Blue Moon Top 100 Bands Artists - Full List of Artists (pg 287)

Up until around six months ago, Sgt Pepper excepted my Beatles listening was restricted to the red and blue compilation albums. Unusual for me because I'm not one for greatest hits compilations, I usually prefer to listen to an album but those two are so good that it's almost all you need. I have started remedying the omissions though and listen to actual albums more now. Sure there's a few dud tracks but a few hidden gems as well. The Beatles weren't in my top 15 but no complaints from me about them being number one.

I haven't seen the documentary that @Mad Eyed Screamer posted but will, I suspect that it will resonate with me. It may sound very dramatic but the Smiths more than any other band have been in the right place at the right time in my life and although I wouldn't go as far as to say they saved my life they certainly gave me hope in dark times. I suspect I'm far from being the only one that has a deep emotional connection to their music.
 
Protein Junkie said:
Please let me know if there an appetite for Best Female Vocalist which I am willing to run soon
Click to expand...
Sounds like a ripper protein and thanks to Rob for a fantastic effort more than keeping BH on his toes.

only joking BH both of you are to be commended for what you have coordinated to date.

Best threads seen for sometime.
 
Protein Junkie said:
Shame you didn’t participate.
Most of mine had no hope and it will be interesting to see the full list.
Click to expand...
I got it whittled down to about 45 artists but couldn’t really justify some over others. Plus I missed some off! I reckon about 10 out of the 100 would have been in that 45, but Queen is a good example of the problem. Used to listen to them a lot but rarely do now, but they’re a major part of my life and I still rate their early stuff. Do I include them over a more modern band that I listen to more often today? Do I go with my less refined music taste from decades ago or what I desire today?
 
Citizen of Legoland said:
I got it whittled down to about 45 artists but couldn’t really justify some over others. Plus I missed some off! I reckon about 10 out of the 100 would have been in that 45, but Queen is a good example of the problem. Used to listen to them a lot but rarely do now, but they’re a major part of my life and I still rate their early stuff. Do I include them over a more modern band that I listen to more often today? Do I go with my less refined music taste from decades ago or what I desire today?
Click to expand...
I had that very same issue.
In the end I mixed it up a bit at the expense of some very good bands including Van Halen , Black Sabbath and early Scorpions amongst others.
I don’t really listen to then anymore although a big part of my youth.
 
Citizen of Legoland said:
I got it whittled down to about 45 artists but couldn’t really justify some over others. Plus I missed some off! I reckon about 10 out of the 100 would have been in that 45, but Queen is a good example of the problem. Used to listen to them a lot but rarely do now, but they’re a major part of my life and I still rate their early stuff. Do I include them over a more modern band that I listen to more often today? Do I go with my less refined music taste from decades ago or what I desire today?
Click to expand...

I inlcuded Queen on the very basis of how important to me they were in the 70's. Mind I am going to see them with AL again in June or should I say I have a ticket. My next gig was Cheap Trick in a few weeks but it just moved to October.
 
bennyboy said:
I know I'm in the minority but a day in the life is the only redeeming feature on that most overrated album ever.
Click to expand...
That album changed the way 'pop' music was thought about, more than any that had gone before it and after it. It's hard to think of any other album that changed the way music was created or thought about. It also broke boundaries as to how far you could push pop music.

You have to remember that up until, say, the mid-60s bands like The Beatles etc were thought of as what we'd think of as boybands or similar today. It was music for kids. It wasn't an art form, just disposable music. This album pretty much changes all that - pop music is now a 'serious' art form. It also shows every other musician what you can do and pushes the idea that you can use Victorian fairs, drugs, avant-garde classical tape loops, Indian influences, classical orchestras, psychedelics, childhood memories and blend them into rock and make it look as natural as a nursery rhyme.

You have to remember that about a year beforehand they gave up playing live as they couldn't hear themselves play. They then decided to make an album in the studio and would use it's full potential. It had never been done before so no one had any idea as to what a studio-only album could sound like. When it was released, it was jaw-dropping. There's no comparison that you could make to it today.

The album cover, printing of lyrics on the inside and how it was recorded was unlike anything you'd seen or heard before. When it was released, it was an event and it's difficult to imagine what it must've been like to todays ears. Bear in mind Strawberry Fields and Penny Lane were to be on the album but had to be released as a double-a side to show they were still going.

You may not like it, but it is definitely not overrated. It is probably the most important album in rock music history.
 
GoatersLeftShin said:
That album changed the way 'pop' music was thought about, more than any that had gone before it and after it. It's hard to think of any other album that changed the way music was created or thought about. It also broke boundaries as to how far you could push pop music.

You have to remember that up until, say, the mid-60s bands like The Beatles etc were thought of as what we'd think of as boybands or similar today. It was music for kids. It wasn't an art form, just disposable music. This album pretty much changes all that - pop music is now a 'serious' art form. It also shows every other musician what you can do and pushes the idea that you can use Victorian fairs, drugs, avant-garde classical tape loops, Indian influences, classical orchestras, psychedelics, childhood memories and blend them into rock and make it look as natural as a nursery rhyme.

You have to remember that about a year beforehand they gave up playing live as they couldn't hear themselves play. They then decided to make an album in the studio and would use it's full potential. It had never been done before so no one had any idea as to what a studio-only album could sound like. When it was released, it was jaw-dropping. There's no comparison that you could make to it today.

The album cover, printing of lyrics on the inside and how it was recorded was unlike anything you'd seen or heard before. When it was released, it was an event and it's difficult to imagine what it must've been like to todays ears. Bear in mind Strawberry Fields and Penny Lane were to be on the album but had to be released as a double-a side to show they were still going.

You may not like it, but it is definitely not overrated. It is probably the most important album in rock music history.
Click to expand...
Still shite.lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.