BuffettNews.com

Jahfin wrote:

OceanCityGirl wrote:Where to begin...

And why is that? Because YOU don't like them? Like them or not, the Grateful Dead are icons of American music.

And so for a time was David Cassidy. Nope, I don't see the dead as belonging on this list. Not U2, nor the Velvet Underground, or Sly. I don't particularly care for Pink Floyd but you can see the talent and influence on other musicians. Still, I"m not sure they belong either. And while I don't think the Ramones were one of the greatest also they were part of a major change in musical direction. So I agree, you have to have a pioneer of punk. The problem with these lists is how they are defining them. If they're popular music that's one thing. If it's rock that would be another list.

David Cassidy? I believe you have "icon" confused with "teen idol". Perhaps I should of used some different terminology, like modern day American roots music pioneers. The Grateful Dead have without a doubt had a profound effect on the course of music. So have U2, the Velvet Underground and Sly and the Family Stone. The Velvet Underground were instrumental in creating groundbreaking music that would fuel the alternative music movement years later that was then spearheaded by U2, R.E.M. and tons of others. People here may not like alternative music but it is part of music history, like it or not. Sly and the Family Stone most definitely belong because they were among the first to merge R & B with rock n' roll.

ph4ever wrote:

Jahfin wrote:

ph4ever wrote:

Jahfin wrote:

pair8head wrote:

COMMENTARY
By Eric Olsen
MSNBC contributor

When tackling a project as audacious, slippery and fraught with diagnostic peril as “the 10 best rock bands ever,” one can either cower in anticipation of the monsoon of disagreement sure to come and load the package with every manner of weaselly equivocation, or one can swagger ahead blissfully secure in the universal righteousness of one’s judgment. Being American, I choose the latter.

That said. Dude placing the Grateful Dead as number 4 is/was a really bad idea. IMHO They do not belong on the list.

And why is that? Because YOU don't like them? Like them or not, the Grateful Dead are icons of American music. Sure they get a bad rap because of their lengthy jams but with Workingman's Dead and American Beauty they made two of the best albums of American roots music ever committed to vinyl and there's nary a noodly jam to be found. They've also been highly influential; Phish, Widespread Panic, String Cheese Incident, Moe. and dozens of others were inspired by the Dead. In addition to the music itself there's the songwriting of Robert Hunter who rivals Bob Dylan when it comes to the art of songcraft. To each their own, but no list of best bands ever would be complete without the inclusion of the Grateful Dead, they are part of the fabric of Americana.

DUDE - when one says IMHO he's offering his opinion.

And why is that? Because YOU don't like them?

And if he's offering his opinion HELL YES IT'S BECAUSE HE DOSN'T LIKE THEM. EVERYONE is titled to their own opinion. P8 was offering his commentary just as you have offered yours. The only difference is you are being BODERLINE RUDE. It seems to me as if this is not the first time you bring up a subject and then when people offer their opinion you challenge them on it.

Obvioulsy you like confrontations. You participate in so many.

This is the only board I know of when I try to take part in one of the discussions, I am immediately labed "confrontational". There was nothing whatsoever in my post that could be considered rude, I just so happened to disagree with that person's opinion, that doesn't make me rude it just means my opinon is not the same as theirs.

A few weeks ago I posted a list of the Top Ten music cities and because Raleigh was on the list I was accused of posting only because I'm from NC when I even included articles from other cities on the list. In addition to that, the same person said Raleigh shouldn't of been on the list because their music scene is "weak". When I asked the person to cite some examples, I was accused of being confrontational. I wasn't being confrontational in the least, nor am I now. If someone is going to be make such a blanket statement they need to be prepared to back up that statement with some sort of reasoning. I never heard another peep out of the person so I guess they were unable to back up their statement.

Yesterday I had someone jump all over me because they *thought* a comment I made about today's country music was aimed at them. I suggest before anyone else goes accusing me of being confrontational that you do a better job of reading my posts beforehand. I'm merely taking part in a discussion of this list, just because I disagree with someone doesn't make me confrontational in the least, it means my opinion differs from theirs.

Maybe it's not the fact that you take part in the conversations and question and ask for examples but rather the way you do it. When you capatilized the "you" in your feedback which I quoted is what I had issue with. When one uses a word in all caps it's considered shouting. He prefaced his statement with IMHO (In My Honest Opinion) indicating that yes he is offering his opinion of which he is entitled. And if he feels they don't belong on the list because he dosn't like them so what?? Maybe he also dosn't like Phish, Widespread Panic, String Cheese Incident, Moe and the "dozens of other musicians" that refered to. The reason he has not replied to you as of yet is because he signed off the boards prior to your post and will not be back on until tomorrow at which time I'm sure he'll either blow you off or offer some sort of feedback. Incidently he would be the first person to defend your right to your opinion even thou it differes from his own. Since I am not the only person who has accused you of being confrontational maybe you should take a good hard look at the way you reply to posts and make them just a tad bit more friendly even thou your opinion is different. In regards to your comment that maybe I should do a better job of reading your posts beforehand let me assure I did read your post and I did comprehend what you were saying. My issue was not with what you were saying but rather the manner in which you expressed yourself.

ph4ever wrote:

Jahfin wrote:

OceanCityGirl wrote:Where to begin...

And why is that? Because YOU don't like them? Like them or not, the Grateful Dead are icons of American music.

And so for a time was David Cassidy. Nope, I don't see the dead as belonging on this list. Not U2, nor the Velvet Underground, or Sly. I don't particularly care for Pink Floyd but you can see the talent and influence on other musicians. Still, I"m not sure they belong either. And while I don't think the Ramones were one of the greatest also they were part of a major change in musical direction. So I agree, you have to have a pioneer of punk. The problem with these lists is how they are defining them. If they're popular music that's one thing. If it's rock that would be another list.

David Cassidy? I believe you have "icon" confused with "teen idol". Perhaps I should of used some different terminology, like modern day American roots music pioneers. The Grateful Dead have without a doubt had a profound effect on the course of music. So have U2, the Velvet Underground and Sly and the Family Stone. The Velvet Underground were instrumental in creating groundbreaking music that would fuel the alternative music movement years later that was then spearheaded by U2, R.E.M. and tons of others. People here may not like alternative music but it is part of music history, like it or not. Sly and the Family Stone most definitely belong because they were among the first to merge R & B with rock n' roll.

While David Cassidy was in fact a teen idol the music of the 70's at that time was filled with may so called "teen idols" During that time the nation was in turmoil over the Vietnam war and so many people were tired of the protest anthems that were going around plus the "acid rock" of the late 60's and the "teen idol" music helped bring the nation into a happier more mellow time. At that time people desired to hear "happy music". While yes Sly and the Family did merge R & B with rock-n-roll one would be remiss to consider them one of the first. You need to take a look at the music of the 50's where you will find the majority of the R & B musicians were considered to be rock-n-roll. Musicians like Chuck Berry, Little Richard and Fats Domino. The Rolling Stones for example credited one of their early musical influences to the music of Muddy Waters. In the 50's and early 60's there was not much of a difference in the minds of the listening audience between R & B artists and rock-n-roll artists.

Jahfin wrote:

LIPH wrote:Any list of the best bands ever that includes the Ramones can't be taken seriously.

A list without the inclusion of the pioneers of punk rock wouldn't be complete. For better or worse, punk rock is a vital part of the musical landscape, that can't be denied. If it wasn't the Ramones then it would be the Sex Pistols, Iggy Pop and the Stooges or the MC5.

nycparrothead wrote:I didn't expect a top 10 but I thought Rush at least deserved an honorable mention...

aquaholic wrote:What about the...................monkeys????

Jahfin wrote:This is the only board I know of when I try to take part in one of the discussions, I am immediately labed "confrontational".

aquaholic wrote:

nycparrothead wrote:I didn't expect a top 10 but I thought Rush at least deserved an honorable mention...

What about the...................monkeys????

LIPH wrote:

aquaholic wrote:

nycparrothead wrote:I didn't expect a top 10 but I thought Rush at least deserved an honorable mention...

What about the...................monkeys????

I was a kid when the Monkees were popular. My brother and some of his friends went to see them at the Forest Hills tennis stadium here in NY back in the 60's. My parents wouldn't let me go because they thought I was too young. The opening act was some guy nobody had ever heard of at the time. Jimi Hendrix.

BTW, I don't recall seeing any rap or hip hop artists on that list. Hasn't that been a vital part of the American music scene for several years now?

Jahfin wrote:

pair8head wrote:

COMMENTARY
By Eric Olsen
MSNBC contributor

When tackling a project as audacious, slippery and fraught with diagnostic peril as “the 10 best rock bands ever,” one can either cower in anticipation of the monsoon of disagreement sure to come and load the package with every manner of weaselly equivocation, or one can swagger ahead blissfully secure in the universal righteousness of one’s judgment. Being American, I choose the latter.

That said. Dude placing the Grateful Dead as number 4 is/was a really bad idea. IMHO They do not belong on the list.

And why is that? Because YOU don't like them? Like them or not, the Grateful Dead are icons of American music. Sure they get a bad rap because of their lengthy jams but with Workingman's Dead and American Beauty they made two of the best albums of American roots music ever committed to vinyl and there's nary a noodly jam to be found. They've also been highly influential; Phish, Widespread Panic, String Cheese Incident, Moe. and dozens of others were inspired by the Dead. In addition to the music itself there's the songwriting of Robert Hunter who rivals Bob Dylan when it comes to the art of songcraft. To each their own, but no list of best bands ever would be complete without the inclusion of the Grateful Dead, they are part of the fabric of Americana.

Jahfin wrote:This is the only board I know of when I try to take part in one of the discussions, I am immediately labed "confrontational".

pair8head wrote:IMHO = In My Humble Opinion.

Am I not entitled to my own opinion? Last time I checked I was.

nycparrothead wrote:

pair8head wrote:IMHO = In My Humble Opinion.

Am I not entitled to my own opinion? Last time I checked I was.

IMHO, you're a sexy beast baby!!

ph4ever wrote:BACK OFF MONKEY BOY

nycparrothead wrote:

ph4ever wrote:BACK OFF MONKEY BOY

Oh, you know that I lust you the mostest!