DDD Forum :: View topic - 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)

StuBass wrote:

If that's the case then "cultural impact" should be eliminated as a criteria since it's his standing in music which impacted the "culture". It's like saying that Steven Speilbergs film making has nothing to do with impacting culture...even moreso in Stevies case.

Not at all. Elvis Presley's music and performances affected the culture on their own. The Beatles music and performances affected the culture on their own. Steven Speilberg's films affected the culture on their own. Their cultural impact is not because they used their fame to help them lobby a politician to aid a cause. Their cultural impact just happened as a side-effect of their careers as artists and performers. Stevie Wonder's music and performances did not affect the culture on their own in the sense that they resulted in King's birthday being made a national holiday. It took Stevie Wonder using his fame to lobby a politician. To me, that's different. Does anyone really think Bono's humanitarian work makes U2 a greater rock band? Because that would be the same thing.

Can't you see the difference between:

A) Your music and performances directly affecting the culture on their own.

and

B) Jet-setting around saying, "Hey, I'm famous, let's do this."

It's a good thing Osama Bin Laden didn't play bass for Supertramp.

In regards to Stevie vs. The Who, I think The Who wins comfortably in the influence region, and Stevie in musical impact and popularity.

ClashWho wrote:

It's a good thing Osama Bin Laden didn't play bass for Supertramp.

ROFL!!!!

OJ Simpson is the greatest football player ever because of his enormous cultural impact.

Cultural Impact is but one of the criteria in ascessing the "greatest", no more or less important than the other stated criteria...but if it is indeed a criteria, then it must be considered in the analysis. If it has no significance, then eliminate it from the criteria.

Bruce wrote:

ClashWho wrote:

It's a good thing Osama Bin Laden didn't play bass for Supertramp.

ROFL!!!!

OJ Simpson is the greatest football player ever because of his enormous cultural impact.

Not only was OJ one of the greatest running backs in history...but since going to prison he has reportedly also become quite a tight end.

Brett Alan wrote:

How many people bought at least one of those number one hits?

According to the RIAA, "Good Vibrations" and "I Get Around" are gold and "Kokomo" is platinum. "Help Me, Rhonda" isn't certified. So that's at least two million people paying a lot less than the price of a concert ticket.

ClashWho wrote:

Can't you see the difference between:

A) Your music and performances directly affecting the culture on their own.

and

B) Jet-setting around saying, "Hey, I'm famous, let's do this."

Not really...because if their musical iconistic status wasn't what it was, nobody would give a shit.

Author:	StuBass [ Wed Apr 25, 2012 12:23 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
ClashWho wrote: StuBass wrote: If that's the case then "cultural impact" should be eliminated as a criteria since it's his standing in music which impacted the "culture". It's like saying that Steven Speilbergs film making has nothing to do with impacting culture...even moreso in Stevies case. Not at all. Elvis Presley's music and performances affected the culture on their own. The Beatles music and performances affected the culture on their own. Steven Speilberg's films affected the culture on their own. Their cultural impact is not because they used their fame to help them lobby a politician to aid a cause. Their cultural impact just happened as a side-effect of their careers as artists and performers. Stevie Wonder's music and performances did not affect the culture on their own in the sense that they resulted in King's birthday being made a national holiday. It took Stevie Wonder using his fame to lobby a politician. To me, that's different. Does anyone really think Bono's humanitarian work makes U2 a greater rock band? Because that would be the same thing. Bono's humanatarian work does not validate U2's cultural impact, however it does enhance BONO's cultural impact GREATLY, despite the fact that his cultural significance does not enhance his intonation, range, or tone...but it does expose all those factors to a much wider audience.

Author:	StuBass [ Wed Apr 25, 2012 12:33 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
Angelina Jolie's humanitarian work does not make her a more accomplished thespian...but it does draw a lot of attention to her film work and helps sell a lot of tickets and garner her a shitload of awards and recognitions keeping her well placed in the public eye. It all plays off each other. If Angelina, Bono, or Stevie (or Oprah for that matter) were not iconic in their performing endeavors, their humanatarian efforts wouldn't amount to a blip on the radar screen. If The Who weren't involved in a tragic event in Cincinnati, WKRP In Cincinnati wouldn't have devoted an entire half hour episode to that event and The Who's involvement in it.

Author:	ClashWho [ Wed Apr 25, 2012 12:48 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
Can't you see the difference between: A) Your music and performances directly affecting the culture on their own. and B) Jet-setting around saying, "Hey, I'm famous, let's do this."

Author:	StuBass [ Wed Apr 25, 2012 12:52 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
ClashWho wrote: Can't you see the difference between: A) Your music and performances directly affecting the culture on their own. and B) Jet-setting around saying, "Hey, I'm famous, let's do this." Not really...because if their musical iconistic status wasn't what it was, nobody would give a shit.

Author:	Negative Creep [ Wed Apr 25, 2012 12:55 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
I think the whole Stevie thing is pretty impressive and should definitely count for some cultural impact. But certainly not Presley/Beatles/MJ level... In regards to Stevie vs. The Who, I think The Who wins comfortably in the influence region, and Stevie in musical impact and popularity. As for cultural impact, I have no idea really. I can't see any overwhelming cultural significance coming from The Who, so that's probably a tie at best.

DDD Forum https://digitaldreamdoor.com/forum/

100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision) https://digitaldreamdoor.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=259	Page 157 of 457

Author:	ClashWho [ Wed Apr 25, 2012 1:05 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
Look, in all my arguments about The Who, all my battles over Who vs. Zep and whatnot, not once, in YEARS of doing this, have I brought up The Who organizing the Teenage Cancer Trust benefit concerts. And those are a really big deal. I just considered them to be far too peripheral to their career as rock artists to think it should have an impact on these lists. But Stevie Wonder lobbies Ronald Reagan for a Martin Luther King Jr. holiday and that's the #1 thing Sampson mentions as Stevie Wonder's cultural impact? That helps make him a greater rock artist than The Who? Come on, man. It's a good thing Osama Bin Laden didn't play bass for Supertramp.

Author:	Bruce [ Wed Apr 25, 2012 1:07 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
ClashWho wrote: It's a good thing Osama Bin Laden didn't play bass for Supertramp. ROFL!!!! OJ Simpson is the greatest football player ever because of his enormous cultural impact.

Author:	ClashWho [ Wed Apr 25, 2012 1:07 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
Negative Creep wrote: In regards to Stevie vs. The Who, I think The Who wins comfortably in the influence region, and Stevie in musical impact and popularity. Why do you think Stevie Wonder wins musical impact?

Author:	StuBass [ Wed Apr 25, 2012 1:21 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
Cultural Impact is but one of the criteria in ascessing the "greatest", no more or less important than the other stated criteria...but if it is indeed a criteria, then it must be considered in the analysis. If it has no significance, then eliminate it from the criteria.

Author:	StuBass [ Wed Apr 25, 2012 1:23 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
Bruce wrote: ClashWho wrote: It's a good thing Osama Bin Laden didn't play bass for Supertramp. ROFL!!!! OJ Simpson is the greatest football player ever because of his enormous cultural impact. Not only was OJ one of the greatest running backs in history...but since going to prison he has reportedly also become quite a tight end.

Author:	Bruce [ Wed Apr 25, 2012 1:32 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
StuBass wrote: Cultural Impact is but one of the criteria in ascessing the "greatest", no more or less important than the other stated criteria...but if it is indeed a criteria, then it must be considered in the analysis. If it has no significance, then eliminate it from the criteria. Gladly.

Author:	Bruce [ Wed Apr 25, 2012 1:33 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
StuBass wrote: Bruce wrote: ClashWho wrote: It's a good thing Osama Bin Laden didn't play bass for Supertramp. ROFL!!!! OJ Simpson is the greatest football player ever because of his enormous cultural impact. Not only was OJ one of the greatest running backs in history...but since going to prison he has reportedly also become quite a tight end. He's not a tight end, he's a wide receiver.

Author:	Bruce [ Wed Apr 25, 2012 1:35 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
According to the main site, commercial impact is not part of the criteria for this list: CRITERIA These Rock Music Artists were ranked for their Cultural and Musical Impact, as well as their Influence on the rock music world in general.

Author:	Brett Alan [ Wed Apr 25, 2012 1:56 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
ClashWho wrote: Brett Alan wrote: How many people bought at least one of those number one hits? According to the RIAA, "Good Vibrations" and "I Get Around" are gold and "Kokomo" is platinum. "Help Me, Rhonda" isn't certified. So that's at least two million people paying a lot less than the price of a concert ticket. Actually, it's a minimum of three million--gold singles required one million units in the 60s. And there was no platinum at the time, so it's only a minimum. The point is, the amount of money spent isn't particularly important. The Sultan of Brunei spends many millions to bring in his favorite artists to play, but that shouldn't count any more than any other fan.

Page 157 of 457	All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Brett Alan [ Wed Apr 25, 2012 2:03 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
StuBass wrote: ClashWho wrote: Can't you see the difference between: A) Your music and performances directly affecting the culture on their own. and B) Jet-setting around saying, "Hey, I'm famous, let's do this." Not really...because if their musical iconistic status wasn't what it was, nobody would give a shit. How does that translate into there being no difference? I think it's pretty clear that there's a difference. Now, with Stevie, there's a grey area because there was a song involved, and, yes, it was pretty well-known at the time and had an impact on the public's perception of the holiday effort. And I'm not saying that I necessarily think that the ways the artist use their fame should not be considered cultural impact at all, but there's definitely a difference between that and artists whose music per se changed the world. If Bono or Bob Geldof somehow succeeds in wiping out world poverty, that would make him the greatest humanitarian of all time, but it wouldn't give him greater cultural impact than The Beatles or Elvis.