Jump to content

So, who should be in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame??


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 160
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Now whip it

Into shape

Shape it up

Get Straight

Go forward

Move ahead

Try to detect it

It's not to late

To whip it

Whip it good

Lyrics like those should get you in some sort of hall. But the way they kind of sing those words in sort of a rapid-fire style could be considered rap. :laughing: :laughing: But seriously,Devo were pioneers of the video age so maybe they should get some consideration for that.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lemmy / Motorhead: invented the genre of speed-metal, influencing the likes of Metallica, Slayer, Sepultura, etc. and spawning all manner of sub-genres. Speed-metal (used as an "umbrella term" for all its diaspora) is hugely popular, whether one likes it or not.

Lemmy was recently voted "The Greatest Living Englishman" in a Guardian newspaper poll, fact-fans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't even have to check to know that Rush aren't in there. They should be, but I'd say Yes, Genesis and Jethro Tull should be inducted before Rush.

Also, as I mentioned before, The Pretty Things should definitely be inducted. Influence and innovation are important criteria in the HoF, and The Pretty Things invented the concept album, played an important part in the development of progressive and psychedelic music, and have influenced pretty much every progressive and psychedelic band since the 60s. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps you're right about Genesis. When they made great music (1967-1975 in particular) nobody had heard of them, and when they became popular they started making crap music. I'd say their only good album that was also popular was their self titled album from 1983. :)

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But on a more serious note: I'd never seen this list of Inductees before. There are quite a number of soul/funk and even disco artists inducted. In the light of this evidence, I'm still puzzled as to why there should be such a furore about top hip-hop artists being admitted, if they meet the other criteria.

I agree.

It seems to me that Rock and Roll is dynamic and repels categorization. Rock and Roll has regularly consumed other music styles before breakfast.

What is the reason a song can't be simultaneously Rock and Soul ?

Isn't Motown Rock and Roll ?

Rock and Funk ?

Super Freak – Rick James, Burn Rubber On Me - The Gap Band, come to mind, for instance.

And much of Stevie Wonder's stuff between the Talking Book and Songs In The Key Of Life albums ( Superstition , Maybe Your Baby , I Wish , All Day Sucker , You Haven't Done Nothin' , Boogie On Reggae Woman , Higher Ground ) isn't much like Elvis. Songs like I Got A Women , Lonely Avenue and What'd I Say qualify Ray Charles, I think, but I doubt many folks would call him a Rock & Roller. Sly & The Family Stone are legitimate inductees, are they not ?

Anything mutually exclusive about Rock and Disco ?

That Lady – The Isley Brothers, Disco Inferno – The Trammps

Or Rock and Country ?

Haunted House – Jumpin’ Gene Simmons, Running Bear – Johnny Preston, I Can Help – Billy Swan

If Rock and Roll will stand -- and I’m certain it will -- it will continue assimilating some of Hip-Hop and it will keep grabbing bits of Folk, Jazz, Gospel, Reggae, Electronica, Classical and any thing 'new' that comes along, as it always has.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lemmy / Motorhead: invented the genre of speed-metal, influencing the likes of Metallica, Slayer, Sepultura, etc. and spawning all manner of sub-genres. Speed-metal (used as an "umbrella term" for all its diaspora) is hugely popular, whether one likes it or not.

Lemmy was recently voted "The Greatest Living Englishman" in a Guardian newspaper poll, fact-fans.

Motorhead shall be gracing our fair shores this month and we're thinking of getting tickets.

I agree with SJ, Kiss should be in there. And Alice Cooper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree.

It seems to me that Rock and Roll is dynamic and repels categorization. Rock and Roll has regularly consumed other music styles before breakfast.

What is the reason a song can't be simultaneously Rock and Soul ?

Isn't Motown Rock and Roll ?

Rock and Funk ?

Super Freak – Rick James, Burn Rubber On Me - The Gap Band, come to mind, for instance.

And much of Stevie Wonder's stuff between the Talking Book and Songs In The Key Of Life albums ( Superstition , Maybe Your Baby , I Wish , All Day Sucker , You Haven't Done Nothin' , Boogie On Reggae Woman , Higher Ground ) isn't much like Elvis. Songs like I Got A Women , Lonely Avenue and What'd I Say qualify Ray Charles, I think, but I doubt many folks would call him a Rock & Roller. Sly & The Family Stone are legitimate inductees, are they not ?

Anything mutually exclusive about Rock and Disco ?

That Lady – The Isley Brothers, Disco Inferno – The Trammps

Or Rock and Country ?

Haunted House – Jumpin’ Gene Simmons, Running Bear – Johnny Preston, I Can Help – Billy Swan

If Rock and Roll will stand -- and I’m certain it will -- it will continue assimilating some of Hip-Hop and it will keep grabbing bits of Folk, Jazz, Gospel, Reggae, Electronica, Classical and any thing 'new' that comes along, as it always has.

While I agree that rock music has always been about taking bits and pieces from other music styles in creating the rock sound,I think many people feel that today the influences of hip hop and rap on popular music are taking away from what we consider to be rock music.And while there will always be rock music,groups like Led Zepp,The Byrds,The Eagles,The Rolling Stones,maybe even The Beatles,and many,many others,if they were trying to break into the music business in todays music world,would have a hard time of it.I can only speak for myself,but I think many people,including some on here,see that style of music slipping away.Yes I know I will be bombarded with examples of artists today who some feel are making that kind of music,and I know there are some out there who are,but in general,thing's aren't like they were in the 60's,70's and early 80's as far as the music I loved from those periods.I think it's the reason so many in my age group shell out big bucks to see artists in their 60's in concert instead of maybe going to see a artist from "today's" world of music.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the thoughts on this thread, and I have been thinking quite a bit about the whole nominee/induction process and I am going to try and see if I can talk to someone involved in the process. I would love to have them do a call in on my show. I can't say this will happen for sure, but it can't hurt to make some calls and see what happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the thoughts on this thread, and I have been thinking quite a bit about the whole nominee/induction process and I am going to try and see if I can talk to someone involved in the process. I would love to have them do a call in on my show. I can't say this will happen for sure, but it can't hurt to make some calls and see what happens.

Hey tell them some of my comments about The Beastie Boys. :laughing: :laughing:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...Yes I know I will be bombarded with examples of artists today who some feel are making that kind of music...

I can´t give you examples right now, but I know for sure that many nowadays songs and many bands are very much in the style of Beatles, Doors or Velvet Underground. I discovered a lot in Songfacts and many of my young friends introduced into current music. Not that I´ll listen to Weezer or No Doubt while smoking a joint -or maybe I will- , I still stick to my classics... but I have to admit that many modern bands have learned the lesson and are able to make me stop, listen and like it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...