DDD Home Page
DDD Music Lists Page
DDD Movie Lists Page
It is currently Wed Oct 22, 2014 10:05 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1100 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 74  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Greatest Live Rock Artists
PostPosted: Mon Nov 15, 2010 7:14 pm 
Offline
moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:35 pm
Posts: 1407
Brett Alan wrote:
Sampson wrote:

As for the jam band concept, it didn't start with the Dead at all - Diddley started that in the 50's. He'd close shows, do part of one song and then jam for twenty minutes, riffing on his guitar off-the-cuff. It's no surprise that the first group later recognized AS a jam band, which just beat the Dead to it in SF, was Quicksilver Messenger Service and the songs they turned into lengthy jams were Diddley songs. So while the Dead are the most renown for this, they weren't first and they can't get credit for something others did before them.


I don't agree with that at all. I don't think influence works that way.

No one does anything entirely new. Every artist has their influences. So of course the Dead didn't invent the jam band thing out of whole cloth. But the fact is that they perfected it and most importantly they inspired the entire scene. Phish didn't form because of Quicksilver Messenger Service; they formed out of a scene where the Dead was the be-all and end-all. (I know--I went to high school with the keyboard player.) And that's probably true of just about every band on the scene. The nature of the shows, the way the sets are put together, the way the fans behave, are all directly inspired by the Dead. So I think they absolutely should get credit for that, even if everything the Dead did was directly inspired by QMS (which of course would be an exaggeration anyway).

I'm certainly not saying to put them above, say, Springsteen, but when I compare them to, say, Michael Jackson, I think they come out much higher on the criteria. (And I'm a MUCH, MUCH bigger fan of Jackson.) As I said, the lower part of the top ten sounds about right for them.



Inspired by is not influence.

Influence stems from its source. People always want to see artists given credit for being innovative, creating something new, even when what they do might not actually be all that impressive, someone will want to see it credited just because it was new. What proper attribution of influence does is credit those innovations by determining how wide that innovation then spread and how popular it became. So someone coming up with something that turns out to be insigificant because no one else does it after them, aren't going to get anything for it here, but someone, like Diddley, who totally changed the standard approach to rock concerts where prior to him you essentially just re-created your records on stage, and instead turned them into extended jams that showed off his skills, worked the crowd into a frenzy and greatly altered the entire feel of a rock concert, HAS to be fully credited for it, especially when so many others took from it. Not just the so-called "jam band" acts like QMS, the Dead and Phish, but any artist who greatly extends and expands their songs on stage. To do anything less than credit the guy it began with, and instead give credit to someone else because they're more commonly referred to by later artists who are oftentimes just as ignorant as rock history as the guy browsing the racks at some chain music store is, would be historically inaccurate and a disservice to the true innovators, whoever they are.

But just so it's clear, the Dead DO get influence credit for it, in what is called secondary influence, meaning they take something that somebody else created, in this case Diddley, and they brought it to another level of popularity. But secondary influence is not worth as much as primary influence, which is the creation of something new itself. So the Dead get lots of secondary influence for the jam-band scene but not the majority of it, and since that is one of their resume's hallmarks then obviously it costs them a little compared to people's impression of them.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Greatest Live Rock Artists
PostPosted: Mon Nov 15, 2010 8:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 1:26 am
Posts: 63
Location: New York
Georgi, Tropez,

Thanks for the data, you are certainly more of an expert than I am on the subject matter. And i generally agree that the consistence argument has become stale and perhaps not the entire truth. However, the only point I was trying to make, at the outset of this discussion, was simply my confusion over Zeppelin being placed higher than GD.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Greatest Live Rock Artists
PostPosted: Mon Nov 15, 2010 8:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2010 12:09 pm
Posts: 2415
Location: Michigan
ClashWho wrote:
[Maybe this is because Led Zeppelin did not participate in any major rock festivals, but, even when they did, at Live Aid in 1985, they failed to impress.
This is not true. Festival appearances by Led Zeppelin:

Northern California Folk Rock Festival 1969
Texas International Pop Festival 1969
Atlanta International Pop Festival 1969
Schaefer Music Festival 1969
Newport Jazz Festival 1969
Laurel Pop Festival 1969
Midwest Rock Festival 1969
Seattle Pop Festival 1969
Man-Pop Festival 1970
Bath Festival 1970
Days on the Green 1977
Knebworth 1979
and maybe missing some

Live Aid shouldn't even count anyways. The group died with John Bonham.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Greatest Live Rock Artists
PostPosted: Mon Nov 15, 2010 8:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 1:26 am
Posts: 63
Location: New York
Besides Newport and Knebworth, are those really major rock festivals? I guess im also unsure as to what section of the criteria this would fit into. Except for the major, major festivals like Woodstock, and Monterey.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Greatest Live Rock Artists
PostPosted: Mon Nov 15, 2010 8:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2010 12:09 pm
Posts: 2415
Location: Michigan
Ok, not all are major, but these would probably qualify:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_Festival
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Inte ... p_Festival
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlanta_In ... ival_(1969)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Greatest Live Rock Artists
PostPosted: Mon Nov 15, 2010 9:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2010 5:45 pm
Posts: 28804
SanTropez wrote:


That's kind of my point, though, that Led Zeppelin didn't really make a lasting impression with festival appearances like Hendrix did with Monterey and Woodstock, and The Who did with Monterey, Woodstock and the Isle of Wight festivals. That may simply be because the festivals Zeppelin appeared at weren't the subject of major documentary films, but then neither was Isle of Wight until the second one got an extremely belated release.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Greatest Live Rock Artists
PostPosted: Mon Nov 15, 2010 9:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2010 5:45 pm
Posts: 28804
SanTropez wrote:
Live Aid shouldn't even count anyways. The group died with John Bonham.


He's just a drummer, man. If The Who could continue successfully without Keith Moon, then Led Zeppelin certainly could have without John Bonham. If Page, Plant and Jones can't get it together with a decent drummer, then just exactly how good can they possibly be?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Greatest Live Rock Artists
PostPosted: Mon Nov 15, 2010 9:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2010 12:09 pm
Posts: 2415
Location: Michigan
Yikes.

Clash, I won't comment about The Who continuing without Keith Moon, but ask any band member nowadays, especially Plant, will tell you that the real Led Zeppelin died in 1980. They had way too much respect for him to ever do a "reunion" tour, even if they would have made a gajillion dollars. The chemistry between the band members and himself were as key as in any group ever. He and Plant were best friends.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Greatest Live Rock Artists
PostPosted: Mon Nov 15, 2010 10:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2010 5:45 pm
Posts: 28804
SanTropez wrote:
Yikes.

Clash, I won't comment about The Who continuing without Keith Moon, but ask any band member nowadays, especially Plant, will tell you that the real Led Zeppelin died in 1980.


Yes, just as the real Who died in 1978. I'm just saying that Led Zeppelin could have done it if they'd made an effort. And for anyone to say that they couldn't seems to me to be diminishing the abilities of Plant, Page and Jones. If you're only a good band with one specific drummer, then how good a band can you possibly be?

SanTropez wrote:
They had way too much respect for him to ever do a "reunion" tour, even if they would have made a gajillion dollars.


Well, Plant does, I guess. Page and Jones would love to do a Led Zeppelin reunion tour.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Greatest Live Rock Artists
PostPosted: Tue Nov 16, 2010 11:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 11:43 pm
Posts: 4570
Sampson wrote:
Echoes wrote:
Best concert ever: [Jimi Hendrix at Monterey]


Ask the people who were there and they'd agree at Monterey Pop they saw the pinnical of live performance - except not for Jimi's set (which was fabulous), but rather Otis Redding's which most artists there said was the best they'd ever seen.


I say they are tie and I don´t get why Hendrix is not in the top 5 and Redding is.

And I agree with Clashwho, The Who (and Hendrix) should be above Springsteen.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Greatest Live Rock Artists
PostPosted: Tue Nov 16, 2010 11:49 am 
Offline
moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:35 pm
Posts: 1407
Echoes wrote:
Sampson wrote:
Echoes wrote:
Best concert ever: [Jimi Hendrix at Monterey]


Ask the people who were there and they'd agree at Monterey Pop they saw the pinnical of live performance - except not for Jimi's set (which was fabulous), but rather Otis Redding's which most artists there said was the best they'd ever seen.


I say they are tie and I don´t get why Hendrix is not in the top 5 and Redding is.

And I agree with Clashwho, The Who (and Hendrix) should be above Springsteen.


Not by the criteria. I'm picking these at random or deciding which I like best and handing them a spot. Redding's got the highest reputation within music circles at his peak for anyone but Brown. He's off the charts in that regard. The impact of his live show on his career was slightly greater than Hendrix as well, for Jimi debuted with a Top 5 album, so his live shows and his popularity were pretty consistent with each other. Redding's popularity on record didn't reach as high as his overall reputation until well after he'd made his name on stage, when he was already named the Top Male Artist in a British poll in '66 based on his live shows almost exclusively. Both were great, you'd love to see either one in their prime, but by the criteria Otis tops Jimi.

And just a random thought here, but why is it that every argument for moving someone up on this site revolves around the 60's/70's "classic rock radio" guitar oriented artists? Could THAT be taste? Something to consider anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Greatest Live Rock Artists
PostPosted: Tue Nov 16, 2010 12:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 11:43 pm
Posts: 4570
Sampson wrote:

Not by the criteria. I'm picking these at random or deciding which I like best and handing them a spot. Redding's got the highest reputation within music circles at his peak for anyone but Brown. He's off the charts in that regard. The impact of his live show on his career was slightly greater than Hendrix as well, for Jimi debuted with a Top 5 album, so his live shows and his popularity were pretty consistent with each other. Redding's popularity on record didn't reach as high as his overall reputation until well after he'd made his name on stage, when he was already named the Top Male Artist in a British poll in '66 based on his live shows almost exclusively. Both were great, you'd love to see either one in their prime, but by the criteria Otis tops Jimi.


I was being nice and suggesting a tie between them. However, if we look into the criteria, I think Hendrix wins in each category.

Take for example “consistancy at maintaining that high performance level over time”. He started on Monterey, he ended with this one:




Sampson wrote:

And just a random thought here, but why is it that every argument for moving someone up on this site revolves around the 60's/70's "classic rock radio" guitar oriented artists? Could THAT be taste? Something to consider anyway.


Don’t take this the wrong way, you are one of the best posters around here, however, your lists seems to reflect that R&B > Rock.

In my opinion R&B = Rock.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Greatest Live Rock Artists
PostPosted: Tue Nov 16, 2010 12:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 7:57 pm
Posts: 225
Location: Cancun
Sampson wrote:
Not by the criteria. I'm NOT picking these at random or deciding which I like best and handing them a spot.

There you go.

Just so you know, Echoes has a history of bashing at everything he doesn't know, instead of debating about artist he knows well enough, he makes an ass of himself picking on artists he knows squat about.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Greatest Live Rock Artists
PostPosted: Tue Nov 16, 2010 12:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 11:43 pm
Posts: 4570
Raul wrote:
Sampson wrote:
Not by the criteria. I'm NOT picking these at random or deciding which I like best and handing them a spot.

There you go.

Just so you know, Echoes has a history of bashing at everything he doesn't know, instead of debating about artist he knows well enough, he makes an ass of himself picking on artists he knows squat about.


Fuck off Raul. I have been proposing Redding for the top 20 Greatest Rock Vocalist since day one.

I love R&B. In fact, I proposed a R&B guitarist for the top 100 not a long time ago.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Greatest Live Rock Artists
PostPosted: Tue Nov 16, 2010 2:57 pm 
Offline
moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:35 pm
Posts: 1407
Echoes wrote:
Don’t take this the wrong way, you are one of the best posters around here, however, your lists seems to reflect that R&B > Rock.

In my opinion R&B = Rock.



R&B IS ROCK! So therefore why would you be making a distinction that somehow R&B is getting more credit than rock, which is what it is in the first place?

Fact: Rock 'n' roll is a black invention, popularized by black artists. Over the 62 years of rock, under all its terms, more than half of it has been performed by black artists, yet on every rock list on this site, except mine, white styles of rock dominate in everyway. They dominate in overall numbers. They dominate in terms of higher rankings on those lists. AND judging by the comments, complaints and suggestions made by posters the overwhelming majority, and by that I mean at LEAST 95% of all posts on rock lists, want more white artists added or moved up. In fact, there's probably a 50-1 ratio in terms of just discussion on white artists compared to black and that might even be under selling it.

So when people see Otis Redding high on a list that I make they suddenly think that position is unjustified because it doesn't fall in line with that overwhelming bias in the other direction, when in fact, it is simply the criteria doing its job. Statistically speaking it stands to reason that in a field as huge as rock that is roughly 50/50 in terms of race that the greatest of all-time would also be roughly 50/50. On this list the top 10 is 60/40 black to white, yet the Top Five is 3-2 white to black. The next ten is similar. Keep going down the list. 25 of the Top 50 are black, and that includes Hendrix, who had a 95% white audience. 47 of the Top 100 are black and I'm including two mixed race groups in that number. That's about as evenhanded as you can possibly get and I didn't TRY and do it, I wasn't even aware of it until I counted right this minute, but that's just an accurate snapshot of an art-form that has been 50/50 racially for decades. All lists should wind up roughly that way because that's what rock is and always has been and anything else that slants it so overwhelmingly in another direction is the list with credibility issues.

What you really should be doing is going to the other rock lists and using their numbers against them, like asking how on the Most Technically Skilled Rock Vocalists there are only 5 or 6 singers who are black. They won't be able to defend it in any way, shape or form. As for this list, you may not agree with it, but there's no bias to be found and the numbers back it up.

But on the whole, I'd much rather be talking music than numbers.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1100 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 74  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:

DigitalDreamDoor.com   

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group

DigitalDreamDoor Forum is one part of a music and movie list website whose owner has given its visitors
the privilege to discuss music and movies, and has no control and cannot in any way be held liable over
how, or by whom this board is used. If you read or see anything inappropriate that has been posted,
contact webmaster@digitaldreamdoor.com. Comments in the forum are reviewed before list updates.
Topics include rock music, metal, rap, hip-hop, blues, jazz, songs, albums, guitar, drums, musicians...


DDD Home Page | DDD Music Lists Page | DDD Movie Lists Page