or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment, Culture, and Sports › Greatest ROCK Band and Rock Stars?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Greatest ROCK Band and Rock Stars?

post #1 of 70
Thread Starter 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEq1D...elated&search=

I present exhibit A in their prime
post #2 of 70
GNR? Are you serious? I mean, they're awesome, but also derivative and vapid as fuck.
post #3 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edward Appleby
GNR? Are you serious? I mean, they're awesome, but also derivative and vapid as fuck.

ok, i agree that they're not the greatest rock band of all time but at the time that Appetite came out, what were they derivative of? considering their peers, they were far and away one of the best if not the best of the heavy metal/hard rock bands (Metallica would have been up there too). they wrote great songs with damn good lyrics.

oh. my vote goes to Iggy and The Stooges.

-Jeff
post #4 of 70
The Clash or the Dead Kennedys. And as much as they embodied the excesses of the era, I might have to nominate Queen as well.
post #5 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by gamelan
what were they derivative of?
Aerosmith? Tom Petty?
post #6 of 70
Stevie Ray Vaughn -hands down the most mesmerizing display of guitar work I've ever seen. I had the chance to see him live in a concert hall before his death.
post #7 of 70
post #8 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edward Appleby
GNR? Are you serious? I mean, they're awesome, but also derivative and vapid as fuck.

Wow, vapid. What do you consider good music? There's very little that couldn't be considered "derivative" either. Some people don't realize what social impact groups or artists can have, and thus are absolutely horrible at being credible critics of music.
post #9 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edward Appleby
Aerosmith? Tom Petty?

ya, and Aerosmith is derivative of the stones, chuck berry...

what a joke.
post #10 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Violinist
Wow, vapid. What do you consider good music? There's very little that couldn't be considered "derivative" either. Some people don't realize what social impact groups or artists can have, and thus are absolutely horrible at being credible critics of music.
There's a difference between importance, which encompasses social impact, and quality, which (in my usage at least) doesn't.

GNR didn't even try to incorporate any sort of depth into their lyrics, nor did they do anything innovative musically.

Anyway, my vote would go to Led Zeppelin. They embodied the combination of bombast, energy, and depth that rock is all about to me. Sure, maybe songs like The Battle of Evermore come off like faux-intellectual folk bullshit to some people, but [i]they[i/i] had their hearts in their songs, which is what matters.

Who's your nominee Violinist?
post #11 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Violinist
ya, and Aerosmith is derivative of the stones, chuck berry...

what a joke.
In this case what I mean by derivative is totally derivative, without adding anything of their own.
post #12 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edward Appleby
There's a difference between importance, which encompasses social impact, and quality, which (in my usage at least) doesn't.

GNR didn't even try to incorporate any sort of depth into their lyrics, nor did they do anything innovative musically.

Anyway, my vote would go to Led Zeppelin. They embodied the combination of bombast, energy, and depth that rock is all about to me. Sure, maybe songs like The Battle of Evermore come off like faux-intellectual folk bullshit to some people, but [i]they[i/i] had their hearts in their songs, which is what matters.

Who's your nominee Violinist?

wow, you've obviously never listened to what Axl wrote in UYI 1 and 2... read the lyrics to Coma, Estranged, Civil War... they weren't a bunch of idiots. Musically speaking, rock and roll was very stagnant early on. From a harmonic perspective, VERY FEW white musicians in the last 50 years have been original. The reason they were great was their type of sound, their attitude... Slash brought back a type of guitar playing which is sorely lacking in music.. soulful blues stylings at a breakneck pace. Ya, nothing completely ground breaking, but neither were composers like Mendelssohn, who is today highly reveared by audiences and performers alike.

I'll see your Zepp and raise you The Who. I respect Zep a lot... Bonzo, Page, JPJ... a finer group of musicians simply doesn't exist, only maybe if you compare it to The Who. The Ox is without a doubt the greatest bassist ever, Moon was just a totally incredible drummer, and Townshend played a large part in the developing of synthesizers. In my opinion, if you want to talk about "high brow" rock, The Who is right up there with post Rubber Soul Beatles, and Floyd, not to mention their earlier stuff like My Generation and Baba O'Reilly. In my opinion, Daultry is the greatest rock singer along with Freddie Mercury. But if you look at music and nothing else, The Who are very hard to beat, besides maybe by a few groups.
post #13 of 70
What? No Devo?
post #14 of 70
No-brainer.

post #15 of 70
Thread Starter 
I think Appetite for Destruction exceeds anything the Stones/Aerosmith have done as a whole as far as Rock goes.

Stones/Aerosmith etc. are great, but listen to the entire AFD album sometime, and it makes you want to be a freak'in RockStar! Its timeless. The album bleeds energy, rebellion and is simply hell on wheels.

Aersosmith/Stones is actually more commerical to me where GnR did some stuff that was just ridiculously anti commercial. That is what made them so great.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment, Culture, and Sports › Greatest ROCK Band and Rock Stars?