Most shocking Rock & Roll Hall of Fame snubs (according to CNN.com)

btw I'm not against THINKING or discussing music actually

i just think bringing douchey fantasy baseball statistics bullshit into music discussions is a pretty poor substitute for actual thought

yeah i agree, 100%. overthinking--generally not a good idea

also clemenza i get the sneaking impression you actually haven't *heard* some of the classic alice cooper records and are just building up this house of cards faux mathematical thing as a smokescreen to disguise the fact that you don't know wtf you are talking about.

(xhukx - spectrum city was basically a mobile DJ thing that played parties on long island, was basically chuck d and the core of the bomb squad dudes, i think chuck just started rapping because that was becoming the fashion for the dj crews to have rappers)

Actually, Marsh did write that (blue book) T. Rex entry. (Probably what you meant to say.)

Whoops. I actually though someone else had written that entry. His Bolan praise in the 1001 singles book fucked with my memory of the blue RS book.

(I take that back--"One Toke Over the Line"'s pretty good!)

^^ you just be glad you put this part in

also clemenza i get the sneaking impression you actually haven't *heard* some of the classic alice cooper records and are just building up this house of cards faux mathematical thing as a smokescreen to disguise the fact that you don't know wtf you are talking about.

clemenza is actually Alice Cooper

Dylan has more homers but Alice Cooper has more stolen bases. Velvets lead in hit-by-pitch.

Mr Jiggalo: I've heard all of the songs Chuck listed, albeit not yesterday--should I have relistened to each and every one before posting? And, as I mentioned way upthread, I'm approaching this as someone who loved Alice Cooper back in 1973, when I was 12 years old. I just, kind of, moved on.

Milli Vanilli used steroids

I haven't heard any of the classic alice cooper albums but I have no desire to after having heard lots of alice cooper singles. do the albums sound less like novelty songs you would play at a halloween party?

Come to think of it, I think a lot of the polls on ILM take the peak value/career value split as a given.

― clemenza, Wednesday, March 17, 2010 11:44 AM (7 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

The difference between music and sports and why these formulas dont work is that if an artist falls off the rails you can just ignore the bad shit. I am a huge Black Sabbath fan, but I don't listen to any of the Tony Martin shit because I think it sucks. It has no bearing on how great Vol. 4 is. But when Dale Murphy forgets how to hit, or Steve Sax forgets how to throw, or Willie Mays plays outfield for the Mets like he is perpetually shitfaced, you have to take that into consideration because they are still sinking their team, and this is impossible to ignore.

True enough, but again, career value/peak value isn't a formula; it's just an acknowledgement that when somebody says "I love Neil Young," they may be making a general statement about his whole body of work, or they might be zeroing in on his greatest work. I always name Neil Young as my favourite artist ever, but the truth is, I'm zeroing in on that Everybody Knows[i] - [i]Zuma period when I say it; I'm not thinking about the albums he made in the '90s and 2000s, most of which I don't even own.

Yeah, but they don't go and take last years trophy off them. (xpost)

Autotune = pine tar

True, but using sports metrics to gauge artistic merit, even getting into Hall of Fame type shit, just doesnt work. Even those ridiculous 100 best guitarist things that Rolling Stone periodically shits out are utterly ridiculous.

xpost

And when someone puts up a poll on, say, the best Rolling Stones album between Beggars Banquet and Exile (I'm picking that out of the air, not saying such a poll exists), aren't they implicity suggesting something akin to peak value, even if they don't use those specific words?

clearly 2006 is their strongest year, I mean they made it to the super bowl

Great! And yes, James's formulas give them extra credit for making it to the big show.

http://www.driveaccord.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=17504&stc=1&d=1232422631

I don't know why people are talking as if clemenza's suggestions are so far out of left field (sorry).

Every Joy Division vs New Order discussion comes down to two perfect albums + a bunch of perfect singles vs a lot of really good albums and singles spread out over a longer stretch of time. We talk about career value vs peak value on this board all this time, and even though we might not call it that, the concept is hardly new.

Thank you!

In all seriousness, I guess I'm usually a career value guy. I like artists with sprawling messy discographies with lots of cul de sacs and byways to explore and find connections between (The Fall, Rush, Sun City Girls, Robyn Hitchcock, Dylan etc)

But then when forced to make a list of my favorite records they tend to include mostly peak value things (Laughingstock, Tilt, A Walk Across The Rooftops, Golden Age Of Wireless etc)

Every Joy Division vs New Order discussion comes down to two perfect albums + a bunch of perfect singles vs a lot of really good albums and singles spread out over a longer stretch of time.

As long as those "two perfect albums" are Power, Corruption & Lies and Technique, I am okay with this discussion.

Both better than Closer and/or Unknown Pleasures, much as I love them both.

Every Joy Division vs New Order discussion

and neither of those very fine, influential bands is in the R&R HoF either. and yes, that's a damn shame.

i mean, i can see why the rockist old farts may balk @ New Order (given that the Cure and Depeche Mode aren't in there b/c Wenner, Marsh et. al. don't think they're "rock" enough). but considering all of the critical ink that's been spilled over Joy Division?!?

I think I'm a peak-value-nestled-into-career-value guy. As with the Neil Young example cited above, I love the Beatles for their career value, but I love the Beatles even more for their peak value (which, for me, resides in With the Beatles - Revolver). And I definitely think a meteoric peak value (like Tommy James in the late '60s) leaves behind much greater music than a dutiful career value (for me, somebody like the Pretenders).

It just occurs to me that I've been accused on this thread of a) letting other people do my thinking for me, and b) overthinking. Any bids on letting other people do my overthinking for me?

xxxpost

I knew somebody would say that! I personally think that "Unknown Pleasures" is the only perfect JD album, "Technique" is the only perfect NO album, and NO's best five singles >> JD's best five singles (although LWTUA > any NO single). But the main thing is that NO's longevity is usually their strongest asset in the discussion.

but considering all of the critical ink that's been spilled over Joy Division?!?

in the US though?

Oops--make that Beatles for Sale - Revolver.

It just occurs to me that I've been accused on this thread of a) letting other people do my thinking for me, and b) overthinking. Any bids on letting other people do my overthinking for me?

you forget c) being Alice Cooper

http://www.travelgolf.com/blogs/media/alice_cooper.jpg

"I think I'm a peak-value-nestled-into-career-value guy."

So Clemenza, I definitely don't want to put words in your mouth, so just checking: are you basically saying that you think you outgrew Alice Cooper, because even his best stuff was mere music for 12-year-olds, and sensible grownups should be beyond that? Because if so, that's really sad. (I've moved on from some music too, obviously, and sometimes I like music specifically aimed at grown folks a lot. But I can't think of any great music I've ever really outgrown, agewise.)

The things I have outgrown tend to be music for 15-21 year olds. Stuff for 7-12 year olds I like more than ever and stuff for old people is awesome.

I didn't use the word outgrow, although I'll have to think about that--in Alice Cooper's case, it may apply, although it still seems unduly harsh. There's tons of music from '72 that means as much or more to me today than when I loved it at the age of 12; as I've written elsewhere before (many times), I believe that the music that reaches you when you're 12 or 13 makes the deepest impression of all in your life (one of many reasons I love The Virgin Suicides so much). And I still like "School's Out," and I still like "I'm Eighteen," and I still like "Elected"--just not ready to make the leap that any of them rank with "Heroin" or "Cinnamon Girl" and the rest. But...yeah; past a certain age, I guess I did start to think of Alice Cooper's shtick as pretty corny, just as I did Kiss's. (Which doesn't change the fact that I still count seeing Kiss and Blue Oyster Cult in '76 an autobiographical highlight...it's all very complicated, isn't it?)

xp Though come think of it, I don't really get how "Don’t steal, don’t lift/Twenty years of schoolin’/And they put you on the day shift/Look out kid/They keep it all hid" is aimed at somebody very much older than "I got a baby's brain and an old man's heart/Took eighteen years to get this far/Don't always know what I'm talkin' about/Feels like I'm livin' in the middle of doubt," but maybe I'm missing something.

And you can love Alice's songs but scoff at his schtick (same goes for Dylan, Neil, Lou, and the rest really); it's not all that difficult. (I think his music itself got corny at a certain point in his career -- circa Welcome To My Nightmare, to be specific, though he did some great songs later -- but that goes for all those other guys, too.)

Yes...If you're saying my prefence for Dylan/Neil/Stones/Velvets/Pistols over Alice Cooper resides in the fact that their lyrics were aimed at adults and Alice Cooper's at teenagers, that's quite an extrapolation from anything I've written here. I'm pretty sure every Sex Pistols song was aimed at teenagers, not to mention every great Dylan and Stones song from '65/66.

uh no

waht

And just as a very obvious, mundane observation, I think it is more difficult to separate Alice's music from his schtick (or Kiss's, or Lady Gaga's, or anybody else wildly theatrical) than it is to separate Neil Young's songs from his schtick (plaid shirts?).

Roxy Music, Bowie, early Pet Shop Boys = all used schtick, wrote great songs.

I'm really and truly not anti-schtick...there's good schtick and bad (or at least tiresome) schtick. Don Rickles calling David Letterman a hockey puck: good schtick! Late Woody Allen, tiresome schtick. Alice Cooper? Well, I just lost the magic somewhere along the way.

AC's shtick is more reflected in his music than those other folks. There are chunks of Killer, School's Out & Billion Dollar Babies that sound like they're meant to provide background for the stage show, dancing teeth, whatever. They detract, on the whole.

Thank you! (Every 46 posts I issue a personal thank-you to someone who sides with me.)

I think it is more difficult to separate Alice's music from his schtick (or Kiss's, or Lady Gaga's, or anybody else wildly theatrical)

Why is it hard, though? I'm serious. Just don't look at a picture (or think about the stage show) when you're listening to the songs.

Kinda soured on AC, actually, when I saw him open for Heaven and Hell a couple summers ago. Looked tired, and there was a lot of woman-slapping going on in the show. Maybe he was trying to make a larger point. Dylan at least has the courtesy to do it offstage.

I'm channelling "School's Out" right now...trying...trying...just can't do it.

I mean, yeah, the best of the best of AC is really great. I was just saying that the schtick can get in the way of the songs, by lengthening them beyond single-length for instance.