You're right you can't compare them however that's what my mind is accustomed to seeing (energetic performances). Even down to some of the some hip-hop performers like Busta, Tribe, Black Sheep,etc. Make no mistake though, just because your live performance might be lame doesn't mean I won't listen to your record.
I know, I was just making a clarification to holmes that it wasn't purely about stage presence that makes a band good enough for hall of fame induction (Especially in the Dave Clark 5's case).
man , this thread made me dizzy. stats and comparisons.... kool and the gang should be in there, no doubt.
personally, who gives a F*ck about r&r h.o.f and the criteria for it. that shit is like the grammys and all the rest of that garbage. hip hop groups in the rock and roll hall of fame ????!!!! while thats great and all, lets get f*cking real.
I mean this respectfully, but to quote Mr. Hamburger:
"personally, who gives a F*ck about r&r h.o.f and the criteria for it. that shit is like the grammys and all the rest of that garbage."
I couldn't agree more and can't believe this thread has gone this far without more than just a few people questioning why we're even debating the merits of the Rock N' Roll Hall of Fame to begin with, as if it possesses some kind of universal cultural legitimacy. I'm not saying they're wack but I also don't know anyone who takes them seriously as arbiters of the American Pop Music Canon???.
Not being a hardcore sports head, I don't know how seriously people take, say, the Baseball Hall of Fame but while I've seen sports journalists take entry into the Hall as something meaningful, I've yet to meet very many music journalists or scholars - let alone FANS - who think the RRHOF has any real cred.
So again, to repeat RH's question: who gives a F*ck?
re: Chic - I think this needs to be really stressed...the group's contributions to music go way beyond "Good Times." Some people act as if creating the bassline that Sylvia Robinson ripped off was the only thing they ever contributed. That's such a microscopically narrow way of viewing their catalog. As is citing the sample usage of Kool and the Gang.
re: rock vs. R&B vs. whatever
Including R&B or even hip-hop artists within the canon of rock used to strike me as odd too but that was before I met people who saw 1950s rock n' roll as Black music originally. If you take it like that, then you could argue that future variations on Black music - '60s and '70s soul, hip-hop from the '80s onward - are all part of the same lineage. Notably, that's not exactly a universally held understanding, but at least it makes some things more logical, like why Earth Wind and Fire (or Kool and the Gang) could be included within the idea of "rock n' roll."
Including R&B or even hip-hop artists within the canon of rock used to strike me as odd too but that was before I met people who saw 1950s rock n' roll as Black music originally. If you take it like that, then you could argue that future variations on Black music - '60s and '70s soul, hip-hop from the '80s onward - are all part of the same lineage. Notably, that's not exactly a universally held understanding, but at least it makes some things more logical, like why Earth Wind and Fire (or Kool and the Gang) could be included within the idea of "rock n' roll."
Not all Black Music made in 50's was Rock-N-Roll.
I have a problem w/ proclaiming the genre as the foundation for all music afterwards.
I also have a problem w/ blurring the origins to fit into the Rock genre.
On another level I think there's an insidious (intentional or not) process of marginalizing Black music to fit into a largely Caucasoid perspective of musical achievement.
Jump Blues all of a sudden gets enveloped into the RNR umbrella? I cant see that.
Now u'll have dudes talmbout "should R.Kelly get in....."
Batmon: Yeah, I'm not saying it's my personal philosophy but it does seem popular with baby boomer types who believe that America used to have a musical "monoculture" which, to me, is more mythology than reality even though I'm not old enough to have lived through it personally.
Batmon: Yeah, I'm not saying it's my personal philosophy but it does seem popular with baby boomer types who believe that America used to have a musical "monoculture" which, to me, is more mythology than reality even though I'm not old enough to have lived through it personally.
Yeah - I know its not your stance on this.
Im gonna keep it real -
I feel like the Rock-N-Roll illuminati place White Artists at the center and decorate "The List" w/ Black Artists to appear "balanced".
And at this point u have dudes who think the R-N-R "anointing", supports an idea that American music can be structured by a process of canonization which is inherently Euro-Centric.
Batmon: Yeah, I'm not saying it's my personal philosophy but it does seem popular with baby boomer types who believe that America used to have a musical "monoculture" which, to me, is more mythology than reality even though I'm not old enough to have lived through it personally.
Yeah - I know its not your stance on this.
Im gonna keep it real -
I feel like the Rock-N-Roll illuminati place White Artists at the center and decorate "The List" w/ Black Artists to appear "balanced".
And at this point u have dudes who think the R-N-R "anointing", supports an idea that American music can be structured by a process of canonization which is inherently Euro-Centric.
Batmon: I hear what you're saying and would offer the following alternative: Black artists like Chuck Berry and Little Richard are invited into the canon out of 1) historical respect (and I think this is real, not just merely inclusion for the sake of diversity) and 2) because their music didn't seem "too Black" compared to what you saw beginning to shift in the late '60s and esp. by the 1970s. I'm struck by how, for a while, "race records" ceased to be tracked by Billboard b/c pop music and Black music was synonymous...but then, race records - now called "R&B" - get re-charted by Billboard at a certain point. There's debate over whether Billboard was simply following the trends or enforcing a kind of chart segregation (both may be true), but either way, you see a much greater PERCEPTION of a gulf between Black soul and White rock by the 1970s even though, if you analyzed who was listening/buying what, you'd likely find a lot more integration than some may assume otherwise.
I don't think the Rock Hall of fame is the only one. I've got a few bones to pick with the way they handle these VH-1 Hip-Hop honors as well. It's screwed up all across the board. For example, how do you induct Missy Elliot before a group like lets say, Nice and Smooth (who haven't even been inducted yet?).
I don't think the Rock Hall of fame is the only one. I've got a few bones to pick with the way they handle these VH-1 Hip-Hop honors as well. It's screwed up all across the board. For example, how do you induct Missy Elliot before a group like lets say, Nice and Smooth (who haven't even been inducted yet?).
Damn, another
I would say, using your own logic, if you look at who has had 1) more hits and 2) more influence, then Missy >>> Nice and Smooth.
(And I like Greg Nice and Smooth B, no disrespect intended!)
Batmon: Yeah, I'm not saying it's my personal philosophy but it does seem popular with baby boomer types who believe that America used to have a musical "monoculture" which, to me, is more mythology than reality even though I'm not old enough to have lived through it personally.
Yeah - I know its not your stance on this.
Im gonna keep it real -
I feel like the Rock-N-Roll illuminati place White Artists at the center and decorate "The List" w/ Black Artists to appear "balanced".
And at this point u have dudes who think the R-N-R "anointing", supports an idea that American music can be structured by a process of canonization which is inherently Euro-Centric.
Batmon: I hear what you're saying and would offer the following alternative: Black artists like Chuck Berry and Little Richard are invited into the canon out of 1) historical respect (and I think this is real, not just merely inclusion for the sake of diversity) and 2) because their music didn't seem "too Black" compared to what you saw beginning to shift in the late '60s and esp. by the 1970s. I'm struck by how, for a while, "race records" ceased to be tracked by Billboard b/c pop music and Black music was synonymous...but then, race records - now called "R&B" - get re-charted by Billboard at a certain point. There's debate over whether Billboard was simply following the trends or enforcing a kind of chart segregation (both may be true), but either way, you see a much greater PERCEPTION of a gulf between Black soul and White rock by the 1970s even though, if you analyzed who was listening/buying what, you'd likely find a lot more integration than some may assume otherwise.
My Mom wont let me take her Elvis records out of the house and she doesnt have a turntable anymore.
Let say there is that "Perception", there is a difference in the cultural spheres that supported/cultivated say Kool & The Gang's Light Of The Worlds vs. Second Helping by Lynyrd Skynyrd.
Batmon: Yeah, I'm not saying it's my personal philosophy but it does seem popular with baby boomer types who believe that America used to have a musical "monoculture" which, to me, is more mythology than reality even though I'm not old enough to have lived through it personally.
almost certainly mythology. I wasn't around then either, but from everything I've read/heard, "race records" were not something that the average white person was listening to. Their title basically imply that there was not just one "monoculture" in the music being disseminated to the public.
As to how this thread has gone on for so long, despite the obvious "R&R HOF is stupid and none of us care about it. But yes K&G have a good case to be in it", keep in mind that even Batmon didn't start out disputing that K&G has good reason to be in it. The problem with litmus' initial comment was the idea that if Chic is in the hall, somehow K&G should be as well. That's what led this to get out of control.
I mean really: Chic is way more deserving of being in the hall than K&G because their impact on "pop" music (they had an enormous influence on hip hop, new wave, 80s rock, and any "dance music" since 1977) goes far beyond comparing the number of times each group was sampled and eclipses the impact K&G might have had by a huge margin.
P.S. I'd like to quote the 5th post in this thread, it was very telling:
Who cares. The way I see it is you [litmus] have three options: 1.Continue with all this BS and get clowned and subsequently very asshurt 2.Make things worse for yourself and get banned 3.Shut up and live to see another day as a member of this forum
Let say there is that "Perception", there is a difference in the cultural spheres that supported/cultivated say Kool & The Gang's Light Of The Worlds vs. Second Helping by Lynyrd Skynyrd.
Oh, no doubt. I'm not saying there weren't different spheres but I also think these can get overstated in hindsight, to the point where "rock" in the '70s becomes seemingly an all-White affair which I don't think sounds remotely correct even if it's accepted conventional wisdom.
I think the Rolling Stone list of top 100 bands is far more important than the HoF. Where do K&G vs Chic fall their?
I think the reason that Billboard briefly dropped the R&B/Race charts was they were 0r appeared racist. The unintended results was some Black artists that would have charted R&B were not charting at all. So the chart was renamed and reinstated.
Early doo wop was a Black style and called rock and roll from the start. I do not hear any connection between early Ravens style doo wop and what is called rock now.
Willie, what I wrote was reply to your little "Litmus test" comment trying to clown me on the board. That is why you got the response that you got. My intention was to have a cool open discussion regarding music. That's when you and "OST" started taking direct shots at me. Whether if that was because I'm relatively new to the board and don't post too often (at least up until recent) and feel like I don't fit in the "Soulstrut Clique"(so to speak) I really don't care. I just felt both you and Ost's comments were unwarranted and disrespectful and I responded accordingly. And to reply to your other comment that you stated below towards me, let me quote a Funkadelic tune by stating that: "If you don't like the effects, don't produce the cause".
The people who view Billie Holiday as a Rock n Roll artist could be the Janis Joplin fans. Over the years I've noticed that if you've inspired a rock heavyweight, you're considered almost a rock figure in your own right (no matter what type of music you play). Look at Ravi Shankar, he inspired a Beatle to pick up the sitar and now his name has become synonymous with rock n roll.
best metal act= jethro tull ??!!! thats the type of shit were talmbout here.
vh1...ehhhhh, i ride for any ego trip related show and the classic lp breakdowns they have and thats about it.
to pit chic against k&g is crazy. for me, both hold so much weight, across the board. chic is in my top 3 disco groups period, sooooo many of todays hottest dance music producers ( any from france ) still tap that sound. as far as kool and the gang, my strut name says it all...you cant fade either of the groups.
nowadays this whole music industry is straight up wwf shit. i always hated wrestling cuz it was fake.
while we would like to see bullshit institutions who get to decide the rules for inducting, acknowledge our picks, as i said before....i dont give a F*ck...i like to think we all have our own hall of fames, and true seekers of music will induct that real schitt.
8 pages of this mos def has to be the biggest snooze fest.
lets take it to another stage...soulstrut hall of fame, with correct breakdowns for genre and so on. that would be a 100 pager plus.
And then you would have somebody commenting on how boring YOUR post is.LOL. It's like either way you can't win, so I say go ahead man and do your thing. I support your endeavors all the way.
Comments
"but it has the same lineage and they all had pop singles..."
stats and comparisons....
kool and the gang should be in there, no doubt.
personally, who gives a F*ck about r&r h.o.f and the criteria for it.
that shit is like the grammys and all the rest of that garbage.
hip hop groups in the rock and roll hall of fame ????!!!!
while thats great and all, lets get f*cking real.
"personally, who gives a F*ck about r&r h.o.f and the criteria for it.
that shit is like the grammys and all the rest of that garbage."
I couldn't agree more and can't believe this thread has gone this far without more than just a few people questioning why we're even debating the merits of the Rock N' Roll Hall of Fame to begin with, as if it possesses some kind of universal cultural legitimacy. I'm not saying they're wack but I also don't know anyone who takes them seriously as arbiters of the American Pop Music Canon???.
Not being a hardcore sports head, I don't know how seriously people take, say, the Baseball Hall of Fame but while I've seen sports journalists take entry into the Hall as something meaningful, I've yet to meet very many music journalists or scholars - let alone FANS - who think the RRHOF has any real cred.
So again, to repeat RH's question: who gives a F*ck?
re: Chic - I think this needs to be really stressed...the group's contributions to music go way beyond "Good Times." Some people act as if creating the bassline that Sylvia Robinson ripped off was the only thing they ever contributed. That's such a microscopically narrow way of viewing their catalog. As is citing the sample usage of Kool and the Gang.
re: rock vs. R&B vs. whatever
Including R&B or even hip-hop artists within the canon of rock used to strike me as odd too but that was before I met people who saw 1950s rock n' roll as Black music originally. If you take it like that, then you could argue that future variations on Black music - '60s and '70s soul, hip-hop from the '80s onward - are all part of the same lineage. Notably, that's not exactly a universally held understanding, but at least it makes some things more logical, like why Earth Wind and Fire (or Kool and the Gang) could be included within the idea of "rock n' roll."
Not all Black Music made in 50's was Rock-N-Roll.
I have a problem w/ proclaiming the genre as the foundation for all music afterwards.
I also have a problem w/ blurring the origins to fit into the Rock genre.
On another level I think there's an insidious (intentional or not) process of marginalizing Black music to fit into a largely Caucasoid perspective of musical achievement.
Jump Blues all of a sudden gets enveloped into the RNR umbrella? I cant see that.
Now u'll have dudes talmbout "should R.Kelly get in....."
I dont agree w/ that Billy Joel song.
Yeah - I know its not your stance on this.
Im gonna keep it real -
I feel like the Rock-N-Roll illuminati place White Artists at the center and decorate "The List" w/ Black Artists to appear "balanced".
And at this point u have dudes who think the R-N-R "anointing", supports an idea that American music can be structured by a process of canonization which is inherently Euro-Centric.
Batmon: I hear what you're saying and would offer the following alternative: Black artists like Chuck Berry and Little Richard are invited into the canon out of 1) historical respect (and I think this is real, not just merely inclusion for the sake of diversity) and 2) because their music didn't seem "too Black" compared to what you saw beginning to shift in the late '60s and esp. by the 1970s. I'm struck by how, for a while, "race records" ceased to be tracked by Billboard b/c pop music and Black music was synonymous...but then, race records - now called "R&B" - get re-charted by Billboard at a certain point. There's debate over whether Billboard was simply following the trends or enforcing a kind of chart segregation (both may be true), but either way, you see a much greater PERCEPTION of a gulf between Black soul and White rock by the 1970s even though, if you analyzed who was listening/buying what, you'd likely find a lot more integration than some may assume otherwise.
Damn, another
I would say, using your own logic, if you look at who has had 1) more hits and 2) more influence, then Missy >>> Nice and Smooth.
(And I like Greg Nice and Smooth B, no disrespect intended!)
My Mom wont let me take her Elvis records out of the house and she doesnt have a turntable anymore.
Let say there is that "Perception", there is a difference in the cultural spheres that supported/cultivated say Kool & The Gang's Light Of The Worlds vs. Second Helping by Lynyrd Skynyrd.
almost certainly mythology. I wasn't around then either, but from everything I've read/heard, "race records" were not something that the average white person was listening to. Their title basically imply that there was not just one "monoculture" in the music being disseminated to the public.
As to how this thread has gone on for so long, despite the obvious "R&R HOF is stupid and none of us care about it. But yes K&G have a good case to be in it", keep in mind that even Batmon didn't start out disputing that K&G has good reason to be in it. The problem with litmus' initial comment was the idea that if Chic is in the hall, somehow K&G should be as well. That's what led this to get out of control.
I mean really: Chic is way more deserving of being in the hall than K&G because their impact on "pop" music (they had an enormous influence on hip hop, new wave, 80s rock, and any "dance music" since 1977) goes far beyond comparing the number of times each group was sampled and eclipses the impact K&G might have had by a huge margin.
P.S. I'd like to quote the 5th post in this thread, it was very telling:
considerable foresight ost.
Oh, no doubt. I'm not saying there weren't different spheres but I also think these can get overstated in hindsight, to the point where "rock" in the '70s becomes seemingly an all-White affair which I don't think sounds remotely correct even if it's accepted conventional wisdom.
So if you were to chronologically admit artists to the R-N-R HOF who would pay money to see Billie Holiday exhibit?
How many fans of Billie Holiday "perceive" her as a Rock-N-Roll artist?
I think the Rolling Stone list of top 100 bands is far more important than the HoF. Where do K&G vs Chic fall their?
I think the reason that Billboard briefly dropped the R&B/Race charts was they were 0r appeared racist. The unintended results was some Black artists that would have charted R&B were not charting at all. So the chart was renamed and reinstated.
Early doo wop was a Black style and called rock and roll from the start. I do not hear any connection between early Ravens style doo wop and what is called rock now.
"George I couldn't have said it better myself"
yawns for days
quite the achievement
vh1...ehhhhh, i ride for any ego trip related show and the classic lp breakdowns they have and thats about it.
to pit chic against k&g is crazy. for me, both hold so much weight, across the board. chic is in my top 3 disco groups period, sooooo many of todays hottest dance music producers ( any from france ) still tap that sound. as far as kool and the gang, my strut name says it all...you cant fade either of the groups.
nowadays this whole music industry is straight up wwf shit. i always hated wrestling cuz it was fake.
while we would like to see bullshit institutions who get to decide the rules for inducting, acknowledge our picks, as i said before....i dont give a F*ck...i like to think we all have our own hall of fames, and true seekers of music will induct that real schitt.
8 pages of this mos def has to be the biggest snooze fest.
lets take it to another stage...soulstrut hall of fame, with correct breakdowns for genre and so on.
that would be a 100 pager plus.