Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

The Rock N Roll Hall of Fame. **2018 Nominees**


DM72

Recommended Posts

There needs to be a separate entity that honors Hard Rock and Metal acts. There is no logical rhyme or reason behind how some of those acts get picked for the Hall of Shame. I'm fine with Guns getting in, but I'm not fine with how many of the great bands that influenced them don't. At least Metallica was decent enough (in a very round about way) to acknowledge this fact during their acceptance speech, without directly insulting their host.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would argue that in a historical sense, only three of the metal bands from the 80s really mattered outside of that cult (which was a sizable cult):

1. Metallica

2. GnR

3. Motley Crue

Motley Crue is never getting into the Hall of Fame, which is probably unfair but that's life. For whatever reason, "punk" bands that sold no records are seemed far more important than metal bands that sold millions of records. Most metal bands are viewed by critics in the same way as Bobby Sherman and New Kids on the Block.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems that many here feel that musical ability should be the only factor in getting into the HOF. However sales should also be considered greatly. GnR had great sales as well as one of the greatest guitarists of recent history.
They have a hall of fame for people that sell a lot of records. It's called being rich. If it were the Hall of Marketing Kiss would be in.

It's about musical excellence and to a lesser degree influence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems that many here feel that musical ability should be the only factor in getting into the HOF.

Actually, it seems that many here feel that "music I personally relate to as a suburban white guy" should be the only factor in getting into the HOF. Second tier bands like Judas Priest and Def Leppard should never even be allowed near the Hall. They were never the biggest band in their niche, and they didn't create their niche, or change it in any way.

The Beastie Boys were huge and hugely influential, whether or not they were your cup of tea is irrelevant. Same with the Chili Peppers and GnR. (and yes, many of the other people mentioned should be in as well, including Joan Jett/Runaways, Rush and plenty more).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, it seems that many here feel that "music I personally relate to as a suburban white guy" should be the only factor in getting into the HOF. Second tier bands like Judas Priest and Def Leppard should never even be allowed near the Hall. They were never the biggest band in their niche, and they didn't create their niche, or change it in any way.

The Beastie Boys were huge and hugely influential, whether or not they were your cup of tea is irrelevant. Same with the Chili Peppers and GnR. (and yes, many of the other people mentioned should be in as well, including Joan Jett/Runaways, Rush and plenty more).

I agree. I mean when you think of great rock bands of the 80's, GnR has to be in at very least the Top 5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, it seems that many here feel that "music I personally relate to as a suburban white guy" should be the only factor in getting into the HOF. Second tier bands like Judas Priest and Def Leppard should never even be allowed near the Hall. They were never the biggest band in their niche, and they didn't create their niche, or change it in any way.

The Beastie Boys were huge and hugely influential, whether or not they were your cup of tea is irrelevant. Same with the Chili Peppers and GnR. (and yes, many of the other people mentioned should be in as well, including Joan Jett/Runaways, Rush and plenty more).

I know people don't like to admit it, but outside of Van Halen, Def Leppard was the biggest band in the 80's. They're one of a small few bands that have 3 albums sell over 10 milliin copies and they still sell out arenas to this day. Def Leppard should be in the Hall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, it seems that many here feel that "music I personally relate to as a suburban white guy" should be the only factor in getting into the HOF. Second tier bands like Judas Priest and Def Leppard should never even be allowed near the Hall. They were never the biggest band in their niche, and they didn't create their niche, or change it in any way.

You can argue who should be in, but there should be a representative from the New Wave of British Heavy Metal. You could make an argument for Def Leppard with that, but better representatives would be Iron Maiden and Motörhead.

Priest was part of the first wave, which is already represented by Black Sabbath. If there were bands from that era I'd include, it probably be Deep Purple and Rush. Richie Blackmore was a huge influence for the guitarists that came after him, and Rush also influenced a lot of bands and is still going strong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can argue who should be in, but there should be a representative from the New Wave of British Heavy Metal. You could make an argument for Def Leppard with that, but better representatives would be Iron Maiden and Motörhead.

Priest was part of the first wave, which is already represented by Black Sabbath. If there were bands from that era I'd include, it probably be Deep Purple and Rush. Richie Blackmore was a huge influence for the guitarists that came after him, and Rush also influenced a lot of bands and is still going strong.

Every one of those bands should be in...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a feeling that Motorhead will eventually get in as there has been a recent wave of "Lemmy is a badass" stories. There might be some fear that he will show up dressed an SS officer though.

British Heavy Metal is so so so disrespected though. Outside of Black Sabbath, none of those bands have a critic in their corner. And even critics that praise Black Sabbath don't actually seem to like them that much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

British Heavy Metal is so so so disrespected though. Outside of Black Sabbath' date=' none of those bands have a critic in their corner. And even critics that praise Black Sabbath don't actually seem to like them that much.[/quote']

They along with Van Halen really influenced alot of the cheese that came out in the 80s. That's why they won't get in because the critics don't really like 80s music that much and see those bands as influencing them. It should have never taken Van Halen 2, 3, or 4 years to get in.I'm surprised about GNR even though they are seen as the counter of 80s hairbands. GNR wasn't far removed from it, and they were influenced by the exact same people. Who did GNR really influece? So they really surprised me with that one and that's why I think they see it as a ratings and cash grab to get some attention for possibly creating a GNR reunion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I adore the Spinners and grew up on them. But they don't deserve a HOF nod.

You have to be kidding. The Spinners had hits in the 60's, 70's and 80's. IMO, there was no better group in the 70's than the Spinners. Vocally, there probably second only to the Four Tops. If the Beastie ans GnR can get in so easy, why is it so hard for the Spinners?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I adore the Spinners and grew up on them. But they don't deserve a HOF nod.

You have to be kidding. The Spinners had hits in the 60's, 70's and 80's. IMO, there was no better group in the 70's than the Spinners. Vocally, there probably second only to the Four Tops. If the Beastie ans GnR can get in so easy, why is it so hard for the Spinners?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to be kidding. The Spinners had hits in the 60's, 70's and 80's. IMO, there was no better group in the 70's than the Spinners. Vocally, there probably second only to the Four Tops. If the Beastie ans GnR can get in so easy, why is it so hard for the Spinners?

The Spinners weren't very influential...and it's not the Hall Of Popularity, so record sales alone shouldn't be a deciding factor unless the sales were monstrous and were in the stratosphere or something. If we use number of hit records as a significant barometer then we'll be seeing Britney Spears being inducted before long.

As for their abilities vocally, that's more a matter of personal taste on your part than it is anything that can be proven objectively...but critics tend to rank those voices that were unique and could convey those rawer emotions with genuine sincerity higher than the voices that hit all the right notes. And there was no better group in the 70s than the Spinners? Seriously? I don't even think the members of the Spinners would agree with you lol..just off the top of my head, Parliament/Funkadelic, Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd are 70s groups that should easily be ranked ahead of the Spinners. That is, unless you're defining "group" as something else entirely.

I agree that GnR shouldn't be in, either, but The Beastie Boys were--and remain--ridiculously influential. And I don't even like them lol :ols:...but I understand why they should be considered for the RR HOF over groups like the Spinners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is they induct people every year. There simply aren't that many legendary rock bands to continue inducting. If there isn't a good candidate because of the criteria they should just stop inducting members for a while rather than letting in the ****ing Beastie Boys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is they induct people every year. There simply aren't that many legendary rock bands to continue inducting. If there isn't a good candidate because of the criteria they should just stop inducting members for a while rather than letting in the ****ing Beastie Boys.

Why shouldn't the Beastie Boys be inducted?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Spinners weren't very influential...and it's not the Hall Of Popularity, so record sales alone shouldn't be a deciding factor unless the sales were monstrous and were in the stratosphere or something. If we use number of hit records as a significant barometer then we'll be seeing Britney Spears being inducted before long.

As for their abilities vocally, that's more a matter of personal taste on your part than it is anything that can be proven objectively...but critics tend to rank those voices that were unique and could convey those rawer emotions with genuine sincerity higher than the voices that hit all the right notes. And there was no better group in the 70s than the Spinners? Seriously? I don't even think the members of the Spinners would agree with you lol..just off the top of my head, Parliament/Funkadelic, Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd are 70s groups that should easily be ranked ahead of the Spinners. That is, unless you're defining "group" as something else entirely.

I agree that GnR shouldn't be in, either, but The Beastie Boys were--and remain--ridiculously influential. And I don't even like them lol :ols:...but I understand why they should be considered for the RR HOF over groups like the Spinners.

Not everybody in the Hall is influential. Some artist makes it in simply because of their body of work. By that criteria, The Spinner should have been inducted years ago. As for them being one of the best vocal groups, that's a fact. And comparing singing groups to bands is like comparing apples to oranges. They're totally different and they play to different fans.

---------- Post added December-8th-2011 at 09:37 PM ----------

Why shouldn't the Beastie Boys be inducted?

My biggest problem is that there's artist and groups LOL (like The Spinners) that have been waiting for years but the Beasties get in this fast?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why shouldn't the Beastie Boys be inducted?

Because they're not a rock and roll band.

I am aware that the rock and roll hall of fame has never given a **** that they're called the rock and roll hall of fame, and that rock and roll is not the same thing as rap or r&b and other forms of music, but it bothers me. Why don't they just call it the music hall of fame?

Also, have they ever had a #1 album or single? I'm pretty sure they haven't. Have they been a major influence or revolutionized music in any way? I don't really think they have. This is called the hall of fame isn't it? Or is it the hall of pretty good? If you induct the Beastie Boys you have to induct groups like The Offspring or Bush or Collective Soul and I suppose it has to do with opinion but to me those also fall under the category of bands that were commercially successful and popular who do not deserve to be immortalized as musicians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because they're not a rock and roll band.

I am aware that the rock and roll hall of fame has never given a **** that they're called the rock and roll hall of fame, and that rock and roll is not the same thing as rap or r&b and other forms of music, but it bothers me. Why don't they just call it the music hall of fame?

Also, have they ever had a #1 album or single? I'm pretty sure they haven't. Have they been a major influence or revolutionized music in any way? I don't really think they have. This is called the hall of fame isn't it? Or is it the hall of pretty good? If you induct the Beastie Boys you have to induct groups like The Offspring or Bush or Collective Soul and I suppose it has to do with opinion but to me those also fall under the category of bands that were commercially successful and popular who do not deserve to be immortalized as musicians.

Hold on there. Go look up the true definition of rock n roll and you'd be totally suprised at what really qualifies. Believe it or not, motown is more rock n roll than Led Zepplin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because they're not a rock and roll band.

I am aware that the rock and roll hall of fame has never given a **** that they're called the rock and roll hall of fame, and that rock and roll is not the same thing as rap or r&b and other forms of music, but it bothers me. Why don't they just call it the music hall of fame?

Also, have they ever had a #1 album or single? I'm pretty sure they haven't. Have they been a major influence or revolutionized music in any way? I don't really think they have. This is called the hall of fame isn't it? Or is it the hall of pretty good? If you induct the Beastie Boys you have to induct groups like The Offspring or Bush or Collective Soul and I suppose it has to do with opinion but to me those also fall under the category of bands that were commercially successful and popular who do not deserve to be immortalized as musicians.

If you don't like the Beastie Boys, then fine. But don't just dismiss them as a group who had a couple of hits. They've put out a lot of great stuff. Ever listen to Ill Communication?

On top of that, they're white. Yes, I think that's somewhat of a big deal in the rap industry.

And dude, at least they were a rock band at one point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not everybody in the Hall is influential. Some artist makes it in simply because of their body of work. By that criteria, The Spinner should have been inducted years ago. As for them being one of the best vocal groups, that's a fact. And comparing singing groups to bands is like comparing apples to oranges. They're totally different and they play to different fans.

I just did a Google search of the phrase "most influential bands of all time". I looked at any list that talked about the top 50 or more influential bands (skipped the lists that only dealt with the top 10). I ended up clicking on 8 lists.

The results:

(I'm including the rankings of somewhat similar bands and groups to the Spinners, just to show how each lists ranked these types of groups/music)

Rolling Stone 100 Greatest Artists of All Time

Booker T. and the MGs - #93

The Drifters - #81

The Four Tops - #79

Beastie Boys - #77

The Temptations - #68

Smokey Robinson and the Miracles - #32

No Spinners

The Guardians' "50 Albums That Changed Music"

No Beastie Boys, no Spinners

VH1's 100 Greatest Artists of All Time

Beastie Boys - #89

No Spinners

Rolling Stone's "500 Greatest Songs of All Time"

Temptations - #88 ("My Girl")

No Beastie Boys, no Spinners

500 Songs That Shaped Rock

The Beastie Boys, “(You Gotta) Fight for Your Right (to Party)”

The Coasters, “Yakety Yak”

The Coasters, “Young Blood”

The Drifters, “There Goes My Baby”

The Drifters, “Up on the Roof”

The Four Tops, “Baby I Need Your Loving”

The Four Tops, “Reach Out I'll Be There”

The Impressions, “People Get Ready”

The Miracles, “Going to a Go-Go”

The Miracles, “The Tracks of My Tears”

The Miracles, “You've Really Got a Hold on Me”

The Temptations, “Ain't Too Proud to Beg”

The Temptations, “My Girl”

The Temptations, “Papa Was a Rollin' Stone”

No Spinners

Time magazine's "All-TIME Best 100 Albums"

Beastie Boys - "Paul's Boutique"

No Spinners

Time magazine's "All-TIME Best 100 Songs"

No Beastie Boys, no Spinners

AVRev.com's Top 100 Bands of All Time

Harold Melvin and the Blue Notes - #80

The O'Jays - #79

The Beastie Boys - #49

No Spinners

Out of those 8 random "best" lists I clicked on, the Beastie Boys ended up on 5 of them...The Spinners weren't on any of them.

This is probably because the Spinners aren't known for having defining albums as much as they are known for having hit singles. Most critics who vote for the RR HOF are gonna view artists and groups who have created influential and artistic albums on their resume higher than those who have not. And like them or not, the Beastie Boys had the 1st rap album to ever hit #1 on Billboard's album chart.

---------- Post added December-8th-2011 at 07:26 PM ----------

If you don't like the Beastie Boys, then fine. But don't just dismiss them as a group who had a couple of hits. They've put out a lot of great stuff. Ever listen to Ill Communication?

On top of that, they're white. Yes, I think that's somewhat of a big deal in the rap industry.

And dude, at least they were a rock band at one point.

:yes:...Started off as a punk band.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just did a Google search of the phrase "most influential bands of all time". I looked at any list that talked about the top 50 or more influential bands (skipped the lists that only dealt with the top 10). I ended up clicking on 8 lists.

The results:

(I'm including the rankings of somewhat similar bands and groups to the Spinners, just to show how each lists ranked these types of groups/music)

Rolling Stone 100 Greatest Artists of All Time

Booker T. and the MGs - #93

The Drifters - #81

The Four Tops - #79

Beastie Boys - #77

The Temptations - #68

Smokey Robinson and the Miracles - #32

No Spinners

The Guardians' "50 Albums That Changed Music"

No Beastie Boys, no Spinners

VH1's 100 Greatest Artists of All Time

Beastie Boys - #89

No Spinners

Rolling Stone's "500 Greatest Songs of All Time"

Temptations - #88 ("My Girl")

No Beastie Boys, no Spinners

500 Songs That Shaped Rock

The Beastie Boys, “(You Gotta) Fight for Your Right (to Party)”

The Coasters, “Yakety Yak”

The Coasters, “Young Blood”

The Drifters, “There Goes My Baby”

The Drifters, “Up on the Roof”

The Four Tops, “Baby I Need Your Loving”

The Four Tops, “Reach Out I'll Be There”

The Impressions, “People Get Ready”

The Miracles, “Going to a Go-Go”

The Miracles, “The Tracks of My Tears”

The Miracles, “You've Really Got a Hold on Me”

The Temptations, “Ain't Too Proud to Beg”

The Temptations, “My Girl”

The Temptations, “Papa Was a Rollin' Stone”

No Spinners

Time magazine's "All-TIME Best 100 Albums"

Beastie Boys - "Paul's Boutique"

No Spinners

Time magazine's "All-TIME Best 100 Songs"

No Beastie Boys, no Spinners

AVRev.com's Top 100 Bands of All Time

Harold Melvin and the Blue Notes - #80

The O'Jays - #79

The Beastie Boys - #49

No Spinners

Out of those 8 random "best" lists I clicked on, the Beastie Boys ended up on 5 of them...The Spinners weren't on any of them.

This is probably because the Spinners aren't known for having defining albums as much as they are known for having hit singles. Most critics who vote for the RR HOF are gonna view artists and groups who have created influential and artistic albums on their resume higher than those who have not. And like them or not, the Beastie Boys had the 1st rap album to ever hit #1 on Billboard's album chart.

---------- Post added December-8th-2011 at 07:26 PM ----------

:yes:...Started off as a punk band.

All time list can be so objective though. Just to let you know, that MTV 100 greatest artist of all time didn't even have Sam Cooke on it. Again, Sam Cooke. Rolling Stone had a list of the 100 greatest singers. Bob Dylan was 7. I'm pretty sure I can go and look up every inductee in the Hall and not everyone of them are influential.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...