Re: Rock & Roll Hall of Fame 2007 Inductees
Originally Posted by Redsland
I never said either of those things. I haven't decried the presence of popular, non-edgy Billy Joel in the Hall, although it begs the question why Steve Miller isn't there. And I gave a nod to Phil Collins in the other thread, which will probably cost me my Man Card.
In fact, their total lack of popular acceptance makes me want to question the presence of The Velvet Underground in the Hall. After all, how can you be "important" if so few people noticed you? In their case, though, I accept the opinion of musical historians who state that "although only a thousand people bought Velvet Underground albums, every one of them seemed to start a band." Therefore, they were important and influential despite low sales.
My criteria for the Hall would be (in no particular order):
1. Importance to and innovation within their genre (Beatles, Sex Pistols)
2. Widely influential to other musicians during and/or after their time (Pink Floyd, Elvis Costello)
3. Prolific and solid OR meteoric hit machine (Prince, Sly and the Family Stone)
4. Oustanding musicianship (Rush, Clapton)
5. Enough popularity to have achieved the name recognition demanded of a hall of "fame" (sorry 'bout that, Husker Du and Lemonheads).
Oh....that makes total sense and I would agree with you with your criteron.
But I'd also argue that AC/DC meet numbers 2 and 3 on your list.
a super volcano of ridonkulous suckitude.
I simply don't have access to a "cares about RBI" place in my psyche. There is a "mildly curious about OBI%" alcove just before the acid filled lake guarded by robot snipers with lasers which leads to the "cares about RBI" antechamber though. - Nate