Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
Taun

The UM Music Hall

132 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

Okay... Here it is...

This thread is for the UM members to nominate and then vote on who WE think are the best professional bands, performers or groups in the Music world...

Rules:

- Nominations are open and accepted from Monday until Thursday evening - every other week.

- Each member may nominate 1 group, performer or band per nominating cycle.

- I will then do a bit of research on each nominee to ensure that they are eligible

- The following Monday the list of nominees will be published in this thread in alphabetical order

- Members will then have until Thursday evening to vote (1 vote per member)

- Friday the group/performer/band with the highest number of votes will be inducted into our Hall

- I and my staff (my cat) are forbidden from making nominations (to keep it fair)

- NO ONE MAY POST DEROGATORY REMARKS ABOUT ANY NOMINEE - OR THE PERSON WHO NOMINATED THEM

Criteria:

- Groups/bands/performers must have officially formed at least 25 years ago (1987 calendar year or before)

- They must be recognizable professional acts (not local groups that only perform at the local gymnasium or bowling alleys)

- They may be of any style or form of music

As this thread grows I will periodically re-post a list of those inducted.

NOMINATIONS ARE NOW OFFICIALLY OPEN

Edited by Taun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neil Young & Crazy Horse

(or just Neil Young if need be)

(any chance the cut-off date could eventually be scaled back to 15 or 20 years)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I proposed the 25 year date originally and no one complained but If enough people request it - sure...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neil Young & Crazy Horse

(or just Neil Young if need be)

(any chance the cut-off date could eventually be scaled back to 15 or 20 years)?

Actually, I am going to have to separate the two I think.... A quick look shows that while they recorded together, they were not officially joined as one 'group' (hence the "and Crazy Horse')... Do you wish Neil Young - or Crazy Horse? (you may protest this decision if you wish)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Actually, I am going to have to separate the two I think.... A quick look shows that while they recorded together, they were not officially joined as one 'group' (hence the "and Crazy Horse')... Do you wish Neil Young - or Crazy Horse? (you may protest this decision if you wish)

I'll go with simply Neil Young. :D

As for the "25-year frame," I hadn't known there was a thread that discussed this. If everyone who participated feels 25-years is the way they want it, then I'm not going to raise an issue with it.

My main reason for asking if it could be cut to either 15 or 20 years is because I felt it would allow some younger members to participate in mentioning bands they like that weren't so "old."

Also, my teen years came in the 90s so it would allow me to vote for many of the bands that came out during the early part of that decade. :)

Edited by Angel Left Wing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Ramones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have too much of a long list, but if I were to pick somebody that has influenced me and my life for the longest time ..it woul'd be Alice In Chains, before Layne Stayley died. Maybe someone will agree with me...thanks for starting the thread it's pretty interesting.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Bowie - if Ziggy Stardust isn't an Unexplained Mystery, I don't know what is.

Edited by The Mule

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I find the 25 year limit to be a little too restricting, otherwise I'd go with DJ Shadow. Granted, my vote would probably be all by it's lonesome there. He was the first artist to make an album out of nothing but sampled music, back in 1992 with his debut album Entroducing. On a side note, his cousin is Ritchie Kotzen of Poison fame. Here's a little taste...

Since I'm stuck with this age limit I guess I'll follow up with either Pink Floyd, Django Reinhardt or Ludwig Van Beethoven.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bob Dylan - the guy is such an enigma.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

This thread is a follow on to the "Rock And Roll Hall of Shame" Thread I started a month ago or so... the 25 year limit was a copy of the Actual Rock And Roll Hall of Fame - but as I said, if enough people feel it is too restrictive we can just waive it totally... The intent was to separate out some bands that while they might be popular "now" (meaning for a short time) they fade into obscurity when taking "the long view"... One hit wonders so to speak...

(Link to original thread)

http://www.unexplain...howtopic=228882

EDIT: As mentioned in the original thread (but omitted here - sorry) All cut off times listed in the "Rules" are "Oklahoma Standard Time" (Central Standard Time - US)...

Edited by Taun
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Led Zeppelin... After which comes Black Sabbath and Ozzy Osbourne and of course Judas Priest... I'm 26 and I'm pretty sure that they existed before I was born... I believe it can be safe to say that they were succeeded by Iron Maiden and such... Just a thought though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tom waits

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has to be the Beatles for me....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rush is my nomination this time around.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KISS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the 25 year limit. You need time to determine if the music can stand the test of time.

Since so many have been nominated so far, I won't nominate another. I will second a couple mentioned.

Neil Young

The Beatles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I like the 25 year limit. You need time to determine if the music can stand the test of time.

Since so many have been nominated so far, I won't nominate another. I will second a couple mentioned.

Neil Young

The Beatles

Originally I was going to calculate a whole series of factors - awarding points as outlined in the original thread - and only put the top 3-5 up for votes...

but no one really liked the points idea and we could never agree on what was pertinent to calculate - so I will just list those who have passed the 25

year limit and perhaps a separate list for the 'young up and comers'...

No one liked my categories idea either but perhaps they will accept two categories...

"Mature" (Over the 25 year limit) and "Young" or "Recent" for those groups that don't meet the limit... One act from each group gets in?

Edited by Taun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally I was going to calculate a whole series of factors - awarding points as outlined in the original thread - and only put the top 3-5 up for votes...

but no one really liked the points idea and we could never agree on what was pertinent to calculate - so I will just list those who have passed the 25

year limit and perhaps a separate list for the 'young up and comers'...

No one liked my categories idea either but perhaps they will accept two categories...

"Mature" (Over the 25 year limit) and "Young" or "Recent" for those groups that don't meet the limit... One act from each group gets in?

In my opinion, "young" or "recent" goes against what an inductee into the music hall of fame should be about. Time is usually needed to gain perspective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, "young" or "recent" goes against what an inductee into the music hall of fame should be about. Time is usually needed to gain perspective.

Agreed... But danged few of the people who posted on this have even agreed that it should be a hall of FAME...

That is why it is just "The Music Hall" - I'm not too happy with that but that is what the majority seem to want...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Heh, perhaps the 25+ year category is the FAME category... the under 25 crowd is the NOMINEE category.

So for me..

Fame: Rush. Over 25 (1968), multiple albums, multi-generational audience, and they are still making music and touring.

Nominee: Taylor Swift. Under 25 (2006). Not my fave, but I think she may have some staying power in the industry.

It was surprisingly difficult to pick a nominee. A lot of performers started out earlier than I thought they did. Or are so close to 25 years now they are kind of more obvious for fame soon enough.

edit: spelling error.

Edited by rashore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I'd third the Beatles vote, but come on, who am I kidding? These awards should be called The Beatles.

"Welcome to the 23rd annual Beatle awards. Oh I think I see Tori Amos! Let's see who she's wearing to The Beatles this year!"

Edited by _Only

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well - It's 8 PM OST (Oklahoma Standard Time) However, since I will not be 'crunching numbers' on any groups I will extend the nomination deadline until Sunday Evening...

Monday morning I will post the nominees in two groups - over 25 and under... And the voting will commence. Voting will be open until Thursday Evening and on Friday morning I will announce the "Inductees"...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Monday morning I will post the nominees in two groups - over 25 and under... And the voting will commence. Voting will be open until Thursday Evening and on Friday morning I will announce the "Inductees"...

I like this approach. The reason I like the idea of having "under 25" group isn't to have someone that's only been around for 5 years or so get in, but more so to allow groups that have been steadily in existence for a good decade or two to be capable of being mentioned within this thread.

I think it also opens up the possibility of having more members take interest and contribute.

So, since it seems there will now be an "under 25" category I might as well get right to it and nominate Nirvana. :clap:

Edited by Angel Left Wing
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't Nirvana 25 this year? Formed in 87, it's 2012. That's why I didn't choose them for under 25, I thought they were already 25. Or would they be considered 23 since their first album was in 89?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.