*Music Banter Hall of Fame: Induction Thread 6*

[TheBig3]

Originally Posted by Anteater

So it's better to be the actual Rolling Stone (CCR, Iron Maiden, Hendrix) and go for the painfully obvious than to appreciate The Residents in the context of this thread and their influence on non-mainstream music? How disappointing: this just goes to show how rampant both ignorance (They're not Indie or Post-punk related? Must not be important) and laziness (3 seconds on one or two YT vids shouldn't be a deciding factor for a band with 100+ albums) are amidst a supposedly mature and open-minded bunch of people.

Hey temper-tantrum,

Maybe Hendrix, Maiden, and CCR are just good? I don't know, that might just be crazy talk.

I personally don't like Maiden but I guess people do. The kicker about RS is the need to promote their dingy-nightclub superstars because they were on the outside and they were the only ones who got it.

Maybe you're not open minded enough to understand we think your pet bands suck big hairy ape nuts.

[Janszoon]

The Residents: Yes. Unique and influential, that's the winning combination.

Iron Maiden: Yes, I guess. I don't personally like them but I recognize their level of influence.

Jimi Hendrix: Yes, of course. One of the most influential people in the history of rock and also quite unique. Win.

Creedence Clearwater Revival: Sure. Maybe not the most unique or most influential but still a damn good band.

Mission of Burma: Yes. Very influential in formation of indie rock. Also from my home town.

Ludwig Van Beethoven: Yes. Considering we're still talking about him almost 200 years after his death I'd say he deserves to make it in.

[Anteater]

Who said I was mad? I was having fun..not to mention the fact I voted for Hendrix and Iron Maiden also!

However Big3, if you don't get a band or lack experience with them, you could at least abstain from them. Cutting into a group's chances of joining the Hall because you don't want an "Internet Rolling Stone" is ridiculous: this forum is biased certainly, but not for bands like The Residents. The fact that they even made it this far is actually kind of surprising in and of itself...or are you of the opinion that only Beefheart and Zappa are the only avant-garde people good enough for the HoF?

[TheBig3]

Don't hate on me because my argument resonates.

I vote the way I vote. The rules have always been there that there wasn't a criteria for voting.

C'est la vie

[Anteater]

I'm not hating on you: I just found your line of reasoning odd.

[TheBig3]

Originally Posted by Anteater

I'm not hating on you: I just found your line of reasoning odd.

Which is fine, I still doubt that we'd become the eRS. You thwart that by selecting newer acts. We're the internet, we can move faster than print - exploit it.

But the Residents, i feel, are in the same social catagory as Daniel Johnston and Uriah Heep. They stand at the edge of mass common knowledge, you've maybe heard of them, but never heard them.

It almost lends itself to, "people just didn't get it. If you listen to them, you'll love them."

Its not bad that they're like that, but Rolling Stone creates its own writers. This put-upon character who consoles himself with music, who's smart enough to get it, and who's worth a whole lot if only people would look. They take to these acts because its the personification of their own emotion.

Call me crazy but I don't want to take part in such a morally bankrupt operation.

Residents, if you were hoping to get in on my vote, thats one star you're wishing on that turned into a plane.

[lieasleep]

Originally Posted by mr dave

no. more like when i look back at my own personal tastes the handful of Residents tracks that i've heard and liked don't outweigh the ones i've heard and said 'meh' about. Baja? and The Car Thief are 2 of the most played mp3s on my system, but that doesn't change the fact that they're part of a minority to 'my' tastes in regards to the group. so why should I vote yes?

if anything it seems there are too many people trying to prove some higher level of musicality by providing what is commonly seen as the 'right' answer in regards to what makes a grand connaisseur de musique. people answer like there's going to be a test on this later. THAT is where the comparison to Rolling Stone comes in, by forcing the expected - hey look! we're the internet! we're SUPPOSED to be high minded and celebrating nothing but the obscure and unsung from the mainstream....

good for you dave, seriously, gotta stay true to yourself, you don't like the residents? vote no. expectations are for the byrds