KISS

Rock & Roll Hall of Famer

Category: Performer

Inducted in: 2014

Inducted by: Tom Morello

Nominated in: 2010   2014

First Eligible: 2000 Ceremony

Inducted Members: Paul Stanley, Gene Simmons, Ace Frehley, Peter Criss


Inducted into Rock Hall Revisited in 2000 (ranked #152) .


Essential Albums (?)WikipediaAmazon MP3Amazon CD
Alive! (1975)
Destroyer (1976)

Essential Songs (?)WikipediaAmazon MP3YouTube
Rock And Roll All Nite (1975)
Beth (1976)
Detroit Rock City (1976)
Shout It Out Loud (1976)

KISS @ Wikipedia

KISS Videos

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)

Comments

789 comments so far (post your own)

The thing you're forgetting though is KISS is terrible...

I love this site by the way. Exhaustively researched and the spark of many debates.

Support MC5 and King Crimson in '07!

Posted by Kit on Friday, 07.21.06 @ 02:55am


I've always respected KISS but personally have never been a huge fan. I don't understand how people say that they are a terrible band though. The music is certainly NOT complex but it's catchy and clean. ZZ Top doesn't do anything more complex than KISS so what's the reasoning there?

Posted by AZ Dave on Friday, 08.18.06 @ 23:49pm


KISS has been rocking for 35 years, they have and still outsell most bands on this planet. They brought something to the industry that was sorely lacking, namely entertainment. You actually get something for your money, I cannot really say that anymore from the concerts I have seen lately. They raised the bar and forced other bands to put out, we need them back and they will be back, they will sell out everywhere they go. That is the measure of a great band. Their only sin is refusing to kowtow to the industry execs that decide who enters their moneymaker museum, and that too makes them great. It's up to fans to follow KISS' lead and show the crooks "who made who", without KISS and fans, none of them would have jobs. KISS could start their own museum and kill the Hall of Shame in cleveland, it's a sham. If fans decide on American Idol and Dancing with the Stars, what's the problem with R&R Hall? mmm hmmm.. It's about the fans stupid, who put you in charge of me?

Posted by William on Wednesday, 10.4.06 @ 10:09am


KISS leads American bands in gold records and is seconds in all time gold record sells yet they are "terrible" as one person put it. KISS has a legendary following and the KISS ARMY wont stop until KISS is in the hall of fame

Posted by Walter on Monday, 10.9.06 @ 21:19pm


No they aren't, no they don't, yes they are, and that was me.

Posted by Kit on Monday, 10.9.06 @ 22:08pm


I really don't know much about KISS beyond the makeup and "Rock and Roll All Night", so I don't have much of an opinion on them. I don't think their induction would be a joke, though. I'd be fine with it.

Posted by Mike on Saturday, 10.21.06 @ 23:21pm


Fair is Fair, give credit where it is due. Induct deserving people while they are alive, can make it to the podium and thank their peers and public.

Posted by LJ on Saturday, 10.28.06 @ 16:01pm


As far as I am concerned, the little waste of a zygote that is Dave Marsh has no idea what constitutes a great rock and roll band. I mean some of the people that have already been inducted are quite laughable. I mean seriously, since when do Billie Holiday and Nat King Cole qualify as rock n' roll? That pretty much proves the knowledge (or lack thereof) that the committee has. Not to say that they aren't great artists in their own right. Granted, whether you like them or whether you don't, Kiss has made far more of an impact on society in the past 30 years that does not even compare to many of their contemporaries. The rock n' roll hall of fame is a complete joke and has always been. If they really need to decide who needs to be inducted, it should be left to the people and nobody else.

Posted by rachel on Wednesday, 11.1.06 @ 11:29am


Definitely IN. Come on, every young kid growing up the mid 70s idolized these guys. Not only were they first rate musicians, but entertainers! I've been to numerous concerts and these guys aim to please when they're on stage. Ok maybe they've had problems (drugs,fights,etc), but name a band that hasn't had it's issues. They came back in 1996 and did it again. Two thumbs up! The KISS face paint logos are known worldwide and they are part of our culture as well as our music history!

Posted by JAM on Thursday, 11.16.06 @ 10:46am


It is a joke that groups like Alice Cooper and KISS were not first-ballot nominees. Come on now: Blondie, the Pretenders? Good bands but in the Hall of Fame? Joke!

Posted by Glenn on Thursday, 11.16.06 @ 13:38pm


Chrissy Hynde and Deborah Harry both had more musical talent in their hair curlers that Gene Simmons has in his whole worthless carcass...

You know, at this point, I'm willing to let KISS into the hall just so you all will shut up and pick another sub-mediocre band to talk about.

Posted by Kit on Thursday, 11.16.06 @ 14:29pm


kiss rocks they will be in the hall of fame for sure

Posted by dylan on Wednesday, 11.29.06 @ 09:48am


now, im not a huge KISS fan, but damn they deserve to be inducted. they were a great influence on hard rock and they are one of the best selling bands ever. i agree with Paul Stanley on the hall of fame. its a joke.

Posted by Heavy Metal Hero on Saturday, 12.9.06 @ 17:51pm


no they wont because they werent anything but a tage show....0 of their recording were any good. they werent musicians.

Posted by curt on Sunday, 12.10.06 @ 10:01am


Anyone that thinks Kiss doesn't desrve to get in is probably borderline retarded, or possibly deaf, or a combination of both. Every one of their studio albums, save one (the dreadful "Music From The Elder"), has gone either gold or platinum (a couple of them are multi-platinum). That's every album they've released, including 2 "greatest hits" packages and 4 solo LP's, that have went either gold or platinum since 1974. Name me one band outside of The Beatles that can claim that feat. For record sales alone, they should get in. I'm not, repeat NOT, a card-carrying member of the Kiss Army, but for someone to say they don't deserve to be in is just plain assinine. The main reason they are NOT in is due to pretty much one guy, Dave Marsh. He's never liked them and he probably never will, so it's one person's opinion against millions of record-buying customers spanning over 30 years of sales. Nice of him to think about the general public when he's nominating bands to the HOF.....what a self-centered jerk.

Posted by Matt on Thursday, 12.21.06 @ 00:56am


King Crimson?? You mean the King Crimson that has had exactly one gold album in their entire career?? And you're saying Kiss shouldn't get in???

Hope you're not holding your breath until that happens, Kit.

I'll give you the MC5, though.....that's a good pick.

Posted by Matt on Thursday, 12.21.06 @ 01:08am


Sales mean crap. King Crimson INVENTED progressive rock. That's influence, and that's what the hall is about. I don't give a #### about gold records and neither should the Hall.

It won't happen because Jann Wenner is a prog-hater, but a boy can dream.

Posted by Kit on Thursday, 12.21.06 @ 02:01am


Kiss is a legend of hard rock many bands play music based in their sound they never change their style to increase their sell of disc and by the way if i wrote bad something sorry im not north american !!

Posted by .... on Wednesday, 12.27.06 @ 13:21pm


Kit doesn't know what he's talking about... Kiss basically were the Beatles of shock/glam rock, They were one of the few bands to have dolls, comics, and to have an extensive fan club.

With that said, that is the only thing one can be judged on (their -obvious- influence) fairly in that whether or not you like their music is solely your opinion.

I do, however, believe that since they had such a mass influence in the 70s that they do deserve to be in the Hall. They also basically spawned their own pop culture phenomenon rivaling the Beatles.

Posted by X on Friday, 01.5.07 @ 20:22pm


Except the Beatles weren't Johnny Come Lateleys to their own scene. Everything KISS had done was already done better by Bowie, Alice Cooper, or T-Rex. They brought nothing new to the table.

Posted by Kit on Friday, 01.5.07 @ 22:54pm


I can't believe KISS has been ignored by the Hall this long... they made the rock "concert" what it is today... how can a band like the Talking Heads make it in and KISS doesn't??

Posted by Jeff on Sunday, 01.7.07 @ 20:00pm


I've been a long time member of the KISS Army. I still can't figure out whay they are not in there. Van Halen is. Gene Simmons discovered them and signed them. What a misgiving of justice for KISS. Rock N' Roll All Nite & Party Every Day. KISS' day will come!!

Posted by Roland on Monday, 01.8.07 @ 14:57pm


The main things KISS supporters seem to say is in their favor are KISS record sales and concert ticket sales.

If record sales and toy sales were the lone criteria , then yes, KISS should be in. And so would a lot of other acts like Meatloaf and Shania Twain (both had albums that each sold 30 million copies or more worldwide). Or even the Spice Girls, Hootie and the Blowfish and Matchbox 20. All of whom had albums that sold more than any KISS album.

But record sales and merchandise alone do not equal greatness. They just mean a lot of people liked their music back in the day. KISS made some really good songs and put on good shows (and some "live" albums that really barely meet the definition of "live). Is that enough? I don't know. But it's stretching it for me.

KISS also made a lot of crappy music too (God Gave Rock and Roll To Your jumps out), let's not forget.

Posted by Mike B. on Monday, 01.8.07 @ 15:06pm


kit needs to take off the leg warmers and join 2007. Kiss has influenced more bands today then anyone.Also "miss music" mc5 and king crimson are awesome bands,but not everyone knows the songs they perform.however, EveryOne knows a Kiss song.KISS fans 1 Kit the opinionated rock dumbass 0.

Posted by Lance on Monday, 01.8.07 @ 16:36pm


Everyone knows Hitler too. And before Spielberg's movie, not many people knew Jakob Shindler.

Kit 1, Lance the Nazi 0.

Posted by Kit on Monday, 01.8.07 @ 16:46pm


Wow... some heated debate here. I agree Kiss' music wasn't the best but terrible is an over-statement. With what they lacked in that area they more than compensated w/ their live show. They really did just about invent the art of entertaining an audience. Not to mention influence an entire generation of big time musicians. (too many to name)
Like em' or dislike them Kiss was a VERY relavent group. They should of been in years ago.

Posted by steve on Monday, 01.8.07 @ 21:43pm


Kit, and anyone else who doubts KISS's music as being not great or not deserving to be in the hall of fame are being ridiculous.
KISS created the Rock and Roll anthem, of which no one has come up with anything close "Rock and Roll all night" and tons of other classic rock songs!!
Rock and Roll is not complex music, unless it's art rock.
As far as fulfilling the genre, KISS has done it better than most bands out there ever did.

A great drum beat, strong rhythmic driving bass, rockin guitar riffs, cool solos, screaming and relevant lyrics, cool stage shows, rock ballads, breaks, fast, slow, high, low, fire, smoke. They epitomize rock and roll. Call them glam rock, if you want. It's still rock and roll.
I watched KISSymphony, which was a concert combining them with a symphonic orchestra. It was fantastic. Arranged and produced to perfection. The fans go nuts, the music sounds great! Catchy tunes. That's what it's all about. The band puts so much energy into their music and shows.
I'm a big King Krimson fan too, and they deserve RRHF (rock and roll hall of fame) entry too.
But KISS should have been in there years ago!!
Record sales are just a way of verifying the deadication of the fans to their favorite band. And millions of people can't be wrong. Kiss did everything for the fans. Costumes, effects!! WOW, I just can't see how anyone could disagree. Even if you don't like KISS's songs, you gotta admit, KISS belongs in the Hall of fame. Heck, Paul Stanley is on tour now! check out their web site kissonline.com now that's a web site!! They are all about the music and the fans!
They survived and thrived thru the 70's, 80's and 90's, stayed with the times, adapted while sticking to their basic genre and style.
2007, it's got to happen!!
Brian

Posted by Brian on Wednesday, 01.10.07 @ 07:20am


Your talking about the Billboard "Gold Record" Champions (i.e. KISS). How could the R&R Hall of Fame pass them up. I don't care how you spin it, when a band accomplishes that feat....you can't turn your eye to that.

KISS has extrodinary Record Sales and millions upon millions of fans on top of that.

Nuff said.

Posted by Rudy on Thursday, 01.11.07 @ 20:17pm


For the millionth time, record sales do not mean jack shit. If they did, you'd have to let a lot of really, really shitty bands in the Hall. Bands like Kiss.

Posted by William on Friday, 01.12.07 @ 02:11am


I personally don't think KISS is an awful rock band, and it certainly was a successful one. I think it's going to be a case of time being the ultimate arbiter; someday enough of the 75 nominating members will have run out of other bands they can nominate; KISS will get nominated, and at that point... it will probably be one of those bands that instantly gets inducted by the larger group (about 750 industry people).

I think the argument right now might be that the Stooges influenced KISS, so if the Stooges can't get in yet (it looks like they're getting closer every year though), then why should KISS get in? The year or two after the Stooges get in, expect KISS to be the next big candidate for the "dumb, loud but fun rock group" slot.

My best guess for when this might happen...? 2010 or so. : )

Posted by Bookhouse88 on Saturday, 01.13.07 @ 10:24am


Dave Marsh is nothing but Bruce Springsteens drooling, loser buttboy.

Gene Simmons once said: "Rock critics are nothing but frustrated, failed musicians"

Dave Marsh is not even worthy enough to polish KISS's platform boots.

He's just the kind of loser Gene said is....


Hey Dave! Are YOU a household name, you no-talent bum?

Posted by Bud on Saturday, 01.20.07 @ 19:21pm


Dave Marsh is good at what he does (writing), whereas KISS are...yeah...no.

Posted by Kit on Saturday, 01.20.07 @ 23:06pm


KISS should be inducted, even though they are often embarassing. Exhibit A: "I'm a dancer / a romancer / She's a capricorn and I'm a cancer" and "you're good lookin' and your're lookin' like you should be good", both lines from the subtle 'C'Mon and Love Me'.

An argument can be made that rock and roll, at its essence, should be big and dumb, and KISS definitely fits that bill. But they ought to be inducted primarily because of how they influenced the music industry in their heyday as far as marketing, live shows, etc. As one of the primary criteria for RRHOF induction is influence, KISS deserve their due. Like them or not, the album ALIVE! is a seminal live record, and if you can get in the right frame of mind, it really does rock hard.

I vote "yes" for KISS, while at the same time stating that they often suck. I actually really like them, but am smart enough to ackowledge that they fall firmly in the "guilty pleasure" category. But they get in the Hall because of how they influenced the industry in the 70's, not because Paul Stanley is a poet.

And Kit, your view that record sales don't matter, I disagree somewhat. On the one end, the fact that a band does NOT sell a lot of records should not prevent their induction. I agree with you there. Hence, the Velvet Underground deserve their induction, and bands like Big Star also deserve a place in the Hall due to their huge influence. But if a band is one of the biggest selling acts of a decade, then that is indeed a factor to consider. And we can argue over whether KISS broke this sales record or did not break that sales record, but the fact remains they sold a shitload of product, and in the world of pop and rock and roll, that DOES mean something.

Posted by Dezmond on Tuesday, 01.23.07 @ 14:14pm


Kiss is one of the greatest Performing Bands of all time. There shows are stunning because they do outrageous stuff and they need to be recognized.

Posted by Master on Tuesday, 01.23.07 @ 17:37pm


I agree with Dave Marsh about Kiss being a substandard band, I got into them much later than I should have and don't really take them seriously. They are mostly show and not very talented.

That being said, Kiss being left out is one of the greatest cracks in the whole idea of a HOF. Kiss influenced hundreds of bands, personified rock and roll (which is all about kids and rebellion, let's admit it) and defined the seventies. You can't mention the music of the Seventies without considering Kiss and the Seventies were a great period for music.

Kiss should get in based on personifying rock and roll, rebellion and the ecstasy every kid feels when they go to their first concert and are blown away seeing their heroes on stage for real and THAT'S rock and roll, damnit.

Posted by Bruno on Tuesday, 01.23.07 @ 23:16pm


Hey Kit, who do you think you are? KISS is one of the best bands out there since they have lasted over 30 years. In a hundred years people will still know who KISS and the KISS ARMY was, but no one will remember you. Why don't you get a life? From what I see you have nothing better to do but cut down all these good band. Is that because you are a wanna be or maybe like that rap crap? Which you don't have to have talent for that, any one can get up there and talk and call it music, or do you like those boy bands that have no talent either? Ok, let me use one of your sophisticated words, (they suck). So lay off the good bands like KISS,JUDAS PRIST,MEATLOAF and many others. They all deserve their place in the hall.

Posted by Larry on Thursday, 01.25.07 @ 15:45pm


No one will remember you in a hundred years either. So since the sands of time will screw us both over in the long run, I guess it's not really relevant.

You do need talent for rap, as it's more than just talking. Rap makes up a very small portion of my overall listening experience, but people who dismiss it (like you just did) without proper appreciation for the effort behind it irk me.

Nothing you said had anything to do with stating reasons why KISS should be in the hall. Some people have made good points instead of going "they're good shut up, they had comic books, Kit is a loser." You'll notice I didn't jump all over those people.

Why's everybody gotta make this about me? =D

Posted by Kit on Thursday, 01.25.07 @ 17:00pm


YES, if they stop touring / performing with Tommy Thompson & Eric Singer under Ace & Peter's make up ...
They were my very 1st concert I seen back in '77 @ the Cow Palace in SF ...

Angry Nate

Posted by Dylan McLeod on Thursday, 02.22.07 @ 00:25am


Anybody who is anybody, and is a music fan cannot downplay the legends that are KISS. Anyone who says that thier record sales and the impact that they have had on the music world and society is not applicable should think again. KISS is about music, and their fans, the Hall of what? Long live KISS, long live Paul Stanley, Gene Simmons, Peter Criss, Ace Frehely, Vinnie Vincent, and Eric Carr!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by R. Gigler on Monday, 03.5.07 @ 21:55pm


Everyone knows that KISS was the ultimate live concert band and they should get in on that basis alone, if not for the fact that they broke new ground in branding, merchandising, influencing other artists, and discovering several major acts. Plus, their cult following is rivaled only by the Greatful Dead, who incidentally didn't have even a shred of the commercial success that KISS had. ALL of their albums were successful, they had a very long career, not just a flash in the pan, and their appeal spans the entire globe. They are an iconic band who made a MAJOR stamp on pop culture in the 70's and I have no idea how a place that calls itself the "Rock and Roll Hall of Fame" could keep them out.

However, those points have all been made by others. The point that I think needs to be made more frequently is to defend the quality of their songs. They are, and have always been, GROSSLY underrated as musicians. If writing catchy riffs and melodic hooks was easy, everyone would be doing it. It's not easy. It's damn tough and they did it over, and over, and over again, frequently going in new directions and creating original-sounding material both in live performances and in studio recordings. I'll be the first to concede that the lyrics were cheesy but the songs sound great. The riffs are great, the solos are catchy and memorable, not just a bunch senseless shredding, the drumming adds rythm and texture to the songs, and the vocal harmonies are great. People say it's simple but my God, have you listened to Tom Petty, the Kinks, or REM, all of whom are in the Hall? It doesn't get any more simple than that. Besides, if it were all about musical chops, half the bands on the list would never make it.

I know not everyone likes KISS but not everyone likes any of the bands in the hall and KISS shouldn't even be a debate. They are a no-brainer, slam dunk for inclusion. Politics is the ONLY thing that could be keeping them out because their legacy is bigger than all but 2-3 artists that have been inducted since KISS became eligible.

Posted by Coyote on Monday, 03.12.07 @ 16:33pm


I believe it's inevitable that this band will make the hall. Not many people under the age of 60 have NOT heard of them, or do not recognize the makeup.

Posted by Joe on Monday, 03.12.07 @ 16:51pm


Dave Marsh doesn't like KISS? Look at "The Book of Rock Lists" (which he co-authored) under "Best Live Albums"--for "Kiss Alive", he writes--DIRECT QUOTE:

"It's great. (Bleep) you."

Posted by Joe on Monday, 03.12.07 @ 17:15pm


I don't care about KISS one way or the other. I never listened to them much. My impression is that they were entertainers first and musicians second.

ONE THING: I am tired of people like Kit saying that sales mean "crap." Nothing could be further than the truth. Sure, record sales IN ITSELF do not mean much. But, record sales ARE PART OF the whole picture. Why do musicians put there music to vinyl (or to CD) to begin with? Not sure?? Last time I checked, it was to sell records - duh. IF record sales mean so much the the artist, then it must mean something??

Again, sales in itself does not mean much (I will give you that), but when combined with other factors, it means a hell of a lot.

So, for instance, when a band like Rush who has received virtually no radio play during their career and has done little SELF-PROMOTION, which they do not need to do (i.e. being on shows like SNL, tonight show, etc.), the fact that they have the fifth most cosecutive gold albums in Rock history behind the likes of the Beatles, Stones (who get tons of air time and are obviousy HIGHLY SELF-PROMOTED), DOES SAY AND MEAN A LOT. People - try to think in a more complex and sophisticated manner.

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 03.15.07 @ 21:49pm


I don't care about KISS one way or the other. I never listened to them much. My impression is that they were entertainers first and musicians second.

ONE THING: I am tired of people like Kit saying that sales mean "crap." Nothing could be further from the truth. Sure, record sales IN ITSELF do not mean much. But, record sales ARE PART OF the whole picture. Why do musicians put there music to vinyl (or to CD) to begin with? Not sure?? Last time I checked, it was to sell records - duh. IF record sales mean so much the the artist, then it must mean something??

Again, sales in itself does not mean much (I will give you that), but when combined with other factors, it means a hell of a lot.

So, for instance, when a band like Rush who has received virtually no radio play during their career and has done little SELF-PROMOTION, which they do not need to do (i.e. being on shows like SNL, tonight show, etc.), the fact that they have the fifth most cosecutive gold albums in Rock history behind the likes of the Beatles, Stones (who get tons of air time and are obviousy HIGHLY SELF-PROMOTED), DOES SAY AND MEAN A LOT. People - try to think in a more complex and sophisticated manner.

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 03.15.07 @ 21:49pm


WRITTEN BY KIT: "Everyone knows Hitler too. And before Spielberg's movie, not many people knew Jakob Shindler."

Apparently, not only is Kit opinionated and not to swift when it comes to music, he is also not too bright and knows nothing of history- it is OSKAR Schindler!!!

Later

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 03.15.07 @ 21:58pm


No, sales do not mean anything. Bands make records for two purposes: to disperse their music and to make money. Neither of those have anything to do with the music itself. The number sold is not important in the least. If an album sells 30 copies or 3 million does it sound any different?

Posted by William on Thursday, 03.15.07 @ 22:20pm


Again, try to stay focued...sales in itself does not mean much, but needs to be looked at within the context of that particular band. If I tell you that the Beatles or Stones have tons of consecutive gold albums - you say, no big deal and not at all surprising.

But, when you put Rush in as having being fifth on the list with the most consecutive gold albums - THAT DOES mean something. Why you ask?? BECAUSE TO MOST PEOPLE THAT IS A SURPRISING AND UNEXPECTED ACCOMPLISHMENT FOR A "PROGRESSIVE" ROCK BAND THAT HAS DONE SO LITTLE IN SELF-PROMOTION AND HAS RECEIVED LITTLE AIR PLAY. So, I agree and disagree with you. You need to look at the whole picture. For instance, Brittany Spears sells millions of albums and I personally think she blows. So, in that case sales would not mean much.

As for KISS, their sales, which has been huge, along with their live shows and stage presence, and influence should put them in despite the fact that personally I do not care for them.

One last thing, if an album sells 30 copies or 3 million that is unbelievably meaningful. Lets see, 30 copies sold would suggest that that virtually no one enjoys the music whereas in the 30 million case, many people enjoy the music. MUSIC IS A SHARED ARTISTIC AND SOCIAL EXPERIENCE - at least it is supposed to be. If it is only enjoyable to the people playing the music, it has failed horribly...

Posted by Anonymous on Friday, 03.16.07 @ 13:26pm


kiss arnt terrible kiss are brilliant they are the first band i started listening to many many moons ago.they deserve this kiss rocks.

Posted by tracey on Saturday, 03.17.07 @ 05:16am


KISS should be in the hall of fame.
I saw KISS live the at my first concert opening for Deep Purple and KISS blew me and the crowd and Deep Purple away!
KISS must be in.
Gene Simmons saw Van Halen in L.A.and help hook them up with Templton for a record deal.
Now V.H. is in the hall but KISS is not.
Come on now.
Mike D'Amelio, KISS RULES

Posted by Mike D'Amelio on Sunday, 03.18.07 @ 03:03am


Sales mean NOTHING to the Hall??? Hmmm...taken from RRHOF Website from REM Induction:

"Both albums sold more than 4 million copies in the U.S. alone, ushering R.E.M. into rock’s upper echelon."

Gee..wonder why they mentioned that since according to some, sales "Means nothing."


Here is one regarding Van Halen, who was recently inducted:

"After 30 years and 11 studio releases—four of which reached Number One—Van Halen remains the band’s top seller, with U.S. sales of more than 10 million. The band’s other blockbuster, 1984, has also surpassed the 10 million mark. To date, Van Halen has sold more than 56 million records in the U.S., which places them among the top 20 best-selling artists of all time."

Gee...seems to be a pretty long section regarding sales, popularity and rankings.

Sales do not mean anything to the RRHOF? That is total nonsense. If that were the case, well....you know....

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 03.18.07 @ 08:48am


Well,after observing the over 50 comments,most are in favor of KISS being in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.Now let's see,reasons Kiss should be in the HOF aside from some of those already stated,like"Most gold records in the USA".Assholes who say sales don't mean shit must be slightly retarded.What good are songs that nobody listens to?What better measuring tape is there of songs being listened to other than record sales?So the folks saying sales aren't important clearly are just jealous or stupid or both.Further,Kiss is one of the few bands besides The Beatles where everyone of the original band(Gene Simmons,Paul Stanley,Ace Frehley,Peter Criss)each member had hit songs on the radio that he wrote and sang.Gene Simmons-"Rock and Roll all Nite","Calling Dr.Love",(and several others).Paul Stanley-"Detroit Rock City","I was made for Loving you"(and several others).Ace Frehley-"New York Groove"(and several others and was also a successful solo act-"Frehley's Comet").Peter Criss-"Beth"(also sang the song "Hard Luck Woman",written by Paul Stanley,and later redone by Garth Brooks.
Several well known rock musicians state that they would have never started playing an instrument had it not been for KISS.Among them members of "Soundgarden",and members of "Megadeth"as well as bigtime Country artists like "Garth Brooks".
Further,Kiss made it by constant touring and hard work in an era before MTV and VH1,without critical acclaim from "writers" like Marsh.Imagine if MTV would've been around in 1975.My Friends and fellow fans of Rock and Roll Music,whether you loved them or hated them,KISS paid their dues the old fashioned way,on stage sweating in front of the fans,playing their asses off,giving a live show.Kiss is and will always remain proof,that in spite of whatever Industry Execs and Critics may say,ultimately,it is up to the FANS!The FANS kept KISS from dying.The FANS made KISS come back.The FANS will make sure that KISS is inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame,because,they are a GREAT band,and deserve to be in there with the other great bands.More great hard rock and metal bands will follow.From Metallica to Megadeth and many,many more.I won't keep posting like some of those who hang out on this site because (1)I have other things to do,(2)I've said what I had to say.But let the ones who do most of the posting keep posting.Everyone can see that they clearly love KISS.Like the band said in the beginning,"We are loved or hated,but never ignored".

Posted by TJC on Sunday, 03.18.07 @ 10:36am


Sales mean nothing as far as the music goes. That the HoF talks about it only proves how shitty the HoF itself is. Again, look at the Velvet Underground. They never came close to selling as many albums as the biggest acts in their time, but as far as "influence and innovation" went they outclassed almost everyone.

Posted by William on Sunday, 03.18.07 @ 13:44pm


No...the fact that the HOF talks about sales only PROVES that sales and pouplarity to some degree matters to the HOF and in reality, which is what I have been saying all along. Obviously, it is not the WHOLE thing, but part of it, which William has shown to be true with the Velvet Underground......

Later

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 03.18.07 @ 21:29pm


Well, it seems to me that KISS should be in based on this thread. I mean, look at all the people saying they should be in, and a few knuckleheads who think they know everything about music saying no. These are the people who sit in coffee shops reading lame rolling stone magazine driving around in 1990 civics decked out in bumper stickers. bottom line is, they are not capitalists, this is why they hate Kiss. not even a debate. they should be in. and if they dont get in, who cares. it doesnt mean a damn thing anyway. I think it bothers kiss haters more that many more love them than hate them, they take it personally. get a life

Posted by Kevin on Monday, 03.19.07 @ 11:16am


BTW, since you brought up the VU - I know they are "in", but talk about the most overrated pretentious garbage. And, apparently I am not alone - if you go to Amazon and search their albums, there are many reviews lambasting them. I thought there were two reviews that were right on:

"Alright, I just listened repeatedly to the entire discography of the Velvets and reached the following conclusion: they were a mediocre rock'n'roll band who basically hit the lottery when Andy Warhol took them under his wing.Under his caring guidance they aparently mastered the art of portraying their useless output as avant-garde revelation, which the naive flower generation readily consumed in order to quench its own bourgeois complexes....
The only song that truly lives up to all the hype and their legendary status is definitely Venus in Furs. It has a unique sound and a decadent substance(things the band is often hailed for),the sound and the substance all the rest of their material lacks. VU remind a lot of the 60's Rolling Stones: bored white kids adopting a cool, blues attitude and a fashionably non-conformist lifestyle. At least the Stones never had any literary or art claims, a macabre and disturbing part of the VU cult,mostly fabricated by critics. Along with fellow Bowie, VU remain amongst the darlings of the average bo-bo pseudo-intellectual,an acquired taste handed down from generation to generation. Would anybody care to actually listen to those records with an open mind and recognize how plain they are?"

"There music is conventional. their lyrics obvious, but it is uncool to say so."

"The fact of the matter is, even if you buy a record because it is influential, you wont [sic] listen to it unless it is good." Although, I'm going to take up the matter of influence in a moment, first I want to acknowledge the above sentence. Its author, I think, hits the nail on the head. But does he ever wonder how much owners of this formerly obscure artifact from an excessive era really do listen to it? I mean even those owners who profess to be passionately devoted to it. I doubt very often. I imagine very seldom.

We might reasonably suppose it influenced Lou Reed, whose talent developed gradually and is only slightly in evidence here. Lou Reed and Iggy Pop (then Iggy Stooge) influenced David Bowie and late seventies punk rock. David Bowie influenced late seventies and early eighties new wave. Punk rock and new wave influenced what came to be called "alternative rock". So, yes, I suppose you could say this album influenced "alternative rock", but mostly indirectly, and for that matter, Lou Reed was himself greatly influenced by Bob Dylan. Considering how much else was going on at the time "Velvet Underground & Nico" was originally released, a respect for historical perspective requires us to admit that "Velvet Underground & Nico" was and is relatively insignificant."


IN ANY EVENT, I POST THESE BECAUSE THE VU IS PRETENTIOUS GARBAGE THAT THE "HALL" AND SO CALLED "FANS" LIKE BECAUSE THEY ARE OBSCURE AND IT MAKES THEM FEEL SELF-IMPORTANT. BUT, YOU MUST ASK YOURSELF, HOW OFTEN DO YOU ACTUALLY LISTEN TO A VU SONG OR ALBUM?

PUT IN REAL BANDS, LIKE RUSH, KISS, YES...bands that can actually play and write music and that can actually sell millions of records.





Posted by A Person on Saturday, 03.24.07 @ 11:15am


A Person, I listen to The Velvet Underground quite regularly because I thoroughly enjoy the music. The same can be said for all of their fans. Just because you "don't get it", doesn't mean everyone else listens to it simply because it's the "hip thing to do" or whatever.

As for influence, there's hundreds of indie acts, many prominent ones, that went out and bought instruments after listening to VU's debut album...along with mainstream inductees such as U2 and R.E.M. I'm sorry, but no real objective analysis would ever place the Underground below KISS in importance.

Hell, to tell the truth, there's probably way more kids picking up VU records nowadays than those of KISS...

Posted by Casper on Saturday, 03.24.07 @ 15:08pm


Big LOLs at the guy saying I'm not a capitalist. Not that it's in any way relevant, but he's 100% wrong.

Posted by William on Saturday, 03.24.07 @ 18:59pm


Casper...KISS has outsold the VU 100 times over, but of course that "means nothing" - try to stick to reality. Kids nowadays pick up the VU -that is laughable. I say the VU is pretentious wannabe music b/c it is. As for influence, it is much less than it is purported to be......

Posted by A Person on Saturday, 03.24.07 @ 21:48pm


Something that has also been missed in all of these diatribes is that not only Dave Marsh has expressed how much he hates Kiss, but so does Jann Wenner.

The funniest thing about this is that Mr. Wenner indirectly helped to create his own headache since one of the original members of Kiss was found through an advertisement through Rolling Stone magazine's classified ads in the early 1970's!

As for who gets in the R&R Hall of Fame, you can't tell me it's not about indulgent self-congratulating - guess who the winner of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame's 2004 Lifetime Achievement Award went to? That's right, kids - Jann Wenner!

As far as the criteria to put Kiss in the HOF, let's look at their influence/significance - several bands were influenced by them or influenced to start their own bands including Motley Crue, Nirvana, Lenny Kravitz, Pantera, Garth Brooks and many more. This year's inductee, Van Halen, were discovered by Gene Simmons and would have been signed to his label and management company if they were given the chance by both.

Simply put, if Kiss isn't in the R&R HOF, who cares? However, it really doesn't make any sense.

Posted by smylex on Sunday, 03.25.07 @ 10:54am


The Hall of Fame is a big joke...

Just like VU being listened to nowadays by kids more than KISS. I was at the last few "reunion" tours KISS did and guess what I seen ? Well I saw chicks and dudes my own age with thier children. Sharing a part of thier lives with the ones they love. How much more can that mean than the other points brought up in this topic? A few friends of mine checked out a VU show a few years back (exactly when ? or care) and it looked like a bingo parlor at an old folks home. The same folks that were into them back when they were Warhols lil protogee's...rock n roll isn't rocket science folks it is how it makes a person feel.

Posted by Dude on Saturday, 03.31.07 @ 23:29pm


The Velvets consistently get more plays than Kiss on last.fm, so no, we are not kidding you when we say the Velvets are more listened to. The Velvets also hold much more emotional resonance than the musical equivalent of GI Joe. Rock and roll isn't a science, but it isn't a lame gimmick and songs about fucking either.

Posted by Kit on Sunday, 04.1.07 @ 00:29am


Will you people give up? Kit, I, and every other VU fan likes them because we enjoy the music. Life's too short and we listen to far too many albums to waste our time with an artist we could care less for...just because you don't understand them doesn't mean that everyone else is pretending the emperor has clothes on.

Posted by Casper on Monday, 04.2.07 @ 14:43pm


"The Velvets consistently get more plays than
Kiss on last.fm"

Yeah, b/c "last Fm" means anything. Stop picking out obscure points to miss the big picture. The fact is, KISS has outsold the VU by far with worldwide record sales of over 80 million.

A 1977 Gallup poll named Kiss the most popular band in America. In Japan, Kiss performed five sold-out shows at Budokan Hall, breaking the previous record of four held by The Beatles.

Oh, wait a minute....I almost forgot, record sales and actually being able to sell concert tickets does not mean anything, lost my head there......sorry

Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, 04.3.07 @ 16:26pm


I wonder who sells more albums today, though?

Seriously, I can't remember the last time I saw anyone under 35 talk about Kiss, but I still see kids buying The Velvet Underground and Nico all the time.

Posted by William on Tuesday, 04.3.07 @ 16:34pm


The truth is, my opinion is that both bands are just mediocre, and to be honest I don't give a rats ass about either of them. When I have some down time, I go to this webpage to be amused by how serious people take this nonsense.

The RRHOF is really so stupid - it is nothing more than a bunch of people's opinions. I mean for gods sake - look at the Sex Pistols, how they behaved when they were inducted - they MOCKED the RRHOF calling it a "Piss Stain." I mean if one of the inductees thinks that, is this website worth anyone's time? I guess MB when you are bored and have nothing else to do, it could be....Yawn

Posted by ANON on Friday, 04.6.07 @ 09:58am


www.italian.jed.pl/telefilm-senza-traccia.html

Posted by samuel david on Saturday, 04.14.07 @ 19:21pm


THis is funny:

http://www.markprindle.com/velveta.htm#vel

Posted by Anonymous on Monday, 04.16.07 @ 23:56pm


I agree and Support anyone, who is fighting for kisses Induction. They were the most influential, most respected and most creative rock band during the 1970's. So what if they are not one of the GREATEST rock bands of ALL TIME. They are idols and role-models for every wannabe band trying to make a buck in today's society. KISS have devoted their careers, to making great music, excellent live performances, [which is not easy to accomplish] and HARD ROCk History. So I close my argument, saying that KISS IS ROCK HALL MATERIAL.

Posted by Frank Commisso on Saturday, 04.28.07 @ 16:56pm


What about Kiss screams "creative" to you?

Posted by William on Saturday, 04.28.07 @ 18:03pm


They were not very creative...but more gimmicky. In other words, their creativity was more with marketing and entertainment than the music itself. If music is the only criteria, then they should not get in. But, if entertainment and presentation do get factored, then they should get in. But, all in all, there is really nothing creative about their music. In fact, the music in itself was very mediocre...

Posted by Anonymous on Monday, 04.30.07 @ 12:28pm


KISS was always a stage show - like Cats or Circus du Soleil; they are Las Vegas. Not serious musicians. I once saw an interview with Gene Simmons where he openly bragged about what a clever business he had conjured up with KISS.

If our measuring stick is going, in some instances, to be limited to seeing how many gabillions of bong resin clogged 15 year old males will be seduced by metal stripper shoes and a bloddy tongue and how bountiful the dumptrucks of cash from that marketing scheme is, with no regard for actual musical value....
then by all means this wrestling act with guitars belongs in the Hall, gay as they are.

Having said that... I think their place in the Hall is unfortunately undeniable. They were just too big a phenomenon to not acknowledge.
God save us all.

Posted by shawn on Saturday, 05.5.07 @ 17:52pm


I feel strongly that KISS should be in the Rock Hall cause they have influenced so many of their fans to become musicians themselves, like Posion, Motley Crue, Rob Zombie, Garth Brooks, Guns N'Roses,Cinderella,ect. And how many other acts that came before KISS have said they like and respect KISS, like Aerosmith,Alice Cooper,ect. There's even movie,tv and sports stars who love KISS, the list of fans is endless. Plus they have been a pulp culture icon since the 70's, they are everywhere and if you go down the street and ask who KISS is people know, they are a household name. Like Ozzy Osbourne has said before, "If the fans chosed who should be inducted there would be more artist inducted." And KISS would be one of them, if you love them or hate them,KISS will never go away! You can't ignore their impact on music or their talents.

Posted by Richard Franks on Monday, 05.7.07 @ 19:34pm


"pulp culture icon since the 70's"

Sort of like orange juice

Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, 05.16.07 @ 05:39am


KISS has been overlooked for way too long. In my opinion, they should have been in on the first year they were eligible. They have been innovators of the rock genre, and one of the most influential bands of all time.

Posted by Logan on Friday, 05.18.07 @ 20:00pm


So...
Why exactly should Kiss not be inducted? Using whatever criteria you think relevant, where exactly do they fall short.

It can't be record sales. It can't be ticket sales. It can't be artistic influence. It can't be performance related. It can't be longevity. And it sure as hell can't be $$$.

So please, educate the masses. Why not Kiss?

Posted by Stanley Eisen on Thursday, 05.24.07 @ 11:52am


KISS is one of the greatest bands in the world. Its a damn travesty that they ain't in. Many bands we listen to has been influenced by KISS from Anthrax, Pantera, Twisted Sister too. Long live KISS.

Posted by Tony Lewis on Saturday, 05.26.07 @ 19:36pm


2 out 10 people dislike Kiss..
1 out of 10 don't care
and the other 7 love KISS!!!!!

hmmmm... well I'd say that makes them worthy of being inducted into the hall of fame.. the fact they are famous enough that nearly every one has a love, like or dislike opinion about them surely qualifies them..

*sticks out tongue*
kiss fan from birth ;)

Posted by AngelinDisguise on Thursday, 05.31.07 @ 08:22am


No, no it doesn't.

Are people really so stupid that they don't get what innovation and influence mean? And how that has nothing to do with how many non-musician fans a band has?

And for what it's worth, I've never met seven people who liked Kiss.

Posted by William on Thursday, 05.31.07 @ 09:05am


I am not a Kiss fan.I like alot of their music and Gene Simmons is always entertaining no matter what he is doing.They are not one of the tree hugging,political acts like Bono.But they are all about fun.Wine,women and song.Isnt that what rock and roll is supposed to be about?I am so glad I was a teenager in the 70's.The greatest decade of any genre of music,period!!!!!Kiss is rock and roll.They belong in the hall of fame.If you dont agree, then start your own little whinny-ass,politicaly correct shrine of shame.And start off by making Don Henley your first inductee.

Posted by JOE on Wednesday, 06.13.07 @ 15:49pm


"Wine,women and song.Isnt that what rock and roll is supposed to be about?"-JOE

No, it isn't. Music isn't bound by any one theme.

Posted by William on Wednesday, 06.13.07 @ 15:58pm


What is a "whinny" ass shrine? Is that liek Winnie the Pooh?

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 06.16.07 @ 14:25pm


"What is a "whinny" ass shrine? Is that like Winnie the Pooh?"

My first induction would be The Eeyore Experience. Very dark and brooding prog rock stuff, but highly influential to the stuffed animal rock scene. Piglet's stuttering on the early recordings is groundbreaking. Tracks such as "Honey Pot of Hell" and "Rabbit Fucker" are still sampled today.
Of course, the Hall will predictably induct the mainstream crap that Tigger puts out first. Bouncing is not rock!

Posted by shawn mc on Saturday, 06.16.07 @ 14:37pm


Wow, who is this kit person? Doesn't sound too bright to me. Deborah Harry and Chrissie Hynde have more talent in their hair then Gene Simmons possess? I guess this kit person does not know who wrote the songs for Blondie and The Pretenders. Deborah Harry can only sing, she can't play an instrument and in fact, she is a former Playboy Bunny. She just got a lucky break with who she was dating, a muscian. Chrissie is another one who basically just wrote the lyrics to her songs and played basic rhythm guitar. Even Chrissie admits that it is a joke that the Pretenders made the hall of fame. Hey kit genius, can you tell us what makes Blondie and the Pretenders hall of fame material? I am sure you will only have generic reasons. Now you said these 2 have more talent in their hair then Gene Simmons possesses in his whole body. Then tell me how it is that someone who can play bass, guitar, drums, write entire songs, and produce albums has less talent then the 2 you have said that have more talent in their hair? The fact is that Blondie was only a fad that lasted around 4 years. The Pretenders were just a garage band that had a couple of hits and didn't last long either. Neither band sold a lot of records. To be honest, Joan Jett has more talent then both of them combined (she should also be in the hall by the way)but does not have the talent that Gene Simmons does. kit, to me you sound like a fan of rolling stone magazine and their hippie ways and that explains your nonsense. The Velvets get more play then Kiss? I am willing to bet that the song Rock and Roll all Nite gets more play then the entire Velvets playlist gets. Not to mention other songs like Detroit Rock City, Beth, Shout It Out Loud, Lick it Up, I Was Made For Loving You and countless others. I am sure most people who are reading your comments can only think of one song they actually did, that is a ringing endorsement as being heavily influencial. Kiss may have borrowed from previous acts as far as appearances are concerned, but no one can doubt that they are the main influence of the 80's heavy metal scene. They have sold over 80 million records, and they have played non stop for 33 years. Now aren't those the criterias for induction to the hall of fame? Influence - 80's music, impact - 80 million albums sold, longevity - 33 years. So if you combine Blondie, The Pretenders and The Velvet Undergrounds careers you get a fraction of the Kiss hit songs, album sales, longevity and impact. Or maybe, just maybe, you have no idea what you are talking about which is my guess and your just a hippie rolling stone lover. Get your facts straight.

Posted by andrew on Sunday, 06.24.07 @ 12:31pm


William,

I am 100% sure that you are a liar. No one under 35 talks about Kiss? Have you been to a Kiss concert lately? There is a lot of young people going to thier shows. As far as buying records goes I just checked out soundscan which monitors record sales and since 1991 Kiss has sold 8 1/2 million albums alone. In that same amount of time The Velvet Underground sold around 30,000 albums and Nico sold so little amount of albums that they didn't even register on the list. I think you are more of a Kiss hater and you will say anything just to try to make them look bad. But the only one who looks bad is you. Get your facts straight and try not to lie to prove a point.

Posted by andrew on Sunday, 06.24.07 @ 12:50pm


--" Not to mention other songs like
Detroit Rock City,
Beth,
Shout It Out Loud,
Lick it Up,
I Was Made For Loving You
and countless others."

Let's see...
Classic Iconic Crap,
Cloying Ballad Crap ,
Please Don't Crap,
Put the Makeup Back On Crap,
Cliched Crap,
and countless hours of more Crap.

andrew, if you'r egoing to try to make a cease for KISS, you're better off mentioning their massive cultural presence and innovation in marketing and influence in rock stage production.
Leave the musical aspect alone - no - really... just walk away.




Posted by shawn mc on Sunday, 06.24.07 @ 14:33pm


Shawn, why do you always feel the need to "fight" the battles of others?... you have become a wannabe...your posts have deteriorated significantly to the point that all you can do on these blogs is repeat the rhetoric of K & W with pseudointellectual babble (i.e. see your post:"gabillions of bong resin clogged 15 year old males will be seduced by metal stripper shoes and a bloddy tongue and how bountiful the dumptrucks of cash from that marketing scheme is, with no regard for actual musical value."

What?? What is musical value? Is there some type of formula for that or is it just the subjective experience of the listener? Because if you possess the "hidden" formula of musical value, I would love to know what it is....

In any event, I am not so sure about inducting Kiss, but I can say that I agree with Andrew about the joke that Blondie and the Pretenders were inducted over much more deserving bands....I really just do not see The Pretenders oozing with talent and influence....in fact, to me at least and probably a lot of others, the Pretenders were a mere blip on the screen of rock and roll...just my opinion.

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 06.24.07 @ 14:59pm


"Then tell me how it is that someone who can play bass, guitar, drums, write entire songs, and produce albums has less talent then the 2 you have said that have more talent in their hair?"

Because he isn't good at any of those things. He's a joke. A talentless scummy joke.

Posted by Kit on Sunday, 06.24.07 @ 15:36pm


"Kiss may have borrowed from previous acts as far as appearances are concerned, but no one can doubt that they are the main influence of the 80's heavy metal scene."-andrew

Did you pay attention to '80s metal at all? Progressive, thrash, speed, doom, black, and death metal all picked up a lot of speed in the '80s. It wasn't just hair metal. Ironic considering your Rolling Stone reference.

"They have sold over 80 million records, and they have played non stop for 33 years. Now aren't those the criterias for induction to the hall of fame? Influence - 80's music, impact - 80 million albums sold, longevity - 33 years."-andrew

Pay attention, because I've said this more times than I care to: Record sales do not necessarily prove influence because the people who buy them are not always musicians. Most people just buy an album to listen to. I don't see 80 million Kiss-influenced bands running around. Do you?

"I am 100% sure that you are a liar. No one under 35 talks about Kiss? Have you been to a Kiss concert lately?"-andrew

Yeah, who would have thought you could find Kiss fans at a Kiss concert? What a revelation.

"As far as buying records goes I just checked out soundscan which monitors record sales and since 1991 Kiss has sold 8 1/2 million albums alone. In that same amount of time The Velvet Underground sold around 30,000 albums and Nico sold so little amount of albums that they didn't even register on the list."-andrew

And? That only further proves the Velvets' greater significance because of the sheer number of bands they inspired with only a handful of records sold as opposed to Kiss's monstrous discography and scarce musical following. The VU was integral, Kiss was replaceable.

Posted by William on Sunday, 06.24.07 @ 18:16pm


Anon: "Shawn, why do you always feel the need to "fight" the battles of others?..."

Anon, what the fuck are you pinching off about now? Fight what battles? Are you referencing my post below from 5/5/07? The one like 2 months old? I have no idea what the bloody hell you are talking about - I gave my 2 cents on KISS - said that despite their joke status musically, I felt they were too powerful a cultural presence to deny induction - that was my opinion. Your post preceded mine, though I was, in this case, commenting apropos of no post in particular. What is up your ass again with me, man?

anon: "you have become a wannabe...your posts have deteriorated significantly to the point that all you can do on these blogs is repeat the rhetoric of K & W"

Anon, don't start with me again - go read some Rush liner notes and have a beer; relax. I am truly sorry if I don't entertain you sufficiently, but if you can't differentiate between SG and Kit and Will and Dezmond and I and your old posts, blame your own reading comprehension skills, Ace.

anon: "with pseudointellectual babble (i.e. see your post:"gabillions of bong resin clogged 15 year old males will be seduced by metal stripper shoes and a bloddy tongue and how bountiful the dumptrucks of cash from that marketing scheme is, with no regard for actual musical value."

I'm sorry - what about "gabllions of bong resin clogged.." screams pseudointellectual to you?

anon: "What?? What is musical value? Is there some type of formula for that or is it just the subjective experience of the listener?"

I really have to break down what "musical value" means? Really?? As in the context of shit or gold? As in as opposed to purely commercial value. I know you concur that KISS is crap musically.
Being art, this is ALL subjective, isn't it? Some things are more gray and debatable, some - by virtue of collective opinion over time - are more clearly grand or foul, yes?
I am of the assumption that most non-KISS Army members would generally agree that KISS's musical value is negligible.

Is it just your time of the month again, Anon. I actually try to put a lot of thought into my posts - I neither kiss ass nor simply repeat another's thoughts. I am not afraid to ask questions when I am unfamiliar with an artsist, I thoroughly enjoy reaping the benefits of others who are more knowledgable than I, and I try very hard not to talk out of my ass - try it too, Anon.

Posted by shawn mc on Sunday, 06.24.07 @ 18:45pm


ANDREW SAYS: "I am 100% sure that you are a liar. No one under 35 talks about Kiss? Have you been to a Kiss concert lately?"

WILLIAM SAYS: Yeah, who would have thought you could find Kiss fans at a Kiss concert? What a revelation.

See, William now you are the dumb ass - his reference was not to Kiss fans in "general", but to those under 35 because you had said that people under 35 do not listen or care about Kiss much - remember you said that? You left out his whole quote, which in full read:

"No one under 35 talks about Kiss? Have you been to a Kiss concert lately? There is a lot of young people going to their shows."

See, you left out the last part William where he specifically says, there are a lot of YOUNG people there. He was merely pointing out to you that people under 35 DO listen to Kiss, as when he goes to concerts he sees young people there. He was reponding to YOUR statement. He was NOT saying that at Kiss concerts there are Kiss fans - because that would be self-evident.
What's the matter, hate to be proven wrong?

In any event, with your twisting of the truth there, you should seriously consider a career in politics and get out of this pseudo music review "business."

Take Care

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 06.24.07 @ 20:21pm


I was in the mood to pick a fight :-), although there is some truth to what I said Shawn

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 06.24.07 @ 20:26pm


"See, William now you are the dumb ass - his reference was not to Kiss fans in "general", but to those under 35 because you had said that people under 35 do not listen or care about Kiss much - remember you said that?"-Anonny

I know fully well what he said. Of course you're bound to find some younger Kiss fans at an ENTIRE CONCERT FULL OF KISS FANS. Is this tough to grasp?

Point: As I said before, I have never seen a younger Kiss fan in my area, and I live near two very large cities. I work in a music shop and have not sold nor seen anyone else sell a single Kiss album in the last 6 months. Maybe they're just reclusive. I neither know nor care. I chose my words carefully and know what I said. You read something differently. "What's the matter, hate to be proven wrong?"

Posted by William on Sunday, 06.24.07 @ 21:18pm


That probably came off as being more hostile than intended, but come on. I didn't think there would be any confusion, especially over the leaving out of what I thought was a superfluous line (he said "under 35" in the part I DID quote). Don't be so quick to start a fight.

Posted by William on Sunday, 06.24.07 @ 21:26pm


"I was in the mood to pick a fight :-), although there is some truth to what I said Shawn"

Yea, you keep pattin yerself on the back with that, Anon - you're a regular fount of penetrating insight. Oh that I might be more like you. Thanks for the literary wisdom; how much do I owe you for that nugget of sagacity?

Posted by shawn mc on Sunday, 06.24.07 @ 23:30pm


Bottom line: You completely distorted the quote to make yourself look "right." Like I said, head for a career in politics...it will work out well

Posted by Anonymous on Monday, 06.25.07 @ 05:52am


See..now why could you have just said thanks for the nugget of wisdom, rather than use the SAT word, Sagacity????

As for this record sales thing it is true that a band can be highly influential and not have sold a lot of records, as with the VU. However, what is also true is that the VU and their music really have very little apppeal to the general public, for whatever that is worth.

One point, although I hate those 80's hair metal bands, there is no way you can tell me that KISS did not have some (note emphasis on some) influece on all of those 80's cheese metal bands??

Posted by Anonymous on Monday, 06.25.07 @ 06:12am


Do you guys think that Kiss would have been as popular as they were without wearing all that damn make-up??? I think not!!! That's probably the main reason why they will not get in the Hall. The look of Kiss is what put them over the top. Not their music.

Posted by Joe-Skee on Monday, 06.25.07 @ 12:02pm


I agree - I said that awhile back. If pure musicianship is counted only - they do not get in. If entertainment value and showmanship counts, then it is a no brainer.

But, as I said above, influence can be in different ways, not necessarily on the music itself - and I think Kiss has been influential, primarily in the entertainment / showmanship aspect

Posted by Anon on Monday, 06.25.07 @ 12:26pm


God ple-e-e-a-a-s-e... KISS has already been hashed up all the ways it can be, hasn't it? Unless you have some new perspective to proffer, let's just assume it's all been said in the above posts and try to ignore the inevitable random KISS Armyman drive-by shout out... alright?
Let it go.

Posted by shawn mc on Monday, 06.25.07 @ 12:53pm


If you want to let it go, then why are you still posting here?

Posted by Anonymous on Monday, 06.25.07 @ 21:52pm


I read Anon, I read it all, and like you say:

"I agree - I said that awhile back."
Indeed.

and: "But, as I said above.."

and many of the rest of us have also gone over this subject -- it's redundant now, isn't it?
That's all I was saying, Anon.

Posted by shawn mc on Tuesday, 06.26.07 @ 01:40am


It is funny to hear all these haters of Kiss try to justify their hatred for Kiss with nonsense. One person says the only reason they were popular was because they wore make up. So when people hear Kiss songs on the radio that they like it is because it is the make up that they hear, not the song? When their music is played at sporting events, is it because of their make up. Talk about an ignorant statement. Now I will grant you that the make up made for bigger draws at their concerts but it certainly didn't write the songs, or play the instruments. Shawn is another genius. This person continues to make comments on a subject that he quotes as redundant. How boring must your life be to continue to do something you deem redundant? If it is so redundant then shouldn't you be doing something else that is less redundant? The fact that you keep coming back here to read all this redundancy makes you the most redundant of it all. Then there is William who keeps saying that the Velvet Underground is one of the most influential acts around, more than Kiss actuall, yet fails to produce any names that they have influenced. I dare you to come up with one quote from any musician that says Velvet Underground was the reason they picked up an instrument and started playing music. On the other hand, I can tell many bands who have cited Kiss as their biggest influence to include the genres you mentioned, like speed metal Slayer, Anthrax (recorded several Kiss songs), Jason Newsted and Kirk Hammet of Metallica. Other genres include Country, Garth Brooks (covered a Kiss song also) and Gretchen Wilson. Lenny Kravitz (covered a Kiss song) cited Kiss as a big influence. Wow, all these bands have cited Kiss as a big influence, covered their songs and yet I have not mentioned on Hair band yet. Then we have Shawn again who whips out these genius lines;
Let's see...
Classic Iconic Crap,
Cloying Ballad Crap ,
Please Don't Crap,
Put the Makeup Back On Crap,
Cliched Crap,
and countless hours of more Crap.

It is good to see you have mastered the word Crap. The funny part is that even though a lot of their classics are over 30 years old you can still hear them on the radio, in movies and on That 70's Show not to mention other places. Kiss still sells out Stadiums around the world more than 30 after they got famous. If you turn on any rock radio station does it still play Rock and Roll all Nite? Does it play Shout it out Loud or Detroit Rock City? Do you still hear Beth on the radio? How about Love Gun or Lick It Up? I am not sure where all of you are from but here in the Los Angeles area stations like KLOS, JackFM and others still play Kiss songs quite often.
William, Kit and Shawn. Next time you want to have a serious discussion with facts then come with facts. Do not just ramble incoherently about nonsense you make up on the fly. Shawn, go get a life that is less redundant. William, go listen to the Velvet Underground and become the first one they influence and Kit, well, I can't come up with anything for you. You are hopeless and just plain confused. I am sorry about that for you. Take care geniuses and remember, only the really great ones get talked about like this by the likes of you guys 33 years after they released their first albums. Thank you geniuses for keeping them relevant.

Posted by andrew on Wednesday, 06.27.07 @ 23:13pm


"William, Kit and Shawn. Next time you want to have a serious discussion with facts then come with facts."

Mkay, here's a good one: KISS bites the weiner.

"Do you still hear Beth on the radio?"

Mmmm, not so much. But I weep when I recall all of the radios that were sodomized by being forced to run that CRAP (oo --there it is again!) through their speakers. I put one out of its misery in '77 with a hammer. "Beth I hear ya callin, but I can't come home right now... Me and the bo-o-oy-s are playin, and we-"SMAAAASH!!!!!!!


"So when people hear Kiss songs on the radio that they like it is because it is the make up that they hear, not the song?"

Here's your reality check andrew: Do you understand that there hasn't been a soul on earth, since about September 1975 who doesn't know that "Rock and Roll All Night" comes from "those weird guys with the black and white face paint"? Nobody's hearing "Detroit Rock City" and going, "Wow - who is this?"
Are you really stupid enough to not understand the force of nature that we call Marketing, and its effect on people's taste?

You are gullible enough to believe with your Kiss Army heart that it was Kiss's bitchin' tunes that sold those 80 million albums? You think the spell cast over Beavis that commanded him to hand over his $5.95 for "Destroyer" was because he heard "Shout it Out Loud" and loved it, having no idea it was those pyrotechnics and blood gusher comic book dudes? Are you dumb as an onion, andrew?

"Now I will grant you that the make up made for bigger draws at their concerts but it certainly didn't write the songs, or play the instruments."

No, that's silly. Because if the foundation and powder were to write Kiss's songs, they'd actually not blow. I think Ace Frehley's cover up and mascara are credited with cowriting "Calling Dr. Love" though.

By the way, you used "redundant" 7 times. The irony - lick it up.

Posted by shawn mc on Thursday, 06.28.07 @ 01:06am


Shawn what happened to "this is all redundant" and "unless you have some new perspective to proffer."- practice what you preach...ehh

Plus, you always "take the bait."

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 06.28.07 @ 05:52am


Shawn, your ignorance knows no boundaries does it? Kiss bites the weiner is a fact? To me that sounds like an opinion and to my knowledge the definition of the word fact is not opinion. And if you are such a Kiss hater and that they are so Crappy like you say, then how come you know the lyrics and the song titles. Now you tell us you destroyed your radio because Beth was playing on it? a song that you claim is crappy but yet you know all the words to. You are such a genius. And you are giving me a reality check? You are the lost one my friend. Back when Detroit Rock City did come out everyone who heard it for the first time did say wow. Of course now, 30 years later the song is still relevant and even though people might not say wow like they use to, they still enjoy it or radio stations wouldn't play it, I guess you knew that though since you are such an expert in marketing. Didn't a movie studio even make a movie called Detroit Rock City. I am sure not many songs get made into a movie title. Then you claim people only bought the records because they like the make up. If that was the case then why by the album and not just by a magazine with pictures of them in it? I guess when all those songs make the top 40 because of radio play it is because of the make up right? And you call me as dumb as an onion? How do you know that Calling Dr. Love is a Kiss song? I mean after all Kiss sucks right? And you would never listen to them or buy their records right? So how do you know so many of their song titles? How did you know Destroyer was an album title of theirs? How do you know who the band members are? You know because everyone knows. They were the most popular band in the late 70's and everyone was buying their albums and hearing their songs on the radio, I am sure to include you. Sounds to me like you are a wanna be Kiss hater because most people who hate something usually don't know it as well as you do. Funny how in the 80's that they stayed just as popular but yet had no make up on. I guess it was music after all that people liked. When Kiss first came out, most fans heard songs on the radio like Strutter and liked it long before they knew what they looked like. It is not like it is now when the media gets a hold of you right away. Not until Alive came out that Kiss started drawing a lot of publicity. One last comment before I let you stew in your misery of being a wanna be Kiss hater. You sure make a lot of comments on here. Infact you make comments on here at least once a day. Sounds strange that someone would hate something so much the way you claim you hate Kiss and your smashing radios when their songs come on that you would spend so much time on here reading and commenting on them. I am no Velvet Underground fan and I never look for them on the internet. You are way too obsessed. Go get a life.

Posted by andrew on Thursday, 06.28.07 @ 07:06am


"How do you know that Calling Dr. Love is a Kiss song? I mean after all Kiss sucks right? And you would never listen to them or buy their records right? So how do you know so many of their song titles? How did you know Destroyer was an album title of theirs? How do you know who the band members are?"

Andrew your post is well said...First, Shawn says that Kiss will be inducted, then says they suck, and then says people should stop posting to Kiss unless they have something new to say. He does not have anything new to offer, yet he ignores his own advice. He contradicts himself all over the place.

To answer your question, Shawn is a wannabe - he secretly likes Kiss, but continues to spew the thoughts and commentary of Kit and William, and occasionally Dezmond. But, the bottom line here is that you said it well - if he hates Kiss so much, how does he know so much about them and why does he continue to post here, especially when he tells everyone else to stop posting here???? Shawn, is such a "wind up doll" though and I cannot wait for him to respond, which he will inevitably do of course with a bright red face and steam coming out of his ears :-)

Posted by Anon on Thursday, 06.28.07 @ 07:55am


"Plus, you always "take the bait."

Guilty. Afraid you got me there, Anon.

Posted by shawn mc on Thursday, 06.28.07 @ 10:16am


"Kiss bites the weiner is a fact? To me that sounds like an opinion.."

Nope, it's a known fact. Science proves it.

Posted by shawn mc on Thursday, 06.28.07 @ 10:24am


Alright, I will give it to you there....you laughed it off....don't sweat this shit...it is all pretty funny how fans (aka - fanatics) take this stuff so serious. It is nice to see that kind of passion. Anyway, you sort of proved me wrong. It was also kind of funny how you said that "science" has proved that Kiss sucks...LOL

Posted by Anon on Thursday, 06.28.07 @ 11:06am


BTW, did anyone even notice on a few posts up, my Canadian and "hidden" Rush messages - "ehh...." LOL....

Posted by Anon on Thursday, 06.28.07 @ 11:08am


"To answer your question, Shawn is a wannabe - he secretly likes Kiss.."

I-I... Oh God Anon, your penetrating powers of perception are too keen for me to deny anymore - you have exposed me - I AM A CORPORAL IN THE KISS ARMY!! It's true, it's true (sob!) God help me, I am living a lie! (Sob.. sniff..)I hid my concert t-shirts and my Love Gun lunch box away.. just so I could make Kit and William like me.
How do you do it Anon - how do you know me so well?

Some would say I know of KISS for the same reason I know more about Paris Hilton than I want to - they are in the air - I have ears that hear and eyes that read. But we know the truth: It's so obvious - how indeed could I know of "Destroyer" or "Christine Sixteen" unless I am a closet Detroit City Rocker, for these are secrets known only to those who have sworn their allegience to KISS!

My stance on KISS has always been constant. It's very simple, and the same as I wrote on 5/5/07:

"If our measuring stick is going.. to be (without)regard for actual musical value..
then by all means this wrestling act with guitars belongs in the Hall, gay as they are.
..I think their place in the Hall is unfortunately undeniable. They were just too big a phenomenon to not acknowledge.
God save us all."

I just have fun poking my stick at adolescent goof who takes KISS so seriously he gets ANGRY when the "evil incarnates" are besmirched. I have even more fun laughing at the Tool who is so eager to hit me with something in the room that he's willing to ally himself with any Beavis who walks in.
You know Anon, every opinion I post is 100% mine, and like 95% of them stand alone from one Kit or William or Dezmond has contributed. Actually, I find that when one of them makes a point I almost always don't have a thing to add because they've said it well. (Laughing) You're on this silly jag about "wannabe" because you and I butt heads so often. We fight so much because you're a chronic ass and, you are correct, I can rarely resist the bait.
Shame on me.

KISS stinks musically, they are a kitchy Vegas act, but they belong in the Hall because they were a massive phenomenon and probably were influential to other glam bands that followed. I want to see them in the Hall. And they're crap.

Posted by shawn mc on Thursday, 06.28.07 @ 11:22am


I guess I spoke to soon....Alas, the "bait" was taken!

Posted by Anon on Thursday, 06.28.07 @ 12:43pm


So we have some debate on this subject, I see...

Personally, it all comes down to what qualifies a band for a Hall of Fame. To me, saying Kiss doesn't deserve to be in the Hall of Fame because they're "bad" is ridiculous, whether or not it's true. It's not the Hall of Quality. If it were, they'd already have Echo and the Bunnymen in there. It's the Hall of FAME. Everyone knows who Kiss is. They know because Kiss became larger than life personalities to rise above their confessed limitations as musicians.

As far as them being "awful"... well that's just a statement of opinion. I hate the Kinks, personally, but I can't deny that people seem to think they're one of the greatest bands of all time and thus, deserve their spot in this institution.

And that one of the members of the Hall of Fame's nominations committee has to work to keep people out, well... keep that in mind, Dave, when you try to get people to treat the Hall as a true institution of the industry and no one buys it.

Posted by Strangef8 on Friday, 07.13.07 @ 20:12pm


I agree with the above post, but can certainly see and understand why people like Kit and William do not have much respect for Kiss - while very popular, they basically lacked substance and seemed to be much more of a gimmick and fad - so their viewpoints are certainly legitimate in that regard. However, as Shawn has said, their influence and hugeness is undeniable and should land them a spot.

Posted by Anonymous on Friday, 07.13.07 @ 23:11pm


One guy said, "If sales were criteria, a lot of bad bands would get in the hall." You mean the ones that are already in? Kiss is great, have you heard their music? They are awesome! We should start our own rock hall, and let the good bands in. (We can't let the public vote, or bad musicians like Britney Spears will get in, and good bands like The Used won't get in.

Posted by Chance on Thursday, 07.19.07 @ 10:14am


Kiss not make the hall of fame. What? they were not terrible a great band with several years of permorming. Some of the other inductees do not even rate as high as kiss in my opion. So why, some one has a burr for them a good ol boys club is right.!

Posted by Terry E. Sandretto' on Thursday, 08.2.07 @ 11:59am


As much as I don't like them, even I have to admit they need to be in the rock hall.

Posted by Nicole on Wednesday, 08.8.07 @ 15:32pm


Kiss should have been in the hall a long time ago they rock

Posted by larry on Friday, 08.10.07 @ 09:38am


KISS should be in their they took off the make-up!

Posted by Private on Saturday, 08.11.07 @ 16:50pm


So long at the so-called Hall of Fame excludes KISS it will be incomplete. It's a travesty that a band which spawned so many imitators and jump-started so many careers -- including that of recent inductee Van Halen -- doesn't get the credit it deserves from this bunch of stuffed shirt ass monkeys.

Posted by KISStrick on Wednesday, 08.15.07 @ 00:10am


I think the Salvation Army could take the Kiss Army.

Posted by William on Wednesday, 08.15.07 @ 02:09am


Dave Marsh sucks!!!!!!!! KIss are true hall of famers!!

Posted by william on Wednesday, 08.15.07 @ 07:36am


LOL, I get such a kick out of KISS fanboys, Kit actually knows what he's talking about here. KISS doesn't belong. Oh yeah, and if gold albums mean you belong in the hall I guess that means we should be ushering in the Backstreat Boys, NSync and Britney Spears in the next 20 years. Gimme a break. KISS sucks.

Posted by Chalkie on Monday, 09.3.07 @ 12:59pm


Love'em or hate em', KISS changed the world of music. Every rock band since has been influenced by what KISS did. Hell even Garth Brooks credits KISS for much of his popularity. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean it sucks! 45 gold albums and over 80 million albums sold tells the story. The proof is in the pudding.

Posted by zack on Tuesday, 09.4.07 @ 01:56am


Ok, I shouldn't have said "every" rock band has been influenced by KISS. But in one way or another KISS changed music. Name another band that mixed music, stage shows and merchandising better then KISS did. You don't have to like them but you're blind if you can't see their impact on rock music. Look at the stage shows of U2, Tool, Metallica, Van Halen, Garth Brooks ect ect ect..... Dime Bag Darrell was buried in a KISS casket!!!! Are they the most talented musicians in the world - of coarse not! But no one had the complete package like KISS did.

Posted by zack on Tuesday, 09.4.07 @ 06:11am


Chalkie...you are plain wrong. Let me start by saying that I do not like KISS at all - I am essentially indifferent to them. But, your anaologies are bad (i.e. Spears, etc.) because the influence of KISS in the rock music is simply undeniable. You are letting your dislike for KISS cloud your judgment. And, remember, I do not even like KISS. There is a thing, however, called objectivity...it is worth a try.

Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, 09.4.07 @ 17:26pm


For better or worse, KISS has certainly carved out their own unique place in pop/rock music history. I'm not a fan and don't really see the attraction to this band but apparently there are lots and lots of people who do, and that means something too. Whether or not they get inducted, I personally don't care either way.

Also I think I lost 20 IQ points reading through this entire thread.

Posted by A-Killa on Wednesday, 09.5.07 @ 09:35am


KISS is not my favorite, being that I didn't grow up in the 70's; however, you don't need a whole lot of brain matter to realize the impact they've had on the rock n roll industry and pop culture as a whole. They are the quintessential Arena band, and unarguably the most entertaining band of all time. The whole city of Cleveland should burn like Sodom and Gomorrah for not inducting KISS by now

Posted by James on Wednesday, 09.12.07 @ 22:42pm


KISS have influenced many popular artists. How many bands can say that their fans include Garth Brooks AND Metallica?

Posted by Nebula on Thursday, 09.13.07 @ 15:17pm


Wow, lots of activity here since my last post. I felt the need to post for one reason, and one reason only: I finally got a chance to visit the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame this year, during Goldmine's National Record Show, the first weekend in August.

My personal opinion: If you haven't seen it yet, don't kill yourself trying to get there. No matter what level of music fan you are, you can die happy without making the trek to this joint.

Yes, there were some cool things, like the big Clash exhibit and the Doors big set-up there, but it was so underwhelming. Not very fan-interactive at all. It's spread out over 7 levels, giving it the feeling of a huge shopping mall, almost a Mall Of America-type feel to it. Maybe they should rename it the Rock & Roll MALL Of Fame.

Anyway, after seeing this place, I wouldn't be disappointed if Kiss never made it in there. Even if they did get in, I'm very positive I'd never make a specific trip just to see what they put in there. Like I said, there were some things that were cool, but I definitely won't make the round trip from Michigan to Cleveland just to go there again, no matter who they induct.

A personal aside to Kit, who I kind of bashed last time on here: If King Crimson is one of the bands that floats your boat, more power to you, sir. I've just never been into them. I'm not saying they are without merit and/or talent, and if there are other like-minded individuals that also see them as inductees for the HOF and they get in, that's cool. I'm not one to be judging anyone else's taste in music. But I still think Kiss deserves to get in. I know in a lot of people's opinions, record sales don't (or shouldn't) mean jack as far as induction goes, but it is part (or should be part) of the overall picture. I still think Kiss is getting the shaft due to one or two of the nominating committee members, and there's even a news item on MTV.com, right from Dave Marsh's own mouth, confirming this - http://www.mtv.com/bands/m/music_geek/rockhallfame_040405/

The link is from 2005, so disregard the "no Sex Pistols" part of the article. They're in already. Much to Johnny Rotten's dismay. And I can't say I blame the guy for feeling the way he does about it. The thing he said about it being "the place where old rock stars go to die" sums it up for me. That's the feeling I got while I was there. I really wanted to prove that statement wrong, and I just couldn't do it.

I guess if you're a huge music fan and feel like you HAVE to go at least once in your life, please do yourself a favor......don't go there thinking this is the be-all, end-all inspirational mecca of all things rock, because if you do, you'll be completely disappointed. I've been listening to, collecting and playing music, both as a fan and as a musician, for well over 30 years. I just thought it would be so much more than it was. A huge disappointment.

Posted by Matt on Friday, 09.14.07 @ 02:50am


Completely disagree. I took a trip to Cleveland from Texas just to visit the Rockhall. I spent two complete days going through the place, and I loved it. Sure, there could always be improvements, but overall, they did a fine job. I think a casual fan might be bored with the place, but if you love the music and the history, I think it is well worth the trip.

Posted by Dezmond on Friday, 09.14.07 @ 23:54pm


Stranded on a desert island - with a CD player and you can only take 10 albums / CD's of any genre. What would you take? Only one rule - No greatest hits albums. Not sure of mine yet...

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 09.15.07 @ 15:12pm


Do live albums count?

Posted by Dezmond on Saturday, 09.15.07 @ 16:05pm


"Stranded on a desert island - with a CD player and you can only take 10 albums / CD's of any genre. What would you take? Only one rule - No greatest hits albums. Not sure of mine yet..."

1. The Smiths - Queen Is Dead
2. Stone Roses - Stone Roses
3. Oasis - (What's the Story) Morning Glory?
4. Happy Mondays - Pills N Thrills and Bellyaches
5. Kasabian - Kasabian
6. Kaiser Chiefs - Employment
7. Chemical Brothers - Dig Your Own Hole
8. Prodigy - Fat of the Land
9. The Who - My Generation
10. Echo & the Bunnymen - Songs to Learn and Sing

and u?

Posted by liam on Saturday, 09.15.07 @ 16:12pm


I think most everyone loves making pointless lists, so here goes:

Frank Black-Teenager of the Year
Frank Zappa-Weasels Ripped My Flesh
Guided by Voices-Bee Thousand
The Iceburn Collective-Meditavolutions
Long Fin Killie-Valentino
Naked Raygun-Jettison
Neutral Milk Hotel-In the Aeroplane Over the Sea
Voivod-Nothingface
Ween-Chocolate and Cheese
The Ziggens-Pomona Lisa

Posted by William on Saturday, 09.15.07 @ 23:20pm


We can all beat the heck out of this topic based on our own opinions of it. "Kiss is good"..."Kiss isn't good". Well I for one say they are, were and always will be great. Of course that is just my opinion. We each have a right to an opinion. That doesn't give us the right to bash the opinions of others. To each his own. Except for the biased members of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Nominating Committee. I think we have a right top bash them. They need to begin to base their choices on record sales and concert ticket sales. That is the only way we the fans have a say as to who gets into the Hall. Anyone who has the same opinion I do may want to check out www.kissarmyunites.com and get involved. Anyone who feels against me. That's your right. We all can not think the same. Yet we need not put down the choices of others. So agree that the Hall needs to change the nomination process and let's watch several bands that have been overlooked get inducted. Not just KISS.

Posted by Ira Bostian on Tuesday, 09.18.07 @ 11:36am


"Stranded on a desert island..and you can only take 10 albums of any genre. What would you take?"

Realizing that these are not as edgy/avant garde as other's choices, but what I would choose if I were to spend repeated hours listening to:
(in no special order):

1. Moondance - Van Morrison
2. Songs in the Key of Life - Stevie Wonder
3. Sweet Baby James - James Taylor
4. One Trick Pony - Paul Simon
5. Exile in Guyville - Liz Phair
6. Bring on the Night - Sting
7. Thw White Album - The Beatles
8. Get Happy - Elvis Costello & Attractions
9. Lonelyland - Bob Schneider
10. Come Away With Me - Nora Jones

Posted by shawn on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 14:06pm


aw, jezz, only ten albums? You're breaking my balls here...As always, subject to change on the slightest breeze:

The Band, s/t
Highway 61 Revisted, Bob Dylan
Fear of Music, Talking Heads
Let It Be, The Replacements
This Year's Model, Elvis Costello
Goo, Sonic Youth
Neon Bible, Arcade Fire
Revolver, The Beatles
Los Angeles, X
Quadrophenia, The Who

Posted by Kit on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 14:42pm


Here is my top 10 in no certain order. I cheated and addded one greatest hits album and two extra songs - oh well:

1) Moving Pitures - Rush
2) Outlandos d'Amour- Police
3) Aja - Steely Dan
4) Who's Next - The Who
5) 2112 - Rush
6) The Queen is Dead - The Smiths
7) Led Zeppelin I
8) Legend - Bob Marley
9) Paranoid - Black Sabbath
10) Ten - Pearl Jam
11) War - U2
12) Paid in Full - Eric B. & Rakim

Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 22:25pm


Oh, shit I forgot a solo Sting album: either the Dream of the Blue Turtles or Nothing Like the Sun.

Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 22:32pm


Being limited to 10, the choices are pretty fundamental:


1. Yesterday and Today (British Version)- Beatles
2. The Piper at the Gates of Dawn-Pink Floyd
3. Surrealistic Pillow -Jefferson Airplane
4. In the Court of the Crimson King-King Crimson
5. Days of Future Passed-The Moody Blues
6. Tarkus-Emerson,Lake and Palmer
7. Countdown to Ecstasy-Steely Dan
8. Reckoning-Grateful Dead
9. Tubular Bells-Mike Oldfield
10. Bach: Four Orchestral Suites / Brandenburg Consort

Posted by SG on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 23:48pm


I am adding on:
11. Peter Gabriel III (Melt)
12. Pet Your Friends - Dishwalla
13. Goodbye Jumbo - World Party
14. Before These Crowded Streets - Dave Matthews Band
15. Led Zeppelin II
16. What's the Story (Morning Glory) - Oasis
17. Comatised - Leonna Naess
18. Transparent Things - Fujiya & Miyagi
19. Tim - The Replacements
20. Born To Run - Bruce Springsteen

because my island has some extra storage space; yours may too.

Posted by shawn on Thursday, 09.20.07 @ 00:49am


My island's too tiny to bring anything else but my battery powered lava lamp....wanted to have a bigger 1, but with the fixed income.........

Posted by SG on Thursday, 09.20.07 @ 01:09am


I love when people try to be so "cool" by not "playing" along - it is veiled pretentiousness. Just list 10 fuckin songs and stop with the battery powered lava lamp. Plus, I have always hated lava lamps!

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 09.20.07 @ 05:55am


First off, SG already listen his ten, and was simply refusing to follow shawn's example of listing an additional ten. Also, lava lamps have been scientifically proven to be awesome in a highly scientific study of science, so they can't be criticized.

Posted by William on Thursday, 09.20.07 @ 06:42am


Oh, poo, poo...it was a joke....btw all this talk about the 10 albums you would take. I just listened on the way to work to the Queen is Dead album, which has collected some dust for quite some time - wow that is still that good after all these years...I am glad I am taking it with me to Gilligan's Island

Posted by Anon on Thursday, 09.20.07 @ 08:03am


"My island's too tiny to bring anything else but my battery powered lava lamp.." -SG

Right on. Will you also bring your black light lamp from Spencer's Gifts (in the mall) and tack your Pink Floyd posters to a palm tree? Listening to your 8 tracks wouldn't be the same without these items. Bitchin!

Posted by shawn on Thursday, 09.20.07 @ 09:36am


Funny....I did not know they had "Spencers" all over the country - are they still in business? I also saw the JM comments - I figured it would piss you off a bit....I still think though that he is an "iffy", but it could go either way

Posted by Anon on Thursday, 09.20.07 @ 09:45am


"Sorry - my bad." would have been the appropriate response Anon. There is still time......

Posted by shawn on Thursday, 09.20.07 @ 09:49am


"Funny....I did not know they had "Spencers" all over the country - are they still in business? I also saw the JM comments - I figured it would piss you off a bit....I still think though that he is an "iffy", but it could go either way"

I think there are still some Spencer's, though they're now very antiquated and kitchy-lame-cheap. I remeber always heading for that back of the store nook with the black lights and wave lamps and babe posters when I was a kid in the 70's in Tucson, AZ. We'd wonder at the way our white shoelaces would glow back there, get our adolescent boners from the Farrah Fawcett and Daisy Duke soft porn featured in the poster Rolodex display.

As for Mellencamp - I don't see how you can justify inducting Bob Seger, Billy Joel and Tom Petty and just skip Mellencamp. But I've launched this diatribe before, so.... yea.

Posted by shawn on Thursday, 09.20.07 @ 09:59am


It WAS a joke...I can read you know...

Posted by Anon on Thursday, 09.20.07 @ 10:35am


"It WAS a joke...I can read you know..." - anon

Not the point - you're deliberately obfuscating again... last chance here.

Posted by shawn on Thursday, 09.20.07 @ 11:01am


It WOULD be the point, since it was a joke - I thought it was obvious. Why would I curse or care what songs he listed, esp. when he just wrote them like 2 posts up. And, then make the lava lamp quip??? You make no sense Shawn...

Posted by Anon on Thursday, 09.20.07 @ 11:23am


"It WOULD be the point, since it was a joke - I thought it was obvious."

well make sure that next time you stick LOL or ROFL just so its ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN to be a joke.

LOL! like that

Extra islnad space you say? The I pick:

11. The Melting Pot - The Charlatans
12. Paul's Boutique - Beastie Boys
13. Blue is the Colour - Beautiful South
14. Black Grape - Black Grape
15. Setting Sons - The Jam
16. Out of Time - REM
17. Something else by the Kinks - Kinks
18. Viva Hate - Morrissey
19. Power, Corruption and Lies - New Order
20. Different Class - Pulp

Posted by liam on Thursday, 09.20.07 @ 12:01pm


Liam, don't tell me what to do - NOT LOL - yeah, like that!

Posted by Anon on Thursday, 09.20.07 @ 12:10pm


"You make no sense Shawn..."

Dude... you wrongly chastised SG for being pretentious by not playing along and listing 10 favs, when he already had. It's alright, you obviously just overlooked his post - just would be nice to see you acknowledge your easy mistake in bashing him rather than ignoring the booger on your face by saying, "I know - I meant to do that." Please try to not fal back on old ways, Anon, please.

Posted by shawn on Thursday, 09.20.07 @ 12:12pm


No, you obviously overlooked my warped sense of humor. But, believe what you want - I am not here to convince you...now leave me alone or else I am going to shove a lava lamp up your ass (btw, that was a joke)

Posted by Anon on Thursday, 09.20.07 @ 12:24pm


"(btw, that was a joke)"

i think you 'LOL FALL OUT BOY ARE TEN BEST BAND EVER XXXXX :O'

Posted by liam on Thursday, 09.20.07 @ 12:41pm


11)Pretenders II, The Pretenders
12) Bossanova, Pixies
13) Eat A Peach, THe Allman Brothers
14) Document, REM
15) The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the SPiders From Mars, David Bowie
16) Ritual De Lo Habitual, Jane's Addiction
17) American Beauty, The Grateful Dead
18) Unknown Pleasures, Joy Division
19) Metal Box, Public Image Limited
20) Zaireeka, The Flaming Lips (with all the spare time I'll have on this island, I can perfect my synching up of the four CDs!)

Posted by Kit on Thursday, 09.20.07 @ 14:46pm


As of mid 2005 there was a Spencers in a mall just north of Philly and I went in to see if there were any new solar powered lava lamps. A month or 2 later though, I heard on the news that the store was shut down. Dealin dope behind the counter! No joke.

Posted by SG on Thursday, 09.20.07 @ 16:03pm


Nombres 11-20:

Big Black-The Rich Man's Eight Track Tape
Budgie-Never Turn Your Back on a Friend
Fugazi-13 Songs
Jeremy Enigk-Return of the Frog Queen
King Crimson-In the Wake of Poseidon
Kyuss-Welcome to Sky Valley
Melvins-Houdini
Monster Magnet-Spine of God
Silver Apples-Silver Apples
Smog-Dongs of Sevotion

Posted by William on Thursday, 09.20.07 @ 16:12pm


" A month or 2 later though, I heard on the news that the store was shut down. Dealin dope behind the counter! No joke." - SG

Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha.... that is classic. A store that sells shit gets busted for selling... shit.

Posted by shawn on Thursday, 09.20.07 @ 17:54pm


The 10 albums thing... are you supposed to name 10 different artists? Because if not, I'd just take 10 Beatles albums and call it a day. I know, that's a really unoriginal answer, but you like what you like.

Posted by A-Killa on Thursday, 09.20.07 @ 21:19pm


I was going to make the rule only one artist, but that is dumb - you pick what you want. But, you would not want some variety there - I mean how much "She loves you, yeah, yeah, yeah" could you take?

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 09.20.07 @ 22:07pm


Beatles are one of the most hideously over rated artists EVER, If not THE most over rated.

I'll admit they had a 'few decent tunes', and they influenced ALOT of britpop and madchester bands, but that is as far as it goes for me.

I'd also like to replace my Kinks album for Screamdelica by Primal Scream

Posted by liam on Friday, 09.21.07 @ 10:02am


I despise the term overrated, it makes no sense to me. If you're the kind of person that listens to and puts that much weight into hype, you're probably not the kind of person who enjoys music on more than a superficial level.

What specifically do you find objectionable to The Beatles?

Posted by Kit on Friday, 09.21.07 @ 12:32pm


the lyrics. and the song hey jude. its just boring (give me paperback writer anyday)

Posted by liam on Friday, 09.21.07 @ 12:54pm


"I'll admit they had a 'few decent tunes', and they influenced ALOT of britpop and madchester bands, but that is as far as it goes for me." - liam

Quite generous of you to grant them "a few decent tunes', you twit. Oooo- how daring and irreverent of you to dismiss The Beatles as mostly hype. You're a real maverick, nobody's gonna fool you, liam. What a fucking cloud of self deception the rest of the music world has been in since the 60's. You're quite a guy to see right through all that crap and nonsense from Rubber Soul to Abbey Road. Holy nutsack.

Posted by shawn on Friday, 09.21.07 @ 14:09pm


I'm glad Shawn said that so I didn't have to. It's one thing to say you don't particularly care for the Beatles - it's all subjective. It's another thing to call them "overrated." That's just silly. They influenced some Britpop bands, what? They influenced damn near EVERYBODY in the last 40 years! Are you trolling?

Posted by A-Killa on Friday, 09.21.07 @ 14:38pm


And Liam, aren't you the big Oasis fan? Oasis is an all-time great, but the Beatles are overrated. That's logical.

Posted by A-Killa on Friday, 09.21.07 @ 14:40pm


if i had expected this response, then i would have put a bit more thinking into that comment.

Posted by liam on Friday, 09.21.07 @ 14:51pm


You didn't think posting "The Beatles are overrated" on a music discussion board would provoke a strong response?

Posted by A-Killa on Friday, 09.21.07 @ 15:23pm


all i can say in defense is 'i'm tired'

Posted by liam on Friday, 09.21.07 @ 15:31pm


Well put A-killa - I agree. However, there could be a case made that the Beatles are "overrated." To me overrated is basically about anything that is hyped or overhyped. Certainly, much of the early Beatles was new and different, but most of it was simple pop friendly songs, which were easy on the ears and made the girls go nuts. Certainly, if those songs were released for the first time today, they would probably not do very well. I mean much of the later Beatles music was probably a reaction to their own earlier bubble gummy pop tunes. Go figure, they influenced themselves! But, it is true Liam, you are asking for some trouble when you bash the Beatles. That being said, a case could be made for them being "overrated." Anyway, I am sure I will get "chewed" out for these comments - fire away! :-)

Posted by Anonymous on Friday, 09.21.07 @ 15:47pm


Well, no one is saying that everything they did was pure gold. Early Beatles music wasn't exactly filled with lyrical depth (I Wanna Hold Your Hand?!) and Late Beatles was a drug-crazed mess (the Abbey Road suite). The Beatles did get away with some things that other bands wouldn't have, because they were THE BEATLES, so I guess they could be considered "overrated" in that sense. But that's more semantics than anything. Like I said above, I'd never flame anybody for saying that the Beatles aren't their cup of tea, but dismissing their enduring popularity and influence is something else.

Posted by A-Killa on Friday, 09.21.07 @ 16:25pm


"Certainly, if those songs were released for the first time today, they would probably not do very well."

That's only really true because the Beatles are largely responsible for the basic pop formula used in most genres. Of course they'd be dismissed now, just as someone who came out with an invention he called a "printing press" would be laughed at today.

Posted by Kit on Friday, 09.21.07 @ 17:17pm


"Certainly, if those songs were released for the first time today, they would probably not do very well."

And if the cotton gin or the light bulb were introduced into the world today, they too would be anachroniistic so-whats, but evaluating them out of the context of their place on the timeline of history is as meaningless as dragging "Meet The Beatles" into 2007.

Would the amalgamate musical minds of John/Paul/George/Ringo have created such iconic works in today's music world? Probably not -- but it takes not a thing away from their lofty acheivments. Timing has as much to do with anybody's story as any other variable.

Music is so hydra-headed and subjective that you can point to any artist and make a case that they are both overrated and/or underappreciated.

You are forgiven for your sin, liam. :)





I mean much of the later Beatles music was probably a reaction to their own earlier bubble gummy pop tunes.

Posted by shawn on Friday, 09.21.07 @ 17:22pm


Wow that was weird - made the exact same point as Kit simultaneously. That's special.

Posted by shawn on Friday, 09.21.07 @ 17:26pm


"but evaluating them out of the context of their place on the timeline of history is as meaningless as dragging "Meet The Beatles" into 2007."

That is naturally true. Of course music has to be taken within the context of when it was released. Like I said, though one could make the argument that they were a bit overrated.

Posted by Anonymous on Friday, 09.21.07 @ 22:19pm


What people forget is all the major bands that are or will eventually be considered for the HOF that have at one time or another, opened for KISS on tour. Aerosmith, BonJovi, Van Halen, Judas Priest and Metallica among others. Add in the fact that Kiss has been awarded 45 gold albums to date and the group's worldwide sales exceed 80 million albums and it is impossible to ignore the influence thaty have had on rock-n-roll. Their stage show, fan base and theatrics / pyrotechnics during a show are what all groups to this day strive for everyday.

Posted by Chris Humbertson on Monday, 10.1.07 @ 07:01am


YOU PEOPLE MUST BE CRAZY! YOU RICH SNOOTY MUCKY MUCKY THINK YOU CAN SPEAK AND CHOOSE AND VOTE FOR US THE PEOPLE ON WHO SHOULD BE INDUCTED TO ROCKS GRANDEST STAGE THE HALL OF FAME. YOU MAKE ME SICK AND ONE BAND PROBABLY THE MOST ULTIMATE BAND TO EVER BE CONSIDERED TO BE INDUCTED KISS YOU JUST LOOK AWAY AND LAUGH AND SAY THEY SUCK. THEY HAVE SOLD OUT AREANAS ALL OVER THIS WORLD .PLAYED TO MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF LOYAL FANS WHO ARE THE KISS ARMY.SOLD MILLIONS UPON MILLIONS OF RECORDS, TAPES, AND CDS.THEY TOUCH THE HEARTS AND SOULS OF THERE FANS AND YOU TELL ME AND THE REST OF THE ROCK FANS OUT THERE THAT THEY STINK AND DID NOTHING TO INFLUENCE MUSIC .YOU ARE SICKNING TO ME AND EVERYONE ELSE THAT LOOKED AT YOUR COMMENTS ON THEM AND ESPECIALLY THE CHOICES YOU MADE FOR THIS YEARS INDUCTIONS. THEY ARE A DAMN JOKE AND SHAME! 85% OF THE CHOICES AREN'T EVEN ROCK.IF YOU COULD FOR JUST TWO SECONDS GET YOU HEAD OUT OF YOUR BUTTS AND STOP LOOKING AT YOUR BANK ACCOUNTS AND PUT PEOPLE ON THE BOARD THAT AREN'T SO YOUNG AND CAN'T REMEMBER BANDS LIKE KISS OR ALICE COOPER AND HIGHER PEOPLE FROM THAT ERA THEN MAYBE JUST MAYBE PEOPLE WOULDN'T LASH OUT AT YOU PEOPLE. IF YOU CONTINUE TO PUT CERTAIN PERFORMERS THAT AREN'T ROCK AND ROLL BANDS IN THE ROCK HALL OF FAME YOU WILL JUST MAKE THE HALL OF FAME MEANINGLESS AND A JOKE AND BASICALLY SAY YOU COULD MAKE ANYTYPE OF MUSIC IN THERE. IF THEY ARE RAP THEY SHOULD GO INTO THE RAP HALL OF FAME IF THEY ARE COUNTRY THE SAME PUT THEM IN THEIR OWN HALL OF FAME.THATS THE POINT OF ALL THESE HALL OF FAMES TO HAVE THEIR OWN INDUCTEES. IN CLOSING I HOPE THAT YOU COME TO YOUR SENSES AND REALIZE THE BAD CHOICES YOUR MADE THIS YEAR AND NEXT YEAR INDUCT THE PROPER BANDS AND PEOPLE IN THE ROCK HALL OF FAME AND MAKE SURE THEY ARE IN THE RIGHT CATERGORY THAT IS ROCK TO BE IN THE ROCK AND ROLL HALL OF FAME.

Posted by TONY on Monday, 10.1.07 @ 07:05am


So because of one guy it seems KiSS doesnt get in, what a crock!!!!!....politics!!!!!! Madonna please. KISS, Iron Maiden, Judas Priest?????

Posted by Ken Quade on Monday, 10.1.07 @ 10:02am


How can that JERK continue to deny what KISS means to America? The world?

As a child, my family never exposed me to any music other than African American R&B. Of course, I'd seen and heard of the Beatles, Elvis, and others, but none turned my head and made me think that maybe my family might be rather limited in what we called "music".
On Halloween in '76, I was disappointed and upset because rain superceded the annual pillaging. So, I sat down in my Wonder Woman costume and turned the television on, flipping through channels of uninteresting horror movies, cartoons, etc. and found the Paul Lynde Halloween Special about to begin. I'd already liked Lynde from Bewitched, so I settled down to watch.

My world came to crashing halt that night. Crashed, stopped, and then started turning again... but this time, there was MORE.
KISS was amazing that night. The music, the magic, the makeup, THE UTTER SHOWMANSHIP!!! I wasn't just star-struck... I was enthralled for all time.
I still like Marvin, Al, La Belle... but they never MOVED me, never caused my breathing to accelerate, my heart to fill to bursting and my soul to sit up and beg for more. Up until then, I could only get that feeling when I settled down with an especially well-written book.

KISS showed me that music is more than just skin color. Its about what you feel and experience when you listen.. really listen... to what the artist is trying to tell you. They taught me to have fun with music, to abandon yourself to the sound, give yourself over to the feelings evoked.

Through them, I have discovered other types of music,learned to appreciate each for it own special beauty. KISS saved me from the narrow-minded outlook the majority of my family still ascribe to.

I have four kids now, all taught to appreciate all kinds of music and people. They are well-rounded individuals who see the world in colors, not just black n' white. Thank you Peter, Gene, Ace & Paul. You are, will always be, the HOTTEST BAND IN THE WORLD.

Posted by Catt Cantu on Monday, 10.1.07 @ 10:59am


"What people forget is all the major bands that are or will eventually be considered for the HOF that have at one time or another, opened for KISS on tour."

CONGRATULATIONS!!!! You've actually broken the record for most bullshit contained in one comment!! I actually don't understand it. 'all the major bands'? Have Oasis? Nirvana? Soundgarden? REM? Bullshit

Posted by liam on Monday, 10.1.07 @ 11:11am


What can I say that hasn't already been said (184 times before my comment at last count) INDUCT KISS!

Posted by Ryan on Monday, 10.1.07 @ 11:14am


"Its about what you feel and experience when you listen.. really listen... to what the artist is trying to tell you. "

And KISS is telling you to... LICK IT UP! LICK IT UP! OOOOOOH!

"What people forget is all the major bands that are or will eventually be considered for the HOF that have at one time or another, opened for KISS on tour."

I forget, what year did Madonna open for KISS? Was that '82?

Posted by A-Killa on Monday, 10.1.07 @ 11:45am


"What can I say that hasn't already been said?"

How about:

'KISS suck',
'Don't induct KISS',
'don't ever listen to KISS',
'don't call KISS 'musicians''?

just a few examples there

Posted by liam on Monday, 10.1.07 @ 11:47am


I agree,Kiss was never a great band,there are so many more bands and individuals that belong,Hell Bryan Adams wrote music for kiss.I already know the hol is a farce,if Kiss every gets there,or,heaven forbid,motley crue,that would really show how far off they are when it comes to rock and roll.
There are probably 50+ bands that need to be there before Kiss ever gets a sniff,ie:Rush,Deep Purple,Moody Blues,the list goes on and on

Posted by John on Monday, 10.1.07 @ 11:50am


KISS should have been in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. Jann Wenner is a joke, the hall is a joke, and frankly, KISS is too good for them.

Posted by Jim on Monday, 10.1.07 @ 11:58am


KISS should have been in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. Jann Wenner is a joke, the hall is a joke, and frankly, KISS is too good for them.

Posted by Jim on Monday, 10.1.07 @ 11:58am


"KISS also made a lot of crappy music too (God Gave Rock and Roll To Your jumps out), let's not forget.

Posted by Mike B. on Monday, 01.8.07 @ 15:06pm"

That song was written by Argent..it was a cover tune.

Posted by Steven Sime on Monday, 10.1.07 @ 13:20pm


Madonna isn't a BAND....Judas Priest, AC/DC, Black Sabbath, Tom Petty, so who looks like a doof now??

KISS should be in there.

Posted by Shea on Monday, 10.1.07 @ 13:51pm


why?

Posted by liam on Monday, 10.1.07 @ 14:02pm


Its amazing listening to people that have no clue about music whatsoever....Ive been a musician for over 25 years and I think Kiss should absolutley be in. No, they are not complex, but this isnt the berkley school hall of fame either. They have fun songs that touched millions of people over a 35 yr career. Look at some of the awful musicians in the hall.....Ramones (3chord retards) blondie, U2 (the edge could possibly be one of the worst guitarist ever) Bob Dylan (great poet, but sings like a dying cat) remember folks......Rock n Roll is about having fun and not taking life to seriously......ps Id love to see some of these deadbeats try and fill an arena today......only a handful can still do it and most new bands could never do it.

Posted by ultshowman on Tuesday, 10.2.07 @ 04:23am


Name a band that has been able to stay viable for over thirty years? Name a band that introduced a unique sound into the rock-n-roll industry namely heavy metal? Name a band that still has its core song writers working together (that are comparable to McCartney-Lennon; Richards-Jagger)? Name a band that can still not only write great songs, can still sell out stadiums, sell records, rock-out second to none, put on show envied by all?
Kiss – hell yes.

Posted by Scott on Tuesday, 10.2.07 @ 08:54am


"Name a band that has been able to stay viable for over thirty years? Name a band that introduced a unique sound into the rock-n-roll industry namely heavy metal? Name a band that still has its core song writers working together (that are comparable to McCartney-Lennon; Richards-Jagger)?"

The Moody Blues, Black Sabbath, and oh my gosh did you seriously just compare KISS to the Beatles and Stones? What color is the sky in your world?

Look, there are legitimate arguements for KISS being in the Hall of Fame, but their fans aren't doing them any favors.

Posted by A-Killa on Tuesday, 10.2.07 @ 09:05am


you can easily compare kiss to the stones.....the only really good musician in the stones is wyman.....charlie watts is lucky he can walk, let alone play drums. Keith isnt very good either, but together it works....thats all that matters......i mean Ringo sux too

Posted by theman on Tuesday, 10.2.07 @ 09:58am


"Rock n Roll is about having fun and not taking life to seriously"-ultshowman

No, it isn't. It absolutely is not. Rock is what you make it. Some people want to have fun and some people want to be serious. Stop trying to mess with the definition to make your band look better.

"ps Id love to see some of these deadbeats try and fill an arena today......only a handful can still do it and most new bands could never do it."-ultshowman

Didn't you just say they were all about fun? What kind of crappy band is Kiss that they couldn't have fun with a bar crowd or anything less than a full stadium? Stadiums suck. As others have said, assigned seating is not rock.

Posted by William on Tuesday, 10.2.07 @ 11:10am


"you can easily compare kiss to the stones"

and you can just as easily get your teeth knocked out on a rugby pitch. i could compare Godspeed to Travis, and I wouldn't have benefited anyone, so what's your point?

Posted by liam on Tuesday, 10.2.07 @ 11:23am


It's the rock and roll hall of fame, not the rock and roll hall of good taste. Kiss should be in the hall of fame!

Posted by matt on Tuesday, 10.2.07 @ 15:02pm


people who say assigned seating isnt rock is just an excuse that there music isnt good enough to make it nationally........ As far as saying rock is what you make it......that is very true, however, If I wanted to be depressed and talk about wars ect I dont want it in music Ill watch the news. Most of these musicians dont know jack shit when it comes to world issues and politics...I saw a video of Bono singing to some fucking zulus that were looking like they wanted to eat him and not listen to where the streets have no name.......wake up.........maybe you should go get laid.........

Posted by theman on Tuesday, 10.2.07 @ 21:12pm


Okay....it is called the Rock and Roll Hall of FAME. So, it is based on the level of FAME the artist/s has acquired over the years, correct? And on the level of INFLUENCE the artist/s have had on society as a whole, and other aspiring bands, correct? Then, by all means, KISS should be inducted. It doesn't matter if you like their music or not. I can't stand the Rolling Stones or Led Zeppelin. But does that keep them out? No. And it shouldn't keep KISS out, either. But, like Paul Stanley said, the Hall of Fame is overrated, and the votes don't come from the people that matter: the fans. So, whatever. I love KISS, and I always will, so I could give a sh** less what the "committee" thinks of them. Or you eithe, Kit, for that matter.

Posted by kissfreak65 on Tuesday, 10.2.07 @ 21:53pm


"people who say assigned seating isnt rock is just an excuse that there music isnt good enough to make it nationally"-theman

I'm sorry, but the lowest common denominator isn't quite as high as I'd like it to be.

"As far as saying rock is what you make it......that is very true, however, If I wanted to be depressed and talk about wars ect I dont want it in music Ill watch the news. Most of these musicians dont know jack shit when it comes to world issues and politics...I saw a video of Bono singing to some fucking zulus that were looking like they wanted to eat him and not listen to where the streets have no name"-theman

Did I say anything about politics? No, tardo. I agree that Bono is full of shit. We'd be in a pretty bad situation if every musician was Bono. Thankfully, they aren't.

"maybe you should go get laid"-theman

Didn't I just say something about the lowest common denominator? It seems relevant, somehow.

"Okay....it is called the Rock and Roll Hall of FAME. So, it is based on the level of FAME the artist/s has acquired over the years, correct?"-kissfreak65

No, genius. It's about history and what deserves to be remembered, same as any Hall of Fame.

"And on the level of INFLUENCE the artist/s have had on society as a whole, and other aspiring bands, correct?"-kissfreak65

Society, no. Bands, yes. Society doesn't make records. Bands do.

Posted by William on Tuesday, 10.2.07 @ 23:05pm


I guess if you go by technical ability.....the stones, beasties, the beatles, blondie ect ect shouldnt be in, because most of them cant play a lick, however, they made fun songs that appealed to millions of people and thats what really counts.....Kiss should be in

Can you imagine if we did this for sports hall of fames lol How funny would that be.....

Posted by ultshowman on Thursday, 10.11.07 @ 11:23am


"they made fun songs that appealed to millions of people and thats what really counts"


wow, anon, you should take a look at this. he's trying for your 'biggest bullshitter' award

Posted by liam on Thursday, 10.11.07 @ 11:54am


This is a crime! For those who know and love Rock & Roll, adding Madonna, Beatie Boys, Donna Summer, Chic & Afrika Bambaataa is a slap in the face.

After last years induction of Grand Master Flash, who didn't see this coming? The R'N'R Hall of Fame is a SHAM! Since when has DISCO/DANCE/RAP been assoicated with Rock 'N' Roll?

R&B, Hip-Hop, Dance should have a Hall of Fame of their own....like in MOTOWN...Detroit.

Whether you like KISS or not, KISS has been a house-hold name since 1975 (Since "Rock 'N' Roll All Nite"). They helped pave the way for ALL the metal band that followed after them.

Who is voting anyway?

Posted by Adam Z (STEEL 93) on Tuesday, 10.23.07 @ 09:04am


"They helped pave the way for ALL the metal band that followed after them."

In my eyes, they also helped pave the way for McDonald's getting into America. They are a shite band, and anything that sells itself THAT much should be ignored by anyone who considers themself to have good taste.

Thank god Dave Marsh

Posted by liam on Tuesday, 10.23.07 @ 09:14am


Absolute bull. In order to "pave the way" for something, that something has to be slightly less prolific than metal was before, during, and after the alleged "paving" happened.

Posted by William on Tuesday, 10.23.07 @ 15:33pm


Liam, you should'nt be bitter, Go back and listen to your Madonna and Bangles C.D's that you undoubtedly have in your collection. You dont like Kiss WTF on you on here for?

Posted by Hey joe on Thursday, 10.25.07 @ 07:48am


"You dont like Kiss WTF on you on here for?"

Is english your second language?


Posted by liam on Thursday, 10.25.07 @ 13:11pm


Have to take it to a personal level, go listen to Madonna dumbass.

Posted by Hey joe on Monday, 10.29.07 @ 06:09am


Aww shit man, you're just gettin deep now.

Posted by liam on Monday, 10.29.07 @ 09:13am


"Aww shit man, you're just gettin deep now"

It's Awe, now who needs the English lesson?

Posted by Hey joe on Monday, 10.29.07 @ 10:15am


Hey, Hey Joe, give me a good reason for a debate/argument, and you'll get one.

Until then, you just keep masturbating over that Hung Up video

Posted by liam on Monday, 10.29.07 @ 10:18am


"It's Awe, now who needs the English lesson?"-Hey Joe

No, it isn't. It's "aw," a-w. "Used to express protest, disbelief, disgust, or commiseration."

This has been today's English lesson.

Posted by William on Monday, 10.29.07 @ 11:43am


So you admit you watch her video's? Sorry haven't seen it. Seriously now Liam, Kiss isn't the greatest band around but they're definitely not the worst. How can the hall put people like Madonna in when she isn't Rock and Roll? Who's next Britney Spears? Where's Judas Priest and Iron Maiden? Why should one person have so much influence over the decision?

Posted by Hey Joe on Monday, 10.29.07 @ 12:56pm


I guess we proved this to be untrue

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. Any personal attacks will be deleted.

lol

Posted by Hey joe on Monday, 10.29.07 @ 13:04pm


"So you admit you watch her video's? Sorry haven't seen it. Seriously now Liam, Kiss isn't the greatest band around but they're definitely not the worst. How can the hall put people like Madonna in when she isn't Rock and Roll? Who's next Britney Spears? Where's Judas Priest and Iron Maiden? Why should one person have so much influence over the decision?"

Plenty of more influential (*cough* better) artists weren't inducted, and I for one am slightly glad that KISS, one of the biggest sellout whore bands EVER, wasn't inducted. A few examples of better snubs? How about:

The Cure
Brian Eno
The Stooges
Rush
Moody Blues
Genesis
The Specials
Joy Division
New Order
Talk Talk
The Buzzcocks
T Rex
Roxy Music
The Jam
Cocteau Twins
Kraftwerk
and Sonic Youth

and that's just a few

Posted by liam on Monday, 10.29.07 @ 13:21pm


But before you respond, I must commend the fact that you presumed what my musical tastes are. Ingenious!

Posted by liam on Monday, 10.29.07 @ 13:23pm


Why are you so bitter? Agree with you on Rush, good band. Not the same hall I realize, when I went to Cleveland to the Rock and Roll hall of fame, again no Kiss but Michael Jackson? Any Rock and Roll hall should have Rock and Roll only. Start a new one for the Madonna, Prince,Michael Jackson's of the world. Completly different music.

Posted by Hey Joe on Monday, 10.29.07 @ 13:42pm


I'm not bitter, it's just fuckwits like you who think 'oh its a rock n roll hall, so it always will be' that piss me off. Where will the hall be in 20 years time WHEN there are no significant rock n roll artists to induct?

As music progresses, so does anything that relates itself with it.

Posted by liam on Monday, 10.29.07 @ 13:50pm


You really are a little man just by the insults, grow up a little, it's only music someday when you mature and have a logical debate we'll chat again on here but for now your not worth the time and effort little man.

Posted by Hey Joe on Monday, 10.29.07 @ 13:55pm


"it's only music"

Then don't comment here.

"someday when you mature and have a logical debate"

So what is mature about empty presumptions? Here's another: You're obviously unaware of almost everyone on that list, apart from Rush.

Posted by liam on Monday, 10.29.07 @ 14:02pm


You're right I've only heard of a few of them, but am I telling you they suck? Or that they dont deserve to be at the hall? Maybe they do, maybe they dont. You're the one slamming my music tastes calling Kiss a whore band. You know they have sold tens of millions of records, they were popular in their day (like Rush)I think both should be in, and yes 20 years from now music tastes will be different, I'm talking now. Why come onto a Kiss thread and start crap? Go on to the Rush thread and fight for them to get on. Or do you just get off on this?

Posted by Hey joe on Monday, 10.29.07 @ 14:14pm


"and yes 20 years from now music tastes will be different"

And I'd put good money on there being no substantial rock n roll bands. SO what does the hall do then? Does it bask in the swinging 60s, or does it change to meet a relative market?

"You dont like Kiss WTF on you on here for?"

Wait, you do realize that this is NOT a KISS fan site?

Posted by liam on Monday, 10.29.07 @ 14:35pm


Over 80 Million record sales, No one on your list comes close.... 60 million for Moody Blues, 40 Million for Rush.

Posted by Hey joe on Monday, 10.29.07 @ 14:37pm


That said, you'd also induct Green Day, Duran Duran and The Spice Girls.

Slaes mean nothing when you're analysing how innovative and influential an artist is.

Posted by liam on Monday, 10.29.07 @ 14:44pm


Name should be changed to the Music Hall of Fame.

Posted by hey joe on Monday, 10.29.07 @ 14:51pm


Change the name like I said, yes,yes,and maybe. Greenday and Duran Duran for sure. Cant comment on the Spice Girls, never listened to them. Glad to see the Ramones are all ready in. Where's the Cult?

Posted by Hey joe on Monday, 10.29.07 @ 14:53pm


80 Million record sales and you dont think they had any influence on people maybe not generation but I know they did on mine.

Posted by Hey Joe on Monday, 10.29.07 @ 14:57pm


"Greenday and Duran Duran for sure"

This really isnt the place, but what the hell did either of them do to help/progress music?

"80 Million record sales and you dont think they had any influence on people maybe not generation but I know they did on mine."

Since when did 'generations' specifically make music?

"Name should be changed to the Music Hall of Fame."

The first valid point you've made

Posted by liam on Monday, 10.29.07 @ 15:10pm


Liam, sales figures can be indicative of influence. As in, a band (like Kiss) with astronomical sales figures will most likely influence at least some of those listeners. And some of those listeners will most likely be musicians. Also, a band that has astronomical sales most probably had some influence on the popular culture of its time, and even popular culture after its heyday. So while sales figures are not the end of the influence inquiry, or even the most important aspect of it, they are relevant to the discussion.

But obviously, sales figures have nothing to do with innovation.

Kiss should be inducted, by the way.

Posted by Dezmond on Monday, 10.29.07 @ 17:38pm


First, I am not a KISS fan. However, at the risk of being the subject of attacks by Casper, Kit, Shawn and Liam (the way you 4 talk, I certainly hope you are all musicians), it is IMO that KISS belongs. They arrived while Zep and the Who were dominant, The Stones were doing some serious work, bands like ELP and Yes were giving us something new to listen to and Aerosmith and Queen were the new kids on the block. And yet, Kiss still somehow managed to find their place. Their live album (smirking) did break some new ground and the rest is history. It wasn't until Eric Fox and Bruce Kulick joined did they finally have some guys who were better than adequate on their instruments. And still, many young people picked up their instruments for the first time because of them. Yes, they took Alice Cooper "one step beyond". The stage act was not something innovative, but it was bigger than life and their audience got their monies worth. I understand where Kit and the boys get their opinion. At least, by what I can tell by their comments, they were all very much into what was being played on the college stations. And the Alt. groups were heavily influenced by the VU and others whose success was more of a "cult" thing or big on the college stations. Great music came from many of these bands. And before any of them jump down my throat, I am a big fan of the VU and saw them live. I did think Lou Reed was a bit full of himself, especially after reading his comments regarding Sgt. Pepper and I believe their attachment to Warhol was big for them, however, I cannot deny the VU and bands that followed in their footsteps, both in music and attitude. But to completely ignore the importance of Kiss is a mistake. Marsh, Wenner and Kaye seem to have a lot to say about the RRHoF; which is probably why a certain female rocker is in, however, they need to look at what the listening audience enjoyed and Kiss was enjoyed. They did record "Detroit Rock City" - great song. IMO, put them in, but make sure Alice Cooper goes in as well. Ok - Shawn, Kit, Casper and Liam - have at me.

Posted by Dameon on Tuesday, 11.27.07 @ 17:27pm


Kiss = Shit Sandwich. Their music was and still is boring. None of the musicians, if you want to call them that, had any ability. Their appeal is to adolescent boys. It's time to grow up though. I do like Gene Simmons and beleive he's a funny and entertaining guy. However, Paul Stanley takes himself way too seriously if he believes Kiss' music was even marginally good...it was mind numbingly boring.

Posted by D. Stroy on Sunday, 12.9.07 @ 19:53pm


kiss - marketing hall of fame - yes
rock and roll hall of fame - no way

these guys make sid vicious look like a virtuoso

Posted by willtheoak on Friday, 12.14.07 @ 21:01pm


There is nothing I can add to what hasn't been already said about Kiss. To the people who are Kiss haters, go to any other message board and see if you have the overwhelming response for our childhood heros. No other band has a loyal following like Kiss and like them or not, they will never go away. I wish they would get nominated to the Rock Hall of Fame and tell those sandal wearing hippies to Kiss their ass.

Posted by Joe Ski on Sunday, 12.16.07 @ 18:43pm


you people are out of your minds. madonna, mellencamp where do they rank on total albums sold. not only does kiss deserve to be in the hall of fame, these imbecials that run this fake hall of shame should be fired. its pretty funny that kiss has been around since 1973 and still sell more cds and concert tickets than most of these scrubs of shame combined. and if everyone hates kiss so much, whos buying the cds, videos, concert tickets, and watching genes reality show.
and one more thing, everyone keeps saying kiss music isnt very complex but i dont see evryone else puting songs that will last forever. madonna, mellencamp, the clash i'm a guitarist and can play songs like that in my sleep.

KISS Fan since 1978 and still my favorite

Posted by pat on Tuesday, 12.18.07 @ 10:11am


"madonna, mellencamp where do they rank on total albums sold."

"its pretty funny that kiss has been around since 1973 and still sell more cds and concert tickets than most of these scrubs of shame combined"

"and if everyone hates kiss so much, whos buying the cds, videos, concert tickets, and watching genes reality show."

Waaaaaaaanker!!!!

By the way, I can't remember the last time I saw someone buying a KISS record. Even then, I hardly see KISS albums in the shops much at all, and most of the time it'll just be "Greatest Kiss", "Crazy Nights" and "Kiss". Try to avoid the regular bullshittings of "well, you must not have a life!!". And, if you do, try to improve your grammar by just a dot more than that in your original post.

"everyone keeps saying kiss music isnt very complex but i dont see evryone else puting songs that will last forever."

What, so a good song has to have a catchy riff, memorable hook...whatever?

"madonna, mellencamp, the clash i'm a guitarist and can play songs like that in my sleep."

Superb reasoning.



Posted by liam on Tuesday, 12.18.07 @ 10:34am


"these imbecials that run this fake hall of shame should be fired."-pat

Feel free to contact those whatever-you-called-them (by any chance did you mean imbeciles?) and kindly ask them to fire themselves.

"everyone keeps saying kiss music isnt very complex but i dont see evryone else puting songs that will last forever. madonna, mellencamp, the clash i'm a guitarist and can play songs like that in my sleep."-pat

So Kiss isn't complex, BUT IT'S OKAY! These other guys aren't complex, according to you, but it's NOT OKAY! What's the difference? Songs that will, in your words, "last forever"? Delusion pure and simple. Grab someone off the street and ask him to name every Kiss song he knows. See if the list tops three. Not that that's a meaningful criterion, but I reason that you're the type of person who might believe it is.

So rather than talking about how much you personally love the band or how many wares they've pedalled, why don't you tell me what's so damn special about their music? What do they do that is WORTH paying good money to hear?

Posted by William on Tuesday, 12.18.07 @ 11:44am


EDIT: And before anyone can call me on it, I'll go ahead and say that I used the wrong homonym of peddled above (which is not quite the same as making up an entirely new word, such as imbecials).

Posted by William on Tuesday, 12.18.07 @ 11:46am


What, have the KISS army been concentrating in their english lessons all of a sudden?

Posted by liam on Tuesday, 12.18.07 @ 11:57am


Come on, people. Like them or dislike them, Kiss deserves induction into the Rock Hall of Fame. Unfortunately, some of the people posting here are not the most articulate spokesmen for Kiss, but I will go ahead and rectify that situation. Why not use the great adaptation of the Keltner Test as advertised elsewhere on this site to analyze whether Kiss should be inducted or not. The Keltner Test was designed by some respected journalist to analyze whether certain players deserved induction into the Baseball Hall of Fame, and it has been adapted for Rockhall purposes. OK, Kiss...

1. Was Kiss ever regarded as the best artist in rock music? Did anybody, while Kiss was active, ever suggest that Kiss was the best artist in rock music?

The answer here would be "no". Other than the loyal legions of the Kiss Army, nobody with much credibility ever suggested that Kiss was the best artist in rock music. Now, they had/have tons of fans around the world, and that counts for something. One of the more loyal fan bases around. To me, a "yes" answer here would be rare for any band, and a "yes" would probably mean automatic induction. But if you only inducted those with "yes" answers here, you'd have a small Hall.

2. Was Kiss ever the best artist in rock music in its genre?

What is the genre? Hard rock? Probably not, but in their 70's prime, they were one of the primary movers in the genre. Glam/hard rock? I would argue that they would contend here. Definitely the most successful in the genre. Here we are getting into more subjective analysis, but the best 70's hard rock songs of Kiss stand up to some other bands who are already inducted...Aerosmith? Definitely comparable. So, my answer here is that "you can make a good argument", but it is not a slam dunk.

3. Were members of Kiss ever considered the best at their instruments?

No, but there are many inductees who would also have a "no" answer here. Out of all of them, Ace Frehley was probably the most talented instrumentally, and amongst hard rock/metal guitarists, Ace is quite respected. So, Ace would never be considered the best guitarist around, but he was often at least mentioned in the discussion during his prime.

4. Did Kiss have an impact on a number of other bands?

Yes, definitely. There is a definite link between 70's Kiss and the make-up wearing, hair bands of the 80's (Motley Crue, etc.) (Hey, I didn't say it was all positive!) A decent diversity of artists have covered their tunes (Garth Brooks' cover of "Hard Luck Woman" come to mind out of left field). Kiss had a massive impact on putting on spectacle concerts, from pyrotechnics to creating fictional characters/ personas onstage, to bombastic excess. They did not invent rock excess, of course, but they definitely contributed to its development. Many subsequent bands took note of what Kiss did in the 70's as far as putting on shows and tours. More on this later.

5. Was Kiss good enough that it could play regularly after passing its prime?

Yes. Analysis of this factor generally goes to longevity and touring. Kiss' prime was in the 70's, yet well into the 2000's they continued to tour and garner impressive ticket sales.

6. Is Kiss the very best artist in history that is not in the Hall of Fame? One of the best?

Not the very best. Genesis, Yes, Peter Gabriel, Jeff Beck, etc. are all eligible and deserve induction more than Kiss. But I would still put Kiss on the shortlist of glaring omissions. They were not the best, but perhaps the most successful that is still waiting and eligible.

7. Are most bands that have a comparable recording history and impact in the Hall of Fame already?

This is a mixed bag. I look at Aerosmith and AC/DC sitting in the hall, and they are comparable hard rock giants with long four decades long and counting careers. But hard rock is a genre the hall tends to overlook, so some other deserving acts in Kiss' category are also still waiting. I'd give this one a "yes".

8. Is there any evidence to suggest that Kiss was significantly better or worse than is suggested by its statistical records?

Tough to answer, because Kiss has hugely impressive statistical records (album sales, tour receipts, etc.) No serious critic is going to put Kiss in the top echelon, although their sales are there. So, the answer would probably be "no". But, if you go back to listen to their best records (especially the debut, "Destroyer", "Love Gun", the superlative "Alive!" and "Alive II"), their music can still stand up as great adolescent, hard rock. And what is more rock and roll than that? Although, their mad stuff is REALLY bad.

9. Is Kiss the best artist in its genre that is eligible for the Hall of Fame?

Already sort of analyzed above, I guess it depends on the genre you choose. But I would say they are definitely one of the more glaring omissions as far as hard rock bands with massive popularity and cultural impact.

10. How many #1 singles/gold records did Kiss have? Did Kiss ever win a Grammy award? If not, how many times was Kiss nominated?

I say fuck the Grammy analysis, because the Grammys have always been a joke. But this question essentially asks about commercial success. The stats have been cited vociferously here already, so I won't repeat them. But Kiss is one of the most commercially successful bands still waiting to get into the Rockhall. They didn't have any #1 singles (I don't think), but their album sales and concert ticket sales are in the stratosphere.

11. How many Grammy-level songs/albums did Kiss have (critically lauded)? For how long of a period did Kiss dominate the music scene? How many Rolling Stone covers, etc. did Kiss appear on? Did most of the bands with this sort of impact go into the Hall of Fame?

Overall, this series of question is in Kiss' favor. OK, critics hate Kiss (which is why the Committee won't nominate them, the Committee is dominated by critics). But Kiss did dominate the music scene for a decent chunk of the 70's, from about '75 through the end of the decade they were one of the biggest bands on the planet. Half a decade ain't bad. And their popularity waned greatly, but they never really disappeared since then. I am not sure whether they were ever on the cover of Rolling Stone, but they had plenty of other music mag cover features. I can cite them if you want. Kiss had a huge impact on pop culture and rock music in the 70's, so I would say most comparably impactful bands are in (but not all...since prog rock as a genre is ignored by the Rockhall).

12. If Kiss were the best band at a concert, would it be likely that the concert would rock?

Hell yeah. Even their detractors must admit that they put on a hell of a show. It is no accident that some of their most popular albums are live albums. They created a great concert spectacle, and I could think of a lot worse than to be jammin' out to "Cold Gin" or "Rock and Roll All Nite".

13. What impact did Kiss have on rock history? Was it responsible for any stylistic changes? Did it introduce any new equipment? Did it change history in any way?

Change history? That is a tall order for any band to claim. But Kiss did have an impact on the 70's popular culture (I remember when I was little the joy I felt when I opened my Kiss Make-up kit on Christmas morning...all of our Christmas pics from that year feature a little Ace Frehley running around). They also had a huge impact on the industry, as far as marketing. The Kiss Army? The merchandising? Like it or not, Rock and Roll is a popular, commercial music, and therefore that stuff does matter. Stylistic changes? They didn't really innovate the music all that much, but as far as performance, presentation, etc. go, absolutely innovative.

14. Did the band uphold the standards of sportsmanship and character that the Hall of Fame, in its written guidelines, instructs us to consider? (Sort of a joke, but if the artist was particularly active in charity work, etc., perhaps that should be a factor to consider, albeit to a lesser degree than the other factors above).

I don't know.

So, it is not like you just add up the "yes" and "no", you've got to weigh all of the answers and how strongly they answer some questions, negative or postively. But overall, if you consider the analysis above, Kiss belongs in the Hall of Fame. I enjoy them, but I am by no means a Captain in the Kiss Army or anything. But from an objective standpoint, looking at their overall impact on the rock and roll landscape and when compared to some other Hall of Fame Inductees, the Kiss ommission is rather ridiculous.

Posted by Dezmond on Tuesday, 12.18.07 @ 13:37pm


"(Hey, I didn't say it was all positive!)"

As far as I see it, you haven't given us any examples of how their influence wasn't completely negative. Oh yeah, please don't try the old "such and such said he was a fan", as unless you can actually hear KISS in that artist, it's a useless argument.

"and I could think of a lot worse than to be jammin' out to "Cold Gin" or "Rock and Roll All Nite"."

And I could think of a hell of a lot better than do that. Like a cold shower or eating shit.

"looking at their overall impact on the rock and roll landscape and when compared to some other Hall of Fame Inductees, the Kiss ommission is rather ridiculous."

Their impact on the "rock and roll" world, rather than the "public that doesn't contribute to music" world, is quite minimal, and alot of what is there is quite awful. KISS really should be at the back of the list of ommisions.

Please explain to me how KISS deserves it more than Joy Division, Gang Of Four, Nick Drake, The Cure, New Order and all the countless amounts of snubs who I currently believe are more deserving than KISS, and avoid your "cultural impact" argument, as "culture" never wrote music [insert tacky joke about someone like Culture Club here].

Posted by liam on Tuesday, 12.18.07 @ 13:54pm


"Please explain to me how KISS deserves it more than Joy Division, Gang Of Four, Nick Drake, The Cure, New Order"

Couldn't they all deserve it?

Posted by ryan on Tuesday, 12.18.07 @ 14:37pm


No reasoning with Liam, don't even try. Never heard of Joy Division, Gang of Four, Nick Drake or New Order. Guess they never made it really big. Does that mean they shouldn't be included? No........But Liam will argue just to argue and if he can’t come up with something positive he attacks your grammar. Better to just skip his posts. Kiss isn’t and was never the best but should be inducted. Halls a joke.

Posted by Hey Joe on Wednesday, 12.19.07 @ 07:21am


"But from an objective standpoint, looking at their overall impact on the rock and roll landscape and when compared to some other Hall of Fame Inductees, the Kiss ommission is rather ridiculous." - Dezmond

Excellent analysis and post, Dezmond.
I hate, hate, hate, hate, hate KISS - crassly commercial, silly and contrived "theme", low low low on the musical value bell curve, just plain GAY-AYYY!!!!!!......
and I agree with you for all the reasons you point out that they have a place in an American, populist oriented Rock Hall of Fame. The dunderheaded KISS Army dorks owe you thanks for articulating a case. They'll never understand half of what you said, but...

Posted by shawn on Wednesday, 12.19.07 @ 10:37am


If fans decide on American Idol and Dancing with the Stars, what's the problem with R&R Hall? mmm hmmm.. It's about the fans stupid, who put you in charge of me?

Posted by William on Wednesday, 10.4.06 @ 10:09am

Oh I should've know ole cleft lip boys favorite band was KISS well the ROHOF isn't a popularity contest. I never cared for KISS from day one. Their comic book look and mediocre music during the 70s when bands like The Who, Stones and Zeppelin were ruling the scene made me wonder who these folks were that liked that band.

As the years have gone by I still don’t care for KISS as a musical group and of the handful of songs I do like I wouldn’t vote for them based on my musical taste. However I have to give KISS their due and the facts speak for themselves. The group should’ve been elected already but KISS fans at least the few I’ve encountered on various sites that hate Led Zeppelin are such snot mouthed punks they deserve to suffer although it's unfair to the Band or the majority of decent KISS fans out there which I have no doubt out number the jerks like you William.

Posted by zepfan on Sunday, 01.6.08 @ 00:08am


Actually, that wasn't me. As you might be able to tell from the many other posts with my name on it, I don't really care for Kiss very much at all.

A pity that all your points are now moot, eh?

Posted by William on Sunday, 01.6.08 @ 01:08am


kiss is the greatest live band ever. great songs if you hear the music instead of listen to it. when you let in country acts ,doowop and pop crap like madonna then you should call it the music hall of fame not the rock and roll hall of fame. it's obvious that the hall committee all have enormous bones in their heads when they nominate and vote. let the fans vote em in and while your at it let the fans vote some of them out.

Posted by greg on Saturday, 01.26.08 @ 09:38am


"let the fans vote em in and while your at it let the fans vote some of them out."-greg

Shut up.

Posted by William on Saturday, 01.26.08 @ 13:19pm


this is to slick willy who told me to shut up.
go listen to your bee gee albums ya frickin dancin queen!

KISS RULES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by greg on Sunday, 01.27.08 @ 11:54am


Dancing Queen? That's ABBA, kid.

As I've said before, a fan-run Hall of Fame is just about the only conceivable way to make the current Hall WORSE than it already is. I get the feeling that your personal fantasy Hall would be especially crappy.

Posted by William on Sunday, 01.27.08 @ 18:24pm


only a dancing queen/disco duck like you would truly appreciate ABBA. MY HALL WOULD CONSIST OF ROCK N ROLL PERIOD.(BECAUSE IT IS THE ROCK N ROLL HALL OF FAME)AS FAR AS BEING A KID YOU GOT THAT WRONG TOO THERE LITTLE DUDE OR DUDETTE OR WHATEVER YOU ARE. I'M A 46 YEAR OLD MAN WHO STILL APPRECIATES GOOD MUSIC AND IT AIN'T ABBA. KISS RULES AND DISCO/POP/COUNTRY/RAP/HIPHOP SUCK!!!!

Posted by greg on Monday, 01.28.08 @ 14:57pm


"only a dancing queen/disco duck like you would truly appreciate ABBA."-greg

Appreciate? I wasn't aware merely mentioning a name equates to appreciation. Wouldn't that mean that you "appreciate" The Bee-Gees?

"MY HALL WOULD CONSIST OF ROCK N ROLL PERIOD.(BECAUSE IT IS THE ROCK N ROLL HALL OF FAME)AS FAR AS BEING A KID YOU GOT THAT WRONG TOO THERE LITTLE DUDE OR DUDETTE OR WHATEVER YOU ARE. I'M A 46 YEAR OLD MAN WHO STILL APPRECIATES GOOD MUSIC AND IT AIN'T ABBA. KISS RULES AND DISCO/POP/COUNTRY/RAP/HIPHOP SUCK!!!!"-greg

Congratulations on being a 46-year-old kid. Evolution has failed you. Rock does not need hacks like Kiss, and it will be better off when they are forgotten.

Posted by William on Monday, 01.28.08 @ 15:56pm


Congratulations on being a 46-year-old kid. Evolution has failed you. Rock does not need hacks like Kiss, and it will be better off when they are forgotten.

Come on William - that is the good thing about RnR - it keeps us young.

And no matter how much people might wish Kiss to disappear from history, I have a feeling it will be a very long time before that happens. Henry Rollins once said "Kiss fan, un-Kiss fan, everyone knows at least one of their songs". As Metallica said - "Sad, but True".

Posted by Dameon on Monday, 01.28.08 @ 17:28pm


Ya know, a lot of this talk is very foolish. I played lead guitar in a funk band in the late 70's which also happened to do rock sets. We would play "Stayin' Alive" and "Detroit Rock City"...on the same night!! Guess what?? Everybody loved it because none of it SUCKED!!!! If I had a vote, I'd vote for KISS, but I also agreed with the Bee Gee's induction. About 70 years of staying power between those two groups...must be doing SOMETHING right!! ABBA has sold 400 million records, 3rd only to The Beatles & Elvis, and has a Broadway play about them. Heck, in Sweden they're even on postage stamps!! I don't own any ABBA, but I at least give them their due!! I've said this on this site before, but it bears repeating...

Quote from Dimebag Darrell: "If you're making music, none of it SUCKS!!!"

'Nuff Said!

Posted by Terry on Monday, 01.28.08 @ 17:45pm


Paul Stanley said something very interesting...I think that if you're eligible or already in the HOF, you should get a vote. If they're deceased, then their family should at least get one vote. That would make it more objective and part of the vote would be by their peers. The powers-that-be don't always seem to "get it".

Posted by Terry on Monday, 01.28.08 @ 19:03pm


DAMN RIGHT I'M A 46 YR. OLD KID, AND PROUD OF IT. STILL PLAYING ROCK N ROL ON MY FENDER STRAT JUST LIKE I WAS DOIN 30 YEARS AGO(AND IT EARNS ME A GREAT SIDE LIVING). COME ON SLICK WILLY ADMIT IT, YOU'RE A CLOSET KISS FAN. I WILL ADMIT THERE IS ANOTHER TYPE OF MUSIC THAT I LIKE TO PLAY OTER THAN ROCK AND THAT'S THE BLUES, ROCKIN BLUES THAT IS. ALL OTHERS SUCK!!!!
------GOD OF THUNDER-------BLACK DIAMOND------
-----COLD GIN------SHOCK ME---HOTTER THAN HELL----

Posted by greg on Tuesday, 01.29.08 @ 19:42pm


KISS,despite only ten hit singles overall were the 1970s version of Beatle-mania. They,like The Beatles,were wildly popular for 7 years (1974-1981).

In a time where you had disco,teen-pop/TV stars and airwaves full of Adult Contemporary,they were the true and most fitting rock and roll band of that decade. They sold out stadiums and halls all over the world and their live shows kick serious tail.

Hall voter and rock critic Steve Marsh doesn't like them,so he kicks and screams like a baby to the other hall voters give into his tantrum.

I'm sure KISS would like to be in but before they would accept,Z believe they'd want the acts left before them to be inducted first.

On a seperate issue,I agree this five people a year nonsense has got to stop. Look back at the early years,they inucted up to ten acts then. So what is it....VH1 can't find enough sponsors to allow that much time for so many?? Pretty patetic guys.

Posted by Walter on Tuesday, 02.5.08 @ 16:14pm


I wish we could edit these messages...I know how to spell pathetic for Pete's sake! LOL!

Posted by Walter on Tuesday, 02.5.08 @ 16:18pm


"In a time where you had disco,teen-pop/TV stars and airwaves full of Adult Contemporary,"

Apart from the countless Garage and Independent acts, right? Right.

"they were the true and most fitting rock and roll band of that decade."

Yeah, they were the epitome of Corporate Society; completely outshined by countless other Glam acts musically, and yet able to be churned out in the millions.

"Hall voter and rock critic Steve Marsh doesn't like them,so he kicks and screams like a baby to the other hall voters give into his tantrum."

Yet you forget to mention the bit where KISS are a completely average band and are one of the most correct snubs.

Posted by Liam on Wednesday, 02.6.08 @ 10:16am


{{What, have the KISS army been concentrating in their english lessons all of a sudden?
Posted by liam}}

Liam, pay attention! I compared listening/watching to KISS to the effects of a well-written book. I wasn't talkin' 'bout Penthouse.
I'm a college-educated female with a healthy interest in rock, opera, classical, country and other areas of music. KISS makes sense to ME. Granted, I NEVER listen to anything Ace or Gene have written with the exception of a very few songs (Ace writes worse than Steve Perry's "Stone In Love" and Gene-- well, let's just say Gene has real 'respect for women' issues.)

But yeah, I can spell & speak English better than most, better than my kids who largely use txting for communication. And I've found HUNDREDS of fans who are the same. We are not acidheads or MickeyD cashiers. Hell, my boss, a well-respected and seemingly demure manager at our world-wide company, was Peter Criss in a tribute band! (Luv u, JP!!!)

So, our detractors can stuff the 'dumb' comments about the intelligence of KISS' fanbase.

We are legion. We are The KISS Army.

Posted by Catt Cantu on Wednesday, 02.13.08 @ 11:13am


Slow day....:(

Posted by Liam on Wednesday, 02.13.08 @ 11:47am


{{What about Kiss screams "creative" to you?

Posted by William}}

Aside from the R&R Anthem "Rock And Roll All Nite"...let's see..

Appearance/Makeup-- who did it first? Who did it BEST?

Stage show-- Who did it first? ( Admittedly, it has been improved upon, technology being what it is...)

Stage Set- Who did it first? Who did it BEST?

Costume: That hot axe guitar!! The colossal imagery with the boots alone!! Who did it first? Who's outdone it since? (Elton, MAYBE...)

Showstopper: Fire-Breathing! Blood-spewing! Lightning bolt-filled solo! Drummer extraordinaire! Only Ozzy can compare!! (And the one bat was accidental!!)

Marketing: The halloween costumes DID and perhaps still outsell the Beatles', Ozzy, etc. Care to be buried in a KISS Kasket? Or maybe wear a KISS condom for your next tryst? KISS Kooler, anyone?

Fanbase: I think only Elvis could compare, and even he doesn't have a named, world-recognized collective...

AND LASTLY-- Who, among ANY you could name, could claim ALL? (and you're allowed to exclude the showstoppers-- we already know uniqueness can't really be compared.)

And don't just nitpick on one or two things, guys. Go thru it all, show me I'm wrong!!!
Hugz from Cheyenne!!

Posted by Catt Cantu on Wednesday, 02.13.08 @ 12:04pm


Your entire post reeks of bullshit, Catt Cantu. None of it links to KISS' creativity. Hardly any of what you said was true, either.

"Who, among ANY you could name, could claim ALL?"

A few, but I could think up a few hundred better (and more-deserving) artists than KISS. I could probably hit one thousand with enough time...

Posted by Liam on Wednesday, 02.13.08 @ 12:13pm


"And don't just nitpick on one or two things, guys. Go thru it all, show me I'm wrong!!!"

I've said this before, but it bears repeating...EDUCATE YOURSELF on Rock & Roll history before you make un-substantiated statements!! It would take a lot of space to form a rebuttal on what you said but for starters...
-In the mid 70's I heard KISS referred to as "Alice Cooper Wannabes".
-Even though he's been dead for 30 years, you can't imagine the enormous following that Elvis still has. He still sells more records than a whole lot of living artists. Makes KISS' following look pretty minute.

KISS really didn't do anything first, and even in their own era did very little of it "best" (Some bands didn't need "a gimmick" to totally mesmerize a crowd).

Theres a lot of difference between being educated...and being smart!!

Posted by Terry on Wednesday, 02.13.08 @ 20:27pm


Liam...what happened to our friend Catt Cantu?? I didn't realize that "selling haloween costumes" was a valid contribution....hmmmm?? And that "hot axe guitar", can't say anyone else contributed one of those (even though I've seen players with perfectly normal bass guitars who would BLOW Gene Simmons away!!!) Brother!! She doesn't really want me to get started on KISS!!!!

Posted by Terry on Thursday, 02.14.08 @ 15:19pm


People need to sign a petition to get the absolutely idiotic Dave Marsh fired. Kiss is not a great band? What a conceited jerk. He has done everything he could to keep them off the ballot? What a complete donkey.

Posted by Lance Swanson on Sunday, 02.17.08 @ 11:04am


"Kiss is not a great band?" - Lance Swanson

No. They never were, either. Chances are, they never will be.

Stop talking.

Posted by Liam on Sunday, 02.17.08 @ 11:09am


I am definately a kiss fan. I do have to say wheather you like them or not, it is undeniable what an indeliable mark they have left not only on the music industry, but society as a whole. They created what a stage show and conert should be. They single handedly created the merchandising industry which today's "current/relevant" artists are whoring up with branding their name. But its acceptable for Kiss, Give me a break. They have sold the most gold records of all time! That is a statement. Maybe they did not have a record that sold 15 or 20 million but they have been selling records since 1974. What other bands can say that? Only a few come to mind, and we all know they are great. It doesn't matter who you are, everyone knows a Kiss song! That is what leaving a mark is all about!
-Kyle

Posted by kyle on Thursday, 02.21.08 @ 19:48pm


Allow me to show you how off the mark you are on "Gold Records"...

KISS- 24 gold, 10 platinum, 2 multi-platinum.

The Beatles- 41 gold, 36 platinum, 24 multi-platinum.

Elvis Presley- 89 gold, 46 platinum, 23 multi-platinum.

Elton John-36 gold, 25 platinum, 12 multi-platinum.

Not a good comparison. Theres a lot of other bands with better sales, and have been around at least as long. Some haven't been around as long with better sales. As far as stage shows, Alice Cooper pretty much did it first. Hmmm....

Posted by Terry on Thursday, 02.21.08 @ 20:24pm


"They created what a stage show and conert should be."-kyle

That's a judgement call and you'll find a lot of people disagreeing with you there. Earlier hard rock bands never needed makeup and pyrotechnics to put on a kick-ass show.

"They single handedly created the merchandising industry"-kyle

Wrong. Thanks for playing.

"which today's "current/relevant" artists are whoring up with branding their name."-kyle

Name an artist and a branded product besides t-shirts and the like which are rock staples and predate Kiss. I'm not seeing an epidemic that could reasonably be linked to Kiss.

"They have sold the most gold records of all time!"-kyle

Again, wrong. Two factually inaccurate statements in one post is more than enough for me to stop caring about what you have to say.

Posted by William on Thursday, 02.21.08 @ 21:37pm


It is rare that William and I agree on much, but I certainly have to agree with him on the points that were made by Kyle in which he and Terry rebutted.

KISS owes much to Alice Cooper.

I am not going to judge whether KISS deserves this or not. I will give Gene Simmons credit for milking all he could from the band. He is definitely a very smart business man. I think most, but definitely not all fans might like to see KISS get this nod, but I just don't see it happening. And certainly not before Alice. I wish someone could explain to me exactly what the problem is between the HoF and Alice. Is there some tension between him and Jann?

If Alice does ever get the nod, I hope it includes the actual Alice Cooper band from the pre-Welcome to My Nightmare albums.

Posted by Dameon on Friday, 02.22.08 @ 08:53am


First let me mention that I am not, never have been, and never will be a KISS fan. That being said, They belong in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and I couldn't agree more with Paul Stanley.

Posted by JasonsMusicPage on Sunday, 02.24.08 @ 15:12pm


...and just exactly what did Paul Stanley say?

Posted by Terry on Sunday, 02.24.08 @ 16:30pm


Hi Liam!!!!!

Posted by Hey joe on Tuesday, 02.26.08 @ 09:17am


Everyone cites how many albums Kiss has sold as a reason why they deserve induction. To me that is completely missing the point. The Baseball Hall of Fame doesn't induct people based on how many jerseys they sold. General popularity is pretty much irrelevant, the only thing that it truly important is they music they made. Kiss may be influential to future musicians, but that doesn't redeem the poor music their career is based on.

Posted by Ren on Sunday, 03.9.08 @ 22:21pm


KISS should be indected simply on their merits as a LIVE ACT! There has never been a live act like KISS, they revolutionized the concert experience - they put the spectacle back in rock. Anyone who has seen KISS knows it's one of the best (if not the best) show trhey have ever seen. Perhaps, Dave Marsh needs to pick up a copy of KISSOLOGY vol. 1, 2 or 3 to see why they should be inducted.

Posted by Dave C on Monday, 03.10.08 @ 11:54am


Big suprise, Rock Hall is having financial problems. With people like Dave Marsh contributing no big suprise. Induct Kiss

Posted by Hey Joe on Tuesday, 03.11.08 @ 06:32am


bands in the hall today NEED to be in there to stay alive in the public eye...Kiss doesn't...35 years and still breathin' fire, spittin' blood, and makin' the people happy...that's what matters...not a freakin' trophy.

Posted by Mike on Tuesday, 03.11.08 @ 11:27am


Never having been a Kiss fan, but obviously aware of them and familiar with their music, I can't really understand what the argument is about. It's the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Obscurity, or the Hall of Music I Like. Of course Kiss belong in there. To put forth the opinion that they don't belong because you don't like their music is about as lame and elitist an argument you can make. If you don't look with blinders on it's easy to see the Kiss influence in virtually every rock band that has come along since. There are plenty of very popular bands who I couldn't name one song from, but I know several Kiss songs. That speaks to the impact they have had.
Also, the argument that their musicianship isn't up to par holds no water. They play rock and roll, there's no need to be a virtuoso. I'm an average guitar player and can play the music of pretty much any band in the hall of fame, it's not that difficult. They are as capable as any other band out there playing rock music.
The likes of Kiss and Alice Cooper won't be in the hall anytime soon because of musical snobbery, it's as simple as that. Somewhere along the way these people have gotten old and forgotten that rock and roll is supposed to be fun. Whether or not you or I, as individuals, like their music is beside the point, it means nothing...that's called personal taste...millions enjoy it and have for 35 yrs, and that's a good enough reason for me to include them.
And at the end of the day, it's only rock and roll..no need to get too excited about it. It really is meaningless and based on some of the inductees, it's kind of arbitrary...perhaps rock bands shouldn't want to be in a rock and roll hall of fame that includes the likes of Madonna and other artists that might be fine at what they do, but probably aren't the most shining examples of rock and roll.

Posted by John on Tuesday, 03.11.08 @ 15:09pm


One other point on originality...since when was this ever important? Every song you've ever heard has been based, at least loosely, on something the writer of the song has heard. There's only so many chords and so many ways to arrange them. And the moronic notion I read in this thread that music is only important if it has an effect on musicians is another example of the elitist ideas that seem to run rampant in these posts. Because I can play a guitar doesn't make me the arbiter of what is valid and what isn't...get over yourself...music has an impact on all listeners, and Kiss has had an impact that is larger than all but a handful of bands.

Posted by John on Tuesday, 03.11.08 @ 15:30pm


Completely missed the point. A band worthy of the hall should (in theory) be indispensible to music history. They are rungs in a continuing ladder, not dead ends or redundancies. It's the difference between the Guinness Book of World Records and a history textbook. They're both names, places, dates, facts, and history, but one is considerably more valuable because the people and places it discusses actually matter in the long run, moreso than the fastest cup stacker or the guy with the beard of bees.

Posted by William on Tuesday, 03.11.08 @ 17:18pm


I would argue that Kiss is indispensable to music history...surely you would agree that neither a record book nor history book would leave out Kiss in a discussion of 70's music..they were simply to big to ignore. Kiss had an undeniable stamp on teens in the 70's, and when talking about the long run, it's been 35 yrs....how much longer can we reasonably expect. I could understand your argument if Kiss were flailing, but they aren't. They're still selling out arenas around the world, and complain that you might about musical relevance, that only matters to a point, 35 yrs is beyond the point. The music means something to some people and it's effected people...what more could you ask for? And, like it or not, Kiss seems to have a life of its own regardless of either of our opinions. We wouldn't be having this discussion about any other band, in that way Kiss is unique...no matter what you or I think, Kiss matter. It really is that simple.

Posted by John on Tuesday, 03.11.08 @ 21:57pm


I'm not much of a KISS fan, but I'll admit their marketing has been nothing short of brilliant over the years...

Posted by Terry on Tuesday, 03.11.08 @ 22:08pm


I think KISS fans may see them inducted at some point, but it seriously looks like most of us will be in nursing homes when that happens!
NEVER has a more deserving band been overlooked like KISS has been!
There are many other people who belong there as well but "politics" as in everything else is playing it's role in doing the right thing!
Someday maybe if we are all lucky those who choose the inductee's will pull their heads out of their $## and the greatest will be inducted at last!

Posted by Carol on Friday, 03.14.08 @ 08:19am


im very suprised that someone who likes rock N roll would trash any band!but come on KISS not being in the HOF..,thats a shame.look who they are and what they've done.,

#1 gold record U.S. band
best live band ever
created a image no one before or after has come close too
each band member had a hit single
have had a hard metal,disco,concept,hair band and grunge album..,no other band can make that claim!!
they have inspired people from garth brooks to dime bad darrel..,man name another band that can make a claim of that scope..,please
35 years and still sellin out concerts just played infront of 85,000 in australia.

KISS is a band of the people!people have demaned KISS!
maybe record sales dont mean much but over time with each one going gold..,it means somethin to the people
when you say brittney this and that put maddona in there instaed..,yeah thats right shes stood the test of time..,brittney might not!KISS DEFINETLY HAS!!

for those who say KISS are marginal musicians go find a copy of KISS MTV unplugged'96..,its magic.its good song after good song.

funny VU's lou reed is a KISS fan and helped write "a world without heroes" that gene sang.almost all bands praise KISS and there vision and for someone to lobby AGAINST a band is unthinkable..,dave what the hell's wrong with you..,

KISS will be remember in a 100,000 years!!!!

Posted by getup on Monday, 03.17.08 @ 08:46am


A fantastic concert band, you got your money's worth whenever you attended one. Only really great songs, IMO, are 'Detroit Rock City' & 'Beth'. I don't think they should be inducted.

Posted by Paul in KY on Monday, 03.17.08 @ 11:26am


"Completely missed the point. A band worthy of the hall should (in theory) be indispensible to music history. They are rungs in a continuing ladder, not dead ends or redundancies. It's the difference between the Guinness Book of World Records and a history textbook. They're both names, places, dates, facts, and history, but one is considerably more valuable because the people and places it discusses actually matter in the long run, moreso than the fastest cup stacker or the guy with the beard of bees." -William

Worth reprinting in its entirety due to it possibly being the best post ever here. Such an excellent way of making a point - categorically brilliant.

Too bad it is wrong.

Posted by Blue on Wednesday, 03.19.08 @ 11:25am


I'm gonna have to disagree, Blue.

Unless, ofcourse, you believe that the Guiness Book of World Records is more valuable than a history textbook (I do, if in a monetary sense of value). ;D

Posted by Liam on Wednesday, 03.19.08 @ 12:20pm


"Too bad it is wrong."-Blue

An explanation would be nice.

Posted by William on Wednesday, 03.19.08 @ 14:19pm


Did it ever occur to anybody that Kiss has its place in history because of all the new recruits they brought into the rock camp.. Just think of where those kids that flocked to Kiss as their 1st exposure to ROCK might have went instead, ;like Disco, or new age....

The rock and roll industry including Jann Wenner-RS and all the other rock magazines, record stores, concert promoters, and just about anyone connected to the rock&roll industry should be quite grateful to Kiss and their fans who now probably have kids of their own that are being introduced to Rock & Roll instead of rap, or whatever other music ...

Posted by Arrow Man on Wednesday, 03.19.08 @ 14:38pm


Arrow Man is right on. KISS had more to do with the "perpetuation of rock and roll" than nearly every band not already in the Hall.

Posted by Axl on Wednesday, 03.19.08 @ 14:42pm


"Arrow Man is right on. KISS had more to do with the "perpetuation of rock and roll" than nearly every band not already in the Hall."

Bullshit. Grossly overstated hyperbole.

Posted by Blue on Wednesday, 03.19.08 @ 15:03pm


"Bullshit. Grossly overstated hyperbole."

Oh, as opposed to all of that understated hyperbole... (?)

It's not hyperbole at all. Look, as you probably know, KISS were absolutely HUGE in the 70's. Are you trying to say they didn't turn on a sizable portion of that generation to rock music?

Posted by Axl on Wednesday, 03.19.08 @ 15:16pm


I did a little looking around and found some quotes that shows the impact Kiss has made on people. Some of these are bands that are obvious, and some aren't...if anything it's a testament to how big Kiss was, and how far reaching their influence was. I love the mats and joy division, but to ever compare the impact, either on the public at large or on just musicians, that they had against that which Kiss had is foolish. And that's not a knock on the replacements or joy division, it's about sheer numbers of people reached. To not accept the fact that Kiss were a tremendously influential rock and roll band is to hide your head in the sand.

Mike McCready (Pearl Jam): "I started playing because of KISS. I was eleven. I had the KISS lunch box, everything. They were the biggest band in the world."

Dicky Barrett (The Mighty Mighty Bosstones): "We thought Detroit Rock City was the coolest KISS song of all time. Destroyer was the third album I ever owned, back when it came out. I joined the KISS Army. They gave you a patch, a postcard and a real sense of belonging."

Dave Snake Sabo (Skid Row): "I didn't even think about being a musician until I was about 13. That's when I discovered KISS and it was all over. It changed my life and I thank them every day."

Dean Delen (Stone Temple Pilots): "I remember bouncing around my bedroom playing along to KISS Alive! on an old tennis racquet... I lived for their music."

Vinnie Paul (Pantera): "I'd skip school, stay home and dress up like flapping Ace and put on KISS records. My dad got me my first guitar. It was a Gibson like Ace's and he was always behind me."

Garth Brooks: "My biggest influence through junior high was KISS... I had all of their eight-track tapes in high school, and that was my thing."

Lars Ulrich (Metallica): "Out of all the bands, I'm the one who back in 1977 would sit outside KISS' hotel room in Copenhagen to get an autograph."

Ted Nugent: "KISS and its members represent rock 'n' roll irreverence at its best, with make-up or without."

Bob Seger: "I did about 70 shows with them. Their fans, the KISS Army, were chanting KISS, KISS, KISS! The band came back and apologized later. They were great."

Kim Thayall (Soundgarden): "KISS were the reason I started playing guitar. If it wasn't for them, I'm sure I wouldn't be playing and doing what I'm doing today."

Nuno Bettencourt (Extreme): "You wanted the best, you got the best, the hottest band in the world: KISS infected me and every other kid in junior high!"

Joey Ramone (The Ramones): "I remember back in '73 when I used to hang out at the Coventry in Queens, I saw KISS in the early stages. I saw them grow. Gene would wear a black skull and crossbones t-shirt, and the band used dry ice. They gave a big concert at the Coventry to announce their signing to Casablanca Records. The band came out on stage with all this new equipment together. It was the loudest show I had ever experienced at the time. It was great! A few years later, my brother, who was friends with the designer of the KISS dolls, got us free tickets to see the band at Nassau Coliseum. This was around the time of Destroyer, which - along with the band' first LP - is my favourite KISS album. My brother and I had good seats, near the front. It was a real freak show walking in because everyone in the audience was dressed like a different member of KISS. It was amusing. I remember the stage explosions were so intense it was like getting a bad sunburn. I was definitely a fan of KISS in those early days. Detroit Rock City is one of my favorite all time KISS songs.

Nikki Sixx (Motley Crue): "When I first saw KISS, I stood in line for six hours at the Paramount Theatre in Seattle, Washington. I was sitting in the front row and when they took the stage, I knew that I wanted to have a band that was nothing less than what I saw. The theatre bug bit me. Rock 'n' roll from then on had to have an element of theatre to excite me."

Jason Newsted (ex Metallica): "One day in junior high school somebody brought the first KISS album. That pretty much changed things for me. My fourteenth birthday I asked for a bass guitar. I wanted to be Gene Simmons."

Brett Michaels (Poison): "What can I say except that KISS is and always will be one of the most entertaining and exciting bands that ever happened to rock 'n' roll. KISS has definitely left their mark in rock 'n' roll history and I consider them one of my major influences."

Patrick Badger (Extreme): "The God Of Thunder inspired me to pick up the bass and make my own thunder. Thank you Gene!"

Charlie Benante (Anthrax): "I first saw KISS in 1976 - I was very young, so I went with my cousin. I was so excited because I caught one of Ace Frehley's guitar picks. It was broken, but I didn't care. It was at Nassau Coliseum in New York. They ruled that night. After that, I went to see them every time they played for years. People sometimes said that the members in the band couldn't play their instruments, but that's bullshit. When the make-up came off, the only thing that happened was it meant Halloween is over."

Rodney Sheppard (Sugar Ray): "KISS was the single reason I wanted to get into this business. Their songs were very catchy and at such an early age for me they were very impressionable and that ended up being the single driving force why I wanted to play guitar and be in a band."

The Clown (Slipknot): "They are the reason why I play music. They are my love."

Brian May (Queen):"I like KISS a lot. Queen were often compared to KISS at the time. We were sort of counterparts. They were the American version and we were the English version."

Corey Glover (Living Colour): "KISS is living proof that rock 'n' roll will never die."

Lenny Kravitz: "I grew up on all kinds of music, soul, R & B, blues. But it was KISS who were the first group which made me think I want to be onstage doing this. They were so larger than life and so underrated and just got shit on because of their whole theatrical thing. Ace Frehley is a great guitar player."

Roger Daltrey (The Who): "I say this with regret, I never actualy saw any of KISS' live shows. But I loved them. I thought that KISS really had the right attitude. They never ever took themselves too seriously and they made some f*****g good music."

Johnny Ramone (The Ramones): "KISS is one of the most exciting and entertaining rock bands of the past 30 years."

Noddy Holder (Slade): "To me, they were the perfect American band because they took what was best about British music and Americanized it. And they certainly took the image of the glam rock thing that was happening in England. I knew KISS were very influenced by Slade. It was a great compliment for a band like KISS to mention us as an influence. They took everything that was good about Slade and took it to the farthest extreme. Like Slade, KISS did anthem songs but in an American way."

Brian Eschbach (The Black Dahlia Murder): "I could go on forever talking about KISS, but if there is only one thing to say, it is that KISS revolutionized live performance. KISS is one of the best bands I have ever seen live."

Brian Wilson (The Beach Boys): "KISS is an interesting band indeed. I like their energy."

Paul Westerberg (The Replacements): "They were the band that I was ashamed to like but I would go in my room and play 'em and love 'em. Destroyer had some great stuff on it. Completely underrated"

Paul Rodgers (Free/Bad Company) "I think KISS is absolutely amazing.They're very unique."

Little Steven: "Even though KISS' whole dressing-up thing was a gimmick, musically they're just a terrific rock 'n' roll band."

John Fannon (New England) "Everyone would probably agree that KISS' place in rock 'n' roll history has ben paved by their concept and their big theatrical show. But to me if their music didn't impact people they wouldn't still be playing in arenas. If you don't have good music and you're not a great band, you're not going to last as long as they did. Only the great bands can have the success that they've had for so long."

Julian Lennon: "One of the first albums I bought in America was KISS Alive! I listened to that nonstop way back then. When you saw this whole act that was going on with the flames and the blood and the enormity of it, it was impressive."

Posted by John on Wednesday, 03.19.08 @ 17:07pm


"It's not hyperbole at all. Look, as you probably know, KISS were absolutely HUGE in the 70's. Are you trying to say they didn't turn on a sizable portion of that generation to rock music?" -Axl

I sorta retract that last statement, Axl, as I did not read it carefull enough; my bad. I would agree with you that KISS, when considered alongside the acts NOT YET inducted, has done enough for perpetuating the cause of Rock-n-Roll
to merit serious consideration.

This in spite of them being a steaming pile of warm shit.

Posted by Blue on Thursday, 03.20.08 @ 09:47am


Ignoring the fact that they sucked weiner, I can objectively admit that they deserve consideration at least.

Still, they're probably in the bottom few as far the snubs queue is concerned, and there are acts in both the glam (Roxy Music, T Rex, Alice Cooper and others) and hard rock/heavy metal (Judas Priest, Alice Cooper Cheap Trick, Deep Purple and others) genres yet to be honoured who I believe deserve in before KISS.

I'll probably put up a new Snubs queue some time time soon.

Posted by Liam on Thursday, 03.20.08 @ 13:52pm


As far as KISS is concerned, they should be in the hall. Perhaps they're not as "deserving" as some of the above mentioned bands. I don't see the justification of putting Madonna in there...she would be better suited to be in the Pop H.O.F. The bottom line is: Rolling Stone has way too much influence on the rock hall. I agree in part concerning KISS: Not exactly super musicianship...nor spectacular songs...but their impact on rock music and showmanship, you can't deny it.

Posted by Doc on Friday, 03.21.08 @ 07:46am


kiss will never get in as long as bands LIKE SCORPIONS stay out

Posted by scorpion on Tuesday, 03.25.08 @ 14:23pm


Dave Marsh can go take a long walk off a short pier.

KISS should be in there, in my eyes.

Posted by K-Money on Sunday, 04.13.08 @ 09:24am


i see people who have started their fame 10 years after KISS and are no longer relivent while KISS just sold out 4 shows in a row down under at 50,000 people a pop..,

lil to much hate for the hottest band in the world!!

DAN LAW

Posted by getup on Tuesday, 04.15.08 @ 12:34pm


kisssssssssssssssssssssss

Posted by richard on Wednesday, 04.16.08 @ 08:42am


sorry people, but this so called hall of fame is the hall of shamefullness!!! let the people vote!!! or maybee the better solution is to open up a peoples rock and roll hall of fame!!! I am open to having it in jacksonville fl.!!! or somewhere else, as long as it is voted on by the people and having to meet how they infuenced music, stage performance or show becouse thats what the fans pay for!!! music and a show or great performance to go along with the fans vote! the current systeym stinx!!! i'm 42 years old and have listened to music my parrents listened to,up to music of today and their are honestly many so called rock bands in this so called hall of fame that are 1 hit wonders or in someones pocket!! let's open a real alternative hall of fame for the people by the people and on influence in"rock and roll" and by their truely deserved acomplishments!! not old fogy stallworthes that are on air resperators! example i came frome freehold n.j or springsteen country! do i like his music? i hate it!! but i honestly know that he deserves to be in the hall on his influence in "rock and roll" and his great stage performances!! come on 3 hour shows!!! u get more then what your paying for!!! and i can honestly say he deserves to be thier, even thouh i can't stand his music or him!!! thats the differance between my idea and the current systym, put aside your personal feelings listen to the people and look at the person or band honestly!! it only hurts the current hall of fame the way the systeym is set up now!!! many people including myself would not visit the "rock and roll" hall of fame in it's current communist systeym!!! sad but true!! oh and the perentheses on "rock and roll" hall of fame is precicely that! "rock and roll" not rap or country or any other music thats not truely "rock and roll" and it does'nt take a rocket scientist to tell the difference between rap, country and pop!! sorry!! open your own hall of fames!!!

ill2day and tommorow!!!

Posted by darren on Thursday, 04.17.08 @ 15:55pm


"let the people vote!!! or maybee the better solution is to open up a peoples rock and roll hall of fame!!!"

"The people" listen to Linkin Park and Britney Spears. So it would definitely be even worse than it is now.

...

Man, that comment's so damn long, and barely legible...can I just stop here and call you an imbecile?

Posted by Liam on Thursday, 04.17.08 @ 16:01pm


This guy is a stark raving idiot.

Posted by Wolfie on Saturday, 04.19.08 @ 18:27pm


construction, building, construction cost
none
http://blog.searchinginternet.com/main/commercial-building/

Posted by None on Saturday, 04.26.08 @ 22:54pm


KISS KICK ASS FOREVER !!!

Posted by VICTOR on Wednesday, 05.7.08 @ 23:00pm


If Kiss is inducted they should refuse to accept.

Posted by HW on Thursday, 05.8.08 @ 09:51am


I don't know how can Kiss not be in the Rock&Roll Hall of Fame, they have been rocking for 35 years and still are. They The Natural Born Headbangers! They have influenced the music so much and they are not on The Hall of Fame. They were able to compose some of teh greatest songs ever, to dress the way they want and get respected and without them there wouldn't probably thousands of bands today! PUT KISS ON THE ROCK&ROLL HALL OF FAME NOW!

Posted by Kiss' Greatest Fan on Friday, 05.9.08 @ 17:05pm


The whole idea that a rock band would not be nominated because their music was not complex or innovative enough is a joke. Rock and Roll is both musically and lyrically simplistic.

The only thing that makes rock even a relevant form of music is as: #1 a form of visual stage art/entertainment, #2 an embodiment of youth rebellion, #3 a pop-cultural phenomenon.

KISS was smart enough to realize the limitations of rock and absolutely embodies everything that makes rock a relevant art form.

If the only other criteria for letting a band in is their influence on future rock musicians then I'm not sure how KISS is not in yet. Most current rock guitarists list KISS as a major influence...even if they are embarrassed to do so.

Posted by Blaz on Tuesday, 05.13.08 @ 19:26pm


"Rock and Roll is both musically and lyrically simplistic." - Blaz

Only if you want it to be. Otherwise, no it isn't.

"The only thing that makes rock even a relevant form of music is as: #1 a form of visual stage art/entertainment, #2 an embodiment of youth rebellion, #3 a pop-cultural phenomenon." - Blaz

Guess you missed the part where Rock was (partly) turned into an art-form.

"KISS was smart enough to realize the limitations of rock and absolutely embodies everything that makes rock a relevant art form." - Blaz

Rock has no/very few limitations; that's the point of it. KISS did absolutely jack to aid rock as an art-form; if anything, they helped it not be taken seriously.

"Most current rock guitarists list KISS as a major influence...even if they are embarrassed to do so." - Blaz

Absolute BS. How many current rock guitarists do you know then? 20, maybe?

Posted by Liam on Wednesday, 05.14.08 @ 04:15am


"Rock has no/very few limitations; that's the point of it. KISS did absolutely jack to aid rock as an art-form; if anything, they helped it not be taken seriously." -Liam

Kiss absolutely aided rock as form of stage art. Their shows elevated what is expected from a band.

"Absolute BS. How many current rock guitarists do you know then? 20, maybe?"

Check out the post: John on Wednesday, 03.19.08 @ 17:07pm. There's more than 20 already and it doesn't even scratch the surface.

This will be fun, name a guitarist that came into prominence after KISS and I'll show you either a direct quote from the person naming KISS as a major influence or show you how they were influenced by KISS.

Posted by Blaz on Thursday, 05.15.08 @ 06:28am


Having a rock and roll hall of fame is kind of like having a processed cheese foods hall of fame. Cheese Wiz is a fantastic candidate for the processed cheese foods hall of fame, while it is a culinary abomination when compared to other cheese. Similarly Elvis is a musical abomination when compared to Mozart, Bach, or even Miles Davis.

Saying Velveeta does not belong in the processed cheese foods hall of fame because it does not have the complexity of flavor that Cheese Wiz does is moronic. KISS is every bit as musically complex and innovative as Elvis, if not more so...of course that isn't saying much if you're comparing them to Mozart.

It is important to understand what are the key components that make processed cheese foods superior to other cheese foods. Well, it's easier to spread, it melts better in the microwave, and it has superior shelf life. None of these criteria would ever be considered when evaluating cheese in a broader context, but they are perfectly fine ways of evaluating processed cheese foods.

So what are the important criteria that make Rock and Roll a superior or relevant art form compared to other forms of music?

If you can answer that question correctly, then it's pretty obvious why KISS should be in the rock and roll hall of fame.

Posted by blaz on Thursday, 05.15.08 @ 08:12am


"Kiss absolutely aided rock as form of stage art. Their shows elevated what is expected from a band." - Blaz

Get this straight: nothing, absolutely nothing KISS ever did was original. They came years too late to glam rock, being beaten by T. Rex, Bowie, Mott The Hopple, Slade, Alice Cooper, Queen and Roxy Music. They weren't the first of their kind to "elevate" the rock concert, as they were beaten by Alice Cooper and others.

"There's more than 20 already and it doesn't even scratch the surface." - Blaz

It's funny, because loads of those 'citations' of influence (I cba checking them out) only look like fan messages. Just because Brian Wilson thought they were an "interesting band indeed" doesn't mean he was influenced by them at all.

It's interesting how Brian Wilson and plenty others in that list don't actually play guitar.

"name a guitarist that came into prominence after KISS and I'll show you either a direct quote from the person naming KISS as a major influence or show you how they were influenced by KISS." - Blaz

The "coming into prominence" bit is irrelevant since you said "most rock guitarists." But here goes (if you've heard of them):

Andy Patridge, Andy Gill, John Squire, Johnny Marr, Bernard Sumner, Thurston Moore, Lee Ranaldo, Curt Kirkwood, Will Sergeant, Mick Harvey, Rowland Howard, Robin Guthrie, Porl Thompson, Martin Gore, Vini Reilly, Pete Greenway, Jeffrey Lee Pierce, Geordie Walker, Pete Shelley, Steve Diggle, Barry Adamson, Tom Greenhalgh, Roger Miller, Clint Conley, Keith Levene, Mark Webber, Gareth Sager, David Thomas, Keith Moliné, John Ashton, Robert Smith, Robyn Hitchcock, Bruce Gilbert, William Reid, Kevin Shields, Bilinda Butcher, Wayne Coyne, Joey Santiago, Jason Pierce, Peter Buck, Huw Bunford, Graham Coxon, Gaz Coombes, Noel Gallagher, Jonny Greenwood, Ed O'Brien, Thom Yorke, Kele Okeroke, Alex Kapranos and Nick McCarthy. (not that they're the only ones).

Posted by Liam on Thursday, 05.15.08 @ 08:28am


I suggest everyone look up "The Crazy World of Arthur Brown"

Posted by Dameon on Thursday, 05.15.08 @ 10:46am


Musically speaking, I can't think of a single band or solo act that is original, outside of maybe Zappa. Originality can hardly be a factor in determining who gets in the hall, otherwise it would be a lonely hall.

Posted by John on Thursday, 05.15.08 @ 21:01pm


"Musically speaking, I can't think of a single band or solo act that is original, outside of maybe Zappa." - John

Then you're ignorant to the extreme, John.

Posted by Liam on Friday, 05.16.08 @ 08:21am


KISS influence a broad range of rock both stylistically and musically.

A quick rundown of bands they've influenced by rock genre:

Industrial Rock:
Trent Reznor(NIN):

"I loved Kiss when I was growing up. At puberty they were there to rescue me from a life of athleticism - failed athleticism."

Alternative:
Stone Temple Pilots-
Eric Kretz: "I think I was ten or eleven. My older brother had the KISS Alive II album and I would spin it and stare at the pictures and see Peter Criss’ enormous drum kit. And I would listen to his drum solo in “God Of Thunder” and I would be so emotionally overwhelmed at how great that sound was. "

In 1992 the Stone Temple Pilots did an entire show in Kiss make-up

Tom Morello (Rage Against the Machine, Audioslave): I was thirteen when I first picked (a guitar) up. I wanted to learn how to play Detroit Rock City by Kiss

Grunge:
Dinosaur Jr-
Covered "Goin Blind" on tribute album "KISS my Ass"

The Melvins-
Covered "Goin Blind" on 2 albums
Covered "God of Thunder" on "Spin the Bottle: An All Star Tribute to KISS"

Mike McCready (Pearl Jam): "I started playing because of KISS. I was eleven. I had the KISS lunch box, everything. They were the biggest band in the world."

Nirvana-
Cobain was influenced by KISS directly and through the Melvins(See Below)

Nirvana covered "Do You Love Me?" on "Hard to Believe: A KISS Covers Album"

Metal:
Lars Ulrich (Metallica): "Out of all the bands, I'm the one who back in 1977 would sit outside KISS' hotel room in Copenhagen to get an autograph."

Jason Newsted (ex Metallica): "One day in junior high school somebody brought the first KISS album. That pretty much changed things for me. My fourteenth birthday I asked for a bass guitar. I wanted to be Gene Simmons."

Glam Rock:
Brett Michaels (Poison): "What can I say except that KISS is and always will be one of the most entertaining and exciting bands that ever happened to rock 'n' roll. KISS has definitely left their mark in rock 'n' roll history and I consider them one of my major influences.

Pop Rock:
Lenny Kravitz - along with Stevie Wonder recorded a cover of "Deuce" for "KISS My Ass"

Posted by stan on Saturday, 05.17.08 @ 05:51am


Poison is a case against KISS, not for.

Posted by Liam on Saturday, 05.17.08 @ 09:14am


"Poison is a case against KISS, not for." - Liam

Why because you don't like their music?

Honestly, I don't like Poison either, or most glam rock bands. The point was to show a broad range of influence, whether you or I like the bands they influenced is irrelevant.



Posted by stan on Saturday, 05.17.08 @ 10:18am


It's pretty useless when you start citing sh*tty influence. Or I guess you're gonna let in, say, Green Day in for allowing all this crappy pop-punk revival?

I don't "like" Poison's music because it is worthless, scummy and generic to the max.

Posted by Liam on Saturday, 05.17.08 @ 10:25am


"I don't "like" Poison's music because it is worthless, scummy and generic to the max." - Liam

Again, irrelevant, but I'll cite another musician from the same genre if it makes you happy. I'm sure I could find 50 other if I had the time.

Slash: I think Steve Adler was the lug that pushed me to pick up the guitar, because at the time we were like 14-15 years old when we first started hanging out and he had this electric guitar at his grandmothers house in Hollywood, that he would pick up after work, and when we were supposed to be going to school, we would ditch and go to his grandmothers house and crank up these KISS records

"And so when I went to go started, it was because our old drummer, Steven Adler had a guitar. He put a Kiss record on and took the guitar. He would just bang on it. And that gave me a hard-on."



Also, Rob Zombie, Slash, Tommy Lee, Scott Ian and Gilby Clarke covered God of Thunder during the VH1 Rock Honors for KISS.

Posted by stan on Saturday, 05.17.08 @ 11:05am


You know Devo covered the Stones' "Satisfaction," but that's not saying they were influenced musically (especially if you listen to it).

Posted by William on Saturday, 05.17.08 @ 11:35am


"You know Devo covered the Stones' "Satisfaction," but that's not saying they were influenced musically (especially if you listen to it)." - William

All of the cover songs I listed came off albums made specifically in Tribute to KISS. The songs listed are not exactly Top 40 material, the bands would have had to have bought the albums and listened to know the songs.

I guess if that's not enough then there are other sources:

Kurt Cobain From Rolling Stone's Biography of Nirvana
"As a child (Cobain) loved the Beatles, but by nine discovered the heavier music of Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, and Kiss."

From Rolling Stone's Review of "Kiss my A**"
"(KISS) has been cited as an influence by numerous artists, from Seattle pioneers the Melvins (who appeared, along with Nirvana, on an earlier Kiss cover album) to Garth Brooks. This tribute, aptly titled Kiss My Ass, celebrates the unabashed pleasures of vintage hard rock."

Posted by stan on Saturday, 05.17.08 @ 16:54pm


Liam questions the influence Kiss has had, then when shown the influence states that it doesn't count because he doesn't like the bands that were influenced...perhaps the most childish and irrelevant argument on this board.

It's a great big world, Liam, with all kinds of genres of rock and roll which all impact different people. We don't all have to like it, and I'm not a huge fan of hard rock/heavy metal, but to dismiss it's impact and relevance to others is perhaps the ultimate ignorance. Being contrary just to be contrary doesn't make you seem knowledgeable, it makes you seem pompous.

Posted by John on Saturday, 05.17.08 @ 22:00pm


Stan I agree with you wholeheartedly about Kiss. I even like all of the references you had on who they influenced. The best part is because both Liam and William again were against Kiss. You bring up their oh so great inlfuence on criteria...shove it right up their wazoo..and they still cry..no those bands wern't influenced or they were crappy bands! So little Willy go take Lame for a walk right out of here.

Posted by moterfly on Sunday, 05.18.08 @ 01:45am


"Liam questions the influence Kiss has had," - John

Nope, I questioned the idea that "almost all" current rock guitarists took influence from KISS. Try reading, John.

"then when shown the influence states that it doesn't count because he doesn't like the bands that were influenced" - John

Never realised that Poison were multiple groups. Nice try.

"perhaps the most childish and irrelevant argument on this board." - John

Yeah, again with the (lack of) reading, John.

"but to dismiss it's impact and relevance to others is perhaps the ultimate ignorance." - John

Show me where I ever did that, idiot.

"You bring up their oh so great inlfuence [sic] on criteria...shove it right up their wazoo..and they still cry..no those bands wern't influenced or they were crappy bands!" - motersh*t

I don't actually understand why anyone would honour a band if all they were responsible for was more muck. No, before you throw out yet more juvenile gay jokes, I'm not specifically referring to KISS, just bands in general. Do you put in Green Day for allowing the god-awful pop-punk revival that's been going for around 15 years?

Not that I actually give a crap about anything you have to say, motersh*t. I'm just interested to see if you can go five minutes without using any unfunny, juvenile gay jokes. Unlikely, that.

Posted by Liam on Sunday, 05.18.08 @ 04:43am


"Do you put in Green Day for allowing the god-awful pop-punk revival that's been going for around 15 years?" -Liam

Actually, yeah.

Since when is taste one of your criteria, Liam? I always thought you were on board with William in that your personal taste has nothing to do with the criteria for induction.

Kiss deserves induction, yes or no? I say yes.

Posted by mel on Sunday, 05.18.08 @ 05:25am


Mel you have to look at it this way. If William and Liam like a band then their influence is of the highest. Now Liam hates Poison so therefore if they were influenced by KISS its a bad influence. So their personal tastes come out with what they think of KISS. And not that I give a crap what either of you two think either! Your bias just shines as bright as day. And as for you Willam about Pearl Jam not sounding like any of the others you mentioned a week ago. Sooundgarden..yes..Mudhoney..yes..Temple of the Dog..yes..mother Love Bone....yes...Stone Temple Pilots...yes..Nirvana....yes. It's amazing you you lump all the 80's metal together yet seem to think those grunge bands all sounded different. BIAS BIAS BIAS BIAS!

Posted by moterfly on Sunday, 05.18.08 @ 05:35am


I just fail to see any logic behind honouring the sowers of the crap crops. I say that personal taste isn't a factor for the band whose case is being made. I don't think "personal taste" makes any difference to the fact (yes, it's stone-cold FACT) that Fall Out Boy and Panic! At The Disco are totally worthless.

I suppose you could make a case for KISS based on the influence, but you can't put them in before the other notable glam snubs (Roxy Music, Mott The Hopple, Alice Cooper, T. Rex, Slade) are put in. I sure as hell am not going to openly advocate for their induction, though.

Posted by Liam on Sunday, 05.18.08 @ 05:40am


It is your personal taste! Just as you stated "I just fail to see any logic behind honoring the sowers of the crap crops." That is your personal opinion of all of the groups. They are not ones that YOU like so therfore the influence is negative. Just admit it. You've been caught.All this being objective crap you've spewed is BS. Get off your pedastal because everyone now sees what your really like. If you live in a glass house don't throw rocks.

Posted by moterfly on Sunday, 05.18.08 @ 05:53am


"If William and Liam like a band then their influence is of the highest." - moterfly

I like The Charlatans (UK). Their influence is almost non-existant. Try again.

"Now Liam hates Poison so therefore if they were influenced by KISS its a bad influence. So their personal tastes come out with what they think of KISS." - moterfly

"Personal taste" fails to change the fact that '80s hair metal is among the most generic, repetitive and worthless music ever to be written.

"And not that I give a crap what either of you two think either!" - moterfly

That's why you keep talking to me, right?

"And as for you Willam about Pearl Jam not sounding like any of the others you mentioned a week ago. Sooundgarden..yes..Mudhoney..yes..Temple of the Dog..yes..mother Love Bone....yes...Stone Temple Pilots...yes..Nirvana....yes." - moterfly

What is it with you and grunge? I'm not even a grunge fan, you idiot.

William was talking about the heaps upon heaps of post-grunge bands that directly ripped off Pearl Jam. I don't understand HOW Mother Love Bone or Temple of The Dog could have taken ANY influence from Pearl Jam. Soundgarden, Nirvana and Mudhoney took no influence from PJ. Simply sounding similiar to someone doesn't mean you've been influenced by them.

I've never lumped "'80s metal" together. When have I put Metallica, The Melvins, Guns N' Roses, Jane's Addiction and Faith No More in the same bag?

"It's amazing you you lump all the 80's metal together yet seem to think those grunge bands all sounded different." - moterfly

Find me the comment where I said anything to that effect.

Posted by Liam on Sunday, 05.18.08 @ 06:00am


"It is your personal taste! Just as you stated "I just fail to see any logic behind honoring the sowers of the crap crops." That is your personal opinion of all of the groups. They are not ones that YOU like so therfore the influence is negative." - moterfly

Except for the part where there's often a massive difference between what I like and what I think is good. I hate Jane's Addiction's stuff, but I can, now, at least admit its worthiness.

Maybe you're one to consider everything you don't like as "bad." Maybe but I'm not.

Posted by Liam on Sunday, 05.18.08 @ 06:04am


Again your opinion of 80's hair metal. So again your comment of KISS influencing Poison as devalueing KISS as an influence. As for the Pearl Jam comment that was to William from last week. Just admit it Liam that your personal taste comes in to play...especially more if you can't stand a band. My god I'm not the only one to comment on that.

Posted by moterfly on Sunday, 05.18.08 @ 06:08am


"Just admit it Liam that your personal taste comes in to play...especially more if you can't stand a band. My god I'm not the only one to comment on that." - moterfly

Back up your argument; show some examples. I'll remind you that I actually went and said KISS should be inducted eventually.

Posted by Liam on Sunday, 05.18.08 @ 06:14am


I don't consider everything that I don't like as bad. I have never cared for 99% of the Beattles music...I don't buy it... I turn the radio when their on....but they are not bad. It just seems to me that if you don't like a certain genre of music..if they are influential...it is degrading. I'll admit it I love the Bulletboyz!! Are they HOF material...maybe in their hometown!

Posted by moterfly on Sunday, 05.18.08 @ 06:16am


Bullet Boyz - Smooth Up In Ya! - Very good!

Not like the Beatles - very sad.

Instead of this lame arguement fight over Kiss - let's go back to the conversation regarding influence and exactly how it should be viewed. Stan brought up a few excellent points which we carried over on the "Induction Criteria" board.

Posted by Dameon on Sunday, 05.18.08 @ 07:16am


Dameon what about..hard as a rock!!! Oh yeah baby!Liam I again tried the Cocteau Twins for the fifth time. It's not happening brother. And you never answered my question of the chick singer being in Roxette. My new hall of fame voting commitee William/Liam/Dameon(myself of course). And for a little fun to see if someone gets arrested, the great and almighty (in his/her own mind) MOTERFLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AHHHHHHHHHHH!

Posted by dano on Sunday, 05.18.08 @ 07:24am


I would get the over riding vote with the Liam and Will(liam) loser twins.

Posted by moterfly on Sunday, 05.18.08 @ 07:26am


""Personal taste" fails to change the fact that '80s hair metal is among the most generic, repetitive and worthless music ever to be written." - Liam

Ummm, "Love Me Do" is, for the record, the most repetitive, generic, and worthless piece of crap ever written. However, I'm not going to dismiss the Beatles as irrelevant.

The Beatles popularized a style of music that had been previously inaccessible. I know you're going to say that they went on to make better music, but they would have never gotten there without the abysmal crap they pedaled to begin with.

Similarly, 80's Hair Metal may not be your thing, but it was a stepping stone to greater things.

Posted by stan on Sunday, 05.18.08 @ 08:14am


I have gone back and read your posts, Liam, and have to say that I was probably unfair in the way that I categorized your opinion, perhaps it was the tone that I read into your posts that turned me off...In fact, mostly all of your posts I agree with, aside from the one that T.Rex and Roxy Music deserve consideration ahead of Kiss...ultimately I suppose that none of it matters much...but it's still kinda fun to argue about!
I don't believe Kiss is as great a band as many on here proclaim, nor are they as awful as some wish to state....I still firmly believe, however, that they are very influential...as far as being called an idiot, I can't argue that point...my girlfriend calls me one everyday...and she's almost never wrong.

Posted by John on Sunday, 05.18.08 @ 21:04pm


T. Rex created the glam rock/hard rock genre, and it ripped off non-stop during the '70s and earlytomid '80s. Roxy Music pre-dated the New Wave by a good few years, created its sound, and are a HUGE influence to it (especially the New Romantics). So no, KISS aren't ahead of either of them, I'm afraid.

Posted by Liam on Monday, 05.19.08 @ 11:04am


Regarding stage shows and look - you want to check out Arthur Brown who pre-dated them all when it came to this. T-Rex may have released their first album about 6 months prior to The Crazy World of Arthur Brown.

Posted by Dameon on Monday, 05.19.08 @ 11:41am


Although a fan, my biggest problem with T-Rex is that after Electric Warrior came out, there were too many songs on subsequent albums that sounded a tad too much like Get It On(Bang a Gong) for me, although everyone out there should run out and pick up Dandy In The Underworld..an album that barely made a splash over here but deserves to be listened to. As for Roxy Music, I only have the Avalon album so I can't comment a whole lot on their body of work. Great songs on that album, but I have to be in the right mood for Bryan Ferry's voice.

Posted by John on Monday, 05.19.08 @ 16:07pm


i could not agree better with paul stanleys comment any better about the hall of fame.......some and most deserve to be there .but some are a joke......the sex pistols.......come on...........kiss werent the greatest band but they are a great band.....even alice cooper is not in there???????? kiss were and are pioneers in rockn roll and deserve to be inducted......look how long it took for sabbath to get there.......once again heavy metal/hard rock always has to fight for what it is.........we are the most loyal fan base out there for any kind of genre of music.............how about priest, maiden metallica.................i just dont get it

Posted by bobby on Friday, 05.30.08 @ 23:05pm


Actually, if you'd bothered to do the research, you'd know that the Sex Pistols have masses more influence than KISS could ever dream of.

Posted by Liam on Saturday, 05.31.08 @ 04:24am


KISS IS BY FAR THE HOTTEST BAND IN THE WORLD!
The boys music has recently pulled me out of a terrible health crisis. Gene Simmons is my mentor in life. Paul Stanley is one of the finest vocalist in music today!Peter Criss adds the passion to the band and one hell of a beat! Ace Frehley is by far my greatest guitar hero! Eric Carr (RIP), Bruce Kulick & Eric Singer should also be included for their enormous commitments to the band they belong in, KISS, IS Rock! Yet Eminem, a rapper, will be inducted? This R&R Hall of fame should be for rockers ONLY! It reminds me of another childhood to present favorite band who is being lambasted by Rolling Stain Magazine, The Monkees. Who says who is not Rock & Roll?

Posted by Kevin Stafford on Saturday, 06.7.08 @ 10:51am


"Rock! Yet Eminem, a rapper, will be inducted? This R&R Hall of fame should be for rockers ONLY!"

Yet Eminem, someone with discernable talent, will be inducted? This R&R Hall of Fame should be for talentles, generic corporate bullsh*t ONLY!

Posted by Liam on Saturday, 06.7.08 @ 12:58pm


All this talk of KISS music being crap or basic - have any of you tried playing some of their stuff? How about the drums on some of the earlier music? How about keeping up with Eric Carr on numerous albums or Peter Criss with his jazz, hard rock combinations? Kiss is the first one to say they never wanted to be known as the Eddie Van Halens or whatevers, they played simple son gs that people could sing to and remember. But yeah once in awhile they let it all go and played til it hurt - KISS never mimicked Alice Cooper they took his stage idea of wearing make-up to a whole new level just as Alice took Vaudville to a new level - everyone copies someone, even Elvis copied! Regardless of the music, KISS has made an influence of R&R forever and for that and their accomplishments for 35+ years they should be inducted but I think if they were Paul Stanley just might not show up - good for you Paul!!

Posted by Ron on Thursday, 06.12.08 @ 21:27pm


"everyone copies someone,"

There goes your credibility.

Posted by Liam on Friday, 06.13.08 @ 05:12am


'"everyone copies someone,"

There goes your credibility.' - liam

I don't get this line? Are you saying that no one is ever influenced by another artist?

I think the point is valid. Saying KISS owes everything to Alice Cooper because they took what he did and added something to it is like saying the Beatles owe everything to Chuck Berry.

I don't think you have to be the first to do something, it will always be possible to find someone who did something similar to what you've done in the past, it's the nature of a progressive art form.

I think you need to judge by the end product, or what was added to what came before them. KISS certainly had the best, or one of the best live shows of their era and it was certainly unique.

Posted by stan on Friday, 06.13.08 @ 06:19am


"I don't get this line? Are you saying that no one is ever influenced by another artist?"

Except there's a rather large difference between taking influence from something ands coying it.

"Saying KISS owes everything to Alice Cooper because they took what he did and added something to it is like saying the Beatles owe everything to Chuck Berry."

Ironic. Just a shame for you that the Beatles do owe everything they did to other artists, just a few more than Chuck Berry.

KISS do owe Alice Cooper, but not solely him. They also owe T. Rex and a slew of earlier and better glam rockers.

"I don't think you have to be the first to do something, it will always be possible to find someone who did something similar to what you've done in the past, it's the nature of a progressive art form."

OK, then who was doing what Public Image Ltd. did? No, not who PiL took influence from, who had done EXACTLY what they had previously done.

(I have more examples if need's be)

"KISS certainly had the best, or one of the best live shows of their era and it was certainly unique."

Yeah, if by "unique," you mean "derivative" and/or "generic."

Posted by Liam on Friday, 06.13.08 @ 06:43am


Yeah, that's quite a lot of typos.

Posted by Liam on Friday, 06.13.08 @ 06:48am


The bigger question should be is who really cares what Public Image did? But then, who really cares about what KISS did either! Although I will admit that when they close the book on Rock and Roll, Rock, Punk, Contemporary Music, etc., KISS will have a larger footnote than P.I.

Induct Iggy already!

Posted by Blah-blah-blah on Friday, 06.13.08 @ 09:33am


"The bigger question should be is who really cares what Public Image did?"

Hmm, how's about the legions of musicians who are indebted to their any innovations of/within post-punk, post-rock and chamber-rock?

"But then, who really cares about what KISS did either!"

Idiots.

"Although I will admit that when they close the book on Rock and Roll, Rock, Punk, Contemporary Music, etc., KISS will have a larger footnote than P.I."

So that's the conclusion you came to, is it? You looked at all the facts, and that's what you came up with? Or is it yet another case of "KISS are famous and I like them so there important!"?

Posted by Liam on Friday, 06.13.08 @ 13:04pm


Yes -I looked at all the facts that have been presented and KISS will indeed have a bigger footnote than Public Image. KISS rots and sux, but their bizarre impact on the music scene as a whole is much greater than P.I. Maybe it was the campyness of it all - who knows.

Did you say legions of musicians? You are kidding right? By the way you speak, you would think that Post-Punk; Post-Rock and Chamber-Rock are the foundation of the Rock and Roll World. I don't think so.

When is IGGY getting in? His peanut butter spread has more impact than either band put together.

Posted by blah-blah-blah on Friday, 06.13.08 @ 13:34pm


That's why there are so many memorable Iggy Pop songs, right? Oh, hang on, I can't think of any. Maybe if the man had some talent, he wouldn't have to be a worthless exhibitionist whose only abilities are taking off his shirt and showing us how skinny he is from all the crack he does.

Posted by Metalsmith on Friday, 06.13.08 @ 13:41pm


M.S. - Don't get me wrong; I may not like the music of KISS, but I certainly respect what they have done. Same with P.I., but I stand by my comment that KISS will leave a much larger legacy that P.I. Personally, I prefer the non make-up wearing KISS. I happen to think that Bruce Kulick brought some musicianship to the band.

The appeal of Iggy has more to do with his influence on the musical landscape than any one specific song he wrote. If you were to draw a family tree of Rock and Roll, KISS and P.I. would be branches on the tree. The Stooges would be one of the roots of the tree. And this is why I think he belongs. And judging by your moniker here, I think someone who enjoys the harder Rock genres would appreciate The Stooges a little more.

Posted by blah-blah-blah on Friday, 06.13.08 @ 14:28pm


"That's why there are so many memorable Iggy Pop songs, right? Oh, hang on, I can't think of any."-Metalsmith

Color me surprised.

Iggy's a streetwalking cheetah with a heart full of napalm. Doesn't matter if you think it's memorable. And since you're a Motorhead fan, might as well mention that guys like The Stooges, the MC5, and other early punkers were big influences on Motorhead's sound.

Posted by William on Saturday, 06.14.08 @ 00:47am


"KISS rots and sux, but their bizarre impact on the music scene as a whole is much greater than P.I. Maybe it was the campyness of it all - who knows."

So, what is is that KISS did that outweighted: turning punk rock into post-punk; turning post-punk into chamber-rock; and sowing the seeds of post-rock?

"Did you say legions of musicians? You are kidding right? By the way you speak, you would think that Post-Punk; Post-Rock and Chamber-Rock are the foundation of the Rock and Roll World. I don't think so."

If you can't see the rapid growth of those three sub-genres during the past thity years or so (especially during the late '80s and '90s), then you ought to try doing some research.

Posted by Liam on Saturday, 06.14.08 @ 06:30am


She's got a T.V. eye on him, afterall.

Posted by Liam on Saturday, 06.14.08 @ 06:35am


Plus, it's "PiL" if you're going to abbreviate the name, not "P.I." Doesn't really suggest much familiarity with the group.

Posted by Liam on Saturday, 06.14.08 @ 07:59am


You are kidding with this comment? How old are you - 5?

Posted by blah-blah-blah on Saturday, 06.14.08 @ 09:34am


Research music? Are you serious?

Posted by blah-blah-blah on Saturday, 06.14.08 @ 09:48am


Yes, I'm entirely serious. You're on a music discussion site, so researching music should happen by default. Or do you like being completely out of touch?

Posted by Liam on Saturday, 06.14.08 @ 10:31am


No it shouldn't you idiot. This site is not a career or special project and there is no reason to research what I already know. So if I want to use P.I. or PiL or shitwad, the fact of the matter is that Public Image is a minor footnote in the history of contemporary music. Johnny Lydon may not be, but the band is. KISS will have a bigger footnote and it doesn't matter what you or I may think of the band. And as for Chamber Rock and whatever other category you want to mention; they will never be the foundation, only a new room in the house. Preety much small rooms; perhaps the attic rooms.

On the lighter side, I will always remember how Henry Rollins described Johnny Lydon. He called him a cute little lapdog. LMFAO!

Get Iggy inducted! WIthout the Stooges, everything associated with punk does not even exist.

Posted by blah-blah-blah on Saturday, 06.14.08 @ 17:06pm


"the fact of the matter is that Public Image is a minor footnote in the history of contemporary music."

Of course, because if you say so they must be. Great argument.

Next time I want no one to take me seriously I'll give you a call, K?

Posted by Liam on Sunday, 06.15.08 @ 04:12am


If KISS doesn't deserve to be in the Rock Hall, I don't know who does...I've never seen anything close to a rock n roll show that could touch KISS. Those boys know how to put on a show, and their music is excellent too...raunchy, loud, and most of all FUN!!! Isn't that what rock n roll is supposed to be about??? The fact that these guys aren't in the rock hall is an absolute joke.

Posted by Dennis Brockman on Sunday, 06.15.08 @ 04:17am


"raunchy, loud, and most of all FUN!!! Isn't that what rock n roll is supposed to be about???"

Not at all. If it was, then Robert Smith would be out of a job.

Posted by Liam on Sunday, 06.15.08 @ 04:19am


Having looked at this site for a couple of days now, I can already see that most people don't take you seriously.

Posted by blah-blah-blah on Sunday, 06.15.08 @ 07:06am


At least I've, you know, actually bothered to do some research, as opposed to your display of wilfull ignorance.

Posted by Liam on Sunday, 06.15.08 @ 08:24am


Well, I have done my research on this website and have found that you are quite annoying. Has anyone told you that you are a lame asshole?

Posted by blah-blah-blah on Sunday, 06.15.08 @ 08:50am


This is the first time I've posted here, but it is not the first time I've been on this site. I'm interested in what some people here are using for the measuring sticks of influence & innovation, most specifically Liam & perhaps William. I cannot help but notice the painfully one-sided way you view the acts you appreciate, Liam, while casting doubt on artists like Kiss. Whenever you are trapped in a corner by someone in this on-running debate, you put up blinders and simply deny the worth of the act. I actually have little problem w/ some of your moves here. I appreciate both Kiss & the Velvet Underground (to bring in one of your favorite examples). I'm more interested in what you're basing your own I&I criteria on. You seem to want to find some concrete argument for your own favorites, and the only way to do so would be w/ some kind of statistics, yet the only real stats would be the # of albums sold. I readily agree w/ anyone who says albums sold are not the whole picture, yet I can think of no other concrete #'s to work with. I know the R&R Hall is not Cooperstown, but you seem to be searching for a solid method of sorts to use here. What are your I&I qualifications, and just exactly how do acts like Kiss fail here?

Posted by Cheesecrop on Sunday, 06.15.08 @ 09:48am


I would guess influence can only be measured by other muscians. If a musician mentions another as an influence, then he was. I would imagine that some publications, writers and critics have an opinion on influence as well.

Hey Liam - It seems you made a new friend. You should be a politican. I can see you as the Prime Minister of England one day. WW III wouldn't be far behind (Only kidding buddy).

Happy Fathers Day to all of you and your fathers and their fathers.

Papa - rest in peace.

Posted by Dameon on Sunday, 06.15.08 @ 12:34pm


"I'm interested in what some people here are using for the measuring sticks of influence & innovation, most specifically Liam & perhaps William."

How's about our own knowledge.

"I cannot help but notice the painfully one-sided way you view the acts you appreciate, Liam, while casting doubt on artists like Kiss."

If you'll move your eye up the page, you'll see that I've actually been advocating KISS. Nice try.

"What are your I&I qualifications, and just exactly how do acts like Kiss fail here?"

Again: try reading the page, and you'll see it a little differently.

ps: they aren't "my" qualifications. They've actually been put in place by the HoF itself.

Posted by Liam on Sunday, 06.15.08 @ 15:00pm


You are such a hypocrite. You state one use their own knowledge, especially you whem judging influence, yet you ramble on to me about doing research. I guess you feel that your knowledge is vastly superior to everyobe elses. I doubt that very much. I think you are nothing more than some silly groupie.

Posted by blah-blah-blah on Monday, 06.16.08 @ 03:45am


Dameon - Your post on I&I might be open for interpretation in regards to musicians saying they were influenced by one another. Still cool though.

Liam - Reading 400 or so posts can be exhausting, in addition to which you may lose track from time to time as a reader. I've no doubt you have defended Kiss at one point, and that I am in the wrong in saying otherwise. If you could be so kind as to reprint just two or three lines where you advocate the band's induction, and the reasons why, doubtless I will stand happily corrected.

As to the notion of I&I, would it not be correct to say that instrumental technology would have a say in this matter? Advances in electronics over the years would have a neutralizing effect on this criteria, no matter who employed them, by definition of their advancement themselves.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Monday, 06.16.08 @ 04:28am


Cheesecrop,

Lines from Liam on KISS: "What can I say that hasn't already been said?"

How about:

'KISS suck',
'Don't induct KISS',
'don't ever listen to KISS',
'don't call KISS 'musicians''?

just a few examples there!

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

I don't think Liam once gave a glad hand to KISS. But no one should expect that from someone who states and I quote - "Beatles are one of the most hideously over rated artists EVER, If not THE most over rated."

I am not comparing KISS to the Beatles; but just trying to give you an idea of Liam's thought process.


Posted by Eric on Monday, 06.16.08 @ 07:51am


And I'll stand by that statement. Everything pre-Rubber Soul is generic, pathetic garbage ("She loves you YEAH YEAH YEAH"), and even their stuff from after that isn't deserving of many of the praises they have been awarded. You know, like when Rolling Stone named Sgt. Pepper the greatest album of all time, when in reality, it's not even the Beatles best.

But of course, since you clearly go with the massive double standard surrounding the Beatles, there's no real arguing with you.

Posted by Liam on Monday, 06.16.08 @ 09:46am


i would not say that A hard day's night (the album ) is garbage. And I love her i.e is a pretty beautifull song. A hard day's night and can't buy me love are surely not their best songs but they are classics.
By the way you're saying that yesterday is also garbage (not my favorite song )but come on many of the greatest have sung that song

Posted by roméo on Monday, 06.16.08 @ 10:00am


A Hard Day's Night? Barely. A few bits of OK-ish generic pop, I suppose, but nothing spectacular.

I utterly despise "Yesterday," actually. Honestly, it's among the most rancid, cloying pieces of crap I've ever heard. Just like "Eleanor Rigby," except the latter is nice for singing along to occasionaly.

Posted by Liam on Monday, 06.16.08 @ 10:28am


First off, I only mention your comments about the Beatles as a reasoning for some of your thought process. Most of your appreciation lies with bands that may have had some success, but not the mega-success that the Beatles and KISS can boast of. It is just an observation.

As for your comment, it makes zero sense. Whether Sgt. Pepper was or wasn't the Beatles best is not the point. And it certainly does not matter if the pre-Rubber Soul albums were garbage, which they weren't. For anyone to make such a ridiculous statement just boggles the mind. In itself, just the fact that those albums were all pretty much self contained was a gigantic influence in popular music. Keith Richards has been quoted as saying that if it weren't for the Beatles, he doubts whether Mick and himself would have ever tried to write their own music back in the beginning.

The only reality that you have based your comments on has to do with your taste in music and nothing else. Just admit that and be done with it.

I don't comment much here, but I have read many of your comments. You blast people as Fanboys when they comment about their wanting a band inducted, yet your commentary is full of exactly what you deride them for.

I read one comment on this KISS board that listed about 15 musicians from prominent bands crossing different genres of music labeling KISS as an influence or inspiration. And I am sure we can find a hundred others. Did KISS write and record anything substantial; probably not. They wrote anthemic teenage adrenalin pumping songs. Did KISS as a band cause thousands of these kids to form their own bands; hell yeah! Was KISS self-promoting whores, yes! Does it matter, no! Should KISS be inducted into the Hall of Fame, I think so. But I am not the one that votes on it and neither are you.

Posted by Eric on Monday, 06.16.08 @ 10:29am


I like plenty of relatively-unsuccesful (as I see it) bands, such as the Birthday Party and the Red Krayola, and I also like quite a few mega-succeses, such as Led Zeppelin and David Bowie. I even like the Beatles stuff from when they started writing songs and not worthless dirge like the debut.

I honestly couldn't care about what Mick and Keef think of the Beatles' early material, nor anybody else for that matter. The Beatles early material is generic beyond belief, and it's really not worth listening to when you put it up against some of the pioneering works of the time, like Captain Beefheart, the VU or Frank Zappa. If I want plain '60s pop, I'll take the Kinks, K Thanx?

Posted by Liam on Monday, 06.16.08 @ 10:38am


Zappa And Beefheart; excellent choices if I might say did not actually release any self-contained material until after 1965 (unless their is music that I am unaware of which is always possible. I know of none in eithers discography). This does not include the work that Zappa had done on some soundtracks in the early 60's. Therefore you cannot use either one of them as a standard when looking at the albums released by the Beatles in 1963, 1964, and ealy 1965. Nor did either one of these musical geniuses have to deal with the pressure that was associated with the Beatles. Let's not forget that music is a business. As for the Kinks; great band whom I rate right up their with the Who and the Stones. However, the Beatles were the first of that scene, therefore they win that race. So try another arguement. Besides, if the best you can do is say that the Beatles music was not as complex as Zappa's, well neither is anyone elses, especially prior to 1967, unless of course you want to bring Jazz into the conversation.

Every individual has their own likes and dislikes. There is certainly no objectivity involved when we making these comments. What makes the Beatles stand out is the progression of the sound through their recording career and that is what makes them stand front and center.

But let's leave the Beatles, Kinks and Zappa for a moment (they are already in the Hall) and get back to KISS. We can both agree that musically they were neither revolutionary or masterful. We had heard it before. But what I can clearly see, you do not seem to accept. If influence is defined by the number of people who became interested in an artform whether as an artist or just as a spectator because of another artist, then that artist must be considered influential. And if that influence leads to the continuation or perpetuation (stated Hall criteria) of the artform, then they should be inducted. Therefore, KISS is worthy of induction.

It has been a pleasure Liam.

Posted by Eric on Monday, 06.16.08 @ 11:12am


Liam

One more thing. Please do not bring the Velvet Underground into this conversation. Without Warhol financing them to do whatever they liked without any repercussions, they wouldn't have lasted a year. Those are Lou Reed's words.

Posted by Eric on Monday, 06.16.08 @ 11:20am


Happy to find someone who does not like yesterday and Eleanor Rigby. I just think that ifI would have been there in the 60s I would have probably begun listening to them with hard day's night.
I agree there is nothing really amazing in this album but it is quite good pop, it is at least interesting to see where it began to be interesting , if you know what I mean.
Nobody would say that their firts albums are great it would be ridiculous.

Concerning Kiss I would say no, because of all the great bands that are out, but it is not a definitive no, i would maybe consider them

Posted by roméo on Monday, 06.16.08 @ 11:22am


Again, to what standards are you holding those first few albums to? Pop/Rock music at the time was basically Motown, Beach Boys, Phil Spector's Wall of Sound and the safe Elvis clones. The first couple of lp's by the Beatles may not have been the most musically intelligent, but the sound was quite fresh. And remember, back at that time, the artists who recorded their own music could be counted on one hand.

Yesterday, Michele and some of that earlier stuff is difficult to listen to now, but back then it was perfect. As you stated Romeo; you had to be there. I was and those songs were big. Personally, I hate both those songs as well, but that is a subjective opinion.

And remember, the Beatles were more than just music at the time. It was like a whole new beginning for many.

I know it is cool in some circles to say that the Beatles were really not all that great musically. It is sort of like saying that Babe Ruth was not that great a hitter because of the segregation in baseball. But that arguement just does not hold water.

As far as KISS, I say again, they were not anything musically, but they influenced many and according to the criteria set forth by the Hall, they should be worthy of induction.

Posted by Eric on Monday, 06.16.08 @ 12:57pm


Hey in five years Danger Danger will be eligible for the hall!!! They're a shoo in right!!!! And the great almight Ratt next year.....man I'm excited!!!!!!

Posted by dano on Monday, 06.16.08 @ 16:33pm


I am not even going to ask how this conversation turned to the Beatles. But points well made. This site is too funny sometimes.

Hey Dano - are you sure about Danger Danger. What do you think, 1st time inductees?

Posted by Dameon on Monday, 06.16.08 @ 17:03pm


A quick word about Liam's [I enjoy reading Liam's comments BTW] comments...The VU,Zappa and Beefheart were producing their more challenging material circa 1967...this is mid period Beatles, not "early" period. BTW I love the early Beatles stuff...minor key classics like 'Things We said Today' and 'I'll Be Back' stack up with anything released in 64-65.

Posted by Steve on Tuesday, 06.17.08 @ 08:47am


I think an arguement pitting Captain Beefheart and Zappa against early Beatles recordings is just a way to seem cutting edge, when in actuality it is a case of not doing one's research (As Liam would say).

I think this is the year for the Stooges!

Posted by blah-blah-blah on Tuesday, 06.17.08 @ 08:58am


So you think that CB and Zappa weren't cutting edge? Or are you just going for patronising?

Posted by Liam on Tuesday, 06.17.08 @ 09:49am


Patronizing, no question about it! Guilty as charged!

I think Zappa and Beefheart were absolutely unique and on the edge; but your attempting to compare them to the 1963 Beatles is not a very good arguement and seems lacking of knowledge on your part and having read many of your comments on other band boards, I know that this is not the case. I think you attempted to make this comparison to show that you are cutting edge.

Posted by blah-blah-blah on Tuesday, 06.17.08 @ 10:35am


Of course I'm cutting edge - goes without saying ;D

Posted by Liam on Tuesday, 06.17.08 @ 11:07am


Dameon

I would say that they Ted Polly version of Danger Danger is a certain lock!!!! lol at myself! I can always hope...right? And I'm sure that my main man Liam will be the first in line to endorse Danger Danger :)

Posted by dano on Tuesday, 06.17.08 @ 14:12pm


Don't ya think that they song "I was made for loving you." was a Disco....or dare I say a KISSCO song?

Posted by dano on Tuesday, 06.17.08 @ 14:15pm


If you listen to any of the ZZ Top hit singles in the mid 80;s like Leggs you hear that exact same "KISSCO" sound as IWMFLY-so there's your innovation. Hall Of Famers ZZ Top were definitely influenced by the Kiss sound for better or worse.

Posted by classicrocker on Tuesday, 06.17.08 @ 14:58pm


What came first, Kiss doing "I Was Made For Livng You" or Blondie's "Heart of Glass"?

How can we forget their big MTV hit Naughty, Naughty by Danger, Danger. I am sure Liam will be all for this induction.

As for Kiss, they are never getting in because what's his name thinks he is more important than the music itself.

Posted by Dameon on Tuesday, 06.17.08 @ 15:42pm


Kiss doesn't care in the slightest about the HOF so why do their fans? The HOF is basically a joke nowadays anyway.

Posted by Tom on Wednesday, 07.9.08 @ 20:11pm


Liam said up above somewhere: '"Do you put in Green Day for allowing the god-awful pop-punk revival that's been going for around 15 years?" -Liam'

IMO, Green Day is Waaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyy better than Kiss.

Also, the best early Beatles tunes (which I didn't se mentioned up above) are: Norwegian Wood, Paperback Writer, Day Tripper, Help, and Nowhere Man.

Discuss...

Posted by Paul in KY on Thursday, 07.10.08 @ 13:35pm


There's a KISS tribute album called KISS MY ASS

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 07.22.08 @ 18:57pm


I don't know how the heck you guys got on the Velvet Underground. But hey, you have to give them credit. They almost single handedly invented "Alternative Rock". Now, that being said, If they get in, Rush, Kiss, and Yes should definatley be in. Kiss sings some of the best rock songs around, and even if they don't get in, they will still always be remembered as one of the best live bands of all time. AND, the GODS OF THUNDER AND ROCK AND ROOOOOAAALLLLL.

Posted by Calzone on Wednesday, 07.23.08 @ 13:44pm


Any way you slice it, Kiss is one of the most influential rock bands of all time. A score of big acts broke out because of their first tours with Kiss.... Cheap Trick, Aerosmith, Judas Priest, Van Halen, Billy Squier.... And, speaking from someone who's in the business, a significant percentage of musicians on the national scene today name Kiss as a major influence, second perhaps behind only The Beatles.

Were these guys virtuosos? No. Did they ever intend to be? No. They put out simple rock songs and added a sense-assaulting live show, complete with onstage personas that, if you look at history and stats, made them one of the biggest touring bands of all time. At one time Kiss was the largest grossing live show in the history rock music. Simply put, Kiss was the Grateful Dead of theatrical rock music.

Posted by jimmy on Saturday, 07.26.08 @ 22:16pm


Hello True Kiss fans, of course they should be in the RRHOF. You might hate them or love them but you can't ignore them. Any band that sells close to 100 millions albums will not be ignored by the people. Yes,the critics don't really give two shits about them . But hey, who the hell needs critics when you are making millions of dollars. We the people are crtics and I say , vote them in because they earn they dues . Sincerely, Peter (fan for over 30 years).

Posted by peter on Friday, 08.22.08 @ 12:05pm


Why of course YES..? Hollywood Hype at its best ..?? what ever lol....

Posted by mrxyz on Thursday, 09.11.08 @ 14:10pm


I am reading all these comments that Liam makes and ignores. Who the hell is he and remember one thing Liam, groups copy groups. Hey, if you really want to see where rock came from look at litte deeper down South my friend. Rock n Roll came from the heart through black performers. Elvis,Black Sabbath, Judas Priest,Led Z etc,, all copied the south blues my friend. So before you open your BIG mouth get your facts straight. Kiss might not be the most talented group but they are sure entertainig. And someone mentioned how can Blondie & Pretenders get in the RRHF before KISS. I just don't get it. I would like to know who exactly makes these decisons because obvioulsy its not the people. Peter

Posted by PETER GALLERT on Monday, 09.15.08 @ 13:59pm


These idiots that are trying to keep KISS off of the ballots cannot ignore the fact that possibly every popular group or solo artist of the late 70's through today knows a KISS song, or has been influenced by KISS, whether the voting board likes them or not. I'm sure if the voting board had their way, they'd vote in "rock groups" like New Edition, New Kids on the Block, N'Sync, Backstreet Boys, and the like, which is just a shame. I mean, BonJovi????

Posted by Joseph Cusumano on Monday, 09.22.08 @ 17:54pm


Kiss is terrible. They're not even a real act. Other than that horrid Party everyday song, I can't name one of their songs. They're like the Monkeys with louder guitars and more makeup. Keep them out.

Posted by Vincent Hanna on Tuesday, 09.23.08 @ 07:35am


My wife and I recently made a trip to Cleveland to visit the RRHOF and I was blown away to find out that KISS was not an inductee. So I had to do some research as to how this could be and that's how I found this site. I have read many of the postings and it is clear that the overwhelming majority share my belief that KISS should be in the RRHOF. I have come to the conclusion that to be an inductee is not based on accomplishments, but rather the opinion of a few individuals. I would just like to add that while KISS is not good enough to be inducted, the RRHOF sure does like to sell KISS merchandise in their gift shop.

If this is what the RRHOF represents then I would rather KISS not be inducted.

Posted by Chris on Tuesday, 09.23.08 @ 08:23am


First, let me acknowledge that I am a long time KISS fan. I wanted to state my affiliation first and foremost so that everyone reading this post will try to understand that I am trying to be reasonable.
When listening to KISS music, you have to understand that you aren't listening to high-concept music. It is not on the level of "Imagine" by John Lennon. You have to suspend any belief that you are listening to music that will reach stylistic and poetic levels of the latter songs by the Beatles. Having said this, however, it’s exactly what makes KISS liked by so many people. Their music is pure escapism and they publicly acknowledge this. You listen to KISS music to feel good and on some level relate to its lyrics. Paul Stanley states, “Rock 'n' roll isn't made by virtuosos. The best rock 'n' roll is made by people who can best communicate with other people. It doesn't have to do with how good you are, but how good you are at what you do.” Simply put, music is always going to be subjective because everyone relates to it on different levels. Does this make KISS fans a bunch of simpletons? Absolutely not. KISS has fans from all walks of life. KISS is adored by young teens, college students, adults, corporate types and so on. This is obvious by the type of crowds they attract to their concerts. A band can best be defined by how well they communicate their message to the music-buying fans. A song isn’t immediately popular. It’s made popular by fans that relate and choose to make it so. It just so happens that KISS has a legion of fans that do not waiver in their support. So, obviously, a chord (no pun intended) was struck by KISS that has stood the test of time. Indeed, time is the great equalizer.
What concerns me most about the selection process is not so much about the inductees but more so, what criteria members use when voting. It concerns me that a member can express their desire to exclude a band from induction simply because of their dislike for them. Is this the Dave Marsh Hall of Fame or the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame? What argument does he have that makes a rational case for KISS not to be inducted? What justification other than not liking their music does Dave Marsh have? Is it their music? Is their style? Certainly such an argument can be made about all the current inductees. Not everyone likes Bruce Springsteen, U2 or John Mellencamp. Elton John’s music could be considered campy in some respects. However, one should respect their accomplishments and influence he’s had over the years. Shouldn’t the HOF be an admission of respect for the contributions each band or artist has made to music? In addition, it seems that the induction process should be based on a fair assessment on the band’s influence on culture and music. Thus, leave any personal prejudice out of the voting. I think a fair discussion and explanation is warranted.
It’s hard to take the emotion out of an argument as emotions are all you have. It’s the emotional attachment to a band, the connection if you will, that makes you a fan. This is what drives the voting today. The emotional reaction, positive or negative, plays a big part in the decision to nominate and induct certain artists. It’s sad that the process is not more of an honest consideration of the artists’ accomplishments. Whether KISS is ever inducted into the Hall of Fame remains to be seen. The committee should step back and re-examine the true objective of the Hall of Fame. If the Hall of Fame is intended to be a true representation of the culture and music that spans across generations, then KISS certainly deserves to be inducted. Fairness in the voting and induction -- music fans, not just KISS fans, certainly deserve this.

Posted by webslinger00 on Tuesday, 09.23.08 @ 08:40am


I would just like to add that while KISS is not good enough to be inducted, the RRHOF sure does like to sell KISS merchandise in their gift shop. - Chris

Great comment Chris. I think that sums up a lot of what this place is about. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Posted by blah-blah-blah on Tuesday, 09.23.08 @ 08:42am


Vincent Hanna, you are one ignorant MFKR.
You probably have zero musical background and even less mental stability.
Your observations are pointless since you sound like you are a little kid. Go back to your Jonas Brothers Cd's and leave us TRADITIONAL ROCK-N-ROLLERS to handle this debate.

Posted by The Wolf on Tuesday, 09.23.08 @ 09:32am


I ended up at this site because I was listening to Howard Stern this morning, and during Robin's news segment, she mentioned who the 2009 nominees are. She followed that up with who continues to get snubbed by this Rock Hall of Sham; KISS, amongst others. Howard even added that some of the other bands that Robin mentioned should be on the ballot, but feels that KISS shouldn't be; incredible!

I am a 37 year old, African American, hip-hop hard-head, and I love KISS! And I gaurantee that I am not the only African American KISS fan on Earth. I can't tell which I get more heat for; being a KISS fan, or being a Dallas Cowboys fan...living in Philadelphia!!! Anyway, to me, KISS was never "white" music; they were larger-than-life super heroes, come to life! Growing up in the 70's, no matter what color you were, if you were into comics and music (from Michael Jackson to REO Speedwagon), you were into KISS. Eventually, you matured to where you actually understood what tha heck KISS were singing about. Interestingly enough, their most harshly reviewed albums are the ones that I vibe on the most (Elder, Creatures, Carnival, & Psycho). I even used to avoid going to rock / metal concerts, because to be honest, I didn't know what the crowds would be like at such events. I fed into the whole "I don't want to be the only black there" crap. Well...I saw KISS for the first time on their first reunion tour, and it was nothing like I expected; many people, of all ages...families, all to see this legendary band! I saw them 4 more times, after that! No one cared about what you looked like; they only cared that they had something in common with you; an admiration for KISS!

The committee apparently views bands from a simple perspective, and it appears to be as simple as this; if some committee members don't like you, or if you're a band that doesn't roll with "the system", you're not getting in. Some folks just don't get it. Politricks has always influenced rock & roll, but this politricks committee will never convince me that the Bee Gees, The Pretenders, or Madonna has had more of an influence / impact on pop culture, or is more "rock & roll" than KISS!

Posted by Courtney on Tuesday, 09.23.08 @ 14:10pm


Courtney... You are wonderful!!!!
Well written!!!wow...
I think I may get misty eyed.

Posted by The Wolf on Tuesday, 09.23.08 @ 17:19pm


Love em or hate em (i'm indifferent)they have influenced many bands, fit the criteria to a T as RRHOF worthy based on sales,influence etc.
Almost all known rock- hard rock- metal acts
(even Garth Brooks cites them as an influence,who woulda thunk it) have publicly cited their admiration/influence covered their songs.

Posted by Lynn on Wednesday, 09.24.08 @ 09:34am


KISS deserves to be in the Hall...that's for sure.....but not for their songs or musicianship. I have listened to just about every KISS song ever...oh lord, are they ever capable of they worst fake head-bangin' ever. Their lack of instrumental skills are very evident. For every good song like Strutter or Detroit Rock City there are numerous craps that just make me cringe. They should be embarrased of over half the terds they have produced. But yet, I don't know how they did it, they made some good ones too. They put on fabulous rock n roll shows....one of the most thrilling, unique live acts of all time. Not many bands can compete in that category......just great showmanship. KISS seems to have a great sense of humor about themselves and their music....probably why they won't get voted in....the members of Hall take this whole induction stuff way too serious. That's why Steeley Dan gets in right away and KISS doesn't.

Posted by bquest on Wednesday, 09.24.08 @ 16:44pm


Like 'em or hate 'em, no one can dispute KISS's influence on Rock & Roll. Even if you don't like the music, you can't miss the show and the entertainment spectacle of a KISS concert. Is their music high art? No..but then most of rock & roll isn't.

KISS belongs in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame...and should've been inducted far earlier than half of the posers that in there now.

It's time for Dave Marsh to step down. When personal vendettas get in the way of doing your job, its time to go. This isn't about you, Dave. It's about Rock & Roll.

Posted by Jake K. on Saturday, 09.27.08 @ 19:07pm


If Gene Simmions did not care only about money and was not as perverted Kiss would be there now. But for the future yes Kiss will go.

Posted by Mike on Saturday, 10.4.08 @ 18:28pm


Dear Vincent Hanna, if you haven't heard anything by KISS please turn on station 104.3 or 102.3. It sounds to me like you been living under a rock or something maybe even worse. You sound either very young to me or very stupid. But please don't put down anything that you don't know about. When you ask any group in the 80's or even 90' their where all infulence by KISS in some way. Have anice day. And remember one thing, KISS WILL ALWAYS ROCK. Peter from Queens

Posted by Peter on Thursday, 10.9.08 @ 14:53pm


Kiss definitely deserves to be in the HOF. If you look at their prime years, 1974-1977, there was no band that put on a better live show or had more of an impact on arena rock than Kiss. If you ask most of today's top guitarists, rest assured that Ace Frehley would be on their top 5 influences list. The only thing that kills them is that they became more a marketing scheme than a rock band as the years went by. This was mainly because of Gene's lust for money which far outweighed the band's credibility. I think they should be in based on those years in the 70's and they do have songs during that time which are classic rock tunes. Just listen to songs like "Deuce", "Parasite", "She", "Rock Bottom", "Detroit Rock City", and "Black Diamond" and you'll hear a rock band at the top of their game. If the Hall had any class at all, Kiss should be in. If they don't get in, at least put the Space Man in!!!

Posted by Billy Hud on Monday, 10.13.08 @ 01:08am


Dear Billy Hud, I agree with you when it comes to Gene's Lust for money. He will never ever have enough money. I am huge Kiss fan since 1977 and no other band was as big as KISS was between 1975-1978. I seen their shows about 50 times or so. It's sad that they are still singing the same freaken songs over & over. But no matter how greedy Gene or Paul is they should without a question be in the RRHOF. The influence that they had over other bands was really incredible. They should get in for what they did in the beginning of their careers not for their merchandise sales. KISS ARMY

Posted by peter on Wednesday, 10.15.08 @ 14:45pm


. The influence that they had over other bands was really incredible. They should get in for what they did in the beginning of their careers not for their merchandise sales. KISS ARMY

Sadly true the true Hollywood Hype....
I met Kiss in 75 fun guys good showmen if your into shows ..

Posted by mrxyz on Wednesday, 10.15.08 @ 14:50pm


DEAR MRXYZ, I HAVE ALSO MET THEM IN 77 & 79 AND THEY WHERE VERY FUNNY AND WHERE WILLING TO SIGNED GUITARS AND POSTERS THAT I HAD. BUT YOU SAY THAT THEY ARE SHOWMEN.HMMM, LISTEN, KISS IS LIKE THE NEW YORK YANKEES,EVERYONE TALKS ABOUT HOW YANKEES & STEINBRENNER SPENDS TO MUCH MONEY AND HOW THEY ARE BEING PAMPERED AND SPOILED. BUT YET EVERYONE WANTS TO PLAY FOR THEM. KISS IS NOT JUST A BAND IT IS A LIFE. DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY GROUPS WOULD LOVE TO BE IN KISSES SHOES. HEY, I LIKE THEM, MILLIONS OF PEOPLE LIKE THEM AND THEY MADE MY LIFE MORE PLEASURABLE. KISS LIVES FOREVER.

Posted by PETER on Thursday, 10.16.08 @ 13:28pm


DEAR MRXYZ, I HAVE ALSO MET THEM IN 77 & 79 AND THEY WHERE VERY FUNNY AND WHERE WILLING TO SIGNED GUITARS AND POSTERS THAT I HAD. BUT YOU SAY THAT THEY ARE SHOWMEN.HMMM, LISTEN, KISS IS LIKE THE NEW YORK YANKEES,EVERYONE TALKS ABOUT HOW YANKEES & STEINBRENNER SPENDS TO MUCH MONEY AND HOW THEY ARE BEING PAMPERED AND SPOILED. BUT YET EVERYONE WANTS TO PLAY FOR THEM. KISS IS NOT JUST A BAND IT IS A LIFE. DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY GROUPS WOULD LOVE TO BE IN KISSES SHOES. HEY, I LIKE THEM, MILLIONS OF PEOPLE LIKE THEM AND THEY MADE MY LIFE MORE PLEASURABLE. KISS LIVES FOREVER.

Posted by PETER on Thursday, 10.16.08 @ 13:28pm

That is to funny ..I would not let anyone sign my guitar unless I was going to sell it on EBAY....and make extra $$$
Nothing wrong being a showman..
I am not fan of anybody Fans are for them to make $$$$ on god bless HOLLYWOOD HYPE!!!!!!!!!!$
enjoy the music nothing wrong with being a fan It is all good!!!!!!!
Rock on!!!


Posted by mrxyz on Thursday, 10.16.08 @ 13:34pm


IMPACT, IMPACT, IMPACT!! Was KISS the most technically proficient band ever? No. Greatest musicians? No. Greatest songwriters? No. But the impact that had accross the world is undeniable.

If you look at the majority of artists already in the HOF, none of them can meet every criteria above. And most don't come close. There are very few Dylans, Van Morrisons and Buddy Hollys around. Other than music style, where do the Ramones differ from KISS? I'd say KISS had an even greater impact on culture because they were some much more popular around the world. Sure they didn't have a ton of radio hits, but there are plenty of KISS songs that everyone that listens to music knows.

KISS should be in the HOF. Period, end of discussion. It's a ROCK AND ROLL HALL OF FAME man! What's more Rock and Roll than KISS?

Posted by Scott on Sunday, 10.19.08 @ 09:45am


Scott...the problem that KISS has is innovation and influence, that the "Legends In Their Own Minds" in the nominating committee seem to pick and choose when to ignore that criteria. The theatrics...been done before. The music they play...that's been done before, too.

No doubt they have been immensely popular, sold a ton of records, sold out a bunch of shows, sold a lot of merchandise, etc..., but that doesn't necessarily mean automatic HOF induction.

I will be the first one to admit, however, that there are a lot of artists LESS deserving already inducted. It's amazing how much Madonna comes up when that particular topic is mentioned...I personally don't know ANYONE who thinks she should've been inducted!

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 10.19.08 @ 10:22am


Scott, you just answered everyone's question. 1. They are popular. 2. Sold over 80 millions albums. 3. They have a amazing show.4. They are merchandise Kings. What else do you want? What I realize here, its not the people who vote the performers to the RRHOF its the freaken critics. And some of the critcs have grudges. Kiss will live on no matter what. Kiss Lives and will never die. Dear MRXYZ, I have Kiss merchandise that's priceless. I WOULD NEVER SELL KISS STUFF ON EBAY. DON'T NEED THE MONEY. BUT THANKS FOR YOUR COMMENTS.

Posted by peter gallert on Friday, 10.24.08 @ 13:10pm


Rock and Roll Over is a really good albume (I have it).

Posted by Mike on Wednesday, 10.29.08 @ 15:23pm


Dear Mike, if you want a great Album, buy KISS ALIVE or ALIVE 2. You will not be disappointed. KISS LIVES ON. GOD OF THUNDER.

Posted by PETER on Thursday, 10.30.08 @ 14:17pm


DAVE MARSH IS A TOTAL POMPOUS ASS! He has spent his life kissing Springsteens ass (his wife is a co-manager of The Boss...no conflict of interest there!) as if Springsteen was the greatest artist ever (he is great...just not the best).

But to blackball KISS and admit is makes him the arrongant tool I always thought he was. And JAnn Wenner is just as bad...look at all the glaring ommisions in the Hall?

So gald the Sex Pistols boycotted their induction.

It is not the RNR Hall of FAme...it is the Rolling Stone Hall of Fame.

And Marsh, WEnner, and Dave Fricke (another pompus dick) should not be allowed to vote!

And KISS RULES!

Posted by GeneRules on Friday, 10.31.08 @ 09:12am


Dear GeneRules, all I could say is WOW. I couldn't say better myself. Dave Marsh is a complete Idiot. I agree with you on the Sex Pistols. Remember thing its thepeople who listen and buy their music. So, SCREW THE CRITICS AND THEIR BULLSHIT IDEAS OF WHO SHOULD AND SHOULD NOT BE IN THE RRHOF. KISS RULES AND WILL RULE EVEN AFTER THEY ARE GONE.

Posted by PETER on Saturday, 11.1.08 @ 11:56am


HEY GENERULES, ALSO DON'T FORGET THAT DAVE MARSH IS SPRINGSTEEN'S CO-MANAGER ALSO. EVENTHOUGH HE WAS A CO-FOUNDER OF CREEM MAGAZINE HE NEVER GAVE KISS THE RESPECT THAT THEY DESERVE. I THOUGHT CIRCUS MAGAZINE WAS BETTER WRITTEN ANYWAY. SO, MARSH GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ASS AND SEE WHAT THE PUBLIC LIKES. DUDE, YOU ARE ONLY 58 YEARS OLD BUT YOU ACT LIKE YOU KNOW EVERYTHING. I AM SURPSRISED THAT DETROIT COULDN'T COME OUT WITH A BETTER WRITER THEN DAVE MARSH. DAVE I THINK YOUR BIGGETS FAN IS BARBARA. DO US A FAVOR AND GO BACK TO YOUR CAVE. PETER

Posted by PETER on Saturday, 11.1.08 @ 12:08pm


The RRHOF is just someone's opinion of influential music. Was KISS' music influential?..not really, but neither were many other acts that are in. (ref. Steely Dan, Blondie..etc). These left-wing Rolling Stone writers just think they're above voting for an 'Act' verses some writer like Springsteen who was a seventies Bob Dylan. Without Kiss, Van Halen don't get in -- so they did have some influence. Isn't it really about entertainment? I've been to tons of shows (Springsteen, Stones..etc) and I have to say KISS was probably the most entertaining. If I were KISS, I would reject any nomination just to show that they don't the RRHOF to validate their career. I think the concert attendance speaks loader than some self-righteous frustrated RS writer.

Posted by Benny on Monday, 11.24.08 @ 08:03am


Wow, Benny that's exactly my thoughts. It's freaken entertainment. Music should be fun and it shouldn't be taken seriously. In my life time I saw 100 of concerts and met all sorts of groups from AC/DC to Zebra's Randy Jackson. But the writers have to understand that each group or each individual has a different way to express themselves. Listen, I don't want to bore you with crap just look and see how KISS is respected and talked and copied. From Motley Crue to Slipknot to Pantera they have mentioned KISS as a huge influnece for them. Anyway, till next time. KISS ROCKS. Peter

Posted by PETER on Wednesday, 11.26.08 @ 12:13pm


This has nothing to with KISS, my trouble is with Gene Simmons.

Gene Simmons is the biggest, arrogant, pathetic little prick I have ever heard of. The man should go screw himself, his large ego and his enormous forehead. He isn't even real. He's real name is Haim Witz. Talk about a fake! Goddamn long tongued man slut!

Posted by GeneSucks on Saturday, 12.6.08 @ 16:29pm


God bless you GeneSucks. It's nice to know there are some smart people out there!!

Posted by Mr. Octagon on Saturday, 12.6.08 @ 16:38pm


Yes, I agree to a point GeneSukcs & Octagon. But Gene Simmons wasn't an ASSHOLE like he is now. I met Gene back in the late 70's and he was pretty friendly and willing to sign anything I put in front of him. I think as the years go bye and he is getting older he is realizing that his fame is running out. I am a huge KISS fan for over 30 years but I know exactly what you guys mean. Thank you for your comments.

Posted by PETER GALLERT on Monday, 12.15.08 @ 12:29pm


I am not a fan of Gene Simmons or KISS, but where do you see his popularity dimming. He has had a reasonably successful cable TV show for the last couple of years and anytime KISS wants to do a show, there will never be enough tickets for those who want to go.

And getting away with all other crap about the band, and as hard as it is for me to say this, but KISS should be inducted.

Posted by Blah-blah-blah on Monday, 12.15.08 @ 13:25pm


Hey, BLAH BLAH BLAH, I NEVER SAID HIS POPULARITY IS DIMMING. I AM A KISS FAN FOR OVER 30 YEARS AND I SAW THEM LIVE OVER 50 TIMES. BUT ITS TIME FOR THEM TO COME OUT WITH A BRAND NEW ALBUM. AND GUESS WHAT BLAH BLAH, I HEAR THAT THEY ARE WORKING ON ONE. GENE WILL BE GENE. REMEMBER ONE THING, KISS WOULD NOT BE AS FAMOUS AS THEY ARE IF IT WASN'T FOR GENE. ENOUGH SAID, KISS SHOULD BE IN RRHOF VERY SOON. BLAH BLAH BLAH, WHATEVER THAT MEANS. KISS RULES.

Posted by PETER on Wednesday, 12.31.08 @ 10:42am


I think as the years go bye and he is getting older he is realizing that his fame is running out. (Peter)

Perhaps I worded your statement from above incorrectly, but all I was commenting on was that KISS is not going away in the hearts and minds of millions of fans. I am not a KISS fan, but I certainly recognize the lasting impression they have made on the music scene.

Long Live Iggy Pop!

Posted by Blah-blah-blah on Wednesday, 12.31.08 @ 11:28am


Peter you say you saw Kiss "LIVE OVER 50 TIMES." Over 50 times???? Hard to believe unless you are one of their roadies? Has your mind gone numb?

Posted by My Ass on Wednesday, 12.31.08 @ 11:36am


The truth is, they are not a great band technically, but even as mediocre songwriters (which they are) their songs have become memorable anthems for millions. Few people remember what any of these critics wrote back in 1976, but millions remember what KISS wrote.

AND, they single-handedly inspired more kids to pick up guitars than probably any band in history, with perhaps the exception of the Beatles. Countless legendary rock stars today count their experience as fans of KISS as what started them. By this alone they have had more influence on Rock N Roll and popular culture than most bands.

Posted by Tony on Saturday, 01.3.09 @ 11:17am


Hey Ass, I guess you did not see what I wrote. Let's just see if I made some sense. First concert I saw was in 1977 Madison Square Garden. Same year I saw them in Nassau Colliseum. Then I sam them in Florida & in California still with their make up on. Then there was the Ritz in New York without make up. Then there was the Lamour East years (without makeup). I think I saw Ace Frehley 10 times alone. Ok, maybe 40 times. I am not a Roadie just a fan. I guess you don't realize what it means to be a fan of someone that you like a lot. Kiss this Ass boy. Thank you Tony for realizing what KISS did for lots of Bands in the past. Hey Blah blah, thank you also for your comments. Iggy Pop is cool. Peter

Posted by PETER on Saturday, 01.3.09 @ 16:04pm


Hey Ass, I guess you didn't have enough balls to even post your name. I still got a kick when you said I had to be a Roadie to see them 50 times. I don't know how old you are but you don't sound to intelligent.So, on that note I got one thing to say: KISS MY ASS. This is from all the KISS fans outhere that feel the same way about ASSHOLES like you. Peter

Posted by PETER on Saturday, 01.3.09 @ 16:12pm


Everybody´s talking about Kiss´ live performances as the reason to let them in, but Kiss has made some really excellent pop songs. They are hugely underrated.

Posted by baker on Wednesday, 01.14.09 @ 16:02pm


remember back when they (radio) wouldn't play KISS songs...the KISS ARMY should set a date and march on the Hall.....feedback please....but... something tells me that even if they are voted in ...they wouldn't show...too bad...they are the 'hottest band in the world'....take it EZEE

Posted by EZEE on Thursday, 01.15.09 @ 16:31pm


WHAT A JOKE!!!! GENE HELPED DISCOVER VAN HALEN...INSPIRED MANY INCLUDING GARTH BROOKS....MUSIC PLAYED AT STADIUMS ACROSS THE GLOBE. ROCK N ROLL ALL NITE IS THE NATIONAL ANTHEM FOR ROCK. AND THEN THERE ARE BANDS THAT COULDNT SELL OUT MY LITTLE HIGH SCHOOL GYM THAT ARE IN. HOW ABOUT THE GENERATIONS THAT KISS HAS SPANNED ....WHAT A JOKE!!!

Posted by justin l on Thursday, 01.15.09 @ 18:36pm


Garth Brooks???? Well, heck yes...Kiss' influence on his music is "obvious"....LMAO!!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Friday, 01.16.09 @ 07:19am


KISS has been my favorite Rock group since 1975. When I discovered KISS at 11 years old, I then wanted to listen to rock groups that members of KISS where influenced by (Beatles,Stones, Led Zep, Cream, Yardbirds,Alice Cooper). Then I would listen to bands featured in the many numerous rock bands that KISS where in in the 70's. KISS music is GREAT! Hey just like any other rock band not everybody is going to like ALL of their songs.All rock bands, yes even the Greats have merchandise KISS just did it bigger. KISS has a HUGE following that has lasted for years, KISS still sells out concerts. KISS has had and still does have a Huge impact and influence in the History of Rock and released their first album in 1974 so KISS should rightfully be in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.

Posted by Floyd on Friday, 01.16.09 @ 15:19pm


KISS definitely deserves to be in, whether or not the voting committee likes them or not. Lots of artists, from Metallica, Alice in Chains, to Poison, to garth Brooks cite them as a huge influence. Even Dimebag loved them so much, he was burried in a KISS coffin.
Yes, they've had some bad eras (Esp the dynasty/unmasked/elder era) and the merch is overkill. But they also have a lot of great rock tunes, a damn good live show,a legion of fans, longevity,They've broken some attendance records set by the beatles...
But, as the HOF goes, it's a joke. Is the Jackson Five "Rock"? No. It's suggary pop. And who are the Ronettes? Do they have a lot of "fame"?
But i fear 25 years from now , KISS will still not be inducted. neither will Rush, or Alice Cooper. At least we can watch them induct the Jonas Brothers and Lil Wayne.

Posted by mike on Monday, 01.19.09 @ 20:42pm


DEAR MIKE, THAT WAS WELL SAID BUDDY. RRHOF IS A FREAKEN JOKE. LIKE I SAID BEFORE, THE BONEHEADS THAT DECIDE WHO SHOULD BE IN RRHOF HAVE THEIR HEADS UP THEIR ASSES. THAT'S WHY THE PEOPLE SHOULD DECIDE NOT THESE FREAKEN NERDS. KISS IS HERE TO STAY FOR A LONG TIME AND NO MATTER WHAT THEY WILL ALWAYS SELL OUT WHENVER THEY COME TO TOWN. LONG LIVE KISS AND KISS ARMY AND ALL THE PEOPLE THAT LOVE THEIR MUSIC & THEIR SHOW. BECAUSE WHEN YOU REALLY THINK ABOUT ALL OF US WANT TO BE ENTERTAINED ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. PETER




Posted by PETER on Tuesday, 01.20.09 @ 14:50pm


Here's an interesting tidbit...I heard Paul Stanley did the title role of "Phantom of the Opera" in Toronto a few years back...I saw his name on the list of everyone whose done it. I verified the fact that it was THAT Paul Stanley. That was absolutely shocking to me because they don't let just anyone perform that role...you have to audition for Webber and Prince...amazing!!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Friday, 01.23.09 @ 17:58pm


Kiss reminds me of Nirvana.Not because they're similar in music because they're obviously not but because everyone either hates them or loves them.Rarely do you find a in-between.I tried this all week.I asked everyone I talked to whether or not they liked nirvana or kiss.And I always got a strong opinion.
I know that's not really relevant to whether or not kiss should get into to rnr hall of fame or not I just thought that was interesting.
On to whether they should get in or not dare I say...yes.I know the music sucks but there seems to be a lot of bands that claim them as a big influence,and they're without a doubt cultural icons.
As far as Kiss goes the only song they did I find tolerable is "Detroit Rock City".It's one of those songs I hate to love.

Posted by Juelz on Wednesday, 02.11.09 @ 15:06pm


I've never been able to really knock the music too much here. I don't think Kiss will ever reveal a shocking Dylanesque side anytime soon, but I'm kinda glad they never have in the first place. If you remove all the crap that gets tossed around about them & just stick to the songs, they've got a lot of great stuff.

Five favorites:

1. Shout It Out Loud
2. Detroit Rock City
3. Lick It Up
4. I Was Made For Lovin' You
5. Rock & Roll All Night

Posted by Cheesecrop on Wednesday, 02.11.09 @ 18:10pm


My KISS top 5 looks like this:

1. I Want You
2. Lick It Up
3. Hard Luck Woman
4. Detroit Rock City
5. Shout It Out Loud


Rock N' Roll all night for me is not that great.

Posted by Mike on Thursday, 02.12.09 @ 18:12pm


THIS BAND SUCKS SO BAD THE WORLD WILL IMPLODE IF MORE THAN 50 PEOPLE PLAY THEIR MUSIC AT THE SAME TIME!

Jeez I wish this debate would end. Not only is the music is boring, uninteresting and oscenely stupid, it's poorly played. These guys weren't musicians but crap salesmen.

Posted by P Onyou on Thursday, 02.12.09 @ 19:20pm


I dont even know how kiss isn't even in the hall of fame yet. I mean kiss is one of the biggest rock bands to ever play. I mean really put madonna in before kiss.

Posted by caity on Saturday, 02.21.09 @ 11:01am


C'mon... If R.E.M. can make the Hall of Fame, why not KISS !?!? Wether you like KISS or not is not the question here. KISS were more of an influence and did a lot more for rock and roll then R.E.M. or even RUN DMC !!!

Posted by Jaybee on Saturday, 03.21.09 @ 07:46am


KISS has some of the most wonderfully touching ballads, hard-hitting, pulse-pounding riffs and outrageously sexy commentaries-in-song, anyone with an ear for music can find something to deem a 'keeper'.
I once even heard my "if it ain't black, it ain't music!" sister singing along to "Every Time I Look At You" when she thought I couldn't hear her. (She denied it when I walked around the corner and smiled at her.)

My point is-- With any nominee, it shouldn't matter if you don't like them or their music. Your job is to do your research and find out if the nominees' accomplishments, contributions and impact factors are enough to acknowledge them as having been an important part of the history of Rock and Roll. And KISS damned well qualifies!!

Obviously, someone refused Dave Marsh his under-the-table vote inducement and he's going to stand his ground until his bank account reflects his change of heart.

Besides-- At this point, even if RRHOL comes to its senses and offers, I'm fairly certain the RSVP card will return with a heartfelt, "KISS our and our fans' collective asses!".

Posted by Catt Cantu on Thursday, 03.26.09 @ 12:18pm


Be as self-rightous as you want, KISS should probably have their own wing. I just recently looked that the list of inductees -- are you kidding? I have never heard of half of them. Sure, they're no Paul Simon or Carole King, but either are most bands. Their influence is documented in the bands that came after them. No one ever claims to be a KISS fan, just like no one claims to be an ABBA fan. Someone is out there buying millions of records. I think Marsh was shut out of a backstage KISS party or something. People forget that Springsteen had about ten years with nothing notable. Why such a vandetta? The irony is that I think now it's more of a tribute NOT being in the RRHOF. If I were them, I would reject any nomination. btw, I love the post with all the quotes from the other bands.

Posted by benny on Friday, 03.27.09 @ 14:40pm


I am currently in an email debate with Dave Marsh over why he feels Kiss does not deserve to be in the RRHOF. I asked him to back up his stance with some real examples as to why Kiss shouldn't be in. The only things I got back were single sentence responses like, "Every time I see Gene Simmons, I want to puke". He has not come forth with one legitimate reason. Today he told me to piss off.

Posted by dbri on Tuesday, 04.7.09 @ 10:21am


KISS are a permanent part of Pop culture and have created some good foot stompin' rock and roll. Like it or now....They DESERVE to be in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.

The KISS ARMY is not dead yet!

Posted by Mark Cooper on Tuesday, 04.7.09 @ 11:12am


And here you have the reason why so many bands are not in the HoF! The nominating committee feels they are bigger than the music, and that is ridiculous. I have to admit, the sight of Gene Simmons has made me want to puke for the last 37 years, but that has absolutely nothing to do with anything.

Posted by Dameon on Tuesday, 04.7.09 @ 11:42am


Give us Dave Marsh's email address! Or at least tellus which website you went to to get the email address.

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 04.7.09 @ 12:03pm


I contacted Dave Marsh at rockrap@aol.com. This is the email address of his online magazine "Rock & Rap Confidential". The website is www.rockrap.com. Have fun!

Posted by dbri on Tuesday, 04.7.09 @ 12:14pm


IT'S OFFICIAL: DAVE MARSH HATES CHICAGO AND BERNIE TAUPIN!

I SENT DAVE MARSH TWO EMAILS:

CHICAGO - THE ROCK AND ROLL HALL OF FAME

BERNIE TAUPIN - THE 2010 ROCK AND ROLL HALL OF FAME (NON-PERFORMERS CATEGORY)

DAVE MARSH READ AND DELETED MY BERNIE TAUPIN EMAIL AND JUST DELETED MY CHICAGO EMAIL WITHOUT READING IT.

Posted by ROY on Tuesday, 04.7.09 @ 14:08pm


This is a travisty. KISS is the definiton of rock stars. Over the last 35 years, they have influenced two generations of kids to pick up instruments. Several artists in this Hall have been influenced by KISS. They are the only band in the world where if you showed them a picture of this band, almost everyone would know who they are. Yeah you may say KISS isn't a good band or skilled band, but how about all those punk bands? KISS can play more than three chords and get screwed up on heroin (uhm...Sid Vicious.) I just love how all these rap and pop acts can get in but real ROCK bands like KISS or Journey or Rush or The Stooges are left out.

Posted by Zack on Saturday, 04.11.09 @ 18:31pm


for all of u that dont think that kiss should be in .... ur completly crazy....kiss is one of the best bands ever n they should have been in the rock hall years ago...kiss has been rocking out for 35 years and if u cant reconize that they rock...u have problems...also another thing...i saw that they r thinking of getting ppl like..2pac n mariah carey...since when do they sing rock??? cuz i havent heard any...if they can at least try n get in even if its in a few years...n kiss that is an actually rock band cant...then this might as well b completly useless....
i strongly think kiss should get in and if ppl dont agree that dosent mean we ( kiss army ) r going to stop trying...kiss is better then any other bands out there and they deverse to be in...

Posted by katie on Tuesday, 04.14.09 @ 05:15am


Any musician/fan/critic/whatever has to be either blind, deaf and dumb to think that KISS doesn't belong in the RRHOF. They have influenced a ton of current rockstars, they have a huge following and have had worldwide success and recognition for decades. How technical or complicated their songs are is irrelevant...the sole criteria is supposed to be artists that have had an impact on rock music. What did REM do that was so special? They're just another rock band with a (self-admitted) lousy guitar player. Pretenders? Joan Jett was fronting The Runaways before Chrissie Hynde probably cashed her first royalty check. Patti Smith...Elvis Costello...Talking Heads? Puh-lease. Who the heck did any of them inspire, what was so original about them and what was their big impact on the music world/history of rock? NADA. David Lee Roth said it best..."The only reason most critics like Elvis Costello is because most of them LOOK like Elvis Costello". They should change the name of the place from the RRHOF to the House of Jan Wenner's Pals. Tell them Bono sent you. KISS, Rush, Neil Diamond, Chicago, Yes, Boston, Doobie Bros, ABBA, Bad Company, Journey, Cheap Trick, Ted Nugent, Ozzy Osbourne, Heart... to name but a few HUGE bands who belong in there.

Posted by Stevie on Thursday, 05.14.09 @ 00:45am


The critics never thought much of them but they rock AND roll. And they are very good singers and great showmen.

Posted by Timothy Horrigan on Tuesday, 05.19.09 @ 17:19pm


"Your entire post reeks of bullshit. None of it links to KISS' creativity. Hardly any of what you said was true, either." -Liam

How can you say it doesn't link to their creativity? Lots of artists have been great showmen, but NONE compare the shows KISS produced in their hey-day, the wonderfully imaginative theatrics and props. Also, just about everything I said was true, Liam. I admit, Alice DID come before KISS (mea culpa), and he's a terrific artist, but KISS did indeed carry that aspect to heights Alice never reached.

"I didn't realize that "selling haloween costumes" was a valid contribution.." -- Terry

I was answering the question on creativity, Terry, pointing out that they indeed have beau coup points in that area. And about those costumes- THEY SOLD AND CONTINUE TO SELL.

You guys pointed out that Elvis' fan base can't compare. True. But Elvis was only original because mainstream America had never set foot into a Black club, seen the acts, heard the music. I'm not saying he wasn't great-- He was charismatic, soulful, sexy. He deserves his eternal fanbase. But his initial music and act was "borrowed" from others, too. He just made it more acceptable, is all.
And I stand by the FACT that Elvis does not have a named world-recognized fanclub. Not unless you count the Vegas impersonators.

You two guys seem to be trying to say that KISS doesn't merit the dubious honor because they haven't impressed YOU. So be it. Your opinion. But cannot you respect the fact they inspired so many other young artists to become what they are today? Watch some of the Monster Rock and other MTV documentaries-- you'll see quite a few famous artists state that KISS influenced their lives, music and/or destinies. The Ramones, The Clash, Motley Crue, Rush, Genesis, Frank Zappa, Sebastian Bach, Garth Brooks, Lullacry, Neurosonic, LoveCrave, etc. If you like ANY of them, then perhaps you can honestly concede that my boys had a positive effect on your lives, too?

Lastly, if we're going to be at eachother's throats on such silly points, "Catt" will do.

Posted by Catt Cantu on Wednesday, 05.20.09 @ 12:03pm


Can't stand the dude who sticks out his tongue. Keep It Stupid Sucks.

Posted by deemand on Tuesday, 06.2.09 @ 10:02am


I took a shit that cleared a bathroom full of other guys taking shits. That crap smelled as bad as Kiss songs sound.

Posted by D-Stroy on Monday, 06.8.09 @ 21:13pm


D-stroy! U suck! so does your mom! go get a life! Kiss is the best band ever!

Posted by fuk u d-stroy on Monday, 06.8.09 @ 22:11pm


The intelligence and amount of thought that went into the last two comments amazes me

Posted by Keebord on Tuesday, 06.9.09 @ 17:06pm


shame shame on you kiss changed the way we saw a rock show gone were the days of guys in suits preforming like stiff penguins. kiss gave us our moneys worth . fire smoke lights a drun kit that moved that was a first.they entertained us and had fun doing it . the rock and roll hallof fame better get ther act together the kiss army demands that kiss peter paul ace and gene be inducted where they belong but if not kiss will ive on forever will the hal so rock and roll all night and party every day

Posted by harold mccarthy on Sunday, 07.5.09 @ 09:42am


My god why are there so many haters out there! There are a lot of musical acts out there that I simply can't stand to listen to yet their reviews are glowing. But what is a review anyway. It is someone who gets paid to give their opinion of something they often don't even give a shit about.
As far as KISS goes I have been a fan since childhood and still am. I'm also a musician and probably wouldnt be if it werent for KISS. Yes most of their songs were simple but they were still really good. By comparison ACDC rarely used more than 4 chords in a song and they are also considered by many to be one of the greatest ROCK bands of all time.
Kiss simply put deserves to be in the HOF. They are loved by millions around the world. It is why they are still selling out arena's all over the world. It is why they are still selling albums, dvd's and tons of other merchandise. Because MILLIONS love them.
I don't give a damn if millions also hate them. Any band with as many fans as KISS has deserves to be recognized for it.
Rock and Roll is not just about trippy lyrics or poetry put to words it's about having fun. And again to myself and millions of other KISS fans there is nothing more fun than KISS.

Posted by Wes on Friday, 07.17.09 @ 13:01pm


Today I was listening to "Love Gun" by Spinal Tap, and I realized that it might as well be a Spinal Tap song. that is why KISS hasn't been inducted yet..

Posted by Jonny on Friday, 07.17.09 @ 13:32pm


KISS is Rock and Roll. Without them, the Hall of Fame is just a museum in Cleveland.

Posted by Timothy Horrigan on Monday, 07.20.09 @ 19:13pm


http://www.rockhall.com/pressroom/nominees-for-2010-induction/

KISS

Few bands short of The Beatles inspired more kids to pick up the guitar than KISS. With their signature make-up, explosive stage show and anthems like “Rock and Roll All Night” and “Detroit Rock City,” they are the very personification of rock stars. Original members Ace Frehley, Peter Criss, Paul Stanley and Gene Simmons came together in New York in 1972. While their first two records didn’t generate many sales, they quickly gained a national following for their bombastic, pyro-filled stage show. Their 1975 live disc Alive! captured that energy and reached number nine on the charts, quickly making them one of the most popular bands of the 1970’s - scoring countless hit singles, sold-out tours and appearing everywhere from comic books to lunch boxes to their very own TV movie. They continue to perform sold out concerts around the world.

Posted by Roy on Wednesday, 09.23.09 @ 10:52am


I thought the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame decided they were against KISS...I guess that Metallica induction is opening up a lot of doors here.

Posted by maplejet on Thursday, 09.24.09 @ 11:40am


Shame on the Hall Of Fame, many groups should had already been inducted. Kiss has been my favorite band since middle school. They haven't always put out great songs but have survived and refound themselves selling outarenas again. Judas Priest, The Runaways, Ram Jam and the Godz need to find a spot in the Hall of Fame. Or the Hall of Same. KISS keep ROCKIN YOUR ASS OFF. Thanx.

Posted by SMF on Friday, 09.25.09 @ 05:51am


KISS is one of the most legendary and influental bands in america and the world. They are known worldwide and loved everywhere. They deserve to be in the hall of fame far more than LL Cool J who isn't even a rock artist. He is a rapper. He should not even be thought of when the subject of rock & roll comes up. Anyone who does not see that kiss is an amazing band is a fool.

Posted by Cody Lilly on Friday, 09.25.09 @ 06:27am


No other Hard Rock act got in on their first nomination. Van Halen, Black Sabbath, Lynyrd Skynyrd, AC/DC, and Led Zeppelin included. Kiss might have to wait a few more years.

Posted by Joe-Skee on Friday, 09.25.09 @ 10:34am


KISS have never been my cup of tea(they are an acquired taste I suppose), but I do support their induction. There are few acts more influencial hard rock/heavy metal than them.

Posted by Dude Man on Saturday, 09.26.09 @ 20:54pm


KISS

Peter Criss
Ace Frehley
Gene Simmons
Paul Stanley
Vinnie Vincent
Eric Carr
Bruce Kulick
Eric Singer
Mark St. John

Which members will be inducted?

Posted by Roy on Monday, 09.28.09 @ 04:04am


Judging by this years noms, it's gonna be a battle between Kiss and Genesis for the induction, and honestly either one could get it.

Posted by Breaker on Monday, 09.28.09 @ 23:03pm


Kiss

An entire suburban army of now middle-aged white males with KISS emblazoned on the dusty covers of their childhood notebooks let out a collective "About time!" cry upon hearing the news that the 70's most notorious purveyors of rock 'n' roll excess and staged showmanship have been nominated at long last. Gene Simmons is now frantically looking for new ways to profit on this unexpected acknowledgement of their careers from a body he's long railed against. To be fair, Kiss was deserving of nomination when they first became eligible in the mid-90's, but their over-the-top image that had played best to the type of fan the Hall voters would rather distance themselves from socially meant that their actual accomplishments were overshadowed by their naked quest for commercial dominance. Though they did not start the theatrical stage-show by any means (for that see the still ignored Screamin' Jay Hawkins) they were one of the decade's biggest sellers and consistent draws on the road, and for a commercial enterprise such as rock 'n' roll those are genuine credentials. Their catalog is rife with familiar hits and their impact in defining rock's most decedent era is uncontestable. Will a still fervent anti-Kiss backlash among voters prevent them from getting in, or will they beat the odds for election in part so the Hall does not have to deal with the questions regarding their candidacy from the Kiss Army any longer?

Qualifications: 7 - Solid Choice

Posted by Roy on Friday, 10.2.09 @ 15:00pm


Yes!!! I am a Doctor. lol

Posted by Joe-Skee on Thursday, 10.15.09 @ 14:41pm


During the early to late 70's and beyond, there were supergroups that reigned the largest most successful rock bands not just in america but on the planet. Led Zeppelin, Queen, and Kiss. Two are recognized and one for reasons I just can't seem to understand whatsoever.

If anything Kiss was the Top by the late 70's and were pretty successful through the 80's no matter make up/non makeup and pretty much repeated history in the 90's to the current.

I can't find one reason on God's green earth why they are no given the honor of being placed with the other two in this honor. Something is most definetly not right!

Posted by Doug Brown on Sunday, 11.22.09 @ 21:21pm


The only good song this group ever did was "New York Groove"...oh..hold on a minute, that was Ace Frehley, SOLO

Posted by Greg on Sunday, 12.13.09 @ 09:09am


I bet most of the people who think KISS is nothing ot Rock and Roll don't realize that they are the main reason Van Halen got their start. If not for their on popularity and contributions, what about bringing one of the biggest rock bands of the 70s, 80s , and 90s? KISS has done a lot for the music industry. They took chances and learned how to market themselves better than everyone else. They have influenced most modern bands after them. As far as the so called lack of talent, how many of today's acts use some type of help to improve their sound? A lot of the acts have been caught lip-synching and get awards for supposedly being great! Do you think rap stars make up their own music? They are the kings of sampling old music. Critics are usually the worst measure of anything good. Most of the time, your favorite movie got horrible reviews and the so called best movies are horrible to watch.

Posted by Scott on Wednesday, 12.16.09 @ 11:53am


I"m not a really big KISS fan, but it seems like they should be in the Hall to me.

Posted by Tim on Saturday, 01.2.10 @ 23:49pm


KISS still not being inducted just shows how true Paul Stanley's comments are. Purposely and defiantly ignoring their induction simply shows how much of a private club this really is- not the voice of the people. It must stick in the craw of "Dave Marsh" (sp?), that 83% of the people are still scratching their heads wondering why the American band with the most gold records is still sitting on the bench while niche bands like The Stooges sail through. Good to see ABBA and Genesis finally get their due though. Hopefully next year the commitee swallows its pride and honors KISS like they should have all along.

Posted by Steve on Friday, 01.29.10 @ 18:57pm


Steve,

most people would agree with you on KISS, but seriously don't knock the Stooges.

Posted by Greg on Friday, 01.29.10 @ 20:35pm


KISS will most likely get into the Rock Hall, just not in the next couple of years anyway. I agree with Paul Stanley's comment 100%, and let's face it, Rolling Stone Magazine has never been a fan of KISS. However, I would dare Iggy Pop to wear a KISS T-Shirt at the induction ceremony. Iggy, here's your chance to continue to piss people off and make some KISS fans laugh their asses off!

Posted by Jack on Saturday, 02.6.10 @ 10:08am


Not innovative, and I'm not that big a fan, but their influence is too big to ignore. T.Rex, Alice Cooper (and the guys who paved the way for Alice), NY Dolls, Deep Purple, Hawkwind, Judas Priest and Thin Lizzy (at the very least T. Rex, Alice and the Dolls) should all be in first, but after that they have my full backing.

Posted by Sam on Monday, 02.8.10 @ 21:06pm


What the poster at Liam and a few others on here said about The Beatles is totally ignorant and inaccurate! Their early music wasn't as simple (besides the lyrics) as you assume.I'm sure none of the good information I post here is going to get through to someone like Liam he's too ignorant and close minded,especially when he said he didn't care what Mick Jagger and Keith Richards
or anyone else says about The Beatles early music.Eric was one of the only sensible posters on here,but I like Yesterday and Michelle.


I was born after 1964 and I love their A Hard Day's Night album which The Rolling Stone Album Guide and The All Music Guide give 5 stars to (like they do every album except Yellow Submarine and that makes sense since most of it was George Martin's instrumentals of their music from the film and the only great song on it is John's great rocker Hey Bulldog) and The All Music Guide accurately classifies the A Hard Day's Night albun as pop,pop rock,rock n roll and rock.


The Beatles wrote one of The Rolling Stone's first hits in late 1963 a rock n roll song,I Wanna Be Your Man.And John and Paul wrote it right in front of them and Mick and Keith were impressed and said how can you write a song just like that and it inspired them to star writing their own songs.



As The All Music Guide saysn their excellent Beatles biography "That it's difficult to summarize their career without restating cliches that have already been digested by tens of millions of rock fans, to start with the obvious,they were the greatest and most influential act of the rock era and introduced more innovations into popular music than any other rock band of the 20th century."


"Moreover they were among the few artists of *any* discipline that were simultaneously the best at what they did *and* the most popular at what they did." They also say as singers John Lennon and Paul McCartney were among the best and most expressive in rock.


Also on an excellent site,The Evolution of Rock Bass Playing McCartney Style by Dennnis Alstrand,Stanley Clarke,Sting,Will Lee,Billy Sheehan,George Martin and John Lennon are quoted saying what a great,melodic and influential bass player Paul has always been'


And Wilco's John Stirratt was asked in Bass Player which bass players have had the most impact on his playing and the first thing he said was, Paul McCartney is one of the greatest bass players of all time,if you listen to what he was tracking live in the studio it's unbelievable." "With his tone and musicality he was a huge influence,he covered all of his harmonic responsibilities really well but his baselines were absolutely melodic and inventive."

And in an online 1977 Eric Clapton interview,ERic Clapton In His Own Words he says that there was always this guitar game between John and George,and he said partly because John was a pretty good guitar player himself.He played live with John as a member of John's 1969 Plastic Ono Band.


And there is a great online article by musician and song writer Peter Cross,The Beatles Are The Most Creative Band Of All Time and he says that many musicians besides him recognize Paul as one of the best bass guitar players ever.He too says that John and Paul are the greatest song composers are among the 2 greatest singers in rock and that John,Paul and George were all excellent guitarists and that George is underrated by people not educated about music but that ERic Clapton knew better,he also says that both John and Paul played great leads as well as innovative rhythm tracks.


John Lennon co-wrote,sang and played guitar on one of David Bowie's first hits Fame in 1975 David also invited John to play on his version of John's beautiful Beatles song Across The Universe.Brain May,Ozzy Osbourne,and Liam Gallagher and many more call The Beatles The Greatest Band Ever.


Also on MusicRadar Tom Petty,Joe Perry and Richie Sambora in What The Beatles Mean To Me all say how cool and great they thought The Beatles were when they first saw them on THe Ed Sullivan Show in February 1964 when they were just teen boys,Richie was only 5.Tom Petty said he thought they were really really great.


Robin Zander of Cheap Trick said he's probably one of the biggest Beatles fans on the planet.Brad Whitford of Aerosmith said that a lot of that Beatles influence comes from Steven Tyler's collaborartion with Mark Hudson both whom are absolute Beatles freaks and he said I guess the goal is to try and emulate probably some of the best music of the last 50 years which has to be The Beatles.

Posted by LetMeRollItToYou on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 18:22pm


I made a typing mistake I meant Brian May.

Posted by LtMeRollItToYou on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 18:29pm


What Liam an a few other posters said about The Beatles is totally ignorant and inaccurate!The Beatles early music (besides the lyrics) wasn't as simple as you assume,infact many of their chords were somewhat complex) and I'm sure the good information I'm posting on here isn't going to get through to Liam and others like him he's too ignorant and close minded especially when he said he doesn't care what Mick Jagger and Keith Richards or anyone else says about The Beatles early music.The Beatles wrote one of The Rolling Stones first hits in late 1963, a rock n roll song I Wanna Be Your Man,and John and Paul wrote it right in front of him and Keith Richards and Mick Jagger were impressed and said how can you write a song just like that,at it inspired them to star writing their own songs.


The Rolling Stone Album Guide and The All Music Guide gives A Hard Say's Night 5 stars as they do with every Beatles album except Yellow Submarine,(hich makes sense since most of it is George Martin's instrumentals of their songs from the film)and the only great song on it is Hey Bulldog.The all Music guide accurately classifies A Hard Day's Night as pop,rock,rock n roll and pop rock.



As The All Music Guide saysn their excellent Beatles biography "That it's difficult to summarize their career without restating cliches that have already been digested by tens of millions of rock fans, to start with the obvious,they were the greatest and most influential act of the rock era and introduced more innovations into popular music than any other rock band of the 20th century."


"Moreover they were among the few artists of *any* discipline that were simultaneously the best at what they did *and* the most popular at what they did." THey also say as singers John Lennon and Paul McCartney were among the best and most expressive in rock.


Also on an excellent site,The Evolution of Rock Bass Playing McCartney Style by Dennnis Alstrand,Stanley Clarke,Sting,Will Lee,Billy Sheehan,George Martin and John Lennon are quoted saying what a great,melodic and influential bass player Paul has always been.



And Wilco's John Stirratt was asked in Bass Player which bass players have had the most impact on his playing and the first thing he said was, Paul McCartney is one of the greatest bass players of all time,if you listen to what he was tracking live in the studio it's unbelievable." "With his tone and musicality he was a huge influence,he covered all of his harmonic responsibilities really well but his baselines were absolutely melodic and inventive."



And in an online 1977 Eric Clapton interview,Eric Clapton In His Own Words he says that there was always this guitar game between John and George,and he said partly because John was a pretty good guitar player himself.He played live with John as a member of John's 1969 Plastic Ono Band.


And there is a great online article by musician and song writer Peter Cross,The Beatles Are The Most Creative Band Of All Time and he says that many musicians besides him recognize Paul as one of the best bass guitar players ever.He too says that John and Paul are the greatest song composers are among the 2 greatest singers in rock and that John,Paul and George were all excellent guitarists and that George is underrated by people not educated about music but that Eric Clapton knew better,he also says that both John and Paul played great leads as well as innovative rhythm tracks.


John Lennon co-wrote,sang and played guitar on one of David Bowie's first hits Fame in 1975 and David invited John to play guitar on David's version of John's great Beatles song Across The Universe.


Brian May ,Ozzy Osbourne,and Liam Gallagher and many more call The Beatles The Greatest Band Ever.
Also on MusicRadar Tom Petty,Joe Perry and Richie Sambora in What The Beatles Mean To Me all say how cool and great they thought The Beatles were when they first saw them on The Ed Sullivan Show in Februar 1964 when they were just teen boys,Richie was only 5.Tom Petty said he thought they were really really great.


Robin Zander of Cheap Trick said he's probably one of the biggest Beatles fans on the planet.Brad Whitford of Aerosmith said that a lot of that Beatles influence comes from Steven Tyler's collaborartion with Mark Hudson both whom are absolute Beatles freaks and he said I guess the goal is to try and emulate probably some of the best music of the last 50 years which has to be The Beatles.

Posted by LetMeRollitToYou on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 18:59pm


I really didn't mean to get a double post, I really wish there was an edit button on here!

Posted by LetMeRollItToYou on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 20:06pm


As The Rolling Stone Album Guide said,not liking The Beatles is as perverse as not liking the sun. And Ozzy Osbourne said not loving The Beatles is like not loving oxogen. And a guy who runs Keno's Classic Rock n Roll Site and who runs a Rolling Stones and John Lennon fan site says in his review of The Beatles 1967-1970 Red Album damn The Beatles were one great group and he said in his great review of The Beatles 1962-1966 Red album, that if you don't love or at least like The Beatles and their music then you are not a true rock fan and more than likely will never ever get it.Billy Joel also says you can't like music and dislike The Beatles.



He also says that John Lennon showed on Paul's rocker Get Back why he should have played lead guitar more often because he did such a good job of it. He also said he played a pretty good slide guitar on George's For Your Blue and he said John also played one of the first and best acid guitar parts on his great rocker Revolution.

Posted by LetMeRolliTYou on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 20:19pm


I meant that Keno on Keno's classic rock n roll site said that about John Lennon's guitar playing on Get Back,Revolution and For Your Blue.

Posted by LetMeRollitToYou on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 20:24pm


Also in an excellent Beatles book Ticket To Ride by Denny Somach where so many other well known popular respected rock musicians and artists are interviewed about The Beatles praising them including Jimmy Page,Brian Wilson who says he's always loved The Beatles. And Brian Wilson called John & Paul the greatest song writers of the 20th century on a 1995 Nightline Beatles tribute show,(which had on music artists from every type of music,a young black jazz musician,a middle aged black opera singer,Steve Winwood,Meatloaf,and classical violnist Isak Perleman,who said he plays his children Bach,Beethoven Mozart and The Beatles)and he played With A Little Help From My Friends on the piano and he said he just loves this song. He also said that Sgt.Pepper is the greatest album he ever heard and The All Music Guide says in their Beach Boys biography,that Brian had a nerveous breakdown after he heard it. Brian also said that when he first heard The Beatles brilliant 1965 folk rock album Rubber Soul he was blown away by it.He said all of the songs flowed together and it was pop music but folk rock at the same time and he couldn't believe they did this so great,this inspired him to make Pet Sounds.



John Lodge and Justin of The Moody Blues are interviewed in this book and Bill Wyman and Ron Wood says how The Rolling Stones became good friends with The Beatles in 1963 after John and Paul wrote 1 of their first hits,the Rock n Roll song,I Wanna Be You're Man.



Ron Wood was asked what his favorite Beatles songs and he said there are so many apart from the obvious like Strawberry Fields I Want To Hold Your Hand is one he said he used to like a lot ,and he said he really loved We Can Work It Out.He also says that The Beatles used to have a radio show every Friday where they played live and spoke and he would never miss an episode. He said infact whoever has the rights to those shows should dig them up,because they are incredible.



Justin Hayward says that the album he always really loved ,and he said it was when they started experimenting with chord structures ,was A Hard Day's Night.He says they began to move away from the standard 3 chord thing and just went into more interesting structures .He said A Hard Day's Night was the album for him and their song If I Fell was the song.He said it started in a different key to how it ended up,and it's a beautifully worked out song and that there are some songs on that album that were very emotinal and evocative. He said that for everybody just starting to weite songs as he was,it was a real turn on and eye opener.


Roger McGuinn of The Byrds says in this book when he was asked what he felt about The Beatles music when he first heard it and he said he loved it and he said when he saw a film of one of their early concerts and they were playing She Loves You and I Want To Hold Your Hand,he said he loved the songs and he bought their albums soon after and learned all of their songs and he played them in clubs in the mid 1960's.Roger also says that he feels The Beatles invented folk rock without even realizing it,because they were using unusual folk rock chords in their early music and he said those chords were never used in pop rock before. He also said after he saw The Beatles great film A Hard Day's Night twice,and he saw that George Harrison was playing a 12 string guitar he went and bought one soon after.


And John's You Can't Do That is a great rocker recorded in Febuary 1964 and John made his debut as a lead guitarist and did a darn good job of it!The All Music Guide describes Can't Buy Me Love as a rocker and says it's one of the great early Lennon and McCartney originals. And it's really impressive and interesting that as early as their A Hard Day's Night album,they wrote 4 beautiful acoustic guitar songs on it,And I Love Her, If I Fell,Things We Said Today and the gorgeous I'll Be Back a year before the Help album and over a year before Rubber Soul.

Posted by LetMeRollitToYou on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 20:37pm


LetMeRollitToYou...It boils down to this...Liam simply doesn't like the Beatles. He is from that area of the world, and grew up long after their heyday and doesn't understand what all the fuss was about. There's a lot of highly influential bands he does like, though...

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 20:42pm


NME.COM
HOME
NME News

Bob Dylan talks of Beatles friendship


Legend admits: 'I'm in awe of McCartney'


May 16, 2007


Bob Dylan has spoken in depth about his longstanding friendship with The Beatles and his particular bond with George Harrison.



Talking to Rolling Stone magazine, Dylan talked freely about Harrison’s struggle to find his voice within the songwriting collective of John Lennon and Paul McCartney.




"George got stuck with being the Beatle that had to fight to get songs on records because of Lennon and McCartney. Well, who wouldn’t get stuck?" he asked.



Dylan highlighted the writing talents of Harrison, saying: "If George had had his own group and was writing his own songs back then, he’d have been probably just as big as anybody."



Speaking against popular belief, the singer also denounced any rumours of competitiveness towards Lennon and McCartney, asserting, "They were fantastic singers. Lennon, to this day, it’s hard to find a better singer than Lennon was, or than McCartney was and still is."



Nodding his cap to McCartney in particular, Dylan concluded: "I’m in awe of McCartney. He’s about the only one that I am in awe of. He can do it all. And he’s never let up... He’s just so damn effortless.


N

Posted by LetMeRollitToYou on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 20:44pm


...and why are you discussing the Beatles on the Kiss page????

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 20:47pm


Gitarzan,

As I said I was born after 1964 too.But I have been a huge highly impressed Beatles fan (specifically a big John and Paul fan) since I started to collect their albums at the age of 9,I got my first Beatles book for my 11th birthday and I had every album by age 13.



The ponit is Liam doesn't like them largely because he has a lot of ignorant misperceptions about them which are all too sadly common.

Posted by LetMeRollitToYou on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 20:51pm


To Gitarzan,

You ask why am I discussing The Beatles on a Kiss page,because others discussed them here first and a lot of ignorant inaccurate things were said about them that's why.

Posted by LetMeRolitToYou on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 20:56pm




Pete Townsend along with John Bonham, John Paul Jones and David Gilmore played on 2 songs on the last Wings album Back To The Egg that came out in 1979 . They also all played with Paul and Wings in the last Wings concerts in December 1979.



Pete also along with Phil Collins who is also a big Beatles fan since he was 13 in the concert scene in the Beatles film A Hard Day's Night, played on Paul's 1986 album Press To Play.



And I have found over 50 former Beatles haters on different message boards who are now big Beatles fans,many call them The Greatest Rock Band Ever and most say they now think they were brilliant song writers. I didn't communicate with these people, but they said in their posts that they hadn't even heard most of their songs and albums,and had inaccurate misperceptions of them like the ridiculous one that they ever were a "boy band." Which besides knowing even most of their music and knowing their history knows is totally false.



Last year a musician posted on some message board about the new John Lennon biography, and he said watch The Beatles Anthology video series and learn how truly immensely talented this band was.



Most people don't hate The Beatles in the first place and people don't usually go from hating a band to loving them, so it just goes to show how great and timeless their music really is/was!



I once found a post a few years ago of a 35 year old musician in Jamaica who said on his blog that when he was younger and a big Who fan he used to think The Beatles were overrated, but that he did a 300 degree turn around and he said he now truly believes that The Beatles were the greatest rock band ever.

Posted by LetMeRollitToYou on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 21:00pm


You're preaching to the choir here...I learned to play the guitar listening to the Beatles during their heyday. I actually don't think ignorance is what guides Liam...in his eyes there were just artists who were much more influential...he thinks they're just an over-hyped "pop band", which we know he'd be hard pressed to fing a lot of people in agreement.

As a comparison, as time has gone on there are people who think the likes of Chuck Berry and Little Richard were more influential than Elvis Presley...which people who know better (or who actually were "there") and know the "big picture" of the origins of Rock & Roll know that's simply ridiculous...

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 21:02pm


It's all good that you list all of this stuff that other people have said or written about the Beatles...but what is it about them that YOU think is influential? Is that going to make any more sense than why Liam doesn't think they're so hot?

The Beatles have been well chronicled, to be sure. but they've also had their fair share of critics, too...

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 21:10pm


Gitarzan,

The Beatles have *not* had their fare share of critics too. The majority of rock critucs,the majority of people,and many many well known respected rock musicians and rock artists continue to praise them as one of and many call them The Greatest Band Ever! And yes Liam and others like him are saying very inaccurate ignorant things about The Beatles.

Posted by LetMeRollitToYou on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 21:56pm


And you don't recognize it as total ignorance that Liam or anyone has the total inaccurate ignorant misperception that The Beatles were " just an over-hyped "pop" band???!!! That bleeds total ignorance right there!!!!

Posted by LetMeRollItToYou on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 22:00pm



There are many good music scholars and musicologists and music professors who have done serious studies and praise of The Beatles music of especially John Lennon and Paul McCartney. Award winning music composer and classical composer Dr.Glen Gass at Indiana Scholl of Music has been teaching a course on how brilliant The Beatles were as composers and a course on rock music since 1982.


Dr.Gary Kendal's Beatles course is the most requested course at North Western University,Oxford University recently also had a Beatles course,and The University of California does too.


University of Penn graduate musicologist Alan W.Pollack did an extensive 11 year study of every Beatles song Notes On... Every Beeatles Song and it's online. He demonstrates how even in many of The Beatles early songs they used complex,unusual and interesting chords and arrangements( many of their early songs have as many as 9 chords not only 3, and Paul's excellent rocker,You Never Give Me Your Money on Abbey Road has as many as 20 chords),and Bob Dylan,Roger McGuinn of The Byrds and The London Times musicologist William Man all ponted this out too.William Mann pointed that out as early as December 1963 when he called John and Paul the 2 most outstanding composers of 1963.




University of Michigan music profesor and musicologist Walter Everett wrote a 2 volume academic study on The Beatles,The Beatles As Musicians:The Quarry Men Through Rubber Soul and The Beatles as Musicians: REvolver Through Anthology.And British music professor, classical composer and musicologist Wilifred Mellers in 1973 wrote,Twilight of The Gods:The Music Of The Beatles and he also wrote about Beethoven,Mozart and Bob Dylan too.



The Beatles are also the most covered music artists ever with everyone from classical,jazz,Motown,pop,rock,and even heavy metal recording and playing their great timeless music.

Posted by LetMeRollItToYou on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 22:06pm




On Last FM. The Rolling Stones only had 80 members of their fan group in 2007, The Beatles had over 2,000 which is now over 11,000 the average age of fans is 22 more guys than girls and they are from all over the world!



In 2006,2007 and 2008 The Beatles were the # 1 most listened music artists on Last.FM and they are very popular on YouTube and Rate Your Music where many male and female fans in their teens and 20's call them The Greatest Rock Band Ever!


The Beatles are still rightfully regarded by most people,most rock critics,and many other music and rock artists as The most creative,innovative,and prolific rock band ever!



As many people even some Rolling Stones fans have said, The Rolling Stones haven't made a great record in at least 25 years or more.




The Beatles wrote *plenty* of great rock songs including hard rock on The White Album and Abbey Road and as many have rightfully pointed out Paul invented heavy metal with his 1968 song Helter Skelter and people have also said John's I Want You She's So Heavy on Abbey road was also one of the first heavy metal songs.




Even in their early days they wrote some great rockers that were very rocky for the times, as The All Music Guide said,in their very good review of Past Masters Volume 1 that they proved they could rock really really hard,with John's I Feel Fine from late 1964 which featured the very recorded feedback guitar on a rock song,and Paul's great blues rocker,She's A Woman also from late 1964,and what they called the peerless I'm Down which is Paul's screaming rocker from mid 1965 which they performed even harder rocking, and screaming in August 1965 at Shea Stadium.



Also John's You Can't Do That from early 1964,is a great rock song, so is Day Dripper,Paperback Writer,Oh Darling,Hey Bulldog And You're Bird Can Sing, She Said She Said,Taxman, etc!

Posted by LetMeRollitToYou on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 22:11pm


And Gitarzan,

What do you think of Kiss as a band?

Posted by LetMeRollIitToYou on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 22:14pm


I don't think it's any more ignorant than you being a big fan of theirs...it's purely subjective. If one doesn't like a particular artist, then no amount of coaxing is going to make them. It doesn't necessarily mean they have bad taste in music.

Also, not everyone during that time thought the Beatles were a positive influence to the culture of young people...thinking otherwise is ignorant. I grew up during that time, and know that to be a fact. That sort of thing goes with the territory...

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 23:03pm


I think KISS is okay...I've covered some of their material in the past. Their approach to music and theatrics had been done before, but during their heyday music was all about being FUN...and they certainly cornered that market...

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 23:07pm


Gitarazan,

Being a big Beatles fan certainly isn't ignorant at all,but Liam or anyone else calling The Beatles an "overhyped "pop" band" is certainly very ignorant if you can't see that then you must not be much of a Beatles fan either,and maybe you share Liam's inaccurate misperception of them too!


And by the way I don't like classical music but I belive that Beehtoven,Mozart and Bach were the brilliant composers they are widely considered to be,and I'm not a Bob Dylan fan either but I also believe he's the great song writer he's widely considered to be, it would be really ignorant of me to say they are were overrated and not that talented!

Posted by LetMeRollIitToYou on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 23:20pm


Well, considering I grew up during that time (yes, i actually experienced "Beatlemania"...as it was happening), cut my teeth learning to play the guitar listening to them, and pretty much owning everything they ever did, I'd say it's pretty stupid for you to think otherwise. Once again...Liam...doesn't...like...them!!! For whatever reason, they just never "did it" for him. It doesn't mean he's "ignorant" or has bad taste in music...it means they just weren't that significant in his mind.

Funny thing about it is if he were still frequenting this site, I'm sure you would've gotten an earful on his "perspective" by now...and you'd be frustrated to tears trying to tell him anything about the Beatles...

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 23:30pm


The Beatles wrote, played and recorded so many great critically acclaimed, popular songs and albums of all different styles of music and wrote about 50 or more years worth of mostly great music in just an 8 year recording career.




When The Beatles were playing live in 63,64, 65& 66 they had very limited primitive sound systems at the time,only 100 watt amplifiers,(and George Harrison says in the excellent video series,The Beatles Anthology that special 100 watt amplifiers were made for their August 1965 Shea Stadium concetts,and he said they went up from the only 30 watts before!) no feedback monitors so they couldn't even hear themselves play and sing(yet they amazingly managed to sing and play in sync and in tune with each other anyway!) plus all of the screaming from the crowds.


In their January 1969 live rooftop concert they sounded great, the sound systems had improved some by then ,although still pretty primitive compared to today's,and there were no screaming crowds anymore.


When I was a teenager I met 3 people who saw he Beatles in concert, 2 saw them in 1966 and 1 saw them in 1964, they all told me they could see and hear them and that they were great.



On the site Artist Facts in The Rolling Stones section a guy Steve from Canada said he saw The Beatles in concert in 1966 and The Rolling Stones in 1996(and the sound systems by then were a million tines better!) and he said they both were great but he said The Beatles were The *GREATEST* Band ever!



And former Kiss guitarist Bob Kulick who produced the heavy metal tribute Beatles album,Butchering The Beatles, said he saw The Beatles at Shea Stadium in 1966 and he said he only heard them in bit and pieces but he could hear parts of Baby's In Black and Paperback Writer and he said they sounded amazing. He also callsthem the *GREATEST* band ever.



In The excellent Beatles Anthology video series they show The Rolling Stones playing live The Beatles song I Wanna Be Your Man and on those limited sound systems The Rolling Stones sounded almost like a bad bar band.

Posted by LetMeRollitToYou on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 23:32pm


...he respected my viewpoint on the Beatles because I respected HIS.

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 23:32pm


The Beatles were no doubt the most influential group of the rock era...but not everyone liked them.

Just a little FYI...a 100 watt amp is pretty powerful...

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 23:37pm


Gitarzan,

No, it's his saying that The Beatles early music was pure generic garbage and calling them the most hideously overrated band ever that is what is *SO* *IGNORANT*. As Eric said to Liam on here,that for anyone to make such a ridiculous statement just boggles the mind!Yes it really does and I can't really understand why you don't see this.


Beethoven,Mozart,Bach and Bob Dylan were overrated garbage,now does that sound intelligent to you at all?

Posted by LetMeRollitToYou on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 23:47pm


Hardly, a 100 watt amplifier is a joke compared to what people use today and even the 70's sound systems were so much better and more advanced.

Posted by LetMeRollItToYou on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 23:52pm




Not only did The Beatles give The Rolling Stones one of their first hits with their rock n roll song I Wanna Be Your Man,and they wrote it right in front of them and Keith Richards and Mick Jagger were impressed and like wow how can you write a song just like that and it motivated them to start writing their own songs.



And as I already said The Rolling Stones were good friends with and fans of The Beatles.


Mick Jagger was at 4 Beatles recording sessions and Keith Richards was at 2 of them with him.Also Mick Jagger was such a big Beatles fan that in May 1967 when The Beatles were redording their song Baby You're A Rich Man he came there and stood on the sidelines to watch and listen to them recording it. His name is also on the tape box and he likely sang at the end verses.



The Beatles have the best selling album of the last decade with their CD 1.



And Brian Jones played the saxaphone on the strange Beatles song, You Know My Name Look Up The Number and he and Mick Jagger's girlfriend at the time Marriane Faithful contributed sound effects on the song Yellow Submarine.



As this guy Sal66 who has also posted on sites debunking ignorant cr*p about The Beatles has rightfully pointed out, The Beatles wrote,played and recorded I Feel Fine (which The All Music Guide says has brilliant,active ,difficult guitar leads and riffs) in the Fall of 1964 which was the first use of feedback guitar on a pop rock record and it also had a prominent guitar riff throughout this very good song almost a year *before* The Rolling Stones's Satisfaction came out.



And on John's great Norwegian Wood recorded in the Fall of 1965,George Harrison was the first to play a sitar on a pop rock song and it was released on their great album Rubber Soul in December and then in May 1966 The Rolling Stones song Paint It Black came out with Brian Jones playing a sitar!


And in Paul McCartney's authorized biography Many Years From Now, Mick Jagger's former girlfriend singer Marriane Faithful says that she and Mick used to go over to Paul's house a lot and hang out in his music room. She said he never went to see them at their house they always went to visit him because he was Paul McCartney.She also said that Mick was intimidated by Paul but that Paul was totally oblivious to this.


Paul also says in this book that he turned Mick on to pot in his music room and he said which is funny because a lot of people would assume it was the other way around.



















Posted by LetMeRollitToYou on Sunday, 02.14.10 @ 23:58pm


Also, classical composer Leonard Bernstein called John and Paul the greatest composers of the 20th century so did Elton John on a 1991 CBS Morning news show,he was asked who he musically admires and he said you can talk about your Rogers and Hammerstein but for the quanity of quality songs that Lennon and McCartney wrote in that short period of time,he said he thinks they were the greatest song writers of the 20th century.Brian Wilson said this too on a 1995 Nightline Beatles tribute show. The Beatles are in the Vocal Hall of Fame and The Song Writing Hall of Fame and they were awarded about 20 prestigious Ivor Nevello awards as great singers and song writers in just a remarkable 8 year recording career,John and Paul won the first one in early 1964!

Posted by LetMeRolitToYou on Monday, 02.15.10 @ 00:00am


The Rolling Stones also wrote quite a few soft sentimental pop kind of songs,Lady Jane,As Tears Go By,Rubey Tuesday,Angie,Wild Horses,Waiting On A Friend and the 2 dreadful disco imitations,Miss You and Emotional Rescue. At least when Paul McCartney did a disco like song,Good Night tonight it was good interesting sounding music!

Posted by LetMeRollitToYou on Monday, 02.15.10 @ 00:03am


And George Martin himself said in an online interview I found around 2002 said that he has worked with many different music artists but that he has never known or worked with anyone as brilliant as The Beatles!


He says in his biography All You Need Is Ears refutes that he was the one who had most to do with The Beatles music. He admits most of the ideas came from them.


And if anyone ever reads the excellent book,The Beatles Recording Sessions by Mark Lewisohn which is a very detailed music diary of of every recording session in their amazing only 8 year career, which has interviews with their recording engineers,tape operators,George Martin quotes,and a very good interview with Paul in the beginning,they would see how truly creative,and innovative especially John and Paul were in the recording studio and that most of these great musicial ideas came from them.



George Martin was also once inerviewed on a rock station Beatles program and he said what is clearly obvious and true, John Lennon and Paul McCartney were incredibly talented people(and he said it like he still couldn't belive it.), they both were extrodinarily talented song composers and great singers.And notice how Ringo working with George Martin for 8 years didn't turn him into a brilliant song writer like John and Paul,and George Martin has produced many other music artists but non of them have had as much critical acclaim,success or popularity as THe Beatles!

Posted by LetMeRollitToYou on Monday, 02.15.10 @ 00:06am


Many people on different message boards have said the only Rolling Stones song they like is Paint It Black, my first cousin who is a head hunter helping people find jobs,she used to an accountant,and when she was 21 a huge Rolling Stones fan she also had The Beatles Revolver album in her bedroom.

When The Rolling Stones did their Steel Wheels tour in 1989 I asked her if she still liked The Rolling Stones and she said no,but the same year at her wedding shower my male and female cousins were talking about The Beatles who we all love,and my cousin Randi said Oh I love The Beatles.


And when I was going to Paul McCartney live for the first time in 1990 and I was very excited about it,I was going on about how great he,John and The Beatles were and she said OK,I said you said you love The Beatles too and she said hey bottom line they were genuises!


And I once heard a radio host who was a former rock DJ and he said The Beatles are really like the only music artists who have just about every song they did was great and wasn't great was still good. He said even their album tracks that weren't released as singles.


And many people have said it's The Rolling Stones albums that have just a handful of very good songs and the rest is filler!

Posted by LetMeRollitToYou on Monday, 02.15.10 @ 00:10am


Bob Dylan ,Roger McGuinn of The Byrds and music critic William Mann of The London Times as early as 1963 and 1964 pointed out that even in early Beatles songs like She Loves You and I Want To Hold Your Hand had unusual and interesting chords and they arranged them.



And as early as late 1963 a music critic Richard Buckle in The London Times called John and Paul the two of the most briliant composers since Beethoven after John and Paul composed the music for a ballet Mods and Rockers.


And John and Paul wrote one of The Rolling Stones first hits, I Wanna Be Your Man in late 1963 right in front of them. And Keith Richards and Mick Jagger were impressed and said wow,how can you write a song just like that and it inspired them to start writing their own songs.



John Lennon and Paul McCartney were such amazingly talented singer song writers that they were already writing hit songs for other artists as early as 1963 when their own song writing success was getting off the ground,besides The Rolling Stones,they also wrote hit songs in 1963 for Billy J.Krammer and The Dakatos,Celia Black,and Peter and Gordon etc.



Paul wrote his first song at age 14 and was playing guitar,John wrote heavy deep poetry but didn't start writing songs until he met Paul and was impressed that he wrote his own songs,and he too started to write his own songs at age 17,and they wrote together and never stopped from then on.Paul wrote the very pretty song I'll Follow The Sun at only 16!


By the way I really don't like Paul McCartney's 1980 solo album McCartney 2, he plays every instrument by himself though and does a great job as he did on his first good solo album McCartney.

Posted by LetMeRollitToYou on Monday, 02.15.10 @ 00:17am


I recently got an email back from Tony Keys of a web site called,rocksbackpages and he said he does have a December 1973 ZigZag Charlie Watts interview. He said if I want it he would scan it and send it to me for 30$ British $. But I don't want to buy it I thought that they posted old rock interviews on their site for free.



Also,

on a fan site for the rock group Yes, called,Yesfans.com ( who are also big Beatles fans themselves and they recorded and played live several Beatles songs and member Rick Wakeman did a whole Beatles tribute album in 2000) they had a topic called Are The Beatles Overrated? from 2004-2008 and over 74% of the Yes fans voted the first choice, No Of Course Not They Were Not Overrated How Can You Even Ask This Question.


And one of the Yes fans posted in early 2008," The Greatest Band of all time overrated? Phuck no!"



And another Yes fan quoted him and said I second what he said! Another Yes fan quoted his own post from a year before when he had said he thought The Beatles were overrated and he now quoted his old post with an I'm stupid emoticon and he said how could I have been so stupid,of course The Beatles are not overrated.



Also, guitarist Frank Marino of the hard rock group Mahogany Rush said in several online interviews that he hates The Rolling Stones but he likes The Beatles,Jimi Hendrix,and The Doors etc. And Dave Navarro of the rock group Jane's Addiction said in Guitar World in 1991 and 1996 that he has always hated The Rolling Stones and he will never play one of their records.



Also there used to be an online interview
with Rolling Stones drummer Charlie Watts from a 1973 Magazine called Zig Zag,and the interview was called,The Drinking Man's Rolling Stone. He says in this interview that The Beatles and The Rolling Stones were a lot alike as people and were friends. He also said what made The Beatles so great is that they made one great single and great album after the next.


Posted by LetMeRollitToYou on Monday, 02.15.10 @ 00:22am


The All Music Blog


With the Beatles
The Beatles



Artist

The Beatles

Album

With the Beatles

Rating *****


Release Date

Nov 22, 1963

Label


Capitol Records

Time


32:24

Type


Enhanced

Genre Styles
Pop/Rock
Contemporary Pop/ Rock
Merseybeat
British Invasion
Rock & Roll
AM Pop
Early Pop/Rock



Moods Themes
Lively
Gleeful
Exciting
Warm
Bright
Yearning
Energetic
Raucous
Fun
Bittersweet
Playful
Sweet
Rollicking
Rousing
Poignant
Witty
Cheerful
Acerbic
Exuberant
Earnest
Whimsical
Affection/ Fondness
Playful
Summertime
Spring
Hanging Out
Party Time



Review by Stephen Thomas Erlewine


With the Beatles is a sequel of the highest order — one that betters the original by developing its own tone and adding depth. While it may share several similarities with its predecessor — there is an equal ratio of covers-to-originals, a familiar blend of girl group, Motown, R&B, pop, and rock, and a show tune that interrupts the flow of the album — With the Beatles is a better record that not only rocks harder, it's considerably more sophisticated. They could deliver rock & roll straight ("I Wanna Be Your Man") or twist it around with a little Latin lilt ("Little Child," one of their most underrated early rockers); Lennon and McCartney wrote sweet ballads (the achingly gorgeous "All I've Got to Do") and sprightly pop/rockers ("All My Loving") with equal aplomb; and the propulsive rockers ("It Won't Be Long") were as richly melodic as slower songs ("Not a Second Time"). Even George Harrison's first recorded song, "Don't Bother Me," is a standout, with its wonderfully foreboding minor-key melody. Since the Beatles covered so much ground with their originals, their covers pale slightly in comparison, particularly since they rely on familiar hits (only "Devil in Her Heart" qualifies as a forgotten gem). But for every "Roll Over Beethoven," a surprisingly stiff reading of the Chuck Berry standard, there is a sublime moment, such as Lennon's soaring interpretation of "You Really Got a Hold on Me," and the group always turns in thoroughly enjoyable performances. Still, the heart of With the Beatles lies not in the covers, but the originals, where it was clear that, even at this early stage, the Beatles were rapidly maturing and changing, turning into expert craftsmen and musical innovators.


Tracks




Title
Composer
Time

1 It Won't Be Long Lennon, McCartney 2:13
2 All I've Got to Do Lennon, McCartney 2:02
3 All My Loving Lennon, McCartney 2:07
4 Don't Bother Me Harrison 2:28
5 Little Child Lennon, McCartney 1:46
6 Till There Was You Willson 2:13
7 Please Mister Postman Bateman, Dobbins, Garrett ... 2:34
Composed by: Bateman, Dobbins, Garrett, Gorman, Holland


8 Roll Over Beethoven Berry 2:45
9 Hold Me Tight Lennon, McCartney 2:31
10 You've Really Got a Hold on Me Robinson 3:01
11 I Wanna Be Your Man Lennon, McCartney 1:59
12 Devil in Her Heart Drapkin, Dropkin 2:26
13 Not a Second Time Lennon, McCartney 2:06
14 Money (That's What I Want) Bradford, Gordy 2:51
15 With the Beatles Mini-Documentary [Multimedia]

indicates Track Pick
indicates a click-through to a song review




Releases Other Editions
Year
Type
Label
Catalog #

1987 CD Capitol Records C2-46436
1987 CS Capitol Records C4J-46436
2006 LP Parlophone Records 1206
2007 CD Toshiba EMI 51112
Edition

Stereo












Posted by LetMeRollitToYou on Monday, 02.15.10 @ 00:26am


This is some of what the early music was from a great rock band Liam called generic garbage below is a review of the great late 1964 blues rocker by Paul,She's A Woman.




You know your music - so do we. THE ALLMUSIC BLOG


She's a Woman

The Beatles

Composed By
John Lennon/Paul McCartney



Song Review by Richie Unterberger



"She's a Woman" was one of the hardest-rocking early Beatles originals, and although it was the B-side to "I Feel Fine," it was almost as big a hit in its own right, reaching number four on the American charts. Sung and primarily written by Paul McCartney, it's a belter that illustrates how the Beatles could be bluesy without writing conventional blues songs that stuck to normal blues progressions. Right from the start, the track has a brash, almost harsh edge, with choppy guitar chords that are more like barks than power chords. McCartney, too often unfairly pegged as a sweet balladeer, demonstrates that he was also one of the best white rock hard singers of all time with his shrill yet rich, even ballsy, vocal. Certainly his vocal style here betrays a strong trace of Little Richard, but it's unfair to accuse him of imitating or lifting wholesale from his idol. In its confidence and assertiveness, McCartney's high-octane style is most assuredly his own. The basic, R&B-derived melody is effectively counterpointed with one of the briefer Beatle bridges on record, in which the Beatles detour into some non- blues chords and melodies for just a few bars before returning to the main thrust of the tune. McCartney, while devoting most of the words to celebration and praise of his woman, throws in a couple of phrases as evidence that he's starting to think in more sophisticated terms, particularly the line "turns me on when I get lonely" (a very, very early use of "turn me on" slang).




There's also the declaration that his love doesn't buy him presents, even though she's no peasant. Peasant's an unusual word to use in a pop song no matter what the era, and McCartney's value of true love over money (as previously also stated in "Can't Buy Me Love") is eternally hip. George Harrison executes a crafty blues-rock solo with a touch of country influence that's, as was his wont, just right for the song at hand. The ending is uncommonly unimaginative for a Beatles track, with McCartney repeating the title phrase several times over a fade; a more basic alternate take exists (on bootleg) in which he extends this section by improvising on that title line for a few minutes. He'd have to wait until "Hey Jude," however, to take that approach to the multi-extended fade onto an official single. As a rabble-rousing rocker, "She's a Woman" was a natural for the Beatles' live shows; a 1965 version was recorded for their The Beatles at the Hollywood Bowl album, and it was still part of their set on their final world tour in 1966. The most famous, or notorious, cover of "She's a Woman" was done by Jeff Beck in the mid-'70s, employing a voicebox on his guitar to sing-play the lyrics. That version was an FM radio favorite for a while, and subsequently sometimes scorned (as were Peter Frampton's voicebox-heavy tracks) as an example of mid-'70s hard rock excess.




Appears On
Rating
Year
Album

Length
Label

1964 Beatles '65
2:57 Capitol

AMG Track Picks

No Reply, I'll Follow the Sun, I Feel Fine

196Z Beatles in Italy EMI


1977 Live at the Hollywood Bowl 2:47 Capitol


1984 The Compleat Beatles [Video] MGM


1988 Past Masters, Vol. 1
3:03 Capitol

AMG Track Picks


She Loves You, I Want to Hold Your Hand, I Feel Fine, I'm Down

1988 Past Masters, Vols. 1 & 2 Capitol


1988 The Beatles Box Set [1988] 3:03 Capitol


1988 Ultra Rare Trax, Vol. 1 The Swingin' Pig


1989 Documents, Vol. 2 6:31 Oh Boy


1989 Five Nights in a Judo Arena Swingin' Pig


1989 Hold Me Tight 6:34 Condor


1989 Ultra Rare Trax, Vol. 6 6:32 The Swingin' Pig


1989 Unsurpassed Masters, Vol. 2 (1964-1965) Yellow Dog


1991 British Rock: 1st Wave [video] RCA


1991 I Feel Fine/She's a Woman Capitol


1992 Ready Steady Go!, Vol. 3 [Video] Pioneer


1992 The Beatles Box Set [1992] Capitol


1993 Artifacts, 1958-1970 6:32 Big Music


1993 Compact Disc Singles Collection 3:01 Capitol


1994 Artifacts II 1960-1969 3:19 Big Music


1994 Complete BBC Sessions Great Dane


1994 Live at the BBC 3:14 Apple/Capitol
AMG Track Picks


I'll Be on My Way, Soldier of Love (Lay Down Your Arms)

1996 Anthology 2

2:54 Apple/Capitol
AMG Track Picks


Yes It Is, If You've Got Trouble, That Means a Lot, I'm Looking Through You, Strawberry Fields Forever

1996 Anthology Video, Vol. 5 Apple


1998 Live in Japan 2:52 Walrus


1999 CD Singles Collection

3:01 EMI

AMG Track Picks

We Can Work It Out, Paperback Writer, Strawberry Fields Forever, Don't Let Me Down, I Am the Walrus, I'm Down, Ticket to Ride, She's a Woman, Revolution, All You Need Is Love

1999 EP Boxset 3:05 EMI


2001 Beatles Story CTA


2003 Around the World Import


2004 The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1 3:01 Capitol

AMG Track Picks

I Want to Hold Your Hand, It Won't
Be Long, I Wanna Be Your Man, Roll Over Beethoven, You Can't Do That, She Loves You, I'll Cry Instead, Things We Said Today, And I Love Her, No Reply, I'm a Loser, She's a Woman, I Feel Fine

2009 The Beatles: Stereo Box Set Capitol


Budokan Concert VAP Inport


Concerts 1964-66 [DVD]


Unauthorised Live, Vol. 1 Joker
























































Posted by LetMeRollitToYou on Monday, 02.15.10 @ 00:39am


You know your music - so do we. THE ALLMUSIC BLOG


You Can't Do That

The Beatles

Composed By Other Links
John Lennon/Paul McCartney All Performers that have performed this Title



Song Review by Richie Unterberger



As the B-side to "Can't Buy Me Love," "You Can't Do That" was a worthy companion to the more well-known hit, particularly as it was also one of the Beatles' grittiest and hardest-rocking early originals. The track was introduced by a ringing, circular George Harrison guitar lick that marked the first time he played 12-string electric guitar on a Beatles recording — an innovation that would figure strongly not just in the Beatles' mid-'60s records, but also in the development of folk-rock. Rhythmically the song has a funkier, more soulful beat than anything else the Beatles had previously done, perhaps sparked by increased exposure to American soul music as the group began to tour the U.S. John Lennon, in fact, specifically cited Wilson Pickett as an inspiration for the song, although since Pickett had barely begun to record under his own name when "You Can't Do That" was written in early 1964, one wonders if Lennon was influenced by Pickett only in hindsight.




The song had no shortage of dynamite hooks, particularly the insistent stuttering beats at the end of each verse and bridge, the thrilling soulful responsive harmonies that answer Lennon's lead vocal, and the dramatic rising harmony vocals that accompany Lennon on the bridge.

Lennon lets loose with one of his all-time great screams to launch the instrumental break, in which he makes his debut as a lead guitarist on a Beatles record, with crunchy, frenetic riffing that suits the tune well. Listen also for the very end, in which a reprise of the principal 12-string guitar riff suddenly slows to a crawl for the last three notes. Lyrically this is one of the toughest Lennon- McCartney songs, principally written by Lennon , and verging almost on misogyny in its threats to leave a girl if she so much as talks to another guy. There's an underlying note of insecurity, however, in his laments that others will laugh in his face if they see her acting the way she does. "You Can't Do That" was honored with a most unusual cover version by Nilsson a few years later on his debut album, in which he did not so much sing "You Can't Do That" as use its main motifs for the body of a track which interwove brief phrases from other Beatles classics like "Can't Buy Me Love," "Day Tripper," "You're Going to Lose That Girl," and "Drive My Car."




Appears On
Rating
Year
Album

Length
Label

1964 A Hard Day's Night [UK] 2:37 Capitol

AMG Track Picks

A Hard Day's Night, I Should Have Known Better, And I Love Her, Can't Buy Me Love


1964 The Beatles Beat Odeon



1964 The Beatles' Second Album 2:23 Capitol
AMG Track Picks


You Can't Do That, I'll Get You
, She Loves You

1976 Rock & Roll Music 2:37 Capitol


1980 Rock & Roll Music, Vol. 1 2:33 Capitol


1988 The Beatles Box Set [1988] 2:37 Capitol


1990 Ready Steady Go!, Vol. 1 [Video] Pioneer


1991 Can't Buy Me Love/You Can't Do That Capitol


1993 Artifacts, 1958-1970 2:38 Big Music


1993 Compact Disc Singles Collection 2:34 Capitol


1994 Complete BBC Sessions Great Dane


1994 Complete BBC Sessions Great Dane


1994 The Making of a Hard Day's Night MPI


1995 Anthology 1 2:42 Apple/Capitol


AMG Track Picks


Free as a Bird, Ain't She Sweet, One After 909, All My Loving, A Hard Day's Night, Leave My Kitten Alone


1999 CD Singles Collection 2:34 EMI

AMG Track Picks


We Can Work It Out, Paperback Writer, Strawberry Fields Forever, Don't Let Me Down, I Am the Walrus, I'm Down, Ticket to Ride, She's a Woman, Revolution, All You Need Is Love


199Z The Get Back Journals VigoTone


2001 Beatles Story CTA


2001 The Beatles Beat: The Beatles Sessions [Bootleg] Odeon Bootleg


2004 The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1 2:40 Capitol

AMG Track Picks


I Want to Hold Your Hand, It Won't Be Long, I Wanna Be Your Man, Roll Over Beethoven, You Can't Do That, She Loves You, I'll Cry Instead, Things We Said Today, And I Love Her, No Reply, I'm a Loser, She's a Woman, I Feel Fine


2009 The Beatles: Stereo Box Set Capitol


It's All in the Mind Y'know Beat


The Beatles, Vol. 3 Beat/Cool Daddy


The Beatles: 16 Superhits, Vol. 3 2:36 Dorado










Posted by LetMeRollitToYou on Monday, 02.15.10 @ 00:45am


A Marshall 100 watt plexi head on a 4x12 cabinet comes pretty close to ripping your face off...trust me. Now that you've told us what everyone else has said about the Beatles, you still haven't said why YOU think they're great. I have my reasons...doesn't matter to me what anyone else says.

Wanna know something else? After everything you've posted, Liam still thinks they're "generic garbage"...which he's entitled to...

Posted by Gitarzan on Monday, 02.15.10 @ 06:29am


It would be nice, if during your lengthy tomes to the Beatles/Kiss, you closed up your comments so you didn't leave so much blank space. Sorta messes up the 'Most Recent Comments' portion to have like 7 comments, all of which could be dramatically shortened.

Posted by Paul in KY on Tuesday, 02.16.10 @ 06:37am


LetMeGetKickedOffTheSiteForBeingAnnoying: Have you been taking lessons from Roy and Bill G? We got the point the first time. I'm sure Liam does know of the importance of the Beatles; if he doesn't like their music, that's fine. I'm more partial to the Stones and Zeppelin myself. When I saw stupidity on the Journey and Bon Jovi pages, I addressed it once, I didn't say it over... and over... and over... What is your opinion of KISS by the way?

Posted by Sam on Tuesday, 02.16.10 @ 16:18pm


Posted by LetMeRollitToYou

(about 1,000,000 times)
--------------------------------------------------
Dear Mr Roll,

If you have read the Beatle page, then you know that while I am not of Liam's ilk, I do not mind questioning the influence of the Beatles from time to time. You remind me of a person who showed up before I arrived at the site, who also wrote the equivalent of the Dead Sea Scrolls on the band and it's meaning.

While I appreciate hearing from anyone on the site, I fear the mania that has gripped you may be classified as a public health concern over time. Your statements best illustrate why some younger generations still question the fab four. In short, I fear you, not just because I imagine you are drooling over the keyboard while preparing to cast evil spells, but because it is precisely this allegedly life-affirming music that has done this to you.

Please don't hurt me, sir... PLEASE! (lol)

Posted by Cheesecrop on Tuesday, 02.16.10 @ 18:36pm


Cheesers...he sure let me have it, didn't he (LMAO)? It's always enlightening to have a conversation with someone who just doesn't "get it"...

Posted by Gitarzan on Tuesday, 02.16.10 @ 18:47pm


"What did REM do that was so special? They're just another rock band with a (self-admitted) lousy guitar player. Pretenders? Joan Jett was fronting The Runaways before Chrissie Hynde probably cashed her first royalty check. Patti Smith...Elvis Costello...Talking Heads? Puh-lease. Who the heck did any of them inspire, what was so original about them and what was their big impact on the music world/history of rock? NADA. David Lee Roth said it best..."The only reason most critics like Elvis Costello is because most of them LOOK like Elvis Costello". They should change the name of the place from the RRHOF to the House of Jan Wenner's Pals. Tell them Bono sent you. KISS, Rush, Neil Diamond, Chicago, Yes, Boston, Doobie Bros, ABBA, Bad Company, Journey, Cheap Trick, Ted Nugent, Ozzy Osbourne, Heart... to name but a few HUGE bands who belong in there. What did REM do that was so special? They're just another rock band with a (self-admitted) lousy guitar player. Pretenders? Joan Jett was fronting The Runaways before Chrissie Hynde probably cashed her first royalty check. Patti Smith...Elvis Costello...Talking Heads? Puh-lease. Who the heck did any of them inspire, what was so original about them and what was their big impact on the music world/history of rock? NADA. David Lee Roth said it best..."The only reason most critics like Elvis Costello is because most of them LOOK like Elvis Costello". They should change the name of the place from the RRHOF to the House of Jan Wenner's Pals. Tell them Bono sent you. KISS, Rush, Neil Diamond, Chicago, Yes, Boston, Doobie Bros, ABBA, Bad Company, Journey, Cheap Trick, Ted Nugent, Ozzy Osbourne, Heart... to name but a few HUGE bands who belong in there."
Holy shit, that comment took up almost an entire page. Where to begin? I'll throw you a crumb with R.E.M. Some consider them to be the first alternative band (turning post-punk into alternative) and if they weren't the first then they were damn near the first and definitely one of the most important. They set the stage for alternative to get attention on college radio in the 80's (hence the original nickname "college radio") and championed college radios. The common perception of them these days seems to be just another band with a few cheesy hits in the 90's, but go up to Nirvana, Soundgarden, Black Flag, Radiohead, pretty much anyone who relied on indie labels and college radio to get to where they got and see what happens if you say R.E.M. was "just another rock band." If that's what you think I don't know what to say. Yes, Peter Buck only uses a few chords, but three or four chords has always been what rock 'n' roll has been about (AC/DC, Chuck Berry, Keith Richards.) I agree that The Runaways (and possibly Joan Jett on her own) should already be in but The Pretenders are good. I don't know for sure why they're there, but Kit says they were an important part of post-punk and who am I to argue? Dameon would agree with you on Patti Smith, and he's a smart guy. As for Elvis Costello and The Talking Heads I'm not much of a fan of either but they were pretty important parts of new-wave. Speaking of importance... Boston, Journey, Neil Diamond, Doobie Brothers, Bad Company (I like), Heart (ditto), Ted Nugent (ditto; I know he has some influence though), and Chicago? I'll turn it on you. Who did THEY influence and how did they change history? Maybe for Yes as they were one of the prog heavyweights. I know Cheap Trick has some influence so it wouldn't bother me if they were inducted. I agree that KISS (after the glam and shock rock acts that came first) Ozzy (after a lot of people however) and Rush (after the early prog acts, and Deep Purple) should all be in.

Posted by Sam on Thursday, 02.25.10 @ 18:57pm


Some idiot wrote - "Patti Smith...Elvis Costello...Talking Heads? Puh-lease. Who the heck did any of them inspire, what was so original about them and what was their big impact on the music world/history of rock? NADA."

It's worth pointing out again that this is a ludicrous, titanically stupid comment.

Posted by Jonas on Friday, 02.26.10 @ 00:09am


It's worth pointing out again that this is a ludicrous, titanically stupid comment.

Posted by Jonas on Friday, 02.26.10 @ 00:09am

Just as I said. Patti Smith was a major player at CBGB's (as were Talking Heads), and TH and Costello were both big parts of new-wave. Okay, maybe I'll give you Journey for the video boards and Ted Nugent did influence James Hetfield, but beyond that... It's worth pointing out that there was nothing original about either of them (and I think Nugent's awesome). Ditto for Boston, Heart, Bad Company and the Doobie Brothers, and I feel comfortable in saying that if none of those artists had come along then rock history would either be the same or not all that different. You'll find a lot of those idiots here.

Posted by Sam on Friday, 02.26.10 @ 16:47pm


You might want to talk to Dameon about Patti Smith and what people actually thought of her at CBGB's (he used to frequent that place back in the day, from what I understand)...you'd be surprised!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Friday, 02.26.10 @ 18:54pm


I know about that; check the Def Leppard board. BTW, have you seen the 500 songs that shaped Rock 'n' Roll list? Or the Rock Hall Definitve 200? Some major errors on those.

Posted by Sam on Sunday, 02.28.10 @ 13:27pm


The action taken to local and national disasters is awesome but it's a damn shame that so many people take advantage of the negative situations.

I mean everytime there is an earthquake, a flood, an oil spill - there's always a group of heartless people who rip off tax payers.

This is in response to reading that 4 of Oprah Winfreys "angels" got busted ripping off the system. Shame on them!
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/08/19/crimesider/entry5251471.shtml

Posted by Choolahelable on Friday, 03.5.10 @ 19:37pm


Those artists who are begging to be inducted deserve it the least.

Posted by denyo on Sunday, 03.14.10 @ 12:58pm


Those artists who are begging to be inducted deserve it the least.

Posted by denyo on Sunday, 03.14.10 @ 12:58pm

I do find it interesting that Paul and Gene seem to be the only snubbed artists that are fired up about not being in (okay, Ozzy was complaining about Sabbath being snubbed, and rightfully so, but I hope by that logic you'd be saying Sabbath didn't deserve it?) If I was running a Hall of Fame I would first put in Alice Cooper (and Screamin' Jay Hawkins and Arthur Brown, who preceded him), the NY Dolls, Deep Purple, the important prog acts, maybe MC5, and the four major UK glam acts (T. Rex, Mott the Hoople, Slade and Sweet; T. Rex first.) Possibly a couple other people as well. However, KISS' massive influence would get them in mine, and they should in this one as well. However, if they're not going to induct those other acts then they don't have any excuses for not putting KISS in, so yes I feel Gene's rants are justified.

Posted by Sam on Sunday, 03.14.10 @ 19:22pm


Todd Cowle Municipal Bond Credit Report synthesizes, analyzes and presents aggregate credit information and trends in the municipal bond market. The report includes municipal bond rating information from the three major rating agencies – Moody’s Investor Services, Standard and Poor’s and Fitch Ratings.

Posted by dressiofe on Monday, 03.15.10 @ 01:42am


As a huge fan of KISS sence 1978,I have had followed they're music thru my life, 'til 2005 when i had gotten my first chance to see them perform live, the show had blown me away. Now for all of you who don't follow music that well, or don't understand music, well ok (hahaha), that is your opion. But let explain something if you don't mind. Music is a blessing of tellante. There is alot of those out there that doesn't have tellante at all but we accept them no matter what, because of they're tellante. KISS has influenced a lot bands or artist's, some who toured with them, are now big names of rock and roll. They even helped alot of them big names out in their career's, or even helped them to get started in they're career. So with all respect, KISS does deserve to be in the "ROCK HALL". Thank you for your time, Danny Painter

Posted by Danny Painter on Thursday, 03.18.10 @ 10:56am


I agree. There are others ahead in line, but if they're not going to deal with them then they should deal with KISS. Either way, their massive influence is difficult to ignore. I say yes.

Posted by Sam on Sunday, 03.21.10 @ 20:52pm


Not a huge fan of them, but you have to respect what they've done in their musical career lifetime. We just got back from the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame over this past weekend and we were VERY disappointed in the displays that they had, the Elvis, Jimi Hendrix, Jim Morrison and the guitars at the entrance of the museum were about the only descent displays. They needed to add some more rock displays and not just Motown and and Jefferson Airplane crap. There was no ACDC or Black Sabbath, I really thought we were going to the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame not the Blue Grass & Motown Hall of Fame, what a huge waste of money for the 4 of us it turned out to be!

Posted by Karin on Monday, 03.29.10 @ 15:53pm


Merchandising, entertainment value, many great songs, Gene and Paul, intimate relationship with their fans, and many many albums sold. Based on this criteria alone, this band has earned the title of one of the best Rock and Roll bands that ever lived. They have always had critics and always will, just as the Beatles did. The same ignorant people that criticize Kiss, AC/DC, and the Beatles because their music doesn't meet their backward ass standards, are the same idiots that keep them out of the hall. I would like to see one of their critics get on stage and pull off what Paul and Gene have been doing for decades. NOT!!!!!! They are so good live they make it look effortless. Until you have seen these guys in a small night club like I had the privilege of doing it is hard to realize just how good they really are. Please you snob nose rockers get your heads out of your ass.

Posted by Ray Painter on Monday, 04.12.10 @ 15:34pm


AMEN! Grand slam, Ray. Paul and Gene are KISS, I don't know why the Ace Frehley fanboys can't see that. Is Gene an ass? Yes, but it's interesting to hear him talk because he's a hell of a businessman and really does want to give the best show he can. Their influence is undeniable. If you're not going to induct T. Rex, Alice Cooper or the NY Dolls, then what excuse do you have for not inducting KISS?

Posted by Sam on Monday, 04.12.10 @ 17:09pm


Its interesting to hear people say the record sales dont matter, but how do you think an artist gains influence? WHEN PEOPLE BUY THEIR RECORDS. Musically KISS may not be the best band (though they are much better than people make them out to be, and i would like to see any of their haters make as many memorable songs as they did) but they are probably the most influential band to not be in the Rock Hall. Its time to correct that mistake.

Posted by Jim on Sunday, 04.18.10 @ 16:45pm


Well Jim, when people talk about how influential The Beatles were (and are), they're talking about the musicians they inspired, rather than the massive amount they sold. If I did karaoeke (spelling; and no I don't) and I said that Deep Purple changed my life (there's another way overdue band) and Metallica also claimed to be inspired by them (which they have), who's statement would carry more weight, mine or Metallica's? Correct. Fortunately, KISS has influenced lots of musicians, and thus should be in. I actually do think that sales do have some significance, but it's certainly not the #1 criteria in my book. If it was, then yes, we'd be able to correct the omissions of KISS and Rush. We'd also have to induct Poison, Bon Jovi, The Spice Girls, The Backstreet Boys and various other bands who didn't change the world in any way. Perhaps the HOF should have made the criteria a bit more clear when they started.

Posted by Sam on Sunday, 04.18.10 @ 19:15pm


Yes the HOF needs to be a bit more clearer on sales, cause it states sales doesnt matter and then inducts ABBA, so its a confusing situation.

Posted by Jim on Sunday, 04.18.10 @ 21:21pm


I'm not entirely sure about that one (ABBA) either, but since they put Sweden on the popular music map and I believe they had some influence (can't be sure), I see no reason not to induct them if they're not going to induct any of the more deserving bands, just as it doesn't make any sense to hold KISS back if they won't induct the more deserving shock rock, glam or Hard Rock bands. The Hall says the criteria that it came up with is important and sales are not, but then some of the glaring omissions (Joy Division, The Smiths, Thin Lizzy, The Runaways, for example) lead me to think otherwise. It's actually some people on here (namely Kit, William and Liam, whose opinions I value) who believe that sales are irrelevant to whether someone deserves induction. I do believe sales should play a part, but only a small part.

Posted by Sam on Tuesday, 04.20.10 @ 20:51pm


"madonna, mellencamp where do they rank on total albums sold." For what it's worth, Madonna has sold sixty three million albums in the US, and has two of the top ten biggest selling albums in British history, and has sold about 100-200 million albums worldwide.

"So, what is is that KISS did that outweighted: turning punk rock into post-punk; turning post-punk into chamber-rock; and sowing the seeds of post-rock?" - Liam
Wasn't Joy Division the first post-punk band?

Posted by Sam on Thursday, 04.29.10 @ 20:13pm


wait, they DIDN'T get inducted yet?
what kind of a sickk place is this?

Posted by ryan on Monday, 05.10.10 @ 16:18pm


"Criteria include the influence and significance of the artist's contributions to the development and perpetuation of rock and roll."

Most hard rock bands from the late 70s to the 90s and even some just starting today list KISS as one of their main influences and reasons for wanting to pick up an instrument or be in a rock band. It is the "influence" on others that matters. KISS certainly had influence on the entire 80s metal scene and still has influence today. Every time I see an interview with one of these bands, a Behind the Music, or whatever, they mention KISS as their inspiration or one of them. KISS invented Arena Rock as we know it today. There are many other bands as well that are getting overlooked just as James Hetfield of Metallica stated in his speech, so for me, it is not just a KISS thing.

Posted by Rick on Thursday, 07.1.10 @ 12:09pm


Well done Rick, but to add to your comment:

Metallica's Hall of Fame:

-Motorhead
-Judas Priest
-Iron Maiden
-KISS
-UFO
-Ted Nugent
-Deep Purple
-Alice Cooper
-Rush
-Thin Lizzy

I'll say no to Ted though he's a great guitarist, and UFO's a toss-up, but the rest there's room to argue for, with half of that list being absolutely baffling omissions.

Posted by Sam on Friday, 07.2.10 @ 16:22pm


If you are looking for great lava lamps we can help. With our price range on lava lamps for sale, it is easy to expand a collection of lava lamps and gifts.
We offer a wide variety of lava lamps for sale in different colors, sizes and styles.
We have had many motion lamps on sale They are in the same era as disco balls and black lights. Buy lava lamps at an affordable rate and you just might have it for years to come. Light up a dark room today.
This page: http://deansideas.com/Pligg/story.php?id=34285
explains our process in detail.

Posted by lavalampi on Wednesday, 07.7.10 @ 15:58pm


If you want to find a black lava lamp feel free to contact us.
Visit our stor to find the best deals on home lighting See which lamp will look right in your room. This offers Plasma in a Contemporary way that brings attention and helps you relax. You might think about our high quality yellow lava lamps as a compliment to a black lava lamp. One of our most popular products in this category are black and white lava lamps. These lamps are amazing. We also have quite a few color choices available. Large Lava Lamps can really make a huge impact.
Search and you will understand why the lava lamps were in the heart of generations.
We have had many motion lamps on sale They are in the same era as disco balls and black lights. Buy lava lamps at an affordable rate and you just might have it for years to come. Light up a dark room today.
This page: http://web.smashits.com/story.php?id=1965685
explains our process in detail.
If you want to find black lava lamps do not miss this opportunity.
Visit our stor to find the best deals on home lighting See which lamp will look right in your room. This offers Plasma in a Contemporary way that brings attention and helps you relax. You might think about our high quality yellow lava lamps as a compliment to a black lava lamp. One of our most popular products in this category are black and white lava lamps. These lamps are amazing. We also have quite a few color choices available. Large Lava Lamps can really make a huge impact.
Lava lamps have fascinated and mesmerized the public for decades.

Posted by jlavao on Monday, 07.12.10 @ 04:47am


KISS ARE A BUNCH OF GIMMICKY OLD MEN SPITTING FIRE AND BLOOD OUT OF THEIR BIG MOUTHS.THE SOLD 8 MILLION RECORDS.THAT AINT CRAP.BACKSTREET BOYS SOLD 100 MILLION.SCREW KISS AND THEIR COCKROCK MUSIC.

Posted by dion reed on Tuesday, 07.13.10 @ 13:12pm


Sales don't mean much (in fact KISS have sold 19 million albums in the US alone, far more than your dubious claim of 8 million.)

KISS>>>>Backstreet Boys. KISS' influence is well-documented. The influence of the Backstreet Boys is minimal at best. KISS wrote their own songs and played their own instruments, and Paul Stanley could outsing anyone in that average boy band (no one in said boy band writes many songs or plays instruments.) Where are they now? KISS' latest album received some good reviews and came in at #2 in the U.S. and they are still playing stadiums. The latest Backstreet Boys came in at #9 and dropped straight out of sight, falling off the charts after only six weeks. Really wimpy stuff.

Posted by Sam on Wednesday, 07.14.10 @ 20:42pm


With a thread as long as this one I'm sure someone has already made these points, as it would take hours to read the whole thing.

People can complain about Kiss, VU or any other band as being muiscally inferior all they want. This is nothing more than a subjective judgment. Obviously Kiss has reached their audience whether anyone else likes the message/delivery or not. Record sales, concert attendance, and the Kiss Army all speak to the fact they have a large and fiercely loyal following.

As a fan myself, I hope they don't get in. Why? Because going to a Kiss concert and listening to their music back in the day was our way of giving the finger to authority. Now I feel like going to a Kiss show and buying an album is how I can flip off these self-rightous Bozo's at the so called RRHOF.

Yeah. That's right. Obviously Kiss doesn't deserve to be in. All the while the sales and attendance figures will continue to increase. But hey, who needs the likes of Kiss when you've got authentic Rock heros like Madonna?

Posted by Russ on Wednesday, 08.18.10 @ 17:08pm


You know sometimes people miss the point ??? It's the Hall of Fame !!! C'mon does Kiss not belong in the RRHOF ??? Of course they do.

Posted by Joe-Skee on Wednesday, 08.18.10 @ 17:12pm


Kiss is simply not a good band. They've always been clunky and amatuerish.

Posted by ShootaLoad on Sunday, 08.22.10 @ 04:09am


Character Match,union wine recently acid argument spring his royal driver cost later manager contribute refer care music up order pattern disappear whose traffic excellent school bag senior tree ordinary thus conclude well estimate educational military many off surely telephone committee resource on smile sing part restaurant release message operate under reduce union used sleep watch interesting defendant couple nature introduction rare worker through institute field phone software force forward nature century across around help cut slightly answer field factor individual claim recognize plate refer

Posted by top colon cleanse products 2011 on Wednesday, 09.1.10 @ 23:44pm


I have seen many bands perform over the years. Attending a KISS concert is an adventure of many pleasures. It's audience is varied; from TOM JONES like multi-generational fans to the aspiring and accomplished in the entertainment industry. As far as I am concerned KISS is already in the hall of fame, my hall of fame.

Posted by Christopher Corn on Sunday, 09.5.10 @ 17:26pm


KISS influenced more bands musically and set the bar for decades for Rock and Roll musicians. Their fans are passionate about KISS musics influences on their lives. Any successful group does the same for their fans (all VH1's top 100), but KISS is and has been a worldwide phenomenon and because they don't seek political correctness they are shunned by folk and global warmers. So far I've had no compelling reason to visit the Hall of Fame, though every year I travel twice as far several times to catch a KISS concert. They positively inspire (the music and lyrics) despite a show. KISS fans can enjoy shortlived self proclaimed serious artists too and recognize their influences but keep denying where millions found their Elvis or Michael Jackson...A hard Rock band named KISS

Posted by phantom on Thursday, 09.9.10 @ 21:49pm


There'S is no Rock and roll all of fame, there's is only a Rock and roll all of shame, they intuduce madona and they not intuduce kiss. I would like to say something to Dave Marsh, but they will remove my comment if i did. Kiss is one of the greatest band in the world.

Posted by Raphael on Saturday, 09.11.10 @ 11:55am


When it comes to influence and impact KISS wins every time. No other band save the Beatles has inspired as many to pick up a guitar and start a band.

Posted by oBiwalrus on Sunday, 09.26.10 @ 19:13pm


They all suck dick....never, and if they do I'll put a gun to my head.

Posted by Brittany on Monday, 09.27.10 @ 07:59am


I think "Shit" should be a new genre of music.... Kiss and The jonas brothers would be first pick.

Posted by Brittany on Monday, 09.27.10 @ 08:02am


Kiss suck so hard that if their music is played any more, the entire universe will implode from the suckage. I wish Gene Simmons would quit trying to burnish his image. Kiss just sucks really hard and no image make over will make the music any better. He can't make it any worse though. Freakin' Aweful music.

Posted by The King on Thursday, 09.30.10 @ 22:58pm


"I think 'Shit' should be a new genre of music.... Kiss and The jonas brothers would be first pick."

Come on... surely Soulja Boy should be the first pick there? Anyway, one man's trash is another man's treasure. KISS are too damned influential to be ignored for much longer. It'll take awhile, and they might all be dead by the time it happens, but they'll get in... eventually. I hope Alice Cooper can get in on this vote, as that might open some doors for other Hard Rock acts (Deep Purple, for one; way overdue) to finally get their due as well.

Posted by Sam on Friday, 10.1.10 @ 09:38am


postcards

Posted by KighSleegegax on Wednesday, 10.13.10 @ 14:17pm


A hall of fame is for people or groups who had records or outstanding contributions to the organization or league. Since rock and roll has a broad spectrum there should be nominees in the various genres. Looking at the past "Inductees", the genre of hard/metal rock is very sparse along with many other genres such as alternative.
This organization picks only the bands they like so many bands will be omitted. If we (the fans and the bands/peers) want the right bands/people we must unite and make our own hall of fame.
Arguing about Kiss's worthiness is a waste of time and energy!When someone believes something they are not going to change their view because someone else has facts or rips on them! Let the masses vote and see if they qualify along with all the other bands/people omitted!

Posted by rock student on Thursday, 10.14.10 @ 10:03am


We're already making our own Hall of Fame on this site. We're nearly done. KISS got into it first ballot.

Posted by Sam on Saturday, 10.16.10 @ 13:56pm


The fact that Kiss sold so many albums supports P.T. Barnum's comment that there is a sucker born every minute.

Put dog shit on a paper plate and it will sound better than a Kiss song.

Posted by D. Stroy on Saturday, 10.23.10 @ 19:55pm


I like Kiss because I like everything boring. And Kiss' music is boring.

Posted by Bo Ring on Saturday, 10.23.10 @ 20:14pm


Perhaps the biggest misconception about determining if an act is worthy: Not liking them is a legitimate reason.

Posted by Jim on Saturday, 10.23.10 @ 22:24pm


Perhaps the biggest misconception about determining if an act is worthy: Not liking them is a legitimate reason.

Posted by Jim on Saturday, 10.23.10 @ 22:24pm

What's the difference, their influence and innovation is still minimal.

Posted by Chalkie on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 09:46am


Another misconception: You can look smart by totally ignoring stone cold facts that have been presented on this board.

Posted by Jim on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 10:03am


"Another misconception: You can look smart by totally ignoring stone cold facts that have been presented on this board.

Posted by Jim on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 10:03am"

This goes both ways here my friend.

Posted by Chalkie on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 11:17am


Then please explain why KISS isn't worthy. Explain away their large influence, impact on stage shows in music, and how they influenced the business side of music. I'm all ears.

Posted by Jim on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 11:21am


Firstly, "stage shows" and "the business side of music" should be (and are) irrelevant when talking about musical influence and innovation in general. MUSIC. What you hear through your ears when you put on headphones and close your eyes. Not pyrotechnics and make-up designed to draw your attention away from vacuous songs. Secondly, there is NOTHING that KISS did musically that wasn't done before and better by other artists except for, as you've mentioned, needless stage theatrics and moving merchandise (both classic symptoms of all that is wrong in music since KISS). As for influence, musically speaking, bands like Poison, Def Leppard and Bon Jovi (to name a few) do not represent relevant music for their day and age or generation. And as I've said before here, I know that the Replacements (a TRULY great band from the 80's) did "Black Diamond", but other than this questionable (at best) cover, their music shows little proof of influence of KISS.

Posted by Chalkie on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 11:43am


"As for influence, musically speaking, bands like Poison, Def Leppard and Bon Jovi (to name a few) do not represent relevant music for their day and age or generation."

...which is why they all sold a bunch of records? Hair Metal was just as much a part of 80s as alternative and new wave. Quite a few of those hair metal bands cited KISS as an influence, and they sound like them as well. Also since you cited The Replacements cover as a tiny shred of influence, I'm sure you're aware of the Kiss my Ass album, which was full of bands covering KISS songs?

"Firstly, "stage shows" and "the business side of music" should be (and are) irrelevant when talking about musical influence and innovation in general."

I disagree, music is about entertainment, which comes from a visual element as well as a musical one. It is quite important if your band redefined the show aspect of music and did something besides just sit around and play. (You can trace this back to Alice Cooper and Screamin Jay Hawkins, but Alice himself has admitted that KISS took his ball and ran with it to spectacular heights.) And besides if the business side of music is "irrelevant", why is Barry Gordy inducted?

"Secondly, there is NOTHING that KISS did musically that wasn't done before and better by other artists except for, as you've mentioned, needless stage theatrics and moving merchandise (both classic symptoms of all that is wrong in music since KISS)."

You sure about that? KISS and Aerosmith both laid the groundwork for the pop-metal sound of the 80s by mixing heavy riffs with good hooks, which explains why so many bands of that era have cited them as an influence. And I hardly see how entertaining your audience via visual and musical means is a symptom of whats "wrong with music". I suppose you want KISS to pull a Replacements and show up drunk and play covers of other bands songs instead? (I like the Replacements, but I think you get my point).

Posted by Jim on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 11:59am


"...which is why they all sold a bunch of records? Hair Metal was just as much a part of 80s as alternative and new wave. Quite a few of those hair metal bands cited KISS as an influence, and they sound like them as well. Also since you cited The Replacements cover as a tiny shred of influence, I'm sure you're aware of the Kiss my Ass album, which was full of bands covering KISS songs?"

- record sales do not musical relevance make.
- Hair Metal is a large reason why many people (rightly in this case) do not take the 80's seriously.
- As for the "Kiss My Ass Album" -- So what? Dinosaur Jr., Anthrax, Kravitz & Wonder and a bunch of garbage.

"I disagree, music is about entertainment, which comes from a visual element as well as a musical one. It is quite important if your band redefined the show aspect of music and did something besides just sit around and play. (You can trace this back to Alice Cooper and Screamin Jay Hawkins, but Alice himself has admitted that KISS took his ball and ran with it to spectacular heights.)

- no headway will be made here, I'll agree to disagree

"And besides if the business side of music is "irrelevant", why is Barry Gordy inducted?"

- Berry Gordy, Jr. is inducted because he acted as founder/producer/songwriter for a legendary record label which produced infinitely timeless, enduring and flawless music for the better part of two decades and helped to discover some of the greatest musical talents of all time.

"I suppose you want KISS to pull a Replacements and show up drunk and play covers of other bands songs instead?."

- sure, it would be better than them playing their own music

Posted by Chalkie on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 12:19pm


I'll agree to disagree on this, although I think you're basing it more on your personal dislike of them.

But I must say:

"- As for the "Kiss My Ass Album" -- So what? Dinosaur Jr., Anthrax, Kravitz & Wonder and a bunch of garbage."

I'm quite surprised you'd praise Motown in one sentence and proceed to call Stevie Wonder garbage in another, but thats beside the point. But your rebuttal- "so what?"- shows that you have no point. KISS may have recorded some crappy music, but their influence is far more than minimal.

Posted by Jim on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 12:32pm


"I'm quite surprised you'd praise Motown in one sentence and proceed to call Stevie Wonder garbage in another, but thats beside the point."

I thought that it was fairly obvious that I intended Stevie Wonder to be one of the 4 groups that I mentioned from that compilation that WEREN'T garbage (although I say that about Kravitz with reservations)

"But your rebuttal- "so what?"- shows that you have no point."

There was no point to be made there. How does a compilation with a handful of artists (most of them inconsequential) solidify a band's influence?

"KISS may have recorded some crappy music but their influence is far more than minimal."

Again, if we're talking strictly musical terms here, I beg to differ.

Posted by Chalkie on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 14:06pm


"There was no point to be made there. How does a compilation with a handful of artists (most of them inconsequential) solidify a band's influence?"

I'd say you're pretty significant if you've influenced Dinosaur Jr., Anthrax and Garth Brooks. (The first 2 are important from a musical perspective while Garth was one of the biggest musicians of the 90s, so that counts for something.) And lets look at artists who have cited KISS as an influence:
Pearl Jam
Nirvana
Alice In Chains
Anthrax
Guns N' Roses
Motley Crue (Tommy Lee in particular said that Peter Criss changed his life)
Pantera (Dimebag Darrell: "Without Ace Frehley there is no Dimebag Darrell)

And don't start with that "they dont sound like KISS" argument. Who do you think knows James Hetfield's influences better, you or the man himself?

And I'll bring up once again how the MUSIC of KISS laid the groundwork for pop metal music with its heavy riffs and catchy choruses, so they're far more musically relevant than you think (or wish)



Posted by Jim on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 14:28pm


Also, Krist Novoselic, Jason Newsted and Troy Sanders (Mastodon) have cited Gene as an influence on Bass, and people like Scott Ian, Kim Thayil, Dimebag and C.C. DeVille cite Ace Frehley as an influence, so I dont see how their influence isnt musical.

Posted by Jim on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 14:34pm


"And don't start with that "they dont sound like KISS" argument."

It's not merely that most of them (save Motley Crue) don't sound like KISS, it's that there isn't ANY hint of KISS or their influence in their music.

"Who do you think knows James Hetfield's influences better, you or the man himself?"

What's the difference? I can say that Elton John's music influences me, but if there is no evidence of his influence in my songwriting, playing or overall sound, then for all intents and purposes there is MINIMAL (at most) influence. I'd be merely a fan.

Evidence is what is needed, there is no EVIDENCE. A person can say that they did or didn't commit a crime, but without any evidence it means nothing.

Posted by Chalkie on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 14:56pm


"It's not merely that most of them (save Motley Crue) don't sound like KISS, it's that there isn't ANY hint of KISS or their influence in their music."

Even if that is true, then you have to deal with the fact that KISS had a huge influence on the hair metal scene of the 80s. Bad as it was sometimes, influence is influence.

"What's the difference? I can say that Elton John's music influences me, but if there is no evidence of his influence in my songwriting, playing or overall sound, then for all intents and purposes there is MINIMAL (at most) influence. I'd be merely a fan."

The difference? One person is a poster on the internet and the other is a frontman for one of the most successful bands of all time. I think I'll take his word over yours. Also as far as those bands not having any trace of KISS:

a) KISS could be heavy metal too, go listen to Creatures of The Night, so any influence on metal isnt an absurd argument.
b) GNR = Sleazy glam rock with arena rock tendencies. KISS = Sleazy Glam Rock with arena rock tendencies. A clear line can be drawn.
c) Per Wikipedia: "Cobain was also a fan of classic rock bands from the 1970s, including Led Zeppelin, AC/DC, Black Sabbath, Aerosmith, Queen, and Kiss. Nirvana occasionally played cover songs by these bands, including Led Zeppelin's "Immigrant Song", "Dazed and Confused" and "Heartbreaker", Black Sabbath's "Hand of Doom," and Kiss' "Do You Love Me?", and wrote the Incesticide song "Aero Zeppelin" as a tribute to Led Zeppelin and Aerosmith."
Are you going to discredit Led Zeppelin and Aerosmith as influencing Nirvana? Or is it just because you dont like KISS?

Its a crime that they're not in the hall, but whatever, hope Alice gets in this year.

Posted by Jim on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 15:10pm


"Bad as it was sometimes, influence is influence."

- Terrible logic.

"The difference? One person is a poster on the internet and the other is a frontman for one of the most successful bands of all time."

- More terrible logic here. And though I enjoy most of Metallica's pre-1990 music, James Hetfield is a complete moron.

"KISS = Sleazy Glam Rock with arena rock tendencies. A clear line can be drawn"

- GNR weren't glam rock. KISS is more like a sleazy arena rock band with faux-glam tendencies

"c) Per Wikipedia: "Cobain was also a fan of classic rock bands from the 1970s, including Led Zeppelin, AC/DC, Black Sabbath, Aerosmith, Queen, and Kiss"

- Again, the "fan-of vs. influenced-by" argument applies here. Also with the exception of possibly Sabbath and Zeppelin, Nirvana's music shows little evidence of any influence by these groups.

Posted by Chalkie on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 15:30pm


"Terrible logic."

No its not, mainly because one mans trash is another mans treasure. There are people out there who enjoy that kind of music, and would consider it good influence.

"More terrible logic here. And though I enjoy most of Metallica's pre-1990 music, James Hetfield is a complete moron."

You wanna know whats even worse logic? That last sentence, as if what you think James Hetfield has any bearing on the fact that he was influenced by KISS.

"GNR weren't glam rock. KISS is more like a sleazy arena rock band with faux-glam tendencies"

Bullshit. GNR had basically all the elements of the 80s bands, they were a litte darker and had arena rock tendencies. Not to mention GNR desecnded even farther into hair metal with Lies and Use Your Illsion. "They werent glam rock" is an argument spread by the Rolling Stone crowd to attempt to seperate GNR from the 80s pack when they musically fit it to a T. Also KISS had glam influences (they cited Slade and the New York Dolls) and like glam, they were highly stylized.

Also saying that "X band" inspired me to pick up a guitar is a pretty clear definition of influence.




Posted by Jim on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 15:42pm


"And I'll bring up once again how the MUSIC of KISS laid the groundwork for pop metal music with its heavy riffs and catchy choruses, so they're far more musically relevant than you think (or wish)"

I missed this comment.

First of all, since when has "Pop Metal" been relevant? What is "Pop Metal"? Does it even exist?

Secondly, more than a handful of great groups did "heavy riffs and catchy choruses" earlier and better than KISS such as...

The Who
The Rolling Stones
The Animals
The Kinks
T. Rex
Alice Cooper
The Beatles
MC5
Jimi Hendrix
Cream
Big Star
Lynyrd Skynyrd
Derek & The Dominos
Faces
Vanilla Fudge

...to name a few

Posted by Chalkie on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 15:57pm


"First of all, since when has "Pop Metal" been relevant? What is "Pop Metal"? Does it even exist?"

Somebody missed out on the 1980s.


"Secondly, more than a handful of great groups did "heavy riffs and catchy choruses" earlier and better than KISS such as..."

But lets take a page from your book then. None of those groups (save for Cooper and maybe T. Rex) carried the sound of those pop metal bands of the 80s. KISS did.

Posted by Jim on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 16:03pm


"No its not, mainly because one mans trash is another mans treasure. There are people out there who enjoy that kind of music, and would consider it good influence."

No, your exact quote was "Bad as it was sometimes, influence is influence." Are you saying that even if their influence was negative, KISS should be inducted because "influence is influence"?

"You wanna know whats even worse logic? That last sentence, as if what you think James Hetfield has any bearing on the fact that he was influenced by KISS."

It does if I think he's a moron and therefore has no clue as to whether or not a particular band has influenced his sound, which KISS clearly haven't.

"Bullshit. GNR had basically all the elements of the 80s bands, they were a litte darker and had arena rock tendencies."

This statement is incomprehensible.

"Not to mention GNR desecnded even farther into hair metal with Lies and Use Your Illsion. "They werent glam rock" is an argument spread by the Rolling Stone crowd to attempt to seperate GNR from the 80s pack when they musically fit it to a T."

??? There is a difference between Glam Rock and Hair Metal, did you know that?

"Also KISS had glam influences (they cited Slade and the New York Dolls)..."

That still doesn't make them glam.

"Also saying that "X band" inspired me to pick up a guitar is a pretty clear definition of influence."

Not of sonic influence it isn't

Posted by Chalkie on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 16:14pm


"No, your exact quote was "Bad as it was sometimes, influence is influence." Are you saying that even if their influence was negative, KISS should be inducted because "influence is influence"?"

I personally consider it bad influence, but not everyone out there hates hair metal. But its still influence.

"It does if I think he's a moron and therefore has no clue as to whether or not a particular band has influenced his sound, which KISS clearly haven't."

Moron or not, hes entitled to his opinion.

"This statement is incomprehensible"

Whoops, that should read "GNR had all the elements of the 80s bands, they were just a little darker and had arena rock tendencies at times." my point still stands about them being influenced by KISS.

"??? There is a difference between Glam Rock and Hair Metal, did you know that?"

Yes, and future bands of both styles were influenced by KISS.

"That still doesn't make them glam."

Right, because putting on makeup and having heavily stylized music isnt glam at all. Silly me.

"Not of sonic influence it isn't"

You know sometimes its fun to be less ignorant about things?







Posted by Jim on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 16:24pm


"Somebody missed out on the 1980s."

I guess I was too busy listening to Sonic Youth, the Minutemen, the Fall, Wire, Pixies, Public Enemy, Run DMC, New Order, Gang of Four, the Replacements, Dinosaur Jr., Ultramagnetic MC's, the Jesus & Mary Chain, Public Image Ltd., Boogie Down Productions, the Pogues, Nick Cave & the Bad Seeds, the Smiths, the Cure, the Tragically Hip, Big Daddy Kane, Kool G Rap & DJ Polo, Beat Happening, Steve Earle, Afrika Bambaataa, fIREHOSE, the Stone Roses, R.E.M., Grandmaster Flash, Hüsker Dü, Devo, Tom Waits, Camper Van Beethoven, Echo & the Bunnymen, 54-40, Mission of Burma, Stevie Ray Vaughan, the B-52's, Pretenders, Butthole Surfers, X, Bad Brains, Minor Threat, U2, Black Flag, Bruce Springsteen, Prince, the Dead Kennedys, Cocteau Twins, Cowboy Junkies, N.W.A., Iggy Pop, David Bowie, Lou Reed, K.D. Lang, Depeche Mode, Talking Heads, Stetsasonic, the Durutti Column, Elvis Costello, Warren Zevon, Eric B. & Rakim, Frank Zappa, Tom Petty, Suicide, They Might Be Giants, Robyn Hitchcock, Squeeze, Hall & Oates, the Soft Boys, Paul Simon, Bob Dylan, Van Morrison, Loop, the Ramones, the Psychedelic Furs, the Rolling Stones, Peter Gabriel, Bootsy Collins, My Bloody Valentine, the Chameleons UK, the Misfits and, yes, Guns N Roses.

Posted by Chalkie on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 16:32pm


Well isnt that the most intimidating collection of music ever. Too bad you still haven't "explained away" KISS' influence on glam metal.

Posted by Jim on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 16:38pm


"Well isnt that the most intimidating collection of music ever."

A poor attempt at sarcasm, but probably an accurate description of how you'd feel before attempting to conquer my record collection.

"Too bad you still haven't "explained away" KISS' influence on glam metal."

Are you looking at the big picture here? Can you honestly, with a straight face, name five relevant bands, over the last five years or so, that have been influenced by Kiss via Glam/Hair Metal (or whatever you want to call it)?

Posted by Chalkie on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 16:47pm


"A poor attempt at sarcasm, but probably an accurate description of how you'd feel before attempting to conquer my record collection."

Not really, but if makes your dick feel bigger to brag about your record collection then fine by me.

"Are you looking at the big picture here? Can you honestly, with a straight face, name five relevant bands, over the last five years or so, that have been influenced by Kiss via Glam/Hair Metal (or whatever you want to call it)?"


You're asking me to name modern bands of a musical trend that, outside of maybe Buckcherry, doesn't even exist anymore. But for what is worth, KISS is still relevant today, even after all the crap thats been thrown at them, and they were nominated last year, so theres obviously something that people (even critics, who used to hate them) see in them. Shame you can't.

Posted by Jim on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 16:56pm


"Not really, but if makes your dick feel bigger to brag about your record collection then fine by me."

It was your Freudian slip, not mine.

"You're asking me to name modern bands of a musical trend that, outside of maybe Buckcherry, doesn't even exist anymore."

No, I'm asking you to name modern bands that are influenced by KISS, by way of Glam/Hair Metal, and so far you've come up with one (and a remarkably crappy one at that).

"But for what is worth, KISS is still relevant today..."

Nope. Not that they ever were, either.

"and they were nominated last year"

..and lost...

"so theres obviously something that people (even critics, who used to hate them) see in them."

Not necessarily. Perhaps the industry twisted their arms. Or, maybe it was to placate KISS and their fanboys' collective whining, and shut them up for the time being (and for once).

"Shame you can't."

Perhaps.

Posted by Chalkie on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 17:25pm


"It was your Freudian slip, not mine."

I never attempted to impress with my record collection...but thats beside the point.

"No, I'm asking you to name modern bands that are influenced by KISS, by way of Glam/Hair Metal, and so far you've come up with one (and a remarkably crappy one at that)."

I'm just going to refer you to my previous statement, as I'm not typing it up again. Keep running head first into that wall and tell me when you wanna stop.

"Nope. Not that they ever were, either."

Translation: LA LA LA IM JUST GONNA CLOSE MY EARS AND LIVE IN FANSTASY LAND!!!

"..and lost..."

I hope you're aware of the bands that have been turned down on their first nomination.

"Not necessarily. Perhaps the industry twisted their arms. Or, maybe it was to placate KISS and their fanboys' collective whining, and shut them up for the time being (and for once)."

Or maybe it was because the hall realized they needed more hard rock and KISS won out that year? (And Alice won out this year)







Posted by Jim on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 17:40pm


"I never attempted to impress with my record collection"

Nor did I. I was merely giving a list of bands who were putting out better/more relevant, influential and innovative music than Motley Crue and Poison were in the 1980's. Music that is still influencing music groups today.

"Keep running head first into that wall and tell me when you wanna stop."

It was a simple request actually, you're the one who can't seem to grasp it.

"Translation: LA LA LA IM JUST GONNA CLOSE MY EARS AND LIVE IN FANSTASY LAND!!!"

anyways...

"I hope you're aware of the bands that have been turned down on their first nomination."

Obviously I am, the point was that the nomination meant very little.

"Or maybe it was because the hall realized they needed more hard rock and KISS won out that year? (And Alice won out this year)"

Not likely, there's a number of better, more influential/innovative artists available.

Posted by Chalkie on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 18:06pm


"Nor did I. I was merely giving a list of bands who were putting out better/more relevant, influential and innovative music than Motley Crue and Poison were in the 1980's. Music that is still influencing music groups today."

And yet KISS still influenced those groups, you're missing the point.

"It was a simple request actually, you're the one who can't seem to grasp it."

You're the one who cant seem to grasp that there arent any glam metal bands anymore.

Posted by Jim on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 23:14pm


and by those groups, I mean Motley and Poison

Posted by Jim on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 23:15pm


I've enjoyed reading the whole "Jim vs Chalkie" take on Kiss. While I'm not the biggest fan of their music, I do enjoy a fair amount of it. I do happen to think they should be in the Hall.

Pop-Metal was a major part of the 1980's, & Kiss did have an influence w/in the pop-metal landscape. The fact that mainstream hard rock took a radical 180 degree turn about 20 yrs. ago shouldn't hide this fact.

A lot of people want to dismiss them, but there was a difference in relation to the other glam acts of the day. Their whole show was based on a comic book ideal, but compare it for a second to the others. Bowie tried to be more like some sort of alien E.T. vibe, Alice Cooper tried out a horror movie stance, & T-Rex were more effeminate in their style. 80's metal took little from Bowie, but the others were touchstones of the genre. You need only look at some of the cheesy promotional photos to realize that (lol).

You could argue that musically they weren't breaking any new ground, but they did put together a fair size catalog of good tunes from 1975-1980. Even if there influence isn't nearly as great today as it was then, there still WAS an influence. I think the tunes from 75-80 + the influence from 80-90 (91? 92?) is enough to seal the deal.

Think of it this way: if it were a requirement that influence be at a constant level of sorts, then the Rock Hall would constantly be changing plaques around every year. Even Elvis & the Beatles would have been removed for at least one yr. (I'm thinking 2000 here - popular music showed little influence of them that yr. - think Britney, Backstreets, N'sync).

Posted by Cheesecrop on Monday, 10.25.10 @ 05:36am


i hope they stay out, Gene Simmons is such an annoying bastard.

Posted by GFW on Monday, 10.25.10 @ 11:48am


"A lot of people want to dismiss them, but there was a difference in relation to the other glam acts of the day. Their whole show was based on a comic book ideal, but compare it for a second to the others. Bowie tried to be more like some sort of alien E.T. vibe, Alice Cooper tried out a horror movie stance, & T-Rex were more effeminate in their style. 80's metal took little from Bowie, but the others were touchstones of the genre. You need only look at some of the cheesy promotional photos to realize that (lol)."

Well done, Cheesecrop, well done. You forgot about Queen, however; major oversight, as they also had the excess in their music and stage show that defined the whole hair band scene. All right, in that whole back-and-forth thing, Chalkie and Jim agreed upon three names: Poison, Motley Crue and Guns 'n' Roses. All right, we now have a place to start at. KISS discovered Van Halen, and I believe Chalkie has admitted elsewhere that Van Halen DO owe an obvious musical debt to KISS. That's 4. On the Metallica thing: Obviously the musical debt to KISS is minimal. However, it's worth noting that Jason Newsted picked up the bass because of Gene Simmons. I think what Jim might've been referring to is the idea that KISS was a gateway band for many young people: As they were among the most accessible Hard Rock bands out there at their peak, isn't it possible that they got some young guys into music, got them to pick up guitars and into other less accessible (and yes, better) bands? You know, like the guys in Metallica? (Though I need to check whether that was the case.) I do know that David Ellefson (Megadeth bassist) has said that they were the band that got him to start playing music (it's on VH1's Heavy: The Story of Metal, Episode 4 Part 3, you can check for yourself.) As Jim said, the guys in Anthrax got into the heavy stuff because of KISS, Dimebag's main influence was Ace Frehley (and KISS was his first concert.) In addition: Dave Lombardo and Krist Novoselic have both cited Peter Criss and Gene Simmons, respectively, as being among their main influences. Venom have cited KISS as one of THEIR main influences. So yes the connections are there. I know their bands don't necessarily sound like KISS, but The Rolling Stones and The Beatles don't sound like Elvis either, and nobody denies his influence on them.

"You could argue that musically they weren't breaking any new ground, but they did put together a fair size catalog of good tunes from 1975-1980. Even if there influence isn't nearly as great today as it was then, there still WAS an influence. I think the tunes from 75-80 + the influence from 80-90 (91? 92?) is enough to seal the deal."

"Good" is in the eye of the beholder and completely subjective, as you could say that about anyone if you wanted.


"Think of it this way: if it were a requirement that influence be at a constant level of sorts, then the Rock Hall would constantly be changing plaques around every year. Even Elvis & the Beatles would have been removed for at least one yr. (I'm thinking 2000 here - popular music showed little influence of them that yr. - think Britney, Backstreets, N'sync)."

Truth well spoken. I agree fully. Guns 'n' Roses have virtually no influence on the musical landscape today (if they ever did) yet they're definitely going in. Ditto for Bon Jovi.

Posted by Sam on Friday, 10.29.10 @ 13:04pm


H. L. Mencken said: "No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public."
Kiss cashed in. Kiss act and music = unintelligent junk.

Posted by D. Stroy on Friday, 10.29.10 @ 19:38pm


You seem to say something along those lines on lots of artists' pages. Is there ANYBODY you like?

Posted by Sam on Saturday, 10.30.10 @ 05:19am


Kiss is one that could go either way. They have, no doubt, influenced plenty of musicians through the years. My issue with them: the music is a distant third to the theatrics and marketing. I mean a Kiss casket, Kiss dolls, Kiss condoms, Kiss bedding, Kiss cat litter, Kiss deodorant, Kiss toilet paper etc. It starts to get real ridiculous. Listening to Gene and Paul drone on and on about Kiss is, frankly, boring and cheesy to the point of embarrassment. They have, though, had some decent tunes and plenty of gold albums, but when your release that many records (I counted over 40 on Wikipedia, including live and compilations) your bound to strike gold at some point. Album sales in the US are around 40 million (100 million worldwide), which starts to water down their effectiveness musically. That would equate to US sales of roughly one million per album. Not good at all for a band of Kiss' stature.

If they get in, it will have more to do with their influence for things having to do, not with their music, but with their look and stage show. Lets face it, a lot of their songs are second rate. They rely primarily on nostalgia anymore, putting on makeup, taking off makeup, putting it back on, reunion tours etc.

...They may want to start praying.

Posted by Kevin on Wednesday, 11.3.10 @ 21:58pm


"sales in the US are around 40 million (100 million worldwide),"

Album sales in the US are 19 million, 100 million worldwide. The marketing has gotten a bit embarassing (toilet paper and stuff.) Cat litter? Seriously? I haven't heard about that one. KISS condoms sound pretty cool though.

Posted by Sam on Saturday, 11.6.10 @ 06:00am


Kiss has made the single largest influence on the music industry since the Beatles. Their music is rock n roll at it's finest. I've read many times, their musicianship is average.
I've got two comments on that:
#1 Most rock bands are very average musicians. The Beatles wrote some of the most basic pop songs ever.
KISS seems to write the same kind of music but a lot heavier than most rock bands. You can even hear a little Motown in Paul's stuff.
#2 I've met and jammed with some real good guitarists in my life. And whenever it comes to KISS, they don't want to play it because it turns out they can't play it. It usually starts with them saying KISS has no talent, then they want to pick a song to show me how easy it is. I always tell them....look, you don't have to do this, I'm not offended. But their egos are so strong and they don't back down. I pick any song from Alive or Alive II...and it never seems to fail...they can't do it. They try to fake it and play it with power chords and it sounds awful. I had one friend growing up who loved KISS and ACE FREHLEY, one of the few that could actually play KISS. He has grown up to record with some of the greatest musicians ever...Schenker being one of them. My other bud who hated KISS has toured the world only as a guitar tech is one of the most requested guitarists in Arizona. He was also one who could not play KISS.
Now, at 49 yrs old he thinks Ace is badass and is trying to learn Kiss songs. He shoulda just listened a long time ago...I believe that is why most famous musicians who actually learned how to play guitar claim ACE or KISS as an influence, those still at home playing cover bands never got it. I'm sure you still don't get it...but that's the point..those who got it, understood and have enjoyed some of the greatest music ever written...those who didn't missed out....
There's still some time though....listen to what this band is doing....they're only the Hottest Band in the World

Posted by Music lover on Monday, 02.7.11 @ 15:58pm


They'll get in the next 5 years. Jann knows this, Little Steven knows this, Jon Landau knows this and (as much as it probably hurts him to think it) Dave Marsh knows it too. The fact is that they've held it off as long as they could by not really acknowledging hair metal (which was mostly influenced by KISS) but they want to get GNR and some Grunge bands in, and last time I checked all of the Big 4 have cited them as an influence. So if the goal is to ignore them further they're stuck between a rock and a hard place because god knows James Hetfield has already campaigned for them and its hard to imagine them turning him down if he has Slash, Chris Cornell, Eddie Vedder and Krist Novoselic on his side in the future. The 2010 nomination was definitely testing the waters for a future induction and it wouldn't surprise me if one of the hall's power players (Aside from President Terry Stewart, who's one the record supporting them) got behind it just to "get it over with" like they did with Van Halen in 2007.

Posted by Jim on Monday, 02.7.11 @ 19:47pm


Black Sabbath, Alice Cooper, The Stooges, Metallica, and Van Halen will be voting for KISS!

Posted by Roy on Monday, 02.7.11 @ 20:01pm


"Kiss has made the single largest influence on the music industry since the Beatles."

I agree with your post, but I think that's a wild exaggeration. Surely even Jim will back me up on this one. I agree with Jim, it's just a matter of time.

Posted by Sam on Wednesday, 02.16.11 @ 09:58am


It depends if we're talking about the musical side or the business one. Musically? Of course not. Business wise their importance and the way they treated a band not just as a band, but as a product was too important to ignore. If we're talking about the business part of the music industry they definitely belong in a top 5. (If we're talking artists since the Beatles.)

Posted by Jim on Wednesday, 02.16.11 @ 18:20pm


What they are forgetting is that rock & roll is, and always has been, about much more than just the music. Kiss sure as hell have done their part.

Posted by Brother Ron on Tuesday, 02.22.11 @ 10:27am


They made some good songs but I just find gene simmons so annoying.

Posted by GFW on Tuesday, 02.22.11 @ 11:11am


Well yes, I forgot about the business side. I was just making the point that although I support their induction, you and I could list post-Beatles artists that came around both before and after 1974 that were more influential musically and create an entire thread out of it.

"Black Diamond" and "Detroit Rock City" are the two best songs.

Posted by Sam on Wednesday, 02.23.11 @ 08:31am


they better get in next year as part of the 2012 class, i mean, guns and roses and kiss in the same class and the ceremony will be in cleveland, come on, writers who dont vote for shit, get kiss in right now.

Posted by chris on Friday, 02.25.11 @ 08:26am


Kiss' music is less interesting than corn shits.

Posted by D. Stroy on Friday, 02.25.11 @ 10:23am


KISS IS ROCK N ROLL, KISS IS THE PARTY
KISS SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE RNR HALL OF FAME
YEARS AGO. ALICE COOPER IS IN, NOW ITS TIME FOR
KISS. also RUSH, JUDAS PRIEST, IRON MAIDEN,
OZZY SOLO career, DEF LEPPARD should all be in.
Not having KISS in the Rock N Roll Hall Of Fame
is stupid.

Posted by LK on Saturday, 04.9.11 @ 21:40pm


they better induct kiss with guns and roses in 2012, because this is just getting ridiculous not putting this iconic band in, its either kiss or at least put rush in, one of these two bands has to make it next year

Posted by chris on Wednesday, 05.18.11 @ 10:18am


Rock and Roll is not about music with good taste, Rock and Roll is about music that tastes good.

The Patti Smith's wanted their music to be considered so important that it would change the world. The Rolling Stone Cabal that runs the RARHOF buys into that notion of self importance and that is why those bought and paid for artists like Springsteen and Bono are held up as the standard of artistic quality. It's bullshit. Always has been. Those people never understood what rock music was about. Its not about Global warming, No Nukes or Live Aid. Its about Rocking and Rolling All Night and Partying Every Day. "Musicians" and "politicians" masquerading as musicians need not apply.

Posted by Sidney Allen Johnson on Sunday, 05.22.11 @ 19:29pm


KISS still suck, Sidney.

Posted by Chalkie on Sunday, 05.22.11 @ 21:10pm


Rock can be whatever you want it to be, Sidney (something that should've been realized during the Blur vs. Oasis thing, but that's going off topic).

Posted by Sam on Tuesday, 05.31.11 @ 13:18pm


I do not like Kiss, but yes they do deserve to be in the R&RHoF. For better or worse they made a lasting impact.

Posted by Mr. Misters Seventh Son on Wednesday, 06.1.11 @ 16:16pm


I do not understand why KISS and each of it's members have NOT been inducted into the R&R hall of fame.

This group has had a MAJOR impact in music for over 40 years and deserve to be in the R&R Hall of Fame.

I, personally, am not going to purchase anything related to the R&R Hall of Fame until KISS is inducted.
There are so many singers and groups already inducted who have made little or no impact on music or society.
Then an awesome group like KISS is not included?
I am going to post this link on Facebook and challenge everyone of my 4000 friends to post it and also to boycott buying anything related to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame until Kiss is inducted.

SO HOW ABOUT IT PEOPLE??? ARE YOU IN OR NOT?

Posted by Terrie on Tuesday, 06.14.11 @ 03:54am


The fact that KISS may have a lot of fans does not mean they are a great band worthy of being inducted into the Rock n' Roll hall of fame. It just means that there are a lot of people with lousy musical tastes. KISS's music was awful when I was in high school in the 70's and it still stinks. Emerson, Lake & Palmer are far more deserving to be in the Hall of Fame, and I hope KISS is never inducted because it would be an insult to those persons with true talent that have been inducted. Mike Gutierrez. North Hollywood, California

Posted by Michael Gutierrez on Monday, 06.27.11 @ 08:24am


I hate to sound like a dick but claiming that Kiss does not deserve to be in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame is an insult. They made an influence regardless how horrible their music may be. Have you not seen half of the people who have been suggested for the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame? Horrible, awful, crap. The band must have an influence (of extremely good or legendary status) or they will never get introduced to the Hall of Fame. Kiss having A LOT of fans and influencing rock music of the 80s suggest that Kiss will eventually be inducted in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame. Sorry.

Posted by Minoru on Thursday, 07.7.11 @ 14:57pm


"Have you not seen half of the people who have been suggested for the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame? Horrible, awful, crap."

Well yes I have, but unless I know which names you're referring to it's impossible to answer that question.

Posted by Sam on Thursday, 07.7.11 @ 15:51pm


Kiss' music is so boring that it's more interesting to speculate which band member sucked the most farts out of dead chickens.

Posted by D.Stroy on Wednesday, 07.27.11 @ 12:50pm


D.Stroy is so boring and unimaginative that speculating how best to put him out of his misery is more interesting. A punch-up in a pub? Crushed in a mosh pit? When a website's being trolled by Exhibit A for the pro-choice movement, nothing's off limits.

Posted by Sam on Wednesday, 07.27.11 @ 14:14pm


Were they a great band? Their songs are not great. They are not very innovative either.

BUT: They put on a great show in their heydey, and had a great sense of theatrics and showmanship. Some of their live performance videos from 75-77 were exceptional. And the songs, although not great, were good enough.

At the end of the day a band that was so huge in its heydey (they were on lunch boxes!)cannot rightfully be denied. I certainly don't think commercial success is everything, but they were a phenomenon on the 70s and that has to be respected. They should be in.

Posted by astrodog on Tuesday, 08.2.11 @ 23:50pm


THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT THAT RAPPER SHOULD BE INDUCTED INTO THE ROCK AND ROLL HALL OF FAME. THEY HAVE THEIR OWN HALL OF FAME EVERY YEAR IT OWN BET SO LET FORGET ABOUT THEM THAT ISN'T MUSIC ANYWAY THEY ARE JUST USING PROFANITY IN THEIR MUSIC, KISS SHOULD BE IN THE HALL OF FAME BEFORE PRINCE

Posted by carolyn on Thursday, 08.4.11 @ 01:42am


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHGCKSpMS9g

gene simmons on rock and roll hall of fame

Posted by Roy on Monday, 08.15.11 @ 11:30am


Didn't watch it. Gene Simmons makes me sick even to look at. All the guy cares about is capital and right-wing politics.

Posted by Chalkie on Monday, 08.15.11 @ 12:21pm


Already seen it. Old news, and he's half-wrong. You might find his interview with Henry Rollins much more interesting.

Posted by Sam on Tuesday, 08.16.11 @ 18:17pm


I don't have any particular feelings about Kiss either way. I was never a fan and I dislike Gene Simmons later incarnation of himself.

But, the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is a joke anyway. I mean Abba is in there for crissakes! If they are in Kiss should be in because Kiss were certainly more rock than freakin' Abba! But, they way the nominees and inductees get put in without seeming rhyme or reason I'm still waiting for Pia Zadora's hubby to buy her a spot.

All the artists people think belong there would make a shorter list of who SHOULDN'T be there. It may be easier to not take Hall of Fame as a joke if it was called something like Popular Music Hall of Fame. Rock and Roll has certain connotations and people have expectations of what the term gets applied to. As long as it claims to be about Rock and Roll the Hall will be a sham. It already seems a huge number of people are angry with it.

maybe it should be a badge of honor to stay out of it, or if Kiss ever does get nominated, publicly refuse it and tell the world what most know- it's a joke.

Posted by Jimmyzen on Sunday, 10.30.11 @ 17:21pm


the rnrhof has never been just rock despite the name.

Posted by GFW on Monday, 10.31.11 @ 12:23pm


i want kiss in they are good better then ac/dc i mean kiss have been rocking out beside this page is for kiss lovers

Posted by koby on Thursday, 11.10.11 @ 04:32am


koby no they not they are good but gimmick come on why the makeup who needs all that ac/dc dont have cause they dont need it they already good and like kiss u son of a bitch ac/dc are in rock n roll of fame plus kiss are just show offs like justin bitcher kiss are pop bitchers who cant get women

Posted by cade on Thursday, 11.10.11 @ 04:36am


CADE KISS ARE AWSOME THEY GREAT BETTER THEN OVER BANDS RIGHT THOSE ON THESE LIST WHO HATE KISS DELATE U IDOTS AND FOR THOSE WHO LIKE THEM STAY ON THOSE WHO HATE THEM DONT COMMET AND THOSE WHO LIKE THEM COMMET SO THAT KISS ARE NOT THE ONLY ONES WHO HAD MORE HATERS IN THIS SITE ACTULLEY KISS LOVERS TYPE SO THAT KISS ARE THE ONES THAT HAVE MORE LOVERS IN THIS SITE

Posted by koby on Thursday, 11.10.11 @ 15:00pm


I LOVE KISS THEY HAVE GOOD MAKEUP

Posted by TV on Thursday, 11.10.11 @ 15:02pm


YES KISS ARE GREAT YOU KNOW I WENT TO THEM LIVE AND IT WAS GOOGLE OUT OF GOOGLE I BET THEY ARE IN THE ROCK N ROLL OF FAME BUT THEY MUST BE SCARED OF SHOWING THEM BUT ANYWAY KISS RULES

Posted by RYAN on Thursday, 11.10.11 @ 15:04pm


what?

Posted by GFW on Thursday, 11.10.11 @ 15:43pm


YES KISS ROCKS gene so me and wank me thats why i like kiss

Posted by rosie on Friday, 11.11.11 @ 13:22pm


im a boy and yes gene wank me as well THATS WHY I LIKE KISS EVAN IF GAY OR NOT I LOVE THEM BUT ROCK N ROLL OF FAME IS A JOKE THEY HAVE NON ROCKERS BUT KISS ARE GREAT CRAZY NIGHTS IS THE BEST MAKES ME 53 AND IM 99 IM STILL YOUNG

Posted by charlie on Friday, 11.11.11 @ 13:25pm


even if rock n roll of fame is a joke they shoud put them in

Posted by SONIC on Friday, 11.11.11 @ 13:25pm


what the?

Posted by Tahvo Parvianen on Friday, 11.11.11 @ 13:26pm


tahvo would you like to be wank by gene simmons

Posted by charlie on Friday, 11.11.11 @ 13:27pm


Nope.

Posted by Tahvo Parvianen on Friday, 11.11.11 @ 13:28pm


i think kiss will be in it i mean they stll good now so why not rock on kiss

Posted by andy on Friday, 11.11.11 @ 13:29pm


ok tahvo cause he dosent want wank you to i mean you have a bushy tree but gene is big great cock i suck im a man how lucky

Posted by charlie on Friday, 11.11.11 @ 13:31pm


lol, trolls.

Posted by Tahvo Parvianen on Friday, 11.11.11 @ 13:32pm


charlie stop insulting him dont worry tahvo his just an ass anyway kiss rocks

Posted by daphine on Friday, 11.11.11 @ 13:32pm


im just jokeing tahvo you cool genes a twit evan if i do like kiss i pefer eric carr

Posted by charlie on Friday, 11.11.11 @ 13:34pm


NO charlie you hurt his feelings his cool yes you are just a twit i love kiss but you charlie stink tavho does not have a bushy tree his is big hard and taste nice gene does not suck you do so why dont you get the hell off and dont come back or i get the kiss army to kill you by the kiss members you killed eric carr you twit im gonna kill yuo

Posted by daphine on Friday, 11.11.11 @ 13:40pm


I appreciate the support but I can assure you nobody hurt my feelings.

Posted by Tahvo Parvianen on Friday, 11.11.11 @ 13:45pm


OK TAHVO IT JUST THAT I KNOW HIM HIS MY BROTHER ITS TRUE WE LIVE IN DIFFRENT TOWNS BUT I KNOW HE TRYS TO INSULT OTHER USES AND PEOPLE BUT I WAS ONLY DOING IT SO THAT HE DOESNT MAKE U MAD SORRY

Posted by rosie on Sunday, 11.13.11 @ 09:58am


tahvo do you hate kiss cause i do

Posted by Cade on Sunday, 11.13.11 @ 09:59am


no tavho loves kiss just doesnt want to go far besides i said cant commet un less your a kiss fan

Posted by Koby on Sunday, 11.13.11 @ 10:01am


Whatever

Posted by Cade on Sunday, 11.13.11 @ 10:02am


i love kiss WHAT THIS IS FOR KISSLOVERS KOBY THERE ARE KISS HATERS BITCHERS LETS KILL THEM CALL KISS ARMY

Posted by marven on Sunday, 11.13.11 @ 10:09am


im from the AC/DC army and we gonna kill the kiss member eirc and mark down gene paul tommy eirc s ace peter vinne bruce to go hahaha

Posted by Cade on Sunday, 11.13.11 @ 10:13am


AC/DC are crap most stupied most worst music wrost vocals in the world rock n roll of fame is a bloody joke why are people writeing in the bloody site

Posted by marven on Thursday, 12.8.11 @ 13:26pm


i was jokeing about kiss treable kiss are great and i hope thry be rock n roll of fame soon

Posted by kit on Thursday, 12.8.11 @ 13:27pm


KISS ARE AWSOME WELL IF THEY DONT GO TO ROROF THEY SHOUD PUT ERIC CARR IN HE WAS AMIZING OUT OF ALL MEMBERS

Posted by jet on Monday, 12.12.11 @ 03:31am


I think the best KISS lineup was PAUL STANLEY GENE SIMMONS BRUCE KULLACK AND ERIC CARR SINCE THEN THEY BEAT IRON MAIDEN BUT TODAY ITS THEM THAT KICK KISS ARS HOWEVER I LIKE THEM BOTH AND BOTH SHOUD BE IN IT BEST KISS SONGS ARE 1CRAZY NIGHTS 2UNHOLY 3I LOVE IT LOUD 4GOD GAVE ROCK N ROLL TO YOU 5ROCK N ROLL ALL NIGHT 6FLAMING YOUTH 7LETSPUT THE X 8PSHICO CIRCUS 9ITS MY LIFE 10GOD OF THUNDER

Posted by Rake Rockmore on Friday, 12.16.11 @ 17:10pm


THEY SHOUD PUT JUSTIN BIBER IN TO ROROF HIS BETTER THEN MAIDEN BUT NOT KISS

Posted by KOBY on Friday, 12.16.11 @ 17:12pm


eh,no.

Posted by GFW on Friday, 12.16.11 @ 18:19pm


Give these guys credit. They were marketing gods. They knew they were low on talent, so you had the makeup, dolls and lunchboxes. Anything to make money. Remember they cut a disco record I was made for loving you. Easily the most overated band in recent memory, by their fans. The music critics knew all along.t

Posted by Eddie Dobzanski on Tuesday, 12.27.11 @ 23:02pm


I don't see why even supporters of KISS try to act as if their musical merits are something to be ashamed of. Their 1974-1977 period is filled with some prime hard rock music. Their debut, Hotter Than Hell and Dressed To Kill are all great rock records filled with great hooks and despite their low budget still hold up well. Destroyer is recognized by many (including the critics) as a classic of the 70s. Rock and Roll Over and Love Gun are also both fun records with some great singles and album tracks, even if the image was becoming a bit ridiculous by that point. There's obviously some bad stuff in there (I Was Made For Loving You, the "Hair Metal" era), but I definitely think that the KISS of 1974-1977 meets the "Quality Test"

There's a reason why the band is still popular with many generations after some 40 years, and I think it might have to do with the fact that their music and legacy has aged alot better than critics want to admit.

Posted by Jim on Saturday, 01.14.12 @ 13:17pm


Anyone who says KISS sucks and/or is terrible (ESPECIALLY Kit) is a moron. Like everyone else has said in lengthy comments, basically KISS laid down the very groundwork for all bands following them. They invented the "concert". And as for live albums, KISS proved that those work. After KISS Alive!, every band afterwards has at least one live album. I am a card carrying member of the KISS Army and I will NOT allow anymore biased, unsupported accusations to go by. Anything that anyone says against KISS, once again ESPECIALLY Kit, will immediately be shot down and pummeled by me or any other KISS Army soldier. And yes, I said soldier, because after all we are an ARMY.

Posted by Jack on Monday, 01.16.12 @ 11:54am


Invented the concert?

I'll assume you're not ignorant enough to claim they created the concept of playing live and assume you mean incorporating visuals. In which case I respectfully disagree and point to both Alice Cooper and numerous Prog rock bands.

Also if there's a kiss army does that mean one day I might find a Joy Division army? sweet!

Posted by GFW on Monday, 01.16.12 @ 12:48pm


You have no idea how the KISS Army was even started, do you?

Posted by Jack on Monday, 01.16.12 @ 22:54pm


And also, I doubt that you know that the KISS Army is the biggest fan base for any band in the world. This is a proven FACT.

Posted by Jack on Monday, 01.16.12 @ 22:57pm


Forming the JD army!

also biggest fanbase? erm,

Kiss worldwide sales: around 140 million.
Beatles: between 600 million to 1 billion.
Sorry bro, Beatles got you beat.

Posted by GFW on Tuesday, 01.17.12 @ 10:57am


Record sales are the only measuring stick we have for a fanbase, so let's sue that. In the US KISS have sold 20 or 21 million (I don't remember which) albums. Do you know how many people have that number beat? A lot. Also, worldwide KISS have sold an estimated 100 million records, according to Wikipedia. According to Wikipedia the following have equalled that mark (I'm sticking to the people I've actually listened to to save time): Scorpions, Paul McCartney, The Who, Metallica, Guns 'N Roses, Rod Stewart, Phil Collins, Depeche Mode, Tina Turner, Cher, Lionel Richie, Bryan Adams (actually estimated between 65 and 100, but still), George Michael, Janet Jackson, Britney Spears, Fleetwood Mac and Neil Diamond (between 115 and 120 million). Let's now see how many verified (confirmed) sales KISS have: 26.7 million. That's still good, but Turner, Cher, Richie, Adams, Michael, Jackson, GNR, Spears, Stewart, FM, Diamond and Metallica all have that number beat, all having 30 million or more confirmed (in case you were wondering, the highest is Metallica with 81.2; very impressive for a band who rarely focus on getting hit singles didn't get any MTV or radio play until their fourth album). Not to mention all the people who have less estimated but more confirmed sales. This includes Dylan, The Spice Girls, Oasis, Robbie Williams, Nirvana, Pearl Jam, R.E.M., Lady Gaga and Eminem. Rather than carry on too far, I will list the top selling artists to date, all of whom almost certainly have larger fanbases.

1. The Beatles. Estimated sales: Between 600 mill. and 1 billion. Confirmed: 248.3 million. As far as I'm aware there has never been demand for KISS to re-record some of their songs in German, which The Beatles did (a friend played me a tape of it years ago).
2. Elvis. Estimated sales: See above. Confirmed: 201.2 mill. To this day people still go to Graceland to remember him.
3. Madonna. Confirmed sales: 157.8 million.
4. Michael Jackson. 155.8 mill. Not a fan, but surely you remember what it was like when he died. Almost all the news people stopped worldwide and were scrambling to report on it. It was headline news on the BBC when he was rushed to hospital and after the death was confirmed they spent the entire evening talking about his life and legacy. Do you think that'll happen when Gene Simmons snuffs it?
5. Led Zeppelin. 133.4 million. You don't really think KISS have a bigger fanbase than Zeppelin do you?

KISS should still get inducted, but not even close to the most fans. Sorry.

Posted by Sam on Tuesday, 01.17.12 @ 12:55pm


You guys really thought I meant of all TIME? Wow, what idiots.

Posted by Jack on Friday, 01.20.12 @ 22:40pm


I'd be careful calling people idiots when you yourself said: "KISS Army is the biggest fan base for any band in the world. This is a proven FACT" without actually including any facts. You'll notice GFW and Sam both included facts in their comments, and without resorting to name-calling as well!

Posted by Tahvo Parvianen on Saturday, 01.21.12 @ 03:21am


I don't think you need facts to support another FACT, and if you don't believe these facts, go take it up with Paul Stanley himself. Good luck.

Posted by Jack on Saturday, 01.28.12 @ 00:48am


It seems you have great difficulty apprehending what the definition of a proven fact is. Saying the "Kiss Army is the biggest fan base for any band in the world" might very well be a fact but it is not a "proven fact" as you said it was, it is an unsupported statement. Now, if you said something like "The Kiss Army has a fan base of 5 million which is more than the second biggest fan base in history at 2 million according to (so and so credible source, even wikipedia would be fine in this case)" I'd have an easier time believing you.

I could easily say Pink Floyd sold more albums than any other band in history but a quick look at a list of bands by record sales would prove otherwise. See what I mean? It's not a fact just because you say it's a fact. If you PROVED to me that Kiss have the biggest fan base by actually citing a credible source I'd believe you. (Sorry for being redundant here)

(And those 5 and 2 million numbers are completely made up, I just used them as an example)

Posted by Tahvo Parvianen on Saturday, 01.28.12 @ 04:31am


All I have to say is that you can either look it up yourself, or drop the argument entirely. And don't look up of all time, because I only mean right now in all this. So make sure you get the most recent facts, then you can get back to me on this.

Posted by Jack on Sunday, 01.29.12 @ 23:26pm


While I feel KISS is worthy of an induction, The New York Dolls must go first.

Posted by Zach on Sunday, 02.12.12 @ 01:24am


"Musical excellence is the essential qualification for induction."
Aren't the Sex Pistols in the Hall? I'm not saying they weren't relevant or important. They were extremely important for many reasons not traditionally applied to music criticism. But musical excellence? They could barely play their instruments, and they will tell you that. The Pistols belong in the Hall, but their inclusion destroys the reasoning of the Hall of Fame's snobbish selection process and the reason cited for excluding bands like Kiss.

Posted by Stephen Roberson on Sunday, 03.18.12 @ 21:46pm


"Musical excellence is the essential qualification for induction."
Aren't the Sex Pistols in the Hall? I'm not saying they weren't relevant or important. They were extremely important for many reasons not traditionally applied to music criticism. But musical excellence? They could barely play their instruments, and they will tell you that. The Pistols belong in the Hall, but their inclusion destroys the reasoning of the Hall of Fame's snobbish selection process and the reason cited for excluding bands like Kiss.

Posted by Stephen Roberson on Sunday, 03.18.12 @ 21:46pm

You raise an excellent point there, Stephen.

I think musical excellence is all in the eye of the beholder. I can guarantee that even among the immortals (i.e., Chuck Berry, Elvis Presley, The Beatles, Bob Dylan, Pink Floyd, etc.), there are those dissenting voices who don't consider their music to be excellent. I can speak for myself because I loathe The Beatles and Bob Dylan. But enough about me.

I think we all have our own standards by which we judge musical excellence. Some of us place emphasis on lyrics, while others focus more on the melody. Still others are more captivated by the rhythm or the beat. There are also those who are attracted to artists who continue to mature and develop their craft, as well as those who like artists who master a certain style and stick with it their whole careers. Then you have people who like a mix of elements, which is easily the healthiest mindset to have when it comes to evaluating music's potential for excellence. Like I said, it's all subjective.

What attracts me the most to KISS is their showmanship. With KISS, you aren't just experiencing the music, you're experiencing an over-the-top, comic book-like performance that cannot be duplicated when you listen to them on vinyl, CD, eight-track, or any other physical medium

While KISS may not have innovated flashy theatrics or elaborate concerts, they certainly took it to a whole new level. I realize that pyrotechnics and costumes have anything to do with making music, but they can certainly enhance and visualize it. After all, would David Bowie have been as daring and original had he not given Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars?

Don't listen to what a couple of failed critics (you know who you are) say about KISS. They're just trying to impose their views on others and bully them around. I can certainly opposing views on KISS, but not when they are snide remarks.

I've made my feelings known before that The New York Dolls, the band that most heavily influenced KISS, deserves to go into the RRHOF first. Still, KISS is far too big to be ignored. Their time will come.

Posted by Zach on Friday, 03.23.12 @ 22:47pm


Whoops, I meant to say "Would David Bowie have been as daring and original had he not given us..."and "I can certainly tolerate opposing views on KISS..." Please ignore the missing words in the previous post. It's what happens when you're typing late at night and your eyes are dozing off.

Posted by Zach on Friday, 03.23.12 @ 22:50pm


I guess I was too busy listening to Sonic Youth, the Minutemen, the Fall, Wire, Pixies, Public Enemy, Run DMC, New Order, Gang of Four, the Replacements, Dinosaur Jr., Ultramagnetic MC's, the Jesus & Mary Chain, Public Image Ltd., Boogie Down Productions, the Pogues, Nick Cave & the Bad Seeds, the Smiths, the Cure, the Tragically Hip, Big Daddy Kane, Kool G Rap & DJ Polo, Beat Happening, Steve Earle, Afrika Bambaataa, fIREHOSE, the Stone Roses, R.E.M., Grandmaster Flash, Hüsker Dü, Devo, Tom Waits, Camper Van Beethoven, Echo & the Bunnymen, 54-40, Mission of Burma, Stevie Ray Vaughan, the B-52's, Pretenders, Butthole Surfers, X, Bad Brains, Minor Threat, U2, Black Flag, Bruce Springsteen, Prince, the Dead Kennedys, Cocteau Twins, Cowboy Junkies, N.W.A., Iggy Pop, David Bowie, Lou Reed, K.D. Lang, Depeche Mode, Talking Heads, Stetsasonic, the Durutti Column, Elvis Costello, Warren Zevon, Eric B. & Rakim, Frank Zappa, Tom Petty, Suicide, They Might Be Giants, Robyn Hitchcock, Squeeze, Hall & Oates, the Soft Boys, Paul Simon, Bob Dylan, Van Morrison, Loop, the Ramones, the Psychedelic Furs, the Rolling Stones, Peter Gabriel, Bootsy Collins, My Bloody Valentine, the Chameleons UK, the Misfits and, yes, Guns N Roses.

Posted by Chalkie on Sunday, 10.24.10 @ 16:32pm

Excuse me while I laugh at a music hipster's attempt to impress others with his knowledge of musical nonentities. The fact that I and others never heard of most of these bands outside of the Internet speaks volumes of their "real world impact," or lack thereof.

The Rolling Stones were already washed up by the 1980s and only recorded a few memorable songs in that decade. They're such a colossal joke today, but in their prime, The Rolling Stones were tops.

Ditto with Bob Dylan, Van Morrison, and Paul Simon. I wouldn't point to them as the vanguard of 1980s music.

David Bowie, Devo, Prince, Iggy Pop, The Psychedelic Furs, The Ramones, Stevie Ray Vaughan, Run DMC, Guns N Roses (only their first album), Public Image, Ltd., Hall & Oates, and maybe one or two others are fine.

The rest of your list is mainly comprised of complete obscurities. Only a snobby revisionist would think that a menagerie of nonentities like X (Who?), Beat Happening (Who?), and Wire (Who?) were as representative of the 1980s or important as the true giants. Michael Jackson alone pisses all over these no-hit wonders. I'm not a fan of the likes of Madonna, Bruce Springsteen, or U2, but at least I can be objective and recognize that they had real impact that extended far beyond the music world.

Posted by Zach on Saturday, 03.31.12 @ 22:43pm


I hope you're not dissing stone roses as one of those "non entities" they were a pretty big deal over here!

Posted by GFW on Sunday, 04.1.12 @ 08:15am


Not to mention that X and Wire are miles away from being non-entities.

Posted by DarinRG on Sunday, 04.1.12 @ 08:24am


OK from that list I'm going to have to defend a few names:

Gang of Four:
Not as big a deal in the States, but Entertainment! is still a solid album.

New Order:
Never quite as good as Joy Division, but not an obscure name.

The Pogues:
A very entertaining and good Celtic Punk band. And more fun to listen to than any punk compilation you can assemble.

Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds
Nick Cave is a very talented and underrated artist, some of his work might be admittedly difficult to get into, but "The Ship Song" for example is class and excellence personified.

Steve Earle
He's got at least a dozen songs I could listen to on repeat for hours, his Guitar Town and Copperhead Road albums are both excellent.

R.E.M.
Not as big a fan of them as the three immediately above but they've definitely earned respect.

The Misfits
Horror punk may be a silly name for a genre but I can't help smile whenever I hear "Astro Zombies" or "Where Eagles Dare"

Don't get me wrong, Zach. You do make valid points, just saw an opportunity to defend the above acts so I went for it.

Posted by Tahvo Parvianen on Sunday, 04.1.12 @ 08:31am


Not to mention that X and Wire are miles away from being non-entities.

Posted by DarinRG on Sunday, 04.1.12 @ 08:24am

The only X I'm familiar with is the 1967 kaiju eiga film The X from Outer Space.

Out of curiosity, I looked up X on Grooveshark and listened to snippets of some of their songs. Overall, I think they're a decent band, and certainly miles ahead of unintelligible crap like The Dead Kennedys, Black Flag, Fugazi and Black Flag. I'm not nearly interested enough to explore X any deeper, as I pretty much loathe most post-1970s punk, especially the political propaganda (Since when was it acceptable for fast, fun music to be watered down and tailored for disgruntled senior citizens who piss and moan over problems they can't control?).

So I stand corrected on X, but only to an extent. They're not a nonentity in the world of punk. However, in the world of music as an overall art form, X is a mere footnote compared to bands that had an impact that extended far beyond a mere cult following (The Mills Brothers, The Ink Spots, Bill Haley and His Comets, The Coasters, Buddy Holly and The Crickets, The Beach Boys, The Rolling Stones, The Temptations, Black Sabbath, KISS, Duran Duran, and countless others).

Tahvo, R.E.M. is one of the three bands that you mentioned that I've actually even heard of in a real world context (i.e., word of mouth, the radio, record stores, television, etc.). Needless to say, I don't like them at all.

I vaguely remember seeing the Misfits mentioned in some horror movie magazines. Other than that, I have no familiarity with their music.

I never said New Order was obscure. In fact, I saw a music video of theirs on VH1 Classic's Totally '80s block last Friday. I'm familiar with some of their material, as well as with Joy Division. Both are pretty top-notch synthpop bands.

GFW, I wasn't referring to The Stone Roses as obscure. While I can't say I can ever remember hearing any of their output, the fact that both of their albums went platinum in the U.K. eliminates The Stone Roses from the heap pile of obscurities.

I can't say the same about Dinosaur, Jr., Firehose, Hüsker Dü, or the Ultramagnetic MCs, none of whom I have ever encountered in a real world setting. They mean about as much to me as Ke$ha, Flo Rida, Maroon 5, and Simple Plan do, which is nil. Yeah, I'm that out of touch with contemporary popular music, but I couldn't care less. The farther I can distance myself from the current music landscape, the better. I'm pretty much out of the loop with most music made after the mid-1980s, with a few exceptions.

Posted by Zach on Sunday, 04.1.12 @ 19:46pm


Thanks for clarifying, Zach.

Posted by Tahvo Parvianen on Monday, 04.2.12 @ 04:08am


I agree with what you said about New Order, but I don't think Joy Division would really fall under synthpop.

Posted by GFW on Monday, 04.2.12 @ 07:28am


It's simple. Kiss Suck

Posted by D-Stroy on Wednesday, 08.1.12 @ 22:06pm


Look, it's like this. KISS has been Rockin and Rollin for over 35 years. They still outsell most bands. When most, if not all people think of Rock, they think of "Rock N' Roll all Nite!" not, "Who are you?". You see? These guys know how to rock. They must be inducted. No matter what they say, I know that deep down, they want to be inducted. They really do. The so- called "Rock and Roll" of today is a JOKE!!! Justin Beiber and One Direction don't
A) Play and instrument
B) Can't sing
c) DON'T SING ROCK!!!!!!! THEY SING STUPID POP! ALL THIS CRAP! IT'S ALL ABOUT MAKING GIRLS FEEL "BEAUTIFUL"!! No, that's not what its about. Rock and Roll is about the, entertainment! The fun! The masquerade! The "Living in Sin"! Loving your instrument almost more than your Lady! About having so many girls throw them selves at you, then going home to the one lady that has your heart and credit card number.:)

Posted by Erin on Sunday, 08.5.12 @ 18:44pm


But if KISS got inducted, we would lose the annual drama of people complaining that they haven't been inducted yet. At a certain point it's actually more fun not to induct them, especially when the band complains about the snub in the media, as they often do. I think they should have been voted in already, but it has taken on a life of its own.

Posted by astrodog on Sunday, 08.5.12 @ 20:11pm


Oh boy this is a doozy.

Look, it's like this. KISS has been Rockin and Rollin for over 35 years.

Longetivity means nothing.

They still outsell most bands.

True, but so does Kenny G.

When most, if not all people think of Rock, they think of "Rock N' Roll all Nite!" not, "Who are you?".

Personally I think of something by Chuck berry considering the guy made rock n roll what it is today but whatever.

You see? These guys know how to rock. They must be inducted.

No argument there, but they're not the biggest snub.

No matter what they say, I know that deep down, they want to be inducted. They really do. The so- called "Rock and Roll" of today is a JOKE!!!

I take it you've no idea what indie rock is.

Justin Beiber and One Direction don't
A) Play and instrument

Actually Justin can play a couple, guitar, drums and trumpet to name some.

B) Can't sing

Gene Simmons ain't exactly Otis Redding himself.

c) DON'T SING ROCK!!!!!!! THEY SING STUPID POP!

BECAUSE GOD FORBID THERE BE OTHER TYPES OF MUSIC!

ALL THIS CRAP! IT'S ALL ABOUT MAKING GIRLS FEEL "BEAUTIFUL"!! No, that's not what its about. Rock and Roll is about the, entertainment! The fun! The masquerade! The "Living in Sin"!

Nope.

Loving your instrument almost more than your Lady! About having so many girls throw them selves at you, then going home to the one lady that has your heart and credit card number.:)

Sounds a lot like being about girls... which you just condemned JB and 1D for.

Posted by GFW on Monday, 08.6.12 @ 08:20am


KISS: The Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame Inductees

01. Paul Stanley
02. Gene Simmons
03. Ace Frehley
04. Peter Criss
05. Eric Carr
06. Bruce Kulick

Posted by Roy on Thursday, 08.23.12 @ 06:33am


I was walking through a pharmacy the other day when I happened to notice KISS-brand headphones. Is there anything these guys won't put their name on? I recall they even marketed a KISS coffin. And wasn't there an official KISS wrestler back in the 90s?
I personally think they should be inducted, but you can see why they might have attracted some disdain.

Posted by astrodog on Saturday, 09.8.12 @ 12:27pm


Funny you should mention that, astrodog, as I saw KISS-branded cigarette lighters at a convenience store/gas station last summer.

The KISS wrestler of whom you speak wrestled in 1999/2000 for WCW. I'm a devout fan of the fine art of professional wrestling, although I tune out most of what's gone on after the territories died out in the mid-to-late '80s.

Getting back to KISS, I'm no KISS army member and I don't put them on any kind of pedestal. That said, I do enjoy some of their songs and can see a case for their induction. I'll leave that to someone who is level-headed and is neither a raving fanboy/girl or a disgruntled critic. The Hall cannot ignore KISS forever, but they're certainly not one of the more glaring snubs.

Posted by Zach on Tuesday, 09.11.12 @ 19:27pm


KISS is a novelty band who are complete sell outs but worst of all their "music" just plain sucks.Madonna never should've been inducted in the RRHF and neither should KISS.

Posted by DLC on Wednesday, 09.26.12 @ 17:13pm


Pray tell, DLC. How exactly did Kiss "sell out"? Did they betray what they originally set out to do? Justify your inane comment instead of being so oblique.

If the word "sell out" were a species, I'd embrace its genocide. The overuse and misuse have stripped it of any meaning, much like "ironic", "awkward", and other words which hipsters have a habit of ruining.

Posted by Zach on Thursday, 09.27.12 @ 13:23pm


I don't like Kiss too much, but I think they deserve it. they have enough influence and what not. Record sales mean nothing and should mean nothing, but influence and innovation should. Kiss was influential so I think that one day they will ge tin.

Posted by Joey on Tuesday, 10.9.12 @ 02:15am


Stuttering John.....Hank the Angry Drunken Dwarf....Beetlejuice.....Eric the Midget.....Mr. Methane......Jeff the Drunk.....John the Farter.....Debbie the Pet Lady.....Marianne from Brooklyn......Jackie "the Jokeman" Martling.....

Posted by Phil on Friday, 10.12.12 @ 14:45pm


forget all the gold albums sold, the millions of concert tickets sold world wide, or even the fact they are about to celebrate 40 yrs as one of the most successful bands in all of music history, love them , hate them , or have no opinion, one thing i think everyone can agree on, they have earned their spot in the rock and roll hall of fame. I just saw kiss for the 13th time on this last tour with motley crue, and i have to say, they are like a fine wine they get better and better evey year. pauls voice is ailing a bit, they dont move as fast as they once did, but oh yeah, THEY ARE 60 yrs old for christ sake!!! I would be cruious to know wha is the official reason as to why they are not in? i cant think of one, except that dave marsh doesnt like them, what happened? Did gene sleep with his wife or something?

Posted by kissfanpdx on Saturday, 10.13.12 @ 12:29pm


Kiss has a new album out...MONSTER

Posted by Roy on Sunday, 10.21.12 @ 21:04pm


KISS has undergone a lot of changes in the nearly 40 years of ACTIVELY PERFORMING! They just finished a very successful US tour and fixing to head into other countries soon. They are what Rock and Roll is all about. The big stage shows, the explosions, the loudness, the groupies...all the things they pretty much started and continue to take over the top today. Many of the inductees are drug addicts, some have even died from drug overdoses. KISS is clean and still performing sold out shows in 2012. Some inductees had two or three years and then self destructed or fell apart. Some inductees are not even rock and roll. I am a KISS fan but you do not have to be one to see the impact they have had and are still having. Like I said, they have been performing concerts for nearly 40 years straight, not like some bands that had one or two hits even, yet still got in.Paul Stanley will be the first to say he knows people spend their hard earned money to see them and when you walk out he wants you to feel like, "Now THAT was a Rock and Roll concert!"...and you do!

In my life I have seen KISS, New England, Cheap Trick, Judas Priest, Cinderella, Poison, David Lee Roth, Aerosmith, Black Crowes, Bon Jovi, Warlock, MSG, Def Leppard, Ozzy, The Scorpions, Edgar Winter, Kenny Chesney, Montgomery Gentry, Skid Row, Nugent, and Metallica. KISS blows them all away. Metallica is close, but there is no concert like a KISS Concert!

They have played the Olympics and the Super Bowl. Their fans are phenomenal yet they continue to get dissed. I will never pay to vist the hall of shame until KISS is inducted and I am sure there are many others like me? Abba, Public Enemy, Donna Summer (DISCO?), The Beastie Boys, Run DMC, Isaac Hayes???? C'mon!!?? Van Halen is in there and KISS took them on their first tour.

I guess if you played for two years and then overdosed you are in? What an example. What an impact. Just imagine the impact of Hendrix, Joplin and Cobain (cuz I am sure Nirvana will get in ) had they not offed themselves. They were basically selfish because they could have had even a more lasting impact then they did.

KISS!! Rock and Roll all Nite and Party Every Day. With or without being in the HOS.

Posted by Bill on Monday, 10.29.12 @ 14:04pm


You dense motherf*cker.

"They are what Rock and Roll is all about. The big stage shows, the explosions, the loudness, the groupies...all the things they pretty much started and continue to take over the top today."

Large stage shows was done by Alice Cooper first, loudnes by Dick Dale and The Who, and groupies since... well since the beginning.

"Many of the inductees are drug addicts, some have even died from drug overdoses"

Oh yeah, druggies are bad because... wait, why are they bad again?

"Some inductees had two or three years and then self destructed or fell apart"

.. and in that short time made much better work than KISS ever had!

"Abba, Public Enemy, Donna Summer (DISCO?), The Beastie Boys, Run DMC, Isaac Hayes????"

Atleast three of those bands are more deserving.

"I guess if you played for two years and then overdosed you are in? What an example. What an impact. Just imagine the impact of Hendrix, Joplin and Cobain (cuz I am sure Nirvana will get in ) had they not offed themselves."

First off, those three have been much more important in Rock than KISS. Third, Hendrix and Joplin both died accidentally.

"They were basically selfish because they could have had even a more lasting impact then they did."

Yeah, f*ck Joplin and hendrix for dying accidentally!

Posted by GFW on Monday, 10.29.12 @ 14:40pm


"Record sales mean nothing and should mean nothing, but influence and innovation should."

And Kiss has neither.

Posted by Chalkie on Monday, 10.29.12 @ 18:55pm


26 year old music fan here... I grew up with acts like Nirvana and Nine Inch Nails. Kiss is kinda before my time and never saw the appeal until recently they came to New Orleans and did a live show for free on the riverwalk...

The show was electrifying. They really out performed almost any live acts I've ever seen. On the stage, Kiss DEFINES what a rock show should be and for that, they should be in the rock and roll hall of fame... Until you've seen them play, shut up.

Posted by Steve on Wednesday, 10.31.12 @ 14:19pm


I think David Bowie was the first male artist to perform with make-up. David Bowie was inducted in 1996, followed by Peter Gabriel with Genesis in 2010, folllowed by Alice Cooper in 2011. KISS will be inducted next.

David Bowie ---> Peter Gabriel ---> Alice Cooper ---> KISS

Posted by Roy on Saturday, 11.3.12 @ 21:01pm


To all you nayers, and haters, please don't judge on the basis of how people look. Just because the Kiss members wear make up doesn't make them a band not worthy of the RocknRoll Hall of Fame. When it comes to their songs, yes, they are simple, no argument there. It's all sex, drums, and rocknroll, but so were Elvis Presleys, The Beatles, and The Rolling Stones. Their song "RocknRoll All Nite and Party Everyday", has arguably become the RocknRoll National Anthem in millions of peoples lives around the world. Talk about influence!

Understand that not only does Kiss still sell out Arena's and Stadiums in 2012 but their music and showmanship have influenced numerous bands and artists to this day; from Motley Crue to Poison, to Anthrax, to Rob Zombie, to Lady Gaga, and Garth Brooks. Yes Garth Brooks. He lists Kiss as one of his influences in music and he's such a big Kiss fan that he loosely based his live show from theirs. Anyways, the list goes on. They also have sold over 100 million records, they have 31 Platinum records and 28 Gold records. That's more Gold records than Elvis Presley.

Yet, there are artists like Abba, Run DMC, and Madonna in the Rock and Roll of Fame. How are they rocknroll? Yes, they may be influential in pop and Hip Hop, but not rocknroll. They don't belong there. Kiss has been apart of the rocknroll psyche since they began. They have proven every critic wrong, when they said that Kiss was just a flash in the pan, or they won't last or they're just a gimmick....that was 40 years ago and they are still going strong recording albums and touring relentlessly. They also have a devouted fan base that keeps on getting bigger and stronger and has not been duplicated ever. Kiss has persevered over the years because of 2 things; firstly, they truly believe in themselves and secondly,they refuse to allow anything or anyone to stand in their way. It was the same case with Rocknroll music and the artists back then in the 50's. Rocknroll was considered the devils music, and anyone who dwelved in it were shunned and criticized by people and radio stations alike, but yet there were some artists that persevered because they didn't stop believing in themselves and they didn't let anyone or anything stand in their way. That was over 50 years ago!! Sound familiar?!

So in closing, I hope that one day you nayers, and haters will open up your minds, and realize that whether you like it or not, Kiss has been and will always be embedded in the fabric of the rocknroll culture. They were the first in many aspects when it came to rocknroll and they opened up so many doors for so many other artists. I think its time that they are recognized for their numerous accomplishments, and not just recognized for how they look.

Posted by CA on Wednesday, 11.21.12 @ 18:08pm


This is the strangest thing that I have come across since my question of why is KISS not a member of the hall of fame. The only thing that could explain this is that they are of Jewish decent, or from other backgrounds that does not concur with the main members who vote. I am not anti-Semitic in no way shape or form. But how can you explain that the one band that is known as the best band in the world for almost four decades not being in the hall of fame..that one man can keep these talented men out of the hall. WOW. From now on I am calling it the hall of SHAME.

Posted by Cjfinerty on Tuesday, 12.11.12 @ 22:08pm


"The only thing that could explain this is that they are of Jewish decent, or from other backgrounds that does not concur with the main members who vote."

This is so asinine it almost doesn't merit response, but...

Bob Dylan, Simon & Garfunkel, Lou Reed, Leonard Cohen, Geddy Lee, Mick Jones, Neil Diamond, Billy Joel, Cass Elliot, Randy Newman, Laura Nyro, David Lee Roth, The Beastie Boys, Jackie Wilson, Marty Balin & Jorma Kaukonen, Zal Yanovsky, Chris Stein, Joey & Tommy Ramone, Robby Krieger, Peter Green, Mickey Hart, Joey Kramer, and I'm sure I'm forgetting people all say "Hi", Jackass

"But how can you explain that the one band that is known as the best band in the world for almost four decades not being in the hall of fame"

Easy, they aren't and never have been the best band in the World.

Posted by Chalkie on Tuesday, 12.11.12 @ 22:43pm


"The only thing that could explain this is that they are of Jewish decent, or from other backgrounds that does not concur with the main members who vote."

This must also explain why Shlomo Carlebach and Al Jolson aren't in the Hall.

Posted by Chalkie on Tuesday, 12.11.12 @ 22:46pm


Chalkie, don't forget about all those inducted into the other categories too! Alan Freed, Leonard Chess, Leiber and Stoller, Jerry Wexler, Phil Spector, Gerry Goffin, Carole King, Doc Pomus, Mort Shuman, Milt Gabler, Clive Davis, Mo Ostin, David Geffen, Ellie Greenwich, Jac Holzman, Art Rupe, Don Kirshner, Lou Adler, Herb Alpert, Seymour Stein, and of course Jann Wenner himself.

But yeah, just because Kiss aren't in it must automatically mean that the Hall is anti-Semitic, at least according to a Kiss fan! Besides, Ace Frehley and Peter Criss aren't Jewish.

Posted by Tahvo Parvianen on Wednesday, 12.12.12 @ 04:50am


Calling the Hall anti-Semitic is about as uneducated and moronic a statement as saying they are racist, though this latter argument pops up quite a bit.

Sexist at least, is an argument one can make and not necessarily be totally wrong based on tangible evidence.

Posted by Tahvo Parvianen on Wednesday, 12.12.12 @ 04:53am


Here's the bottom line & I write this as a one time HUGE fan & even now I still hold a special spot for them on some weird level in my being...

Paul Stanley has had moments of pure epic-ness mixed with something that most people would find embarrassing but he pulls it off with a great voice. Without Stanley KISS would not exist on any level musically. He is the music of KISS that makes the decision to not include them in the RRHOL a sad one for many.

The problem is Gene... a great showman, a seasoned excellent rock bass player but he's too much of a right winger/Donald Trump sort of personality for an institution that is largely about honoring artists that speak to personal liberation and/or social insights COMBINED with great music such as U2, Rolling Stones, etc.

Those are huge bands but many of the lesser known artists that people are puzzled as to why they were inducted were also trying to speak to truth as they saw it in terms of taking the human experience to a higher level.

KISS, love them or not, has simply never had the courage or honesty to write something like "Gimme Shelter" "Bloody Sunday Bloody", etc. The closest they came to taking the music as art seriously was The Elder but let's face it, it operates on about a 7th grade level of insight as compared to things other artists are writing about.

KISS is a great live band, EVERYONE should see a KISS show at least once on their life, until you do you aren't qualified to have a negative opinion any more then a restaurant critic could review a place he' had eaten at. KISS is a live act.

As such the KISS show would've definitely gotten KISS in to RRHOF had Gene kept his mouth shut but his constant promotion of Nihilism, sex & capitalism as life's only purpose makes it even more of an uphill battle for those who actually have tried to champion the artistic merit of KISS.

Posted by John Milano on Wednesday, 12.12.12 @ 13:00pm


Thank you for that frank and realistic post. A very refreshing perspective from someone who seems to be in Kiss's camp. I do believe that part of the embargo against Kiss is karma/retaliation against the shameful antics of Gene Simmons.

Posted by Chalkie on Wednesday, 12.12.12 @ 13:27pm


"KISS is a great live band, EVERYONE should see a KISS show at least once on their life, until you do you aren't qualified to have a negative opinion any more then a restaurant critic could review a place he had eaten at"

I would have to take issue with this comment, however. It is just plain false. Like anyone else in the Hall, Kiss is to be judged just as much by their career on record as their career as a live band.

Posted by Chalkie on Wednesday, 12.12.12 @ 15:21pm


One positive thing I can say about Gene Simmons is that he's been a fan of horror movies since childhood. As with Alice Cooper, Simmons has been very vocal about his love of classic horror films. In fact, I found this quote from an interview he did for Fresh Air with Terri Gross in 2002:

"Um ... my makeup came as a result of a lot of things, all things Americana. Godzilla, horror movies, science fiction ... uh, Black Bolt, which was an Inhumans Marvel comic book, and science fiction certainly. So it's comic books, sort of, all things sort of American pop culture. The rest of the guys in the band had different notions. Paul put on the red lips and the star over his eye as a kind of a exaggeration of what he thought a rock star was, because he always wanted to be a rock star. I was never interested in being a rock star. I always wanted to be Boris Karloff. And Ace -- who's the spaceman in the group, you know -- has delusions of grandeur, and perhaps gravity doesn't quite affect him in the same way, which is to say that he doesn't have good equilibrium, which is a big word, come to think of it. Just like "gymnasium." This is NPR. That's why we're using big words."

I could picture myself talking horror movies with Gene over dinner. I'd immediately leave if he started blabbering about politics, a topic that no entertainer is qualified to speak on. I'm a proponent of the shut up and sing philosophy through and through.

I personally am not a KISS fanatic, although I will admit to enjoying a handful of their songs. For shock rock and theatrics, I prefer Alice Cooper. He brought it to a new level of excitement and recorded some tremendous songs along the way (The Ballad of Dwight Fry being my favorite).

BTW, John, social significance should never be among the criteria of evaluating a band's or a singer's music. All that matters is what's coming out of the speakers. Anyone who listens to music to ascertain the meaning of life is a damn fool. It should be about the music first (namely, the instruments, how they mesh together, how they sound, and how they complement the vocals, if there are any). Singing is fine, too, but again it should be the tone of the voice that should be evaluated, not "meaningful messages."

Posted by Zach on Wednesday, 12.12.12 @ 16:12pm


"I'd immediately leave if he started blabbering about politics, a topic that no entertainer is qualified to speak on. I'm a proponent of the shut up and sing philosophy through and through."

what, so now they can't even hold personal political opinions? I see no reason why entertainers can't talk about politics, as long as they don't go on about it in their music.

Posted by GFW on Wednesday, 12.12.12 @ 16:33pm


I really don't want to keep this whole debate raging, but I'll offer this final comment:

If an entertainer wants to vote for someone they think is qualified to be President/mayor/governor/whatever, fine. No problem.

If an entertainer has opinions about politics and voices them in the appropriate setting, fine. No problem.

It's when they hijack concerts, films, poems, novels, stand-up comedy routines, and other venues to spout their views that I become incensed.

Posted by Zach on Wednesday, 12.12.12 @ 16:40pm


Zach would rather just strike that whole Freedom of Speech thingy off of the Bill of Rights.

Posted by Chalkie on Wednesday, 12.12.12 @ 16:44pm


Political songs are okay by me if they're on about something that's really bad, but if it's over something mundane or out right says "leftists/rightists are awful" then i don't care for them.

Posted by GFW on Wednesday, 12.12.12 @ 16:50pm


"He may look like an idiot and talk like an idiot but don't let that fool you. He really is an idiot." - Groucho Marx.

That means you, Chalkie.

Now get back to discussing music. I've already said my piece.

The Ballad of Dwight Fry truly is a brilliant song as well as a harrowing portrait of insanity. Gotta love the Dwight Frye reference, who had memorable roles in two of the all time classic Universal horror films: Dracula and Frankenstein.

Posted by Zach on Wednesday, 12.12.12 @ 16:52pm


Hey, you don't know what I look like.

BTW, "The Ballad of Dwight Frye" is totally irrelevant to any discussion in this forum but the one you created.

Maybe I'll start listening to Alice Cooper when they/he write a song about Edward Van Sloan... or one worth listening to in general.

Posted by Chalkie on Wednesday, 12.12.12 @ 17:05pm


I know, it just felt like the right time to quote one of the wittiest comedians and a member of one of the best movie comedy teams ever. I have a vast knowledge of classic movies, which is why I often quote the comedians from the golden age of Hollywood.

I brought up The Ballad of Dwight Frye to move the conversation away from politics and back to music.

I wasn't necessarily trying to get you to like Alice Cooper, but hey, opinions are like assholes.

Posted by Zach on Wednesday, 12.12.12 @ 17:16pm


So you didn't enjoy my little Edward Van Sloan reference???

Posted by Chalkie on Wednesday, 12.12.12 @ 17:31pm


Actually, I thought it was quite clever.

Posted by Zach on Wednesday, 12.12.12 @ 17:44pm


in the youtube vids section are two vids of carly rae jepsens "This Kiss" song.

and funnily enough, it's better than any KISS song I've ever heard.

Posted by GFW on Thursday, 12.27.12 @ 11:26am


KISS: The Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame Inductees

01. Paul Stanley (1973-Present; rhythm guitar, vocals)
02. Gene Simmons (1973-Present; bass guitar, vocals)
03. Ace Frehley (1973–1982, 1996–2002; lead guitar, vocals)
04. Peter Criss (1973–1980, 1996–2004; drums, percussion, vocals)
05. Eric Carr (1980–1991; drums, percussion, backing vocals)
06. Vinnie Vincent (1982–1984; lead guitar, backing vocals)
07. Bruce Kulick (1984–1996; lead guitar, backing vocals)
08. Eric Singer (1991–1996, 2001–Present; drums, percussion, backing vocals)
09. Tommy Thayer (2002–Present; lead guitar, backing vocals)

Posted by Roy on Wednesday, 02.27.13 @ 18:00pm


were they already inducted?

Posted by akeem on Wednesday, 02.27.13 @ 18:36pm


No.

Posted by Roy on Wednesday, 02.27.13 @ 18:37pm


I say KISS should be in. They are very influential and are highly innovative in their development of the rock show. They went overboard in merchandising, but so did Elvis and The Beatles. Should they be left out? Are they the greatest musicians? Not really. Neither the above examples or The Sexton Pistols. Most country and blues songs are three chords, so what's your point. Record sales shouldn't keep people out, but they should be accounted for.

Posted by Mr. Stone on Saturday, 03.16.13 @ 16:33pm


Far too much is made of this issue. The Rock & Roll Hall of Fame lacks credibility. To be in the Hockey Hall of Fame means so much more to hockey greats that to be in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame. In the latter case so many members of bands whom have been inducted into the Hall don't show up at the ceremony. Van Halen's minimal member appearance is a classic case. There are many other cases of this absenteeism. KISS has now been around for 40 years and continues to draw massive audeinces at conerts. They have a following (as reflected by the conventions)that very few bands have. They have had a huge impact of a range of artists such as Garth Brooks, Lenny Kravitz, etc. Many of the bands that are in now opened for KISS at one time or another (i.e. RUSH). Those credentials make KISS the hall of fame for their industry. Their record speaks for itself. They don't need some venue in Cleveland to rubber stamp the obvious.

Posted by Kissaliverich on Sunday, 04.21.13 @ 09:55am


Only if the Original Band is inducted. The Members that played on the 1975 album Alive which is the album that launched their career. That would be Ace, Gene, Paul and Peter. These are the guys that came up with the concept of Kiss. The Fire , Spitting Blood, Smoking Guitars etc.
I would not want Ace and Peter to be excluded from this by those 2 ego maniacs Gene and Paul.

Posted by Rick on Saturday, 05.4.13 @ 20:40pm


Why should any other members be excluded? I think you should at least honor Eric , Vinnie, and Bruce.

Posted by Mr.Stone on Thursday, 05.9.13 @ 22:43pm


I think I figured it out...KIT is Dave Marsh...Dave Marsh is a Dousche...therefore, KIT is a Dousche!!
and, yes, the "Cock and Hole Hall of Lame" is a joke...
Let's start with the actual name "Rock and Roll" Hall of Fame...do yourselves a favor and name it something else more appropriate like:
Dave Marsh's favorite bands hall of fame...it wouldn't be as grand and glorious but it would be more honest.
There are a great number of artists who have been inducted who have no business being associated with anything that has the words "Rock and Roll" attached to it...let alone anything that has the words "hall of FAME" attached to it. Heck, shouldn't your "fame" be one of the factors that put you in the (make air quotes along with this:) "Hall of FAME"? Just saying...but hey...it's not my Private Club...I'm not the one that feels that my personal opinion is so damn important that I'd have to go ahead and open my own (air quotes again) "hall of fame" and name people who only I think are worthy of it's moniker......enjoy your lame club friends...I'll be at a KISS concert with the rest of us that I guess don't have your exquisite pallet for "fine" music...and that is ok with me.

Posted by Kits a Dousch - Not Deuce on Friday, 05.24.13 @ 23:48pm


So, how do you blame Dave Marsh for the fact that KISS has been on the ballot and were rejected by the voting committee? Take off your tin foil hat, enroll in a remedial Rock and Roll history class then get back with us.

Posted by DarinRG on Saturday, 05.25.13 @ 04:03am


Kiss Sucks

They don't just suck, they suck rat shit.

Posted by Kiss Sucks on Friday, 06.21.13 @ 16:00pm


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zedcIEtbUlQ

A 2014 pretend KISS induction video using the 2013 ceremony with Jann Wenner, Rush and audience reaction.

Posted by Roy on Wednesday, 10.9.13 @ 09:43am


KISS

01. Paul Stanley (1973-Present; rhythm guitar, vocals)
02. Gene Simmons (1973-Present; bass guitar, vocals)
03. Ace Frehley (1973–1982, 1996–2002; lead guitar, vocals)
04. Peter Criss (1973–1980, 1996–2004; drums, percussion, vocals)
05. Eric Carr (1980–1991; drums, percussion, backing vocals)
06. Vinnie Vincent (1982–1984; lead guitar, backing vocals)
07. Bruce Kulick (1984–1996; lead guitar, backing vocals)
08. Eric Singer (1991–1996, 2001–Present; drums, percussion, backing vocals)
09. Tommy Thayer (2002–Present; lead guitar, backing vocals)

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 10.15.13 @ 23:13pm


Of course they should be in the Rock n Roll hall of fame. They have so many albums with such a large variety of music! And they rock live!
The people that try to say they have no talent or aren't musicians are just musical morons. Some of the hottest bands out there now were fans of KISS. They are musicians and obviously know more about bands than you ever will. If can't find a great song in the massive KISS archive... you might as well throw your earphones out!!
There are bands in the hall of fame now that shouldn't even be considered rock?!!

Posted by Todd on Wednesday, 10.16.13 @ 18:28pm


KISS are terrible because our friend Kit says so and our opinions don't count, only his...ok??

Posted by lino on Thursday, 10.17.13 @ 18:06pm


Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame Inductees Who Will Vote For KISS

Queen, U2, R.E.M, Blondie, Van Halen, Ozzy Osbourne, Alice Cooper, Metallica, Red Hot Chilli Peppers, Guns N' Roses, Rush, Heart, Beastie Boys, Public Enemy, RUN-DMC

Posted by Roy on Friday, 10.18.13 @ 10:49am


WOW! I must say I ALWAYS enjoy reading comments BOTH pro and con regarding Kiss and the Rock Hall.As a LONGTIME and LOYAL Kiss fan since 1982, funny enough, the LOWEST point in their career at the time, I think their induction is LONG OVERDUE! However, it would be disingenuous and dishonest of me not to acknowledge that some things that Kiss have done INFURIATE me which, to that end, I can understand where their critics are coming from.

I go on record saying that, contrary to what Gene and Paul say, Kiss DO care what critics think of them, and truth be told, so do MOST other artists and bands. In fact, I'll go as far to say that ANY musician who says they "only care about what fans think" THEY ARE LYING! Put another way, NO BAND OR ARTIST wants to see their body of work ripped apart by a major publication, otherwise why utilize the media if they "don't care"? And with Kiss, make no mistake, for 40 years they have indeed utilized, and manipulated the media, to THEIR benefit, and no one else's!

From my perspective, I've ALWAYS talked with other fans about a certain amount of resentment I see that Kiss still harbors towards their critics, who were/are notorious for saying that Kiss ONLY cares about the BRAND, and not the BAND. And truthfully, who can blame them? In that sense, BOTH Gene and Paul helped perpetuate that THEMSELVES with merchandise overkill, unfortunately.

On the other hand, perhaps Kiss'strong business acumen is the MAIN reason why the critics and execs are resentful towards Kiss, and as a result, have not YET been inducted into the Hall? I think there's some truth to both scenarios.

It's too bad that some only see Kiss as nothing more than "show". True, they have NEVER been the greatest musicians or songwriters, HOWEVER, they have GREAT songs that have stood the test of time. One does NOT have to be a great "musician" to have great songs, likewise, there are great musicians who have TERRIBLE songs! Kiss offer the BEST of both worlds: straight-ahead, no-nonsense rock and roll with visual flair that will ALWAYS go hand in hand, and of course, will always be a lightning rod for fans AND critics of Kiss. And truthfully, I wouldn't want it any other way!

Anyway, great comments everybody PRO AND CON! I continue proudly to call Kiss the GREATEST American rock and roll band of all time, and hopefully a 2014 Rock Hall induction is right around the corner!

Posted by V.F.T. on Wednesday, 11.27.13 @ 23:55pm


Kiss' music sucks rat shit. They were a tired act when they began and became even worse as time went on. Perhaps there are/were lots of adolescent boys who thought their stuff was "cool" but they were just the other side of the star trek coin...geeks, but without trying to understand anything. There isn't any adequate way express how boring and badly played Kiss' music was/is. It's the biggest shitstain around...worse, it's like shitting your pants when you were only trying to fart.

Posted by D. Stroy on Thursday, 11.28.13 @ 12:23pm


It's hard to deny this band's influence on so meny glam and heavy metal bands, but what I can't stand about KISS are all the merchindisc that goes along with it. I mean, KISS comic books?

Don't get me wrong, I like KISS and their music and would vote them in to the Hall.

By the way, Zach, are there some lesser-known Alice Cooper songs that I should listen to?

Posted by Andrew on Sunday, 12.1.13 @ 22:07pm


12/10/2013 :

Wee-e-e-e--l-l-l. LOL! Looks like all of you "nay-sayers" who don't like KISS and said they'd never make it have finally lost! KISS is currently leading the voting on The R&R Hall Of Fame site for 2014 inductess and clearly outdistancing all other nominees! HA!! Serves you all right!

Posted by Lazurus on Tuesday, 12.10.13 @ 21:31pm


Well its about time KISS is one of the best bands out there i"ve been a fan for $#yrs i"ve seen there shows 20 times and i hope to again this has been along time comeing after 45 yrs as a fan i say thank you gene.paul.ace.and peter. tommoy. eric carr r.i.p eric with out you my rock and roll would be lame so to KISS Keep Rocken

Posted by cindy allen on Tuesday, 12.17.13 @ 11:41am


Does anyone know if Peter Criss and Ace Frehley will even be invited to the ceremony?

Posted by Conrad on Tuesday, 12.17.13 @ 18:36pm


Personally, I think that the members of the KISS army should now support the nomination and induction of Twisted Sister. What do you think? ;-)

Posted by Enigmaticus on Wednesday, 01.1.14 @ 02:40am


'Enigmaticus', I have to say NO to a Twisted Sister induction. Mind you, I like them very much, but their impact, respecfully, was NOWHERE NEAR what Kiss achieved. And truth be told, I think the guys would openly acknowledge that.

That said, if there was ever a "Hard Rock Hall Of Fame" created, I would absolutely put them in there. Unfortunately, their impact on the "rock world" per se, is marginal at best.

What I would LOVE to see though is a Kiss/Twisted Sister tour for 2014. Frankly, they would give the CURRENT Kiss lineup a run for the money without a doubt! Great question.

A BIG CONGRATULATIONS to Kiss on their LONG OVERDUE induction into the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame! WELL DESERVED Gene, Paul, Peter, and Ace!

Posted by V.F.T. on Thursday, 01.9.14 @ 14:45pm


Screw you kit

Posted by jo bob on Wednesday, 01.15.14 @ 16:25pm


Twisted Sister - have you all lost it completely? Congrats to KISS - although I think for the most part their music is horrid, their stage show was as good as it gets. Sadly, I do not think this will be a happy induction. I will be shocked if Ace and Peter come within 20 miles of the King Pimp himself, Gene Simmons.

Posted by Dameon on Friday, 02.7.14 @ 12:18pm


I'm shocked and disappointed to hear that, as of this writing,Ace and Peter will NOT be performing with Gene and Paul at the induction in April! In short order: A SLAP IN THE FACE TO ALL KISS FANS! Is there anybody at 'FRL' who can perhaps get more information on this?

Posted by V.F.T. on Saturday, 02.22.14 @ 19:56pm


Ace and Criss not performing, but are they attending, speaking and collecting their trophies?

Posted by Roy on Saturday, 02.22.14 @ 20:43pm


Of course all of this drama with KISS. Could it be any other way? Even with them not performing, they have taken the spotlight from all other inductees with all of the bickering between Gene/Paul and Ace/Peter. People aren't even talking about Nirvana. It is like nobody else is even being inducted. That is always the way KISS wanted it. I wouldn't be surprised if they secretly do plan on performing and this is all a way gin up publicity. Probably not, but I put nothing past them. I'm a fan of the original line up, by the way. But the rockhall had to know what they were getting into.

Posted by dezmond on Sunday, 02.23.14 @ 13:31pm


Seriously, what did anyone expect? Realistically, it was always going to be just Gene, Paul, Ace, and Peter. Anyone who said it'd be otherwise was either lying or deluded. Just wasn't happening.

As far as who will pay tribute to Kiss. At the risk of inciting the KISS Army, their music was not that technically proficient, and fairly easily replicable. Bon Jovi would probably seize the opportunity to try and get their name on the ballot again. Or for a pure, fun, HBO spectacle, get Poison. They'd easily whore themselves out for the occasion.

Posted by Philip on Sunday, 02.23.14 @ 15:01pm


What if they are lying and they really are going to perform. Maybe it's a surprise.

If KISS doesn't perform, then which four artists get to paint their faces and perform for KISS? We need three guitarists/singers and a drummer/singer, or maybe not: Alice Cooper, Rob Zombie and Don Henley or maybe Insane Clown Posse themselves can do it with the in house musicians for the Rock Hall.

Posted by Roy on Sunday, 02.23.14 @ 20:20pm


http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/kiss-cancel-rock-hall-of-fame-performance-after-lineup-dispute-20140223#ixzz2uCMuVZIK

Kiss Nix Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Performance After Lineup Dispute

"This is understandably an emotional situation where there is no way to please everyone," band says

Posted by Roy on Monday, 02.24.14 @ 05:42am


Probably Kiss inductees (If The Band get they want):

Gene Simmons (1973-Present)
Paul Stanley (1973-Present)
Ace Frehley (1973–1982, 1996–2002)
Peter Criss (1973–1980, 1996–2001, 2002–2004)
Eric Carr (1980-1991)
Bruce Kulick (1984-1996)
Eric Singer (1991–96, 2001–02, 2004 – present)
Tommy Thayer (2002 – present)

Posted by L.A on Monday, 02.24.14 @ 08:12am



Probably Kiss inductees (If The Band gets what they want):

Gene Simmons (1973-Present)
Paul Stanley (1973-Present)
Ace Frehley (1973–1982, 1996–2002)
Peter Criss (1973–1980, 1996–2001, 2002–2004)
Eric Carr (1980-1991)
Bruce Kulick (1984-1996)
Eric Singer (1991–96, 2001–02, 2004 – present)
Tommy Thayer (2002 – present)

Posted by L.A on Monday, 02.24.14 @ 08:13am


I so hope they get Lady Gaga to induct them and to preform. That would be hilarious!

Posted by Gassman on Monday, 02.24.14 @ 08:37am


Hall and Oates and KISS are being inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in the same year and Hall and Oates have a song called Kiss On My List.

Posted by Roy on Wednesday, 02.26.14 @ 19:24pm


**mind blown**

Posted by DarinRG on Wednesday, 02.26.14 @ 19:42pm


Eddie Trunk says the person inducting Kiss is "someone not openly associated with Kiss and someone the HOF loves"

Who could this be?

Alice Cooper? Neil Young? Elton John? Jeff Beck? Eric Clapton? Madonna? Prince?

Posted by Roy on Thursday, 03.6.14 @ 23:06pm


Lady Gaga

Posted by Gassman on Thursday, 03.6.14 @ 23:15pm


How does the HOF love Lady Gaga?

Posted by Roy on Thursday, 03.6.14 @ 23:16pm


How does the HOF love Lady Gaga?

Posted by Roy on Thursday, 03.6.14 @ 23:16pm


sampling isn't writing... it's arranging maybe... but not writing. you never truely put your creative into it.. so..it's not genius.. your just a punk user of the system put in place. standing upon the shoulders of genius. corporate structure has made it this way to generate profit for itself...it's puppets in it's places. lights, camera, action. on the wayside...sure... words can be put together by you.. whatever... any monkey can string a sentence to spell your name and say wassap? we can use our collective misery to fell our minds but the ones with true wealth are the ones who hold it in their blood... not the ones who buy it... they have nothing. they can take what they want... when they die they will still have nothing. what i was born with i will take with me.. i'm am only licensing it to you in this world.

Posted by Curt on Wednesday, 03.19.14 @ 03:53am


Is Chuck Klosterman inducting Kiss?

Posted by Roy on Saturday, 03.29.14 @ 07:00am


Is Jack Black inducting Kiss?

Posted by Roy on Saturday, 03.29.14 @ 11:51am


Is Nigel Farage inducting KISS?

Posted by GFW on Saturday, 03.29.14 @ 14:37pm


Chuck Klosterman has written about KISS quite extensively. They are his favorite band and he often goes into tangents about them in his books.

Posted by Roy on Saturday, 03.29.14 @ 21:16pm


After reading the article on Cracked.com today that included Nickelback, I'm absolutely inclined to think that Chad Kroeger is the ideal person to induct KISS. And given the Hall's hate for KISS, it wouldn't surprise me if that's who they got.

NO ONE deserves to be inducted by Jack Black. That's just cruel and unusual punishment.

Posted by Philip on Sunday, 03.30.14 @ 01:05am


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. Basically, this sums up our policy.

No HTML code is allowed.




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