Rock and Roll Hall of Fame

[ali032373]

I visited the RnR Hall of Fame maybe 2 years ago. If memory serves it was a little underwhelming, but still cool.

IMO the inductees have become less and less stellar with the passage of time. I think this is due almost entirely to the fact that music suffered an enormous drop in quality starting in the 90s and has gotten appreciably worse IMO. The committee does not want to face the idea of putting boy bands and bubble gum teen queens into the HoF. Consequently, performers from the 70s and 80s who were once on the bubble now get into the HoF on first ballot. Anything not to face the bubbling cauldron of schlock that spewed out of the ‘90s and ‘00s.

Moreover, the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame has never been exclusively rock and roll. “Performers who Have Made a Significant Contribution to Popular Music” would serve as a more appropriate moniker given the body of inductees in its entirety. James Brown, Miles Davis, Woody Guthrie, Aretha Franklin- all early inductees, but not Rock and Roll performers. At least not in the traditional sense. So the precedent has long existed to induct performs who are not rock and roll musicians. Given the malleable criteria I submit that Nine Inch Nails, Janet Jackson, and Iron Maiden should be inducted.

 

[The Ween]

There are so many people who are more deserving than the ones that they've been putting in lately. Some are just laughable. I just ignore the whole thing now. I used to want to go and it's not that far from me, but now, don't care.

 

[Sweet Rabbit]

The inductions the last few years have been laughable

 

[ali032373]

People who released albums in 1993 will be eligible next year. Top acts of 1993- Billy ray cyrus, whitney houston, kenny g, eric clapton (already in), and janet jackson.

It gets much worse by the late 90s.

 

[karamazov80]

There is a great deal of arbitrariness to the RNR Hall of Fame, and the decisions made the the committee are extremely questionable. In a given year, some random act from the past may appear on the ballot for whatever reason, then disappear from ballots in future years. It took Deep Purple--one of the most influential rock bands of all time--almost 20 years to get in following their initial eligibility. KISS didn't get in until recently, and you can't deny their success or influence. Yet Tupac, Green Day, and Pearl Jam get in first eligible year. Nothing against those groups, but the criteria seems to factor in popularity among current audiences, moreso than anything else. Yet you also get token classic acts who have been neglected who eventually get let in, like Deep Purple, or Black Sabbath, or Journey, or Yes.

Clearly, you don't have to be a "rock" act to get in. NWA got a lot of praise for saying that the reason for this is that it is the spirit of rock that should get you in. But if that's the case, how do you argue for the Bee Gees or the Eagles getting in as soon as possible. It's not just ticket and record sales, otherwise Journey and Hall and Oates would have been first ballot, as would Foreigner. It's not just influence, or else you would have had Deep Purple immediately, and Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, Yes, and Depeche Mode would have made it in a long time back.

So, it's a recognition. A select group of people do vote, so it's not purely undemocratic, though the committee hamstrings choices. But it doesn't mean much to me. The committee and voters were no doubt falling all over themselves to get Steely Dan in first chance. And I love Steely Dan. But did they deserve to go in on first ballot, over a Deep Purple, in a "rock" hall of fame? No freakin' way. But they were beloved by the committee and voters for whatever reason, just like Pearl Jam, so there it is.






By the way, if Kenny G gets in ever, much less next year, I'll flip my table over and cuss at it.

 

[Skywalker(OG)Kush]

The only good induction of late was Pearl Jam, but I agree its become a joke. Its only going to get worst, but this isn't really the Hall of Fames fault, there hasn't been a band worth its salt in over 20years. I haven't bought any new music in years, last album I bought was more then 17 years ago. One poster said music in the 90s sucked, well I beg to differ, that was arguably the last great era in rock music, there has been nothing since then. The 90s was like the 60's in terms of rock music, there was an explosion of good bands. Unfortunately, most of the vocalist are all dead, Eddie is the last man standing.. We all need to face the facts that rock is dead now. Hopefully there is a resurgence at some point. Hell music of the 80's was terrible, it wasn't until the 90s that it came back again. The current hiatus has been much longer though, but there is still hope

FYI I am only talking about rock bands not other genres of music which are technically eligible

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

Hopefully Limp Bizkit makes it in soon

I regret nothing.

 

[Skywalker(OG)Kush]

Hopefully Limp Bizkit makes it in soon

I regret nothing.

You do it all for the nookie

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

You do it all for the nookie

Yup, and I keep on Rollin', baby!!

 

[ali032373]

Not to say everything in the 90s sucked- STP and Pearl Jam are obvious stand outs. To me Nirvana was so so.

you can name a dozen super heavyweights that came out of the 60s. Same for the 70s. The 80s- van halen, Michael Jackson, u2, the police, prince, Madonna, arguably Springsteen- all peaking in the 80s.

When you get to the 90s the picking get slim. And they get slimmer as time goes on. And I think they'll keep putting in Journey and ELO types to avoid the obvious issues that are coming- the spice girls, Britney Spears, nsync, limp bizkit, Korn, Marilyn Manson, etc.

 

[Sweet Rabbit]

I would vote for Korn, when Slipknot's time comes, does the band itself get in or just Corey

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

Not to say everything in the 90s sucked- STP and Pearl Jam are obvious stand outs. To me Nirvana was so so.

you can name a dozen super heavyweights that came out of the 60s. Same for the 70s. The 80s- van halen, Michael Jackson, u2, the police, prince, Madonna, arguably Springsteen- all peaking in the 80s.

When you get to the 90s the picking get slim. And they get slimmer as time goes on. And I think they'll keep putting in Journey and ELO types to avoid the obvious issues that are coming- the spice girls, Britney Spears, nsync, limp bizkit, Korn, Marilyn Manson, etc.

I've noticed that most popular bands from any given decade, usually started in the previous decade. Just about every popular 90's band started in the 80's, and every 80's band started in the 70's, and so on so forth. However, rock bands from the 2000's and 2010's are almost nonexistent. The last decade to produce a lot of rock bands was the 80's. It's sad.

 

[Skywalker(OG)Kush]

Not to say everything in the 90s sucked- STP and Pearl Jam are obvious stand outs. To me Nirvana was so so.

you can name a dozen super heavyweights that came out of the 60s. Same for the 70s. The 80s- van halen, Michael Jackson, u2, the police, prince, Madonna, arguably Springsteen- all peaking in the 80s.

When you get to the 90s the picking get slim. And they get slimmer as time goes on. And I think they'll keep putting in Journey and ELO types to avoid the obvious issues that are coming- the spice girls, Britney Spears, nsync, limp bizkit, Korn, Marilyn Manson, etc.

I agree with clown prince that some of these bands formed in the late 80's but most of their albums came out in the 90's so that is why i consider them 90s bands. When i said the 80s sucked for rock i was specifically referring to rock n roll not other genres. For me only U2, Metalica, Guns n Roses, the Police, Van Halen, Springsteen & ACDC (even though they formed and had a album or 2 in the late 70s) would make this list.

For the 90's you have
Alice N Chains
Soundgarden
Smashing Pumpkins
Foo Fighters
Tool
Greenday
Red Hot Chili Peppers
Nirvana (i realize you didnt like them but they deserve mention here)
STP (which you mentioned)
Nine Inch Nails
Korn
Faith No More
Radiohead** formed in the 80s but most albums in 90s)
Offspring
Oasis
Collective Soul

Just to name a few... i could go on but i could be here all day. Not saying all these bands deserve to be in the Rock n roll Hall of fame but they put out good music for the most part

 

[ali032373]

Green day and chili peppers are already in.

NIN should have walked in IMO. Same for Janet Jackson.

But to put oasis or faith no more on the same shelf as the dead or Aerosmith- I just can't do it.

 

[Skywalker(OG)Kush]

I forgot to mention Sublime, No doubt, Beastie Boys & Rage Against the Machine

 

[Pork Chop Express]

I stopped paying attention the the Rock HoF a long time ago. The majority of the music I listen to now (current day stuff that's worth the $ I pay for) will never make it in because it's nothing close to top 40 or what would be considered "popular".

There's still plenty of good music being made, you just gotta find it.

 

[Pork Chop Express]

For the 90's you have
Alice N Chains
Soundgarden
Smashing Pumpkins
Foo Fighters
Tool
Greenday
Red Hot Chili Peppers
Nirvana (i realize you didnt like them but they deserve mention here)
STP (which you mentioned)
Nine Inch Nails
Korn
Faith No More
Radiohead** formed in the 80s but most albums in 90s)
Offspring
Oasis
Collective Soul

The 90's was so much more than that, also considered to be the golden age of Hip Hop and lots of electronic music from that decade.

 

[Skywalker(OG)Kush]

The 90's was so much more than that, also considered to be the golden age of Hip Hop and lots of electronic music from that decade.

I agree 100% i was just naming rock bands

 

[Pork Chop Express]

I agree 100% i was just naming rock bands

Gotcha, 90's do seem like the 60's in some regards when it comes to music.

The 80's are the new 50's (in general), now I know how my dad feels.

 

[ali032373]

Depeche Mode and the cure- not in th HoF. Should be.