Is Lady Gaga the next Nirvana/Beatles/Zeppelin?

No. Btw, Zeppelin >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Beatles/Nirvanachessmaster1989

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

I mean, Nirvana helped to popularize grunge but that's about it in terms of their influence. Zeppelin had significant influence on some 70s heavy metal bands. There's no denying that Zeppelin was an important band. Did they bring about a change in pop culture (although that could be argued as they were one of the first bands to popularize the heavier sound seen in many popular 70s hard rock bands)? No, not really. Did they influence a significant genre of music? Definitely.

TyrantDragon55

Led Zeppelin is influential (although Black Sabbath had more to do with influencing 70s metal than Zeppelin did), no question about that. Nirvana popularizing grunge wasn't necessarily what I meant because Grunge is not so much a musical genre as it is a set of ideals and attitude shared by bands who happened to be playing around the same time frame and area. Nirvana basically killed an entire genre of music (hair metal) and restored passion, authenticity, and meaning to rock music. When Nevermind came out it wasn't just a big record, it was a movement sort of like Punk back in the 70's.

Sure Sabbath was more influential on metal. And though I'm fine with Nirvana killing hair metal, I don't think it killed it with a particularly good form of music. And I wouldn't say at all that Nirvana restored rock music...

[QUOTE="TyrantDragon55"]

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

I mean, Nirvana helped to popularize grunge but that's about it in terms of their influence. Zeppelin had significant influence on some 70s heavy metal bands. There's no denying that Zeppelin was an important band. Did they bring about a change in pop culture (although that could be argued as they were one of the first bands to popularize the heavier sound seen in many popular 70s hard rock bands)? No, not really. Did they influence a significant genre of music? Definitely.

chessmaster1989

Led Zeppelin is influential (although Black Sabbath had more to do with influencing 70s metal than Zeppelin did), no question about that. Nirvana popularizing grunge wasn't necessarily what I meant because Grunge is not so much a musical genre as it is a set of ideals and attitude shared by bands who happened to be playing around the same time frame and area. Nirvana basically killed an entire genre of music (hair metal) and restored passion, authenticity, and meaning to rock music. When Nevermind came out it wasn't just a big record, it was a movement sort of like Punk back in the 70's.

Sure Sabbath was more influential on metal. And though I'm fine with Nirvana killing hair metal, I don't think it killed it with a particularly good form of music. And I wouldn't say at all that Nirvana restored rock music...

It did in a sense that it brought rock back to what it was originally about in the first place, stripped down no nonsense music about rebellion, forgoing all the self-indulgent tendencies that poped up in genres like hair metal. Of course this didn't last long as Alternative rock became just as much of a corporate machine that the genre it killed was. I believe that's one of the reasons Kurt took his own life.

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]No. Btw, Zeppelin >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Beatles/Nirvanathe_one34

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

[QUOTE="TyrantDragon55"]

Led Zeppelin is influential (although Black Sabbath had more to do with influencing 70s metal than Zeppelin did), no question about that. Nirvana popularizing grunge wasn't necessarily what I meant because Grunge is not so much a musical genre as it is a set of ideals and attitude shared by bands who happened to be playing around the same time frame and area. Nirvana basically killed an entire genre of music (hair metal) and restored passion, authenticity, and meaning to rock music. When Nevermind came out it wasn't just a big record, it was a movement sort of like Punk back in the 70's.

TyrantDragon55

Sure Sabbath was more influential on metal. And though I'm fine with Nirvana killing hair metal, I don't think it killed it with a particularly good form of music. And I wouldn't say at all that Nirvana restored rock music...

It did for a short term anyway, then corporate greed set in and alternative rock became as much of a corporate machine as the genre it killed. I believe that's one of the reasons Kurt took his own life.

Aye bands selling out is a problem (look at Metallica), but there are still plenty of great bands that don't sell out. And if you think Nirvana only had short term impact, why do you count it as so influential?

[QUOTE="the_one34"][QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]No. Btw, Zeppelin >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Beatles/NirvanaJonnyEagle

I mean in terms of influence The Beatles outweigh Zeppelin, but I personally think The Beatles are kind of boring. If they came out now they'd probably be considered a mediocre pop/rock band. That's not to undermine their importance of course, I'm just not a fan.

No

[QUOTE="TyrantDragon55"]

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

Sure Sabbath was more influential on metal. And though I'm fine with Nirvana killing hair metal, I don't think it killed it with a particularly good form of music. And I wouldn't say at all that Nirvana restored rock music...

chessmaster1989

It did for a short term anyway, then corporate greed set in and alternative rock became as much of a corporate machine as the genre it killed. I believe that's one of the reasons Kurt took his own life.

Aye bands selling out is a problem (look at Metallica), but there are still plenty of great bands that don't sell out. And if you think Nirvana only had short term impact, why do you count it as so influential?

That part of it's influence was short term, hair metal's still dead isn't it?

No, Led Zeppelin were talented.

I mean in terms of influence The Beatles outweigh Zeppelin, but I personally think The Beatles are kind of boring. If they came out now they'd probably be considered a mediocre pop/rock band. That's not to undermine their importance of course, I'm just not a fan.chessmaster1989

I actually find The Beatles both Melodically and Harmonically more interesting than Zeppelin, I mean don't get me wrong, Zeppelin is a huge influence of mine, but if anyone can write something seemingly simple, yet complex, it's The Beatles, especially in their later albums.

I mean in terms of influence The Beatles outweigh Zeppelin, but I personally think The Beatles are kind of boring. If they came out now they'd probably be considered a mediocre pop/rock band. That's not to undermine their importance of course, I'm just not a fan.

chessmaster1989

I doubt that, the Beatles experimented with many different instruments and sounds on all of their albums. They were masters of creating atmosphere as well (or atleast John Lennon and George Harrison were, I've always maintained the wrong two Beatles survived).

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

[QUOTE="TyrantDragon55"]

It did for a short term anyway, then corporate greed set in and alternative rock became as much of a corporate machine as the genre it killed. I believe that's one of the reasons Kurt took his own life.

TyrantDragon55

Aye bands selling out is a problem (look at Metallica), but there are still plenty of great bands that don't sell out. And if you think Nirvana only had short term impact, why do you count it as so influential?

That part of it's influence was short term, hair metal's still dead isn't it?

I mean I wouldn't say killing hair metal means they should be ranked highly in terms of influence...

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]I mean in terms of influence The Beatles outweigh Zeppelin, but I personally think The Beatles are kind of boring. If they came out now they'd probably be considered a mediocre pop/rock band. That's not to undermine their importance of course, I'm just not a fan.JonnyEagle

I actually find The Beatles both Melodically and Harmonically more interesting than Zeppelin, I mean don't get me wrong, Zeppelin is a huge influence of mine, but if anyone can write something seemingly simple, yet complex, it's The Beatles, especially in their later albums.

Well that's personal preference, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[QUOTE="TyrantDragon55"]

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

Aye bands selling out is a problem (look at Metallica), but there are still plenty of great bands that don't sell out. And if you think Nirvana only had short term impact, why do you count it as so influential?

chessmaster1989

That part of it's influence was short term, hair metal's still dead isn't it?

I mean I wouldn't say killing hair metal means they should be ranked highly in terms of influence...

Completely re-writting the rules on what qualifies as mainstream and what doesn't sounds pretty influential to me. Then again maybe I'm just grasping here because I'm such a huge Kurt Cobain fan.

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

I mean in terms of influence The Beatles outweigh Zeppelin, but I personally think The Beatles are kind of boring. If they came out now they'd probably be considered a mediocre pop/rock band. That's not to undermine their importance of course, I'm just not a fan.

TyrantDragon55

I doubt that, the Beatles experimented with many different instruments and sounds on all of their albums. They were masters of creating atmosphere as well (or atleast John Lennon and George Harrison were, I've always maintained the wrong two Beatles survived).

[QUOTE="TyrantDragon55"]

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

I mean in terms of influence The Beatles outweigh Zeppelin, but I personally think The Beatles are kind of boring. If they came out now they'd probably be considered a mediocre pop/rock band. That's not to undermine their importance of course, I'm just not a fan.

Lockedge

I doubt that, the Beatles experimented with many different instruments and sounds on all of their albums. They were masters of creating atmosphere as well (or atleast John Lennon and George Harrison were, I've always maintained the wrong two Beatles survived).

Paul's a great singer/writter in his own right don't get me wrong, but he's not John Lennon.

[QUOTE="Lockedge"][QUOTE="TyrantDragon55"]

I doubt that, the Beatles experimented with many different instruments and sounds on all of their albums. They were masters of creating atmosphere as well (or atleast John Lennon and George Harrison were, I've always maintained the wrong two Beatles survived).

TyrantDragon55

Paul's a great singer/writter in his own right don't get me wrong, but he's not John Lennon.

Bob Dylan wipes the floor with John Lennon IMO.

[QUOTE="TyrantDragon55"]

[QUOTE="Lockedge"] Paul doesn't get near the credit he deserves. :( Although Harrison was great.chessmaster1989

Paul's a great singer/writter in his own right don't get me wrong, but he's not John Lennon.

Bob Dylan wipes the floor with John Lennon IMO.

I identify with John Lennon more so then I do Bob Dylan, Dylan's up there in terms of my favorite song writters though. I was at the Rainbow Gathering last weekend and I heard 2 guys with guitars doing dylan covers (very well I might add, the guy singing was a dead ringer for Dylan), gotta say it gave me a new appreciation for Dylan.

Lady gaga like madonna are nothing more than visual eye candy and entertainment.. Her music is just terrible. Pessu

[QUOTE="Pessu"]Lady gaga like madonna are nothing more than visual eye candy and entertainment.. Her music is just terrible. Mystic-G

Atleast Maryln Manson stands for something, Lady Gaga's just another pop singer really.

*edit: holy crap I really need to get to bed, gotta work at 9 in the morning. Thanks guys, been a while since I've had a good conversation about music on here.

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

[QUOTE="TyrantDragon55"]

That part of it's influence was short term, hair metal's still dead isn't it?

TyrantDragon55

I mean I wouldn't say killing hair metal means they should be ranked highly in terms of influence...

Completely re-writting the rules on what qualifies as mainstream and what doesn't sounds pretty influential to me. Then again maybe I'm just grasping here because I'm such a huge Kurt Cobain fan.

Why do people feel the need to so unabashedly and vehemently foam at the mouth against music that does not appeal to them? My god... you would think there would be better things you could be doing. raven_squad

[QUOTE="raven_squad"]Why do people feel the need to so unabashedly and vehemently foam at the mouth against music that does not appeal to them? My god... you would think there would be better things you could be doing. Mystic-G

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

[QUOTE="TyrantDragon55"]

Paul's a great singer/writter in his own right don't get me wrong, but he's not John Lennon.

TyrantDragon55

Bob Dylan wipes the floor with John Lennon IMO.

I identify with John Lennon more so then I do Bob Dylan, Dylan's up there in terms of my favorite song writters though. I was at the Rainbow Gathering last weekend and I heard 2 guys with guitars doing dylan covers (very well I might add, the guy singing was a dead ringer for Dylan), gotta say it gave me a new appreciation for Dylan.

Great Dylan covers are incredible. I might go see a Dylan concert still, though I'm not sure...

[QUOTE="Lockedge"][QUOTE="TyrantDragon55"]

I doubt that, the Beatles experimented with many different instruments and sounds on all of their albums. They were masters of creating atmosphere as well (or atleast John Lennon and George Harrison were, I've always maintained the wrong two Beatles survived).

TyrantDragon55

Paul's a great singer/writter in his own right don't get me wrong, but he's not John Lennon.

what

Lady Gaga?

Nirvana, The Beatles, and Led Zeppelin created their music to mean something over time and really strove for quality with everything they did. I really don't think I can say the same about Lady Gaga. If she stands for this generation then there is something sincerely wrong.

[QUOTE="Mystic-G"][QUOTE="Pessu"]Lady gaga like madonna are nothing more than visual eye candy and entertainment.. Her music is just terrible. TyrantDragon55

Atleast Maryln Manson stands for something, Lady Gaga's just another pop singer really.

*edit: holy crap I really need to get to bed, gotta work at 9 in the morning. Thanks guys, been a while since I've had a good conversation about music on here.

I don't think so. She is just what is hot right now, but it is temporal. In my opinion, if Britney didn't reach that far, less chance for Gaga.

No, no, no.

[QUOTE="TyrantDragon55"]

[QUOTE="Mystic-G"] I said Marlyn Manson, but close enough. Lockedge

Atleast Maryln Manson stands for something, Lady Gaga's just another pop singer really.

*edit: holy crap I really need to get to bed, gotta work at 9 in the morning. Thanks guys, been a while since I've had a good conversation about music on here.

Threads like this really make me wonder about GS users.... Next Beatles? Led Zepplin? Does anyone honestly think that 10 years from now people will be listening to Poker Face and talking about how it's the best in it's genre? :?II_Seraphim_II

[QUOTE="Lockedge"][QUOTE="TyrantDragon55"]

Atleast Maryln Manson stands for something, Lady Gaga's just another pop singer really.

*edit: holy crap I really need to get to bed, gotta work at 9 in the morning. Thanks guys, been a while since I've had a good conversation about music on here.

Mystic-G

Lady Gaga is the next 2pacAnti-Venom

I think she's kind of a ditz. Have you seen her interviews?

Are you kidding?! Her music sucks, and all she has to rely on is her stupid stage act. No chance.hillelslovak

And Yes i do believe that she will be the next revolutionary artist. I still don't liker her music but it doesn't take a scientist to see that she just has "it".

I don't know, maybe.

I think she's great, and I really like her music. That's all that matters to me. I love to dance and her music just makes me want to dance all the time. I know a lot of people hate and despise her, but it doesn't really bother me. I'll be seeing her Yokohama in April. So excited!

can you even compare something in that way?
lady gaga the next nirvana/beatles/zeppelin?
nirvana brought grunge, the beatles brought melodicMUSIC, zeppelin...i know **** about zeppelin=)
lady gaga brought herself a shiny wardrobe. shes a decent artist yeah, i personally dont like her, though she is good and blah blah blah, shes not about to be the next nirvana, or beatles, or zeppelin, or anything..