Here we go again.. Rock Hall Nominees 2016

[ReRushed]

Robert Fripp, Brian Eno and Jeff Lynne all deserve recognition. If their respective bands don't get in they should as individuals. Hell, for producing alone.

 

Where's Roxy Music in all this? New Wave would not have happened without them.

 

It's so backwards. It's the same with Punk/ hardcore/ post Punk.. where is Husker du? The Replacements? The pixies? Sonic Youth? The Minuteman?

 

Is Television in?

:goodone: Bob Mould should be in for his influence on punk. Husker Du, Sugar, and his solo work. The man is amazing, and a tragically underrated guitarist.

 

All of those bands should have made the list before Jane's Addiction. :eyeroll:

This is why the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame sucks. Green Day was a first ballot inductee. First ballad. Look at the bands listed above and let it sink in. First ballot.

[stoopid]

My issues: Pearl jam and no Soundgarden? Soundgarden has had the same career and influence.

 

Definitely not the same career, PJ has much more output and longevity. Soundgarden only recently starting putting out material again after a longish hiatus.

 

I think as far as 'importance' to R&R, Soundgarden ftw. But this is as much a popularity contest as it is a celebration of the actual primary players in the R&R music biz.

Edited October 18, 2016 by stoopid

[HemiBeers]

I have no problem with using the term "rock and roll" as an umbrella definition for all popular music. The more rap artists piss off old school rock fans the more rock and roll they become.

 

Under this reasoning, how about Liberace ?

How is Liberace not rock and roll?

he was a glam rocker before there was glam.

[HemiBeers]

I have no problem with using the term "rock and roll" as an umbrella definition for all popular music. The more rap artists piss off old school rock fans the more rock and roll they become.

 

Under this reasoning, how about Liberace ?

How is Liberace not rock and roll?

 

Where did I say he wasn't ??

 

If I had a vote, I'd induct him

Is Tony Bennett in? Frank Sinatra? Bobwa Striesand? If all these other non R&R performers are in, might as well f**k it up with everyone.

[Fordgalaxy]

Ok with: The Cars, Yes (no brainer), Joan Baez, Pearl Jam, J. Geils Band. My issues: Pearl jam and no Soundgarden? Soundgarden has had the same career and influence. No Deep Purple? Come on man. Tupac? Gimme a break. The rest of the list is a pile of meh. Journey will probably get in, but I hate poppy rock bands. Oh yeah, no Kansas? Oh I forgot that since we have Yes, we met our quota of one prog band per year. Other misses: Iron Maiden, Slayer, Motorhead, Kate Bush.

Listen to their early prog stuff. Hardly sounds like the same band.

[ILSnwdog]

I have no problem with using the term "rock and roll" as an umbrella definition for all popular music. The more rap artists piss off old school rock fans the more rock and roll they become.

 

Under this reasoning, how about Liberace ?

How is Liberace not rock and roll?

he was a glam rocker before there was glam.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjOn5uJptnY

[Wil1972]

The Cars are worthy, but barely. Yes should be in, probably the most influential Prog band in history (next to later Beatles album?).

 

I agree I voted for Yes.

[Wil1972]

I'm okay with most of those, but I've always f***ing hated the J. Geils Band.

What is it about them that you hate?

 

Every song I've ever heard by them. Admittedly, I haven't heard most of their 70s material, but the band who made Freeze Frame and Love Stinks isn't one I'm delving into.

 

I like their track Rage in the Cage, the B-side to Centerfold. I wore out that B-side as a kid.

[Wil1972]

Depeche Mode is a well deserved consideration (finally). Still though...The Cure anyone?!

The Cure isn't in? What other band has had as profound of an influence on alternative and goth than the Cure? And lets not forget that Michael Smith saved the world by defeating Mecha Streisand. :)

 

Robert Smith ;) And I agree, The Cure should be in.

Edited October 18, 2016 by Wil1972

[EagleMoon]

Except for Joan Baez and ELO, they're dragging the bottom of the barrel now.

 

No Yes?

No the Cars? No J. Geils Band?

 

Not as far as I'm concerned.

[Lucas]

For those interested, here's an alphabetical list of the 310 inductees, with photos and the year inducted

 

https://www.rockhall.com/inductees

[Lucas]

I've been out of the loop with the Hall Of Fame for a while, so I thought you guys were joking about Green Day being in there - on the first ballot, no less

 

 

 

wow

 

 

[Entre_Perpetuo]

I still stand by the idea that the "rock and roll" hall of fame should be reserved for rock artists or those who are instrinsically connected to rock music. If they want a place for other genres, each genre should have it's own place, or better yet, they should just stop calling the whole thing the rock and roll hall of fame and change it to the popular music hall of fame with section for each genre.

 

My list from their nominees:

 

YES (should've been in years ago, and last year especially after Chris passed away)

Electric Light Orchestra

The Cars

Pearl Jam

(This last one could be between a few, but because of the Woodstock connection...) Joan Baez

 

I also argue Kraftwerk, Tupac, and Janet Jackson don't belong in a "rock and roll" heart of fame, regardless of how good and influential and long lasting they've been. You could actually make a case for Joan Baez being too folk to be in, and I can see that, but for me any rock and roll history must include an account of Woodstock, and Joan undeniably played a big role at the start of Woodstock, which was mostly folk anyway.

[HemiBeers]

Here's a couple that are deserving but in a 'cold day in hell' category.

 

Devo and Primus.

[Super25Smasher]

I've been out of the loop with the Hall Of Fame for a while, so I thought you guys were joking about Green Day being in there - on the first ballot, no less

 

 

 

wow

Green Day is a good band!

[Mosher]

My opinions, as of now, until someone convinces me of another argument:

 

 

Bad Brains -- Considering the massive impact they had on hardcore, and in turn the impact hardcore had on grunge and metal, these guys HAVE to get in some day. HR has his issues, but that's irrelevant to the impact. They aren't well known, but their influence certainly is. Probably won't get in yet, though.

 

The Cars -- Actually odd they aren't already in. I don't think they've had the same musical influence, but they have undoubtedly had a massive impact on the radio and I love them. They just might get in this time. Ocasik has been mighty helpful to a lot of bands across a lot of genre as well. They had more impact on how to make a record than they did on how the music sounds, and that's also a big deal.

 

Chaka Khan -- With or without Rufus? She's had a big influence on presentation and larger than life stylings and image. I'm not sure she's affected the state of how music sounds, but she's definitely affected how it's performed. I could see her getting in, but it's tight for her.

 

Chic -- Whether disco 'sucks' or not is irrelevant. Niles Rodgers and Bernard Edwards were huge forces in the sound of the 70's and that sound is echoed in all genre even today. Those two guys could write a hook and they are great musicians. If disco and funk acts get in they have to get in. Listen to them and then listen to many alternative rock acts. The DNA is there.

 

Depeche Mode -- Undeniable influence and should get in based on what they did for their end of the emotive spectrum.

 

Electric Light Orchestra -- Happy happy happy sounds even when they weren't saying happy things. They had an effect on their scene, but honestly I think they took their influences and popularized them. That's important, but I don't think they are as directly influential as much as they are a filter through which their influences were passed. Certainly Lynn could produce the hell out of song, so perhaps in that area.

 

J. Geils Band -- Been around a decade longer than a lot of people would have expected, so otherwise forever. I don't see them getting in though, as sad as their fans will be.

 

Jane’s Addiction -- Too soon for the impact they had, although if Lollapalooza counts then they are automatic someday. I honestly think they stand a better chance for Lollapalooza then they do for their music.

 

Janet Jackson -- No. Unless I'm ignorant of something, and I could be because she does nothing for me. I just see her as being good at servicing her pop songs but not really adding much.

 

Joan Baez -- Should already be there.

 

Joe Tex -- He'd hate this, but James Brown just had more impact. I think he will keep losing out to someone else year after year, despite having been important, I think he'll miss this train.

 

Journey -- Huge band, huge hits. Too polished, too tidy. I don't see it until a fan backlash forces it.

 

Kraftwerk -- They better get in. These guys even influenced early hip hop, let alone the whole New Wave electronic side and every industrial band.

 

MC5 -- They better get in as well. Without those great Detroit bands, do we get Cleveland, and then New York, London, and on through the ages?

 

Pearl Jam -- Absolutely some day, but now? I definitely could see it, and it helps give credit to Green River for Seattle's overall impact. I guess they feel new to me, but that just means I'm old. :)

 

Steppenwolf -- Could get in on reputation and fable. I think they're hurt by the decades of John Kay trying to keep it going with minimal success. I don't think that should hurt them, but I think it serves to reduce how their name rolls on the tongue when comparing them to the other nominees.

 

Tupac Shakur -- Another myth bigger than the artist, but in this case he might get in. Considering the fact that they didn't throw any other hip hop artist in I think he just might. But their are a LOT of rappers that should get in before him.

 

Yes -- I like Rush a lot more, a whole lot more. And I still say Yes should have got in before Rush. They might not get in because the hall hates these bands, and they gave us Rush. They may feel like they can skip a year. But they SHOULD get in.

 

The Zombies -- No. Not everyone gets in and eventually the modern competition squeezes out the bands that didn't make it. A lot of great songs, and significant force on 60's into 70's sounds, but I think the ship passed by.

[Mosher]

Whether Green Day is or isn't good isn't the point. They weren't remotely innovative and pretty much every band they owed a massive debt to was still active when they started.

 

Obviously they took that sound and somehow hit the stratosphere with it, and I won't take that from them, but that's a mighty quick entry into the hall for a band that did nothing new.

 

And I like a lot of things they have done, I'm fine with them getting in. It's just tough to see a band sail in that added nothing new when bands that defined a genre still aren't in. (Like the Cure, though to be fair Siouxsie mattered nearly as much at getting things going, with Bauhaus slightly later.)

[Entre_Perpetuo]

Whether Green Day is or isn't good isn't the point. They weren't remotely innovative and pretty much every band they owed a massive debt to was still active when they started.

 

Obviously they took that sound and somehow hit the stratosphere with it, and I won't take that from them, but that's a mighty quick entry into the hall for a band that did nothing new.

 

And I like a lot of things they have done, I'm fine with them getting in. It's just tough to see a band sail in that added nothing new when bands that defined a genre still aren't in. (Like the Cure, though to be fair Siouxsie mattered nearly as much at getting things going, with Bauhaus slightly later.)

 

Green Day had a huge influence on a newer generation of "so-called" pop-punk groups. My Chemical Romance, Fall Out Boy, Panic! at The Disco all owe a huge debt for the nineties pop-punk spearheaded by Green Day for instance, especially in the category of their popularity and their ability to find an audience. Green Day didn't really do anything new, but they did take old things and do them in a really commercial and universally relatable way which helped to creat an audience for that brand of punk which many don't even consider to be punk but exists and matters nonetheless.

[Mosher]

Whether Green Day is or isn't good isn't the point. They weren't remotely innovative and pretty much every band they owed a massive debt to was still active when they started.

 

Obviously they took that sound and somehow hit the stratosphere with it, and I won't take that from them, but that's a mighty quick entry into the hall for a band that did nothing new.

 

And I like a lot of things they have done, I'm fine with them getting in. It's just tough to see a band sail in that added nothing new when bands that defined a genre still aren't in. (Like the Cure, though to be fair Siouxsie mattered nearly as much at getting things going, with Bauhaus slightly later.)

 

Green Day had a huge influence on a newer generation of "so-called" pop-punk groups. My Chemical Romance, Fall Out Boy, Panic! at The Disco all owe a huge debt for the nineties pop-punk spearheaded by Green Day for instance, especially in the category of their popularity and their ability to find an audience. Green Day didn't really do anything new, but they did take old things and do them in a really commercial and universally relatable way which helped to creat an audience for that brand of punk which many don't even consider to be punk but exists and matters nonetheless.

 

I wasn't discounting their influence so much as lamenting the fact that the bands that they sounded so much like were still not only active but still actively influencing other bands. Those predecessors to Green Day were ignored when Green Day rocketed to stardom. Like Bad Religion as the most obvious example.

 

But again, I'm not slamming Green Day, the fact that they did rocket away proves they're popularity, and no doubt a lot of people turned on to the scene after that.

 

But without adding anything new at all it seems wrong to get in so immediately when other bands that did more have to wait decades. I'm all for Green Day getting in, btw. Just odd how immediate it was, considering.

[Entre_Perpetuo]

Whether Green Day is or isn't good isn't the point. They weren't remotely innovative and pretty much every band they owed a massive debt to was still active when they started.

 

Obviously they took that sound and somehow hit the stratosphere with it, and I won't take that from them, but that's a mighty quick entry into the hall for a band that did nothing new.

 

And I like a lot of things they have done, I'm fine with them getting in. It's just tough to see a band sail in that added nothing new when bands that defined a genre still aren't in. (Like the Cure, though to be fair Siouxsie mattered nearly as much at getting things going, with Bauhaus slightly later.)

 

Green Day had a huge influence on a newer generation of "so-called" pop-punk groups. My Chemical Romance, Fall Out Boy, Panic! at The Disco all owe a huge debt for the nineties pop-punk spearheaded by Green Day for instance, especially in the category of their popularity and their ability to find an audience. Green Day didn't really do anything new, but they did take old things and do them in a really commercial and universally relatable way which helped to creat an audience for that brand of punk which many don't even consider to be punk but exists and matters nonetheless.

 

I wasn't discounting their influence so much as lamenting the fact that the bands that they sounded so much like were still not only active but still actively influencing other bands. Those predecessors to Green Day were ignored when Green Day rocketed to stardom. Like Bad Religion as the most obvious example.

 

But again, I'm not slamming Green Day, the fact that they did rocket away proves they're popularity, and no doubt a lot of people turned on to the scene after that.

 

But without adding anything new at all it seems wrong to get in so immediately when other bands that did more have to wait decades. I'm all for Green Day getting in, btw. Just odd how immediate it was, considering.

 

I can understand that, but you also have to consider the fact that the average joe knows nothing about Bad Religion, The Descendants, or other such bands which are maybe more deserving, while he probably knows Boulevard Of Broken Dreams and Green Days other biggest hits rather well, might even be able to identify their name or Billy as the lead singer. If they put in one of those bands, the average joe would react with confusion and ignorance, but when they put in Green Day everyone essentially knows who they're talking about and what they're getting put in for. Plus, many more people would clamor for Green Day's induction and make a big fuss if they didn't get put in the year they were eligible than do for Bad Religion and such.

[Lucas]

I am not trying to minimize Green Day's place in music history, or even comment on it ..

 

But as a fan of Johnny Thunders, The Dead Boys, Stiff Little Fingers, The UK Subs, The Boys, The NY Dolls, etc, I am sort of .. how should I put it .. not surprised

 

 

 

 

 

 

[ReRushed]

Whether Green Day is or isn't good isn't the point. They weren't remotely innovative and pretty much every band they owed a massive debt to was still active when they started.

 

Obviously they took that sound and somehow hit the stratosphere with it, and I won't take that from them, but that's a mighty quick entry into the hall for a band that did nothing new.

 

And I like a lot of things they have done, I'm fine with them getting in. It's just tough to see a band sail in that added nothing new when bands that defined a genre still aren't in. (Like the Cure, though to be fair Siouxsie mattered nearly as much at getting things going, with Bauhaus slightly later.)

 

Green Day had a huge influence on a newer generation of "so-called" pop-punk groups. My Chemical Romance, Fall Out Boy, Panic! at The Disco all owe a huge debt for the nineties pop-punk spearheaded by Green Day for instance, especially in the category of their popularity and their ability to find an audience. Green Day didn't really do anything new, but they did take old things and do them in a really commercial and universally relatable way which helped to creat an audience for that brand of punk which many don't even consider to be punk but exists and matters nonetheless.

 

I wasn't discounting their influence so much as lamenting the fact that the bands that they sounded so much like were still not only active but still actively influencing other bands. Those predecessors to Green Day were ignored when Green Day rocketed to stardom. Like Bad Religion as the most obvious example.

 

But again, I'm not slamming Green Day, the fact that they did rocket away proves they're popularity, and no doubt a lot of people turned on to the scene after that.

 

But without adding anything new at all it seems wrong to get in so immediately when other bands that did more have to wait decades. I'm all for Green Day getting in, btw. Just odd how immediate it was, considering.

 

I can understand that, but you also have to consider the fact that the average joe knows nothing about Bad Religion, The Descendants, or other such bands which are maybe more deserving, while he probably knows Boulevard Of Broken Dreams and Green Days other biggest hits rather well, might even be able to identify their name or Billy as the lead singer. If they put in one of those bands, the average joe would react with confusion and ignorance, but when they put in Green Day everyone essentially knows who they're talking about and what they're getting put in for. Plus, many more people would clamor for Green Day's induction and make a big fuss if they didn't get put in the year they were eligible than do for Bad Religion and such.

Green Day are songwriting hacks. Blatant and obvious. There's not an original note or chord sequence in their repertoire. I like a song here or there, but that's an exception to the rule. I find their popularity and longevity baffling.

[ReRushed]

I am not trying to minimize Green Day's place in music history, or even comment on it ..

 

But as a fan of Johnny Thunders, The Dead Boys, Stiff Little Fingers, The UK Subs, The Boys, The NY Dolls, etc, I am sort of .. how should I put it .. not surprised

I'll diminish it. They are hacks. They suck.

[Entre_Perpetuo]

Whether Green Day is or isn't good isn't the point. They weren't remotely innovative and pretty much every band they owed a massive debt to was still active when they started.

 

Obviously they took that sound and somehow hit the stratosphere with it, and I won't take that from them, but that's a mighty quick entry into the hall for a band that did nothing new.

 

And I like a lot of things they have done, I'm fine with them getting in. It's just tough to see a band sail in that added nothing new when bands that defined a genre still aren't in. (Like the Cure, though to be fair Siouxsie mattered nearly as much at getting things going, with Bauhaus slightly later.)

 

Green Day had a huge influence on a newer generation of "so-called" pop-punk groups. My Chemical Romance, Fall Out Boy, Panic! at The Disco all owe a huge debt for the nineties pop-punk spearheaded by Green Day for instance, especially in the category of their popularity and their ability to find an audience. Green Day didn't really do anything new, but they did take old things and do them in a really commercial and universally relatable way which helped to creat an audience for that brand of punk which many don't even consider to be punk but exists and matters nonetheless.

 

I wasn't discounting their influence so much as lamenting the fact that the bands that they sounded so much like were still not only active but still actively influencing other bands. Those predecessors to Green Day were ignored when Green Day rocketed to stardom. Like Bad Religion as the most obvious example.

 

But again, I'm not slamming Green Day, the fact that they did rocket away proves they're popularity, and no doubt a lot of people turned on to the scene after that.

 

But without adding anything new at all it seems wrong to get in so immediately when other bands that did more have to wait decades. I'm all for Green Day getting in, btw. Just odd how immediate it was, considering.

 

I can understand that, but you also have to consider the fact that the average joe knows nothing about Bad Religion, The Descendants, or other such bands which are maybe more deserving, while he probably knows Boulevard Of Broken Dreams and Green Days other biggest hits rather well, might even be able to identify their name or Billy as the lead singer. If they put in one of those bands, the average joe would react with confusion and ignorance, but when they put in Green Day everyone essentially knows who they're talking about and what they're getting put in for. Plus, many more people would clamor for Green Day's induction and make a big fuss if they didn't get put in the year they were eligible than do for Bad Religion and such.

Green Day are songwriting hacks. Blatant and obvious. There's not an original note or chord sequence in their repertoire. I like a song here or there, but that's an exception to the rule. I find their popularity and longevity baffling.

 

Well, original or not, they are the first place many of us have heard some of those melodies and ways of playing chord sequences (many great bands didn't often have original chord sequences, so I don't understand your argument there), and they play and sing them very well in their own collective voice. They are easy for me to love, songwriting hacks or not.

[ILSnwdog]

Whether Green Day is or isn't good isn't the point. They weren't remotely innovative and pretty much every band they owed a massive debt to was still active when they started.

 

Obviously they took that sound and somehow hit the stratosphere with it, and I won't take that from them, but that's a mighty quick entry into the hall for a band that did nothing new.

 

And I like a lot of things they have done, I'm fine with them getting in. It's just tough to see a band sail in that added nothing new when bands that defined a genre still aren't in. (Like the Cure, though to be fair Siouxsie mattered nearly as much at getting things going, with Bauhaus slightly later.)

 

Green Day had a huge influence on a newer generation of "so-called" pop-punk groups. My Chemical Romance, Fall Out Boy, Panic! at The Disco all owe a huge debt for the nineties pop-punk spearheaded by Green Day for instance, especially in the category of their popularity and their ability to find an audience. Green Day didn't really do anything new, but they did take old things and do them in a really commercial and universally relatable way which helped to creat an audience for that brand of punk which many don't even consider to be punk but exists and matters nonetheless.

 

I wasn't discounting their influence so much as lamenting the fact that the bands that they sounded so much like were still not only active but still actively influencing other bands. Those predecessors to Green Day were ignored when Green Day rocketed to stardom. Like Bad Religion as the most obvious example.

 

But again, I'm not slamming Green Day, the fact that they did rocket away proves they're popularity, and no doubt a lot of people turned on to the scene after that.

 

But without adding anything new at all it seems wrong to get in so immediately when other bands that did more have to wait decades. I'm all for Green Day getting in, btw. Just odd how immediate it was, considering.

 

I can understand that, but you also have to consider the fact that the average joe knows nothing about Bad Religion, The Descendants, or other such bands which are maybe more deserving, while he probably knows Boulevard Of Broken Dreams and Green Days other biggest hits rather well, might even be able to identify their name or Billy as the lead singer. If they put in one of those bands, the average joe would react with confusion and ignorance, but when they put in Green Day everyone essentially knows who they're talking about and what they're getting put in for. Plus, many more people would clamor for Green Day's induction and make a big fuss if they didn't get put in the year they were eligible than do for Bad Religion and such.

Green Day are songwriting hacks. Blatant and obvious. There's not an original note or chord sequence in their repertoire. I like a song here or there, but that's an exception to the rule. I find their popularity and longevity baffling.

Preach on, brother!