Ursa Majoris Posted July 20, 2007 Share Posted July 20, 2007 I know Kurt Cobain wasn't genius enough to figure out how to get through life. And his wife was/is a phsycho druggie. That's some righteous legacy, man. Leaving aside the irrelevancy of Cobain's wife, it's worth pointing out that genius very often struggles mightily with "getting through life". This isn't just a rock music trait, though God knows there's enough casualties in that arena (the biggest, IMO, is Hendrix who was indisputably a genius). Art in general is littered with geniuses or near geniuses who simply couldn't cope with everyday existence. I am by no means calling Cobain a genius, just pointing out that genius in any field and everyday life often don't mix well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengal Mania Posted July 20, 2007 Share Posted July 20, 2007 cultural significance? no. musical significance, yes. the problem with judging popular music, like rock, is that the line between the two isn't always so clear. k  I say booey to cultural significance. I understand musical significance, which I assume means other bands emulate. But that would make American Idol one of the greateast American TV show, because there are now 15 shows that copy it.  It's all personal preference, but this argument is fun on a Friday.  I like Allman Bros. They had definite musical significance (other S. Rock bands). Little/no cultural significance. Don't care. Duane Allman could play a slide like nobody before him. I like Bad Company. I don't think they have any (real) musical or cultural significance. Thought they had a great singer and sound. I like Bob Seger. Lyrics tell stories that remind you of High School. But I don't even care about that. I like the music/sound. Was very good in concert years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengal Mania Posted July 20, 2007 Share Posted July 20, 2007 it's worth pointing out that genius very often struggles mightily..... Â Â Poppycock. Mine doesn't Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted July 20, 2007 Share Posted July 20, 2007 Poppycock. Â Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Egret Posted July 20, 2007 Author Share Posted July 20, 2007 Musical taste is highly subjective. It depends what speaks to you. I love the grunge era music. My wife loves hair metal. My 2 1/2 year old son loves John Lennon and the Grateful Dead. He always wants me to put it on the "guitar channel" on Sirius in the car (Jam_On). Â I think it's like trying to compare RBs/QBs/WRs from different eras in football. It's tough to do. Was Barry better than Jim Brown? Is LaDainian better than Emmitt? It's much easier to say who is the best of the different eras. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexgaddis Posted July 20, 2007 Share Posted July 20, 2007 One of my buddies DJed at Double Door on New Year's Eve back in the mid '90s and we got to hang out with Liquid Soul in the dressing room area. Great dressing rooms at the Double Door... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cameltosis Posted July 20, 2007 Share Posted July 20, 2007 "Brilliant" is too strong? How 'bout "lucid" or "well-crafted". This whole argument is silly because music is very personall in preference. YOu think Nirvana changed the culture of an entire generation, I think they're guys who couldn't hold a real job. Tomato, Tomahto. Â After this post I may actually agree with your brilliance. Of course I'm an idiot. But the fact of the matter is Nirvana did influance a generation. People dressed different. Music changed. yadda yadda yadda. This doesnt mean they are "genius" or even good. IIt just means a lot of kids got stoned and dressed in flannal shirts and ripped jeans. I feel the same way about the Dead. Just because a bunch of people didnt want to work and travalled around the country dropping acid and smoking Josh Gordon doesnt make them a great band. Of course, if was old enough to do that I probably would have. Which brings me to your point of music being subjective, I concur. Nothing like typing a huge response when a couple words would have worked just to kill the last 10 minutes of work on a Friday!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted July 20, 2007 Share Posted July 20, 2007 Great dressing rooms at the Double Door... Â It looked at lot better with the free 12-pack of Newcastle that the owner gave us. Being able to use the VIP bar and VIP bathrooms were big bonuses as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted July 20, 2007 Share Posted July 20, 2007 Can I just say that threads like this are what makes the Tailgate great? Â Thanks - back to your regular programs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sugar Magnolia Posted July 20, 2007 Share Posted July 20, 2007 I voted for Grateful Dead. Despite my screen name, I'm not a dead head but went to a number of concerts. Â I considered only the bands where I have attended their concerts, because I think a live concert really shows a band's talent. Their improvisation, changing a hit song and making it better and entertaining on stage. Of the list beside The Dead, I've seen Bruce, The Eagles, and REM. Â I've been straight, stoned, really stoned and backstage to Grateful Dead and was always entertained. No two concerts were ever alike and their improvisation was what made them so fun. Â Springsteen was awesome in concert, and almost voted for them, but it's really HIM and think of Bruce as a solo artist. I saw him in 76 before he became famous and didn't have any hit songs-the only song I recongnized was a remake of Blinded by the Light. The next chance I had to see him in 83, he was playing in a hugh stadium and didn't want to see him in such a big venue. Â REM totally disappointed. They didn't change any of their songs-it was like listening to an album. They just went through the motions and didn't seem to really try to entertain. It was at the Greek Theatre in Berkeley which is a really great place for a band to perform a concert. Â I did enjoy The Eagles but don't really consider them a true hard rock band. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chargerz Posted July 20, 2007 Share Posted July 20, 2007 Well, Van Halen's winning this poll. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuke'em ttg Posted July 20, 2007 Share Posted July 20, 2007 Eagles..........gotta have the most talented dudes............ top to bottom of the bands............imo  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTryvhwi4LM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REZ Posted July 21, 2007 Share Posted July 21, 2007 I voted for Grateful Dead. Despite my screen name, I'm not a dead head but went to a number of concerts. I considered only the bands where I have attended their concerts, because I think a live concert really shows a band's talent. Their improvisation, changing a hit song and making it better and entertaining on stage. Of the list beside The Dead, I've seen Bruce, The Eagles, and REM.  I've been straight, stoned, really stoned and backstage to Grateful Dead and was always entertained. No two concerts were ever alike and their improvisation was what made them so fun.  Springsteen was awesome in concert, and almost voted for them, but it's really HIM and think of Bruce as a solo artist. I saw him in 76 before he became famous and didn't have any hit songs-the only song I recongnized was a remake of Blinded by the Light. The next chance I had to see him in 83, he was playing in a hugh stadium and didn't want to see him in such a big venue.  REM totally disappointed. They didn't change any of their songs-it was like listening to an album. They just went through the motions and didn't seem to really try to entertain. It was at the Greek Theatre in Berkeley which is a really great place for a band to perform a concert.  I did enjoy The Eagles but don't really consider them a true hard rock band.  Born to Run was out by then. Blinded by the light was actually written and recorded by Springsteen first. Was a flop for him. Recorded by ?? and became a hit for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted July 21, 2007 Share Posted July 21, 2007 there can be only one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh B Tool Posted July 21, 2007 Share Posted July 21, 2007 (edited) Hendrix Santana Grand Funk Railroad ZZ Top Eagles CCR Edited July 21, 2007 by Hugh B Tool Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SheikYerbuti Posted July 21, 2007 Share Posted July 21, 2007 I don't know a singe song by Nirvana, and could care less. Â Well then, who better to critique their value?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted July 21, 2007 Share Posted July 21, 2007 Born to Run was out by then. Blinded by the light was actually written and recorded by Springsteen first. Was a flop for him. Recorded by ?? and became a hit for them. The ?? is Manfred Mann's Earth Band Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REZ Posted July 21, 2007 Share Posted July 21, 2007 The ?? is Manfred Mann's Earth Band  I thought it was them and then for some reason I thought of the Steve Miller band. Wasn't sure. Springsteen's version is not very good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaxfactor Posted July 21, 2007 Share Posted July 21, 2007 u have all forgotten about BTO Â Sky is correct. BTO were either partially or totally Canadian. BTO was formed from the Guess Who. Burton Cummings was an awesome vocalist. Â And Bad Company were British. Paul Rogers came from Free and Mick Ralphs came from Mott The Hoople. Â This thread could go on forever, but I love it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godtomsatan Posted July 21, 2007 Share Posted July 21, 2007 The ?? is Manfred Mann's Earth Band  Wrapped up like a little buddy, yo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaxfactor Posted July 21, 2007 Share Posted July 21, 2007 I thought it was them and then for some reason I thought of the Steve Miller band. Wasn't sure. Springsteen's version is not very good. Â Yeah, when Bruce belted out "madman's drummers bummers indians in the summer..." he sounded like he just got through drinkin a fifth. Â I wanna say Manfred Man did another Springsteen song. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think the Boss wrote Spirits In The Night also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thews40 Posted July 21, 2007 Share Posted July 21, 2007 I thought it was them and then for some reason I thought of the Steve Miller band. Wasn't sure. Springsteen's version is not very good. I like it. Born to run was the second album I had growing up, so I've always been a Bruce fan. LZ III was the first... damn I wish I would have kept that album cover. LZ made some sort of deal with the record company where they could do whatever they wanted with the covers. I'm pretty sure Pearl Jam has the same deal, because a lot of their CD's are out of form factor. Back to the topic, I really can't believe Van Halen is leading this. Agree the guitar was "revolutionary", but the lyrics were idiotic. I'll change my mind again after reading this and give a tie to the Doors and Pearl Jam. No love for Neil Young? I really don't like the Crazy Horse twangy guitar, but Rust Never Sleeps is prolly in my top ten favorite CD's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperBalla Posted July 21, 2007 Share Posted July 21, 2007 I did not see the greatest American rock band listed. I did not vote. Â Â Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted July 21, 2007 Share Posted July 21, 2007 Since this thread comes up on a bi-annual basis, I always wait for someone to bring up MC5, and since it is page 10 I'll do it. Â Some people were astounded that Steeley Dan, Queensryche, and even Nickelback or Dave Matthews Band hadn't been brought up for perspective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sugar Magnolia Posted July 21, 2007 Share Posted July 21, 2007 Born to Run was out by then. Blinded by the light was actually written and recorded by Springsteen first. Was a flop for him. Recorded by ?? and became a hit for them. Â You're right-then it must have been '74 when I saw him 'cause Born to Run was not out yet for sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.