Dad rock tier list (1 Viewer)

[Eephus]

I don't get the Eagles hate at all. They were overplayed, but still a very good band. To compare them to REO is a joke. I know the Eagles are despised here, but the band played well, wrote solid songs and Henley was a great lead singer.

If you lived it, and couldn't get away from it, you would hate them too.

Maybe this is it. By the time I was born, the Eagles were long gone. I never had to deal with them during their peak.

Their peak, such as it was, was relatively short. They weren't a commercially huge band until "Hotel California" and the greatest hits albums came out in 1976. They were still an opening act for the Stones the previous year. Once "Hotel California" came out their songs started getting played everywhere. They spent the next few years doing cocaine, arguing and recording "The Long Run". And thankfully that was it for them as a creative force. They respawned in the 90s to make up for all the money they snorted but I can't remember a single song from this period. They've had tremendous popularity for 40 years due to the unwillingness of late boomers to listen to new music and the unrelenting poor taste of proto-bros.

What's wrong with liking what you like? Who says you have to listen to new stuff if you don't like it?

Listening exclusively to stuff you used to like when you were a teenager is an alternate definition of dad rock.

If you like the Eagles, there are a bunch of newer acts like Dawes, Father John Misty and Jonathan Wilson who are influenced by the Eagles but offer more opportunity for discovery than spinning "Desperado" for the thousandth time.

 

[Scoresman]

I nominate this for worst thread of the year

I don't know about worst, but certainly among the most misguided.

Carving out British bands from a broad-based music list is like cutting out pasta from a list of Italian foods.

its not that hard to get. this isn't a broad based music list. its dad rock. most british classic rock transcends generations so it doesnt count. most american classic rock does count because it hasnt aged as well. teens listen to floyd and zeppelin these days, not bad company and steely dan.

 

[zamboni]

Everyone approaches music differently. One thing I like to do is separate the musicianship from the material -- they can be reckoned separately and can offer value in music that I wouldn't choose to listen to recreationally.

For instance, my dad was also born in the 1940s. He was probably born 7 or 8 years too early to really get into the British Invasion, or the Doors, Hendrix, or anything like that. His favored style was old country-western and acts that carried on that tradition. Never was my cup of tea. At all. But over time, I grew to learn that Chet Atkins and Roy Clark were basically the Hendrix and EVH of country music, and started listening just for their guitar parts. And I could appreciate their musicianship during the piece, even if I'd never put a country record on the turntable myself.

I'd invite people who were born in the '80s and '90s to approach the British Invasion, classic rock, seminal metal, etc. in the same way. Even if you're not a fan of those sounds, it's worth it to explore the history of groundbreakers in those genres. It's also worth it, IMHO, to explore the top-end instrumentalists in those genres. You might "hate the Eagles", but Felder & Walsh's interplay on "Hotel California" is objectively skillfully rendered and is a moving piece of music divorced from the overall song itself.

Do you have to be into Journey's material to appreciate Steve Perry's vocal chops? Into Styx to appreciate Tommy Shaw and James Young's guitar work?

I know the OP carved out an exception for British bands, but I still feel like it's important to note that British Invasion bands like the Yardbirds and the Beatles were very much bulding on the sounds of American acts such as Little Richard and The Imperials. Once you check around and get a taste of the history of post-WWII popular music, you won't be so hasty to affirm that no American music transcends generations. The truth is that popular music, of any nationality, nuilds upon itself over time and carries forward even into the current cool stuff young bucks are listening to today.

Doug always brings good insight.

 

[tom22406]

I don't get the Eagles hate at all. They were overplayed, but still a very good band. To compare them to REO is a joke. I know the Eagles are despised here, but the band played well, wrote solid songs and Henley was a great lead singer.

Overplayed is the least of it. Gutless, ballless, boring, mild-stoner, wimpy music.

I'm kinda hoping you post your tiers.

 

[JaxBill]

I don't get the Eagles hate at all. They were overplayed, but still a very good band. To compare them to REO is a joke. I know the Eagles are despised here, but the band played well, wrote solid songs and Henley was a great lead singer.

If you lived it, and couldn't get away from it, you would hate them too.

Maybe this is it. By the time I was born, the Eagles were long gone. I never had to deal with them during their peak.

Their peak, such as it was, was relatively short. They weren't a commercially huge band until "Hotel California" and the greatest hits albums came out in 1976. They were still an opening act for the Stones the previous year. Once "Hotel California" came out their songs started getting played everywhere. They spent the next few years doing cocaine, arguing and recording "The Long Run". And thankfully that was it for them as a creative force. They respawned in the 90s to make up for all the money they snorted but I can't remember a single song from this period. They've had tremendous popularity for 40 years due to the unwillingness of late boomers to listen to new music and the unrelenting poor taste of proto-bros.

What's wrong with liking what you like? Who says you have to listen to new stuff if you don't like it?

Listening exclusively to stuff you used to like when you were a teenager is an alternate definition of dad rock.

If you like the Eagles, there are a bunch of newer acts like Dawes, Father John Misty and Jonathan Wilson who are influenced by the Eagles but offer more opportunity for discovery than spinning "Desperado" for the thousandth time.

Hey man, why don't you came to your senses and come down from your fences before bashing Desperado?

ETA: yeah Dawes is pretty decent

 

[Papa Georgio]

Everyone approaches music differently. One thing I like to do is separate the musicianship from the material -- they can be reckoned separately and can offer value in music that I wouldn't choose to listen to recreationally.

For instance, my dad was also born in the 1940s. He was probably born 7 or 8 years too early to really get into the British Invasion, or the Doors, Hendrix, or anything like that. His favored style was old country-western and acts that carried on that tradition. Never was my cup of tea. At all. But over time, I grew to learn that Chet Atkins and Roy Clark were basically the Hendrix and EVH of country music, and started listening just for their guitar parts. And I could appreciate their musicianship during the piece, even if I'd never put a country record on the turntable myself.

I'd invite people who were born in the '80s and '90s to approach the British Invasion, classic rock, seminal metal, etc. in the same way. Even if you're not a fan of those sounds, it's worth it to explore the history of groundbreakers in those genres. It's also worth it, IMHO, to explore the top-end instrumentalists in those genres. You might "hate the Eagles", but Felder & Walsh's interplay on "Hotel California" is objectively skillfully rendered and is a moving piece of music divorced from the overall song itself.

Do you have to be into Journey's material to appreciate Steve Perry's vocal chops? Into Styx to appreciate Tommy Shaw and James Young's guitar work?

I know the OP carved out an exception for British bands, but I still feel like it's important to note that British Invasion bands like the Yardbirds and the Beatles were very much bulding on the sounds of American acts such as Little Richard and The Imperials. Once you check around and get a taste of the history of post-WWII popular music, you won't be so hasty to affirm that no American music transcends generations. The truth is that popular music, of any nationality, nuilds upon itself over time and carries forward even into the current cool stuff young bucks are listening to today.

Doug always brings good insight.

Yes. Also in my case, it is nice when someone can come along and put into text what I am unable to convey nearly as well.

Being a teenager in the 80's I always take exception to people calling the movies or music from then "disposable". I think it is very short sighted. I prefer it over the dark and muddled sounds that dominated the 90's but I don't generalize all the music from that decade as such.

Even within some of the genres I don't care for I have bands or songs that I really like simply due to the fact I can appreciate certain aspects of the song or band.

 

[Tom Servo]

Framed this way, these would be granddad bands. Or homeless great-uncle. Dad rock would be Wilco and the National. Mostly mid-tempo smart stuff.

Egad you just can't stop the smug music snob for one second, can you?

 

[Tom Servo]

I don't get the Eagles hate at all. They were overplayed, but still a very good band. To compare them to REO is a joke. I know the Eagles are despised here, but the band played well, wrote solid songs and Henley was a great lead singer.

If you lived it, and couldn't get away from it, you would hate them too.

Maybe this is it. By the time I was born, the Eagles were long gone. I never had to deal with them during their peak.

Their peak, such as it was, was relatively short. They weren't a commercially huge band until "Hotel California" and the greatest hits albums came out in 1976. They were still an opening act for the Stones the previous year. Once "Hotel California" came out their songs started getting played everywhere. They spent the next few years doing cocaine, arguing and recording "The Long Run". And thankfully that was it for them as a creative force. They respawned in the 90s to make up for all the money they snorted but I can't remember a single song from this period. They've had tremendous popularity for 40 years due to the unwillingness of late boomers to listen to new music and the unrelenting poor taste of proto-bros.

What's wrong with liking what you like? Who says you have to listen to new stuff if you don't like it?

Listening exclusively to stuff you used to like when you were a teenager is an alternate definition of dad rock.

If you like the Eagles, there are a bunch of newer acts like Dawes, Father John Misty and Jonathan Wilson who are influenced by the Eagles but offer more opportunity for discovery than spinning "Desperado" for the thousandth time.

I get that; my tastes also changed to stuff like classical, jazz and Christian rock.

 

[Eephus]

I don't get the Eagles hate at all. They were overplayed, but still a very good band. To compare them to REO is a joke. I know the Eagles are despised here, but the band played well, wrote solid songs and Henley was a great lead singer.

If you lived it, and couldn't get away from it, you would hate them too.

Maybe this is it. By the time I was born, the Eagles were long gone. I never had to deal with them during their peak.

Their peak, such as it was, was relatively short. They weren't a commercially huge band until "Hotel California" and the greatest hits albums came out in 1976. They were still an opening act for the Stones the previous year. Once "Hotel California" came out their songs started getting played everywhere. They spent the next few years doing cocaine, arguing and recording "The Long Run". And thankfully that was it for them as a creative force. They respawned in the 90s to make up for all the money they snorted but I can't remember a single song from this period. They've had tremendous popularity for 40 years due to the unwillingness of late boomers to listen to new music and the unrelenting poor taste of proto-bros.

What's wrong with liking what you like? Who says you have to listen to new stuff if you don't like it?

Listening exclusively to stuff you used to like when you were a teenager is an alternate definition of dad rock.

If you like the Eagles, there are a bunch of newer acts like Dawes, Father John Misty and Jonathan Wilson who are influenced by the Eagles but offer more opportunity for discovery than spinning "Desperado" for the thousandth time.

I get that; my tastes also changed to stuff like classical, jazz and Christian rock.

Christian rock hasn't been good since Gregorian chants.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

High Tier

Eagles

REO Speedwagon

Foghat

Mid Tier

The Doobie Brothers

Fleetwood Mac

Bob Seger

Crap Tier

Steely Dan

Bad Company

Frank Zappa

This is a horrible list. The high tier is possibly the worst set of groups ever put together by chimps. And what the #### is Frank Zappa doing with Bad Company and Steely Dan??? This reads like a Dan Lambskin draft list.

You should be banned from any participation, commenting, or viewing of music threads.

 

[Binky The Doormat]

Of almost every topic that gets started here the music ones baffle me as much as any. There are way too many music snobs. You'd be smart to not post about any band that has been remotely popular and you know...had a few hits.

Anyone mention Crosby Stills and Nash...Kansas?

Not snobby about music - big fan of both of these bands.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Dad Rock

fixed

 

[zamboni]

Dad Rock

fixed

That was kind of the point.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I nominate this for worst thread of the year

I don't know about worst, but certainly among the most misguided.

Carving out British bands from a broad-based music list is like cutting out pasta from a list of Italian foods.

its not that hard to get. this isn't a broad based music list. its dad rock. most british classic rock transcends generations so it doesnt count. most american classic rock does count because it hasnt aged as well. teens listen to floyd and zeppelin these days, not bad company and steely dan.

Hmmmmm.....