Started By
Message

re: Most important rock band of the last 25 years?

Posted on 4/3/12 at 12:10 pm to
Posted by JW
Los Angeles
Member since Jul 2004
5263 posts
Posted on 4/3/12 at 12:10 pm to
I certainly respect the Melvins and there place in history (and have actually spent a little time w Buzz), but they are not the most important rock back of the last 25 years.

If you take 25 years literally, i would say REM or U2 would be the answer.

An incredible amount of time making consistently producing viable and commercially successful music.

Posted by Baloo
Formerly MDGeaux
Member since Sep 2003
49645 posts
Posted on 4/3/12 at 12:23 pm to
I think Metallica’s biggest contributions are pre-1987, so they just miss out. Master of Puppets is 1986, and is probably their seminal work. Metallica’s massive influence is in their first four albums, really, and the 25 year cutoff would only include one of them (And Justice for All).

The biggest musical trend in pop music in the past 25 years has been the rise of alternative rock and the rise of hip hop. Since the question is “rock band” and even though I believe in expansive definition of rock, I will not include hip hop. But if I did, the answer is Run-DMC or Public Enemy (though Dr. Dre has a great case if you consider he produced Snoop and Eminem, introducing both to the mainstream – with that extra credit, I’d call him the most influential pop music artist of the past 25 years).

But limiting to a narrow definition of rock, the big seismic shift is the rise of alternative and indie. And that rise traces back to one band – REM. REM is the moment post-punk became “college rock”, which is proto-alternative. They were the elder statesmen of the scene by the time it broke into the mainstream and they still are THE template for how to transition from indie to the majors.

Their use of country elements legitimized it for a generation or rock stars in their wake. Hell, Jack White even recorded one of Loretta Lynn’s albums. Their stage persona is also massively influential. Before REM, rock stars were just that “rock stars”. It was a costume they worse. David Lee Roth didn’t walk down the street in assless chaps. Hair metal bands were putting on a costume to stress their separation from the audience. REM wasn’t the first, but they were the biggest, act to just be regular dudes on stage making music. They removed that sense of “otherness” in rock stars.

They also rooted their songs in the real world. Led Zeppelin sang about wizards, Motley Crue sang about a fantasy world you would never live in… REM sang about your street and your town. They also are the first of many bands which fit the description, to quote Pavement, “none of my favorite singers can sing.” REM could play, but they were a blow to the idea of professionalism – that there was a professional caste of musicians you could never be a part of. They opened the door to the Minutemen’s ideal of “our band could be your life.” The Minutemen, incidentally, opened for REM on their first major tour.

And while I love the Melvins suggestion, they are not the foundational band of grunge. That is either the U-Men if you want to reach back in time, or Mudhoney. I’d love for Mudhoney to be the most influential band of the past 25 years, and I can make that case if you think grunge is the most influential musical moment, but I have to go with REM. Their hands were in everything.
Posted by TheDoc
doc is no more
Member since Dec 2005
99297 posts
Posted on 4/3/12 at 12:33 pm to
quote:

REM


Solid pick and even better post
Posted by Jester
Baton Rouge
Member since Feb 2006
34717 posts
Posted on 4/3/12 at 12:33 pm to
quote:

I agree 100%, Metallica is and always will be one of my favorite bands. In fact Death Magnetic is getting more play on my Ipod than just about anything right now. Great record if you havent heard it.


Do you people listen to your albums underwater? Death Magnetic is one of the worst examples of the loudness wars since, oh, St. Anger. Seriously, they are used as examples of the worst of musical production.
Posted by MStant1
Houston, TX
Member since Sep 2010
4557 posts
Posted on 4/3/12 at 12:34 pm to
quote:

I think Metallica’s biggest contributions are pre-1987, so they just miss out. Master of Puppets is 1986, and is probably their seminal work. Metallica’s massive influence is in their first four albums, really, and the 25 year cutoff would only include one of them (And Justice for All).



So you don't think the Black Album was massively influential on rock music? That's hard to argue.
Posted by H-Town Tiger
Member since Nov 2003
61035 posts
Posted on 4/3/12 at 12:34 pm to
If you are going to exclude Metallic, then I can't see REM being in there either, much of their important work in making college radio was before 87 also.

Reading your case however, I do think we should add REM to the top 5 above over Green Day, no lower than 3rd.

This post was edited on 4/3/12 at 12:38 pm
Posted by Jester
Baton Rouge
Member since Feb 2006
34717 posts
Posted on 4/3/12 at 12:38 pm to
quote:

Nirvana effectively killed glam and hair metal and brought angst to the forefront of mainstream music.


I totally disagree with this. Nirvana just hit at the right time. They didn't "change" anything as far as popularity. They just happened to fit what was being pushed onto the masses. It's like saying the Beatles reinvented music. They did nothing new. They just built on what less popular artists were doing and hit the lottery.
Posted by TheDoc
doc is no more
Member since Dec 2005
99297 posts
Posted on 4/3/12 at 12:39 pm to
I still say nirvana, both musically and culturally.
Posted by MStant1
Houston, TX
Member since Sep 2010
4557 posts
Posted on 4/3/12 at 12:40 pm to
quote:



Do you people listen to your albums underwater? Death Magnetic is one of the worst examples of the loudness wars since, oh, St. Anger. Seriously, they are used as examples of the worst of musical production.


Meh, Death Magnetic really isn't a terrible album. I've said before that it's the type of album I expect from aging rock legends. Metallica will never be able to match the creativity and influence of Master or RTL, but it's still an enjoyable (while admittedly forgettable)album. Had Metallica been making "Death Magnetic" type of albums since the close of the black album tour they wouldn't have soiled their reputation as they did with Load/Re-Load and St. Anger.
Posted by Jester
Baton Rouge
Member since Feb 2006
34717 posts
Posted on 4/3/12 at 12:41 pm to
quote:

someone like Korn or Linkin Park should get some mention as being fore runners of Nu Metal


Dude, Linkin Park rode with their heads up the Nu Metal wave's arse. I don't know where you get the impression that they were fathers of Nu Metal. Deftones/Korn/Papa Roach paved the way for Linkin Park.
Posted by Jester
Baton Rouge
Member since Feb 2006
34717 posts
Posted on 4/3/12 at 12:43 pm to
quote:

I thought about Korn or Linkin Park, but "nu-metal" and "rap metal" is all but dead since about 2004. They were really a short lived phase and I don't see much of their influence showing up in rock or heavy metal today. If we wanted to include rap-metal or nu-metal I would name Faith No More as more important to the genre than LP or Korn.



Along those lines, Nirvana and Pearl Jam are busted, as well. The Pixies and Neil Young beat them to their acts.
Posted by Baloo
Formerly MDGeaux
Member since Sep 2003
49645 posts
Posted on 4/3/12 at 12:45 pm to
The Black album sold boatloads of copies but I wouldn't really call it "influential." Most of the hard rock bands which came post-1991 were more clearly influenced by grunge or Anthrax's rap-metal fusion. The Black Album is a really good comemrcial metal album. It's Hysteria, five years later. Metallica's massive influence, which I'm not discounting, is really in those first four albums. The black album is about when they started to sound like everyone else. Sure, they sold more, but they were no longer plotting their own unique course. they were just one of many, albeit much better than the others (I really do like the Black album, and will even defend both Load and Re-Load).

Cutting of at 1987 for REM, we lose most of their IRS years, but keep Document forward. Document was their first crack into the mainstream (It's the End of the World, One I Love) and Green was their massive breaktrough. Also, their artistic peak is arguable Adventures in Hi Fi or Automatic for the People, so we still have REM's massively influential sonic albums.

It's a period that also includes their transition to the majors (leaving IRS), mentoring young bands (particulary Nirvana - Cobain was famously listening to REM when he shot himself), and even championing underground rap (not well, mind you, but KRS One does appear on Out of Time). They still had massively productive years, even if you lose Radio Free Europe and, I agree, their two best albums -- Reckoning and Fables.
Posted by MStant1
Houston, TX
Member since Sep 2010
4557 posts
Posted on 4/3/12 at 12:45 pm to
quote:

If you are going to exclude Metallic, then I can't see REM being in there either, much of their important work in making college radio was before 87 also.


It's foolish to exclude Metallica. Metallica was considered untouchable until Load came out in 96 which effectively kicked the stool out from under them (somewhat). The reason Load created so much "WTF" is because Metallica WAS metal. It's why it was so funny that Alice in Chains got so much buzz for saying on MTV that friends don't let friends get haircuts. Everyone knew who they were talking about. Those who exclude Metallica forget how huge Metallica's influence is.
Posted by H-Town Tiger
Member since Nov 2003
61035 posts
Posted on 4/3/12 at 12:48 pm to
quote:

They didn't "change" anything as far as popularity. They just happened to fit what was being pushed onto the masses


This could not be more wrong, before Nirvana, hair metal was the rage. After Nirvana it was a totally different scene. Grunge and "alternative" was pushed onto the masses AFTER, not before Nirvana.

quote:

It's like saying the Beatles reinvented music. They did nothing new. They just built on what less popular artists were doing and hit the lottery.


Wow, again, more nonsense, are just trying to be a Jester? No one said The Beatles did not "invent" music, they were however massively influential and lead changing styles.
Posted by MStant1
Houston, TX
Member since Sep 2010
4557 posts
Posted on 4/3/12 at 12:48 pm to
quote:

The Black album sold boatloads of copies but I wouldn't really call it "influential." Most of the hard rock bands which came post-1991 were more clearly influenced by grunge or Anthrax's rap-metal fusion. The Black Album is a really good comemrcial metal album. It's Hysteria, five years later. Metallica's massive influence, which I'm not discounting, is really in those first four albums. The black album is about when they started to sound like everyone else. Sure, they sold more, but they were no longer plotting their own unique course. they were just one of many, albeit much better than the others (I really do like the Black album, and will even defend both Load and Re-Load).



I don't necessarily disagree, but neither do I fully agree.
Posted by constant cough
Lafayette
Member since Jun 2007
44788 posts
Posted on 4/3/12 at 12:48 pm to
KYUSS!
Posted by TheDoc
doc is no more
Member since Dec 2005
99297 posts
Posted on 4/3/12 at 12:49 pm to
quote:

I totally disagree with this. Nirvana just hit at the right time. They didn't "change" anything as far as popularity.


Wow, they absolutely broke down the door for alternative bands in the mainstream.

Smells like teen spirit was a #1 hit and is regarded as one of the best rock songs ever written (however right or wrong that is)

I still remember that music video of them in the gym. Nirvana embodied the culture of the youth of America at the time. Teen angst was at an all time high.
Posted by TheDoc
doc is no more
Member since Dec 2005
99297 posts
Posted on 4/3/12 at 12:49 pm to
quote:

Grunge and "alternative" was pushed onto the masses AFTER, not before Nirvana.


Correct
Posted by MStant1
Houston, TX
Member since Sep 2010
4557 posts
Posted on 4/3/12 at 12:50 pm to
quote:



This could not be more wrong, before Nirvana, hair metal was the rage. After Nirvana it was a totally different scene. Grunge and "alternative" was pushed onto the masses AFTER, not before Nirvana.



Mmmm I think it could be argued that hair metal was already on the way out and that Nirvana was essentially just the last nail in the coffin that was already a dying genre.
Posted by H-Town Tiger
Member since Nov 2003
61035 posts
Posted on 4/3/12 at 12:50 pm to
quote:

Dude, Linkin Park rode with their heads up the Nu Metal wave's arse. I don't know where you get the impression that they were fathers of Nu Metal


I never said they were the fathers of anything, I mentioned them, after Korn, I knew Korn came first, but was not sure of the timeline. They were clearly one of the early fore runners of the genre. Its called a discussion.
first pageprev pagePage 3 of 9Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram