|
|
Post by SAT-I need more room!! on Mar 24, 2005 12:21:22 GMT -5
Since a big topic of discussion on here is the Rock Hall, who is in, who SHOULD be in, who we can't understand why they are in, I thought we would start an actual Discussion piece.
It seems we don't have too many regular features anymore, and Dave just eliminated 2 more, so I hope everyone jumps in on this one!!
The first years of the Rock Hall was 1986. Here is who went in:
Performers-
Chuck Berry
James Brown
Ray Charles
Sam Cooke
Fats Domino
Everly Brothers
Buddy Holly
Jerry Lee Lewis
Elvis Presley
Little Richard
Early Influences-
Robert Johnson
Jimmie Rodgers
Jimmy Yancey
Lifetime Achievement-
John Hammond
Non-performers-
Alan Freed
Sam Phillips
My thoughts: I think it was great that they put exactly 10 performers that first year. These 10 really formed the foundation for Rock and Roll. I don't really dispute any of the choices, but some questions for you to answer in your discussion:
Do you agree with all 10?
If someone said, "Ok, we can only have 9", who would you lop off?
If there someone who didn't make it this first year that should've been in there as part of the formation of Rock?
As I said above, I agree with all 10. I wouldn't take any away. As far as lopping someone off, I would probably say James Brown. He had tons of Hot 100 hits, but he didn't have a real lot of big hits. Plus he peaked more in the 60's whereas the rest of these had their heydays in the 50's. Also, he was a big influence on funk which was years later. I don't really think anyone else should be in that first year because again, I like that there is 10. Arguements could be made for Roy, Carl, Ricky and Aretha (all who went in the following year). But I like this group.
So come on, let's hear it!!
|
|
|
|
Post by lora on Mar 24, 2005 16:31:55 GMT -5
Personally, I think this group is damn near perfect. There are arguments that could be presented for some of the later inductees...but these 10 are usually the first artists one thinks of when considering influential artists from the beginnings of rock.
If I had to lob one off, it would be Sam Cooke, just because I don't think he's had as much lasting influence as the others.
It would have been nice to have Aretha in that first year just to get a woman in there, but she definitely wasn't deserving enough to be put on this 1986 list.
|
|
|
|
Post by 55dodger on Mar 25, 2005 0:18:11 GMT -5
Nice feature Adam.
I wouldn't agree with all the selections, although 10 was a good number. James Brown would be my first choice to come off. I agree his influence was more in the 60s as opposed to the 50s. But you could make the same arguement about Ray Charles. But I would keep Ray on the list because of his staying power and ability to put hits on multiple charts (R&B, Pop, & Country). The other I would take off the list is Jerry Lee Lewis. Great entertainer with ton of hits, just think there are others who were better.
Who would I add. Probably Bill Haley & His Comets & the Platters. Bill wasn't the hit machine the others were, but who can forget the rim shot heard around the world. The Platters simply because I love their music.
I don't know if John Lee Hooker qualified as an early influence, but I would have put him in on the first ballot.
I might have given a nod to Dick Clark being in the 1986 class as well.
I also agree with Lora, it would have been nice to see a lady as part of the first induction class as well. But then, who would you leave off. Back to square one.
|
|
|
|
Post by KittyKat - RIP Luciano on Mar 25, 2005 16:36:38 GMT -5
GREAT topice Sat.
I agree that 10 was the perfect starting number and in the past I've never had any issues with who was inducted the first year.
But really looking at the list I probably would have switched out James Brown and Sam Cooke for Bill Haley/Comets and Otis Redding. But really it's not a big thing for me.
If it was just 9, I'd definitely take out James Brown first.
|
|
|
|
Post by djdave on Mar 30, 2005 20:05:45 GMT -5
Great group of 10.
If I had to, woulda knocked off Jerry Lee. He didn't have THAT many hits, but he was indeed influential.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dawn on Mar 31, 2005 12:35:56 GMT -5
This was a great first class for the Rock Hall. All are worthy contenders, but if I had to select one to leave off, it would probably be James Brown, for the same reason you mentioned.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ken on Apr 1, 2005 1:59:59 GMT -5
Since a big topic of discussion on here is the Rock Hall, who is in, who SHOULD be in, who we can't understand why they are in, I thought we would start an actual Discussion piece. It seems we don't have too many regular features anymore, and Dave just eliminated 2 more, so I hope everyone jumps in on this one!! The first years of the Rock Hall was 1986. Here is who went in: Performers- Chuck Berry James Brown Ray Charles Sam Cooke Fats Domino Everly Brothers Buddy Holly Jerry Lee Lewis Elvis Presley Little Richard Early Influences- Robert Johnson Jimmie Rodgers Jimmy Yancey Lifetime Achievement- John Hammond Non-performers- Alan Freed Sam Phillips My thoughts: I think it was great that they put exactly 10 performers that first year. These 10 really formed the foundation for Rock and Roll. I don't really dispute any of the choices, but some questions for you to answer in your discussion: Do you agree with all 10? If someone said, "Ok, we can only have 9", who would you lop off? If there someone who didn't make it this first year that should've been in there as part of the formation of Rock? As I said above, I agree with all 10. I wouldn't take any away. As far as lopping someone off, I would probably say James Brown. He had tons of Hot 100 hits, but he didn't have a real lot of big hits. Plus he peaked more in the 60's whereas the rest of these had their heydays in the 50's. Also, he was a big influence on funk which was years later. I don't really think anyone else should be in that first year because again, I like that there is 10. Arguements could be made for Roy, Carl, Ricky and Aretha (all who went in the following year). But I like this group. So come on, let's hear it!! I totally agree with the line -up. All of them heavy hitters - Elvis, Chuck , Fats, James etc. It's great how they don't just induct musicians but those from other areas of "the biz" such as the DJ. I guess I would "lop off" Jimmy Yancey since I have absolutely no clue who the dude is LOL - Any info Adam? |
|
|
|
Post by H2IZCOOL on Apr 5, 2005 12:14:00 GMT -5
I've got one advantage over you guys. I am older (yeah, for these purposes, it's an advantage.  ) The '86 list seems to be based on the premise: 'who had influence IN the 50s?' If I were to think like it is, say 1958, and ask who is a rock n roll superstar. Nearly everyone on that list is there. In '58, I was listening to the whole list of 10, with the exception of James Brown. I didn't here of him until later. - although if I were black and listening regularly to the R&B stations (I actually did occasionally listen to them) I would have known James also. As for the others. Back in '58, I knew Buddy Holly, but he was just another rock n roller. He didn't become a superstar until he died. The others? All superstars. So it's a good list. I'd have let James go for another year or two and replaced him with the Platters. The most influential woman rock genre singer back in 1958? No Doubt. Connie Francis. Now.... what year was she inducted......   That's what I thought.  |
|
|
|
Post by gremashlo on Oct 21, 2007 15:41:53 GMT -5
My memory of the 1st "class" is quite clear, mostly due to my college broadcasting days at that time...and I just think that the Everly Brothers were and still are a bit overrated--I think that they were deserving of the Hall, but others were better, and more deserving of the first nomination...
|
|
|
|
Post by m c dornan on Oct 21, 2007 17:25:58 GMT -5
some unresolved issues in my mind:
if everyone gets in the HOF eventually, what's the point?
is it a rock-n-roll HOF, or a "anyone who got on the pop charts for any reason" HOF?
I'd lop off 4 or 5 of the inductees. They weren't r&r. I wouldn't have a "early influences" category.
The field of candidates would be sparse in the early days. I think R & R died by 1958 or so in America, and if it hadn't been for the British Invasion, it would've died forever.
|
|
)
That's what I thought. 
