Kyuss

Not in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame

Eligible since: 2016 (The 2017 Induction Ceremony)

Previously Considered? No  what's this?

Kyuss @ Wikipedia

Kyuss Videos

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

Comments

57 comments so far (post your own)

come on its kyuss, the first stoner rock band they were not but they opened the genre up farther than any other band, infusing psychedelica and blues, just a fucking great band

Posted by austin on Saturday, 03.31.07 @ 10:09am


Not the first. Not even close.

Pentagram, the Obsessed, and Saint Vitus were doing this stuff back in the early '80s.

Still very, very influential, though.

Posted by William on Saturday, 03.31.07 @ 13:16pm


any examples, william?

yeah and to be honest, it does sound ALOT like the harder rock of the 60s

Posted by liam on Monday, 09.3.07 @ 15:39pm


Examples of their influence? Well aside from the direct influence Kyuss had on its various splinter groups (QotSA, Unida, Che, Hermano, and groups that took in Kyuss vets like Fu Manchu), they basically defined the sound of stoner metal for the '90s and beyond.

Posted by William on Monday, 09.3.07 @ 18:56pm


Proves my point. Not 'very, very influential' as you put it, because only a 'big' band such as Oasis or The Beatles could be as influential as (i believe) you put it.

I'm sure it was very influetial. on STONER METAL/METAL BANDS (a genre which i don't recall ever having gripped the mainstream).

Posted by liam on Wednesday, 09.5.07 @ 12:45pm


Maybe when they rename it the "Mainstream Music Hall of Fame," you can have it your way and only induct high-quality bands like Bon Jovi and and Fall Out Boy, but until then, as a catlogue of musical events, the hall is going to be recognizing the forerunners of some genres with which you might not be familiar. Admitting ignorance is fine, but trying to turn that ignorance into some kind of point (well I'VE certainly never heard of it) is stupidity on an epic level.

You could also try not mentioning Oasis every other post.

Posted by William on Thursday, 09.6.07 @ 05:59am


Being influential in itself does not mean much in the general sense. I mean look at George W .Bush - he is highly influential, but an ass too....so much for "influence."

Posted by Anon on Thursday, 09.6.07 @ 11:11am


"Being influential in itself does not mean much in the general sense. I mean look at George W .Bush - he is highly influential, but an ass too....so much for "influence.""-Anon

What in the hell are you talking about? This does not come anywhere close to making sense or being relevant, and what little point it's trying unsuccessfully to make goes against the very criteria that the hall set for itself.

I swear, you're the worst troll in the world.

Posted by William on Thursday, 09.6.07 @ 12:16pm


I thought it was a straightforward point. Like for instance, some people say that Bon Jovi was "influential." But, assuming he was and he influenced Hair Metal - it is one bad and cheesy band influencing others. My point was that being influential is not always a good thing.

Posted by Anon on Thursday, 09.6.07 @ 14:07pm


Well first off, no he didn't. He did not influence hair metal at all, nor much of anything. Second, a better example of a band who influenced bad bands would be Pearl Jam, and guess what? Despite the fact that so many of the bands they've influenced over the past fifteen years completely suck and are terrible, awful disgraces to music, Pearl Jam still deserves induction. Influence is not inherently good or bad, but it's still important. Learn to make the distinction.

Posted by William on Thursday, 09.6.07 @ 14:20pm


Wait...George Bush made an album?

Posted by Kit on Thursday, 09.6.07 @ 16:42pm


Bush made an album?

Not at all...because that would actually be accomplishing a goal, something he is not able to do. BTW, it was an analogy.

William, influence CAN be positive or negative. And, some would say that BJ did influence glam metal. In any event, the point I was making is that one shit band can "influence" another shit band, and so on, and so on. Maybe a better example for you would have been a band like RATT or Def Leppard being influential to the "Glam Metal" scene. Or better yet, KISS.

In either case, my only point was that being influential is not always positive. If you cannot see that obvious point, then you are letting your dislike for me get in the way with seeing an obvious point.

Maybe a line from a Woody Allen movie will help. There is a scene in which they are talking about this character (Alan Alda) who is a highly succesful director, but his movies are popular and commercially successful only. Woody Allen is the struggling director who makes meaningful, yet unsuccesful movies. Mia Farrow says to Woody Allen, he (Alan Alda's character) is an "American phenonmenon". And, Woody Allen says, "Well, so is acid rain."

Posted by Anon on Friday, 09.7.07 @ 08:02am


"William, influence CAN be positive or negative. And, some would say that BJ did influence glam metal. In any event, the point I was making is that one shit band can "influence" another shit band, and so on, and so on. Maybe a better example for you would have been a band like RATT or Def Leppard being influential to the "Glam Metal" scene. Or better yet, KISS."-Anon

Again, that is the individual attributes of the bands themselves. A shit band can influence good bands and vice versa because influence is objective. It is factual. It cannot be inherently good or bad. In any case, why bring it up then unless you're trying to suggest that either Kyuss or some of the bands it influenced was shitty? In which case you're a coward for not just saying it.

"In either case, my only point was that being influential is not always positive. If you cannot see that obvious point, then you are letting your dislike for me get in the way with seeing an obvious point."-Anon

Irony of ironies.

"Maybe a line from a Woody Allen movie will help. There is a scene in which they are talking about this character (Alan Alda) who is a highly succesful director, but his movies are popular and commercially successful only. Woody Allen is the struggling director who makes meaningful, yet unsuccesful movies. Mia Farrow says to Woody Allen, he (Alan Alda's character) is an "American phenonmenon". And, Woody Allen says, "Well, so is acid rain.""-Anon

I just love oblique metaphors.

Posted by William on Friday, 09.7.07 @ 09:01am


Of course influence can be good or bad. Adolph Hitler was HIGHLY influential..that is undeniable....enough said.

Influence, as Shawn has said, is really not objective or measurable. Sure, there are many "no-brainer" cases of influence, but in most instances it is really not measurable and actually quite difficult to define.

As for Kyuss, being influential on such a small "subgenre" of music does not strike me as being that important. To me, influence has to be on a larger scale, although their influence on the subgenre I am not denying at all.

Posted by Anon on Friday, 09.7.07 @ 09:35am


"Of course influence can be good or bad. Adolph Hitler was HIGHLY influential..that is undeniable....enough said."-Anon

Your analogies are dumb and in no way related to MUSIC.

"Influence, as Shawn has said, is really not objective or measurable. Sure, there are many "no-brainer" cases of influence, but in most instances it is really not measurable and actually quite difficult to define."-Anon

Techniques, sounds, technical set-ups, and even visual effects are all observable and irrefutable.

"As for Kyuss, being influential on such a small "subgenre" of music does not strike me as being that important. To me, influence has to be on a larger scale, although their influence on the subgenre I am not denying at all."-Anon

Once again you're trying to argue from a perspective of ignorance. I doubt you're a big metalhead, but it's actually a very, very large "subgenre" that's stuck around since the mid-'80s to today and spans three continents.

Posted by William on Friday, 09.7.07 @ 10:37am


Oh, and btw you yourself said that influence can be negative. I seem to recall a posting in which you said that Robert Plant influenced a lot of later singers to sing in a high pitched and annoying tone - thus, something you found to be both influential and annoying (i.e negative).

Posted by Anon on Friday, 09.7.07 @ 10:38am


"Oh, and btw you yourself said that influence can be negative. I seem to recall a posting in which you said that Robert Plant influenced a lot of later singers to sing in a high pitched and annoying tone - thus, something you found to be both influential and annoying (i.e negative)."-Anon

Plant was a shitty singer in my opinion, and he influenced people who were also shitty singers in my opinion. The fact that he influenced people is not my opinion. It is objective, irrefutable fact that is neither good nor bad.

You are not good at semantics. Stop.

Posted by William on Friday, 09.7.07 @ 10:41am


Heavy metal is a huge genre - agreed, but Kyuss is categorized as "Stoner Metal", which according to WIKI is neither that big nor even easily defined as a "subgenre":

"Today, not many bands associated with stoner rock enjoy mainstream success....Current debates in the genre revolve around classification — who qualifies as stoner rock."

Like I said, I am not denying their influence within the so called subgenre of "Stoner Metal", but I just think that in order to qualify for the HALL, the influence would have to be on a larger scale. That is just my opinion...thats all.

Posted by Anon on Friday, 09.7.07 @ 10:43am


LOL...dude you need to go into politics...I gotcha ya'. Plant was an influential and "shitty singer" - last time I checked, being "shitty" is negative.

Posted by Anon on Friday, 09.7.07 @ 10:45am


"..because influence is objective. It is factual." - William

Perhaps, perhaps not. Nevertheless, so elusive and nebulous as to be beyond our ability to accurately and consistently (and therefore, I proffer, fairly). Except where an artist explicitly endorses another as their inspiration in a liner note or interview (and even then, to what extent and in what manner was that "influence" and how do we give that correct measure? Does the influencee imitate chord/melody/style, was the influence more abstract, more spititual?)How would you compare the taste of an apple and "idea" of an orange?

And of course, when you claim you can map influence, are you assuming you can account for the vast scope of it upon all musicians, or do you just take into account the ones you are aware of. When does an influencee "count"?

Influence is a more than a bit on the Agnostic.

Posted by shawn on Friday, 09.7.07 @ 10:49am


"Heavy metal is a huge genre - agreed, but Kyuss is categorized as "Stoner Metal", which according to WIKI is neither that big nor even easily defined as a "subgenre":"-Anon

1) Wiki is a cursory source at best.

2) It's big enough. Really, music is defined almost entirely by scenes, and this was one of the larger and more enduring ones. As a museum of musical history, to ignore an entire chunk of history is stupid, and one of the main reasons the Hall today is so crummy.

"LOL...dude you need to go into politics...I gotcha ya'. Plant was an influential and "shitty singer" - last time I checked, being "shitty" is negative."-Anon

I am being entirely serious when I say SHUT UP ABOUT POLITICS. Do you have to trot out the same boring analogies every time?

Once again: Influence is factual, not subjective. Quality is subjective. They cannot be conflated. I think Plant's singing stinks. He influenced a lot of singers to imitate that style. He also influenced a few singers I find enjoyable. Once again, my opinions on the individuals' singing has no bearing on whether or not there was influence.

"Perhaps, perhaps not. Nevertheless, so elusive and nebulous as to be beyond our ability to accurately and consistently (and therefore, I proffer, fairly). Except where an artist explicitly endorses another as their inspiration in a liner note or interview (and even then, to what extent and in what manner was that "influence" and how do we give that correct measure? Does the influencee imitate chord/melody/style, was the influence more abstract, more spititual?)How would you compare the taste of an apple and "idea" of an orange?

And of course, when you claim you can map influence, are you assuming you can account for the vast scope of it upon all musicians, or do you just take into account the ones you are aware of. When does an influencee "count"?

Influence is a more than a bit on the Agnostic."-shawn

You are thinking way too hard on this. As a museum, only factual, observable criteria can count, so in order to at least approach objectivity, you have to set a standard. As I've already explained, the technical and visual aspects of influence are all that can be taken into account. Don't worry about anything else if it won't get you anywhere.

Posted by William on Friday, 09.7.07 @ 14:48pm


"the hall is going to be recognizing the forerunners of some genres with which you might not be familiar"

ok, maybe my musical leanings haven't properly discovered metal yet. Basically, i probably won't due to certain bands (cough slipknot cough), but i already like Led Zep and that. But I'd still expect A LITTLE mainstream influence. Look at The Smiths (for a change). During their five years of recording, they failed to crack USA and barely charted in the UK. Now look. There's tons of new artists citing them, alot of whom would have been babies (if that) when The Smiths were around.

"You could also try not mentioning Oasis every other post."

I'd use more, but I doubt you own any Blur albums, and as for The Stone Roses...

Posted by liam on Friday, 09.7.07 @ 14:56pm


"I'd use more, but I doubt you own any Blur albums, and as for The Stone Roses..."-liam

You continue to be wrong. I'll go ahead and knock Pulp out of the way as well. Try again later.

Posted by William on Friday, 09.7.07 @ 15:53pm


As for mainstream influence, well, I know Eagles of Death Metal haven't quite taken off, but I hear those Queens of the Stone Age guys are fairly popular...

Posted by William on Friday, 09.7.07 @ 15:59pm


"I'll go ahead and knock Pulp out of the way as well."

Damn I was gonna give Jarvis a shot!!!! I'll see if you know The Verve, Cast and The Charlatans (UK), then. Do you?

Posted by liam on Friday, 09.7.07 @ 16:35pm


William...as usual you are unable to see any other viewpoint, but your own.

Posted by Anonymous on Friday, 09.7.07 @ 16:46pm


"William...as usual you are unable to see any other viewpoint, but your own."

Sorry, but what in this section can prove that?

Posted by liam on Friday, 09.7.07 @ 16:48pm


What proves that? Can you read?

He says that influence cannot be good or bad. Then I show him an old post in which he said Plant influenced others in a negative manner. Then he says that "Plant was a shitty singer in my opinion, and he influenced people who were also shitty singers." Then he cannot see that being shitty is a negative thing? Hmmm....Oh, well

Posted by Anonymous on Friday, 09.7.07 @ 17:48pm


Your point is well taken, William, and I actually submitted my comment before I read farther up and saw your post specifying techniques, sounds, technical set-ups, and visual effects as your concrete examples of influence.

It is difficult for me to accept ignoring the impact of the more transcendental varieties of Influence because they are more abstract. Paradoxically though, this desire to account for that hazier, emotional flavor of Influence is also the kind that may be so "carried on the wind" that it is not suitable to try to measure, as you suggest.

It just pains me to suspect that many artist's Influence is more this kind and therefore their Impact is underestimated. I'm an idealist perhaps.

Posted by shawn on Saturday, 09.8.07 @ 00:02am


I saw an interview with Alex Lifeson and he said that Rush has "influenced" many bands, even bands that do not "sound" like them. The influence has been more in a vision and a philosophy. Sure, sometimes influence is clear and concrete, and yet other times it is more obscure and abstract. Influence comes in different forms, and as I have said, can be both positive or negative.

"The humblest individual exerts some influence, either for good or evil, upon others" - Henry Ward Beecher

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 09.8.07 @ 04:54am


"He says that influence cannot be good or bad. Then I show him an old post in which he said Plant influenced others in a negative manner. Then he says that "Plant was a shitty singer in my opinion, and he influenced people who were also shitty singers." Then he cannot see that being shitty is a negative thing? Hmmm....Oh, well"-Anon

I'll give this one last try (which is about three tries more than I should have) before I give up on ever cracking that tremendously thick skull: Influence = factual, not subjective, true. Qualifiers like "good" or "bad" are subjective and thus not worth considering when talking about INFLUENCE AS A FACTOR FOR INDUCTION. As I said above, and I quote (myself), "He influenced a lot of singers to imitate that style. He also influenced a few singers I find enjoyable. Once again, my opinions on the individuals' singing has no bearing on whether or not there was influence."

Read that middle sentence until it bores through your skull, you twit.

Posted by William on Saturday, 09.8.07 @ 07:29am


"I saw an interview with Alex Lifeson and he said that Rush has "influenced" many bands, even bands that do not "sound" like them. The influence has been more in a vision and a philosophy. Sure, sometimes influence is clear and concrete, and yet other times it is more obscure and abstract. Influence comes in different forms, and as I have said, can be both positive or negative."

Stop FUCKING dragging Rush into this. There's plenty of bands gone untouched by Rush. I'd have to agree with William, and say that even though INFLENCE CAN BE GOOD, BAD OR BOTH, IT STILL HAPPENED, AND REVEALS AN ARTIST'S RELEVANCE IN A HOF

Posted by liam on Saturday, 09.8.07 @ 12:09pm


Influence in this context is just another word for GRAVITY(=9.8 meters/square second)

Gravity is not evil, it is not good. If you are sitting in a tree and try to fly like a bird gravity will influence you to fall to the ground and possibly break your neck and die, something most fellow human beings would consider negative. That doesn't mean gravity hates you.
Gravity just is doing what it is supposed to do in this and every situation.

Posted by SG on Saturday, 09.8.07 @ 14:29pm


Influence has nothing to do with gravity, the former pertains to art (at least in these conversations), and the latter to science (i.e. physics).

I only used Rush b/c it is a quote that I am familiar with - I am sure other bands have said similar things - but not too sure. I cannot quote something I do not know. Plus, it demonstrates that influence can be in obvious ways and not so obvious ways.

As for William, there is no point in going on because he is stuck in fantasy land and has a penchant desire to be right which seesm to supersede his ability to have a meaningful conversation...oh, well

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 09.8.07 @ 16:50pm


BTW, I admit I do like the gravity analogy. But, the main problem there is that with gravity - he is right, it just is and happens. But, with influence, it relates to emotions and will. That is, it can relate to desires, feelings, and choices. Boy, this turning interesting, like philosophy 101 :-)

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 09.8.07 @ 16:56pm


Oh Anon... our wretched, poor Anon.

Posted by shawn on Saturday, 09.8.07 @ 20:17pm


Are you sure it is 41, mb it is really 14?

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 09.9.07 @ 06:41am


"INFLENCE CAN BE GOOD, BAD OR BOTH, IT STILL HAPPENED"

Thank you for agreeing that influence can be "good, bad or both." As for, "it still happened" - of course it "happened", otherwise there would be no influence. Talk about self-evident...

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 09.9.07 @ 06:43am


you obviously didnt get the message. So I'll give it another go. If a band is INFLUENTIAL, it means people have noticed it. Means that 'the band matters/ed'.

"The influence has been more in a vision and a philosophy"

I'm sorry, but what the fuck is that supposed to mean? A Vision and a Philosophy? Are you implieing that no artists before Rush had Visions or Philosophies? Because if it is, you're talking utter bullshit, as per usual.

Posted by liam on Sunday, 09.9.07 @ 11:20am


Dude, calm down...I was not saying that Rush is the only band to influence other bands - that would be plain dumb and wrong. I was just pointing out, as William said, influence can be with very tangible and technical things like sound, lyricas, effects, lighting or whatever. But, it can also be in an overall vision and approach to things. I just used Rush as but ONE example of I am sure gazillions...

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 09.9.07 @ 11:24am


you still haven'yt explained Rush's 'overall vision and approach to things'

Posted by liam on Sunday, 09.9.07 @ 11:46am


And, William I do see what you are saying with influence just being, so to speak and that good or bad is the opinion portion. That is true, I will give you that. But, I think they tend to just go hand in hand - you really cannot have one without the other - it is human nature on the most basic level - i.e. good vs. not good. And, in reality the opinion portion is likely what the hall voters actually use most to determine eligibility, rather than was this band influential? (i.e. yes vs. no - if it is yes, then they let them in).

The most blatant example is KISS. Clearly, whether you like them or not, they WERE influential to some degree - it is simply undeniable. Thus, based upon this notion of influence (it just "is" and "exists"), then they should be in. However, the hall voters likely feel (and probably true to a degree) that their influence on Rock music was not positive and denigrated or belittled rock music, so they do not vote them in.

In any event, my point is that to a degree, we are both right...I promise not to make any more attacking comments -

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 09.9.07 @ 11:49am


Nice catch Anon - you brought your careening bus of terror to a stop bofore you plunged over the cliff again. I'll let the age comment go.

Posted by shawn on Sunday, 09.9.07 @ 12:08pm


Actually I saw an interview with Alex Lifeson in which he was saying that they have influenced a bunch of bands over the years, but in some instance, have even influenced bands that do not sound much like them. How? Well, Lifeson did not say...but I would imagine one way would be in not succumbing to pressures to play what the record execs. want you to play (2112 is about that topic and they had to sort of "fight" to put out that album) or the song Spirit of Radio is about that as well, and is actually the one Rush song that the Hall of Fame acknowledges as being one of the most influential rock songs of all time. The influence could be other things as well, but not to sure

To be honest, I was just using that as an example and did not want to turn this into another Rush conversation. I mean, do you not think that John Lennon or Bob Dylab influenced other musicians in a vision and philosophy as opposed to chord structures, or other technical aspect of the music, etc. That was really my only point here - so lets drop the Rush talk - ehh?

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 09.9.07 @ 12:18pm


"I'll let the age comment go."

Whewww...thank goodness, a close one....

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 09.9.07 @ 12:19pm


"the one Rush song that the Hall of Fame acknowledges as being one of the most influential rock songs of all time"

Huh? I mean, if Noel Gallagher didnt nick a riff off it, it can't be that influential

Posted by liam on Sunday, 09.9.07 @ 12:24pm


no, influential lyrically and in the philopsophy part, not musically - although musically was pretty cool and unique

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 09.9.07 @ 12:28pm


well maybe, but that's your opinion, and ive heard better songs with better lyrics with better philosphies than this.

unique? Rush songs all sound a bit similar to me

Posted by liam on Sunday, 09.9.07 @ 12:34pm


The fact is, the song is listed at the RRHOF as being one of the most influential of all time. It is not MY opinion at all, it was the voters over there at the Hall - it was their opinion - although I would tend to agree.

C'mon, you do not love the reference and play on words to the Simon and Garfunkel song:

"For the words of the profits
Are written on the studio wall"


But of course, the part I like best is:

"All this machinery
Making modern music
Can still be open-hearted
Not so coldly charted
Its really just a question
Of your honesty

One likes to believe
In the freedom of music
But glittering prizes
And endless compromises
Shatter the illusion
Of integrity"


Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 09.9.07 @ 12:38pm


is that it?

check out The Smiths and The Beautiful South, mate.

Posted by liam on Sunday, 09.9.07 @ 12:52pm


I like the Smiths a lot, although Morrisey's obvious mental illness usually finds its way into most songs. But, see I can like Rush AND the Smiths at the same time...fancy that

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 09.9.07 @ 13:06pm


"I like the Smiths a lot, although Morrisey's obvious mental illness usually finds its way into most songs. But, see I can like Rush AND the Smiths at the same time...fancy that"

say that about morrissey's solo work, and you'd be right. but not thats not going for the Smiths

Posted by liam on Sunday, 09.9.07 @ 15:05pm


"Wait...George Bush made an album?"

Yeah, bu its all covers:

1. God's Cop
2. Lving In Another World
3. There's No Other Way
4. Dig Your Own Hole
5. Be My Enemy
6. President In a Tutu
7. My Big Mouth
8. Are You Gonna Go My Way?
9. Shoot You Down
10. Won't Get Fooled Again
11. Its the End of the World As We Know It (And I Feel Fine)

(i suppose Kudos if you can name the orignal artists)

Posted by liam on Friday, 09.21.07 @ 11:38am



Need more files from Megaupload? Find “more” at http://megaupload.name/

Posted by marky on Friday, 12.19.08 @ 14:59pm


One of the pioneers of stoner rock. Josh Homme got his start with this band. Good amount of influence, so I'd say they deserve it.

Posted by Dude Man on Wednesday, 07.15.09 @ 13:47pm


Kyuss was very influential on many of the alternative rock bands of the mid nineties and even today they are regarded as the velvet underground of metal.

Posted by hwy74 on Monday, 06.14.10 @ 17:40pm


Maybe a line from a Woody Allen movie will help. There is a scene in which they are talking about this character (Alan Alda) who is a highly succesful director, but his movies are popular and commercially successful only. Woody Allen is the struggling director who makes meaningful, yet unsuccesful movies. Mia Farrow says to Woody Allen, he (Alan Alda's character) is an "American phenonmenon". And, Woody Allen says, "Well, so is acid rain."

Posted by Anon on Friday, 09.7.07 @ 08:02am

Only a complete fool would quote a typically boring, overly talky Woody Allen movie to make a point. He's one of my most despised directors/actors/human beings.

Just for the record, acid rain isn't exclusive to the U.S.A. It happens in China, Germany, and plenty of other nations.

Try quoting a better movie next time you want to support an argument.

Posted by Zach on Sunday, 08.19.12 @ 22:34pm


Leave your comment:

Name:

Email:

Comments:


Security Question:

Which letter is Springsteen's band named after?
 

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

No HTML code is allowed.




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