Artists of the Decades

[Freypower]

That’s exactly why I seldom pay much attention to critics – they usually don’t know what they’re talking about. Many of them seem to have this weird notion that if it’s not hard rock, then it’s not rock and roll. As I said before, IMO, a large part of the Eagles’ legacy is that they were the most successful at closing the gap between many musical genres.

But so were Led Zeppelin. It could be argued that because Zeppelin were 'hard rock' they covered that area too, which the Eagles really didn't (the Eagles did a few uptempo songs which weren't really 'hard rock' in the Zeppelin sense). The Eagles are always referred to as 'soft rock' even though I take your point about critics. I think that Led Zeppelin had more influence worldwide than the Eagles did across hard rock, folk and country as well as in the 'mystical' lyrics of many of their songs. The Eagles influence it seems to me was mainly confined to the United States, where country rock is a a major genre. Elsewhere if artists did country influenced songs they cited Gram Parsons, the Byrds, Dylan, even the Stones in their 'country' period, rarely the Eagles.

I think Led Zeppelin also had a larger than life mystique due to all the stories of their life on the road. The band members were also fairly well known. That can't be said of the Eagles, even today, where some would even struggle to identify Joe as a member.

[Topkat]

I'm going to jump into this conversation with JMHO.

I have to agree that the 50's were Elvis

The 60's go to the Beatles and an honorable mention to the Stones

As for the 70's I'm going to go with Led Zeppelin, the Who, & CSN, who in my opinion started the whole soft rock, & strong harmony genre. It started at Woodstock & then they just blew up.

For the 80's, I'm going to have to put Madonna in the 80's. She hit the scene in about 85' and was a very strong influence for the rest of the decade.
80's also go to Micheal Jackson & Bruce Springsteen, who was also a huge influence.

The 90's in my opinion have to go to U2, & Nirvana. When Nirvana came out that was the end of the "hair band' era, & pretty much blew away all those pretty boys like Motley Crue, Warrent & Poison, & that genre was OVER. They have even said this themselves in a documentary. They said, when they heard Nirvana, they knew they were DONE! I am not a fan of Nirvana & I never really did "get it", but with them "grunge was born". They introduced a new sound that lasted throughout the 90's. The influence was strong & lasting.

For 2000, I'm not quite sure. The decade had a wide variety of pop. I can't really give credit to anyone in particular. In the rock genre, I'm going with Green Day. Their album, "American Idiot" was major & was turned into a Broadway show.

Just my 2 cents..

[Freypower]

The Who's most influential decade was the 60s. Although they survived into the 70s they didn't produce very much new work. While Who's Next was released in 1971 and the film of Tommy in 1975 really their best work was behind them.

[Topkat]

Although the Who started out in the late 60's, the Tommy album was released in 1969 & they toured it in the early 70's. The first rock opera was considered so innovative, they were invited to play it at the Metropolitan Opera House. The ONLY rock band to ever play there. I was there & saw this show. This was the best concert I have ever seen. They also were the first band to do "arena rock" playing the biggest stadiums in the UK & US. I think their influence was in the early 70's, but that's JMO, but I do agree that they started out in the late 60's.

[Freypower]

The Who were formed in 1964. Their first hit, I Can't Explain, was in 1965. To me that is at best 'mid 60s', not late 60s.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_who

[Topkat]

The Who released 6 albums in the 70's, just because they formed in 64, doesn't mean they had no influence in the 70's. They really didn't hit the US until they released Tommy in 1969. They were huge in the 70's. I still think they were a major influence on rock in the 70's. JMO

[Ive always been a dreamer]

The fact is that The Who released their first album in early 1965 just months after the Rolling Stones released their first album. I think that most people would consider the Stones as a band of the 60's, and that holds true for The Who as well. However, I do think there is some validity in the argument that much of The Who's success and influence carried over to the 70's. I think they released pretty much the same number of albums and had as many hits in the 70's than they did in the 60's, unlike the Stones who kind of faded in the 70's. This is the same argument I was trying to make for selecting Madonna as my artist of the 90's.

Now, jumping back to Nirvana ...

I don't get why they are so often credited with inventing 'grunge'. They were just one of several Seattle bands that were performing that style of music in the mid to late 80's, including Pearl Jam. I would also take issue with the notion that their influence was strong and lasting. Almost all of the grunge bands that gained notoriety in the 90's are no more. The grunge movement has pretty much died out. Again, Pearl Jam is about the only prominent grunge band that remains. IMO, they are the band that has had the most influence on that genre and deserves the most credit.

I remember this discussion coming up several years ago, and I did some web searching at the time. Nirvana seemed to be synonymous with overrated bands. Their name appeared near or at the top of virtually every list I saw. They were often times credited as being the most overrated band ever. Now, that's where they can get my vote as well.

[Ive always been a dreamer]

But so were Led Zeppelin. It could be argued that because Zeppelin were 'hard rock' they covered that area too, which the Eagles really didn't (the Eagles did a few uptempo songs which weren't really 'hard rock' in the Zeppelin sense). The Eagles are always referred to as 'soft rock' even though I take your point about critics. I think that Led Zeppelin had more influence worldwide than the Eagles did across hard rock, folk and country as well as in the 'mystical' lyrics of many of their songs. The Eagles influence it seems to me was mainly confined to the United States, where country rock is a a major genre. Elsewhere if artists did country influenced songs they cited Gram Parsons, the Byrds, Dylan, even the Stones in their 'country' period, rarely the Eagles.

I think Led Zeppelin also had a larger than life mystique due to all the stories of their life on the road. The band members were also fairly well known. That can't be said of the Eagles, even today, where some would even struggle to identify Joe as a member.

FP, I agree that Zeppelin crossed some musical genres as well, but I would argue that they didn’t do it as well or as successfully as the Eagles. I also agree that there may be some truth in what you say about the Eagles influence maybe being more confined to the U.S. It’s true that Zeppelin did have the mystique and recognition that you refer to. The Eagles, by their own volition, chose to remain rather anonymous as individuals in the 70’s. Even at the height of their fame, you didn’t even see their faces on their album covers. I'm not saying that Led Zeppelin isn't deserving because they were definitely influential, but I guess part of the problem I have with them is that much of their appeal is based on this mystique rather than their music. I think this is even more true today since their cult-like following doesn’t seem to have crossed over to younger audiences very well. I still believe that the Eagles’ music always did and still does have much more mainstream mass appeal across the globe than Led Zeppelins. Of course, it is purely a matter of personal preference about which criteria you value more in a band.

[Henley Honey]

I think Led Zeppelin also had a larger than life mystique due to all the stories of their life on the road. The band members were also fairly well known. That can't be said of the Eagles, even today, where some would even struggle to identify Joe as a member.

I'd recognize Robert Plant and Jimmy Paige if I saw them, but I couldn't pick the other two out of a lineup, so I have to disagree with you on your "fairly well known" statement. Plus, I couldn't tell you one single story about their life on the road. Now The Who -- I could quote you chapter and verse and I "came up" in the 70's.

[TimothyBFan]

I'd recognize Robert Plant and Jimmy Paige if I saw them, but I couldn't pick the other two out of a lineup, so I have to disagree with you on your "fairly well known" statement. Plus, I couldn't tell you one single story about their life on the road. Now The Who -- I could quote you chapter and verse and I "came up" in the 70's.

You need some educating!!! You've surely heard the fish story, haven't you? Anyways, I could say the same of the Who. Don't get it and would never consider them a defining rock n roll band. But that's just me. I could go on for pages about how I feel Zep should be at the top of this list!

As for grunge, NONE of those bands started grunge IMO. There was this little known artist by the name of Neil Young that had done that a decade or so before.

I honestly don't think I could even start to list 1 or 2 artist as Artist of the Decade. There are so many. Yes, there are those that probably had more of a bearing on rock n roll than others but I think this is one of those topics that everyone would have a very different opinion on. The obvious would always be Elvis, Beatles, Springsteen (ugh!!), Madonna, Michael Jackson but so many others that without them, there are a lot people that might not have gotten into music if they hadn't heard a certain band/artist/song. KNIM?