Let's get ready to rumble...... :D

Lot's of opinions of who's who in the rock n' roll HOF. Since this is a baseball card board does anyone have an opinion on who is the Babe Ruth of the Rock n Roll Music HOF (RRHOF)? Are the Beatles the Babe Ruth of the RRHOF? Good argument for that - Ruth was an idol in the US as were the Beatles. Both blazed a trail, Ruth in baseball, Beatles in music.


Here's the list of the first inductees to the RRHOF:

• Buddy Holly
  <li>Chuck Berry</li><li>Elvis Presley</li><li>Fats Domino</li><li>James Brown</li><li>Jerry Lee Lewis</li><li>Little Richard</li><li>Ray Charles</li><li>Sam Cooke</li><li>Everly Brothers</li>

There's hardly any mention of these guys in this thread..... did the RRHOF get it wrong on the first inductees? The Beatles didn't even make it to the third year and Zep wasn't inducted until the doors had been opened for 10 years.

To be eligible for the Rock n Roll Hof, the artist must have made their first commercial recording at least 25 years earlier. The HOF opened in 1986, so the Beatles weren't eligible until 1988.

My favorite band of all-time and none of my friends or family can stand a single song, which I’m totally fine with

I see the argument for bands/musicians that heavily influenced other artist being inducted. But why in the H-E-🏒-🏒 are The Pixies not in yet?

Babe Ruth = Elvis Presley

I don't knock anyone's taste in music and am glad you truly enjoy KISS music and songs. But a lot of people/groups over the years wrote and performed a multitude of songs that people enjoy and like. So there's nothing overly special about having done that that automatically should gain them entrance to the rock hall. But a lot of these performers write and perform their music simply to appease the likes of the masses at that time and don't really do anything different or innovative to advance or expand their musical talents and abilities, or that of the music profession itself. They simply figure out the current formula of what sells, what gimmick gets people to buy tickets to see them, and then they exploit that to the Nth degree. That in my opinion is the type of group KISS is. I never said I don't also like some of their music, just that it isn't anything really special, innovative, new, mind-blowing, whatever you want to call it. They got the formula down to create songs people liked and came up with the additional hook surrounding their makeup and costumes, and then exploited that till, well they still are to this day.

In retrospect, look at groups like the Beatles. Their early albums had a very definite, clean sound. But they weren't happy just performing the same simple songs over and over and took chances and experimented and delved into new sounds and techniques that frankly helped change the face of rock music forever. KISS music has always followed the same pattern and sounded pretty much the same. They just keep following the formula of what sells for them, which is great. Not knocking consistency, just pointing out how they never really took any chances and changed how they were to expand their own musical abilities and horizons, and how they haven't really influenced anyone else either. They just were popular enough to sell a lot of records, but I don't see anything overly special in them to distinguish them enough from a lot of other groups/performers to be in the hall, besides having sold a lot of records and having a very loyal and dedicated core base of fans that like their music and sound.

Now you have lots of other groups that also tried to jump on the bandwagon of just doing what was popular to keep selling records. Look back at some of the performers who experimented with doing disco type songs when that craze was popular for a period of time. You going to tell me that those groups that suddenly changed their style to create s few disco sounding songs weren't doing it just for the sales and money?

By the way, KISS is not the Babe Ruth of rock and roll. I wouldn't even make them any higher than maybe the bat boy on that team. And I have listened to them over the years and seen them perform live, they aren't deserving of that title. But if to your musical likes and taste the rate that, then good for you, I;'m glad you like them and can enjoy them that much.

By the way, as such a big fan, have you been on one of KISS' sponsored cruises ever?

You did not also mention the inductees who went in back in 1986 under the "Early Influences" moniker. Jimmy Rodgers, Jim Yancey and Robert Johnson. I did make mention of Robert Johnson in reference to his not having really sold a lot of records or having a long and illustrious career. But the innovations he came up with and the trends he started by his at that time style and ability, and unquestionable. Not too mention the mythical status he holds as to the way he supposedly gained those abilities and the impact that legend has had on the music and performers over these many years, and still does. I was pointing this out earlier in reference to how being worth of rock hall status should not rest solely on record sales alone.

And of the rock hall inductees in that inaugural group, I know there are a multitude of people who crowned Presley the King, and would claim he is the Babe Ruth of Rock and Roll. But he was always more of a country crooner if you really listen to his music and style. If you want to look at it from a purist standpoint and literally think of the term Rock-n-Roll, the true Babe Ruth is Chuck Berry. His original performances and electric guitar playing and ability were the cornerstone for what we came to believe was the essence of a rock and roll band. The Beatles, Stones, Yardbirds, Zeppelin, even KISS, and so many other rock groups and performers are more aligned with and developed along the lines of Chuck Berry and his musical style and talents than ever did from Elvis. Don't get me wrong, Elvis is great, but Chuck Berry is/was the standard for true, pure rock-n-roll.

And along those same lines, how the hell did they make Les Paul wait until 1988 to get in the rock hall, and even worse, 1992 for Leo Fender? Whenever you hear people discussing rock-n-roll, at the very mention of the electric guitar, which is to me the cornerstone of rock-n-roll music and the only true sound/instrument that defined it and set it apart from every previous music style and form, there are only two names that deserve to be on that Mount Rushmore - Gibson Les Paul and Fender Stratocaster. Period!!!!

KISS has sold over 100 million albums. They have sold probably more merchandise than any other band in the history of rock and roll. They have more Gold albums than any other American rock band. They totally revolutionized the live concert; no band ever worked harder onstage to put on a great show for their fans. If you read interviews of many younger musicians, especially in hard rock and metal, they almost always cite KISS as the band that got them into music (some like Dimebag and Vinnie Paul are buried in their Kaskets). They have the most loyal fan club, the KISS Army, of which I have been a member since 1977. Speaking for myself, I probably wouldn't even care about music if it wasn't for them. If they aren't HOFers, I don't know who is.

I've never done the KISS Kruise but I did the Meet and Greet with them in Bridgeport a couple of years back. They were great guys and truly appreciate their fans.

Yeah, not an egging on but whoa...Roxy Music is the most deserving nominee on that list.

Chuck Berry is the Babe Ruth of Rock n’ Roll
 

I second that thought. Chuck Berry influenced so many bands, that virtually every band that has ever mattered has had Chuck Berry cover songs that they either recorded, or had as part of their live repertoire. The Rolling Stones would not exist as a band without playing Chuck Berry songs at the beginning of their career, as they didn’t start writing their own songs until their second or third album.

Saw this article online and had to bring it up in regards to KISS. Especially take a look at the comments section about KISS and their musical abilities and so on. And the comment/idea made by Simmons about maybe just hiring new people to wear the makeup and have none of the original members even playing lends to the idea that they were not that original or talented to begin with, just doing something to sell tickets and albums to make money and they could plug in anyone they wanted because the fan base would just keep paying for it. And got to love the comparison to the Kardashian's as drama queens. Soooo not HOF worthy!!!

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/...055124104.html

I am not a Kiss fan. I don’t like their music and personally think it’s mediocre. In interviews, almost every band from the past 25 years names Kiss as the reason they picked up an instrument and believed they could be a rock star. For that reason I do believe that their influence and their vision has changed the course of music to make them one of the most important bands ever and they absolutely belong.

Roxy Music one of the greatest bands of all time. The rock and roll hall of fame is a stupid joke, and half the bands in there suck, but Roxy Music is not one of them. Neither is Radiohead.

Agree. Surprised that anyone would question the selection of Roxy Music.

Which is exactly why I don't really listen to anyone that has come along in the last 25 years. :)

I agree they should be in some Hall of Fame for their theatrics and marketing, for their musical ability, innovation and such, I'm not so positive! Be sure to check out the comments section of that article and see what I mean. I know KISS has some unbelievable die-hard fans, and I don't disparage anyone for liking them, and I actually don't dislike them or their music myself. But their music isn't anything innovative or new, there's no new style or sense to it. They took elements of their music and shows from others before them, from the likes of Alice Cooper and Devo, and molded it together to create the image and persona of KISS. And then they marketed the heck out of themselves and played up to the fans. Nothing intrinsically wrong with that, just not HOF worthy in my opinion from a musical standpoint.

And as to the all the others crediting KISS as to why they wanted to pick up an instrument and become a rock star, it was mostly because they realized that if these guys from KISS could do it without any special musical talent or innovation and just a lot of smoke, mirrors and theatrics, then maybe anyone else could do it as well. As pointed out in one of the comments to the article, the KISS guys even admitted to starting the band to make money and get girls, not necessarily to make great music. So all those aspiring to be like KISS, what exactly are they aspiring to be, great rock artists and musicians, or just some horn dogs making all the women and money they can?

Think about it this way. If someone could figure out a way to be a card collector and that directly led to them being able to gets lots of money and women, how many other would be collectors would suddenly start following that person and using them as their influence and example to get into card collecting as well, with the aspiration of also getting lots of women and money. Now if that same someone's actual card collection and knowledge are really nothing great at all, who cares, they're making lots of money and getting lots of women from it. And because of that someone's great success in attracting women and money simply due to their card collecting, there are tons of other people who would probably think they should be elected to the Card Collecting HOF as a result, whether they really deserve to be in there from purely a card collecting standpoint or not. Now if that is the kind of person you would want in a Card Collecting HOF, despite them not really having a decent card collection or special knowledge or expertise in the hobby, then I can understand why you would think KISS belongs in the Rock and Roll HOF.

I'm not going to scroll through 2,000 comments by grown men who live in their parents' basement telling me how KISS sucks.

Long live the KISS Army!

Yet after all this time, Toto is still not in the RNRHOF. That's a travesty. As a band, they've sold well over 40 million albums. Ten Grammy nominations, six wins. The members of the band are some of the most sought after studio musicians in American popular music history. They were instrumental in the recording of the biggest seller of all-time, co-writing and recording multiple tracks on Michael Jackson's Thriller. Pull out a big time selling album from the mid-to-late 70s to the mid-to-late 80s, and chances are that Jeff Porcaro, Steve Lukather, David Paich or Steve Porcaro either co-wrote the song(s) on it, or lent their virtuoso playing. If the Hall celebrates great music, few bands have ever had the influence Toto has had. You can't make an album showcasing the most popular songs of the 1980s without them. From the perspective of sheer musical talent, there might be no more gifted group.

Rush got in. Now Toto is my new bully pulpit.

My only takeaway from this thread is that everyone is pissed off because (name of band that they don’t know well because they were over 30 when they became famous) got into the Hall before (name of band that they liked at some point before they turned 30).

Which is cool because that is how I evaluate pop music too.