

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 07.12.09 @ 20:13pm

Honestly, right now a conversation about cheese would be more interesting than one about Madonna.

Posted by Dude Man on Sunday, 07.12.09 @ 20:15pm

There are alot of major artists who didn't make Rolling Stone's list. CCR is of course one of the biggest misses. Also, not a single prog band made thier list either.

Posted by Dude Man on Thursday, 07.16.09 @ 12:12pm

I think this site made a mistake on the Most Comments list. Here it reads:
1. liam 2488
2. Gitarzan 1376
3. Dameon 1197
4. William 818
5. Philip 680
6. Anonymous 685
7. Cheesecrop 664
8. Keebord 622
9. mrxyz 622
10. SHAWN 776

When is 776 less than 622? And when is 680 greater than 685? Pretty sure never.

Posted by Dude Man on Friday, 07.17.09 @ 13:38pm

6. Anonymous 685

wHO IS HE? tHAT CcRAZY mADONNA FAN?

Posted by kRAMMER4hOLSTEIN on Friday, 07.17.09 @ 15:02pm

Only 20th Century Artists Should Be Inducted Into The Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame!

Posted by Roy on Friday, 07.17.09 @ 15:04pm

I know this has nothing to do with music but i just heard Walter Cronkite died and I want to pay my respects to the man.

RIP Walter

He was a legend "...and that's the way it is"

Posted by Brian on Friday, 07.17.09 @ 20:39pm

Ok... so we know now that Gaven...

1) Hates the U.S.
2) Hates Black people
3) Hates music before 1980

As far as most hits from an album... I think the U.S. version of A Hard Day's Night would have to hold that record... All four of George Martin's instrumental hits were on that one (one Hot 100, and three Bubbling Under hits). And the Beatles had... "A Hard Day's Night", "Can't Buy Me Love", "You Can't Do That", "And I Love Her", "If I Fell", "I Should Have Known Better", "I'll Cry Instead", and "I'm Happy Just To Dance With You". I believe that makes it 12, nine of them Hot 100.

Posted by Philip on Saturday, 07.18.09 @ 01:23am

Only 20th Century Artists Should Be Inducted Into The Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame!

Posted by Roy on Friday, 07.17.09 @ 15:04pm

Roy - just stop it now with these ridiculous comments.

Posted by Dameon on Saturday, 07.18.09 @ 07:24am

After the 1979, pre-fame, naked pics were published on both Playboy and Penthouse in 1985, Madonna performed at Live AID, in Philadelphia,

people were jeering and booing her, crowds of people walked away from the front of the stage and you could see she was close to tears

the audience started to chant 'Who's a Slut!' before Into The Groove

Very telling of the general perception American people got on Madonna after those pics

Sooooo, I was right...
And the pics were published in BOTH Playboy and Penthouse, quite a general attack against Madonna. She was being blackmailed for sure, and the photographer was after the money, more money!

Posted by Gaven on Sunday, 07.19.09 @ 09:22am

Why don't you go on YouTube and watch it???? That crowd didn't exactly act like they were going to tar and feather her! As a matter of fact she's the one who brought it up by saying "I'm not taking anything off today"! If you don't believe me...GO WATCH IT ON YOUTUBE!!!!

If you weren't in America at the time, it's really idiotic to comment on what the musical climate was here. I live in a large metropolitan area, and there really wasn't that much of an uproar (other than she could've figured out what a razor was). A celebrity appearing nude in Playboy was nothing new...even then. Any celebrity with a counter-offer could've stopped their publication, and Madonna's antics since then clearly show that she got the attention she wanted from them...to think otherwise is just plain stupid...!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 07.19.09 @ 09:54am

Gitarzan, ur levels of idiocy r unbreakable

Counter-offer? Lol. Let's say I had the pictures, I call Madonna's manager, the biggest thing in music at the time. I want 100.000 dollars for the pics, deal done, but who could ensure he didn't duplicate the pics and, after receiving the money from Madonna's manager, he still sold 'em after that to Playboy and Penthouse?
Plus, he was not the only photographer to has the same kind of pics, naked pre-fame Madonna. Another one had another set of pics, he published 'em later, in 1991
To claim that Madonna wanted thos pics published

IS PLAIN NON-SENSE, PLAIN IDIOTIC AND RIDICULOUS, AGAINST ANY LOGIC

Posted by Gaven on Sunday, 07.19.09 @ 10:12am

To anyone who lives in the states and knows anything about Madonna at all, I'm sure my scenario makes perfect sense...her behavior dictates it. Besides that, there was stuff in "Truth or Dare", "Erotica", the "Blonde Ambition Tour" (which the pope attempted to have banned), and the book "Sex" that made those pictures look pretty tame. Did those things shock people in the states...not that I'm aware of!!!

It seems like as with most Madonna "fanboys" or "girls", you really have no fast clue what you're talking about. You would have us think that she fought through this "terrible injustice" (those pictures) and became a "mega-star" in spite of them, where all signs point to those pictures as being "part of the plan"...

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 07.19.09 @ 11:55am

Gitar - you cannot comment on every single Madonna worshipper. It is not good for your health.

Posted by Dameon on Sunday, 07.19.09 @ 17:34pm

I think it's like Chief Inspector Dreyfus' reaction to Clouseau in "The Pink Panther"...I read a comment by one of those people, and my eyes start twitching, etc...

You need to be careful or you'll start acting that way with Steve Perry comments...the condition really is quite annoying...!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 07.19.09 @ 17:42pm

"To anyone who lives in the states and knows anything about Madonna at all, I'm sure my scenario makes perfect sense...her behavior dictates it. Besides that, there was stuff in "Truth or Dare", "Erotica", the "Blonde Ambition Tour" (which the pope attempted to have banned), and the book "Sex" that made those pictures look pretty tame. Did those things shock people in the states...not that I'm aware of!!!

It seems like as with most Madonna "fanboys" or "girls", you really have no fast clue what you're talking about. You would have us think that she fought through this "terrible injustice" (those pictures) and became a "mega-star" in spite of them, where all signs point to those pictures as being "part of the plan"..."


Gitarzan, you are making a fool of yourself, you're such an IDIOT that it becomes grotesque, just leave it alone, you're clearly a dumbass
You just...it's not that you don't get it, you're an idiot, it's unbelievable how much of an idiot you and ur kind are

Posted by Gaven on Sunday, 07.19.09 @ 18:57pm

"Gitarzan, you are making a fool of yourself, you're such an IDIOT that it becomes grotesque, just leave it alone, you're clearly a dumbass
You just...it's not that you don't get it, you're an idiot, it's unbelievable how much of an idiot you and ur kind are"- Gaven

You just lost what credibility you had left with that.

Posted by Dude Man on Sunday, 07.19.09 @ 19:02pm

At first I thought that u were joking when talking bout certain maters, but u really r an idiot. It's unbelievable, ur stupidity makes me vomit

Posted by Gaven on Sunday, 07.19.09 @ 19:03pm

It's not about an injustice that she has fought or anything like, it's about objective fact: When u're a star, and she was such a star, with those kind of pics u're OVER, u're in NO MAN'S LAND, u're gonna be discredited for life
It don't matter if u're X or Y, Madonna or Clint Eastwood, it's just that the public perception will always look down upon you, no matter how talented or worthy u are
From a commercial point of view, u're over

Posted by Gaven on Sunday, 07.19.09 @ 19:21pm

Seeing as you write the words your, you, and are as "ur", "u", and "r" tells me your level of intelligence right off the bat.

Posted by Dude Man on Sunday, 07.19.09 @ 19:21pm

It's about the brand, the commercial brand.
While LAV album, singles and performances were acceptable and super OK, ironic and fun and girly etc, even the most puritan could have gone along with em,
those pics brought a 'shadow', resentment and the brand was clearly damaged

Posted by Gaven on Sunday, 07.19.09 @ 19:32pm

GAven's big dilemma is why Steve Perry is not in the Top 100 Immortals. This is not very hard to understand, generally speaking SP is a shallow fuk with no balls or talent, his music is boting and stereotype crap. U just have to look once at his face on a pic to realize why he's not in the Top 100

Posted by Gaven on Sunday, 07.19.09 @ 19:36pm

SP had a good voice, but he lacked ALL the rest, that maked a rock 'n roll star, like Elvis for example (well, these examples are very rare in fact, up to 10 max.). What kind of dilemma is that for Gitarzan?

Posted by Gaven on Sunday, 07.19.09 @ 19:42pm

Gitarzan is a Journey fan. I'm pretty sure according to him Journey is better than Elvis, whicj is another dumass consideration. What is that, a kind of perverted and twisted snobbery? It's plain fuked up, that is what it is, nothing more, nothing less
A true fan of Journey can't have the comprehention of what a true legend is, if he had one, he wouldn't be a fan of em

Posted by Gaven on Sunday, 07.19.09 @ 19:51pm

Dude Man...I guess I musta struck a nerve. It's always the same thing with these clowns...can't present a good argument so they resort to name-calling! And who said anything about Journey...???? Oh, well...

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 07.19.09 @ 20:10pm

It is obvious that when making these lists, the main factor is popularity. There are plenty of bands/artists that deserve to be on that list, but aren't due to their popularity level.

It is obnoxious to see artists like Eminem on there. This is the Rock N' Roll Hall of Fame, and in my opinion, rap artists don't belong here. I have nothing against rap artists, but their work should be credited in something like the RAP Hall of Fame. Bands like Maiden, Purple, Priest, Rush, the list goes on an on, deserve to be here. These are ROCK bands that have an everlasting impact on not just the genre of rock, but music period.

These people on the committee need to be slapped back into reality. To me, since it seems like lots of their nominees are due to what they think is popular, then they need to look at the public, and see what they want. It is quite obvious what bands deserve, and what bands don't deserve to be here.

I know I'm only adressing mainly metal artists, but there are plenty of other more rock artists that deserve to be there.

Posted by N/A on Sunday, 07.19.09 @ 21:16pm

' And who said anything about Journey...???? Oh, well...

Posted by Gitarzan'

How about, Gitarzan, taking a look at the first post on this thread? Who's complaining about SP not being in the
RS's Top 100 Immortals? You, sir!

Posted by Gaven on Monday, 07.20.09 @ 11:02am

I could care less about Steve Perry, dumbass!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Monday, 07.20.09 @ 11:06am

Dude Man...I guess I musta struck a nerve. It's always the same thing with these clowns...can't present a good argument so they resort to name-calling! And who said anything about Journey...???? Oh, well...

!!!

Posted by Gaven on Monday, 07.20.09 @ 11:10am

I love it... argue with a Madge Badge-er and the Badge-er will badger you with his/her uncanny prowess of the 1337 language. Seriously, you slowly watch the coherency of their posts break down and disintegrate, until we're left with a meager "!!!"

Posted by Philip on Tuesday, 07.21.09 @ 17:46pm

I just had to share this with you people, found it stumbling through YouTube. A great live rendition of a classic rock song....I think MOST of you will like it...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DE03gfToaD0&feature=related

Posted by Gitarzan on Tuesday, 07.21.09 @ 18:33pm

Here's the list of voters Rolling Stone used for the "Immortals" list:

Hal Blaine has been a session drummer on recordings by Elvis Presley, Phil Spector, the Beach Boys and many others.
Nathan Brackett is a senior editor at Rolling Stone, where he edits the record-reviews section.

Jackson Browne was inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame in 2004. Cliff Burnstein is the founder of QPrime Management, which handles Metallica, Red Hot Chili Peppers and Garbage.

Chuck D is a musician, writer and activist who founded Public Enemy in 1982.

Anthony DeCurtis has written for Rolling Stone for more than twenty years.

Neil Diamond's thirteen Top Ten hits include "Sweet Caroline," "Cherry, Cherry" and "Girl, You'll Be a Woman Soon."

Bo Diddley, one of the inventors of rock & roll, began his career with Chess in 1955.

Dr. John has released nearly thirty albums of New Orleans funk, jazz and R&B.

The Edge started U2 with schoolmates Bono, Larry Mullen Jr. and Adam Clayton in 1978. They were inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame this year.

Jason Fine is an assistant managing editor at Rolling Stone.

Bill Flanagan is a writer as well as senior vice president and editorial director of MTV Networks International.

David Fricke is a senior editor at ROLLING STONE, where he has worked since 1985.

Gil Friesen was president of A&M Records for twenty-seven years and worked with Sting, Janet Jackson and the Carpenters.

Art Garfunkel had his first hit with Paul Simon -- a doo-wop song, "Hey, Schoolgirl" -- under the name Tom and Jerry in 1957.

David Geffen began his career managing artists including Laura Nyro and Crosby, Stills and Nash. He founded Asylum Records in 1971 and Geffen Records in 1977.

Billy Gibbons is a guitarist with ZZ Top, who were inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame in 2004.

Mikal Gilmore has been a writer for ROLLING STONE for more than twenty years.

Albert Hammond Jr., guitarist for the Strokes, lives in New York.

James Henke is the chief curator for the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame. He was music editor at ROLLING STONE from 1981 to 1993.

Don Henley launched his career in 1970 as the drummer in the Texas rock band Shiloh. He is a founding member of the Eagles.

Robert Hilburn is a pop-music critic and editor at the Los Angeles Times.

Chrissie Hynde worked as a rock critic for London's New Musical Express in 1974 before founding the Pretenders.

Don Ienner is the president of Sony Music Label Group U.S. He started working in the Capitol Records mailroom while in high school.

Lenny Kaye compiled Nuggets, a classic garage-rock anthology, in 1972. He plays guitar for the Patti Smith Group.

Jon Landau began his career at ROLLING STONE in 1967. He has produced albums for the MC5, Jackson Browne and Bruce Springsteen, whom he has managed for twenty-six years.

Joe Levy is a deputy managing editor at ROLLING STONE.

Kurt Loder is a correspondent at MTV and a ROLLING STONE contributing editor.

Greil Marcus was ROLLING STONE's first record-reviews editor. His books include Mystery Train, Lipstick Traces and Dead Elvis.

Joe McEwen is an A&R consultant who has worked with Elvis Costello, Nick Lowe, Wilco and the Beastie Boys.

Moby released his first record with the punk group Vatican Commandos in 1983. His 1999 breakthrough, Play, sold 10 million copies.

Doug Morris wrote the Chiffons' 1966 hit "Sweet Talkin' Guy." He is now chairman and CEO of Universal Music Group.

Ric Ocasek was the lead singer for the Cars and has produced albums by Iggy Pop, Weezer and No Doubt.

Joe Perry has been playing guitar with Aerosmith since the band formed in 1970.

Antonio "LA" Reid, along with his partner Babyface, founded LaFace Records, home to TLC and OutKast. He is currently chairman of Island Def Jam Records.

Keith Richards started his career singing in a boys' choir that once performed for the queen of England. He has played guitar for the Rollling Stones since 1962.

Smokey Robinson had eighteen Top Thirty hits with the Miracles on Motown Records, and wrote and produced songs for Mary Wells and Marvin Gaye.

Rick Rubin co-founded Def Jam Records in 1984 from his New York University dorm room. He has produced albums for Run-DMC, Red Hot Chili Peppers and Johnny Cash.

Carlos Santana's band Santana debuted at Bill Graham's Fillmore West in 1968. The guitarist's 1999 album Supernatural sold 10 million copies and earned nine Grammys.

Mike Shinoda is a vocalist in Linkin Park, which won a 2001 Grammy for Best Hard Rock Performance for "Crawling."

Slash was the lead guitarist for Guns n' Roses and now plays with Velvet Revolver.

Bruce Springsteen has won ten Grammys and an Academy Award since he began releasing albums in 1973.

Seymour Stein is co-founder of Sire Records. He helped launch the careers of Madonna and the Ramones, and was inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame this year.

Stephen Stills formed Buffalo Springfield in 1966. Two years later he joined Crosby, Stills and Nash, with whom he still tours.

Quentin Tarantino is a filmmaker and aficionado of soul, surf and obscure rock music.

Ahmir "?uestlove" Thompson produces and plays drums for the Roots. He has played on albums by John Mayer, Joss Stone, D'Angelo and many others.

Pete Townshend began his career in the 1950s playing banjo in a Dixieland band with John Entwistle. Both were founding members of the Who in 1964.

Little Steven, guitarist for Bruce Springsteen's E Street Band, hosts the radio show Little Steven's Underground Garage.

Butch Vig, drummer for Garbage, produced Nirvana's Nevermind and the Smashing Pumpkins' Siamese Dream.

Bob Weir is a singer, songwriter and rhythm guitarist for the Dead.

Jann S. Wenner is the editor and publisher of ROLLING STONE. Last year, he was inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame.

Jerry Wexler is a producer and former vice president of Atlantic Records, where he guided the careers of Ray Charles and Aretha Franklin.

Lucinda Williams started writing songs as a teenager. Her music has earned three Grammys and has been covered by Tom Petty, Emmylou Harris and others.

Peter Wolf often visited Harlem's Apollo Theater as a kid to see Otis Redding and James Brown perform. He formed the J. Geils Band in the late 1960s and has recorded six solo albums.

Adam Yauch is a member of the Beastie Boys and a co-founder of the Tibetan Freedom Concerts

Posted by Dude Man on Monday, 07.27.09 @ 12:41pm

http://www.hitparadehalloffame.org/index.html

You can vote at The Hit Parade Hall of Fame

Posted by Roy on Monday, 07.27.09 @ 13:57pm

THE TOP 100 CHARTING ARTISTS ON THE BILLBOARD 200 ALBUMS CHART AS OF 2005. NEXT BOOK COMES OUT NEXT YEAR.

01. Elvis Presley
02. Frank Sinatra
03. The Beatles
04. Barbra Streisand
05. The Rolling Stones
06. Johnny Mathis
07. Elton John
08. Bob Dylan
09. Neil Diamond
10. The Temptations
11. The Beach Boys
12. Eric Clapton
13. Ray Conniff
14. Willie Nelson
15. Ray Charles
16. Rod Stewart
17. Mantovani
18. Aretha Franklin
19. Paul McCartney
20. David Bowie
21. Prince
22. James Brown
23. Pink Floyd
24. Andy Williams
25. Lawrence Welk
26. Neil Young
27. Bee Gees
28. Chicago
29. The Supremes
30. Henry Mancini
31. The Kingston Trio
32. Jimmy Buffett
33. Herb Alpert
34. Kenny Rogers/First Edition
35. Jimi Hendrix
36. Aerosmith
37. Stevie Wonder
38. Grateful Dead
39. Roger Williams
40. Fleetwood Mac
41. The Ventures
42. Led Zeppelin
43. Van Morrison
44. George Strait
45. Nat "King" Cole
46. Kiss
47. Linda Ronstadt
48. Metallica
49. Johnny Cash
50. Billy Vaughn
51. Bruce Springsteen
52. Diana Ross
53. Barry Manilow
54. Queen
55. Santana
56. The Who
57. Garth Brooks
58. Madonna
59. Jefferson Airplane/Jefferson Starship/Starship
60. U2
61. Dionne Warwick
62. Billy Joel
63. John Denver
64. Rush
65. Mitch Miller
66. Michael Jackson
67. James Taylor
68. Harry Belafonte
69. The Isley Brothers
70. Alabama
71. The Lettermen
72. The Eagles
73. AC/DC
74. Nancy Wilson
75. Marvin Gaye
76. The Doors
77. Jethro Tull
78. Dolly Parton
79. Tony Bennett
80. The Kinks
81. Dean Martin
82. The Monkees
83. Joan Baez
84. Journey
85. Tom Petty and The Heartbreakers
86. Glen Campbell
87. Gladys Knight and The Pips
88. Earth, Wind & Fire
89. The Moody Blues
90. Frank Zappa
91. Mariah Carey
92. Anne Murray
93. Steve Miller Band
94. Enoch Light
95. Cher
96. Carole King
97. Daryl Hall & John Oates
98. Elvis Costello
99. Carly Simon
100. Bob Seger

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 07.28.09 @ 07:02am

where the hell are the smashing pumpkins, greatest body of work ever and they cant even make the list, billy corgan is a genius but no one wants to recognize that

Posted by Gianluca on Tuesday, 07.28.09 @ 10:02am

Leave it to Rolling Stone to put up another ridiculous and biased list. However, everyone must understand this is an entertainment magazine, it can't be taken too seriously. But really, no Floyd, Queen. Clapton not even in the top 50. SRV also? The Eagles paired with the likes of the beastie boys? Skynyrd and Santana behind eminem!? How do you stay in business. Haha o well.

Posted by Pittguy on Thursday, 08.27.09 @ 23:40pm

ARTISTS WHO HAVE MADE THE FINAL NOMINEES LISTS ON THE ROCK AND ROLL HALL OF FAME BALLOTS BUT HAVE NOT BEEN INDUCTED YET (1986-2009):

Ben E. King, Chuck Willis, Esther Phillips, Johnny Ace, Mary Wells, Carole King, The Dominoes, The Meters, The Stooges, Joe Tex, Darlene Love, Lou Reed, New York Dolls, The "5" Royales, The Chantels, Gram Parsons, ABBA, Chic, Kraftwerk, MC5, Steve Winwood, Conway Twitty, The J. Geils Band, Randy Newman, Cat Stevens, The Paul Butterfield Blues Band, The Sir Douglas Quintet, Afrika Bambaataa, Beastie Boys, Donna Summer, War

Posted by Roy on Friday, 09.4.09 @ 18:18pm

Sabbath is on one list at 85 and not on the other. What a way to snub the band that created the most powerful form of ROCK n ROLL.

Posted by Load on Saturday, 09.12.09 @ 00:47am

Chuck Berry is the King of Rock and Roll my number #1 vote....I also agree, Pink Floyd is an obvious omission.

Posted by antimatterman on Monday, 09.28.09 @ 12:13pm

PROG TO THE ROCK HALL NOW!

01. Pink Floyd
02. Genesis
03. Deep Purple
04. Yes
05. Jethro Tull
06. King Crimson
07. Emerson, Lake and Palmer
08. Procol Harum
09. The Moody Blues
10. Rush

Posted by Roy on Thursday, 10.8.09 @ 13:29pm

Pink Floyd are already in Roy and still no love for Uriah Heep Roy. Again, Purple you can't really call prog(unless you only listen to their first three albums.), though "Child in Time" may be early prog metal.

Posted by Dude Man on Thursday, 10.8.09 @ 13:51pm

I know Pink Floyd is in. I just listed all the Prog Acts!

Rolling Stone gave all Uriah Heep albums 1 out of 5 stars. WHY?

Posted by Roy on Thursday, 10.8.09 @ 14:08pm

WHERE IS CHER? O SONNY AND CHER??? THIS IS A LACK OF RESPEC!!!!!! CHER IS CHER, OK.

Posted by Edgar on Saturday, 11.21.09 @ 18:41pm

happens with Cher, Bette Midler, Liza Minnelli, Pet Shop Boys, Barbra Streisand, who happens to them, what happens??? especially with Cher, more than 45 year career force, 200 million records sold certificates, winning Oscar, Grammy, Emmy, Tony, echos, cannes, Golden Globes, his farewell tour tour Reimbursement 300 million making it one of the most successful tours of the planet, that's what happens, who sees this??? are perhaps blinded by the career of a diva as Cher??? this is a pity to leave out the greatest music icon beloved by legions of fans around the world and even in spite of living proof his latest CD was issued in 2001 and sold 10 million copies, and his name still in force a show stable caesar palace, with a sellout she is an artist who deserves all the respect, for God is Cher!

Posted by Sebastian on Saturday, 11.21.09 @ 18:51pm

Where is Coney Hatch???

Posted by TheFaceOfRock on Monday, 11.23.09 @ 21:37pm

I love men...especially Elton John.

Posted by Labros on Tuesday, 12.8.09 @ 11:54am

Rolling Stone gave all Uriah Heep albums 1 out of 5 stars. WHY?

Posted by Roy on Thursday, 10.8.09 @ 14:08pm

Because Rolling Stone magazine also known as Rolling Stain Ragazine is full of ignorant hairy ass wipes that are obsessed with Bruce Springsteen and Bob Dylan!

Posted by Greg on Sunday, 12.13.09 @ 09:04am

The Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame
http://www.rockhall.com

262 inductees in 25 years. Each band is counted as 1.

AVERAGE # OF INDUCTEES PER YEAR - 10

1986 - 16 inductees
1987 - 23 inductees - BEST YEAR EVER!
1988 - 09 inductees
1989 - 09 inductees

1990 - 16 inductees
1991 - 11 inductees
1992 - 12 inductees
1993 - 11 inductees
1994 - 10 inductees
1995 - 09 inductees
1996 - 09 inductees
1997 - 10 inductees
1998 - 08 inductees
1999 - 10 inductees

2000 - 14 inductees
2001 - 11 inductees
2002 - 08 inductees
2003 - 09 inductees
2004 - 08 inductees
2005 - 07 inductees
2006 - 07 inductees
2007 - 05 inductees - WORST YEAR EVER!
2008 - 08 inductees
2009 - 09 inductees
2010 - 13 inductees

ARTISTS WHO HAVE MADE THE FINAL NOMINEES LISTS ON THE ROCK AND ROLL HALL OF FAME BALLOTS BUT HAVE NOT BEEN INDUCTED YET (1986-2010):

Ben E. King, Chuck Willis, Esther Phillips, Johnny Ace, Mary Wells, Carole King, The Dominoes, The Meters, Joe Tex, Darlene Love, Lou Reed, New York Dolls, The "5" Royales, The Chantels, Gram Parsons, Chic, Kraftwerk, MC5, Steve Winwood, Conway Twitty, The J. Geils Band, Randy Newman, Cat Stevens, The Paul Butterfield Blues Band, The Sir Douglas Quintet, Afrika Bambaataa, Beastie Boys, Donna Summer, War, KISS, Laura Nyro, Red Hot Chili Peppers, LL Cool J

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 12.15.09 @ 07:53am

THE ROCK AND ROLL HALL OF FAME

NON-PERFORMER CATEGORY INDUCTEES

1986 Alan Freed
1986 Sam Phillips
1987 Leonard Chess
1987 Ahmet Ertegun
1987 Jerry Leiber and Mike Stoller
1987 Jerry Wexler
1988 Berry Gordy, Jr
1989 Phil Spector
1990 Gerry Goffin and Carole King
1990 Holland-Dozier-Holland
1991 Dave Bartholomew
1991 Ralph Bass
1992 Leo Fender
1992 Bill Graham
1992 Doc Pomus
1993 Dck Clark
1993 Milt Gabler
1994 Johnny Otis
1995 Paul Ackerman
1996 Tom Donahue
1997 Syd Nathan
1998 Allen Toussaint
1999 George Martin
2000 Clive Davis
2001 Chris Blackwell
2002 Jim Stewart
2003 Mo Ostin
2008 Kenny Gamble and Leon Huff
2010 David Geffen
2010 Jesse Stone
2010 Mort Shuman
2010 Otis Blackwell
2010 Barry Mann and Cynthia Weil
2010 Jeff Barry and Ellie Greenwich

LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT CATEGORY INDUCTEES

1986 John Hammond
1991 Nesuhi Ertegun
2004 Jann Wenner
2005 Frank Barsalona
2005 Seymour Stein
2006 Herb Alpert and Jerry Moss

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 12.15.09 @ 09:55am

It's obvious, Jann Wenner publishes Rolling Stone. He's also behind The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. Missing from The Hall: Chicago, Moody Blues, Joe Cocker, Jethro Tull, 3 Dog night, Blood, Sweat, & Tears, Alice cooper, B.T.O., ELO, Doobies, Zombies, Turtles, Herman's Hermits, spencer Davis group, Tommy James, Fifth Dimension, Procol Harum, Ten years After, Steve Miller, Dr. John, Warren Zevon, Supertramp, Bad Co. ,Peter Frampton, Hall and Oates, Johnny winter, and the list can go on and on. The list is bogus, The Hall of Fame is bogus. Quoting The Sex Pistols upon their induction last year, "The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is nothing but a piss stain".

Posted by angelo1962 on Tuesday, 12.15.09 @ 12:24pm

ummmmm the doors should be way higher than that!

Posted by Bill on Tuesday, 12.15.09 @ 16:51pm

First thing:why are all of u blaming it on RS? VH1 also made a list.

Right side of RS and VH1
Everybody is blaming it on RS. Dont we all have different opinions. I think MIchael Jackson, all due respect to him, shouldnt be in this list. But obviously RS has another opinion. So we need to have respect for them.

Wrong side of RS and VH1
RS cant just start saying that rock n roll started in the late 50s early 20s. You have to go back, rock wasnt born, it has evolved and called different names. Before they used to call it the blues,and the blues goes back to 19th century. I dont see Charley Patton on that list and what about Bukka White, or Son House?

Posted by Hochman on Monday, 12.21.09 @ 14:12pm

I meant late 50s and early 60s not 20s

Posted by Hochman on Monday, 12.21.09 @ 14:14pm

For starters, RS had a "100 greatest guitar players" list that was the biggest crock of bull I'd ever seen...whoever came up with that list probably wouldn't even know how to hold one...!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Monday, 12.21.09 @ 14:26pm

"RS had a "100 greatest guitar players" list that was the biggest crock of bull I'd ever seen" - Gitarzan

That list was a disgrace. An insult to music

Posted by Keebord on Monday, 12.21.09 @ 14:54pm

Allow me to display some of the "highlights" of that list...

Jerry Garcia (13)
Kurt Cobain (12)...both over Jeff Beck at (14).

Eddie Van Halen (70)
Randy Rhoads (85)...FAR behind Johnny Ramone at (16)!!!!

Totally ommitted from the list;
-Eric Johnson
-Django Reinhardt
-Al DiMeola
-Zakk Wylde
-Wes Montgomery

Oh, but Joni Mitchell (70) and Joan Jett (87) WERE on it

Just a total and complete CROCK...!!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Monday, 12.21.09 @ 15:19pm

I believe David Gilmour was 82....Have you heard the guitar solo in "Comfortably Numb?" Kurt Cobain at 12 and Gilmour at 82???? They can't be serious

Posted by Keebord on Monday, 12.21.09 @ 15:28pm

that list sucked but jerry garcia is much better than jeff beck!

Posted by dead on Tuesday, 12.22.09 @ 06:06am

Gitarzan, I have heard that Joanie Mitchell has some unusual way of playing the guitar. Maybe that was why they had her rated so high on that infernal list.

Posted by Paul in KY on Tuesday, 12.22.09 @ 06:08am

Jerry Garcia couldn't outplay ME...that's how much he belongs on that list!!!!

Joni Mitchell uses a wide variety of tunings (almost every song, as a matter of fact), which really isn't that unusual except for the frequency. Roland recently came up with a system where a sound engineer can change her tunings from a remote (the guitar she uses for that looks kind of like a Stratocaster)...which means she doesn't have to change guitars all night and her tech isn't constantly re-tuning. Interesting...but not so unusual. As an example; a standard guitar tuning is EBGDAE, the song "Kashmir" by Zeppelin is tuned to DADGAD...it just makes it easier to play. All of Van Halen's guitars have a switch on the bridge where he can switch to "D" tuning almost instantly.

Another example of how ridiculous that list is...Alan Holdsworth. One of the most unique and innovative players around, and he doesn't rate being on their coveted "list". This list prompted "Guitar Player" magazine to come up with a "Top 50" list that made WAY more sense...

Posted by Gitarzan on Tuesday, 12.22.09 @ 08:48am

Another interesting ommission from that dubious "list" (which I took the liberty to paste on here)...Chet Atkins! Joan Jett is a "greater player" than Chet Atkins...we're entering the realm of "insane" here...

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/5937559/the_100_greatest_guitarists_of_all_time/print

Posted by Gitarzan on Tuesday, 12.22.09 @ 09:28am

Next to James Brown - true innovators in the Funk field has to be Tower of Power. As the saying goes, Often imitated but never duplicated

Posted by Sandy on Tuesday, 12.22.09 @ 15:53pm

To Philip, Cheesecrop, Dameon, Keebord (and the rest of the "house band"), mrxyz, Steve Z, Roy, and all the other regulars...a Christmas Card;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xam01uaj6Vg

Merry Christmas, everyone!!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Thursday, 12.24.09 @ 14:16pm

What I get no "Merry Christmas"? Anyway take care everyone and have a happy new year.

Posted by Dude Man on Thursday, 12.24.09 @ 14:38pm

Sorry about the ommission, Dudester, but you are one of the "regulars, to be sure!!!

So, it's "double barks" for you...be safe!!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Thursday, 12.24.09 @ 14:46pm

Digital Dream Door lists Roy Brown, Wynonie Harris, and The Ravens as the only Immortals among Early Influence candidates.

The father of the modern day solo artist in many ways and a crucial influence on New Orleans rock, not to mention revered by artists from Elvis Presley to James Brown. The writer of "Good Rockin' Tonight", which many call the first rock song, and possessor of two #1 R&B Hits, plus one of rock's first classic sides in "Rockin' At Midnight". Brown should've been in by year two at the latest, yet here it is more than 20 years later and he's still on the outside looking in. If a voter can't identify at least three of Roy Brown's songs they're not qualified to even discuss rock 'n' roll history credibly, let alone vote on its greatest artists.

Other than Louis Jordan no other Early Influence on Rock was as MUCH of an influence on rock's birth as Harris was. The prototypical rock frontman - dashing in appearance, exuding sexuality on stage and a hellraiser off it - his work in the 40's and early 50's literally made rock possible. In "Good Rockin' Tonight" he popularized the term itself and followed that up with "All She Wants To Do Is Rock", another #1 hit that only solidified the expression in the public consciousness. His failure to be voted in as an Early Influence while pop crooner Nat Cole makes it in under that designation is the equivalent of inducting Perry Como to the Rock Hall before Elvis Presley. By far the most important artist in any category not yet in.

The true father of the modern black vocal group has been ignored for two decades of voting while the Ink Spots, a fine group but one that were well before the Ravens (and therefore well before rock 'n' roll) as well as being much farther removed stylistically from rock's origins, were inducted instead. The Ravens two lead singer format, featuring high tenor Maithe Marshall and legendary bass Jimmy Ricks, was extremely innovative and influential while their songs paved the way for the vocal group explosion of the 50's. Even their name instigated a huge onslaught of "bird groups" in rock's first decade and their unique adaptation of standards set that as a precedent in vocal harmony outfits as well. Criminal that they haven't gotten in yet as one of the true early influences.

Posted by Roy on Thursday, 12.24.09 @ 20:18pm

The Digital Dream Door's Immortals among Sidemen Candidates:

Lee Allen

One of the most prolific saxophonists of the 50's, featured prominently on hit records for Little Richard, Fats Domino, Lloyd Price and a host of others, and in the 80's was still recording with the Blasters. He defined the New Orleans carnival sax sound that dominated the era and even cut instrumental hits on his own ("Walkin' With Mr. Lee"). It is almost incomprehensible how Allen wasn't one of the first inductees in this category.

Qualifications: 10 - The Immortals


Mickey "Guitar" Baker

Half of 50's rock duo Mickey & Sylvia who had the huge hit with "Love Is Strange", but even more crucial in Baker's career was his immense sessionwork that literally helped create the rock guitar style as we know it. At a time when rock was saxophone and piano driven Baker was the guitarist who changed that even before Berry, Moore and Diddley came along. Without question the first rock guitar king who's influence down through the years is incalculable. A mandatory inductee who should've been in from year one.

Qualifications: 10 - The Immortals

Posted by Roy on Friday, 12.25.09 @ 09:29am

The Immortals among Non-Performer Candidates according to Digital Dream Door:

Jesse Stone - 2010 Inductee

Tom Dowd

The single most important engineer in rock history, vital in advancing recording techniques including the advent of stereo multi-track recording, of which he was a pioneer. One of the nicest human beings who ever graced rock 'n' roll recently passed on rendering any honor to him here posthumous, which is an absolute disgrace considering he should've been inducted a quarter century ago. If they finally put him in there'd be a line of superstar artists a mile long wanting to give the induction speech for him.

Qualifications: 10 - The Immortals


Cosimo Matassa

Owner of the legendary J&M Recording Studio in New Orleans which churned out countless hits from the late 40's onward, in the process defining the sound of New Orleans rock and setting the template for independent studios forever more. Arguably Matassa recorded more vital rock records than any human being ever and since that is what the Hall claims to be celebrating they ought to name an entire wing after this man, but an induction while he's still with us to enjoy the recognition on earth will do.

Qualifications: 10 - The Immortals


Willie Mitchell

A legendary figure who could be considered as a solo performer (numerous hits as an instrumentalist), or as a sideman (he played trumpet on dozens of major records), but it is the non-performer category where he might be best suited. He built Hi Records into a dominant label after taking over its ownership when its owners died years after he had started out there as an artist and producer in the early 60's. He subsequently shaped the career of Al Green and much of 70's Memphis soul during the label's glory years. That alone should allow him to walk in without question and as an all-around music figure he is a mandatory induction who's entry is long overdue.

Qualifications: 10 - The Immortals


Wolfman Jack

The most legendary rock 'n' roll DJ outside of Alan Freed, the Wolfman rose to fame by broadcasting from border radio stations just inside Mexico, taking advantage of their massive half million watt singles that beamed his hypnotic growl and voice and his crazed off-the-cuff skits halfway around the world. During the 60's he kept rock 'n' roll's wild dangerous image on the dial to everyone within earshot, then in the 70's finally showed his face by playing a vital role in the acclaimed film "American Graffiti" and hosting "The Midnight Special", which featured live performances of hundreds of rock artists over the years on its network television run.

Qualifications: 10 - The Immortals

Posted by Roy on Friday, 12.25.09 @ 09:42am

Hey Roy, how about posting the Digital Dream Door ratings of some of the Non-Performers we've brought up on this site: Bernie Taupin, Doug Morris (who supposedly will get in next year), Bernie Lowe, Kal Mann, Dave Appell, P.F. Sloan, Steve Barri, Bob Crewe, Van McCoy (he had a couple hits, but really belongs in more as a Non-Performer) and even Richard Barrett.

Can you spring that for us?

Posted by Philip on Saturday, 12.26.09 @ 23:23pm

How about not, Roy? He puts up enough stupid lists now anyway. All you are doing is encouraging him. Just go to Digital Dream Door yourself and look them up.

Posted by Brian on Sunday, 12.27.09 @ 06:18am

NIN more immortal than Lynard Skynard...I think not..

Posted by Alec L on Sunday, 12.27.09 @ 22:02pm

How about yes, Roy? I went to DDD, tried the search function and just got a bunch of stupid google results. If I wanted that, I'd go to google.

Posted by Philip on Monday, 12.28.09 @ 05:58am

http://digitaldreamdoor.nutsie.com/pages/best_hall-of-fame-nom-2010.html

You are not using the Digital Dream Door site properly.

Click on the link above and look for this on the top of the page and choose the selection you want.

QUALIFICATIONS (on a scale of 1-10)
1 - Non-existant
2 - Mostly Insignificant
3 - Recognizable, But Minor Credentials
4 - Modest Accomplishments
5 - Worth Examining, But Will Often Fall Short
6 - Strong Case To Be Made
7 - Solid Choice
8 - Unquestioned Credentials
9 - Dominant Artist
10 - The Immortals

Candidates A-C | Candidates C-H | Candidates H-M | Candidates M-S | Candidates S-Z

50 Unlikely Candidates | Sidemen Candidates | Early Influences
Outside Genre Possibilities | Non-Performers | 2010 Nominees

DDD does not have every single artist who is not in the rock hall listed and rated on their site. Just like FRL doesn't.

Posted by Roy on Monday, 12.28.09 @ 06:11am

http://digitaldreamdoor.nutsie.com/index.html

THE DIGITAL DREAM DOOR HOMEPAGE

Digital Dream Door is based out of Clearwater, Florida

Posted by Roy on Monday, 12.28.09 @ 06:15am

It's a great list for a breakdown of what you're looking for (presumably) in regards to the Rock Hall.

I would ask one question regarding their rankings. They list the following as # 8-10:

8 - Unquestioned Credentials
9 - Dominant Artist
10 - Immortals

Kind of makes you wonder, if an artist has unquestioned credentials, why they'd have to pass through stage 9 (Dominant Artist) to get to the Immortals at 10. If you're credentials are unquestioned, shouldn't you be acknowledged as a dominant artist already? (lol)

It's still a solid ranking system, depending upon where you place the little nooks and crannies of an artists career.

I'll have the Thomas's English Muffins Nooks & Crannies Scale for you later on...

Posted by Cheesecrop on Monday, 12.28.09 @ 06:25am

http://digitaldreamdoor.nutsie.com/pages/best_halloffame_non.html

NOT LISTED OR RATED ON DIGITAL DREAM DOOR

Bernie Taupin, Doug Morris (who supposedly will get in next year), Bernie Lowe, Kal Mann, Dave Appell, P.F. Sloan, Steve Barri, Bob Crewe, Van McCoy

Posted by Roy on Monday, 12.28.09 @ 06:41am

From Digital Dream Door

Richard Barrett

The man who essentially conceived the girl group idiom with Chantels in the 50's and then a decade later managed to update the style in the 70's with the Three Degrees. A songwriter and performer as lead singer of the doo wop group The Valentines, he quickly moved to the other side of the business and discovered such legendary artists as Frankie Lymon & The Teenagers and Little Anthony & The Imperials, before switching much of his focus to female artists. Barrett was successful in all areas of rock music he tried and did as much to level the playing field for women in rock as anyone.

Qualifications: 9 - Dominant Artist

Posted by Roy on Monday, 12.28.09 @ 06:48am

Actually, I did find Bob Crewe on there, too. He's ranked as an 8. Gives me hope.

Posted by Philip on Monday, 12.28.09 @ 17:58pm

THE DIGITAL DREAM DOOR'S 119 CANDIDATES FOR INDUCTION INTO THE ROCK AND ROLL HALL OF FAME IN THE PERFORMERS CATEGORY:

QUALIFICATIONS (on a scale of 1-10)
1 - Non-existant
2 - Mostly Insignificant
3 - Recognizable, But Minor Credentials
4 - Modest Accomplishments
5 - Worth Examining, But Will Often Fall Short
6 - Strong Case To Be Made
7 - Solid Choice
8 - Unquestioned Credentials
9 - Dominant Artist
10 - The Immortals

001. Johnny Ace - 8
002. B-52's - 5
003. Afrika Bambaataa - 7
004. The Beastie Boys - 8
005. Jesse Belvin - 6
006. Big Maybelle - 5
007. Blood, Sweat & Tears - 5
008. Kurtis Blow - 6
009. Gary "U.S." Bonds - 5
010. Boston - 5
011. Jerry Butler - 7
012. The Cadillacs - 5
013. Canned Heat - 5
014. James Carr - 5
015. The Cars - 7
016. Clarence Carter - 5
017. Gene Chandler - 6
018. Chic - 7
019. Chicago - 5
020. The Chiffons - 5
021. The Chi-Lites - 7
022. The Clovers - 8
023. Joe Cocker - 5
024. Phil Collins - 6
025. The Commodores - 6
026. Alice Cooper - 7
027. Don Covay - 5
028. Dick Dale - 6
029. Def Leppard - 6
030. Deep Purple - 7
031. The Delfonics - 6
032. Dire Straits - 6
033. The Dominoes - 8
034. Donovan - 6
035. The Doobie Brothers - 6
036. Dr. John - 7
037. Lee Dorsey - 6
038. Electric Light Orchestra - 5
039. Emerson, Lake & Palmer - 6
040. The "5" Royales - 7
041. The Five Keys - 5
042. Eddie Floyd - 5
043. Flying Burrito Brothers - 6
044. The Go-Go's - 7
045. Lesley Gore - 5
046. Grand Funk Railroad - 5
047. Hall & Oates - 7
048. Screamin' Jay Hawkins - 6
049. Heart - 7
050. Ivory Joe Hunter - 6
051. Iron Maiden - 6
052. Janet Jackson - 7
053. Rick James - 5
054. Tommy James & The Shondells - 6
055. Jan & Dean - 7
056. Jethro Tull - 6
057. Joan Jett & The Blackhearts - 5
058. Journey - 5
059. Judas Priest - 5
060. Kansas - 5
061. King Crimson - 6
062. Ben E. King - 6
063. Kool & The Gang - 7
064. Kraftwerk - 5
065. Major Lance - 5
066. Huey Lewis & The News - 7
067. Little Feat - 5
068. Love - 5
069. Lonnie Mack - 5
070. The Manhattans - 5
071. The Marvelettes - 7
072. The MC5 - 6
073. Harold Melvin And The Bluenotes - 6
074. The Meters - 7
075. The Steve Miller Band - 7
076. The Monkees - 7
077. The Moody Blues - 5
078. Motorhead - 6
079. New York Dolls - 5
080. Ted Nugent - 5
081. The Ohio Players - 5
082. "Little Esther" Phillips - 6
083. The Pointer Sisters - 7
084. Procol Harum - 5
085. Paul Revere & The Raiders - 6
086. Rufus featuring Chaka Khan - 7
087. Rush - 7
088. Mitch Ryder & The Detroit Wheels - 5
089. Sam The Sham & The Pharaohs - 5
090. Shirley & Lee - 6
091. Sonny & Cher - 5
092. The Spinners - 6
093. Ringo Starr - 5
094. Steppenwolf - 5
095. Billy Stewart - 5
096. The Stray Cats - 5
097. The Stylistics - 7
098. Styx - 5
099. Johnnie Taylor - 6
100. Joe Tex - 7
101. Carla Thomas - 6
102. Irma Thomas - 5
103. Rufus Thomas - 6
104. Three Dog Night - 5
105. Toots & The Maytals - 7
106. The Treacherous Three - 5
107. Tina Turner - 7
108. The Turtles - 5
109. Junior Walker & The All-Stars - 6
110. War - 7
111. Johnny "Guitar" Watson - 6
112. Mary Wells - 7
113. Barry White - 7
114. Larry Williams - 6
115. Otis Williams & The Charms - 5
116. Chuck Willis - 7
117. Link Wray - 6
118. Yes - 6
119. Warren Zevon - 7

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 12.29.09 @ 06:49am

THE DIGITAL DREAM DOOR'S 41 CANDIDATES FOR INDUCTION INTO THE ROCK AND ROLL HALL OF FAME IN THE EARLY INFLUENCE CATEGORY:

QUALIFICATIONS (on a scale of 1-10)
1 - Non-existant
2 - Mostly Insignificant
3 - Recognizable, But Minor Credentials
4 - Modest Accomplishments
5 - Worth Examining, But Will Often Fall Short
6 - Strong Case To Be Made
7 - Solid Choice
8 - Unquestioned Credentials
9 - Dominant Artist
10 - The Immortals

01. Faye Adams - 7
02. Archibald - 5
03. Tiny Bradshaw - 7
04. Roy Brown - 10
05. Arthur "Big Boy" Crudup - 5
06. Larry Darnell - 7
07. The Dixie Hummingbirds - 8
08. Billy Eckstine - 5
09. Five Blind Boys Of Mississippi - 7
10. Cecil Gant - 6
11. Lionel Hampton - 6
12. Wynonie Harris - 10
13. Bull Moose Jackson - 7
14. Illinois Jacquet - 7
15. Buddy & Ella Johnson - 6
16. Julia Lee - 8
17. Joe Liggins - 8
18. Nellie Lutcher - 6
19. Percy Mayfield - 8
20. Big Jay McNeely - 8
21. Amos Milburn - 8
22. Lucky Millinder - 7
23. Roy Milton - 7
24. Wild Bill Moore - 5
25. Joe Morris - 6
26. Charley Patton - 7
27. The Pilgrim Travelers - 8
28. Jimmy Preston - 5
29. The Ravens - 10
30. Johnnie Ray - 7
31. The Sensational Nightingales - 6
32. Pine Top Smith - 5
33. Sister Rosetta Tharpe - 9
34. Willie Mae "Big Mama" Thornton - 5
35. The Treniers - 8
36. Eddie "Cleanhead" Vinson - 6
37. Clara Ward Singers - 8
38. Paul "Hucklebuck" Williams - 6
39. Sonny Boy Williamson II - 6
40. Jimmy Witherspoon - 5
41. Billy Wright - 7

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 12.29.09 @ 07:48am

THE DIGITAL DREAM DOOR'S 32 CANDIDATES FOR INDUCTION INTO THE ROCK AND ROLL HALL OF FAME IN THE SIDEMEN CATEGORY:

QUALIFICATIONS (on a scale of 1-10)
1 - Non-existant
2 - Mostly Insignificant
3 - Recognizable, But Minor Credentials
4 - Modest Accomplishments
5 - Worth Examining, But Will Often Fall Short
6 - Strong Case To Be Made
7 - Solid Choice
8 - Unquestioned Credentials
9 - Dominant Artist
10 - The Immortals

01. Lee Allen - 10
02. Jerry Allison - 9
03. Jack Ashford - 6
04. Bob Babbitt - 6
05. Mickey "Guitar" Baker - 10
06. "Daddy" Gene Barge - 8
07. Aston "Family Man" Barrett - 7
08. Gil Bernal - 5
09. Michael Bloomfield - 8
10. Terry Bozzio - 7
11. Bobby Byrd - 6
12. Al Casey - 6
13. Clarence Clemons - 8
14. Tommy Cogbill - 8
15. Cornell Dupree - 6
16. Panama Francis - 6
17. Cliff Gallup - 9
18. Jim Gordon - 7
19. Jerome Green - 8
20. Mick Green - 5
21. Peter Green - 6
22. Herb Hardesty - 9
23. Roger Hawkins - 9
24. The Hi-Rhythm Section - 8
25. Nicky Hopkins - 8
26. The Jordanaires - 7
27. Carole Kaye - 7
28. Jim Keltner - 8
29. Bobby Keys - 6
30. Al Kooper - 8
31. The Memphis Horns - 9
32. David "Fathead" Newman - 6

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 12.29.09 @ 08:38am

THE DIGITAL DREAM DOOR'S 10 OUTSIDE GENRE POSSIBILITIES FOR INDUCTION INTO THE ROCK AND ROLL HALL OF FAME. NOT RATED.

Joan Baez
The Caravans
Guitar Slim
Roy Hamilton
Herbie Hancock
Richie Havens
Albert King
Willie Nelson
Ravi Shankar
Jimmy Smith

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 12.29.09 @ 08:53am

Regarding the DDD ratings that Roy posted:

ELO is a '5'.

Huey Lewis & the News is a '7'

That says it all about whomever rated the acts.

Posted by Paul in KY on Tuesday, 12.29.09 @ 12:57pm

http://forums.nutsie.com/index.php

THE DIGITAL DREAM DOOR FORUM/MESSAGEBOARD.

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 01.5.10 @ 12:44pm

where is metallica on this list

Posted by jacob beahm on Monday, 01.18.10 @ 18:50pm

Aside from the first two Rock Hall induction ceremonies, I've noticed that the Rock Hall inducts the most artists at the start of a new decade. Is this intentional?

1986 - 16 inductees
1987 - 23 inductees

1990 - 16 inductees
2000 - 14 inductees
2010 - 13 inductees

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 01.19.10 @ 05:37am

Aside from the first two Rock Hall induction ceremonies, I've noticed that the Rock Hall inducts the most artists at the start of a new decade. Is this intentional?

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 01.19.10 @ 05:37am
--------------------------------------------------
Unconscious reflex action, I'm betting. At least I don't think there's anything special there. Chalk it up to the awareness of a new decade.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Tuesday, 01.19.10 @ 18:48pm

The MIRACLES ARE one of the Top 50 IMMORTALS ...but not only are they NOT in...they HAVEN'T EVEN BEEN CONSIDERED !!! WHY??

They meet , and exceed ,every possible requirement for induction. Their "influence" factor is through the roof !! Over 50 of their songs have been covered by SCORES OF OTHER ARTISTS!! They were a major inflrence on the British Invasion" groups in particular. The Beatles, Stones, Hollies, The Who, and numerous others have covered Miracles tunes. Also, artists from EVERY MAJOR MUSICAL GENRE HAVE AS WELL.Don't believe it ? check out this list:

The Miracles, Motown's first group, are far and away ,the most covered Motown group of all time. Their music and songs have influenced artists all over the world - in every major musical genre - over the last 50 years.[21] ,including Pop, Rock,Country & Western, Disco, Reggae, Bluegrass,Grunge, MOR/Easy Listening,Acapella,Jazz,and Rap/Hip-Hop, as well as Soul/R&B. Almost all of their hits were self-written, making them unique among Motown acts. Many of the Miracles' songs have been major hits or important recordings for other artists. Among these are:

"Going to a Go-Go" - The Rolling Stones, The Hags, and Secret Affair.
"I Second That Emotion" - Japan, Michael McDonald, Kiki Dee, The Manhattan Transfer, Jerry Garcia, Diana Ross & the Supremes with the Temptations, 10db, Tammy Wynette, Jose Feliciano.
"(Come 'Round Here) I'm The One You Need " - The Jackson 5, The Cowsills, The GP's
"If You Can Want" - The Dirtbombs, Barbara McNair, Chazz Dixon.
"Nowhere To Go- Kanye West (as the basis of his song "About An Angel"), Beanie Sigel (as "Got Nowhere") , Freeway
"Much Better Off" - J Dilla.
"You've Got The Love I Need" -J Dilla.
"A Legend In Its Own Time" - J Dilla (as an exercept of his song "One Eleven").
"Oh Be My Love"- Barbara Lewis, The Supremes, Barbara McNair.
"I Don't Blame You At All"- Rosetta Hightower.
"Mighty Good Lovin"-Edwin Starr, Chris Clark.
"You're So Fine and Sweet"- The Undertakers.
"I Like It Like That" (Miracles song)- Bobby Vee, Mitch Ryder & the Detroit Wheels.
"Would I Love You"-Len Barry.
"Happy Landing"- The Temptations.
"Special Occasion- Jim Gilstrap.
"I'll Try Something New" - Diana Ross & The Supremes with The Temptations, Barbara McNair, A Taste of Honey, Spyder Turner (as an excerpt from his cover of "Stand By Me")
"My Girl Has Gone" - Etienne Daho, Bobby Taylor, Edwyn Collins, Ken Parker.
"Yester Love" - Gerald Wilson & His Orchestra.
"The Love I Saw In You Was Just a Mirage" - The Jackson 5, Vance Gilbert, The Uniques
"Love Machine" - Wham!, Thelma Houston
"Determination" - The Contours.
Choosey Beggar - Chazz Dixon.
"I've Been Good To You" - Marshall Crenshaw, Brenda Holloway, Joe Meek, The Temptones, Ray, Goodman & Brown (The Moments), The Ones, The Temptations.
"Mickey's Monkey" - Mother's Finest, Martha and the Vandellas, The Supremes, The Hollies, The Young Rascals, John Mellencamp, Lou Christie, Cannibal & the Headhunters.
"More Love" - Kim Carnes, Paul Young, Barbara McNair, Mica Paris, The 5th Dimension, Rick Webb.
"Ooo Baby Baby" - Linda Ronstadt, Brenda Holloway, Shalamar, Ruby Turner, Sylvester, Spirit Traveler, Five Stairsteps, Zapp, Laura Nyro, Ella Fitzgerald, Honey Cone, Human Nature
"Shop Around" - Captain & Tennille, Don Bryant, The Astronauts, The Allusions, and Georgie Fame, among numerous others.
"The Tears of a Clown" - La Toya Jackson, The Beat, The Rocking Chairs, The Re-Bops, Nnenna Freelon, The Flying Pickets, Caligula, Human Nature, Enuff Z'Nuff
"The Tracks of My Tears " - Linda Ronstadt, Aretha Franklin, Johnny Rivers, Gladys Knight & the Pips, Mongo Santamaria, Martha and the Vandellas, Bryan Ferry, Dolly Parton, Boyz II Men, Human Nature, among many others
"Darling Dear" - The Jackson Five.
"Who's Loving You" - The Jackson 5, En Vogue, Terence Trent D'Arby, Brenda Holloway, The Supremes, The Temptations, Honey Cone, Stevie B., Archie Bell & the Drells, Nikka Costa.
" You've Really Got a Hold on Me" - Percy Sledge, Barbara McNair, The Beatles, The Temptations, The Supremes, The Zombies, Aidan Smith, Sonny & Cher, Mickey Gilley, Eddie Money, Cyndi Lauper, The Bobs, Greg Brown, Small Faces, Bobby McFerrin, and She & Him among many others.
"I Gotta Dance to Keep From Crying" - The Who, Jimmy James.
"From Head to Toe" - Elvis Costello, Chris Clark
"A Fork in the Road " - Rebbie Jackson
"Way Over There" - The Royal Counts, The Temptations, Edwin Starr, The Marvelettes, New Man, Eddie Adams Jr.
"(You Can't Let the Boy Overpower) The Man In You" - Chuck Jackson
"What's So Good About Goodbye" - Giant Sunflower, The Temptations
"More, More, More of Your Love" - Bob Brady & the Con Chords
"Doggone Right" - Bobby Davis.
"After All" - The Supremes, The Marvelettes.
"Swept For You Baby" - The Sylvers, The Blenders, The Tamlins (as Sweat For You Baby).
"The Hurt is Over" - The DT's
"Whatever Makes You Happy"- Jacki Gore.
"Save Me" - The Undertones
"(You Can) Depend On Me" - The Temptations, The Supremes, Mary Wells, Brenda Holloway.
"Baby Baby Don't Cry" - Gerald Wilson and His Orchestra, Projekt.
"Can You Love a Poor Boy" - Bobby Vee, Softones, Gil Bernal, Ronnie Walker.
"Bad Girl" - Dazz Band.
"That's What Love Is Made Of" - Michael Jackson, Bobby Vee, Choker Campbell, The Magicians.
"We've Come Too Far To End It Now"-The Escorts
"Here I Go Again" - Chazz Dixon, Carey Bell, A.J. De Bravo, Little Willie G., Oran "Juice" Jones.
"Point It Out"' - The Supremes and The Temptations.
"Got A Job" - The Marcels
"Whole Lotta Shakin' In My Heart (Since I Met You)" - The Hellacopters, Marv Johnson.
"Give Me Just Another Day" - Young Jeezy (as the basis for his song, "Mr 17.5")
"Do It Baby"- Jimmy Ponder, Red Holt (of Young-Holt Unlimited).

.....But THAT group's not worthy of induction ?

Posted by Bill G on Friday, 02.5.10 @ 07:48am

There is something very strange going on at the Rock Hall when the biggest names in 60s Folk music have not been inducted or nominated yet!!

The Kingston Trio
Peter, Paul and Mary
Joan Baez
Judy Collins
Phil Ochs
Buffy Sainte-Marie

But they nominated Laura Nyro!! I guess because she wrote more of her own material and was a better writer. They inducted Leonard Cohen, Bob Dylan, Joni Mitchell, Pete Seeger, Woody Guthrie and Lead Belly. Now what about the rest!!!!?

Posted by Roy on Wednesday, 02.10.10 @ 07:41am

VH1's Top 100 Artists of Rock And Roll History as voted on by the artists themselves back in 1998.

The only 12 artists on the list who have not been inducted into the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame yet:

42. Nirvana
53. Peter Gabriel
63. Sting
67. Kiss
70. Stevie Ray Vaughan
77. John Coltrane
80. Tina Turner
82. Devo
83. Iggy Pop
84. T. Rex
85. Carole King
90. Tom Waits

Posted by Roy on Saturday, 02.13.10 @ 06:56am

Roy....you forgot the group at # 61 on the VH-1 Top 100 list.

Posted by Bill G on Saturday, 02.13.10 @ 19:31pm

VH1's Top 100 Artists of Rock And Roll History as voted on by the artists themselves back in 1998.

The only 13 artists on the list who have not been inducted into the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame yet:

42. Nirvana
53. Peter Gabriel
61. The Miracles
63. Sting
67. Kiss
70. Stevie Ray Vaughan
77. John Coltrane
80. Tina Turner
82. Devo
83. Iggy Pop
84. T. Rex
85. Carole King
90. Tom Waits

Posted by Roy on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 05:09am

Thanks, Roy. (LOL) I just didn't want The Miracles forgotten.It certainly looks like the RRHOF Induction Committee has.

Actually, The Miracles are on all 3 lists of the Top 100 Artists of All Time, VH-1's, Rolling Stone's , and Billboard Magazine's, I can't understand their justification for ignoring them.

Everything that The Miracles ever did, they did as a group. They wrote songs together (Smokey didn't write all those hits by himself), They recorded together, toured together ,produced songs together....so why did he get inducted alone ? There is NO REASONABLE EXPLAINATION FOR IT.

The Village Voice,in it's issue of Oct 30th 2009,in commenting on the Rock Hall's 25th Anniversary Concert, made this comment:

"Meanwhile, soul legend Smokey Robinson, who sang "Tracks of My Tears" with Wonder, expresses remorse that his band, the Miracles, aren't members. None of the musicians take the Rock Hall lightly--except David Crosby, who compares it to the way his cinematographer father used his Oscar as a doorstop." (end of quote).

Even Smokey knows his group should be in. Hopefully, he'll DO something about it.

The RRHOF inducted The Impressions (and Curtis Mayfield separately), The Jackson Five (and Michael separately), The Beatles (and 3 of their individual members separately) , there's no reason why they can't do it for The Miracles .This group is TOO INFLUENTIAL and IMPORTANT for their many accomplishments to be simply swept under the rug and forgotten.

On a side note: I thought Tina was already inducted with Ike ? (although her accomplishments since Ike also definitely merit separate induction). Isn't Carole King also in ?

Posted by Bill G. on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 11:07am

Ike and Tina Turner are in, but Tina Turner is not in for her solo career. She can be inducted again as a solo artist. Carole King was inducted in the non-performers category in 1990 as Gerry Goffin and Carole King. She still qualifies for being inducted again in the performers category. She was nominated for induction in the performers category in 1988 for the 1989 induction ceremony and lost. Tina Turner has been nominated to be nominated but hasn't made the final nominees list yet for any year.

Posted by Roy on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 15:50pm

Dr. Dre does deserve to be in this list seeing as he is one of the greatest orchestrators of music history.....

Posted by ChaCha on Saturday, 02.27.10 @ 06:06am

We're missing who inducted Robert Johnson, T-Bone Walker, Hank Williams, Ahmet Ertegun, Jimmy Yancey, Jimmie Rodgers, Leonard Chess, Jerry Wexler

--Future Rock Legends

It's in the book "The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame: The First 25 Years, 2009, by Holly George Warren

I don't know if it is Robert Palmer the singer or Robert Palmer the writer for Rolling Stone magazine.

1986 - Robert Johnson by Robert Palmer
1986 - Jimmy Yancey by ???????
1986 - Jimmie Rodgers by Jerry Wexler

1987 - Ahmet Ertegun by Jann S. Wenner and Walter Yetnikoff
1987 - Jerry Wexler by Jann S. Wenner
1987 - Leonard Chess by ??????
1987 - Hank Williams by Seymour Stein
1987 - T-Bone Walker by Seymour Stein
1987 - Louis Jordan by Seymour Stein

Posted by Roy on Sunday, 02.28.10 @ 01:11am

THE DIGITAL DREAM DOOR'S LIST OF IMMORTALS WHO HAVE NOT BEEN INDUCTED YET:

QUALIFICATION RATING: 10 - THE IMMORTALS

01. Lee Allen
02. Mickey "Guitar" Baker
03. Roy Brown
04. Wynonie Harris
05. The Ravens
06. Tom Dowd
07. Cosimo Matassa
08. Willie Mitchell
09. Wolfman Jack

Posted by Roy on Wednesday, 03.3.10 @ 03:35am

R.I.P. RON BANKS 1951-2010

RON BANKS, The leader and founding member of the legendary R&B vocal group THE DRAMATICS paased away on 3/04/10 of a massive heart attack . one of the all time great groups of R&B, THE DRAMATICS SCORED OVER 40 CHART HITS ON THE R&B CHARTS , including the million- sellers WHAT YOU SEE Is WHAT YOU GET, and IN THE RAIN , as well as the Certified Gold album , DO WHAT YOU WANNA DO. Banks was 58.

Posted by Bill G on Saturday, 03.6.10 @ 11:22am

What about Leon Russell? He has done more than most of the current inductees. Shindig; Mad Dogs and Englishmen; Concert for Bangladesh; Clapton; super sideman; super writer - Delta Lady, Tightwire, A Song for You; hits for everyone. Why isn't HE in the Hall of Fame? Shame, shame, shame.

Posted by unca hubie on Sunday, 03.7.10 @ 14:05pm

http://digitaldreamdoor.nutsie.com/pages/music0.html

THE DIGITAL DREAM DOOR MUSIC LISTS

Posted by Roy on Sunday, 03.7.10 @ 15:19pm

In view of the recent passing of group leader / founder RON BANKS, I cant help but ask: Is there a site for THE DRAMATICS on Future Rock Legends ? I was looking, but couldn't find one.

Posted by BillG on Wednesday, 03.10.10 @ 13:17pm

There is no page for the Dramatics yet. Click on "Contact Us" on the left of the screen and tell them to add them and anyone else you have not seen listed yet. Click on "Complete List of Artists" to see what is available first. FRL had added pages for over 100 artists already from emails that I have sen them.

Posted by Roy on Wednesday, 03.10.10 @ 13:34pm

http://rockhall.com/

The Rock Hall has got a new looking website now and they have stoped posting timelines with the inductee bios and they have removed the timelines from all the past inductees bios as well! That sucks! Oh well, we can always read them on the Way Back Machine!-Internet archives.

Posted by Roy on Thursday, 03.11.10 @ 09:43am

"RS had a "100 greatest guitar players" list that was the biggest crock of bull I'd ever seen" - Gitarzan

That list was a disgrace. An insult to music

Posted by Keebord on Monday, 12.21.09 @ 14:54pm

Yeah. Joan Jett (whom I like and respect greatly, though not for any amazing guitar work) ahead of Tony Iommi, Kim Thayil and Angus Young. Oh, and Kurt Cobain (great songwriter, okay guitarist) and Jerry Garcia and Johnny Ramone and Jack White, The Edge, John Frusciante and Tom Morello (I like some of them as well) ahead of all three of those guys, and ahead of Brian May, Randy Rhoads, David Gilmour, Ritchie Blackmore, Eddie Van Halen, Jeff Beck, Carlos Santana, Richard Thompson, Mark Knopfler, Joe Perry, Dickey Betts, Steve Howe and Dave Davies. Unbelievable, huh? The good: It was a diverse list. The bad: Since they had both simple, no-solos people (Johnny Ramone, Joan Jett), people who took the less-is-more soulful approach to playing, and people who were both technical and less-is-more, I couldn't really figure out what criteria they were using. They did seem to sometimes use innovation and influence, and sometimes their opinion of the playing was enough to outdo the lack of both. Missing from the list: Glenn Tipton/KK Downing, Dave Murray/Adrian Smith, Gary Moore, Brian Robertson/Scott Gorham, Ted Nugent (okay, that's debatable)... some others.

Posted by Sam on Thursday, 03.11.10 @ 17:31pm

"The show opened in the mid-60's, and they couldn't do enough to hide 1950's America from the proceedings. They attempted to hide Elvis/Little Richard/Berry/Jerry Lee, and all the rest while pretending that they invented rock. Oh, I forgot, ROCK is different from rock & roll (LOL!!!). One of the biggest cons ever perpetrated." There are actually many people who disagree with you there. There are many who feel that rock & roll. Check out this article from MTV (okay, it's true that the two names mentioned in there are Brits, but still)... http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1452945/03182002/black_sabbath.jhtml

Posted by Sam on Thursday, 03.11.10 @ 17:46pm

Sam...what makes that list even more appalling is the fact that it's called "The 100 Greatest Guitar Players"...not rock, country, jazz, etc...With that taken into account, the list of players left off that list is absolutely ridiculous...there's players who were left off who people on the list shouldn't even be mentioned in the same breath...

Posted by Gitarzan on Thursday, 03.11.10 @ 18:39pm

Sam...here's an example of someone who was left off of that stupid list...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ig3Wx96ZmzA&feature=related

Posted by Gitarzan on Thursday, 03.11.10 @ 18:46pm

Sam...Eric Johnson either wasn't on it or he was ranked very low...but you can judge for yourself...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15eu7ar5EKM

I guess their definition of "great" and mine are vastly different...

Posted by Gitarzan on Thursday, 03.11.10 @ 18:55pm

If we're going to bring classical and Spanish guitarists into it, what about Paco de Lucia? "Cliffs of Dover"... now that was cool! Really good playing there. Now, the problems with the RS list:

-I dig GNR and Eminem, but they haven't earned a spot. Lacking a bit in the two I's, particularly when so many of the people who paved the way for GNR didn't get a spot.

-Certainly Tupac's had an impact in the Hip-Hop world, but has that crossed over to the world of R'n'R?

-Pink Floyd and Queen should be on the list, as many people have pointed out. Too much influence and importance to be ignored.

-I love Nirvana, and I feel they do deserve a spot, but R.E.M. should without a doubt get a spot ahead of them (and probably someone one of R.E.M.'s contemporaries), and I feel like one of Nirvana's Seattle contemporaries should have gotten a spot as well.

-I didn't even know Dr. Dre had an actual solo career. Isn't he mostly known for producing outside of NWA?

-I don't care that much for Cream's music, but without them I don't think there would've been the Jimi Hendrix Experience, and possibly no Zeppelin, no Sabbath and no Deep Purple (they should've made the list over GNR.) For that they should be a bit higher.

-I like the Eagles but since I believe country rock was already in existence, I'm thinking it's their massive popularity that got them a spot, and that alone doesn't do it for me (plus, "Hotel California" the song is massively overrated.)

-Nirvana ahead of Sabbath, AC/DC, Cream, The Who, Bowie, The Allman Brothers, The Kinks (should be higher), Aerosmith... can't deal with that.

-I also feel like 100 spots isn't enough, to keep the people that deserve it on and fit in all the people who should've made the cut (Deep Purple, Judas Priest, T. Rex, Thin Lizzy, Joy Division, New Order, The Smiths, NY Dolls, Alice Cooper...)

Gitarzan, I noticed you commented on the Seven Ages of Rock thing. The Americans have actually picked up on the idea of Rock and R'N'R being different if you watch VH1 Classic's version* of Seven Ages of Rock.

*I use the term "version" loosely with how badly they screwed it up (3 of the original episodes had some major flaws, yes, but that can sometimes be expected when you have about an hour of footage per episode, except for the British Indie episode, which was an hour and a half and thus the most insightful to me.) What VH1 Classic did was to use exactly the same content and interviews ours did, try to fit each episode into an hour, and when you include commercials that means that lots of key content is cut, and from the bits I watched meant that it was a completely mess. Plus, they censored any swearing and got Dennis Hopper to narrate, and he is hands down the most boring narrator ever.

Posted by Sam on Friday, 03.12.10 @ 16:53pm

I don't care that much for Cream's music, but without them I don't think there would've been the Jimi Hendrix Experience, and possibly no Zeppelin, no Sabbath and no Deep Purple (they should've made the list over GNR.) For that they should be a bit higher. Sam
If it was not for the Surfaris there may not have been a Cream

Posted by mrxyz on Friday, 03.12.10 @ 21:51pm