A Look at the 2012 Rock and Roll HOF Nominations

Well gang here it is....     Every Year we debate the nominations for the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and we suspect that it will be no different this year as once again it has been very interesting.   If there is a pattern, it is definitley that this is the "Year of the Woman", as a plethora of fenmale candidates have been nominated.

Let's take a look at them, shall we?

#5 The Red Hot Chili Peppers

Nominated again, we would not be surprised if they got in.  Even if they don't this is just a matter of time and we defy anyone to make a solid case as to why they shouldn't get in.

#8 The Beastie Boys

Very much the same situation as the Chili Peppers, the Beasties have been nominated before and there would be no shock to seem get their due.  Obviously, with our high rank, we would be totally fine with this induction.

#13 The Cure

We are absolutly thrilled with this nomination!   This was a band (much like the Smiths) that we thought would never really receive a serious look.  A major win for the 80's Alternative Sound, we are very curious to see if they get in.  We are hoping for it, as we suspect that this may be their only real shot.

#15 Guns 'N' Roses

No surpise here.  This was our highest rated act in their first year of eligibility, and if the Rock Hall got a sniff of a possibilty that both Axl and Slash would appear, this could be a sure thing. 

#33 Heart

Another one we love!  If the Hall wants hard rocking women, they would be hard pressed to do better than the Wilson sisters who also have a lot of success to boot.  Very possible induction.

#57 War

Again, another group who have been nominated before, but their just may too many intruiging candidates.  We have a suspicion they wont be "freinds" with the Hall this year.

#59 Small Faces/#131 Faces

We had them seperated based on the difference between the two groups in terms of musical style, but we have no problem with this as a joint nomination. Any respect paid to the Small Faces is fine with us!

#61 Donna Summer

She is the lone Disco act nominated, but she has been here before.  With other powerful female acts on the nomination ballot, she is likely to get turned down this year.

#76 The Spinners

We would be thrilled if they got in.  Philly Soul has not overly represented by the Hall, this would be a great place to look for another inductee.  With a long and winding career, it would be great way to cap it.

#77 Eric B. & Rakim

The Hall has shown that they want to honor Rap artists, and this would be a great choice.  Could they cancel out the Beasties though?

#108 Donovan

The eccentric folk star is back, but without any real momentum from the last process, we are skeptical of his chances.

#157 Laura Nyro

She's Back!  For the third year in a row, Laura Nyro appears on the ballot but we suspect she will "Susan Lucci" it up and go 0 for 3

#159 Rufus with Chaka Khan

It's possible that they could sneak in, but their overall body of work does not measure up to some of the others here.  We would be shocked if they got in.

#174 Joan Jett

A very good chance, especially based on the exposure that the Runaways have received recently.  Honestly, we would rather she gets in with them.

#355 Freddie King

Our lowest ranked artist is a great Blues Man, but in a ballot with nobody else like him, he could sneak in.

 

So what's missing?  Well other than Rush, KISS and others, this nomination group has no representatives from Heavy Metal or Progressive Rock.  These are two genres that are most closely defined my many as Rock and Roll and it was passed over again.

 

You know our thoughts....  Let's here yours!

 
Last modified on Thursday, 19 March 2015 18:47

Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Comments   

0 #19 EverestMeisterNeg1 -0001-11-30 00:00
This is a great class... Other than Donovan and Laura Nyro, I don't think they could go wrong with any of these choices.
What's the maximum they can induct in 1 year? Is it 8? If it is, then here would be my 8:
1. Red Hot Chilli Peppers
2. Guns N Roses
3. Heart
4. The Cure
5. Beastie Boys
6. Joan Jett
7. Small Faces
8. The Spinners
With a few other good ones just missing out.
Quote
0 #18 Dr Clayton Forrester -0001-11-30 00:00
Knuckles, I actually wrote two lists regarding film scores and composers for digitaldream door.com about 5 years ago. I haven't posted in their forum since then and unfortunatel y they haven't been updated since then either.

I originally wrote the two top 100 lists in their forum to generate discussion. But not long after, they got uploaded to the main page. I was and still am a film score buff, but the list would have been better served with more input from other opinions before the site owner uploaded them. Especially since they've apparently never bothered to update and revise them over time. The greatest film scores list was expanded 4 or so years ago to include 200 scores, but IMO it's a bit more chaotic past 100.

EDIT: P.S. I've edited this post down a bit so that we don't stray too far off topic here. Rock and Roll!!!!!
Quote
0 #17 Knuckles -0001-11-30 00:00
I really like that site, not just for the rated artists but 3,000 rated songs and 3,000 rated albums, too. It's like a buyer's guide.
I really like Radiohead, but their rating shocked me, as did Velvet Underground& #39;s (whom I'm not so big on.)

Does anyone else here look at digitaldream door.com? I think they have a good, balanced look at things.
Quote
0 #16 Sean -0001-11-30 00:00
But obviously as statisticall y nerdy as I can get about things, these rankings (like sales) are just a rule of thumb that aren't necessarily indicative of anything.

406. Britney Spears (which is probably enough to call the entire list into question. She's not better or more important than Seger, Mellencamp, Billy Joel, The Cars, Rush, or the Moodies...)
Quote
0 #15 Sean -0001-11-30 00:00
They've collected dozens (hundreds?) of greatest album and single lists from various critics and publications over the past several decades and they award a certain number of points for each position on a list. I think some more prominent critics may be weighted more prominently than others. They have used this to calculate the 3000 albums and singles which have received the most critical acclaim in rock-era history. This is worldwide, so you'll see a good share of artists outside the English-spea king world (primarily on the lower parts of the list), and it covers jazz, blues, country, rap, and whatever else (it's not strictly ROCK). Sure, it's easy to quibble with, especially for artists who have relatively few albums/singl es on the list, as one or two underrated singles could make as big a difference as 500 positions on the list (at least for those outside the top 500), but still looking at the top 50, that does seem to be a good measure of the artists critics slobber over:

1. Beatles
2. Rolling Stones
3. Bob Dylan
4. David Bowie
5. Led Zeppelin
6. Radiohead
7. Prince
8. Bruce Springsteen
9. The Who
10. Elvis Presley
11. Jimi Hendrix
12. Beach Boys
13. Velvet Underground
14. Marvin Gaye
15. R.E.M.
16. U2
17. Clash
18. Neil Young
19. Nirvana
20. Stevie Wonder
21. Pink Floyd
22. Bob Marley
23. Elvis Costello
24. Smiths
25. Talking Heads
26. Aretha Franklin
27. Van Morrison
28. Byrds
29. Public Enemy
30. Doors
31. Kinks
32. James Brown
33. Miles Davis
34. Michael Jackson
35. Beastie Boys
36. Johnny Cash
37. Sex Pistols
38. Beck
39. Sly and the Family Stone
40. Creedence Clearwater Revival
41. Otis Redding
42. Pixies
43. John Lennon
44. Madonna
45. Lou Reed
46. Roxy Music
47. Blur
48. Joy Division
49. Sonic Youth
50. Kraftwerk

The list is certainly measuring SOMETHING, whether or not you like all the artists on the list... I think it is a reasonable proxy for the amount of critical acclaim certain artists have received. There are certainly some artists critics probably overrate (RADIOHEAD) and others they underrate, and I think this accurately reflects that.

Still, I don't think anybody really needs to be told that critics like Beastie Boys, The Cure, and GNR...

And lists like this are relevant in terms of HoF because there are several rock critics on the voting committee, thus probably explaining some of the genres that have been largely snubbed (heavy metal, progressive rock, synthpop) which were not in general favorite genres of critics.
Quote
0 #14 Knuckles -0001-11-30 00:00
How exactly does one measure critical acclaim?
Quote
0 #13 jimmy26 -0001-11-30 00:00
I will be a very happy dude if your predictions are correct Sean. Very interesting about the critics love list. Almost looks like a VH-1 gratest artists list. Still, these are groups that have obviously been pushed throughout the course of the time by the critics and for good reason. These are some grat artists. Still, their is room for both the critical and the popular in the hall. So for every Pixies they let in give me a Def Leppard or for every Roxy Music give me a Journey. Then I will be ecstatic.
Quote
0 #12 Knuckles -0001-11-30 00:00
Very interesting. Probably a lot of painstaking research went into it. I'll have to check out the website you posted. Heart was 1677th? Post-Woodsto ck AOR artists must really suffer on the list.
Always good to see another strong music poster here. Welcome aboard, Sean.
Quote
0 #11 Sean -0001-11-30 00:00
I agree it shouldn' t all be about critical success. Billy Joel was loathed by critics but had a long, distinctive, and successful career. Other bands critics ignore have strong cases (Heart and Chicago for instance). It should be some kind of combination.

And certainly there are some bands critics slobber over that are overrated (OK Computer and Kid A are certainly groundbreaki ng electronic albums, but still New Order and Depeche Mode beat Radiohead to electronica by like 15 years and Kraftwerk by 25. I think Radiohead should be more in the 50th-75th range). Similarly, I think Lou Reed's solo career, Beck, and Joy Division (New Order was more significant and The Cure did post-punk/go th better in my opinion), among others should be a bit lower.

Then when you get to the lower parts of the list, it really gets kind of strange. Although some hair metal acts get their due (KISS, Def Leppard, and Bon Jovi are higher than you probably think), the '70s prog and arena rock acts generally do not.

Def Leppard is actually sort of acclaimed at #316 (both Pyromania and Hysteria are highly acclaimed as definitive hair metal albums), and they're more acclaimed than some artists who have been inducted (George Harrison, James Taylor, Jackie Wilson, Jeff Beck, ZZ Top, Billy Joel, John Mellencamp, Gladys Knight & the Pips). If an even sillier band that fewer people take very seriously like ZZ Top can get in, Def Leppard has a chance. After all, ZZ Top was never really seen as groundbreaki ng in blues-rock or southern rock, and more people see Def Leppard as groundbreaki ng in hair metal. Solo Eric Clapton is at #301 (barely ahead at all), and considering people laughably list him as a top 100 artist solo (completely laughable if you consider "Layla& quot; as Derek & the Dominos instead of his solo career, which you should since Duane Allman probably had more impact on that song anyway.)

KISS is a few positions ahead of Def Leppard on the list (#311) and will probably also get in.

Bon Jovi is at #445 (with only Slippery When Wet on the album list and only Livin' on a Prayer on the singles list). Still, with their success that might be enough. Although I certainly don't AGREE they're better than John Mellencamp, they're more acclaimed than him, which surprises me. Still Bon Jovi is ahead of The Cars, Rush, Bob Seger, Cat Stevens, and others that may be surprising (again, I personally think all four of those are better, but that's just me - and The Cars should be around #200, not where they are). Since they've already been nominated, they'll probably go in, but I kind of hope it isn't that soon.

My point? Hair metal isn't that hated as much as other genres. Critics honestly hate prog rock more (except Pink Floyd):

21. Pink Floyd
166. King Crimson
274. Genesis
280. Yes
315. Procol Harum
334. Jethro Tull
464. Rush
633. Moody Blues
637. Electric Light Orchestra
993. Emerson, Lake, and Palmer (OUCH)

I think this explains why Pink Floyd and Genesis are the only prog acts we've seen in yet (even though Crimson, Yes, Rush, Tull, and the Moodies all should have been in years ago by any objective measure). Honestly, I only think Genesis got in solely as a way to get Phil Collins (#845) and Peter Gabriel (#132) in while ignoring their solo careers (Collins justly, Gabriel unjustly). I suspect Roxy Music (much more acclaimed) will get in the same way, as a means of inducting Bryan Ferry and Brian Eno without thinking of anything they did solo (though Eno invented ambient rock and is in my opinion the best producer of all time, so he SHOULD get in solo, as a non-performe r probably).

The arena rock acts (besides those in) are usually considered lame imitations of prog-rock or earlier metal/hard rock which isn't much liked either, so they're the guys who really suffer critically:

72. AC/DC
106. Queen
121. Aerosmith
135. Deep Purple (so why exactly are they being snubbed? Extremely acclaimed and popular)
185. Van Halen

But...

399. Boston (just due to debut, much like Bon Jovi/Slippery)
545. Meat Loaf
863. Foreigner
891. Bad Company
1017. Journey (though I expect Don't Stop Believin' ; to rise on the singles list over time as omnipresent as it has become)
1677. Heart
Not ranked - REO Speedwagon
Not ranked - Styx

Meat Loaf's albums are considered too novelty by the critical establishmen t to seriously be considered (they'll cover that by inducting producer Todd Rundgren as a non-performe r, and Rundgren certainly deserved at least that many years ago; Rundgren also has some case as a performer). Foreigner, Styx, and REO Speedwagon will never get in. Heart probably will because they were more influential than that (influencing women rockers and apparently even some of the grunge bands - as much as you hate them, I believe Soundgarden cites Heart, which will probably help their case, though I think Nirvana and Pearl Jam are the only bands who will be considered grunge no-brainers) . Journey? Who knows? They've had a kind of renaissance and even made VH1's top 100 artists list (as did Leppard), so they may actually be taken more seriously in later years, although VH1 tends to be much kinder to '80s hard rock than the critical establishmen t.

Still, if I was predicting for hard rock, I think it would be: Deep Purple, then KISS, then Rush (who is gaining critical esteem right now), then Heart (who I think will miss this year), then Bon Jovi (who is friends with many of the committee), then Def Leppard. Boston, Journey, and Heart will be perpetually snubbed although I think they should eventually get in (but aren't extremely high priorities). Bad Company might have a chance since Paul Rodgers is considered one of the great singers (though I think he was better in Free, and it would almost be offensive to me to see Bad Company get in over its parent bands - King Crimson, Free, and Mott the Hoople - all more deserving, since I think Free was better and Crimson is one of the definitive prog bands and Mott is one of the definitive glam bands, to a degree greater than Bad Co. is one of the definitive arena bands). Foreigner, Styx, REO Speedwagon? No chance whatsoever (nor are they deserving in my mind).
Quote
0 #10 Sean -0001-11-30 00:00
acclaimedmus ic.net ranks how much critical acclaim artists have received over their entire career by worldwide rock critics. This may give you some idea of these artists' chances:

35. Beastie Boys (35th most acclaimed artist of the rock era)
68. The Cure
81. Guns 'N Roses
145. Red Hot Chili Peppers
178. Eric B. & Rakim
238. Donna Summer
330. Small Faces (Faces at #731)
470. Laura Nyro
682. Joan Jett & the Blackhearts
683. Spinners
765. War
939. Donovan
994. Chaka Khan (Rufus at #1221)
1290. Freddie King
1677. Heart

This explains why I'm going for Jett instead of Heart, although Heart is certainly critically underrated.
Quote

Add comment


Security code
Refresh