Who is your Favorite classic band?

[bat1]

The Beatles? Jimi Hendrix? Rolling stones?

Pre 1980 stuff only...

Mine is ..

Black Sabbath and Jimi Hendrix plus David Bowie

[Sulka_bewitched_me]

Beatles and Led Zeppelin

[ed_jaxon]

Steely Dan

[pharcyde]

Pink Floyd :-)

[Corran]

I was just getting into rock and roll. A friend put a tape in and the first thing I heard was a guy saying "Helloooo baby" followed by the crunchiest gutiar riff I'd heard at that point in my life. The band? Van Halen. The album? 5150. I was hooked and yes, I discovered and like the Roth fronted Van Halen but the Sammy Hagar led version really got me into rock so they hold a special place in my rock and roll heart. It didn't hurt things that every album they released was awesome and they were and are the best concert I've ever attended.

[Stavros]

To answer this question I think I would argue that the scene before the emergence of stadium rock was rooted in clubs, which is where all the great bands went to in order to start, and be heard and out of which they migrated if they developed into the bands that could fill a stadium. Pink Floyd are an example of such pioneers because they moved out of the clubs to produce 'shows' with themes and also, because their fan base became so large, a club was too small a venue to satisfy the customers. I think that on both levels, Pink Floyd and the Mothers of Invention were musically the ones who made the transition; but for the club scene, which is where most of us went two or three times a week or certainly on a weekend, to hear raw, live music, John Mayall's Bluesbreakers in the 60s, even with those ever-changing personnel, were for quality, unbeatable. This is one track with its dazzling guitar work is from the album which catapulted Eric Clapton to the top of the guitarists table which he shared with Hendrix. Mayall was a gateway for a lot of musicians, he was, and perhaps remains, a diffiicult person to deal with, but with Alexis Korner he was the foundation of blues-based rock music in the UK.

John Mayall & the Bluesbreakers - Hideaway - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvI0P6o_H8k)

[Prospero]

As a schoolboy I sneaked into clubs in Richmond and Twickenham to hear some pretty seminal bands - The Yardbirds, The Pretty things, Them (with Van Morrison) and on one occasion The Rolling Stones. But I still cleave to the belief that the Beatles were the band who more than any other transformed bland fifties pop into the music that is still mutating today. They, of course, started as a club band as well - in Liverpool and then honed to sharpness in Hamburg.

The Pink Floyd played at the Eel Pie island Hotel in Twickenham on one notable occasion - in those days Syd Barrett had not become an Acid casualty. When he left their music changed fundamentally - losing its quirky englishness and whimsy and become more studied and - in a way - laying the seeds for pomp rock.

A lot of other bands had their start in clubs like UFO and Middle Earth in London (and others in the provinces).

Never saw Mayall but what a breeding ground for talent that band was... Clapton and Mick Taylor among the guitarists who moved into the spotlight from his early bands.

[speedking59]

i'll go with Mountain. i remember when Climbing! came out. i was at a party for the opening of the Kingston Mines Theater in Chicago and side two was being played repeatedly.

[maxpower]

The Beatles, of course, but also The Who, The Rolling Stones, Led Zeppelin, The Doors, and The Velvet Underground.

[Dino Velvet]

Black Sabbath

BLACK SABBATH BLACK SABBATH - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GgBx7Y0aso)

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_4J5EbJuDLC8/TRA_3P449GI/AAAAAAAAAT8/dDvgGUt0fOs/s1600/BlackSabbath77.JPG

[irvin66]

Black Sabbath

BLACK SABBATH BLACK SABBATH - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GgBx7Y0aso)

:iagree: yuuuup me too! :Bowdown::rock2:Bowdown:

[CORVETTEDUDE]

This is where my mind goes.......Black Sabbath, Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin & ZZ Top, in no particular order.:rock2:rock2:rock2:rock2

[Stavros]

As a schoolboy I sneaked into clubs in Richmond and Twickenham to hear some pretty seminal bands - The Yardbirds, The Pretty things, Them (with Van Morrison) and on one occasion The Rolling Stones. But I still cleave to the belief that the Beatles were the band who more than any other transformed bland fifties pop into the music that is still mutating today. They, of course, started as a club band as well - in Liverpool and then honed to sharpness in Hamburg.

The Pink Floyd played at the Eel Pie island Hotel in Twickenham on one notable occasion - in those days Syd Barrett had not become an Acid casualty. When he left their music changed fundamentally - losing its quirky englishness and whimsy and become more studied and - in a way - laying the seeds for pomp rock.

A lot of other bands had their start in clubs like UFO and Middle Earth in London (and others in the provinces).

Never saw Mayall but what a breeding ground for talent that band was... Clapton and Mick Taylor among the guitarists who moved into the spotlight from his early bands.

I don't understand the reasoning in this post. What did the Beatles change in music? It was at the popular/selling end with the focus on songs and harmonies, and film, but while they may have started as a club band they made their reputation in the studio; surely this thread is about bands performing live not albums which has been done before? On this basis, the Beatles are easily disqualified; and even when you list the Yardbirds, the Pretty Things and so on, they were, in fact, run of the mill mediocrities. What Mayall did was attract players who developing a talent which they then used to go on to other things. There were a lot of good bands around in the 60s who never really got out of the club circuit -Chicken Shack, the Ainsley Dunbar Federation, Timebox, Junior's Eyes, Circus, Taste, they were all good to listen to in a club. Pink Floyd and Mothers of the Invention took music to a different level, that is the difference.

[CORVETTEDUDE]

Stavros...Everybody has their own opinion and you know the saying about opinions. There IS no argument here. If you can't participate, I suggest you vacate.

[my my my!]

as someone stated earlier

the Beatles, and Led Zeppelin . black sabbath. In that order.

so fave classic band: The Beatles

[morim]

Deep Purple!!!!!

[RallyCola]

i was born in 1978. The first 2 LPs that i can remember that were actually mine were Thriller and Purple Rain. Today, I have a rather eclectic music taste owning music from most genres except weird world music (which includes many foreign styles), country, hardcore/scremo and other versions of death/black metal.

so taking that together, i don't know that i prefer any one classic rock band more than the other because i like particular songs from many of them and can't say that there is one catalog that i have listened to near completion. The stones and beatles are probably the catalogs I am most familiar with and I appreciate the beatles a bit more.

can i ask...what is the definition of classic rock for this thread? there are some kids today that think Metallica and U2 are classic rock. What is the cut off year we want to use for this thread?

[SP27]

4 char

[Idt20082008"]

Can't narrow it down to one - Black Sabbath, The Who, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, and anything with Eric Clapton (John Mayall and Bluesbreakers, Derek and the Dominos, Blind Faith etc)

[Dino Velvet]

Deep Purple!!!!!

Another good one.

Deep Purple - when a blind man Cries Video - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAZyjARWKzM)

[Dino Velvet]

and anything with Eric Clapton (John Mayall and Bluesbreakers, Derek and the Dominos, Blind Faith etc)

That too.

Blind Faith - In The Presence of The Lord - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbRgSlIrJQ0)

http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs13/f/2007/070/d/8/Clapton_is_god_by_msneep.jpg

[freak]

The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway Full Album Remastered (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mH44CqW4Pvc)



http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a242/bucklberry/band%20pics/gen-DemosDownOnBroadwayexterior.jpg

http://blog.timesunion.com/opinion/files/2011/07/0728_wvmarijuana.jpg

[brad]

I'm surprised that Black Sabath is getting so many votes. I will go with Zappa, Joni Mitchel and Steely Dan with so many others deserving mention.

[Corran]

Love me some old school Genesis.

[robertlouis]

We could spend weeks debating what "classic" means without naming a single band. And my taste veers towards the melodic rather than the merely noisy.

So, using my own definition, The Beatles, without whom we wouldn't be having the discussion anyway, The Beach Boys, The Byrds, The Lovin' Spoonful, Buffalo Springfield, The Band, The Doors, Love, Fairport Convention, Pentangle, Genesis and Show of Hands.

[MdR Dave]

Steely Dan

Fuck yeah, ed_jaxon.

[LeatherTGirlLover]

The Kinks, The Byrds, The Band, The Beach Boys, The Who, Free.

[robertlouis]

Daft omission: Crosby, Stills and Nash.

[Maxim616]

Hands down the The Rolling Stones, particularly the Mick Taylor era, when they were considered the best live act at the time. Mick Taylor is an absolute beast and virtuoso guitarist. Also, I do enjoy the diversity of the Stones' sound when Brian Jones was still with the group.

Although I'm a huge fan of Zeppelin, The Beatles, Floyd, etc but where would music and art be in the past 40 years with David Bowie's influence!?

The Rolling Stones - Honky Tonk Women -Live-'69 - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzNxYjf_4p4)

David Bowie: Queen Bitch - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbDbQc3QdXU)

[Prospero]

I don't understand the reasoning in this post. What did the Beatles change in music? It was at the popular/selling end with the focus on songs and harmonies, and film, but while they may have started as a club band they made their reputation in the studio; surely this thread is about bands performing live not albums which has been done before? On this basis, the Beatles are easily disqualified; and even when you list the Yardbirds, the Pretty Things and so on, they were, in fact, run of the mill mediocrities. What Mayall did was attract players who developing a talent which they then used to go on to other things. There were a lot of good bands around in the 60s who never really got out of the club circuit -Chicken Shack, the Ainsley Dunbar Federation, Timebox, Junior's Eyes, Circus, Taste, they were all good to listen to in a club. Pink Floyd and Mothers of the Invention took music to a different level, that is the difference.

NO Stavros. In your usual manner of potsing something hostile to almost anything I write look at the opener on this thread i says NOTHING about Live bands and so forth. Look again. The Beatles, while as a live band were hardly relevant in their glory days, had an infuence which is still resonating today as a recording band. And the opener asked simply which bands... he did NOT say live. As a cradle for fostering talent mayall was remarkable, but as a player himself and musical innovator in the wider sense, he was second rate.

[Stavros]

Stavros...Everybody has their own opinion and you know the saying about opinions. There IS no argument here. If you can't participate, I suggest you vacate.

I am participating, and making the valid point that judging a band should involve more than listening to recordings, isn't that a fair point? Anyway I like arguing, it should help clarify opinion not suppress it.

[Stavros]

NO Stavros. In your usual manner of potsing something hostile to almost anything I write look at the opener on this thread i says NOTHING about Live bands and so forth. Look again. The Beatles, while as a live band were hardly relevant in their glory days, had an infuence which is still resonating today as a recording band. And the opener asked simply which bands... he did NOT say live. As a cradle for fostering talent mayall was remarkable, but as a player himself and musical innovator in the wider sense, he was second rate.

I know it doesn't call for live bands, but as I have said before, I would have thought a judgement of bands must relate to their live work as well as their recording work for them to be judged overall, and isn't that how most people make judgements? 'Great album, crap live'; great on stage but albums disappoint', etc. I chose Mayall because his live bands at the time were amongst the best live performers, some of his albums remain great, some not, which is why he is not for most people in the top 100 and anyway most people on this board weren't born when his bands were playing. But if we can agree that the optimum value is ascribed to bands for both studio and live work, I cannot validate The Beatles. You need to explain why you dismiss live work and privilege studio work.

[Prospero]

Stavros... again you are drawing false conclusions from my post. I do not dismiss live work and privilege stuido work. In the case of The Beatles i was sadly toddling and in London when they were a supposedly storming live band. (Though I did see Lennon, Harrison and McCarntey live in various solo situations. of those Harrison was by far the finest.) I was talking about their overall influence and musical achievement.And yes there are many bands in the years since whose live music I have seen and hugely enjoyed. In the era designated that would include The Band (a wondrous live band) Floyd - post pre and post the departure of Syd Barrett, - The Stones (rather amaturish back then - hugely and some might say overly professional now) Hendrix, Cream, The Jefferson Airplane ( a concert in Hampstead), CSNY, The Kinks, and many many more I've surely forgotten. I do not in any way privilege recordings over live. Given the opportunity a fine concert - jazz, classical music, rock, rock you name it trumps a recording for presence and immediacy.

We'll have to agree to differ on the musical value of the bulk of Mayall's recordings. Some good stuff but not of the first order.

[irvin66]

:rock2 But I like AC / DC too! :rock2
AC/DC - Long Way To The Top (1976) - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGflPNVmQuA)
AC/DC Let There be rock 1977 - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_AcmtmegKI)

[bassman2546]

Recently inducted Rock and Roll Hall of Famers - RUSH! And still producing great music today.

Rush - Headlong Flight live in St. Louis - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9oELZ3kSBRw)

[Jericho]

What, no KC & The Sunshine Band? :ignore:

[buttslinger]

After all is said and done the Beatles are head and shoulders over any other choice you could make for relevance, gravity, social importance, you name it.
Elvis, Sinatra, Dylan, ....they all top the Beatles in some areas, they used to have to carry John Lennon out of Keith Richard's house.......but the Beatles moved an entire generation to their center, they literally changed the world.

As for FAVORITE band, I say
KC and the Sunshine Band, hands down.....

[Bopper007]

Hard for me to pick my top favorite. So I have several. As stated in the OP, these are pre 80s.

Humble Pie (with Frampton)
Ten Years After
Uriah Heep
Pink Floyd (after Syd Barrett left)
Deep Purple (classic lineup)
Barclay James Harvest

and more

[robertlouis]

The Beatles may not have been themselves great innovators, but when it came to challenging studio orthodoxy they threw the rule book away and gave their collaborators like George Martin and their team of engineers wonderful problems to solve. Some of the effects on Sergeant Pepper had never been tried before, Being For the Benefit of Mr Kite being a prime example, where the Lowrey organ was played via a speaker mounted on a turntable. Playing the tape backwards as on Tomorrow Never Knows from the Revolver album and of course on Strawberry Fields Forever were other innovations.

And no-one can possibly suggest that had the Beatles not become the global musical and social phenomenon that they did, we would have the diversity and rich legacy of popular music of the last fifty years.

I fear more now for the innovators than at any time, when success is measured for the masses by the ability for polished doll-like clones of both sexes to look and sound reasonably good in an entirely created and artificial TV environment, the likes of The Voice, X-Factor, American Idol etc. It kills innovation and plays for safety every time.

Rock and roll is four spotty social inadequates banging tunelessly on cheap instruments in someone's garage for a few months or years until suddenly it clicks and they've got a sound. Without that raw energy the music simply withers.

Please stop watching the shite that the TV channels shove down your throats and get out there and support your local bands before it's too late.

OK, rant over. I'm going to plug in my telecaster with the cans on and play power chords for a while.....

[maxpower]

The Beatles may not have been themselves great innovators, but when it came to challenging studio orthodoxy they threw the rule book away and gave their collaborators like George Martin and their team of engineers wonderful problems to solve. Some of the effects on Sergeant Pepper had never been tried before, Being For the Benefit of Mr Kite being a prime example, where the Lowrey organ was played via a speaker mounted on a turntable. Playing the tape backwards as on Tomorrow Never Knows from the Revolver album and of course on Strawberry Fields Forever were other innovations.

And no-one can possibly suggest that had the Beatles not become the global musical and social phenomenon that they did, we would have the diversity and rich legacy of popular music of the last fifty years.

I fear more now for the innovators than at any time, when success is measured for the masses by the ability for polished doll-like clones of both sexes to look and sound reasonably good in an entirely created and artificial TV environment, the likes of The Voice, X-Factor, American Idol etc. It kills innovation and plays for safety every time.

Rock and roll is four spotty social inadequates banging tunelessly on cheap instruments in someone's garage for a few months or years until suddenly it clicks and they've got a sound. Without that raw energy the music simply withers.

Please stop watching the shite that the TV channels shove down your throats and get out there and support your local bands before it's too late.

OK, rant over. I'm going to plug in my telecaster with the cans on and play power chords for a while.....


Fuck yeah.

[moonunit7]

I like the bands with lots of colors.

Pink Floyd
Deep Purple
Black Sabbath
Blue Oyster Cult

[Merkurie]

Has to be
#1 Led Zeppelin
#2 The Rolling Stones
#3 ... The Doors, Pink Floyd, The Beatles, Miles Davis's band c1968-1975

[CORVETTEDUDE]

I know it doesn't call for live bands, but as I have said before, I would have thought a judgement of bands must relate to their live work as well as their recording work for them to be judged overall, and isn't that how most people make judgements? 'Great album, crap live'; great on stage but albums disappoint', etc. I chose Mayall because his live bands at the time were amongst the best live performers, some of his albums remain great, some not, which is why he is not for most people in the top 100 and anyway most people on this board weren't born when his bands were playing. But if we can agree that the optimum value is ascribed to bands for both studio and live work, I cannot validate The Beatles. You need to explain why you dismiss live work and privilege studio work.

So, start your own thread with your own rules....see how that works. Stop being a *****

[BiBoyinBeantown]

Can't believe no one's mentioned these guys yet:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHEoMpMvz7A

That's from 1978, so it qualifies, although Kraftwerk isn't what most people think about when they think about "Rock". It doesn't involve electric guitars but where else would you put it?

Kraftwerk pretty much singlehandedly invented synthpop, and I think it's a given that the music of the 1980s wouldn't have happened in the way that it did without them. The way they used synthesizers influenced everything from rock to pop to funk to hip-hop and disco and their influence is still being felt today. (Coldplay borrowed the hook from 'Computer Love' for 'Talk', with Kraftwerk's permission.)

[tranlove]

Can't write off the Beatles as influential as they were. Live bands Boston and Molly Hatchet were two of the best concerts ever been to. I was told that I had a blast in 83 at Peter Framptom's but if I don't remember I guess it don't count. Triumph drummer used put a super show. and anothet great AC/DC I had the privilege to hear Bon Scott in 78 or 79 I was in six grade, we sneeked in a friends dads bar in Brooklyn, they where notorious for jamming in bars like the stones do. It gives me chills remembering the first time I heard highway to hell live in a bar, it must have been more like 79 or 80 I think the record was released in 79. Scott also played a bagpipe for minute that was weird. That day it was also when I got introduced to pot. I also love Brian with AC/DC he is a perfect match totally different to Scott but at the same time perfect match is like 2 different great bands, been lucky to seen the band 4 times with Brian including the last album. But no one tops Queen and Freddie Mercury.