One of the things I took from my Music Appreciation class last semester.

The professor simply defined "good" music as "music that lasts."

The Beatles will arguably still be talked about the way Bach, Beethoven, Wagner, etc are today in future decades and centuries.

Bands like LZ may not even be part of a discussion in 20 years, much less 50, 100 or more.

I just discovered Aldo Nova!

not to take away from your point, but LZ was simply brilliant in some of their works. granted, I'm not a huge LZ fan, but some of their stuff stands that test of time.

Elvis was the biggest thing of his era. The Beatles were the Elvis of their era. Michael Jackson was the Elvis of his era. They are all the same in a way.

My idea of "time" differs from yours, apparently.

Not trying to discredit LZ, but I have a hard time believing that their music will still be discussed in 20 years, where The Beatles will go down in the history books as game-changers - and will be talked about in the same circles as the all-time greats for the next 50, 100 or more.

We still talk about Mozart, Beethoven, etc CENTURIES after their work was introduced. I think the Beatles will be the same.

Maybe this should be it's own thread, but what rock-era bands WILL stand the test of time (>50 years, say)? I'll grant Elvis and the Beatles, but who else?

with that rubric, I agree with you. to me, there are VERY few of those artists that are remembered a minimum of 50 years after their time. will LZ be remembered like that? I highly doubt it.

I'd guess that MAYBE an artist a generation gets that honor. there's obviously nothing concrete about it, but considering those who we're talking about, look at the generational gap. elvis and the beatles were KINDA contemporary, but in their heyday, not really. mj, obviously, wasn't contemporary.

who else could be considered in that league? I could offer up robert johnson, the 'founder' of the blues (inasmuch as blues truly HAS a founder, that is). music historians will always remember robert johnson. I really can't think of many others though, and nobody REALLY stands out.

interesting thread of thought.

obviously, rush.

:spock:

LOL I could make a case for Nirvana. They pretty much resurrected guitars when Teen Spirit came out. Changed music overnight.

...and I think I agree on Rush.

hmmmm.... maybe.

jimi hendrix? possibly.

B.B. king? maybe.



(and I was j/k about rush, I'm not really a fan. they're ok, but they're not the gods some of their fans make them out to be)

Rush is a pretty ****ing good band. They'll be remembered, but just not as one of the biggies.

Jimi? Yes.
Chuck Berry? **** yes.

oh dear lord :rolleyes:

Oh the elevator test-well I stand corrected. :rolleyes:

The Who & The Stones? Absolutely.