ILX decides the Poll. 70s Rock Poll vs 70s all genre poll.

ha so basically this is something to point timellison to when he comes along to pretend he doesn't understand in what way do judas priest rock more than jackson browne

― balls, Friday, October 5, 2012 1:24 PM (6 hours ago)

How about this one for ya? Shoes used Marshall half stacks and had crunch and power and Television used Fender Super Reverbs. Case closed.

Well if we're determining what rocks based on equipment than ELP is the most rockingest band that ever played.

I won't link them but look at the promo videos for "Too Late" and "Tomorrow Night" on youtube and tell me I'm wrong.

On the other poll, I was mostly wondering if people were determining more about what doesn't rock based on equipment.

While I'm at it, here's the other thing that's sticking in my craw a little. Roxy Music is OK but "new wave is out." As with the Shoes issue, I actually think there's some merit to including Roxy on the basis of heaviness, but then you get down to the question of which new wave bands were heavier and which ones were lighter. Even a group like A Flock of Seagulls - I think about what kind of amps they might have used, how hard their drummer played, etc.

How about this one for ya? Shoes used Marshall half stacks and had crunch and power and Television used Fender Super Reverbs. Case closed.

While I'm all for poll-runner-as-dictator model of ballot polling (jjj otm), the rationale behind excluding Big Star & Shoes from this particular 1970s rock poll is wha.. actually, nevermind.

then vote for an alltime poll and you can vote for anything from the 70s

Why don't you just include them? Or at least include Shoes, who were heavy. And the Knack, who had a pretty shredding lead guitarist.

Hey AG, you can exclude Shoes, Big Star & really whatever you goddam well please & I would still rather do the rock poll b/c, even if some ppl see yr strictures as arbitrary, in the end we'll end up with a long, unique list of shit to choose amongst & you'll run it down from like #433 or whatever & it will be fun, just like the 1980s poll was. Just do yr thing, man. This is ilm, we do what we want!

first off, AG I said this to you in private, but I think you're fucking nuts for committing to do two more polls so soon afterwards; not in a 'clean your messes' sense, just more in a 'guh!' sense. crut reminded me upthread that I was actually going to persuade you to do an all-time funk poll but I don't know how many ballots it would get, but w/e do what you do...

I feel like the problem that has happened is that as the 80s poll, esp the albums part, gained more and more attention from non-participants, due to its unexpected and/or batshit results, more people are trying to take part in this, coming in kind of unaware that not only was the 80s poll nominations process nothing but AG using the mighty veto wherever and whenever (to the point of jeopardizing key friendships of his) but that that ended up being one of the major point of interests for the participants: AG scribbling lines between "rock" and "non-rock" in what seemed like an arbitrary manner generated a suitable amount of dramatic tension, because nobody knew what results to expect. And what meager expectations we came up with were confounded--NOBODY expected Big Black to take both 80s polls.

ok that post was kind of ridiculous and long winded; sorry bout that

but it's OTM. one reason i didn't vote was because of the restrictions.

hey if someone does start a funk poll is it ok if i whine and raise hell and pretend that someone saying bootsy collins is funkier than gordon lightfoot is being arbitrary? parameters are pretty clear and have been restated over and over. carducci rock, anything xhuxk eddy would call metal, plus heavy metal. should be noted also that even after ag gave in to whiners and pretended that fables of the reconstruction rocks harder than reign in blood or back in black that the whiners didn't even bother to vote. they made sure to turn up here and whine again though.

oh come on, trying to act like "rock" and "pop" weren't deeply intertwined in the 80s is stretching it a bit. putting forth a definition of rock that welcomes Up on the Sun, warily includes Days of wine and Roses, but excludes Crazy Rhythms is not going to seem like the most intuitive approach. And all this namechecking of xhuxk makes me really badly want to nominate this album for the 70s rock poll (if it happens)(which I want it to):

http://www.thefunkstore.com/CurrentCDs/March2006/CD-TeenaMarieWildPeaceful.jpg

anyways I had zero problem (well, almost zero: I wanted to vote for Return of the Giant Slits, but my nom got overrided or ignored or w/e, but really no biggie) with the way AG ran the 80s poll or the way he may or may not run this poll; I was just observing that a lot of ilxors seemed to be excited with how crazy the results of the 80s poll was and seemed to want to be a part of the 70s poll without realizing that the nominations process was the craziest part.

I guess what I'm really trying to say is: don't get butthurt about getting noms thrown out because the lack of really clear boundaries is actually one of the most exciting parts of the poll

(but if you throw out my Las Grecas nom AG then we are quits forever lol)

But the criteria for including Loaded and excluding non-Exile Stones albums don't seem as clear-cut as the example you give.

xpost to balls

hai guyz i have no pony in this race cos too many polls plus i don't really care about what ROCKS right now

BUT

i think the attempt to define an aesthetic here is kinda interesting, and i'm also interested in the attitude of people to borderline cases. it raises a few questions for me.

a) ordinarily i wd be wary of arguments that say "you just know when something is x" but i feel like knowing when something ROCKS is, for the huge majority of cases, pretty obvious

b) so why do quibbles arise? do people genuinely have a different conception of what ROCKING is? how diffuse is this conception? are there people out there - maybe not on ILX - who think the Ted Heath Orchestra ROCKS LIKE FUCK?

c) or are the borderline cases more often a result of people who know in their hearts that record x doesn't ROCK but really want to talk about it anyway? cos imo there's a big wide board out there to start threads - or polls, god help us - with any criteria you as an individual fancy

d) i figure the criteria here aren't nearly as abstruse as people wanna make them, and most of the blur is the result of point c. as i said, some of the arguments over the borderline cases are illuminating but still, they're borderline cases because they don't really ROCK

e) AG, this is your poll really. if i was you i'd drop the consensus-building shtick, invite the noms, then wield the veto with despotic abandon. every genre-esque poll on this board immediately invites peeps who take delight in challenging our conceptions of what a genre is. good for them. take it outside.

peace.

loaded is only velvets nominated right? i probably would've had 3 stones - sticky fingers, exile, some girls - and if only one some girls but i also argued that any not obv hard rock album better be able to hold it's own w/ heavy sabbath, ac/dc/ motorhead, etc. and that ag should err on side of caution; ag decided 'one stones album' as a compromise between anti-rolling stone canonicity and the absurdity of not having any stones in the poll (tbh i would've liked to have seen tattoo you in 80s poll but not shedding any tears). there's also only one who album fwiw. meat puppets were an sst band and up on the sun was their least rawk album in the poll, pointing out that the feelies most rawk album maybe rocks as hard as the meat puppets least rawk album isn't exactly a winning argument, it's like pointing out don mattingly had better numbers than bill mazeroski or ozzie smith and then ignoring that maz and oz aren't in the hof cuz of their numbers. also should be noted that xhuxk didn't call teena marie a heavy metal artist, he called emerald city a heavy metal album - and a good chunk of it, the first 3/4 iirc, is as hard rock as 'computer blue' if not 'let's go crazy'. personally would've liked to have seen more moroder jordache flashdance aor disco on it (if only cuz then that spotify playlist would actually the greatest rock radio station of all time) but i'm not mystified about why 'beat it' or 'call me' aren't on there. loaded i'd have no problem excluding personally (ie i'm not voting for it) but it seems fair to include since god knows the other vu would qualify. if it had been a zombies album it could sound the same but probably wouldn't be in there. cue timellison to wonder in what way 'sister ray' rocks more than 'a rose for emily'.

durr any not obv hard rock ARTIST'S album better be able to blah blah blah rather

idk I do tend to be more attracted to 'rock' as a vehicle for conceptual excess rather than any sort of headbanger purity quotient. Fables of the Reconstruction made the lower half of my ballot, and tho it probably doesn't RAWK as much as Document, let alone any metal band, I feel like it's moodier, murkier, less immediate, seems less concerned with songwriting or pop pleasure than with capturing an altered state of consciousness, a certain surrealism (regrettably understated), which is one of the big things I go to for rock, though that certainly isn't the strongest example of it (xp to Noodle)

Balls I am flattered you engaged with all my assertions \m/ I am still convinced rock and pop are harder to parse than yall are making it out to be, but you've convinced me that my use if the word 'arbitrary' was perhaps a bit wrong-headed

fwiw i go thru this process a lot when i'm trying to decide what folders to store my mp3s in and my decisions are often pretty arbitrary too but i think in this poll the distinction between ROCKING and rock is central

yeah that's why i've used the term rawk cuz rock can be a very different thing - ie fables the least rawk rem of the 80s but i could see an argument for being their most rock album (i'm not sure even i'm following me here so don't feel bad if you're not).

i think my basic working definition of rawk is that it's the non-sublimated expression of aggression. that is why a lot of rem and intellectualised indie pop would fail to qualify, but why a lot of eg free jazz and industrial and techno and "classical" should

by rawk i mean that which rocks

aggression is the wrong word, but there should be some basic level of kick out the jams animal energy involved

bingo! albert ayler rawks. rem don't.

wd argue that, say, Ayler might rawk, but doesn't ROCK

See, when you dilute "aggression" into "energy", that's where AG is getting the Springsteen problem from.

i think if you're gonna ROCK then you must make prominent use of overdriven guitars or machines aping overdriven guitars

bingo. right there.

yeah but then again stravinsky's rite of spring ROCKS and that's just a bunch of bassoon bullshit

dude swung harder than branca too

yes, the idea that rock has to feature guitars or machines aping guitars just doesn't compute with me (and that's not a justification for the nice).

This probably doesn't help AG at all but I'd much prefer a 70s poll of everything other than rock or music that rocks. If it even remotely swings, fuggedabahdit.

AG needs a time out. Better to think about ideas than poll them.

I think AG knows ehat he's doing if we let him go ahead and do it. There was a Nurse with Wound album that made the 80s album poll--whose name escaspes me atm--that doesn't ROCK in any kind of received sense, but everybody congratulated each other on it making the poll nonetheless.

Raspberries, Blue Ash, Shoes = hard rock. As Metal Mike Saunders once pointed out, Raspberries had the balls to open for B.O.C.

pointing out that the feelies most rawk album maybe rocks as hard as the meat puppets least rawk album isn't exactly a winning argument

Huh, must have missed that argument.

loaded is only velvets nominated right?

It's the only one they released with Lou Reed in the 70s. I wouldn't comment on it if it were a matter of the albums with Cale.

ag decided 'one stones album' as a compromise between anti-rolling stone canonicity and the absurdity of not having any stones in the poll (tbh i would've liked to have seen tattoo you in 80s poll but not shedding any tears).

Well, is 'anti-RS canonicity' the point or is polling albums that rock the point? Including stuff like VU and Television would seem to make the poll MORE pro-RS than even the average FM classic rock station.

there's also only one who album fwiw.

There are two listed on the spreadsheet.

loaded i'd have no problem excluding personally (ie i'm not voting for it) but it seems fair to include since god knows the other vu would qualify.

Ah, OK, I see your point here.

I don't want to be a dick. It's AG's poll and it's up to him to decide what's included. The last one turned out great. I just think it would help to have clearer guidelines off the bat, like we had with the other poll.

I love Television and would likely vote for them in any case whereas I'm personally not as enthusiastic about Springsteen and non-Exile Stones. So maybe it's a little odd that I'm questioning/arguing this.

It's nice that so many care about this.
Most of these arguments make it look like another all-genre poll would be better but to get crazy results everyone would need to vote in the style of the 80s poll. Would that happen? I would definitely have to make the no more than 2 albums by one band rule. (bowie counts as a band in this case) even if it means i cant vote all the funkadelic and break my heart)

If enough agree to vote in that style ie rocking or experimental (ie krautrock or weird nww type) then an all genre poll could work.
To get crazy results has nothing to do with the nominations its up to those who vote.

After reading this thread I've changed my mind and I'm convinced this is the way forward. I know jf has said there's 2 polls already on this but his poll excluded the previous results so another all-time poll wont just be the 3rd poll with the same results as the previous 2.

Thewhole point of my polls is to introduce music to everyone. We can do it with a larger rollout, something an all-genre 70s poll hasn't had. It will in no way diminish jf's previous poll or the other one. That would not be the point of it.

And at the end of the day, I am running it so need to make the ultimate decisions but I'd like to know most will agree with what we do.

I say CALL it the 70s things that rock poll but establish no stated boundaries, and let ppl vote in that spirit (whatever that means to them in their personal relationship w/jesus)

There was a Nurse with Wound album that made the 80s album poll--whose name escaspes me atm--that doesn't ROCK in any kind of received sense, but everybody congratulated each other on it making the poll nonetheless.

it was soliloquy for lilith. agreed it was an odd choice for that poll but seeing it there there was no way i wasn't going to vote for it and perhaps someone will now be intrigued to check it out. as it's an exquisite record, surely that can only be a good thing?

I'm prob repeating myself now but really I don't why this has to be a difficult process. In my head it works like -
(1) People nominate albums that they think should be included in the poll
(2) If an album nominated feels like a bit of a borderline case, there will prob be a bit of discussion with people making some arguments as to whether it does or doesn't rock (these can be interesting and don't have to involve people shouting at each other).
(3) AG then gets the final say as to whether the nominations are accepted as he's the one running the poll.
Can't see why anyone would have a problem with that?

stirmonster do you agree then an all-genre poll but we trust everyone to vote in the albums that rock style of the 80s poll to get good results?
xp

xp or as Edward usefully put it in the other thread 'just nominate it dudes, it if gets shot down you can tell yr therapist about it'.

sure AG. also agree with the above that it's your poll so you should have final say. i've run out of things i want to talk to my therapist about anyway.

xp or as Edward usefully put it in the other thread 'just nominate it dudes, it if gets shot down you can tell yr therapist about it'.

― Sock Puppets II (Mr Andy M)

This is def. my attitude as well. Make yer case, and if the Emperor of Rock Polls goes thumbs-down, OH WELL -- it's not like we're going to have a shortage of other polls in the future...

But then again I'm AGs friend and have a similar "arbitrary" outlook on what rawks. I think we pretty much only disagree on Rush.

no you like Yes and Gentle Giant and Jethro Tull and ELP

Well hell, JT won a Metal grammy - isn't that rawking?? ;P

Who let Chuck on the voting panel that year?

The National Association for the Promotion of Flute Solos.