NationStates Jolt Archive

Ok, in response to my first post on this topic, here is the poll. Give us your choices. All these got more than one nomination in the first thread.

Once again, Led Zep. No contest. :D

Dude, where is Yes? They are by far better than: Deep Purple, Black Sabbath, Queen, Rolling Stones, Sex Pistols, Motorhead, and Santana. Only Led Zep and Pink Floyd are close.

should have posted before, when i took nominations. But this is what those who had any chance could have chosen in 24 hours (about). Sorry, but Yes just aren't that popular.

awww man, I'm sorry I missed that.

Ok, is it just me, are all but one of these British? Never noticed before, but Im pretty sure about the first nine...

Well, you did list one of my favorites, the Sex Pistols :D

What a hideously white selection of music...

What a hideously white selection of music...

You say that like its a bad thing. :)

Name your own band, if you dislike the selection. But be prepared to defend your choice...

Although, I tried that already, and this is the selection i ended up with.

The Top 10 Bands/Artists of the 70's (in order):

10- Iggy Pop/The Stooges
09- T. Rex
08- Funkadelic
07- Led Zeppelin
06- Television
05- Rolling Stones
04- Marvin Gaye
03- The Clash
02- Stevie Wonder
01- David Bowie

The Top 10 Bands/Artists of the 70's (in order):
01- David Bowie
:D :D :D :D :D

:D :D :D :D :D

Is that in agreement or ridicule?

The Top 10 Bands/Artists of the 70's (in order):

10- Iggy Pop/The Stooges
09- T. Rex
08- Funkadelic
07- Led Zeppelin
06- Television
05- Rolling Stones
04- Marvin Gaye
03- The Clash
02- Stevie Wonder
01- David Bowie

I really like numbers 1, 3,5,9 and 10. Good choices all round although I'm definatly not a big Stevie Wonder or Funkadelic fan.

Without Parliment/P-Funk/Funkedelic, it's all lacking....(missed the first one...)

Is that in agreement or ridicule?
Agreement. I love Bowie. Though I would personally put Stiff Little Fingers or The Ramones as best band of the 70s, Bowie is the top non-punk musician of that decade.

I really like numbers 1, 3,5,9 and 10. Good choices all round although I'm definatly not a big Stevie Wonder or Funkadelic fan.

I don't see how any one doesn't like "Sir Duke", "Higher Ground", "Superstition", "I Believe", "Livin' for the City", "Isn't She Lovely", and "Sign, Sealed, Delivered".

As for Funkadelic, go out and get Maggot Brain. You'll become a fan.

Agreement. I love Bowie. Though I would personally put Stiff Little Fingers or The Ramones as best band of the 70s, Bowie is the top non-punk musician of that decade.

Fantastic, I would have destroyed you had you been laughing at my choice.

I don't see how any one doesn't like "Sir Duke", "Higher Ground", "Superstition", "I Believe", "Livin' for the City", "Isn't She Lovely", and "Sign, Sealed, Delivered".
Or "Pasttime Paradise"

As far as this poll goes, I voted for Motörhead.

Or "Pasttime Paradise"

As far as this poll goes, I voted for Motörhead.

Yes, there are far too many excellent songs for me to list them all.

I really like numbers 1, 3,5,9 and 10. Good choices all round although I'm definatly not a big Stevie Wonder or Funkadelic fan.

Cheers to liking T-Rex, you would be the first on NS that I know of.

King Crimson (Fripp, Wetton, Bruford, & co.)
Stevie Wonder
Steely Dan
Parliament Funkadelic
Jethro Tull [up through 'A Passion Play']
Marvin Gaye
Pink Floyd
Curtis Mayfield
Led Zeppelin [except for "Whole Lotta Love" and "D'Yer Maker".... blech! actually any time Robert Plant starts grunting, groaning, panting, or making other orgasmic noises Led Zeppelin starts to suck until he ceases]
Frank Zappa [less for the songs with vocals, and much less for the satirical hits]



not quite almost [why their luster shines less brightly]:
The Who [Pete Townshend, uneven material]
Santana [even if it's soulful authentic and groovy, doing just one thing over and over is still doing just one thing over and over]
Yes [Jon Anderson's simper]
David Bowie [the self-fawning vanity]
Genesis [the theatrical pretension, and their slide into Phil Collins-dominance ::shudder::]
Rolling Stones [style: 90% substance: 0.31337%]
Queen [the pompous arena-rock and the unevenness of their other stuff]
Motorhead [their ad nauseaum repetitiveness]


not even close [one aspect of their abject distaste]:
Sex Pistols [great, they inspired the rise of tone-deaf pseudorebellious (but oh! so marketable!) every-song-is-4/4-played-too-fast-for-them-to-hit-the-same-beats infiltration into popular music! huzzah!]
Ramones [take above note, add 1 part sugar and 1 part water; shake, don't stir. Lather (!), rinse, and repeat.]
Deep Purple [GUITARS ARE ALL THAT MATTER, MAN... WHOA.....]
Black Sabbath [Ozzy's atonal squawk accompanied by a band so bad they got the punkrock effect of beat-missing mentioned above, with molasses-inspired tempos!]



Comment Rated Most Funny And True: Bodies Without Organs: "What a hideously white selection of music..." (we'll give her a pass on Santana.....)

--Arren

Cheers to liking T-Rex, you would be the first on NS that I know of.
Everyone likes T-Rex. However, there are some who have yet to hear T-Rex and so have yet to realise it.

Pink Floyd as I mentioned earlier.

Lot of Zep fans here...
Haven't heard much, but everything I've heard is good
and great...

Deep Purple [GUITARS ARE ALL THAT MATTER, MAN... WHOA.....]
Black Sabbath [Ozzy's atonal squawk accompanied by a band so bad they got the punkrock effect of beat-missing mentioned above, with molasses-inspired tempos!]

Hmm... Listen to what DP termed their real music. You'll find it integrates much more of the bands overall talents. I cite their performances with various orchestra's, most of which were integrated by John Lord, and also their live CD's and performances, which tend to include a mix of Solos. Its a shame that as well as being the greatest rock guitarist ever to have lived, Blackmore was also a self-loving, arrogant bastard.

Cheers to the Curtis Mayfield choice above, I am shamed for not remembering him.

Also, Whole Lotta Love came out in the 60's, but "Dyer Maker" did drop Zep down a couple spots on my list alone.

Genesis [the theatrical pretension, and their slide into Phil Collins-dominance ::shudder::]I take it that theatrical pretension is the only type of pretension that you dislike?

Sex Pistols!

https://www.greatmodernpictures.com/sp-kingfishlg.jpg

Haha!

And Avantegarden... Yes, they were marketable, because their music was just that good. They were not manufactured by McLaren or any of that bullshit. And they could indeed play, but when Steve was drunk, things went downhill. And Winterland, well, we all know what that turned into.

RE: Dohnut: I've heard isolated tracks from a couple of their symphony-accompanied performances. You know, the orchestral musicians make quite a bit of money from such endeavors. Admittedly, I was probably too harsh on Deep Purple, but don't assume I was only talking about "Smoke On The Water"..... I wasn't.

RE: Vittos Ordination: I stand corrected on "Whole Lotta Love" of course. Curtis Mayfield never gets his due; I wouldn't have developed appreciation for him if it weren't for Fishbone's cover of "Freddie's Dead".

RE: Jello Biafra: I suppose that one-liner was an attempt at a putdown..... ::shrug:: It would be interesting if you attempted to qualify and/or quantify your insinuation that any of my selections are well-described as "pretentious"..... although I do admit your namesake's musicality-bereft contribution to pop culture was, whatever it may have been, not pretentious either.


And while we're at it, the one group that I left off which my conscience won't allow me to not mention: Mahavishnu Orchestra. There, Mr. "Biafra", another sincere attempt at creative innovation to mis-deride as "pretension"! Have at you!

--Arren

I was torn between Led Zeppelin and Deep Purple, but Jimmy Page is more persuasive.

Why isn't KISS on there? I mean it's not really a poll unless they are on it.

RE: Dohnut: I've heard isolated tracks from a couple of their symphony-accompanied performances. You know, the orchestral musicians make quite a bit of money from such endeavors. Admittedly, I was probably too harsh on Deep Purple, but don't assume I was only talking about "Smoke On The Water"..... I wasn't.


Of course I didnt assume you were talking just about smoke on the water. It may be their most famous track, but IMO is far from their best. Black night rocks, and Pictures of Home is unparellelled for me. I consider it their best track. And I love the integration of bands such as DP with classical. Ive never been able to get into classical, as all the people I get involved with tend to be Musical experts, and I cant even sing on Key, but I can recognise a good performance. Wether its rock or classical. And I can recognise raw talent and expression on an instrument, and I truly believe that a good rock band has both teh essence of rock AND traditional talent. A meshing of the two will produce an unrivalled track. Deep purple are not the only one's I consider for this. I add Motorhead, Metallica, The Darkness, Evanescence and, of course, Pink floyd and Queen to this list, but that is straying somewhat off topic, and way beyond the scope of one decade.

Plus, I stand by my assertion that Deep Purple were the originators of the Hevy AND progressive rock movements, starting in 1969. They lead on to bands like sababth and zeppelin. Before them, pure rock didnt really feature, it was more down to swingin rock and roll. After them, a whole new movement started. And as I Iterated, its still with us, even with new bands like the darkness, the killers, green day, Ten Benson

Black Knight is probably Deep Purple's best guitar track.

I add Motorhead, Metallica, The Darkness, Evanescence and, of course, Pink floyd and Queen to this list, but that is straying somewhat off topic, and way beyond the scope of one decade.

I despise three of those bands, and only actually like one of them. But most of them are technically proficient with their instruments.

But Evanescence? I have never heard them rise above competence on their instruments.

I despise three of those bands, and only actually like one of them. But most of them are technically proficient with their instruments.

But Evanescence? I have never heard them rise above competence on their instruments.

You should watch their Live DVD in Paris. They drag a Grand Piano on stage, in the middle of the gig, and Amy Lee solo's "Haunted". Its brilliant.

Ps. Love Amy Lee. Great voice, great figure. ;)

Led Zeppelin, easy, no contest. The second best: The Clash. Amazing band, unmatched in punk.

I despise three of those bands, and only actually like one of them. But most of them are technically proficient with their instruments.

But Evanescence? I have never heard them rise above competence on their instruments.

Just out of interest, can u specify which bands?

Led Zeppelin, easy, no contest. The second best: The Clash. Amazing band, unmatched in punk.
the clash is matched and surpassed on many occasions, EG the ramones or sex pistols

You should watch their Live DVD in Paris. They drag a Grand Piano on stage, in the middle of the gig, and Amy Lee solo's "Haunted". Its brilliant.

Ps. Love Amy Lee. Great voice, great figure. ;)

I sincerely doubt Amy Lee is that good of a piano player. Piano manages to stick out in rock music because it is a much clearer and crisper instrument than the guitar.

Take a look at the Counting Crows and Coldplay, they have made a living off of simple piano melodies.

Best all around band is Led Zeppelin. The one that really started a movement was Black Sabbath. Along with Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath created the metal genre (even though Led Zeppelin isn't really metal, it was a good influence). Queens also an awesome band, and so is Pink Floyd, they were both really awesome bands that had unique styles, infact, all the bands on the list did, these ones were just far far ahead of their time. My vote? Led Zeppelin. I would have considered the Doors too, but they weren't on the list, I think they were more 60's anyway.

I am really angry that the maker of this poll did not include some of the two most influential bands from the seventies, the Mahavishnu Orchestra and Weather Report. Seriously, wtf gives?

I sincerely doubt Amy Lee is that good of a piano player. Piano manages to stick out in rock music because it is a much clearer and crisper instrument than the guitar.

Take a look at the Counting Crows and Coldplay, they have made a living off of simple piano melodies.

I would agree, but I consider coldplay at least to be simply "above average". Whereas when it comes to guitars, its normally the first individual instrument I pick up on, and while its not crisp, it does tend to be clear, at least to me. So I can make the comparison, though I admit one track is nowhere near definitive to draw a conclusion. Just have to wait (hope for?) the next album, I guess.

I think Boston is a great band too, but many don't like the "geographical" bands...and for good reason...Asia sucks! (the band)

I am really angry that the maker of this poll did not include some of the two most influential bands from the seventies, the Mahavishnu Orchestra and Weather Report. Seriously, wtf gives?

Read the thread. It was based on another thread in which open nominations were taken. Thats how I selected the options. But as I have already said, add your own options, but be prepared to explain your choice. And remember, by the looks of things, you're in a forum full of rock lovers, be it glam, hard, progressive or pure rock n roll. But Ill except anything if you have a reason. Im just interested in comparing other's aesthetics to my own.

Ps. 10 options is too few. I had to go with bands that had at least two nominations, and were architypically 70's, else the list would have gone on for ever.

I simply can't vote in the poll. There are too many great bands to pick just one.

Thus, I abstain.

Though if you're going for putting a "fathers of punk" band in, why not the Ramones? I like them better than the Sex Pistols. I think they kicked around longer too... not that that's hard given how long the Sex Pistols were together.

Just out of interest, can u specify which bands?

I add Motorhead, Metallica, The Darkness, Evanescence and, of course, Pink floyd and Queen to this list, but that is straying somewhat off topic, and way beyond the scope of one decade.

Motorhead - Indifferent. I have never gotten into them, simply because I am not really that into metal. But from what I have heard they are one of the better representatives of the genre.

Metallica - Love them. A fantastic band, or least used to be. Like I said, I'm not really into metal but I own their first few albums, and they are all very good.

The Darkness - Despise them. Hair metal is the worst genre of popular music in history, and these guys revel in all that was horrible about the genre. They are good at what they do, but what they do should only be exposed to rapists and murderers.

Evanescence - Despise them. I don't even take them seriously as a band. They have almost risen to Seven Mary Three level.

Pink Floyd - Despise them. I really do like a few of their songs but they are the most pretentious band in history (unless Radiohead stays on course). I don't think any other band has ever tried to make music that was more intricate and accomplished less.

Queen - Indifferent. I like some of their songs. But I like them much less than a lot of people do, so they tend to annoy me. Especially Bohemian Rhapsody.

I personally love The Darkness!

I personally love The Darkness!

Me too. I think its a great mix, harking back to the days of queen, with a fairly serious, technical band and an absurdly glam frontman, working his arse off for the performance. Doesn't always work out, but once again, J. Hawkins's musical ability can make up for his awful spandex. (I mean, spandex? really? Who does he think he is? one of the X-Men?) But showmanship tends to lead to emphatic performances, from what Ive seen and had reported of them. (3 live gigs in all)

"...Bowie is the top non-punk musician of that decade."

I think "top non-punk musician" is the most hilarious implied oxymoron of all time!
Ludicrous!
Whatever arguments might be made for *punk music*, musicianship is not amongst them.

RE: Potaria: I understand that, at least, the Pistols were not manufactured. And your dismissive sense of humor in response to my (exaggerate) derision for their music bears the mark of the best of what they had to offer.....

RE: Dohnut (again): I appreciate your thought-out comments. I would like to agree with you about the *integration* of rock with classical, however the harsh reality of most of these *collaborations* is that they are executed by the classical musicians as a detached mercenary exercise (for which I can't blame them!).

Also, "musical experts" are questionable right off the bat; some of us who make it our lives consider ourselves perpetual students, whether of only one decade's time as in my case, or more. Trust your opinion, like what you like; Western systems of organizing music are in large part contrived, arbitrary, and abstracted..... the infitely varied fractal patterns they approximate are perceived subjectively by all of us..... which means that ::grunt:: even my disdain for the Sex Pistols is merely subjective.

Unfortunately, although you hit the mark with regard to Deep Purple's progenitor status in 'heavy music', the same can not be said in reference to 'progressive music'. And even where 'heavy' is concerned, Led Zeppelin were contemporaries of Deep Purple in the appropriation of the blues which 'heavy' music is at its core, not followers. Now, as far as the origins of progressive rock.....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_rock
.....is good for starters: "...Many music historians point to King Crimson's as the first "true" progressive rock band; their first appearance was in February 1969. They were quickly followed by other English progressive rock bands, including Yes, Genesis, Emerson Lake and Palmer, Jethro Tull, and Pink Floyd. The influence of King Crimson was huge; it is significant that Genesis, Jethro Tull, and Pink Floyd began their careers before King Crimson, but their musical styles changed after Crimson revealed what could be accomplished in the new genre. ..."

And no, I didn't write that.

So although your sincere appreciation for Deep Purple is yours to have and to hold, their influence on 'progressive rock' (which by the way doesn't necessarily have anything to do with laser-light shows or wanky ELP-style omnisolos) is minimal.

RE: Rock piano........... never mind. I wanted to keep the tone of this post nice.

RE: Weather Report..... my pain for not mentioning them almost equals that for not mentioning Mahavishnu earlier.

RE: Boston is a great band.......... see Rock Piano, above.

RE: Vittos: Metallica's 'Master', 'Ride', and 'Justice', yes. Pink Floyd: whenever Roger Waters talks & much of 'The Wall' I would have to agree with you. But as far as the content of their music before 'The Wall', I think you're totally off.

--Arren

Off topic: Isnt it nice to be able to agree to disagree. Its so rare on these forums, that Ive practically forgotten how good it feels to be able to respect the considered opinions of another NS user..

And I cant agree that collaborations were initiated soley by the classical musicians. Im sorry I have to cite purple as my source again, but as you may have guessed, I have quite a lot of knowledge RE. their history. Jon Lord always wanted to play classical, at heart, and indeed eventually left deep purple to play organ for an orchestra. Richie Blackmore's musical love stems from medievil music. See his recent incarnation, "Blackmore's Knights" and the early days of rainbow for details. Both had a love of classical they wished to express, and as the creative duo of the band, did their best to do it. I think they were also the first, in an unprecedented collaboration with the RPO in "concerto..." I do not doubt that the others may have been mercenary cash ins, but that does not detract from the quality of the playing.

Off topic: Isnt it nice to be able to agree to disagree. Its so rare on these forums, that Ive practically forgotten how good it feels to be able to respect the considered opinions of another NS user..
still off topic,
i dont know, isnt it more fun to be able to realize how superior you are to those people who are to stupid to know that you are right

RE: Vittos: Metallica's 'Master', 'Ride', and 'Justice', yes. Pink Floyd: whenever Roger Waters talks & much of 'The Wall' I would have to agree with you. But as far as the content of their music before 'The Wall', I think you're totally off.


I did say that I liked some of their stuff, which would include I guess some of Meddle and Dark Side of the Moon (even though "Money" ruins it for me, and by extension "Time"), and most of Wish You Were Here.

RE: Jello Biafra: I suppose that one-liner was an attempt at a putdown..... ::shrug:: It would be interesting if you attempted to qualify and/or quantify your insinuation that any of my selections are well-described as "pretentious"..... although I do admit your namesake's musicality-bereft contribution to pop culture was, whatever it may have been, not pretentious either.


And while we're at it, the one group that I left off which my conscience won't allow me to not mention: Mahavishnu Orchestra. There, Mr. "Biafra", another sincere attempt at creative innovation to mis-deride as "pretension"! Have at you!

--ArrenWhile my comment was intended as a putdown, it wasn't meant as a putdown of you, but rather of some of your choices. It seemed rather odd to me that you considered Genesis to be pretentious, but not Jimmy Page or Roger Waters (and no, I am not saying they're pretentious simply because they were creative.)

As far as Jello Biafra not being particularly musically skilled, I agree. However musical skill is not equal to interesting music, at least as far as I'm concerned. Not to mention the sheer influence of the Dead Kennedys on music, both punk and metal.

still off topic,
i dont know, isnt it more fun to be able to realize how superior you are to those people who are to stupid to know that you are right

No, because those people tend to get my back up by abusing facts and evidence, (this applies almost exclusively to non-aesthetic debates), and the science quoted on this forum is totally awful. I could spend the rest of my life refuting it and quoting sources, but what would be the point? The end result is always the same for me. Its :headbang: followed by :mp5: :mp5: :mp5: when all thats really required is a little :fluffle:

oops. smilie overload. sorry peeps.

While my comment was intended as a putdown, it wasn't meant as a putdown of you, but rather of some of your choices. It seemed rather odd to me that you considered Genesis to be pretentious, but not Jimmy Page or Roger Waters (and no, I am not saying they're pretentious simply because they were creative.)

I agree with him. Waters, Barrett, Page, and Plant were all about as pretentious as rock stars get during the mid-70's.

And their music seriously suffered because of it.

Well, Its midnight here, and Im off early tomorrow. And besides, its nicew to save my 100th post for a new day. Will check back later, and offer my (somewhat biased) opinion on the poll results. But I never really doubted Zeppelin would win. There just too popular. And even if you're first choice is off the list, Zeppelin are likely to be you're second.

I agree with him. Waters, Barrett, Page, and Plant were all about as pretentious as rock stars get during the mid-70's.

And their music seriously suffered because of it.
I think Barrett's music suffered more from a surfeit of acid and nervous breakdowns. IIRC, he'd retreated completely from music long before the mid-seventies.

Thin Lizzy!

I think Barrett's music suffered more from a surfeit of acid and nervous breakdowns. IIRC, he'd retreated completely from music long before the mid-seventies.

Sorry, I meant Gilmour.