Same here. My actual list of the bands I listended to and had in the 8 track or cassette the most back then would look something like this:Not gonna make a list, but reading through this thread I see no mention of 3 acts that would be a given in my top 10. Two of them would be in my top 3. These 3 elite bands would be
The Faces
Mott The Hoople
Roxy Music
Sometimes quality beats quantity !! Hell," In Utero" Nirvana's last album with great tunes like All Apologies, Heart Shaped Box, Dumb, Rape me , and Penny Royal Tea is a better album then anything PJ ever did.........
I think when you are looking at generating a list like this, it's important to ask yourself: "What am I being asked to do?". The answer here is: I am being asked to list the (10) ten greatest Rock Bands of All time.
Think about that for a minute...The 10 greatest Rock Bands of ALL TIME. How do we measure something so arbitrary? How can we quantify the crieria so as to generate a list that doesn't allow preference to factor in?
I think a great litmus test is this:..Ask yourself which bands will live forever?...Which bands will successfully CROSS GENERATIONS?? If you think the "Seattle Band Movement" in the early 90's changed music forever and will influence the world through its music and will CROSS GENERATIONS...then put a band or two from that movement on your list.
But I would say this to you: Don't think for one second that bands like Alice In Chains, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden, Smashing Pumpkins and even to a large extent Nirvana belong on this list. I was in my College years from '89 - '93, so I saw that movement..I lived it. But do I think any of these bands are in the same category as the likes of: The Beatles, Stones, Zeppelin, AC/DC, The Who, Pink Floyd...Queen, etc..etc... Of course not. The only band that has a chance to be "cross generational" from this Seattle movement is Nirvana (and for those of us that have teenage children, we can attest to this). But Nirvana is a lot like Jimi Hendrix in that they were Pioneers, and years ahead of their time...but they had limited exposure and although they were as influential as anyone can be in the music industry..they didn't have longevity..they were here and gone in a matter of 3-4 years. Just like Hendrix.
How many people put the Jimi Hendrix Experience on their list?....One..two? This is what I mean....Hendrix was unbelievable..anyone who ever saw him...including all the giants in the music industry pay hommage to the Man..but he's not on the list...You have to have staying power to be on this list..and you have to be engrained in everyday Society..your music must be part of the very fabric of Culture.
How is Elvis Presley left off the list...is he not passed down from generation to generation? I'm not a huge Elvis fan but how can he be left off of a list like this? The Beatles, Stones, The Who, Elvis, Zeppelin ...they are all in their 4th generation of fans...Fans born in the 40's-50's, the 60's-70's, the 80's-90's and now 2K10's. Will Nirvana still be remembered and picking up new fans in 50 years from now?? Maybe?? But Pearl Jam won't. Alice In Chains won't.
I agree with EnFuego..that during the early 90's...Pearl Jam was far bigger than Nirvana..but Nirvana struck a chord and a nerve in the very fabric of Youthful angst with "Smells like Teen Spirit" that began a phenomena and opened up Grunge to Mainstream....just my opinion. For those of us who were 20-21 years old during these years..we remember just how big Pearl Jam was. The two biggest bands in the World in 1991-92 were as follows: Metallica and Pearl Jam...period. Guns N Roses would need to be mentioned as well but Axl was well on his way to a meltdown in taking 4+ years to release Illusions I and II. Anyway....
Good topic...well debated.
i actually listen to more ccr and skynyrd than any others....but had to abide by the 10 band rule
Same here. My actual list of the bands I listended to and had in the 8 track or cassette the most back then would look something like this:
1.Faces
...............
6.Mott The Hoople
...........