@ballpeen said:

We've been through this before....Chicago needs to be in. They were cutting edge, rocking out with a horn section, and had a ton of hits and about 20 top selling albums. Terry Kath was a GREAT guitar player who flys under most radar. Jimmi Hendrix spent many hours trying to figure out Kaths solos. He was a great fan of Kath's.

Also, Paul Rodgers needs to get in, either as the front man of Free or more likely, Bad Company. Now he is Queens lead singer.

Rodgers is the voice of 70's R&R

Paul jammin' with Joe B

@the-gipper said:

My top 20 of Prog rock would be as follows. (I leave The Beatles out because that would be like saying God is a mortal human). I also leave out Frank Zappa and The Mothers of Invention because I don't think they are Prog. They are something, I'm not sure what though:

1.Pink Floyd

2. King Crimson

3. Jethro Tull

4. ELO

5. Procul Harum

6. Emerson, Lake, Palmer

7. Genesis

8. Roxy Music..and Eno (offshot)

8.A Golden Earring

9. Moody Blues

10. Utopia/Todd Rundgren (I assume this is the Todd Rundgren band)

11. Traffic

12. Asia

13. Kansas

14. Peter Gabriel

15. The Strawbs

16. Uriah Heep

17. Atomic Rooster

18. Fripp

19. Styx

20. Tangerine Dream

21. Rush

22. 10cc

23. Toto

How bout:

1. Chick Corea (Return To Forever)

2. George Clinton

3. Canned Heat

4. Wishbone Ash

5. Rory Gallagher

6. Savoy Brown

7. Robin Trower

8. Ten Years After (Alvin Lee)

9. Spooky Tooth

10.Humble Pie (Steve Marriot?)

11.Maze (Frankie Beverly)

12.Ronny James Dio (the greatest rock voice ever?)

@vaportrail said:

Yeah, if you go by quantitative measures like sales, in addition to qualitative measures like musicianship, there really aren't too many bands in Rush's position who aren't in the HoF. The only bands with more consecutive gold and platinum albums are the Rolling Stones and the Beatles.

And Gipper, when you say "the powers that be don't care," go look at what people said about those powers that be over the last 10 years. See what kind of support they have with those in the music industry. Rush not being in the Rock Hall is an affront to rock and roll.

I don't personally care if they want to put Rush in there. Just don't ask me to listen to Geddy Lee screeching. Or the guy from AC/DC.

My counterpoint would also be that there are many other bands that I think it is a bigger affront to rock n roll that they are not in than Rush.

I named a couple dozen of them earlier.

Tell me when they get in.

(and you make a vague reference: "go look ate what people said about those powers"? What are you talking about. If you want me to see what people said, link me to what they said.

@browns149 said:

Like I stated before, it should be called the "MUSIC" hall-of-fame. Madonna is NOT rock-n-roll. Just because she makes music, doesn't make that music "rock-n-roll".

NO, it shouldn't be the Music Hall of Fame....otherwise you would invite Beethoven etc...and I'm sorry, but Rock n Roll has invited Beethoven to roll over.

And for your statement that 1000 obscure bands had more musical talent then RUSH. They wouldn't be obscure if they had more talent then RUSH. The 3 guys in RUSH are musical geniuses.

Now you are showing your complete naivete. Or you are showing that you have never even peripherally been involved with the music business. I knew/know guys that had every bit as much musical acumen as those guys in Rush did....but they were not popular. Fact.

You state it is about money/showmanship/popularity/influence.........well RUSH has had 24 gold albums, 14 platinum albums,over 40 million sold worldwide. And if you ever hear ANY drummer talk about who influenced them they will ALL say Neil Peart was the biggest influence. Not too mention Peart is the main lyricist for the band.

OK, you make an argument for why Rush should be in....they were popular, made money, and perhaps had some influence. All the things that Madonna had in spades. (I note you didn't make any claims about Rush's showmanship).

I am not opposed to them being in...even though they are not my cup of tea. (My primary objection is I can't stand Geddy Lee's vocals). Just don't tell me that someone of the magnitude of Madonna should not be in. Her music is every bit rock n roll as theirs.

@browns149 said:

Like I stated before, it should be called the "MUSIC" hall-of-fame. Madonna is NOT rock-n-roll. Just because she makes music, doesn't make that music "rock-n-roll".

And for your statement that 1000 obscure bands had more musical talent then RUSH. They wouldn't be obscure if they had more talent then RUSH. The 3 guys in RUSH are musical geniuses.

You state it is about money/showmanship/popularity/influence.........well RUSH has had 24 gold albums, 14 platinum albums,over 40 million sold worldwide. And if you ever hear ANY drummer talk about who influenced them they will ALL say Neil Peart was the biggest influence. Not too mention Peart is the main lyricist for the band.

Yeah, if you go by quantitative measures like sales, in addition to qualitative measures like musicianship, there really aren't too many bands in Rush's position who aren't in the HoF. The only bands with more consecutive gold and platinum albums are the Rolling Stones and the Beatles.

And Gipper, when you say "the powers that be don't care," go look at what people said about those powers that be over the last 10 years. See what kind of support they have with those in the music industry. Rush not being in the Rock Hall is an affront to rock and roll.

@the-gipper said:

The powers that be don't care what rock n roll is to you.

And if it is all about music...then 1000 obscure bands you never heard of probably had more musical talent than Rush.....so, obviously, it is NOT about "the music"....it is about money/showmanship/popularity/influence, with maybe a little music thrown in.

Like I stated before, it should be called the "MUSIC" hall-of-fame. Madonna is NOT rock-n-roll. Just because she makes music, doesn't make that music "rock-n-roll".

And for your statement that 1000 obscure bands had more musical talent then RUSH. They wouldn't be obscure if they had more talent then RUSH. The 3 guys in RUSH are musical geniuses.

You state it is about money/showmanship/popularity/influence.........well RUSH has had 24 gold albums, 14 platinum albums,over 40 million sold worldwide. And if you ever hear ANY drummer talk about who influenced them they will ALL say Neil Peart was the biggest influence. Not too mention Peart is the main lyricist for the band.

@the-cysko-kid said:

You don't have to like homosexuals to know queen was a fucking awesome band with a great singer who's (besides mercury that is) still getting lots of airplay on just about every classic rock station in the land and still raking in tons of royalty money.

One of the best of all time. Bad company is ok, but Paul Rodgers is not the talent Freddie Mercury was. If your homophobia won't allow you to enjoy queen I feel sorry for you. Queen is the shit.

Plus, Brian May is a god damned astrophysicist.

@ballpeen said:

I understand. I never understood Rodgers taking a gig with a queer band like Queen. Actually, I am glad to hear he isn't fronting them anymore.

You don't have to like homosexuals to know queen was a fucking awesome band with a great singer who's (besides mercury that is) still getting lots of airplay on just about every classic rock station in the land and still raking in tons of royalty money.

One of the best of all time. Bad company is ok, but Paul Rodgers is not the talent Freddie Mercury was. If your homophobia won't allow you to enjoy queen I feel sorry for you. Queen is the shit.

@browns149 said:

To me rock-n-roll is about the music. And the 3 guys in Rush have way more musical talent then Madonna.

The powers that be don't care what rock n roll is to you.

And if it is all about music...then 1000 obscure bands you never heard of probably had more musical talent than Rush.....so, obviously, it is NOT about "the music"....it is about money/showmanship/popularity/influence, with maybe a little music thrown in.

@vaportrail said:

You've never tripped to Mr. Blue Sky? Or anything by Pink Floyd?

No comment

@vaportrail said:

I think prog, most generally defined, would be rock music that showcases technical proficiency, odd time signatures, as well as taking risks on songs that you will typically not see in the Billboard Top 100.

Prog is my favorite genre, and here's my top 10. I am not a fan of metal, so bands like Symphony X and Opeth won't be on it.

1. Pink Floyd

2. Rush

3. Genesis

4. Dream Theater

5. Jethro Tull

6. Porcupine Tree

7. Electric Light Orchestra

8. Blackfield

prog is definitely my fave genre as well. zappa is not prog at all but as someone else has said rock/jazz/funk fusion. then again no one mentioned hawkwind which were basically the first proggers.

camel is my favorite along with starcastle and genesis (early). i don't know if i'd consider rush, elo, or tull prog and pink floyd is on the cusp. it depends on the definition i guess.

i always defined prog rock as music that is cool to trip on.

@naplesbrowns420 said:

How is Three Dog Night not a founding father to 98 degrees and N'sync? They sang other people's songs, had a back-up band playing the music, and they were very poppy. That's 3 for 3 in my book. I could be wrong, and I admit, in wrong vs. right, I have a sub 500 record, but I am still young.

*edit* I do like Three Dog Night, and I have met them all, minus Chuck Negron, on a few occasions. I just think they are the founders of really wretched shit that we hear today.

Because they suck worse than Tiny Canadian Pussy Douche.

Gawd almighty- "Jeremiah was a Bullfrog- Joy to the World" has to have the dumbest lyrics in the history of songwriting. 99% of their stuff wants to make me puke. I hate Abba, and I'll listen to them in a heartbeat over TDN. They blow. Wow, they have nice three part harmony- so does any corner Gospel trio.

@the-cysko-kid said:

He did a tour or two with queen, but he's not the lead singer of queen. He was terrible, by the way, just like many people trying to tackle Freddie mercury's parts. Unsatisfactory. The guy from foo fighters (not Dave grohl) does Freddie better.

I understand. I never understood Rodgers taking a gig with a queer band like Queen. Actually, I am glad to hear he isn't fronting them anymore.

@naplesbrowns420 said:

I respect that. I mean, my whole argument is based on artists that didn't do this or that, but all the while, Motown is my favorite music out there. I'm listening to "Reach Out" while I'm typing, followed by "Band of Gold". I rank The Supremes in my top ten bands of all time, so forget everything I said. I can't be a hypocrite of that great of size.

On a side note: I envy all you fools that were around for some of the great music that could be heard fresh in the 60's and 70's. I hope all you that had a chance to listen to it when it was new, appreciated it. There is nothing with soul anymore.

Bullshit. You just have to look for it.

@the-gipper said:

Not in my opinion. See how that works?

Rock n Roll has always been about showmanship. Any fool can tell you what a showman..woman..person Madonna has been.

I respect that. I mean, my whole argument is based on artists that didn't do this or that, but all the while, Motown is my favorite music out there. I'm listening to "Reach Out" while I'm typing, followed by "Band of Gold". I rank The Supremes in my top ten bands of all time, so forget everything I said. I can't be a hypocrite of that great of size.

On a side note: I envy all you fools that were around for some of the great music that could be heard fresh in the 60's and 70's. I hope all you that had a chance to listen to it when it was new, appreciated it. There is nothing with soul anymore.

@the-gipper said:

Not in my opinion. See how that works?

Rock n Roll has always been about showmanship. Any fool can tell you what a showman..woman..person Madonna has been.

To me rock-n-roll is about the music. And the 3 guys in Rush have way more musical talent then Madonna.

On your other comment, I may be among the few that feels this way, but I have little respect for Elvis. I just can't stand the hype of someone that pretended to play guitar on stage, and never wrote a single lyric. I just think that then becomes theatre, which it is not. Milli Vanilli comes to mind, but that was with voice. However, I will never win that argument in a million years with anybody. I will fight to the grave though, with anyone that says Elvis over The Beatles.

@browns149 said:

Rush should have been in way before Madonna. They might as well re-name that place the "Music" hall-of-fame, because there are way too many acts that are NOT rock-n-roll in there.

Not in my opinion. See how that works?

Rock n Roll has always been about showmanship. Any fool can tell you what a showman..woman..person Madonna has been.

@naplesbrowns420 said:

Jimi always said that Terry Kath was the best, hands down. Although hand-eye coordination proved to be his own downfall.

Well, then, Jimi must have said about a few people. How self-depracating.

Musical talent does have a lot to do with rock and roll. Although, I am defeated by your overall point, and I agree. However, I think it should be a prerequisite to get in.

Thankfully, I have to press the play button in order to Kath myself; I shall refrain.

How is Three Dog Night not a founding father to 98 degrees and N'sync? They sang other people's songs, had a back-up band playing the music, and they were very poppy. That's 3 for 3 in my book. I could be wrong, and I admit, in wrong vs. right, I have a sub 500 record, but I am still young.

Your better example of that would be The Monkees....who were brought together by the TV Network or Music Label. Like NSYNC and The Backstreet Boys, etc.

Because..as far as doing others songs, having a backup band, and being poppy...you describe a couple of guys perfectly: Elvis Presley and Frank Sinatra.

I think Three Dog Night put themselves together where these new boy bands are "created" by the record producers. They call for auditions for the "new band that MCA is putting together, or some such rot.

*edit* I do like Three Dog Night, and I have met them all, minus Chuck Negron, on a few occasions. I just think they are the founders of really wretched shit that we hear today.

@the-gipper said:

When in fucking hell did you ever think having musical talent had anything to do with Rock and Roll?

If that was the case then half the people in would be out and many more obscure acts would be in: like Glass Harp. Both Jimmy Hendrix and Pete Townshend said that Phil Keaggy was the best guitarist they had ever seen, better than themselves. Yet they won't be in the RRHOF, now will they?

Jimi always said that Terry Kath was the best, hands down. Although hand-eye coordination proved to be his own downfall.

Musical talent does have a lot to do with rock and roll. Although, I am defeated by your overall point, and I agree. However, I think it should be a prerequisite to get in.

Thankfully, I have to press the play button in order to Kath myself; I shall refrain.

How is Three Dog Night not a founding father to 98 degrees and N'sync? They sang other people's songs, had a back-up band playing the music, and they were very poppy. That's 3 for 3 in my book. I could be wrong, and I admit, in wrong vs. right, I have a sub 500 record, but I am still young.

*edit* I do like Three Dog Night, and I have met them all, minus Chuck Negron, on a few occasions. I just think they are the founders of really wretched shit that we hear today.

@naplesbrowns420 said:

...and yes, I hear the KISS army. They are too loud.

In all honesty, I could train monkeys to be better musicians then any of the KISS members ever were.

I get it, they had some pretty rad party songs. They were sweet! They were also make-up wearing pussies that had no musical talent to speak of.

When in fucking hell did you ever think having musical talent had anything to do with Rock and Roll?

If that was the case then half the people in would be out and many more obscure acts would be in: like Glass Harp. Both Jimmy Hendrix and Pete Townshend said that Phil Keaggy was the best guitarist they had ever seen, better than themselves. Yet they won't be in the RRHOF, now will they?