Biggest/Most influential rock band of this decade?

[mickill]

'60s = Beatles/Stones
'70s = Zeppelin/Floyd
'80s = U2/Guns 'N Roses
'90s = Nirvana/Radiohead

It seems less obvious these days. Which is good, I suppose. But (since we're already more than half way through it) what one group do you think will have stood out the most for defining this decade?

I'm thinking The White Stripes, even though they're not exactly MEGA HUGE. But I really can't think of anything that comes close in terms of popularity, critical acclaim, influence, consistency etc. Especially since urban and pop music are garnering most of the attention these days. Or maybe it's still Radiohead, even though their most significant work all came before 2001. I don't know. Opinions?

[Lex Diamonds]

'80s = U2/Guns 'N Roses
'90s = Nirvana/Radiohead
Y'see, I'd even disagree with those. In my opinion, during the 80's with the advent of electronically produced music, music diversified so much that there is no such thing as a "defining" band or genre of music, due to the huge variety of styles available to suit the huge variety of people's tastes.

[abcdefz]

'60s = Bob Dylan/Beatles/Velvet Underground
'70s = Zeppelin/Ramones
'80's... I dunno about U2, definitely don't think Guns and Roses. I'd say REM and Madonna, actually.

[mickill]

Well, I'm only talking rock bands here, otherwise I'd include Public Enemy or whatever. And I'm thinking sales/charts kind of play a big part. Household names and that sort of thing, which sort of eliminates VU, I think.

Anyway, those were just examples. I'm wondering about this decade more.

[mickill]

REM was on my list originally. Not The Madonna Band, though. I'd save it for the biggest pop acts thread, along with MJ and Prince.

[Lex Diamonds]

I'd say the 90's was Blur/Oasis. This decade, it remains to be seen really, but I guess it'll turn out to be something gay like Linkin Park or something. I'd like it if Arctic Monkeys followed up their first album with a couple more quality CDs, I think they'd be a good ambassador of the decade.

[abcdefz]

REM was on my list originally. Not The Madonna Band, though. I'd save it for the biggest pop acts thread, along with MJ and Prince.



True. Pop or dance or something; not rock.

I was thinking of Sly Stone and George Clinton, too, but I think their stuff got soaked up more by soul than rock.

[abcdefz]

Well, I'm only talking rock bands here, otherwise I'd include Public Enemy or whatever. And I'm thinking sales/charts kind of play a big part. Household names and that sort of thing, which sort of eliminates VU, I think.

Anyway, those were just examples. I'm wondering about this decade more.


This decade, I couldn't tell you.

But for your first point -- using sales to even partially determine "influential" nuts. That would make George Thoroughgood a more influential blues artist than Robert Johnson or Charlie Patton.

[Kid Presentable]

Y'see, I'd even disagree with those. In my opinion, during the 80's with the advent of electronically produced music, music diversified so much that there is no such thing as a "defining" band or genre of music, due to the huge variety of styles available to suit the huge variety of people's tastes.
Bullocks.

Anyway, for me it would be Queens of the Stone Age, if only for their subversion of nu-metal with Rated R. And also how you couldn't go anywhere in 2002-03 without hearing talk of them. Like mickill's example, not exactly huge, but definitely worth consideration.

[mickill]

Well, I meant "influence" on people in general, including fans. Not just other groups. And definitely not just cool people. What I'm getting at is, who's the biggest group out there? Who sells, influences, makes money, plays the big shows, is in media a lot etc? Who'll be remembered for defining this decade? Think big. Even grannies and people who don't own radios and TVs know who The Beatles and U2 are.

I'm pretty sure that Blur and Oasis' would be it for the '90s in the UK, but outside of the UK they aren't really as gigantic as one might think.

QOTSA's reign was pretty short, though. That's not to say they aren't awesome or anything.

[DroppinScience]

Maybe we have to wait for the decade to end to properly know?

But yeah, I'm thinking White Stripes have it for now.

[Kid Presentable]

QOTSA's reign was pretty short, though. That's not to say they aren't awesome or anything.
Very short reign. Much like young Patirck's example with the Arctics, the rest remains to be seen in the next album.

[abcdefz]

Maybe we have to wait for the decade to end to properly know?

But yeah, I'm thinking White Stripes have it for now.



Nah. Not by mickill's terms.

[SobaViolence]

Radiohead ever since The Bends
bands are still trying to copy them
and their new stuff is light years ahead of anything
and people are trying (and failing) to replicate their sound.

[abcdefz]

The problem when you take this stuff in populist terms... I mean... Hootie and the Blowfish probably still are more recognizable and have a sincere impact on more people's lives than, say White Stripes. To this day, more people are seeing Hootie shows, buying Hootie merchandise, the independant release, and everything.

[mickill]

Nah. Not by mickill's terms.
Well, they come the closest, jerky.

[mickill]

The problem when you take this stuff in populist terms... I mean... Hootie and the Blowfish probably still are more recognizable and have a sincere impact on more people's lives than, say White Stripes. To this day, more people are seeing Hootie shows, buying Hootie merchandise, the independant release, and everything.
Let's try to strike a bit of a balance here, though. Hootie isn't exactly critically praised and they're more often considered a one hit wonder band than anything. Everytime I go to the used music store I see a stack of Cracked Rear View CDs on the shelf. Not a lot of Nirvana and Zeppelin fans regret ever getting into them.

[abcdefz]

Let's try to strike a bit of a balance here, though. Hootie isn't exactly critically praised and they're more often considered a one hit wonder band than anything. Everytime I go to the used music store I see a stack of Cracked Rear View CDs on the shelf. Not a lot of Nirvana and Zeppelin fans regret ever getting into them.



I say pffffft on your whole ill-defined hypothesis.

[mickill]

Admit that I'm right!

[bigblu89]

Rock music is Dead.

Unfortunately.

[abcdefz]

Admit that I'm right!


I still don't know what the question is.

But it's your thread, dude -- we just live here. (y)







































"sinatra or mathis? -- it's presley."

[mickill]

It's a fairly simple question, really. What one group will have distinguished themselves as THE rock band of this decade the most when it's over? In terms of respect, critical acclaim, sales, media attention, household nameness, giganticness or whatever. You say it'll be Hootie, I say it'll be The Stripes. Let's just agree to disagree.

I have a feeling bigblu really wanted to say Velvet Revolver, but opted to paraphrase Norcen instead.

[cosmo105]

hrm. you're right, mickill, it's hard to think of one that really stands out. i want to say radiohead, but i'm not sure. RHCP? oog, that would be sad.

[abcdefz]

You say it'll be Hootie,



Hardly; I was making a point.

[yeahwho]

I know that the White Stripes are a great band and all, yet they're just a mish mash of influences throughout the history of rock, so to qualify them as influential would a bit ironic, don't you think? They rock hard but nothing new, just a channel to the old.

I don't think rock is dead, it's been very dormant for the past 6 years. A lot of other musical styles are strong such as R&B and DJ.

This is why the high schoolers love the zep and floyd.

And fuck I mean I dig Bob Dylan and Neil Young and they are fucking grandpa's. Christ the youth of today are chickenshits.

Thanks for reminding me how dorky the overall 2000/06 rock scene has been.

[mickill]

Hardly; I was making a point.

Oh relax. I was just poking fun at you for being funny.

RHCP have kinda stretched themselves out over a couple of decades (actually 3) now, kinda like Radiohead...so I don't know. It's like, some people might say that The Stones were more significant in the '70s or even the '80s than they were in the '60s or vice versa. Hard to say, really. I think of RHCP as more of an '90s band since both their big breakthrough and their big comeback took place in that decade.

[mickill]

Yeah, I'd probably say the Pistols had a little more influence than The Ramones.

I know that the White Stripes are a great band and all, yet they're just a mish mash of influences throughout the history of rock, so to qualify them as influential would a bit ironic do't you think? They rock hard but nothing new, just a channel to the old.

Well, they certainly popularized the "no bass guitar rock" aesthetic that has become somewhat prevalent with a lot of indie bands. And they did sort of lead the whole minimalist/garage rock revival.

[yeahwho]

Yeah, I'd probably say the Pistols had a little more influence than The Ramones.



Well, they certainly popularized the "no bass guitar rock" aesthetic that has become somewhat prevalent with a lot of indie bands. And they did sort of lead the whole minimalist/garage rock revival.
The No bass thing is one I'll give you. But bands like the Lyres and the Nomads did a great garage sound thing as far back as the 80's. Even the Hives cornball schtick cranks hard on the garage.

I will give the Stripes props, yet as far as influencing? Maybe reminding.

(offtopic)His latest guitar was made here in Seattle by this guy (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/lifestyle/269221_guitar08.html), ever since I've read that article I keep seeing more and more of those guitars.

[Auton]

I'd say the 90's was Blur/Oasis.

in the uk maybe, definitely not the rest of the world.

[yeahwho]

I wonder if any of these bands can afford a bass player? I mean I knew it was tough early on in the century with downloading and all. The RIAA warned us all it would come to this, bass would have to be dropped from rock if we kept stealing music. It will take years to recover.

[SobaViolence]

technically, the biggest rock band would be Nickleback.


:rolleyes:

[Lyman Zerga]

'80s = U2/Guns 'N Roses

*cums*

[Planetary]

I'd say the 90's was Blur/Oasis. This decade, it remains to be seen really, but I guess it'll turn out to be something gay like Linkin Park or something. I'd like it if Arctic Monkeys followed up their first album with a couple more quality CDs, I think they'd be a good ambassador of the decade.

amgz linkin park totally rulez wtf.

everythin u say 2 me takes me 1 stepcloser to the edge, and im about 2 break!

[Drederick Tatum]

there's a case to be made for The Strokes being the most influential rock band of the 00's.

[TurdBerglar]

van halen definetely needs to be in the eighties era. they created the hair band moster. when i think of 80's music i think of hair bands. ratm needs to be in the nineties. when i think of the late nineties i think of all that shit rapcore nonsense.

[SobaViolence]

there's a case to be made for The Strokes being the most influential rock band of the 00's.

makes sense.

[DroppinScience]

there's a case to be made for The Strokes being the most influential rock band of the 00's.

Yeah, but they're hardly as consistent as The White Stripes are/were.

Foo Fighters belong to the '90s, even if they're still relevant today.

[DroppinScience]

This may also be a premature declaration, but...

What about Death Cab For Cutie? I'm sure by the end of this decade, they'll be considered an important '00s band.

[Drederick Tatum]

Yeah, but they're hardly as consistent as The White Stripes are/were.


that's not the point. popularitywise Is This It was a shot in the arm for rock n' roll. while a band like the White Stripes may have had albums before then they still benefited tremendously from the impact the Strokes had.

[Kid Presentable]

Fuck man, The Strokes put wheels on the bandwagon which The White Stripes launched.

I would say that in this modern era, we get a lot of mini-eras. It seems everything is so accessible and disposable, we just don't have it anymore.

Although if you mention Nirvana, they hung around for a little bit, and changed heaps. So maybe the Stripes have it, but the other way around. Jack White will eventually be remembered as an influential artist, I think.

[cosmo105]

consistent? did you listen to their last album at all, DS? it was so Strokes it made me wonder why they even put their name on the front.


i don't know about death cab. i was thinking about mentioning them up in hurr earlier...it's hard to say. i think they're probably the biggest, most influential emo (ugh) act out there right now, but i wouldn't classify them as rock anymore. god, i used to love them :(

[Kid Presentable]

consistent? did you listen to their last album at all, DS? it was so Strokes it made me wonder why they even put their name on the front.


i don't know about death cab. i was thinking about mentioning them up in hurr earlier...it's hard to say. i think they're probably the biggest, most influential emo (ugh) act out there right now, but i wouldn't classify them as rock anymore. god, i used to love them :(
Is that emo? A young girl at my work made me listen to them while we were closing. It seemed to take itself quite seriously.

[Documad]

The RIAA warned us all it would come to this, bass would have to be dropped from rock if we kept stealing music. It will take years to recover.
:D


It's impossible to tell mid decade. You have to be able to step back from it. I highly doubt it will be a band that's as derivative as The Strokes, et al. Radiohead's got a better chance at taking another decade.

[DroppinScience]

consistent? did you listen to their last album at all, DS? it was so Strokes it made me wonder why they even put their name on the front.


i don't know about death cab. i was thinking about mentioning them up in hurr earlier...it's hard to say. i think they're probably the biggest, most influential emo (ugh) act out there right now, but i wouldn't classify them as rock anymore. god, i used to love them :(

I thought I was trying to say that the Stroked were NOT consistent (that is, the quality of their albums have been on a decline). I'm lost, apparently. :confused:

And Death Cab aren't "emo" in my book. Sure, a lot of their fans are emo, but it bears little resemblance to whichever bands get called emo (whether they're "true" emo or "fake" emo).

[Kid Presentable]

And Death Cab aren't "emo" in my book. Sure, a lot of their fans are emo, but it bears little resemblance to whichever bands get called emo (whether they're "true" emo or "fake" emo).
What about Faux emo?

[Drederick Tatum]

Fuck man, The Strokes put wheels on the bandwagon which The White Stripes launched.

what bandwagon was that? they weren't even on a major label until after Is This It blew up.

[trailerprincess]

I'd somewhat reluctantly put the case forward for RHCP - they are successfully in both the UK and US. I don't know how 'influential' they are still these days, seeing as I don't think they sound particularly current but in terms of sales etc, I don't think you can deny that they have appeal.

[Drederick Tatum]

yeah, they are pretty massive.

[Poster Boy]

No one has mentioned the possibility that it's U2 again. I'm not the biggest U2 fan but the 2 records they've put out this decade are pretty solid and were each pretty fucking huge. They still mount massive tours and have the whole political bullshit thing going on thanks to Boner. Sure, the Stones still tour and shit, but that's become a novelty act.

Like it or not, U2 are still relevant. That Atomic Bomb album nearly went platinum its first week out, NO other recent rock acts can claim that.

So, in short, I say U2.

They also essentially birthed Coldplay which is one of the biggest of this decade as well.

[sercomdj01]

NICKLEBACK OBVIOUSLY




































Mars volta? at the drive in? the get some props too.

[mickill]

Ahhh, yes. Coldplay. I think that might be the answer I've been looking for.

I want to kick Chris Martin in the face, but I think that they probably are "it". They're massive on a global scale, they play big shows, they have the respect of their peers, critics adore them and their fans seem pretty dedicated. They're not particularly innovative and more or less have borrowed bits and pieces from bands like U2, Radiohead and Travis. But yeah, I think they're probably what most people will think of when they think back to the music of the first decade of this century. Unfortunately.

I don't think it would be U2, though.

[mickill]

I think what happened with The Strokes is that their first album had the potential to be huge. And it ended up selling kind of modestly. In relation to the hype, I mean.

After the success of the Modern Age EP, different labels started fighting over them and I think epectations for their first album got very high. It ended up getting excellent reviews anyway. Magazines started calling them the saviors of rock. But then it all backfired somewhat. They did initiate the whole garage revival thing before The Strokes did however.

Also, I don't know what you're talking about, cosmo, because their last album sounds very little like the first two albums. I don't think they're going in a very good direction, though.

[abcdefz]

van halen definetely needs to be in the eighties era. they created the hair band moster.



Actually, I think Barry Manilow is the antecedent for all those power ballads. Think of it: dramatic ballads with the drums turned way the fuck up in their anthemetic glory...

[na§tee]

it's gotta be bon jovi, dude! come on!

actually, i'm joking.

i only say this because when we were hosting a conference for international film offices/commissions last year and after plenty hours of drinking some of the delegates decided to do some of their national songs. people from the madrid film office started flamenco dancing. the germans did some german songs. the barbados people did some, uh, barbados songs.

but the guy from new jersey? (he actually got married to a finnish girl and was working for the finnish film office, but hey)

he got on his knees and started singing bad medicine.

i think perhaps it was most hilarious night of my life.
gotta love him. looked very jewish. have some photos to develop, still, of him.

[abcdefz]

...another problem with The Strokes (for the purpose of this thread) is that they didn't saturate public consciousness like, say, U2 did. I mean, Grandma knows who U2 is; she was also sitting there, horrified, the when the nightly news talked about these snot-blowers called the Six Pistols. (She couldn't fathom how such a name could actually be not only conceived but allowed.)


As far as the '70's goes, I was thinking last night.... KISS? They were huge, everybody knew who they were, they kicked rock-as-theater off into the mainstream -- hell, they even had a comic book and one or two made for TV movies; lunchboxes, the whole thing.

[Lyman Zerga]

what bandwagon was that?

the invisible one













what about david bowie

theres almost no band/artist who didnt get owned by his stuff

and throw in queen somewhere

[mickill]

Hmmm....Kiss....I suppose you have a point.

I guess that Metallica and AC/DC have been kinda huge/influential too as well.


Bowie isn't a band, though. Otherwise we'd be getting into Elvis, Dylan and Cash here too.

Queen's a good one.

[Poster Boy]

ugh. Coldplay. fucking nap time.

[mickill]

ugh. Coldplay. fucking nap time.

But it was your suggestion.

[Lyman Zerga]

Bowie isn't a band, though. Otherwise we'd be getting into Elvis, Dylan and Cash here too.


spiders from mars/tin machine!!!!!1


hah i just so owned you













not



ah well i shouldnt post when im sober

[Lyman Zerga]

so White Stripes/Coldplay wins




ass closed!

[cosmo105]

Also, I don't know what you're talking about, cosmo, because their last album sounds very little like the first two albums. I don't think they're going in a very good direction, though.
maybe i should give it another listen. i think i only got to hear it about once or twice before someone stole it and put it in his truck and i never saw it again. that seems to happen an awful lot around here.

i think you might be right on coldplay.


whatever happened to Travis anyway? they were so cute.


DS, let's not get into "emo" semantics. i know where the genre started and what it was really about ten, twenty years ago, but we both know where it's ended up today. i think it's save to call death cab emo. i'm (or i was) a pretty big death cab fan, and i'm secure enough in my badassculinity to say that.

[cosmo105]

Mars volta? at the drive in? the get some props too.
we're talking about big, influential here. sure these acts are good, but pay attention to the criteria mickill's laying out. does grandma know who they are? no.

[abcdefz]

we're talking about big, influential here. sure these acts are good, but pay attention to the criteria mickill's laying out. does grandma know who they are? no.


That's kinda my problem with this thread -- if the criteria is basically "most influential mega-star public-consciousness-soaking roack band" -- I mean... what if grandma's heard of Pearl Jam but not Nirvana? How does that balance out?

[cosmo105]

then grandma doesn't live in Seattle, apparently.

[abcdefz]

Geography shouldn't matter if they're world-conquering superstars!

[mickill]

That's kinda my problem with this thread -- if the criteria is basically "most influential mega-star public-consciousness-soaking roack band" -- I mean... what if grandma's heard of Pearl Jam but not Nirvana? How does that balance out?
I didn't say that we or you had to like the answer.

[abcdefz]

Nah -- I just think it's too nebulous. There are hardly any cases where, by that criteria, the answer is more objective than subjective.

The Beatles, I think, is clear. Led Zepplin is clear.

After that, I dunno. I mean, you could make a case that the Eagles were more influential than KISS, even though they steered a purer country toward country-pop rather than rock, per se.

[mickill]

i think you might be right on coldplay.

whatever happened to Travis anyway? they were so cute.
They were robbed of their rightful claim to the "queer rock" throne that Coldplay snatched from right under them. Their last 2 albums have been horrendous, anyway. But the first two were great. Parachutes was an inferior rehash of The Man Who.

[mickill]

Nah -- I just think it's too nebulous. There are hardly any cases where, by that criteria, the answer is more objective than subjective.

The Beatles, I think, is clear. Led Zepplin is clear.

After that, I dunno. I mean, you could make a case that the Eagles were more influential than KISS, even though they steered a purer country toward country-pop rather than rock, per se.
Well, the point I was going to make initially was that it's becoming less and less clear. At least the problem with identifying the definitive bands of the '70s is more due to the overwhelming number of big/influential groups and not the lack thereof, which seems to be the case nowadays. The Beatles', Zeppelin's and The Stones' respective reigns spanned entire decades, not (as someone already mentioned) a couple years. There're no more big ass monster bands anymore.

Even Radiohead is more of a hip thing. They're not household names. People don't generally know the names of every member of the group. They don't have massive singles. They don't sell a million copies in their first week. I've met people who haven't even heard a single song by them. So I don't know.

[SobaViolence]

It's impossible to tell mid decade. You have to be able to step back from it. I highly doubt it will be a band that's as derivative as The Strokes, et al. Radiohead's got a better chance at taking another decade.

Radiohead is gonna end after the tour to support their next album.
i'd be surprised if they last another 3 yrs.
which makes me sad.

[Whatitis]

The White Stripes is a good one for the '00s but personally I'll go with QOTSA. As far as the '90s I think Smashing Pumkins has more of an inlfuence than Radiohead. As much as I cannot stand them, Pearl Jam(Hurl Spam) had a big inluence but Nirvana blows them away.

[synch]

First band that came to mind while reading the opening post was Coldplay.

I reckoned that would have been more of a pop thing though, not really what one would classify as rock. I was talking to a friend of mine about that a while back, how Coldplay was probably the closest thing we have to a "super band". Ick.

Incidently... Did Creed and Nickleback die a certain death yet?

[cosmo105]

Green Day?


i know they were part of the '90s, too, but American Idiot was hugely successful...

[Lyman Zerga]

The White Stripes is a good one for the '00s but personally I'll go with QOTSA.

fuck yeah

ok
white stripes/qotsa
are the winnerz

[DroppinScience]

I think Coldplay fits mickill's "influential" criteria. So you may as well just close the thread now.

DS, let's not get into "emo" semantics. i know where the genre started and what it was really about ten, twenty years ago, but we both know where it's ended up today. i think it's save to call death cab emo. i'm (or i was) a pretty big death cab fan, and i'm secure enough in my badassculinity to say that.

It's not about being ashamed of liking emo bands (and I happen to like lots of bands that have the "emo" label), but I just fail to see the emo connections for Death Cab For Cutie. Whether it's Fall Out Boy-type of emo, or the Sunny Day Real Estate brand of emo, I just don't see Death Cab fitting in either of these camps.

[saz]

for the 70s you could include humble pie; the stone roses for the 80s, who had a colossal influence on countless brit bands; the 90s i'd also include spiritualized, who really influenced radiohead.

[na§tee]

when i first came to university i lived in a flat that fran from travis also used to live in back in the day.

TRUE STORY!

hillhead street.

[Lex Diamonds]

So Coldplay are the Rock gods of the decade? That's hilarous.
Yeah but rock isn't the genre god of this decade. "Rock" in the traditional sense is pretty much drying up these days, being replaced by stuff like nu-metal and hip-hop.

[ericlee]

I'd want to say that either STP, Pearl Jam or Alice in Chains was very influential for the 90's.

Think about it. How many bands seemed to appear that sounded just like Pearl Jam or STP? I can think of Seven Mary Three, Creed and there's a few more but I can't remember their name off hand.

I remember when I first heard Godsmack. I was like damn, Alice in Chains took a downfall. I seriously thought Godsmack was AIC till someone told me it wasn't.

Don't get me wrong, I hated Seven Mary Three and Godsmack and DEFINITLY CREED but, Pearl Jam and AIC did play a huge influence in the 90's.

[yeahwho]

Coldplay? Gnarls Barkley (http://video.cgi.cbs.com/video/video.pl?url=cbs/cbs/g2demand/entertainment/mini/lateshow/music/gnarlsbarkley.rm&plugin=1&proto=rtsp) kills Coldplay, you guys are losing it.

[Documad]

It's now become clear that "biggest" and "influential" are, or at least can be, opposites. Sometimes it was the same thing (Led Zeppelin). But most of the time, the most influential bands (Velvet Underground) were never big. If you have to balance both of those criteria, it's going to be impossible.

There is almost no band other than the beatles where the general public in america could name the band members. That's no kind of criteria.

Coldplay isn't "rock." And they're not going to be "influential." I really don't think that there are thousands of kids in garages hoping to grow up to be whoever the lead guitarist is in that band.

[ericlee]

LINKIN PARK!!111SHIFTONE!!

[yeahwho]

It's now become clear that "biggest" and "influential" are, or at least can be, opposites. Sometimes it was the same thing (Led Zeppelin). But most of the time, the most influential bands (Velvet Underground) were never big. If you have to balance both of those criteria, it's going to be impossible.

There is almost no band other than the beatles where the general public in america could name the band members. That's no kind of criteria.

Coldplay isn't "rock." And they're not going to be "influential." I really don't think that there are thousands of kids in garages hoping to grow up to be whoever the lead guitarist is in that band.

point well taken.

Gnarls Barkley has been on the radar a few months and I can think of no other song (crazy) or band that has been sampled or re-mixed in that much in this short amount of time. let alone their whole careers.

Impact may be a better criteria.

[Drederick Tatum]

Yeah but rock isn't the genre god of this decade. "Rock" in the traditional sense is pretty much drying up these days, being replaced by stuff like nu-metal and hip-hop.

I think nu-metal was more 90s than 00s. nu-garage rock took over.

[Lyman Zerga]

point well taken.

Gnarls Barkley has been on the radar a few months and I can think of no other song (crazy) or band that has been sampled or re-mixed in that much in this short amount of time. let alone their whole careers.

Impact may be a better criteria.


they would only win the 'biggest overrated mainstream trash of the year' award

[yeahwho]

they would only win the 'biggest overrated mainstream trash of the year' award
Agree, but they're still way more interesting than Coldplay could ever wish to be.

and I think thats the point of this thread, who has some sort of influence on musical tastes. It ain't Coldplay. They're yellow.

I'll take Neil or Dylan over any of these goofy bands

[Jitters]

they would only win the 'biggest overrated mainstream trash of the year' award

I got the Gnarls Barkley album when it first came out and really liked it, I know everybody has different opinions on music but why all the hate on them?

[Jitters]

Gnarls Barkley is not Rock

It's about as far away from Rock as you can get.
It's electronically produced fucking club music.

I never said they were rock, I've never been to a club but I seriously doubt they play Go-Go Gadget Gospel there.

[Lyman Zerga]

I got the Gnarls Barkley album when it first came out and really liked it, I know everybody has different opinions on music but why all the hate on them?


cause everyone was like omg that new song by gnarls barkley is so hot man!!!!11
yeah even tatum was all hyped about it

then after weeks i finally had a chance to listen to it and umm thats it?
just another radio trash music band

i seriously dont get the hype about them, it's like i have heard songs like that hundred times before..

just warmed up yawn music instead of new never heard before classic music

[Jitters]

cause everyone was like omg that new song by gnarls barkley is so hot man!!!!11
yeah even tatum was all hyped about it

then after weeks i finally had a chance to listen to it and umm thats it?
just another radio trash music band

i seriously dont get the hype about them, it's like i have heard songs like that hundred times before..

just warmed up yawn music instead of new never heard before classic music

Okay, I respect your opinion, but where I'm from, I have NEVER, not once, heard the song on the radio, I bought the album because it sounded original, got a lot of praise from reviews and wasn't vulgar (a huge selling point for me with music). Just let the record show I bought it within the first 2-3 weeks and didn't hop on the bandwagon. :D

[yeahwho]

I actually like the Gnarls Barkley, no real hate from me. They do have a real bass player, a real guitar player, a real set of drums, an actual string section, 3 back-up singers, one hammond B3 organ, electronic piano/synthesizer and vocalist. The sound is much more rock oriented than Coldplay and the beat is awesome.

I'm not trying to sell anybody on the band, but as far as "Impact" I would nod Gnarls direction before I'd nod that body odor shit Coldplay doses out.

Check the Letterman clip from my earlier post of them playing live, it ain't 2 d.j.'s and a record machine.

[Drederick Tatum]

where I'm from, I have NEVER, not once, heard the song on the radio, I bought the album because it...wasn't vulgar (a huge selling point for me with music)

because it wasn't vulgar?

[sjp]

nine inch nails maybe

[Jitters]

because it wasn't vulgar?

If you're asking if I bought it because it wasn't vulgar the anser is yes, that was one of the reasons. The worst thing said is an adlib about coming back to life due to "some good head." Compared to what other artists say that's almost nothing.

[sercomdj01]

we're talking about big, influential here. sure these acts are good, but pay attention to the criteria mickill's laying out. does grandma know who they are? no.


I think historys shown us that the biggest bands arn't usually the most influential. So influential houshold name can be a bit of an oxymoron. Soooo.... i stake my claim on them 2 bands. Look at the pixies - house hold name now but not when they were reccording. Same with Velvet Underground.

[mickill]

I think historys shown us that the biggest bands arn't usually the most influential. So influential houshold name can be a bit of an oxymoron. Soooo.... i stake my claim on them 2 bands. Look at the pixies - house hold name now but not when they were reccording. Same with Velvet Underground.
Regarding VU, when it takes a band nearly 30 years to finally sell a million copies of their most renowned, beloved, critically worshiped album, it's not likely that enough people have heard their music in order for them to have had a direct impact on the world. Especially at the time.

Sure, through all the other artists that they've influenced they've made a huge impression on pop culture and modern music, but it's not because everybody and their dog knew who they were. Groups like Television, Big Star, Love and Pavement have all released albums that were massive in terms of how they've been perceived by critics and inspired entire generations of followers, but in the mainstream they're virtually unknown. Regardless of how important a band is, if so few people are aware that they even exist, how can they be definitive of an entire decade worth of music?

[sercomdj01]

Regarding VU, when it takes a band nearly 30 years to finally sell a million copies of their most renowned, beloved, critically worshiped album, it's not likely that enough people have heard their music in order for them to have had a direct impact on the world. Especially at the time.

Sure, through all the other artists that they've influenced they've made a huge impression on pop culture and modern music, but it's not because everybody and their dog knew who they were. Groups like Television, Big Star, Love and Pavement have all released albums that were massive in terms of how they've been perceived by critics and inspired entire generations of followers, but in the mainstream they're virtually unknown. Regardless of how important a band is, if so few people are aware that they even exist, how can they be definitive of an entire decade worth of music?

Influence or popularity. The case can be made for each. If someone wanted to know the biggest band of the decade i bet its greenday. They may be a 90's band aswell. But they prettymuch populised a huge fashion trend (the red and black look) and are biggest band around this decade. They are critcally acclamed and are global superstars.

Make a case for the bands like Sugar and Husker Du that did the whole pop punk thing before :P

[abcdefz]

Influence or popularity.



The COMBINATION of the two is what mickill is asking. So think of it as "What world-renowned band was most influential and representative of a certain decade."

That's poorly worded, but hopefully you get the idea. It should be somebody your grandma's even heard of (presumably, during the day): The Beatles, Led Zepplin, U2, etc.

If your grandma had ever even heard of Sugar (the band), well God bless her, man. I don't think very many bands have permeated the world consciousness post-'90's, but I could be wrong.

[sercomdj01]

The COMBINATION of the two is what mickill is asking. So think of it as "What world-renowned band was most influential and representative of a certain decade."

That's poorly worded, but hopefully you get the idea. It should be somebody your grandma's even heard of (presumably, during the day): The Beatles, Led Zepplin, U2, etc.

If your grandma had ever even heard of Sugar (the band), well God bless her, man. I don't think very many bands have permeated the world consciousness post-'90's, but I could be wrong.

I know what you mean exactly. I'm just saying who has the balance now? Hense my suggestion of greenday. They're popular and have influenced a mass of bands.

[abcdefz]

Yeah, but I doubt even my parents have heard of them.

Think of artists who permeate public consciousess. Like: they wind up in People and National Enquirer and shit.

[Lex Diamonds]

It's not rock but the only one I can think of is Eminem.

[abcdefz]

It's not rock but the only one I can think of is Eminem.



Not rock + not a group = fukt :D

[Lo_Lyfe]

dawg its coldplay.

scust @ that yellow homo.

[mickill]

You should be paying attention to the criteria that a-z's been kind enough to re-outline on my behalf, man. Em's not rock, as mentioned. AND he's not a band. More importantly, however, he hasn't really influenced anyone worth noting.

But otherwise, yeah, he's probably the most recognizable artist of the last decade, I guess.

I'm actually kinda surprised that the thread has gone on for this many pages without someone chiming in with the obligatory Beastie Boy reference.

[abcdefz]

Nah.

I wish I could kind of slip in a "Bruce Springsteen and the E STREET BAND" ona technicality, because I think he was a huge influence on the '80's, not just in music, but also including making political/social contributions okay for rock musicians rather than just folksy, laid-back types.

But, really, he was a solo artist with a backing band, as intrinsic as they were. Oh well.

[abcdefz]

You should be paying attention to the criteria that a-z's been kind enough to re-outline on my behalf, man.



Yeah, I'll lay off now. (y)

[ericlee]

You can't tell me that Black Sabbath wasn't an influential band during the 60's-70's. They're a main influence to many bands nowadays and they even claim it in their interviews.

Jimi Hendrix isn't mentioned either and he's a strong influence to alot of great guitarists today.

[mickill]

What is wrong with you people?

[Rock]

You can't tell me that Black Sabbath wasn't an influential band during the 60's-70's. They're a main influence to many bands nowadays and they even claim it in their interviews.
i was going to say sabbath as well...but i think they really influence a certain genre and that genre was "popular" for a couple of years not a whole decade.

I have to add that i have probably read this page and a couple of the first posts....so if i broke a "rule" of the thread....fookit.

[Lo_Lyfe]

beasties maybe on the strength of the 90's if it was on the strength of the 80's. you'd need to be an ally mcbeal mahfukker to convince someone the beasties were most influential based on 5 boroughs. its a fun album, but shit, moms be listenin to coldplay.

[mickill]

i was going to say sabbath as well...but i think they really influence a certain genre and that genre was "popular" for a couple of years not a whole decade.

I have to add that i have probably read this page and the couple of posts....so if i broke a "rule" of the thread....fookit.

There aren't any rules. A lot of people just seem baffled that their favorite bands and solo artists weren't included in my EXAMPLE.

And I don't think the Beasties need to be acknowledged. It was just an observation I was making. No group that averages two studio albums per decade would really make the cut, I don't think.

[Jitters]

I think it's already been said once but rock and roll just isn't popular anymore. Sometime I think about who is the best rock band this decade and there just isn't one. We're over halfway through this decade and if we can't tell who it is by now then there probably won't be one.

[ericlee]

There aren't any rules. A lot of people just seem baffled that their favorite bands and solo artists weren't included in my EXAMPLE.

Baffled if you may but I'm not. I'm just adding to your example. Maybe I should have mentioned The Band of Gypsies or The Jimi Hendrix Experience group rather than just plain old Jimi.

I think it's already been said once but rock and roll just isn't popular anymore. Sometime I think about who is the best rock band this decade and there just isn't one. We're over halfway through this decade and if we can't tell who it is by now then there probably won't be one.

I think Clutch is one of the most influential rock bands around. They've kept together, original members since the early 90's, except for they've added a keyboardist recently. I like the fact that they're huge in their own way and have kept their somewhat underground status since day one.

As far as being the most mainstream influential? Possibly Tool? I'd like to think so. They've been around for a while and they've got talent. Alot of people hate on them for whatever reasons but everybody is well acquainted with their instruments and Maynord is intellegent which leads to some interesting lyrics (if you have time to decipher all that shit). Not to mention he's got one of the greatest voices.

[marsdaddy]

'60s = Beatles/Stones
'70s = Zeppelin/Floyd
'80s = U2/Guns 'N Roses
'90s = Nirvana/Radiohead

It seems less obvious these days. Which is good, I suppose. But (since we're already more than half way through it) what one group do you think will have stood out the most for defining this decade?This is the iPod decade.

[yeahwho]

This is the iPod decade.

winner, that is what it is. iPod killed the rock band. (y)

very astute

[Jitters]

This is the iPod decade.

Very good point. Since most people download one song instead of a whole album most of the time, it has caused the market to shift. Things right now are a lot like they used to be when Elvis was popular, everything is based on singles and most of the time everything else on the album isn't that good. So we need a new "Beatles", a group that will make music an "album experience" again instead just a bunch of random songs (y)

Of course this brings us back to the topic and the fact that as of this decade no one has really done this to a mass effect.

[WhoMoi?]

RHCP have kinda stretched themselves out over a couple of decades (actually 3) now, kinda like Radiohead...so I don't know. It's like, some people might say that The Stones were more significant in the '70s or even the '80s than they were in the '60s or vice versa. Hard to say, really. I think of RHCP as more of an '90s band since both their big breakthrough and their big comeback took place in that decade.

I was going to say the same thing about U2 and R.E.M. They've both spanned three decades successfully, so it's hard to pin them down to any one of them.

[DroppinScience]

It should be somebody your grandma's even heard of (presumably, during the day): The Beatles, Led Zepplin, U2, etc.

If your grandma had ever even heard of Sugar (the band), well God bless her, man. I don't think very many bands have permeated the world consciousness post-'90's, but I could be wrong.

Well, if we were to go by MY grandma, I don't think she'd have heard of U2 or Nirvana or anyone else. She just knows Elvis/The Beatles. She really doesn't follow pop culture.

And the only thing closely resembling new music for her would be Celine Dion. :rolleyes: