Best Band at what? Most influential? - hmm it has to be Velvet Underground or N.Y. Dolls. Most popular spread through all ages - well its the Beatles, closely followed by Beach Boys. Best Musicians - Cream by a country mile..I can't bear to listen to Led Zeppelin...its well known that they copied everything by Cream and became a 2nd rate version.. ..the result...the advent of 'Pomp Rock' and 'Heavy Metal'...two devil spawn that have polluted music ever since! And take it from me - I KNOW!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! By far the best rock multi-instrumentalist. Classically trained pianist, cello player, upright and guitar bass player...can turn a hand at Jazz, Blues, Classical, Rock, Pop, Cuban, Salsa..you name it. Also the most under-rated!
Most progressive for their age, Most overrated, Most underrated, Most innovative,... Categories that could be added, IMHO.
It could be easily argued that the Beatles were the most influential. There was a sea change in popular music in the mid-to-late 1960s and the Beatles were at the crest of the wave. Beatles songs now appear on CDs for toddlers. When parents teach a song as a nursery rhyme, it will endure for centuries. The Beach Boys are beloved by the Baby Boomers, but not so much by their children. I wonder how many of their grandchildren even know who they were? Duh? Sure, Jack Bruce is a legend, but nobody but us bassists pays attention to bassists, and when we look back to the pioneers of the 1960s who brought the bass into the limelight it's hard to look beyond John Entwistle's warp-speed fingers. Eric Clapton is a good composer, but not so much of a player. He had to hire Dwayne Allman to play the solo on "Layla," and Dwayne Allman is not even someone I would list among the top five guitarists. Unsung countryman Adrian Gurvitz obviously learned to play by listening to Eric Clapton and plays very much the same style, with equal creativity and better technique. Cream made one album (Disraeli Gears) with creativity and vision, and made two more albums with echoes of that and more dynamics. It was amazing stuff for its time, but both the band and their critics thought they had gotten into a rut with the blues motifs that American bands like Quicksilver had already transcended. Well known by whom? They mined the same lode of old blues and 60s psychedelia, but expanded on it rather than falling into a rut. To each his own taste, but Led Zeppelin made several stunning, groundbreaking albums once they STOPPED trying to sound like the 1960s had never ended. They picked up where Cream left off: Cream was the guitar rock and roll of the 1960s, Zep was the 1970s. "Misty Mountain Hop" may have traces of Cream's blues style, but "Stairway to Heaven" and "Kashmir" picked up the other threads of 60s music that owe more to the Beatles than to Cream. Well pretty much all of rock and roll turned into "pollution" toward the end of the 1970s when Disco and Corporate Rock took over, but you can hardly blame Black Sabbath, Blue Oyster Cult and Led Zeppelin for Motley Crue and Slaughter. As for “Pomp rock,” you must be talking about Genesis, Yes and the other progressive rock bands. Perhaps you don’t have the enzyme to digest music that is more than rock and roll, that doesn’t repeat the same motif endlessly, and that challenges you with unusual modalities and cadences. The Intellectual Revolution of the 1960s and 1970s prepared us for that and we could all tap our feet in 11/4 time at a Rush concert. Or perhaps you’re trashing Queen and Pink Floyd, which puts you in a very small (and perhaps persecuted Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!) minority. And your credentials as a musician, musicologist, or music critic are...? I've been playing rock and roll since 1958 and you can be sure that I’ve heard enough bad rock and roll to recognize it. Bruce is hardly underrated, but as I said we bassists tend to have a low profile. Flash and speed are impressive, but for sheer creative genius I’ll take John Wetton, and for absolute insanity, Tony Levin. And then there’s Jon Camp of Renaissance, one of the few bands that dared to have a lead bass. Or Phil Lesh, who accomplished the impossible job of making the Grateful Dead’s songs sound like they weren’t just disparate bits and pieces tossed together.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Thanks for replying. Too much info, too little time. One mans meat is anothers poison. LZ/Cream...well who came first and who merely copied? Lyrically LZ were fairly bland..just maybe someone can suggest otherwise. Everyone is entitled to their view. Stairway to Heaven is gibberish to me but given the right time and occasion it may mean lots of things to other people. The stage posturing of Robert Plant is just a little too much..how can I say this...Spinal Tap. Yes..its that ole demon..Heavy Metal...oh how I loathe its masculine a[[eal to spotty faced teens (all boys). The difference...Cream were a jazz influenced band. No posturing or fireworks. You dont really need pyrotechnics when Ginger Baker is on drums..and my meagre qualification...failed musician and punk harp/guitar (for its first year)..oh and I was ticket collector/tea boy/Roadies runner (how those yanks love Burgers...all 68 of them with different recipes)...I got to see them rehearse...Jazz musicians are worth watching even when in rehearsal. Rock musicians less so. ..and thats the diference.
Never heard of them. Are they big in China or India? Back to reality. in my experience the Beatles are the most influential like them or not. They get the mass Rock and Roll culture entrenched. This would be followed by the Rolling Stones who nudged the pop charts away from the 'fluff' of the Beatles and similar bands. Then it would be C.C.R. who created a niche market for adolescent males that then drove the rock and roll engine....made room for dedicated markets for heavy metal, punk and so on. The female side split off with the Mommas and Poppas...then Abba who and led to disco, fluff, Michael Jackson, boy bands, spice girls and so on. There were other groups in the mix and even preceded some of the above but they never were the nuclear bombs changing mass audiences. Groups like the Eagles and Fleetwood Mac were influencial in partially pulling the market back together but then it refractured all over the place. Music became generational. 15 year olds listend to 'whatever' while their parents still listened to the Stones or Bob dylan. Move the clock forward and there's 3 generations all listening to their own music . There just isn't the ability of any group or musician to knock down all the walls and be a variable in all market niches. 60 year old grandmothers aren't keen on rap and 15 year olds would be bored with Leonard Cohen. None of this has anything to do who was good, better or best. That's each to their own.
Led Zeppelin belongs in that pantheon somewhere. 1. They were influential. They didn't build the bridge from blues to heavy metal to progressive rock, but they paved it. There are still a lot of young bands who pick up Zep's technique. 2. They were popular. At least in the USA, Cream was big for a couple of years. Zep was big for the whole ten years they were together. And they continued to be big for twenty more years. Even in 1999, at any time of the night or day, five American radio stations were playing half-hour blocks of Led Zeppelin. "Stairway to Heaven" was one of the ten most popular songs in America, for two decades after the average music fan forgot all about "Sunshine of Your Love" or "White Room." 3. They are still popular. You cannot get a job in a bar band in America if you can't play "Rock and Roll," "Stairway to Heaven" and "Kashmir." Kids like those songs as much as "Highway to Hell," and girls like them as much as "Old-Time Rock and Roll." Even in the South, you're liable to get as many requests for "Stairway to Heaven" as for "Free Bird." I don't really mean to be knocking anybody else's favorite bands (I still play my old Cream LPs and I've had a good time performing "Sunshine of Your Love" a few times) and I don't expect you guys to knock Sandy Denny and Bryan Ferry, but Led Zeppelin was a seminal rock and roll band from a purely musicological standpoint. As for the antics rock musicians perform on the stage, who cares? If you come to see the music, let the little kiddies have their fun watching the band get goofy. I still get a kick out of watching Ozzy and Angus Young. (And don't get me started on Shakira's Mongoose Tour. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!) When I pay $100 for the symphony I expect them to all be sitting there in suits reading their sheet music because it's subtle music and they perform better that way. When I pay $100 for a rock concert I expect some multi-media entertainment, no matter how good the music is. Rock is about outrage and I want to both hear and see something outrageous. You go to the symphony to hear a better performance than you can possibly get off or a recording, because of the dynamics. Rock and roll ain't got no dynamics, the acoustics in hockey stadiums are godawful, and the kids are shouting louder than the average sound level in a symphony concert, so there's no way you're going to hear a performance as good as the record. So the performance is about something else.
More bands have been inspired to form by the Velvet Underground...basically because you don't have to be able to play that well. Some people argue the more basic the better..i.e the Fall...of which i was an ex-member for my sins.
It is rediculous to say Led Zeppelin copied everything from Cream. They were voted #1 band of all time by VH1 and Jimmy Page played the best riffs of any guitar player at least the sheer number of great ones is unmatched.
People get locked into the myopia of their own generation. Led Zeppelin? Part of the travesty that sent the Rock era back into over the top show biz and away from music. Between the Who and Led Zepelin the only issue is which band was more contrived and 'an act'.
Not everything lol I mean they looked closely at how Cream had got to No.1 in the USA by playing very loud and bluesy but with little airplay on the radio. LZ copied the blueprint to success. ..the rest is just arguing about what pasta to use...lol ..its a matter of taste and opinion. I mean I HATE Dire Straits but my Ex used to adore them. If its enjoable to you then YOU are right. We are all right.:shrug: ..i think the main reason I gave before..its the Heavy Metal influence...Cream werent Heavy Metal....LZ were nothing if not Heavy Metal. Its just not my bag..although Fraggle likes a bit of head bashing!Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
thats why I like Cream..in my Coffee. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! but y'know EVERYTHING is an Act isn't it...even Elvis...even Sinatra...even Rolling Stones...even dare I sat...the BEATLES! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
True. There are, however, different thicknesses of veneer between the wrapping and the music. What I find interesting is the mythology of 'stardom' that becomes stronger as time goes by. With the exception of the Beatles no individual or group was ever the cultural icon of their time as we often think they were. . Many individuals or acts were popular among a small slice of society....sceaming teenage girls or rebllious males, etc. My mother was a Sinatra fan but my father didn't even know what he looked like...teens fauned over Elvis in the late 50's but the rest of society didn't listen to him or go to the teen-oriented movies. Who outside of young males listened to C.C.R.? My parents couldn't have picked out Michael Jackson in a police line up and Madonna, of course, is literally 'a virgin' to them. If someone sells 'a million LPs' that means that 5999 out 6000 in the world didn't. the media overblows the popularity or influence of rock singers, rappers, bands and so on. They have some influence in their niche but not much beyond that. In the 70's a a teenager I went to school in europe...those influential music years in one's life... and when I returned to Canada to attend university it was quite a schock how many peers didn't know the groups or music I took for granted. 'You don't know.....Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!'. It was an eye opener how we can't generlize about the world through our own limited experiences.
I hate to showoff my music fourm so I won't but... most over-rated band... Nirvana...yawn...I'm almost glad he's not inflicted on us anymore.
I like music tha makes me happy and dance...okay its a persoanl thing but to me thats what music is for...dancing and feeling happy thoughts in a rather sad world. I knew and worked with Ian Curtis of Joy Division. He was a giant compared to Cobain .again I'm biased but go check the lyrics and then come back. He was the 'real deal'..even before I met him I knew Ian was an ill man. His eyes were blue and totally blank and when he'd had a few drinks he's change from being a very quiet and polite guy to a monster who could even be violent. I'm not sure what was the problem..he suffered badly from epilepsy. but really its the WHOLE band that makes it...Joy Division were on another stratosphere to the hackneyed racket put out by Nirvana. ..btw thats not anti-americanism..i know people are vair touchy..why american are touchy is a moot point. ..hell I even like Sweet Home Alabama...and you dont get mo redneck than that!
I thought this was an excellent article about Jimmy Page's musical theft. http://www.furious.com/perfect/jimmypage.html Though I have to admit, I still love them.
In the 1980s it seemed like every new band must have learned to play by listening to Bryan Ferry and Roxy Music. Nothing simple about that band. I think they established an entire genre. The range from basic to complex is just one of the many dimensions of dynamics in rock and roll. They both have their place. It's called head banging dude. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Yeah, as I said there's room for both the cartoonish and the serious in rock and roll. For all of my metalhead albums, my all-time favorite bands were the ones like Gentle Giant and Renaissance, real eggheads. Excuse me, but my generation was Buddy Holly and Chuck Berry. I loved those guys but I don't listen to them any more. I still like new bands. I've gone to see Filter, Maroon Five, Staind, Rob Thomas and Shakira. (Don't knock her, she's a whole different person in Spanish, like Céline Dion in French.) Huh??? The Who were serious music. In fact that was the common complaint from the people who didn't like them: Too much literature and musicology, not enough fun. "Who's Next" was a landmark and "Tommy" was IMO the best of the two or three rock operas that really worked. Of course they put on a show. Like it or not, music is entertainment, not just art. If I just want to hear the music I can hear it perfectly at home on my ribbon speakers. When I shell out big bucks for tickets and devote an entire evening of my time plus all the driving and parking hassle to about ninety minutes of music, I expect it to be something more than a faithful recreation of the LP. Excuse me: CD.
