Air Supply

Not in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame

Eligible since: 2001 (The 2002 Induction Ceremony)

Previously Considered? No  what's this?

Air Supply @ Wikipedia

Air Supply Videos

Will Air Supply be inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame?
"Musical excellence is the essential qualification for induction."
   

Comments

29 comments so far (post your own)

Such lovely, thougtful and relaxing music should be an inspiration to all rock bands. Songs like "Lost in Love"
and "Even the Nights Are Better" will go down in rock history as being some of the most innovative inspiring songs for future generations to cherish for all time.


NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by tank on Wednesday, 04.25.07 @ 00:33am


Excuse me - - I just came in here to poop on the floor and leave.

Posted by shawn on Saturday, 05.5.07 @ 18:16pm


OH HELL NO!!! This band represented the last gasp of the wimpy ballad music by artist such as the Carpenters and Christopher Cross. Thank God that MTV came along when it did and ran these groups off.

Posted by Brian Washington on Thursday, 09.13.07 @ 02:26am


HAHAHAHAHA!

Sorry, Air Supply. Not gonna happen.

Posted by K-Money on Sunday, 04.13.08 @ 09:48am


Nice blog, thanks.

Posted by best savings accounts in uk on Saturday, 08.23.08 @ 08:01am


They should get in. Good music.

Posted by AirSuppleee on Wednesday, 12.17.08 @ 18:30pm


If they get in,I just might pop every baloon in the whole wide world,with just one touch of a button.I'm serious,i'll do it.

Posted by S.R on Wednesday, 03.11.09 @ 16:39pm


They are awesome!!! Get em in!

Posted by Alaistair on Thursday, 12.17.09 @ 18:29pm


SHOULD AIR SUPPLY GET INTO THE ROCK AND ROLL HALL OF FAME? WHAT KIND OF QUESTION IS THAT, OBVIOUSLY

Posted by scottpollard on Sunday, 03.14.10 @ 18:44pm


Making Love Out Of Nothing At All

Posted by Roy on Monday, 08.23.10 @ 20:17pm


OH YEAAAAH! They need to, after all these years of spreading love and romance thru their music. Some people are just too shallow and they don't know that the band has became a total rock band at present. The guys deserve to be included in the R&R Hall of Fame!

Posted by DFayette on Monday, 11.5.12 @ 06:21am


Regardless of whether one appreciates the music of Air Supply or not (and most who would post negative comments here probably haven't heard the group in the past 25 years and know nothing of their music), the group's success warrants them induction. Billboard cited them as the most successful group of the '80's. They now hold the record of the longest sustained touring group. And while they get virtually no airplay in the US, they still have held #1 spots in album sales in many worldwide markets (and even performed to 175,000 people in Havana the day before a major hurricane.) Naysayers should check their recent releases out or see them live. Some of their songs these days ("Me Like You," "Dance With Me") are more reminiscent of KISS (another group that should be inducted)than the mellow stuff remembered from two decades ago.

Posted by Carrigan on Monday, 11.5.12 @ 08:24am


They SO need to be in. They've been snubbed YEARS too long.

Posted by Jenny on Monday, 11.5.12 @ 19:19pm


Air Supply deserves to be in the Rock N Roll hall of fame...They have been around almost 40 years..alot more then some of these so called no talent bands..(They know who they are)...They have been subbed for far too long...WISE UP!!! They need to be inducted ASAP!

Posted by t.general on Monday, 11.5.12 @ 19:49pm


These guys have been recording and touring for 37 years. Sellout stadium shows, and a really loyal fan following. They perform LIVE, they are expert showmen. They write and record their own unique style of music. If you don't like it...why vote??? Is that not like phoning someone to tell them you don't want to talk to them???!!! The "80's ballad image" they had is long gone, it served them well, and was right for the time. Try actually LISTENING to their newer stuff before judging.

Posted by Annalie Hughes on Tuesday, 11.6.12 @ 20:10pm


Also, if people, don't have RESPECTFUL, TASTEFUL things to say, they should have the decency to not say ANYTHING. The guys are really amazing and loving, caring people, and they don't deserve to have garbage said about them. They've done what they need to do to be in and should be, whether somep people are fans or not, and I think it's time they GOT in.

Posted by Jenny on Wednesday, 11.7.12 @ 16:12pm


YES they should get in! They have had a level of worldwide success that rivals most any other band out there. They continue to write, record, tour, and chart new songs across the world after 37 years. They deserve it! On another note, if you are against them getting inducted, that's fine, but back it up with some sort of factual evidence rather than thoughtless opinionated posts.

Posted by David on Wednesday, 11.7.12 @ 22:05pm


These fantastic, artistic and powerhouse singers have been around since the mid-70's wowing audiences of fans (and soon-to-be fans) of all ages since then, and - they're still touring world-wide without so much as more than a two-day break. They've sold studio or live albums almost every year and draw amazingly huge SRO crowds. My grand kids love Air Supply songs as well as my mom did at age 80! If there ever was a group for "All Seasons", this is it! Air Supply accompaniment plays with that cool, spine tingling rock edge and sings with those perfect pitch, mellow vocals that thrill the soul. They compose most of their own music (all of which deserves awards in itself) and are truly the backdrop to the lives of so many people in so many countries. Probably over half of people you ask would say they fell in love, got engaged or got married to an Air Supply song! No group is more deserving of this, and other, accolades and awards. They are deeply loved and appreciated literally millions world-wide.

Posted by Devoted2as on Friday, 11.9.12 @ 14:43pm


Air Supply should be in. They were voted by Billboard as the third most successful band of the 80's. For all of you haters, find their latest music and give it a listen. They have never nor do they need to follow any trends. They have what too many artists nowadays do NOT have: REAL TALENT. Graham can write a song like no one else. Russell has the purest voice of anyone in music today. They should've in years ago. They deserve it.

Posted by Michelle Rhodes on Monday, 11.12.12 @ 23:10pm


One of those acts that excelled at what it did- catchy and cheesy love songs. But, no real shot at consideration for the HOF.

Posted by JR on Friday, 04.26.13 @ 16:06pm


They deserve to and should be.

Correction on Michelle's comment:They were named THE most successful band fd the '80s by Billboard Magazine.

Posted by Jenny on Sunday, 04.5.15 @ 17:02pm


May 12,2015 Air Supply will celebrate 40 years of making music. They deserve to be in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. They still tour and sell out venues through out the world. Their music has grown up a bit, still love songs but rock and roll too, songs have modernized. They put on a great show.

Posted by Sue on Friday, 05.1.15 @ 18:31pm


After 40 years of touring and releasing albums, after tying the Beatles for successive top 5 singles, after selling millions and millions of albums, after continuing to perform for 5 decades, these guys are not in? Give your head a shake RRHOF!

Posted by Lorraine on Monday, 11.16.15 @ 02:08am


I think this is the only artist page where I've seen the most women comment. Maybe its just me (?). Anyway, as much as I'd love to see their legacy get plenty of respect and some sort of, well, induction, I'd say their best chances of getting them in is if the hall had a soft-rock division. They may be touring and all, but none of that matters to the RRHOF nominating committee. One of my guilty pleasure songs is 'Lost in Love'.

Posted by Jason Voigt on Monday, 11.16.15 @ 02:27am


My first cassette tape purchases over 35 years ago were "Lost In Love" by Air Supply and "The Original Motion Picture Soundtrack To Xanadu" by E.L.O. and various artists.

That being said, Air Supply's induction is probably quite a few years away. Neither The Carpenters, Bread, nor America have been inducted yet, nor has Seals And Crofts, Carly Simon, Player, England Dan and John Ford Coley, Dan Hill, Dan Fogelberg, etc. Soft rock may actually be the genre treated the worst by the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Monday, 11.16.15 @ 04:03am


Enigmaticus,

Although I agree that most of the people you listed are soft rock, (I consider Carly Simon and the Carpenters more pop than rock) I have to disagree about Dan Fogelberg who I consider a fusion artist. Listen to his music and you can hear elements in it in addition to rock or pop. According to Wiki, he was influenced by elements of folk, pop, rock, classical, jazz and bluegrass. He is from Peoria which is not that far from Chicago. He is definitely influenced by the Chicago fusion style.

Posted by Zuzu on Monday, 11.16.15 @ 08:02am


Zuzu,

The lines between what is considered "soft rock" and some other style are constantly blurred. For example, many of Rush's songs are not hard at all. However, musicologists have difficulty defining Rush's music as anything other than prog, or hard rock. Some idiots even think that Rush is still heavy metal. A better definition would be "art rock." "Roll The Bones" is definitely not a "hard rock" album, nor is much of "Hold Your Fire," "Presto," or "Snakes & Arrows." So why do I mention Rush on an Air Supply page? Because if I had never developed a taste for softer rock, I probably wouldn't have become an aficionado of "progressive rock."

Posted by Enigmaaticus on Monday, 11.16.15 @ 09:39am


Enigmaticus,

I see a lot less of blurred lines and a lot more of younger generations trying to redefine a music style that they are not familiar with.

You bring up Rush and personally I suspect that how they are defined is due to confusion with Mahogany Rush and M & R Rush which were defined as hard rock and metal respectively. I'm familiar slightly with Rush's 70s songs and not their 80s work. In the the 70s we just called them rock - plain and simple. Their style may have changed in the 80s but you would know a lot more about that than I do.

folk is in no way, shape or form pop music. Pop music was more defined as a combination of teeny bopper music and adult contemporary. This probably accounts for its wide popularity.

In the 70s most of the women were defined as pop rather than rock or folk. Exceptions are Melanie, Joan Baez and Judy Collins who would have been considered singer-songwriters or folk.

Garage bands were defined as the North American response to the British Invasion. The term British garage band is an oxymoron. There is no such thing. The Brits did no respond to themselves. Garage bands were not punk bands. Artist that were part of garage bands developed into rock artist. Garage band artist did have some accomplished and studied musicians despite rumors to the contrary such as Marty Grebb who played about 6 or 7 different instruments. Record companies also made sure they learned from established artists in many cases.

Younger generations are also trying to redefine soft rock, hard rock and metal. Metal was considered a rock derivative in the 70s. Some artist were considered crossovers. Hard rock is different from metal. soft rock involves acoustic guitars and pianos. The kids are trying to phase out rock which was in between hard and soft or a combination of both.

Singer-songwriter was a specific type of fusion music and was not used to define somebody that just wrote and performed their own songs. It was part of a triad the fused rock, folk, country and sometimes other genres such as blues. Singer-songwriters were more considered rock and you had folk artist and country artist that were usually referred to as outlaw country. Between these three there may have been some blurring of lines but pop was pop and was not considered as part of these groups.

Posted by Zuzu on Monday, 11.16.15 @ 10:57am


Zuzu, that's a pretty good write-up. As far as younger generations redefining genres and such, I think part of it has to with the nature of history-chronicling and historians in general. In the 1996 edition of Top Pop Singles, Joel Whitburn referred to the Backstreet Boys as a vocal group, but by the mid-2000's, even he was using the term '"boy band"' to describe them. Reading the liner notes of one of the doo-wop box sets, one learns that "doo-wop" wasn't even coined until the '70s; before then, it was known as "vocal R&B." I suspect the term was coined not just for marketing and "Oldies" and "Dusties" programming, but also to differentiate it between the '50s and '70s vocal R&B that was becoming big from acts like the Spinners, Stylistics, Delfonics, and strangely enough, the Dells who were also a "doo-wop" group back then.

But I do think there is come credence to "blurred lines" arguments, since many artists don't like to be categorized by styles and genres, fearing it will pigeonhole them and inhibit/stunt their ability to grow and expand as musicians. As a result, they tend to be influenced by their contemporaries and up-and-comers, fusing those influential styles with their own. For example, U2 said their Pop album was influenced by artists like the Chemical Brothers, which is a far cry from U2's original punk-rock influences, like the Clash. I think that causes some of the alleged blurring of lines.

And of course, there's always marketing. If you read Charles Crossley's review of this year's nominees, he also states how artists loathe categorization, but for trade publications, radio stations, and even helpful in a word of mouth fashion, to do so. Marketing, in my opinion, has more to do with the blurring of lines and fragmentation and fusions of genres, simply by giving names to them.

Also, genres themselves tend to evolve.

Personally, I've always been a little leery of calling pop a genre, as no one has really ever described it adequately with its structural and rhythmic features that otherwise define genres, and that the name itself is just a shortening of "popular"... hardly a criterion for defining a genre. It is however a very convenient catchall term to otherwise describe the melting pot and dilution of genres. Best as I can describe it, it basically stems from Traditional Americana (a songbook coming largely from Stephen Foster--also some of the roots of early folk and country), Barbershop, and most importantly, ballads. I feel balladry really became the prime ingredient due partially to the huge popularity of crooners like Der Bingle, and also the easy marketability of love ballads, which had as much to do with good singers as it did excellent songwriters.

I say this largely because much of what we call "pop" was essentially a "softer" form of rock'n'roll music, in that the bass and drums were less prominent, and more harmonious and mezzo-piano instrumental backing was preferred instead... that is the traits of ballads. "Dance-pop" is a somewhat "softened" version of more rhythmically driven R&B and electronica. And so forth.

But as you said, even that is partially due to what was then being compared to what is now. Bobby Goldsboro once said in an interview that people are surprised to find he toured with the Stones. He said back then, the Stones were rock and roll, he was rock and roll... parents hated all of them! (Which kind of gives extra credibility to what Weird Al said in "Smells Like Nirvana": "We're so loud and incoherent/Boy this ought to bug your parents! Yeah!")

Some very good thoughts you had, Zuzu. Good read.

Posted by Philip on Tuesday, 11.17.15 @ 00:54am


Leave your comment:

Name:

Email:

Comments:


Security Question:

Which letter is Springsteen's band named after?
 

Note: Emails will not be visible or used in any way, but are required. Please keep comments relevant to the topic. Any content deemed inappropriate or offensive may be edited and/or deleted.

No HTML code is allowed.




This site is not affiliated with the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Museum.