For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
JimmyTheSaint
The candidates always seem to be:
Creedence Clearwater Revival
Lynyrd Skynyrd
Allman Bros.
The Doors
The Eagles
The Byrds
TP & Heartbreakers
Bruce & E Street
Quote
More Hot Rocks
Centerfold and Freeze Frame. MTV schmaltz. The band lost my respect. A great band selling out. Just like ZZ Top going from a great band to doing crap like Legs. Or Steve Miller doing Abracadabra. How embarrassing.
Quote
JimmyTheSaint
I like and admire Peter Wolf and have seen him both as a headliner and an opener in the last decade or so.
Having said that, J Geils band simply doesn't have the songs to be considered America's Rolling Stones. Neither does Aerosmith, nor the Black Crowes.
To be fair, the Rolling Stones have no parallel. The Faces might be their closest match and they do rock and I like them, yes I do.
Back to the USA. I have debated with like-minded individuals as to which band is America's greatest of the rock n roll era?
The candidates always seem to be:
Creedence Clearwater Revival
Lynyrd Skynyrd
Allman Bros.
The Doors
The Eagles
The Byrds
TP & Heartbreakers
Bruce & E Street
(The Band was 4 parts Canadian, and didn't have the longevity. But they were great, no doubt about it!)
From that roster of artists, I would have to argue that the two closest to the Stones in terms of style and substance are:
Lynyrd Skynyrd
Tom Petty & HB
Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Is this a logistic/commercial observation, or a musical one?
Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Is this a logistic/commercial observation, or a musical one, not ruling out other American bands you didn't mention?
Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Sorry, my editing is real slow. I was more thinking in the direction of the black American blues based players, without whom Rock wouldn't even have existed.
Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Sorry, my editing is real slow. I was more thinking in the direction of the black American blues based players, without whom Rock wouldn't even have existed. Comparing British Rock acts with American is in fact useless, and indeed a matter of taste and nostalgia, or even a win-win situation over the years.
Quote
DoxaQuote
TheflyingDutchman
Sorry, my editing is real slow. I was more thinking in the direction of the black American blues based players, without whom Rock wouldn't even have existed.
Yeah, one could make any kind of preferences there and claim who is more important than some other. But it goes to personal preferences and snobbism. Surely, I personally think Robert Johnson and Muddy Waters are much more important than Elvis Presley, but doesn't that sound a bit stupid to say?
- Doxa
Quote
TheflyingDutchmanQuote
DoxaQuote
TheflyingDutchman
Sorry, my editing is real slow. I was more thinking in the direction of the black American blues based players, without whom Rock wouldn't even have existed.
Yeah, one could make any kind of preferences there and claim who is more important than some other. But it goes to personal preferences and snobbism. Surely, I personally think Robert Johnson and Muddy Waters are much more important than Elvis Presley, but doesn't that sound a bit stupid to say?
- Doxa
Quite stupid. I even dare to say that Robert Johnson or even Chuck Berry are more "important" than the Stones, or the Beatles,
(not entirely sure about the Beatles) as their catalogue is based on the music of the authentic American players I mentioned. But then again, 7-tees and 8-tees American Rockbands ripped off the English, and typically American style, improved it, certainly on an harmonic and technical basis.It's a patriotic issue as well.
Quote
DoxaQuote
TheflyingDutchmanQuote
DoxaQuote
TheflyingDutchman
Sorry, my editing is real slow. I was more thinking in the direction of the black American blues based players, without whom Rock wouldn't even have existed.
Yeah, one could make any kind of preferences there and claim who is more important than some other. But it goes to personal preferences and snobbism. Surely, I personally think Robert Johnson and Muddy Waters are much more important than Elvis Presley, but doesn't that sound a bit stupid to say?
- Doxa
Quite stupid. I even dare to say that Robert Johnson or even Chuck Berry are more "important" than the Stones, or the Beatles,
(not entirely sure about the Beatles) as their catalogue is based on the music of the authentic American players I mentioned. But then again, 7-tees and 8-tees American Rockbands ripped off the English, and typically American style, improved it, certainly on an harmonic and technical basis.It's a patriotic issue as well.
Yeah, but there are differences in 'ripping off' in terms of originality. Let'say, it is more creatively demanding to make commercial pop music out of marginal non-pop-music by nature than to make your own version of already highly-popular music. To make Mick Jagger out of Muddy Waters is much more a big thing than making a Steve Tyler out of Mick Jagger, I think.
- Doxa
Quote
More Hot Rocks
Centerfold and Freeze Frame. MTV schmaltz. The band lost my respect. A great band selling out. Just like ZZ Top going from a great band to doing crap like Legs. Or Steve Miller doing Abracadabra. How embarrassing.
Quote
TheflyingDutchmanQuote
DoxaQuote
TheflyingDutchmanQuote
DoxaQuote
TheflyingDutchman
Sorry, my editing is real slow. I was more thinking in the direction of the black American blues based players, without whom Rock wouldn't even have existed.
Yeah, one could make any kind of preferences there and claim who is more important than some other. But it goes to personal preferences and snobbism. Surely, I personally think Robert Johnson and Muddy Waters are much more important than Elvis Presley, but doesn't that sound a bit stupid to say?
- Doxa
Quite stupid. I even dare to say that Robert Johnson or even Chuck Berry are more "important" than the Stones, or the Beatles,
(not entirely sure about the Beatles) as their catalogue is based on the music of the authentic American players I mentioned. But then again, 7-tees and 8-tees American Rockbands ripped off the English, and typically American style, improved it, certainly on an harmonic and technical basis.It's a patriotic issue as well.
Yeah, but there are differences in 'ripping off' in terms of originality. Let'say, it is more creatively demanding to make commercial pop music out of marginal non-pop-music by nature than to make your own version of already highly-popular music. To make Mick Jagger out of Muddy Waters is much more a big thing than making a Steve Tyler out of Mick Jagger, I think.
- Doxa
Aha.I don't deny the greatness of the Stones, The Who ec. I just think that bands like ToTo, Steely Dan or Van Halen continued where bands like the Stones reached their creative peak.Bands like Guns and Rozes or Metallica are not my cup of tea; they are the worst example of American kitsch to me. All my personal taste of course.
Quote
Doxa
Funny to think of it, no matter how great so many American bands are, they lack something to be that great and big like those British bands. Those bands who actually created the story of rock as far as great bands go. Although almost all they did, those British dudes, they picked up from America. But The Stones, the Beatles, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Queen, U2.. You name it. There is not anyone even close in America to touch those in the history of Rock'n'Roll. The British are superior. The Beach Boys, The Doors, Grateful Dead, The Eagles.. Forget it, marginal stuff compared to Brittons..
That said, J. Geils Band was a great band.
- Doxa