Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Class

[The Human Q-Tip]

I would add to this an observation — most innovative artists or the “creators” of a genre are usually not as “popular” or commercially successful, as the artists/bands that were influenced by them. Additionally, many of them are NOT in the Rock Hall, unfortunately. This where i see a massive disconnect with the Rock Hall.

It is what it is.

Right - that's why I mentioned Siouxsie and the Banshees. Not my bag, but very distinctive and original for their time.

 

[Randolphkeys]

Man, this is so wrong. Carole King is probably the most successful female talent in rock history. And rivals nearly any male. Maybe not the biggest performer, but she sold 75 million albums, and Tapestry was #1 for 15 weeks and stayed on the charts for six straight years. Not to mention hundreds of other her songs that were recorded by other artists.
Tina Turner was the female James Brown, the hardest working woman in show biz. Her solo career justifies a second nod, and her work with Ike was more than deserving. I would say these are the most deserving of all this year's nominees. And if the second honor didn't bother Clapton, McCartney, and a dozen others, I don't see these two as being terribly different.

Hey, I am in no way anti-Carol King. She was a hit machine in early rock and roll, and then I bought Tapestry in college. I also watched the Tina Turner doc that came out about two months ago, it was powerful.

I just can't help but point out concern with the female talent pool, and what the HOF is doing about it. Doubling down on Stevie Nicks, Tina Turner, and Carol King has been their option for the very real issue of "the R&R HOF needs more women." That's just continuing to honor the same handful of people rather than inducting more women.

Right - that's why I mentioned Siouxsie and the Banshees. Not my bag, but very distinctive and original for their time.

I have a greatest hits CD sitting around somewhere of Souxie and the Branchees. They came out of that industrial post-punk British scene. Haven't heard them played much anymore, but they were influencers. I think Robert Smith of The Cure was their rhythm guitarist for a few years. This is why the "Influencers" and "musical Excellence" categories are going to become really interesting - it isn't just for blues musicians from the 1930s anymore.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

I just can't help but point out concern with the female talent pool, and what the HOF is doing about it. Doubling down on Stevie Nicks, Tina Turner, and Carol King has been their option for the very real issue of "the R&R HOF needs more women." That's just continuing to honor the same handful of people rather than inducting more women.

But...why do there have to be more women? I'm all in favor of admitting any women whose actual musical production meets whatever the standards are, but why admit an artist/band simply because of sex? I know the argument is that female rock bands didn't get the same support from the industry as did male bands, but presumably, the ones that did succeed were the best of those bands. And -- speaking solely about actual rock - I don't see even any of those female bands that did make it truly being up there with the top 50 or so male rock acts.

I do think it is interesting that women are far more successful in country music, pop music, disco, and the singer-songwriter genre as opposed to rock. And even within rock, the further out you go in terms of heavy instrumentation versus vocals, the fewer female fans and artists there. Metal has acquired a reputation as being sexist, but there's also the joke (true except for Renaissance) about there never being a line for the women's room at a prog concert. I do think there is a self-selection issue out there in terms of musical preferences (lots of studies on that) that explains why rock bands in particular are overwhelmingly male.

In any case, I think the further we get from "rock" being a popular form of music, the more female representation there will be in the HOF over time.

 

[The Oi]

Can’t stand Carole King.

Her music is great, but the fact that she’s a woman making it irks me tremendously.

 

[The Oi]

@WellYouNeednt Foo Fighters have a tremendous amount of hits, are an awesome concert and Dave Grohl is a great guy. Both @Randolphkeys and @The Human Q-Tip will agree that somebody being a great guy has a great deal to do with whether they deserve in.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

@WellYouNeednt Foo Fighters have a tremendous amount of hits, are an awesome concert and Dave Grohl is a great guy. Both @Randolphkeys and @The Human Q-Tip will agree that somebody being a great guy has a great deal to do with whether they deserve in.

I think being a great or shitty guy certainly plays a role if you are anywhere close to the line. There are some folks who have trashed the HOF, and I think that really affects when/if they get in because the HOF doesn't want to nominate someone who either won't show, or will say something shitty if they are inducted.

 

[WellYouNeednt]

@WellYouNeednt Foo Fighters have a tremendous amount of hits, are an awesome concert and Dave Grohl is a great guy. Both @Randolphkeys and @The Human Q-Tip will agree that somebody being a great guy has a great deal to do with whether they deserve in.

Again, just MY observation, but they are a band who has de-evolved, in my opinion. Some artist bend genres, experiment and push themselves artistically to explore “uncomfortable” places. Foo Fighters sonically, to me, have fallen into the “classic rock” trap of creatively doing things that are actually uncreative/safe.

I am total music snob and fully admit it. I just don’t find anything interesting about them. Again, have they had tons of chart topping albums/singles, massive arena tours and are incredibly successful for what they do — absolutely. They encompass what the Rock Hall is all about, a commercially successful artist.

 

[Randolphkeys]

But...why do there have to be more women? I'm all in favor of admitting any women whose actual musical production meets whatever the standards are, but why admit an artist/band simply because of sex? I know the argument is that female rock bands didn't get the same support from the industry as did male bands, but presumably, the ones that did succeed were the best of those bands. And -- speaking solely about actual rock - I don't see even any of those female bands that did make it truly being up there with the top 50 or so male rock acts.

I do think it is interesting that women are far more successful in country music, pop music, disco, and the singer-songwriter genre as opposed to rock. And even within rock, the further out you go in terms of heavy instrumentation versus vocals, the fewer female fans and artists there. Metal has acquired a reputation as being sexist, but there's also the joke (true except for Renaissance) about there never being a line for the women's room at a prog concert. I do think there is a self-selection issue out there in terms of musical preferences (lots of studies on that) that explains why rock bands in particular are overwhelmingly male.

In any case, I think the further we get from "rock" being a popular form of music, the more female representation there will be in the HOF over time.

Cool, let's dig into the ongoing "not enough women in the R & R HOF". In doing so, let's move past the "this is my opinion" because that discussion will end in one opinion against another - let's instead look at why the HOF has given the argument credence.

I trace the pushback against the R&R HOF as multiple irritated groups who began criticizing the organization about 10-15 years ago. Jann Werner tended to push his personal favorites through and bar others for personal reasons. Additionally, they defended a non-transparent process. Both of these issues have been attacked in other hall of fames in sports and led to changes.

The specific argument of women gaining admittance is absolutely an affinity group - much like the metal affinity group or the hip hop / rap affinity group. I can see how there could be an argument against giving an affinity group a great deal off attention in any circumstance, which seems to be @The Human Q-Tip 's stance.

I'd argue that the R&R HOF is not in a financial position to ignore affinity groups because they have only been marginally profitable as an organization. MLB, NFL or the NBA will always be there making billions of dollars to buttress the financial viability of these athletic HOFs. In the music business, intellectual property is a battleground for profit these days.

So I think it makes plenty of sense for the Rock Hall to give affinity groups more of a say. I'd double down and wonder why they don't make the process a completely open one to get even more public buy-in.

 

[The Oi]

If there is an RCF HOF I don’t want in. Fuck that bullshit. They don’t deserve me. And I certainly wouldn’t consider going in with anyone else.

 

[The Oi]

Again, just MY observation, but they are a band who has de-evolved, in my opinion. Some artist bend genres, experiment and push themselves artistically to explore “uncomfortable” places. Foo Fighters sonically, to me, have fallen into the “classic rock” trap of creatively doing things that are actually uncreative/safe.

I am total music snob and fully admit it. I just don’t find anything interesting about them. Again, have they had tons of chart topping albums/singles, massive arena tours and are incredibly successful for what they do — absolutely. They encompass what the Rock Hall is all about, a commercially successful artist.

Confirm that on your top 10 bands of all time you always sneak in Velvet Underground and King Crimson.

I so want to stop beating the KC dead horse @The Human Q-Tip but it’s just...galloping around all over this thread.

 

[The Oi]

Why isnt there a Rap/R&B HOF? I love Jay Z. But he isnt rock n roll. Tf?

 

[Kevalier]

I am an admitted Phishhead, so I'm not going to feign objectivity on the matter. However, I just can't see how Phish is not in the Rock Hall. Their fanbase is massive, as evidenced by their wildly successful tours including selling out Madison Square Garden every New Year's Eve. The Grateful Dead (the greatest band of all time in my opinion) were a no-brainer when they were inducted in 1994. But, Phish is not that far from them in terms of appeal and touring success, which is why it's confounding how I never hear anything about Phish being even seriously considered for induction.

 

[Kevalier]

Why isnt there a Rap/R&B HOF? I love Jay Z. But he isnt rock n roll. Tf?

The Rock Hall hasn't been strictly "rock" for decades now. Essentially, it's the Popular Music Hall of Fame.

 

[WellYouNeednt]

Confirm that on your top 10 bands of all time you always sneak in Velvet Underground and King Crimson.

I so want to stop beating the KC dead horse @The Human Q-Tip but it’s just...galloping around all over this thread.

Haha, sorry I respect King Crimson and being a drummer, really respect Bill Bruford. But, they are not in my top 10 favorite bands.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

The specific argument of women gaining admittance is absolutely an affinity group - much like the metal affinity group or the hip hop / rap affinity group.

"Female" isn't a musical genre like rap, hip-hop, metal, folk, disco, or any of the rest of them, and I don't think it should be seen as equivalent to them. There is always going to be some subjectivity in terms of genres because it involves inherently subjective musical taste. But that still is a distinguishing factor based on music, and it is a music Hall of Fame. Basing admittance on the presence or lack of a penis is something very different.

I'd argue that the R&R HOF is not in a financial position to ignore affinity groups because they have only been marginally profitable as an organization. MLB, NFL or the NBA will always be there making billions of dollars to buttress the financial viability of these athletic HOFs. In the music business, intellectual property is a battleground for profit these days.

So I think it makes plenty of sense for the Rock Hall to give affinity groups more of a say. I'd double down and wonder why they don't make the process a completely open one to get even more public buy-in.

If the argument is "the Hall of Fame should admit more women because that will make it more popular, and therefore stronger financially", then I suppose there's no way to argue that.