Brits Pick Best Music Acts of Past Decades

AP via Yahoo ^ | 11/12/2004 11:42 AM

[itsamelman]

Robbie Williams , Michael Jackson , Queen, The Rolling Stones and Cliff Richard have been chosen by the British public as the best music acts of the past five decades.

The musicians, each representing a decade in the last half of the 20th century, were inducted into Britain's first music hall of fame along with honorary members Madonna , Bob Marley, Elvis Presley, U2 and The Beatles at a ceremony in London.

The honorees were selected by a public vote by Channel 4 television, which invented the British hall of fame. So far, there's no building.

Williams, 30, won the popular vote to represent the 1990s, beating the likes of Blur, Red Hot Chilli Peppers, Oasis and Nirvana, while Jackson was crowned music ambassador from the 1980s, ahead of Prince, REM, George Michael and The Smiths.

Queen was voted for the 1970s honor above Abba, The Bee Gees, The Clash and David Bowie .

The Rolling Stones were voted most popular from the 1960s and Richards the 1950s' most popular musical performer.

Madonna, U2 frontman Bono, The Rolling Stones guitarist Ronnie Wood , and Williams were among those to accept their awards in person at a ceremony Thursday.

The Beatles' award was collected Thursday night by their producer, Sir George Martin.

"After 42 years, the light of their genius still shines as bright as ever," Martin said.

Priscilla Presley said her former husband would have been proud.

"His dream, that of a world tour, was never realized. His fan base was so strong here and because of that he would have been proud to receive this," Presley said.

[F16Fighter]

"WAIT a second! The Beatles got HONORABLE MENTION?????? I don't even have a RESPONSE for that!"

The BEATLES??

Like they've actually done anything substantial...(eyeball roll)

[freepertoo]

One can only hope you're being sarcastic.

[HenryLeeII]

Elvis has 50 years but does that make him a genius? I find genius in jazz and classical, giving full disclosure.

I'm sure I'd view Elvis differently if I were from the generation that grew up with him. I see him as a star and an obviously important figure in R n R, but as far as creative genius I don't see it. Jazz and classical are great too, and fertile grounds for genius. One of the few artists I can listen to at work is Chopin, and one of my favorite performers was Miles Davis. Have a good weekend...

[Beckwith]

If Steppenwolf ain't on the list it's a bullshit list.

[Happygal]

Oi! Equal opportunity when posting pics around here! ;-)

My Robbie! *sigh*! ;-)

[Basil314]

Ramones were a NYC band...

[A Texan]

Nobody, and I mean nobody compares to Sinatra. That man is untouchable.

[wireman]

I love Frank and I'm a fan of the early Elvis, but they didn't write, they interpreted other folks songs. The Beatles did it from soup to nuts.

[JellyJam]

Oh, man ... thanx, I needed that!

[Teslas Pigeon]

I think the reasons organizations come out with these lists is to generate publicity for themselves. People here have been discussing it for 60 something posts now. I don't mind the discussion, but we have to remember these lists are usually self serving silliness.

[itsamelman]

...but we have to remember these lists are usually self serving silliness.

Of course they are. After all, as the story says "The honorees were selected by a public vote by Channel 4 television, which invented the British hall of fame."

I just find that "music people", for the most part, like to talk music the way "gun people" like to talk guns. There's quite a few music lovers & musicians on FR and these threads can go on and on. These lists and other nonsense are usually just a jumping off point for a discussion about music & musicians.

And it makes for a nice diversion from Laci, Yassir, et al... especially on a Friday.

[Teslas Pigeon]

"And it makes for a nice diversion from Laci, Yassir, et al... especially on a Friday."

Yes, it does, so here goes my opinion. I am not sure what they mean by “act”, but I will include writing and other studio and pre-studio abilities in my ratings. Therefore I will consider the following in my ratings (not in any order):

Record Sales – Let’s face it; the greatest act of all time may be someone from Hackensack NJ who recorded several songs on his reel-to-reel in 1972. If no one heard them, who cares. I would never claim record sales alone should be used to rate bands, but it should be considered.

Influence – As pointed out by someone else here, if you influence a lot of bad bands, that is not a good thing. However, influence, like record sales, should be considered. The old line about the Velvet Underground is that their first album only sold a few copies, but everyone who bought one went on to form a band.

Musical performance ability – Yes, this is important. Can (do) these people play their own instruments, and play them well? Do they have good, strong and distinct singing voices?

Writing Ability – Can (do) they write good melodies and intelligent lyrics?

Production ability – Many bands do not produce their own records. I’ll give a few extra points to those that do.

Live Performance – I might not rate this one a high as others. Some bands are known for their live performances more than anything else. I will grant for many people live performance is an “acid test” for a band.

OK, so here goes. For the 90s, Robbie who? The 90s belonged to Nirvana. Not just in influence of those who followed, but also influence in rendering unimportant those that came before. Most hair bands credit (blame?) Nirvana for their demise in the 90s.

The 1980s I don’t have an opinion on, I’ll have to think about it. In terms of record sales certainly M. Jackson is up there. But he did not play an instrument, and his singing, while competent, was nothing special.

Queen for the 70s was a strange choice. I think of Queen as an original, interesting hard rock act, but the best from the 70s? As many others have pointed out here, in terms of every one of the items mentioned above (with the possible exception of songwriting), the 70s belonged to Led Zeppelin.

What Zeppelin was to the 70s, The Beatles were to the 60s and then some. I don’t even know if I would put the Stones second.

When you think of the 50s music you think Elvis, Buddy Holly, Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Fats Domino, Jerry Lee Lewis, etc. Cliff Richard??? Yes, I know he was big in England, but please, have some perspective!

[Burr5]

YOU are correct Sir! Love Zeppelin. Also about a million other bands that the pasty, yellow-toothed intellectual limeys overlooked.

[God luvs America]

Well, well, well....since we all love the Zep so much here ya' go!!   I actually saw them opening night at Madison Square Garden;   June 7, 1977!  The ticket stub is in a frame right above me here in the office.  Face value??  $10.50!!!

LONG LIVE ZEPPELIN!!

 

 

[itsamelman]

Hey, there ya go!

Using your criteria, I think it looks something like this...

50's - Chuck Berry (pretty much the blueprint for rock, I'd say).

60's - The Beatles (hard to deny).

70's - Led Zeppelin ( I don't think there can be an argument here, although I'd give the Clash an honorable mention along with the Ramones).

80's - Hmmm... as much as I (really) hate to say it, I gotta go with U2 or REM (even though my punk rock heart tells me one of the trio of SST trios: Minutemen, Husker Du, or the Meat Puppets. Or Black Flag. Or Minor Threat. Or...).

90's - Nirvana.


I think the 80's is the hardest to pin down - and this was my era....

[itsamelman]

Have you seen the Led Zep DVD released a year or two ago? Man, that thing is great...

[God luvs America]

Yes but I actually had all that stuff on bootleg...I am a Zeppelin collector (video/audio boots).

[SamAdams76]

Last Friday night, I was at a party and played some Led Zeppelin tunes on my iPod. You should have seen how the crowd came alive. People of all ages - they knew all the words. Their music is just timeless.

[cmsgop]

80's!

"Killing Joke" accept no substitute.........

[cmsgop]

I just spent $40 on iTunes with my new iMac!

iTunes is soooo addicting!