RnRHOF - 2014 - Yes? No? Maybe.....

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: RnRHOF - 2014 - Yes? No? Maybe.....

    Really , I think the people who started this whole idea got it wrong.

    They are making a museum of stuff "related to" and " almost like" Rock music.

    But , I hate that people believe the Rock term means " all music that came after Elvis."

    It is not. Jazz is still Jazz, it has been fused with Rock. And sometimes with very nice results. This means artists like Steely Dan and Chicago who successfully merged the two are legit Hall Of Famers. But artists who are pure Jazz shouldn't be in there, although they may be giants of their own genre.

    I can even throw stones at artist I love. Talking Heads and Joni Mitchell , one is Rock , one is Folk. Neither is more prolific or more "Rock" than Deep Purple or Uriah Heep. How is that Heavy Metal and harder rock bands keep getting shafted. How is a band like the Sex Pistols ( another band I am fond of) in the Hall and a creative, prolific and pioneering ( albeit not very well known ) band such as Wishbone Ash neglected? Wishbone Ash was a pioneer on the twin lead guitar style that would be used by Thin Lizzy, Judas Preist and the Scorpions.

    How about Red Hot Chili Peppers.....great group....but why are they in when so many Heavy Metal acts are ignored? Heavy Metal is a major genre of Rock, so many were extremely popular so few are being recognized. How do have three Punk bands and only ones Heavy Metal band in a Hall Of Fame?...and yet you have such minimal artists as Laura Nyro and Randy Newman?...look at their output versus a band like Thin Lizzy or Iron Maiden.

    Totally ridiculous that they think all of Heavy metal can be represented by Black Sabbath. There were lots of Punk bands better than the Stooges. Sure, Iggy Pop recorded many solo LPs and is legendary...but it's The Stooges that are inductees....totally dumb. Sex Pistols had only one LP. The Stranglers have many....and are way more talented.

    Am I getting through to anyone as to why this whole Hall Of Fame business is a total misnomer? It was never meant to honor Rock And Roll, it was created to honor popular music.

    'Cause just like the MLB All Star game. it's not about who deserves it, it's about who is popular with the people who decide....and the people who decide are either uninformed, biased or just plain stupid.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: RnRHOF - 2014 - Yes? No? Maybe.....

    Would you put pizza in the Chinese Food Hall Of Fame?

    Should Lance Armstrong be in the Harley Davidson Riders Hall Of Fame?

    Gloves in the Footwear Hall Of Fame?

    Jerry Lewis in the Horror Movie Hall Of Fame?

    Pizza is food, Armstrong rides a bike, gloves cover and protect an extremity, Jerry Lewis starred in movies. If Randy Newman , who is a very good song writer is in the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame but isn't really a Rock artist, it's like saying all music is Rock , therefre all food is Chinese food and should be allowed in the Chinese Food Hall Of Fame alongside Chow Mein and General Tso's chicken. Armstrong rides a two wheeler, so he belongs in the Harley Davidson Hall Of Fame.

    Are these not legit comparisons to what is happening when Donna Summer or Run DMC are categorized as Rock and Roll? No matter how you slice it, they are not Rock and Roll artists, any more than pizza is Chinese Food.

     

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from devildavid. Show devildavid's posts

    Re: RnRHOF - 2014 - Yes? No? Maybe.....

    Who defines what a rock and roll band or performer is? Who is the unquestioned arbiter of rock and roll legitimacy? What are the criteria that absolutely must be met to qualify?

    If a handful of rock fans in this forum can't even agree on it, who is to say?

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: RnRHOF - 2014 - Yes? No? Maybe.....

    In response to devildavid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Who defines what a rock and roll band or performer is? Who is the unquestioned arbiter of rock and roll legitimacy? What are the criteria that absolutely must be met to qualify?

    If a handful of rock fans in this forum can't even agree on it, who is to say? 

    [/QUOTE]

    It's a good question to be sure.  But I think Zilla has a point when he says this is really the Popular Music Hall of Fame.

    Here's one way to look at it: Rolling Stone magazine is one of the major forces behind the RRHOF.  When Rolling Stone does their lists of the 'greatest rock and roll albums', you won't find any Donna Summer albums. 

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from devildavid. Show devildavid's posts

    Re: RnRHOF - 2014 - Yes? No? Maybe.....

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to devildavid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Who defines what a rock and roll band or performer is? Who is the unquestioned arbiter of rock and roll legitimacy? What are the criteria that absolutely must be met to qualify?

    If a handful of rock fans in this forum can't even agree on it, who is to say? 

    [/QUOTE]

    It's a good question to be sure.  But I think Zilla has a point when he says this is really the Popular Music Hall of Fame.

    Here's one way to look at it: Rolling Stone magazine is one of the major forces behind the RRHOF.  When Rolling Stone does their lists of the 'greatest rock and roll albums', you won't find any Donna Summer albums. 

    [/QUOTE]

    That is my problem with any groups that hand out awards. They are run by people with their own particular tastes and prejudices, likes and dislikes. Popularity very often plays a role in award giving, which to me waters down an act that has its own built in weaknesses to begin with. Awards are subjective, accomplishments are not.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: RnRHOF - 2014 - Yes? No? Maybe.....

    In response to devildavid's comment:

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to devildavid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Who defines what a rock and roll band or performer is? Who is the unquestioned arbiter of rock and roll legitimacy? What are the criteria that absolutely must be met to qualify?

    If a handful of rock fans in this forum can't even agree on it, who is to say? 



    It's a good question to be sure.  But I think Zilla has a point when he says this is really the Popular Music Hall of Fame.

    Here's one way to look at it: Rolling Stone magazine is one of the major forces behind the RRHOF.  When Rolling Stone does their lists of the 'greatest rock and roll albums', you won't find any Donna Summer albums. 

    [/QUOTE]

    That is my problem with any groups that hand out awards. They are run by people with their own particular tastes and prejudices, likes and dislikes. Popularity very often plays a role in award giving, which to me waters down an act that has its own built in weaknesses to begin with. Awards are subjective, accomplishments are not.

    [/QUOTE]

    Well ... Awards that have clear, standardized reasoning behind them, are not subjective.  "Lifetime" achievement awards (that are based on accomplishments ...) are subjective?   

    You seem to be lumping all awards into the popularity contest method.   Many are, of course, but not all.   If that is the difference to you, then sure, awards are subjective, but if you open up the field to awards that are granted on a more serious ranking, then no, they are not.    

    Sure if Billboard gives an award, you know where they're coming from, it's not a secret what they value.    

    And what makes accomplishments any different, unless you are basing the reasoning in nothing but data (which is fine, if stated up front).    "Most sold out shows in a year"  -- "most number one hits" ---  "largest percentage of sales given to charitable causes"  ?    What is an accomplishment to you, may not be to me.  It just has to be stated up front that the list of accomplishments is based on a defined list, or on data.    I am not clear at all why you say that accomplishments are less subjective, again, unless it is absolutely transparent what and how accomplishments are derived, so that comparisons can be made when you put one musician next to another.    He's "more accomplished" because he has ... (fill in the blank), and she is less accomplished because she hasn't (fill in the blank)?    

    Not sure you and I will see eye to eye on this; we come from different points of reference.   Additionally, it's not easy to go down these ratholes online.   =)   

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from devildavid. Show devildavid's posts

    Re: RnRHOF - 2014 - Yes? No? Maybe.....

    In response to yogafriend's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to devildavid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to devildavid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Who defines what a rock and roll band or performer is? Who is the unquestioned arbiter of rock and roll legitimacy? What are the criteria that absolutely must be met to qualify?

    If a handful of rock fans in this forum can't even agree on it, who is to say? 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    It's a good question to be sure.  But I think Zilla has a point when he says this is really the Popular Music Hall of Fame.

     

    Here's one way to look at it: Rolling Stone magazine is one of the major forces behind the RRHOF.  When Rolling Stone does their lists of the 'greatest rock and roll albums', you won't find any Donna Summer albums. 

    [/QUOTE]

    That is my problem with any groups that hand out awards. They are run by people with their own particular tastes and prejudices, likes and dislikes. Popularity very often plays a role in award giving, which to me waters down an act that has its own built in weaknesses to begin with. Awards are subjective, accomplishments are not.

    [/QUOTE]

    Well ... Awards that have clear, standardized reasoning behind them, are not subjective.  "Lifetime" achievement awards (that are based on accomplishments ...) are subjective?   

    You seem to be lumping all awards into the popularity contest method.   Many are, of course, but not all.   If that is the difference to you, then sure, awards are subjective, but if you open up the field to awards that are granted on a more serious ranking, then no, they are not.    

    Sure if Billboard gives an award, you know where they're coming from, it's not a secret what they value.    

    And what makes accomplishments any different, unless you are basing the reasoning in nothing but data (which is fine, if stated up front).    "Most sold out shows in a year"  -- "most number one hits" ---  "largest percentage of sales given to charitable causes"  ?    What is an accomplishment to you, may not be to me.  It just has to be stated up front that the list of accomplishments is based on a defined list, or on data.    I am not clear at all why you say that accomplishments are less subjective, again, unless it is absolutely transparent what and how accomplishments are derived, so that comparisons can be made when you put one musician next to another.    He's "more accomplished" because he has ... (fill in the blank), and she is less accomplished because she hasn't (fill in the blank)?    

    Not sure you and I will see eye to eye on this; we come from different points of reference.   Additionally, it's not easy to go down these ratholes online.   =)   

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes, it is tough to have these discussions and make your view clear. I will agree that subjectivity can affect our view of accomplishments and I'm not arguing for something purely objective. I'm just saying that an individual will have a certain sense of what they have accomplished and their own sense of satisfaction of dis-satisfaction with it. They may win an award deseveredly or not but this award adds another layer of subjectivity. This award may make them feel better about their accomplishment but it does not make it any better or more real than the accomplishments of those who never win an award. My point is that an accomplishment is something an individual is pretty much in controls of. An award is not.

    I'm certain this has not made my position any clearer. Oh well.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: RnRHOF - 2014 - Yes? No? Maybe.....


    When I was a young adolescent and just starting to acquire a taste for heavier and more creative music than the pap music that was featured predominately on TOP40 radio ( Captain and Tenille, Tony Orlando and Dawn , Sonny and Cher, Barbara Striesand ...excuse me while I get sick...) , I knew this teenager who was a cousin of some friends of mine. He used to visit occasionally from Connecticut. Because this guy was older and knew alot about harder Rock music and of course sex , I really thought this guy was really, really cool. He was listening to groups like Free, Grand Funk Railroad and Deep Purple. This was around 1971 ( early post-Beatles era).

    What I am now aware of through talking with others who grew up in that era, and reading countless books and articles is that the "void" caused by the Beatles breakup left the door wide open for Rock bands to attract hungry fans ( like myself) to buy records and go to concerts ( I was still a little too young for that).

    With this in mind, you have to consider the 1970- 1975 period to be an extremely important time in Rock history. This post-Beatles, post Woodstock era spawned many groups and solo acts in Rock.....many of them were hugely popular and broke sales and attendance records around the globe.

    Deep Purple was mentioned in the Guinness Book Of Records as the world's loudest live act, The album Machine Head ( the definitive Hard Rock album, second to none) Reached #1 in the U.K. and #7 in the U.S. iN 2011, Deep Purple did concert tours in 48 countries, THAT'S RIGHT FORTY- EIGHT COUNTIRES!!!

    Grand Funk Railroad packed arenas worldwide in their heydey of the early 70s. They broke the Shea Stadium attendance record set by the Fab Four, selling out in just 72 hours. In 1969 , the debut LP On Time sold over 1 million copies. The second album also achieved Gold status , all this with very little support form radio ( they wouldn't get much of anything on air until "We're An American Band" in 1973. Much like Deep Purple and other powerhouse bands like Uriah Heep....the critics hated these guys.

    Now, tell me. Patti Smith is good, Joni Mitchell is good. Lots of artists in the HOF are very talented, and sold alot of records, performed alot of concerts , do you not agree that Grand Funk Railroad and Deep Purple are more legendary, filled more arenas and recorded more records ( that went Gold or Platinum) than so many artists that have been honored by induction in the HOF?...and they are ROCK BANDS....NOT FOLK, NOT RAP, NOT DISCO.

    Isn't this a museum for Rock fans?...when rock fans speak it is loud and clear what they like.

    ...and where the heck is Foreigner?...this band also filled arenas, sold millions of records (80 million worldwide) and had numerous songs played on radio.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: RnRHOF - 2014 - Yes? No? Maybe.....

    In response to ZILLAGOD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    ( Captain and Tenille, Tony Orlando and Dawn , Sonny and Cher, Barbara Striesand ...excuse me while I get sick...) 

    [/QUOTE]

    They aren't in the HoF, are they...?

    To my mind, THAT's strictly "pop music"...  

    like Carpenters, Bread, 10cc, Air Supply, even Barry Manilow, etc...all of which have sold many millions of records too).

    But Chic is not just pop, nor is Parliament, Isaac Hayes, who are all too funky to be just "pop" or r&b.

     

    My apologies, zilla, but I think your definitions are still too narrow.  And given your antipathy to modern music which can be equally genre-blurring, I think you're holding the HoF to an unreasonable standard.

    I have no issues with who you think should be In - of course, Deep Purple - but the comparisons miss the mark, I think.

     

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: RnRHOF - 2014 - Yes? No? Maybe.....

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    To my mind, THAT's strictly "pop music"...  

    like Carpenters, Bread, 10cc, Air Supply, even Barry Manilow, etc...all of which have sold many millions of records too).

    [/QUOTE]

    Hey, one of these is not like the others (10CC)

     

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: RnRHOF - 2014 - Yes? No? Maybe.....

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to devildavid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Who defines what a rock and roll band or performer is? Who is the unquestioned arbiter of rock and roll legitimacy? What are the criteria that absolutely must be met to qualify?

    If a handful of rock fans in this forum can't even agree on it, who is to say? 

    [/QUOTE]

    It's a good question to be sure.  But I think Zilla has a point when he says this is really the Popular Music Hall of Fame.

    Here's one way to look at it: Rolling Stone magazine is one of the major forces behind the RRHOF.  When Rolling Stone does their lists of the 'greatest rock and roll albums', you won't find any Donna Summer albums. 

    [/QUOTE]

    There's no question RS has a bias here.

    But there are many, many true "pop" and even the dreaded "soft rock" artists who have sold many millions of records but are still not in the Hall.

    Summer was a singles artist first.

    See, I share most of zilla's dislike of disco, but a select few disco artists, like Bee Gees, Summer and Chic transcended the 'disco' label and became more important artistically than the genre or culture it personified.

     

     

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: RnRHOF - 2014 - Yes? No? Maybe.....

    In response to ZILLAGOD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Would you put pizza in the Chinese Food Hall Of Fame?

    Should Lance Armstrong be in the Harley Davidson Riders Hall Of Fame?

    Gloves in the Footwear Hall Of Fame?

    Jerry Lewis in the Horror Movie Hall Of Fame?

    Pizza is food, Armstrong rides a bike, gloves cover and protect an extremity, Jerry Lewis starred in movies. If Randy Newman , who is a very good song writer is in the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame but isn't really a Rock artist, it's like saying all music is Rock , therefre all food is Chinese food and should be allowed in the Chinese Food Hall Of Fame alongside Chow Mein and General Tso's chicken. Armstrong rides a two wheeler, so he belongs in the Harley Davidson Hall Of Fame.

    Are these not legit comparisons to what is happening when Donna Summer or Run DMC are categorized as Rock and Roll? No matter how you slice it, they are not Rock and Roll artists, any more than pizza is Chinese Food.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    No.  In my opinion, they are not legit comparisons.

    And I disagree with your highly literal interpretation of the term "rock n' roll" as it pertains to the museum.

     

    I agree that Randy Newman's contributions to rock n' roll are mostly as a songwriter, but contributions they are, nonetheless, and highly respected he is, especially among critics.  

    I also agree others should have been in there first.

     

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: RnRHOF - 2014 - Yes? No? Maybe.....

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    To my mind, THAT's strictly "pop music"...  

    like Carpenters, Bread, 10cc, Air Supply, even Barry Manilow, etc...all of which have sold many millions of records too).

    [/QUOTE]

    Hey, one of these is not like the others (10CC)

     

    [/QUOTE]

    If you think so....

    But they still aren't in the Hall.

     

    Do you think they should be...?

     

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: RnRHOF - 2014 - Yes? No? Maybe.....

    In response to devildavid's comment:

     

    Yes, it is tough to have these discussions and make your view clear. I will agree that subjectivity can affect our view of accomplishments and I'm not arguing for something purely objective. I'm just saying that an individual will have a certain sense of what they have accomplished and their own sense of satisfaction of dis-satisfaction with it. They may win an award deseveredly or not but this award adds another layer of subjectivity. This award may make them feel better about their accomplishment but it does not make it any better or more real than the accomplishments of those who never win an award. My point is that an accomplishment is something an individual is pretty much in controls of. An award is not.

    I'm certain this has not made my position any clearer. Oh well.



    Actually, it does make your position much more clear, so thanks for your effort, as it paid off in not only my understanding your POV, but also, my ability to agree with you.    

    The way I was reading your previous posts, it seemed as though you were somewhat belittling the idea of an award, but now I can see that's not where you're coming from at all.   Once you teased out the subjectivity / objectivity "clause" (hahah)  (which really has nothing to do with this issue), it all makes sense.    Hey, I think we have closure, at least on this issue!   =)

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: RnRHOF - 2014 - Yes? No? Maybe.....

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Hey, one of these is not like the others (10CC)

    [/QUOTE]

    If you think so....

    But they still aren't in the Hall. 

    Do you think they should be...? 

    [/QUOTE]

    Oh no, I don't think they should be in the Hall.  But they were much weirder and more adventurous than pop groups like Carpenters or Bread, at least they were were while Godley and Creme were part of the unit.  When those two left they did become more of a pop group. 

     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: RnRHOF - 2014 - Yes? No? Maybe.....

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Hey, one of these is not like the others (10CC)

    [/QUOTE]

    If you think so....

    But they still aren't in the Hall. 

    Do you think they should be...? 

    [/QUOTE]

    Oh no, I don't think they should be in the Hall.  But they were much weirder and more adventurous than pop groups like Carpenters or Bread, at least they were were while Godley and Creme were part of the unit.  When those two left they did become more of a pop group. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Fair enough.

    Same goes for Chicago, who were fairly rocking early on but softened considerably as they aged.  Talk about a band that blurs genre lines...!

    And yet Chicago isn't in the Hall either, to my knowledge.  One of the all-time biggest selling acts in popular music.  No "hall pass".

     

     

     

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: RnRHOF - 2014 - Yes? No? Maybe.....

    I am so glad that I can , at least get a partial agreement from many of my respected friends.

    I wish jesseyeric were here to help me out, I am sure he shares many of my opinions.....we have butted heads on Cheap Trick, but although I do not like them much ( or Huey Lewis and the News) I could accept nominations for both as they are ( in my mind) legit Rock acts.....whether worthy or not depends on other factors for sure. I like much of the music of 10CC, their two biggest hits are a little lame, but Wall Street Shuffle and a few others are really good songs.But no, I would suggest they belong.

    Chicago, for sure. How do you argue with a band that good, that popular?....certainly more Rock than Run DMC.....THAT ONE REALLY , REALLY STICKS IN MY CRAW!

    See, I actually own Little Criminals by Randy Newman.I own at least a dozen Patti Smith CDs.There are some good songs by both. I don't see Rock suffering that much had neither existed....ditto Isaac Hayes  I could accept all of these , but not ahead of Foreigner, Grand Funk Railroad, Deep Purple or Uriah Heep. If all these guys get in, then we can start adding the Laura Nyros, the Patti Smiths and the Randy Newmans, etc.

    Maybe they should look more at what people buy and listen to, and spend less time looking for who has impacted this or was behind the scenes or who influenced who.

    How many radio stations still play Cold As Ice by Foriegner, or Feels Like The First Time, or any number of their other monster hits? How many Run DMC or Randy Newman hits do you hear anywhere? I am not sure Foriegner influeced anyone, or do I care. They made some great music and fans spoke with their wallets to attend the concerts and buy the albums....by the millions!

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: RnRHOF - 2014 - Yes? No? Maybe.....

    I keep promising to leave this thread, but I keep getting sucked back in....

    Slim wrote "the HoF is just a museum, and they're trying to appeal to as many paying customers as possible."  Of course, totally correct!  So obvious.  But still we discuss it.  It makes me want to cry.

    As I've written before, I think the entire concept is absurd and counter-intuitive....but I've just had a look at their site for the first time.  "Performers" include (I can barely type this as my hands and soul are burning with shame): Madonna (the number of songs written by her I think remains at two, not to mention her being a horrific "role model" for anyone), Rush, Blondie (thank you, the Nerves), Queen(!) and Mr. Rock'n'Roll, Billy Joel, James Taylor, Earth Wind and Fire....ad absurdum.  

    "Early Influences"....you know, old (mostly Black) dead people like Leadbelly, Hank Williams, Robert Johnson, Bessie Smith, Mahalia Jackson and Billie Holliday.....how could they possibly compete with the brilliance of Jackson Browne, John Mellencamp, Donna Summer and Laura Nyro?  

    No mention anywhere of Hasil Adkins or Andre Williams, of course.  They don't matter because......not sure why.

    Oops, I'm allegedly an obsessive punk rock freak that only knows about and enjoys punk rock.  So to patronise the bigots (although if I cared about such nonsense I'd actually start and vigoroursly defend a serious argument) a "Rock' n'Roll" Hall of Fame that doesn't include Big Black (for very obvious reasons!), Minutemen (for fairly obvious reasons, IMO) and many more is a joke.  But the entire HOF concept is a joke.....Jim Rice in, Luis Tiant out? Don Sutton in, Alan Trammell out?   x

     

     

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: RnRHOF - 2014 - Yes? No? Maybe.....

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:

    "Early Influences"....you know, old (mostly Black) dead people like Leadbelly, Hank Williams, Robert Johnson, Bessie Smith, Mahalia Jackson and Billie Holliday.....how could they possibly compete with the brilliance of Jackson Browne, John Mellencamp, Donna Summer and Laura Nyro?  

    Did you actually just ask how the master who more or less invented the blues could 'compete' with John Mellencamp?

    Or am I missing sarcasm because my head is muddled with yet another lovely autumn virus....?

     

     

     

    Either way, one more thought on the general overall topic: It is called the "Rock and Roll

    Hall of Fame" after all....     (emphasis added).

     

    I'd expect the purpose to be geared not necessarily towards who is "best" as far as it can be quantified, but who is famous and a rock star.....   

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: RnRHOF - 2014 - Yes? No? Maybe.....

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:
    [QUOTE] 

    Either way, one more thought on the general overall topic: It is called the "Rock and Roll

    Hall of Fame" after all....     (emphasis added).

    I'd expect the purpose to be geared not necessarily towards who is "best" as far as it can be quantified, but who is famous and a rock star.....   

    [/QUOTE]

    I think the word fame there is a problem.  I believe that the first Hall of Fame was the baseball one, and that the intention was for it be a 'hall' of only the best.  I think 'Hall of Fame' was a compelling moniker than anything.  The term has been adopted by subsequent 'halls' because of that compelling quality rather than its accuracy.

    Just my take.

     

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from devildavid. Show devildavid's posts

    Re: RnRHOF - 2014 - Yes? No? Maybe.....

    As I asked in a previous thread, what is this thing called rock and roll? Everyone gives examples of performers they think are or aren't, but then it just comes down to a matter of opinion. Why isn't Billy Joel rock and roll? You may not like his music, but that doesn't mean it isn't rock and roll. Is early doo-wop music rock and roll? It was a form of music that was considered part of rock and roll in the early stages of the music. And what about the various branches in those early days? There was both country and R&B coming together to form this new music. Buddy Holly is more on the country side while Fats Domino is more on the R&B side. Different sounds but still considered to be under the same umbrella of rock and roll music. Yet neither performer is really loud or angry or any of those more modern things we associate with ROCK music. And each type of music evolved to become more and more different from each other, especially along racial lines. But to me, they are the epitome of rock and roll music. And what about Roy Orbison? Where does this other-worldly peformer belong? And how about them hard rockin' Everly Brothers?

    The really tough thing to do is evaluate the quality of rock and roll music because there is no universal agreement on the criteria. Is complexity good? Simplicty? Melody? Beat? Volume? Speed? Is there an ideal that all rock and roll music should be held against to see if it measures up? This is nearly impossible. As many rock and roll fans as there are is about as many definitions you will get of what is great rock and roll music.

    It is my opinion that rock and roll does not have to be anything; it does not have to meet any of the criteria any of us may have for it. It is music that stems from certain sounding music which first appeared in the 40's and 50's and has become the dominant form of music in our country.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: RnRHOF - 2014 - Yes? No? Maybe.....

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    "Early Influences"....you know, old (mostly Black) dead people like Leadbelly, Hank Williams, Robert Johnson, Bessie Smith, Mahalia Jackson and Billie Holliday.....how could they possibly compete with the brilliance of Jackson Browne, John Mellencamp, Donna Summer and Laura Nyro?  

    [/QUOTE]

     

    Did you actually just ask how the master who more or less invented the blues could 'compete' with John Mellencamp?

    Or am I missing sarcasm because my head is muddled with yet another lovely autumn virus....?

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes, you misread / misinterpreted what he wrote, and yes, he was being facetious.  

    If you want to blame that on a virus, that's your call.   =)

     

     

     

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: RnRHOF - 2014 - Yes? No? Maybe.....

    In response to yogafriend's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    "Early Influences"....you know, old (mostly Black) dead people like Leadbelly, Hank Williams, Robert Johnson, Bessie Smith, Mahalia Jackson and Billie Holliday.....how could they possibly compete with the brilliance of Jackson Browne, John Mellencamp, Donna Summer and Laura Nyro?  

    [/QUOTE]

     

    Did you actually just ask how the master who more or less invented the blues could 'compete' with John Mellencamp?

    Or am I missing sarcasm because my head is muddled with yet another lovely autumn virus....?

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes, you misread / misinterpreted what he wrote, and yes, he was being facetious.  

    If you want to blame that on a virus, that's your call.   =)

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


     

    Well then equal parts 'my bad' and 'phew'.

     

     

     

     

Share