Music Banter Hall Of Fame: Nominations Thread

[Janszoon]

Originally Posted by duga

I actually sometimes wonder if Jimi deserves all the praise he receives.

I love his music, personally...but I can't help but feel he is one of those flukes that everyone just agrees they have to like. Did he really make music that everyone enjoys?

I think one of the things that makes him so special is that, even though he is hugely influential, nobody who came after him has really ever been able to replicate his style. It's pretty impressive when you think about it because so often the thunder of the highly influential is often muted over the years by the simple fact that their formerly innovative sound becomes commonplace.

That said, naturally I vote yes for Jimi.

[NumberNineDream]

Originally Posted by Vanilla

It's like asking whether Elvis is the King of Rock N' Roll. Yes times infinity.

That's the worst comparison anyone can come up with...

[Janszoon]

Originally Posted by NumberNineDream

That's the worst comparison anyone can come up with...

Definitely.

[The Bullet]

Originally Posted by qspmedia

I love Led Led Zeppelin....

Um... That was the first nomination. Click the ">>" button on the bottem left of the page (not the "writing a post" page) to see the latest discussion... (also "<" to see the last few comments, ">" to see the next few, "<<" to go back to the begining.) There's more but I gtg...

[lucifer_sam]

Just a note: not all influence is good influence. While he inspired plenty of artists' infectious groove he's also responsible for some of the most cringe-worthy indulgent wankery. Of course, it's not like that was his fault.

Any chance we can stop voting in "safe" artists? They might be worth the nomination but there's hardly any discussion behind them.

[Akira]

Get nominating then, lol :P:

I know what you mean though, but there are still some 'safe' artists I'd like to see in the HoF before less worthy ones.

[Urban Hat€monger ?]

I think the reason only safe artists being nominated is because of the way the voting works.
I said pretty much from the start that it's pointless counting 'No' votes against 'Yes' votes.

You need a huge number of Yes votes to get in just to counteract the 'No' votes. Because of this only safe artists will get in.

Let's just have a prerequisite number of Yes votes needed, say 15 or 20 and let them have a week to get to that total.

It'll totally freshen up this thread.

[Violent & Funky]

So nobody has nominated the Chili Peppers, eh?

[crash_override]

Originally Posted by lucifer_sam

Just a note: not all influence is good influence. While he inspired plenty of artists' infectious groove he's also responsible for some of the most cringe-worthy indulgent wankery. Of course, it's not like that was his fault.

Any chance we can stop voting in "safe" artists? They might be worth the nomination but there's hardly any discussion behind them.

Not to mention Lenny Kravitz.

[Janszoon]

Originally Posted by Urban Hatemonger

I think the reason only safe artists being nominated is because of the way the voting works.
I said pretty much from the start that it's pointless counting 'No' votes against 'Yes' votes.

You need a huge number of Yes votes to get in just to counteract the 'No' votes. Because of this only safe artists will get in.

Let's just have a prerequisite number of Yes votes needed, say 15 or 20 and let them have a week to get to that total.

It'll totally freshen up this thread.

That's actually a really good idea!