Grammy's "best" rock categories...nominees

squeeb

I have been listening to more Zeppelin and Floyd in the last 2 months (since hooking up the SDAs) than I probably did the rest of my life. It now sounds "better" and the music that I used to spend most of my time listening to falls flat.

It is a journey! I didn't know what I didn't know. And guess what - I still don't.

Besides, the Grammys were the kiss of death to many groups. Zeppelin are probably grateful they were never put in that category. But like TF said - I'm sure they could give a crap what we or anyone else thinks.

tonyb

One doesn't have to like a genre or band to appreciate the musicality and talent of such. For example, I'm not big on country music, but I can tell who has talent and can sing, without unloading a bunch of hate on them.

I'm thinking this whole arguement comes down to the lost art of .....listening, just listening, no video, no stage show. Today it's all about the show rather than the musical talent, or the singing. I feel at times I'm watching a Vegas show with out the pleasure of laying down some coin on hard eights. I don't see today's youth listening without equating a video to it. To sit your **** down inbetween 2 speakers without a cell phone or TV/computer, is foreign to them. So I'll stand on my theory that listening is a lost art.

Toolfan66

Yeah and the Foo Fighters went to the Grammys in a Slayer shirt and no big stage show!! Just music baby just music like I said they do it right as a rock n roll band should!!!


Oh yeah and Jimmy Page and John Paul Jones showed up at a (I think it was in London) Show and jammed some Zeppelin tunes!!! Funny how all these musicians want to play with David Growl, there is a long list of people that he has played with...

Drenis

heiney9 wrote: »

Those that don't know, don't know that they don't know.

H9

You should make that your new quote.

On topic... 1+ for Zeppelin. Different strokes for different folks. Not everyone is going to like everything. That's simply, impossible.

heiney9

Toolfan66 wrote: »

Yeah and the Foo Fighters went to the Grammys in a Slayer shirt and no big stage show!! Just music baby just music like I said they do it right as a rock n roll band should!!!


Oh yeah and Jimmy Page and John Paul Jones showed up at a (I think it was in London) Show and jammed some Zeppelin tunes!!! Funny how all these musicians want to play with David Growl, there is a long list of people that he has played with...

You have that the other way around and his name is Dave Grohl, no Growl--lol. (just busting your balls)

He (Dave) creamed his pants at the opportunity to sit in on drums if Jason wasn't the choice for the Reunion show for Ahmet. HE asked Jimmy and John Paul to accompany the band on stage, not the other way around. Not that he doesn't get respect, because I'm sure he does..........but Jimmy and JPJ weren't in a long line of musicians hoping to play with him. In fact if you saw the interview after the show, Dave was happier than a pig in **** that they came up on stage to play with the band.

mhardy6647

(FWIW...) The problem, for me, with Yes wasn't their talent - which was prodigious fo' sho' - but their pretentiousness. They kept it under control for a while (mostly the Tony Kaye/Bill Bruford days), started to slip into the black hole when Rick Wakeman joined up... and (as far as I am concerned) after Close to the Edge it was mostly a bunch of guys masturbating - albeit in very accomplished fashion - in stereo.

The Yes Album is a great one, though... and so, in its own way, is their cover of Paul Simon's great song America.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/0Ia8_Lav32c&quot; frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Ia8_Lav32c

heiney9

Foo Fighters frontman Dave Grohl - formerly the drummer with Nirvana - told the 86,000-strong audience on Saturday that he had something special planned, saying: "Tonight this will be the show we are talking about for the next 20 years."

Jimmy Page and bassist John Paul Jones then appeared to perform two of their most celebrated songs: Rock and Roll and Ramble On.

An emotional Grohl told the crowd after the impromptu appearance: "Welcome to the greatest day of my whole entire life."

He just picked them right out of the line of hundreds waiting, hoping to get a chance to play with them

After leaving the stage following 'Monkey Wrench', a clearly emotional Grohl returned to declare, "playing Wembley Stadium is an honour, and if we didn?t take advantage of this opportunity, the greatest night in our band?s lives? for all 86,000 of you, it isn't gonna be any other show".

The rock legends then joined the Foos for the historic encore. At the end of their stint, Jimmy Page visibly clung on to his guitar after a member of the road crew ran onstage to relieve him of it. The members of the makeshift band then posed arm to arm.

As Page and Jones left the stage before a final encore of 'Best Of You', an ecstatic Grohl shouted "Welcome to the greatest day of my life!" The night ended with an extravagant firework display.

kuntasensei

heiney9 wrote: »

YES has more musical talent in a single pinky than the Foo Fighters. I am not even a huge YES fan, but I do appreciate great musicianship and YES has that in spades.

Yeah, you're right. Dave Grohl has contributed nothing. Well, except that whole Nirvana thing. Oh, and Queens Of The Stone Age, Probot, and Them Crooked Vultures (with John Paul Jones). Oh, and drums for Tenacious D. I'm sure serious musicians all think he has no talent either. Obviously Brian May, John Paul Jones, Bob Mould, Greg Dulli, Norah Jones, and Fee Waybill all did work on Foo Fighters albums because they thought they needed help. Good for them for having pity on poor ole Dave and his stupid side project that sells out arenas. Perhaps that same pity is why Paul McCartney wants to collaborate with him on an album now. Maybe they can borrow a pinky from one of the members of Yes when they record it in Grohl's garage studio.

And look at those hacks he has playing with him. I mean... Pat Smear? What has he done other than be in punk pioneers The Germs, and later in Nirvana? And Nate Mendel was just in Sunny Day Real Estate. Taylor Hawkins... total hack. I mean touring drummer with Alanis Morissette? Ridiculous. It was probably pity that made Geddy Lee and Alex Lifeson let him play YYZ with them in 2008... probably the same pity that made Roger Taylor of Queen bring him on for SOS Allstars. I bet that Best Drummer award that Rhythm Magazine gave him was like a runner-up at the Special Olympics type thing. And Chris Shiflett? He left punk favorites No Use For A Name to join Foo Fighters... but continues to play with Me First And The Gimme Gimmes, the greatest punk rock cover band on the planet. No talent there whatsoever.

But no, you're right... They're horrible. Just a mess. Just a horrible mess of down-to-earth rock musicians who despite their popularity and pressure from the labels have put out one of the best honest-to-God ROCK albums of the past year (which you'd know if you actually sat down and listened to it without the television white noise to distract you).

Personally, I just like them for their awesome concert rider/coloring book. Now excuse me while I remove my tongue from my cheek. :razz:

heiney9

Once again you have taken and twisted things to fit your own purpose.

Never anywhere did I say Dave Grohl was a talentless hack. I have great respect for him, just don't care much for the Foo Fighters as a band.

H9

heiney9

kuntasensei wrote: »

But no, you're right... They're horrible. Just a mess. Just a horrible mess of down-to-earth rock musicians who despite their popularity and pressure from the labels have put out one of the best honest-to-God ROCK albums of the past year (which you'd know if you actually sat down and listened to it without the television white noise to distract you).

All in your opinion, so what?

H9

kuntasensei

It's all good... I'm sure we'll find some other 70s band relevant to the discussion that has more talent in their fingers. Because that's a comparison that makes sense when you're talking about modern rock. Let's see... What other currently irrelevant band can we bring up? The Guess Who? Rush?

Wait... what's the talent to Neil Peart's fingers ratio? I need to make some calculations.

(I love where this conversation has gone. Heh...)

Drenis

kuntasensei wrote: »

It's all good... I'm sure we'll find some other 70s band relevant to the discussion that has more talent in their fingers. Because that's a comparison that makes sense when you're talking about modern rock. Let's see... What other currently irrelevant band can we bring up? The Guess Who? Rush?

Wait... what's the talent to Neil Peart's fingers ratio? I need to make some calculations.

(I love where this conversation has gone. Heh...)

Why did you list JUST Canadian bands? Irrelevant? You sir, are ignorant.

kuntasensei

Drenis wrote: »

Why did you list JUST Canadian bands? Irrelevant? You sir, are ignorant.

Wow... I didn't even realize I did. Those were just the first bands that popped into my head.

But yes, as far as MODERN rock, they are irrelevant to the discussion. It would be like if we were having a discussion about cars from the current decade and you were all, "The '57 Chevy beats all of them!" And then I would hand you your walker and wish you well.

Drenis

kuntasensei wrote: »

Wow... I didn't even realize I did. Those were just the first bands that popped into my head.

But yes, as far as MODERN rock, they are irrelevant to the discussion. It would be like if we were having a discussion about cars from the current decade and you were all, "The '57 Chevy beats all of them!" And then I would hand you your walker and wish you well.

I wondered why you chose those bands. Don't worry, I'm not angry. You picked them cause there good stuff :razz:

markmarc

The whole category thing is forgotten in two weeks, what most music lovers remember is that certain groups/individuals won. I appreciated what the Foo Fighters said in one of their acceptance speeches, when he said that it isn't about the perfect sound via computer, but the heart put into the music that is important. All that being said, I wish The Decemberists would have beat them in one of the categories.

As for the show itself, LL Cool J was an outstanding host, very natural with an easy, almost homey delivery. The Rihanna/ColdPlay partnership was a disaster. Glen Campbell, Adele, and Taylor Swift were impressive.

fossy

Toolfan66 wrote: »

I would listen to the Foo Fighters over YES any day of the week. (see what I did there?)

....... both great bands just diff decades.....
Foo rocks...

fossy

heiney9 wrote: »

Foo Fighters frontman Dave Grohl - formerly the drummer with Nirvana - told the 86,000-strong audience on Saturday that he had something special planned, saying: "Tonight this will be the show we are talking about for the next 20 years."

Jimmy Page and bassist John Paul Jones then appeared to perform two of their most celebrated songs: Rock and Roll and Ramble On.

An emotional Grohl told the crowd after the impromptu appearance: "Welcome to the greatest day of my whole entire life."

He just picked them right out of the line of hundreds waiting, hoping to get a chance to play with them

After leaving the stage following 'Monkey Wrench', a clearly emotional Grohl returned to declare, "playing Wembley Stadium is an honour, and if we didn?t take advantage of this opportunity, the greatest night in our band?s lives? for all 86,000 of you, it isn't gonna be any other show".

The rock legends then joined the Foos for the historic encore. At the end of their stint, Jimmy Page visibly clung on to his guitar after a member of the road crew ran onstage to relieve him of it. The members of the makeshift band then posed arm to arm.

As Page and Jones left the stage before a final encore of 'Best Of You', an ecstatic Grohl shouted "Welcome to the greatest day of my life!" The night ended with an extravagant firework display.

Wish I coulda been there ...god bless um .....

zombie boy 2000

tonyb wrote: »

I'm thinking this whole arguement comes down to the lost art of .....listening, just listening, no video, no stage show. Today it's all about the show rather than the musical talent, or the singing. I feel at times I'm watching a Vegas show with out the pleasure of laying down some coin on hard eights. I don't see today's youth listening without equating a video to it. To sit your **** down inbetween 2 speakers without a cell phone or TV/computer, is foreign to them. So I'll stand on my theory that listening is a lost art.

I gotta admit Tony... I don't agree with you on much, but I think you may be onto something here. I firmly believe that today's music (if you know where to look) is just as great as it ever was. However, it's hard to argue against the fact that "simply listening" is becoming a dying art. How many people own a set of cans today vs thirty years ago?

markmarc -

The FIRST band that popped in my head when someone insinuated that modern bands don't take the time to work on "composition" was The Decemberists. So I'm glad you threw them out there for me. How someone could make that insinuation by simply watching the Grammy's blows my mind.

tonyb

Zombie- We agree on something ?? WTF.....

Thats cool, it's not a race to see who agrees with who the most anyway.

One can argue that yesterdays cans are todays earbuds, not the same in my book though. Too many distractions today to keep a person from "listening". They are either texting, watching video's, on the computer, or doing something else with buds in their ears. Todays casual listener doesn't take the time to listen, to appreciate the musicality, the rifts, tone, the air around the notes, the way it flows. I guess we all enjoy music for different reasons and at different stages in our lives. That may explain some of it. Speaking just for myself, I never really appreciated music until I sat down with no distractions and just listened. Music is full of emotion, telling a story without lyrics even, makes you appreciate genre's you normally wouldn't.

zombie boy 2000

Well said. I remember my roommate in college absolutely insisted on listening to his music with headphones on and absolutely NO distractions. He earned the nickname "Music ****" because of this - almost as if this sort of behavior was odd to most people. That was about 14 years ago.

I thought it perfectly normal at the time. And as I grew older, I found myself to be more and more like him. And as a result, I discovered this hobby in my search for the best fidelity possible so to better enjoy the music I was devoting so much of my attention to.

kuntasensei

I often turn off the lights in my living room theater and crank up music. Typically, it's bluegrass ('cause it just sounds so damn good on my setup) or something like Radiohead... but last night it was an Israeli pop-punk band called Useless ID. You really can't totally hear music unless you just tune everything else out. I'm sure that's something that will gradually be lost in our low-fi MP3 world.

heiney9

Lights off, no distractions is best. I am looking to put a simple rig in a sitting area upstairs off the bedroom. The idea is to sit in a nearfield position to a pair of monitors in a low chair in the dark and just listen from about a foot away of the monitors. Nothing inbetween. It's a wonderful experience if the music is good, etc. Sort of Zen like moments, it can be quite relaxing and exhilirating at the same time.

H9

steveinaz

I'm not a good "casual" listener either. I like to focus when I listen to music, with no distractions. I never warmed up to headphones though---I have a set of Grados, but I rarely use them.

heiney9

Steve, I'm not a headphone listener either. This small rig upstairs will sort of sub for a headphone rig in a way. I bought these RT25i's and I have to say for a small monitor they are excellent. Polk hit a home run with these. For lower level, near field listening they are superb, and they even put out some convincing bass, not too extended (obviously) but the bass sounds natural and not forced or "plasticy". I have the RTi38's sitting right next to them and the RT25i's are the more balanced and neutral speaker.

H9

Drenis

tonyb wrote: »

One can argue that yesterdays cans are todays earbuds, not the same in my book though. Too many distractions today to keep a person from "listening". They are either texting, watching video's, on the computer, or doing something else with buds in their ears. Todays casual listener doesn't take the time to listen, to appreciate the musicality, the rifts, tone, the air around the notes, the way it flows.

I disagree with you. Life is busier then ever now for everyone. but that doesn't mean people should be stereotyped with the assumption you made. I make a point of this because it offends me. I feel that I classify myself as a casual listener that critically listens when I can find the time. Doesn't stop me from doing what needs to be done while enjoying the music. But when I can, I do.

There are three reasons why I don't use cans:

1. I'm asking to have them stolen.

2. They're just to large and heavy compared to a well manufactured ear bud assembly.

3. You won't get true potential from an iPod device or similar unit. Big cans like big sound that comes with clean small power (e.g. - headphone amp).

One of my favorite quotes related to music comes from Sting, who once said "I've had a very, very long career in music. If I have gleaned any wisdom, it's encapsulated in five words: Music is its own reward."

Edit: I should also say that while I think I'm a casual listener on the go, I love nothing more then sitting in the center of a great performance with no distractions at home. Music really is, its own reward.

kuntasensei

Saw this today and it was oddly relevant to multiple things we've discussed:
http://www.thedailyswarm.com/headlines/dave-grohls-responds-his-perceived-hate-digital-music/

That’s exactly what I was referring to. The “human element”. That thing that happens when a song speeds up slightly, or a vocal goes a little sharp. That thing that makes people sound like PEOPLE. Somewhere along the line those things became “bad” things, and with the great advances in digital recording technology over the years they became easily “fixed”. The end result? I my humble opinion…..a lot of music that sounds perfect, but lacks personality. The one thing that makes music so exciting in the first place.

Respect, Dave Grohl. You couldn't be more right.