Tell Me :  Talk
Talk about your favorite band. 

Previous page Next page First page IORR home

For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.

Goto Page: Previous12
Current Page: 2 of 2
Re: OT: This Year's Rock Hall Nominees
Posted by: Elmo Lewis ()
Date: September 25, 2009 16:58

HOF is a not-too-funny joke.

They've let in some bozos, while leaving out some obvious good choices.

Re: OT: This Year's Rock Hall Nominees
Posted by: letitloose ()
Date: September 25, 2009 18:48

Quote
tatters
Quote
More Hot Rocks
Quote
tatters
Quote
More Hot Rocks
Again no Moody Blues? Come on

The Rock Hall hates anything that smacks of prog rock. It took Pink Floyd four years to get in. Genesis, like I said, has been eligible for 15 years. Jethro Tull, Yes, ELP, and King Crimson never even get nominated.

I Agree Tatters. But why is that? The Pretenders and B 52's make it in before ELP and King Crimson? i don't get it.


Much of the voting is done by rock journalists who think that an artist "matters" only if they are "influential" and spearhead some kind of shift in the course of rock history. That's why the Sex Pistols, with one album to their credit, are in, and a group like Jethro Tull, who are fantastic musicians who made some very great and very successful records, are not in. To the journalists, a group like Jethro Tull doesn't "matter". I guess they don't "matter" because they didn't inspire legions of fans to go out and buy flutes and start their own bands. In other words, they're not considered "influential" enough.

you are so right. I'm getting into the Tull just now. Heavy horses=excellent

Re: OT: This Year's Rock Hall Nominees
Posted by: Braincapers ()
Date: September 28, 2009 10:39

If Kiss and Jimmy Cliff get in that'll do for me.

Cliff's Harder they Come soundtrack was a major reggae breakthrough and until Marley's Legend was the bestselling reggae album ever. It's arguable that he paved the way for Bob. Not that I'm anti Marley he was great but not necessarily ground breaking in reggae terms.

Re: OT: This Year's Rock Hall Nominees
Date: September 28, 2009 10:42

still no alice cooper. are they serious?

Re: OT: This Year's Rock Hall Nominees
Posted by: Silver Dagger ()
Date: September 28, 2009 13:16

Jimmy Cliff - rock?
Laura Nyro - rock?
Stooges
Hollies

Re: OT: This Year's Rock Hall Nominees
Posted by: leteyer ()
Date: September 28, 2009 14:21

Quote
tatters
Quote
More Hot Rocks
Again no Moody Blues? Come on

The Rock Hall hates anything that smacks of prog rock. It took Pink Floyd four years to get in. Genesis, like I said, has been eligible for 15 years. Jethro Tull, Yes, ELP, and King Crimson never even get nominated.

This is just plain stupid...You can like 'em or not, but this groups surely deserve to be there.

Re: OT: This Year's Rock Hall Nominees
Date: September 28, 2009 14:34

I agree with tatters. Many acts should be in there; has nothing to do with my own personal taste, but I can't believe it took Pink Floyd 4 years. Or that Yes isn't in there. Now Gabriel-era Genesis I happen to like, and they surely should be in there. I agree with all the stipulations, like it has to be x amount of years since you started, and that only a certain amount are inducted every year.
But there is this politically correct, guilt based criteria that makes these powers that be, waste so many slots on prehistoric, blind blues-men and country-pickers.
To clarify - I'm saying: you want to honor these guys ? Pay them the money, the big money owed them for back royalties. Fix that part first.

Re: OT: This Year's Rock Hall Nominees
Posted by: kovach ()
Date: September 28, 2009 16:31

Quote
tatters
The Rock Hall hates anything that smacks of prog rock. It took Pink Floyd four years to get in. Genesis, like I said, has been eligible for 15 years. Jethro Tull, Yes, ELP, and King Crimson never even get nominated.

You got it. It's like a small group of friends who like a certain type of music, and this isn't one of their types.

That being said...who do you think will introduce Jimmy Cliff to the Hall???

Re: OT: This Year's Rock Hall Nominees
Posted by: tatters ()
Date: September 28, 2009 16:56

Quote
kovach
Quote
tatters
The Rock Hall hates anything that smacks of prog rock. It took Pink Floyd four years to get in. Genesis, like I said, has been eligible for 15 years. Jethro Tull, Yes, ELP, and King Crimson never even get nominated.

You got it. It's like a small group of friends who like a certain type of music, and this isn't one of their types.


If you were in one of these great prog groups, and the Rock Hall finally let you in after all these years, wouldn't you consider it even MORE of an insult than not being let in at all? I'd borrow a move from the punks and not even show up. Or I'd show up and act like a total ass hole. They'd never do that, though. Prog boys are far too polite for that. Besides, in this business, nearly everyone is a total kiss ass.

Re: OT: This Year's Rock Hall Nominees
Date: September 29, 2009 02:32

no stevie ray vaughan as a nominee sad smiley

Re: OT: This Year's Rock Hall Nominees
Posted by: Woody24 ()
Date: September 29, 2009 05:18

Alice Cooper, not even nominated, AGAIN. HOF is a joke.

"Take all the pain...It's yours anyway"

Re: OT: This Year's Rock Hall Nominees
Posted by: jhat111 ()
Date: September 29, 2009 05:46

i'm still tripping that Madonna is in there before so many other more worthy and true rockers

Re: OT: This Year's Rock Hall Nominees
Posted by: Undercover1 ()
Date: September 29, 2009 06:35

Wait.....wait....wait.....I guess I could look it up but..... I think it is easier to ask..............Did someone say the B-52's are in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame?

-undercover1

Re: OT: This Year's Rock Hall Nominees
Posted by: Glam Descendant ()
Date: September 29, 2009 06:40

>Did someone say the B-52's are in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame?

Someone did indeed post that on this thread but it is incorrect.

Re: OT: This Year's Rock Hall Nominees
Posted by: bassplayer617 ()
Date: September 29, 2009 07:04

Yeah, Rush. Of course. "Take off...for the Great White North!" Classic. Hall of Fame worthy, indeed. Would just as soon see Slade inducted, as they were more fun, AND more rock n roll.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-09-29 07:12 by bassplayer617.

Re: OT: This Year's Rock Hall Nominees
Posted by: loog droog ()
Date: September 29, 2009 07:32

Quote
Woody24
Alice Cooper, not even nominated, AGAIN. HOF is a joke.


You just can't beat the best records by Alice Cooper (the band): "Under My Wheels" "School's Out"

It makes no sense.

The two biggest problems with the selection process:

1. It's a TV show. The selections are programmed for the TV show. So they won't just pick a bunch of worthy artists...it has to be one from column A, one from column B

"OK, we need an R&B act, a new wave band, a woman, a British Invasion group for the parents and a Rap group for the kiddies...", etc.

It's turned into a variety show! And that's crap that went out with Ed Sullivan!

Neil Young declined to perform with the Buffalo Springfield when they were inducted, because too much emphasis was being put on the television show part of it.

I wish they'd take it off the air, if that's what it takes to get the right people in.

2. Jann Wenner. He's the guy pulling the strings, playing the games. Peter Tork came right out and said that The Monkees will never get in because of Wenner. {Part of Jann has never let go of the 1967 underground attitude that the Monkees--with all of their great records and Nesmith's country-rock cred, were "uncool"]

He had himself installed in the Hall...meanwhile a truly significant non-player like Glyn Johns gets older.


A lot of us can agree to disagree with whom we think should be in. But there are some artists that I think ALL of us can come to 98.99% agreement that they belong.

So what is the deal...why aren't THE FACES in the Hall of Fame??

Honest to God, you'd have to be stone deaf not to "get it" as far as the Faces are concerned. Did McLagan shag Wenner's wife back in the day, or what's the issue here? To deny the Faces what is rightfully theirs, is to hate rock n roll itself.

Do you realize, that if the just-as-worthy Small Faces had been inducted the first year they were eligible--as they should have been because there were/are that good that both Steve Marriot and Ronnie Lane would have been able to accept the honors?

For that I'll never forgive.


Someone should organize a protest in Cleveland. In the form of a torch-bearing mob. The People Want Rockers! Faces Now! Citizen Wenner must go!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2009-09-29 07:35 by loog droog.

Re: OT: This Year's Rock Hall Nominees
Posted by: Come On ()
Date: September 29, 2009 09:17

Is J.Mascis in that club?

2 1 2 0

Re: OT: This Year's Rock Hall Nominees
Posted by: tatters ()
Date: September 29, 2009 16:21

[quote="loog droog
Neil Young declined to perform with the Buffalo Springfield when they were inducted, because too much emphasis was being put on the television show part of it.[/quote]

You're right about the Ed Sullivan "Really Big Shoe!" aspect of it. I'm sure that's why Buffalo Springfield, Crosby, Stills and Nash, and Joni Mitchell were all inducted on the same night in 1997. I think the reason Neil didn't show up was that they would only give him TWO tickets to the show and Neil's attitude was "If my whole family can't be there to see it happen, it ain't gonna happpen". So it didn't happen. Joni didn't show up because she got elected in her fourth year of eligibilty and she was insulted because she felt that she should have gotten in the first year she was eligible. There's actually a Joni concert video where Graham Nash comes out of the audience to present her with the award, wrapped in a garbage bag. I thought that was a nice touch.

Re: OT: This Year's Rock Hall Nominees
Posted by: kovach ()
Date: September 29, 2009 19:38

Quote
loog droog
2. Jann Wenner. He's the guy pulling the strings, playing the games. Peter Tork came right out and said that The Monkees will never get in because of Wenner. {Part of Jann has never let go of the 1967 underground attitude that the Monkees--with all of their great records and Nesmith's country-rock cred, were "uncool"]

Yup. That was the "small group" I was sort of referring to...a group of 1 basically.

Having said that, Mike Nesmith was really the only true musician in the Monkees, wasn't he? And weren't most of their songs written by others, like Neil Diamond?

I'm not sure that qualifies as HOF material.

Goto Page: Previous12
Current Page: 2 of 2


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Online Users

Guests: 1268
Record Number of Users: 206 on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests: 9627 on January 2, 2024 23:10

Previous page Next page First page IORR home