ILX decides the Poll. 70s Rock Poll vs 70s all genre poll.

all genre 70s poll has already been done, both on ilx and elsewhere. not sure why ppl moaning that a rawk poll would exclude stuff that doesn't rawk. did ppl go on the joni mitchell poll and raise hell that they couldn't vote for linda ronstadt???

well i'm not bothered either way I'll run it as how people vote for and people can express the thoughts here rather than mucking up a nominations thread.

who is defining "rock" how?
is that the issue here?

We've had two 70s album polls (all genre), one of which was run by me. Don't see how an all genre poll here would differ much from those. Rock on, you guys.

i would prefer a rock poll, as opposed to an all genre, which would probably end up being too fractured and ultimately useless.

i know jf but some want another and rather than arguments spoiling the noms thread people can decide here what they want and hopefully will stop a nominations thread being ruined.

ha so basically this is something to point timellison to when he comes along to pretend he doesn't understand in what way do judas priest rock more than jackson browne

tbf he hasn't said anything on the thread. It was others.

i have no preference so won't vote but whatever the result i'd probably nominate the same records as i am am not entirely sure what rock is.

i guess answer A and i'll try to figure it out as we go along.

AG just put your foot down, the poll creator gets Papal infallibility with these things imo.

Don't think the noms thread was that bad anyway apart from one guy maybe needing to chill? The discussions about what is or isn't in are healthy & interesting up to a point imo (& 70s prob is trickier to pick apart than 80s in terms of rock) but at some stage it's fine for the person in charge to step in and say how it's going to be.

It's not just rock, it's rock that rocks, i.e. no fucking Jackson Browne

like stirmonster says with an allgenre poll we can still nominate and vote for the same stuff we would anyway.

but the reason for a rock poll was for something different but whatever you guys vote for i'll go with. I get to vote for funk n stuff in an all genre so i can make a good ballot either way and there shouldnt be any arguments over what should be in the poll, noone can just blame me and there shouldnt be any butthurt "im not voting now" crap. Everyone has a chance to state their case and vote.

Thankfully Sonic Youth didn't exist in the 70s so at least that argument doesn't happen

ha !

'No Fucking Jackson Browne - it's the 70s rock-that-rocks results thread!'

Ok I'll stop doing this now.

nobody nominated jackson browne did they? lol

Just making sure

Actually I nominated a Billy Joel related record so what do I know

Rock poll. We can work out what is and isn't rock, if not it'll sort itself out in the voting.

Fwiw I'm personally very much ok with 'non-rock that rocks' being included in this, in a similar way to how a lot of industrial/EBM leaning stuff made the 80s results. That can actually throw up some really interesting music, but it needs people to make the case for it or at least nominate it & see what happens, rather than just taking some lame 'how can we ever really differentiate and who are you to decide anyway?' type position.

i think that one fitted in though.

xp

the sort itself out in voting doesnt always work.

plus you could have an all genre poll and just vote for stuff that rocks regardless. it would be the same thing

x-posts

I think there is a third option, which is a poll of music which rocks, whether or not it is rock (a poll which would also end up excluding some rock). However, I mostly lean in that direction because I don't like that much rock to begin with.

yeah i love rem and maybe wouldn't have been annoyed at seeing them pop up somewhere (would've rmde but whatever) but fables is arguably the least rocking album they made in the 80s.

the 3rd option is kinda what we were aiming for. I just didn't realise the 70s canon was more engrained in ilxors than an 80s one which has led to some wanting an all genre poll to re-affirm their favourites.

Look A_G I don't really have the ability to discern between what rocks and doesn't rock. I am a bit of an asperger type apparently. I try my best but sometimes fall short. The lack of ciggies didnt help either!

Don't see any point in an all-genre poll given we've already done that; the only decade that hasn't been polled is the 00s I think. I'd suggest being strict with whatever subjective criteria you come up with. No Loaded, no Steve Reich, no Can.

There was no arguments over Can! Everyone accepted them.

I agree with Seandalai, none of those things rock, at least not to my ears. I go by gut instinct on these things though.

It was arguments over stuff like Rolling Stones, Bob Seger, Springsteen, VU - Loaded. And some just wanted a poll that wasn't just rock

yeah some wanted shuggie otis and john martyn, comus.
so this poll can decide what we do rather than wasting a noms thread.

the all-time polls were a top 100 iirc so a much larger rollout would mean everyone was happy having their fave albums in the spotlight. I refer to what balls said earlier

would love to see something similar to this for the 70s, maybe ease anti-rolling stone canonicity a little but tighten RAWK parameters. i think if results were around top 400 the multitude of zeppelin and sabbath wouldn't be quite as anticlimactic.

that could apply to either poll really re the canon albums

I like the idea of non-rock stuff being included so long as it has rocking qualities, the third option basically. Fwiw I'd say yes to the Stones, Seger and Comus and no to the others - Springsteen is a tougher one, maybe not his first two albums but Darkness on the Edge of Town rocks a fair bit.

I loved the 80's poll once I got into it but I'm going to vote for all-genre for 70s because I am still a pathetic mainstreamer at heart

This poll provides a beautiful opportunity to mine the pre-Carducci aesthetic. Let's not turn it into "man, the '70s sure had a lot of great records!"

Can rocks, you dicks

I vote for a 70s R&B poll

I was thinking a top 800 goth tracks poll would be awesome, but there needs to be a way of avoiding the top 350 being entirely made up of songs by the cure

so that's my write in vote who's with me

Don't see any point in an all-genre poll given we've already done that; the only decade that hasn't been polled is the 00s I think. I'd suggest being strict with whatever subjective criteria you come up with.

Basically agree with this. I like the idea of a 'music that rocks' poll or basically another hard/heavy/noisy rock poll (how I saw the other one). I just didn't think the boundaries were as clear with this one. One thing that really helped with the 80s poll is that you started out in the OP with quite a bit of detail as to what would be included (all metal, including pop-metal; only the heavier or noisier end of indie rock, with several examples of bands that fit and bands that didn't; punk, as long as it wasn't too poppy; a list of other things that wouldn't fit). In this case, we had to extrapolate from the 80s poll, which is harder to do. Plus, the emphasis on 'anti-RS' in the title (instead of 'albums that rocks') might have been confusing.

Whatever gets decided Comus needs to be eligible b/c Comus are as evil heavy as evil heavy gets without a drum kit on the premises.

\m/ \m/

ILX 70s album poll - results
TURN THIS MUTHA OUT! It's the Alternate 1970s Albums Poll on ILX — Results Thread

Can someone tattoo this across my back?

no point in running a poll if you exclude stuff.

― pfunkboy (Herman G. Neuname), Tuesday, December 1, 2009 3:09 PM (2 years ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

jf clearly in favour of an all-genre poll then

Maybe you could only exclude the 201 albums that placed in the previous two polls.

I think it kind of goes against the ilm spirit to patrol genre borders too zealously, but on the other hand there's no point in running the poll if it just throws up a slightly shuffled version of previous polls. So I skew towards "70s Rock Poll", but let the voters decide what they think fits.

I was quite skeptical of the parameters for the 80s one but it turned out totally amazing. just do the same.

70s RAWK!

rock

Automatic thread bump. This poll is closing tomorrow.

poll: the poll

well unless all the trolls/lurkers vote all-time poll it seems the rock poll is going to win out.

Who are the trolls/lurkers?

Where do we get to vote for a moratorium on all these fucking polls? I mean for fuck's sake, now we're polling what kind of polls to have?

i said this on the mod req thread but seriously, you are doing the heavy lifting so i dont give a shit how the votes turn out, do the poll you want to do, which is a rock poll. bunches of people thought that the 80s poll was going to be boring or whatever, and then totally dug the results, this will be the same, crazy and unpredictable and fun.

xpost maybe you should start a poll about that. actually please dont.

I was enjoying this until some dick started singling me out for personalised digs. I think I will stick to end of year lists from now on.

i wasnt talking about you

Sorry. I am prone to anger as I have not had a cigarette in 5 days. I will be better after some sleep.

no worries. Good luck with giving it up!

ha so basically this is something to point timellison to when he comes along to pretend he doesn't understand in what way do judas priest rock more than jackson browne

― balls, Friday, October 5, 2012 1:24 PM (6 hours ago)

How about this one for ya? Shoes used Marshall half stacks and had crunch and power and Television used Fender Super Reverbs. Case closed.

Well if we're determining what rocks based on equipment than ELP is the most rockingest band that ever played.

I won't link them but look at the promo videos for "Too Late" and "Tomorrow Night" on youtube and tell me I'm wrong.

On the other poll, I was mostly wondering if people were determining more about what doesn't rock based on equipment.

While I'm at it, here's the other thing that's sticking in my craw a little. Roxy Music is OK but "new wave is out." As with the Shoes issue, I actually think there's some merit to including Roxy on the basis of heaviness, but then you get down to the question of which new wave bands were heavier and which ones were lighter. Even a group like A Flock of Seagulls - I think about what kind of amps they might have used, how hard their drummer played, etc.

How about this one for ya? Shoes used Marshall half stacks and had crunch and power and Television used Fender Super Reverbs. Case closed.

While I'm all for poll-runner-as-dictator model of ballot polling (jjj otm), the rationale behind excluding Big Star & Shoes from this particular 1970s rock poll is wha.. actually, nevermind.

then vote for an alltime poll and you can vote for anything from the 70s

Why don't you just include them? Or at least include Shoes, who were heavy. And the Knack, who had a pretty shredding lead guitarist.

Hey AG, you can exclude Shoes, Big Star & really whatever you goddam well please & I would still rather do the rock poll b/c, even if some ppl see yr strictures as arbitrary, in the end we'll end up with a long, unique list of shit to choose amongst & you'll run it down from like #433 or whatever & it will be fun, just like the 1980s poll was. Just do yr thing, man. This is ilm, we do what we want!

first off, AG I said this to you in private, but I think you're fucking nuts for committing to do two more polls so soon afterwards; not in a 'clean your messes' sense, just more in a 'guh!' sense. crut reminded me upthread that I was actually going to persuade you to do an all-time funk poll but I don't know how many ballots it would get, but w/e do what you do...

I feel like the problem that has happened is that as the 80s poll, esp the albums part, gained more and more attention from non-participants, due to its unexpected and/or batshit results, more people are trying to take part in this, coming in kind of unaware that not only was the 80s poll nominations process nothing but AG using the mighty veto wherever and whenever (to the point of jeopardizing key friendships of his) but that that ended up being one of the major point of interests for the participants: AG scribbling lines between "rock" and "non-rock" in what seemed like an arbitrary manner generated a suitable amount of dramatic tension, because nobody knew what results to expect. And what meager expectations we came up with were confounded--NOBODY expected Big Black to take both 80s polls.

ok that post was kind of ridiculous and long winded; sorry bout that

but it's OTM. one reason i didn't vote was because of the restrictions.

hey if someone does start a funk poll is it ok if i whine and raise hell and pretend that someone saying bootsy collins is funkier than gordon lightfoot is being arbitrary? parameters are pretty clear and have been restated over and over. carducci rock, anything xhuxk eddy would call metal, plus heavy metal. should be noted also that even after ag gave in to whiners and pretended that fables of the reconstruction rocks harder than reign in blood or back in black that the whiners didn't even bother to vote. they made sure to turn up here and whine again though.

oh come on, trying to act like "rock" and "pop" weren't deeply intertwined in the 80s is stretching it a bit. putting forth a definition of rock that welcomes Up on the Sun, warily includes Days of wine and Roses, but excludes Crazy Rhythms is not going to seem like the most intuitive approach. And all this namechecking of xhuxk makes me really badly want to nominate this album for the 70s rock poll (if it happens)(which I want it to):

http://www.thefunkstore.com/CurrentCDs/March2006/CD-TeenaMarieWildPeaceful.jpg

anyways I had zero problem (well, almost zero: I wanted to vote for Return of the Giant Slits, but my nom got overrided or ignored or w/e, but really no biggie) with the way AG ran the 80s poll or the way he may or may not run this poll; I was just observing that a lot of ilxors seemed to be excited with how crazy the results of the 80s poll was and seemed to want to be a part of the 70s poll without realizing that the nominations process was the craziest part.

I guess what I'm really trying to say is: don't get butthurt about getting noms thrown out because the lack of really clear boundaries is actually one of the most exciting parts of the poll

(but if you throw out my Las Grecas nom AG then we are quits forever lol)

But the criteria for including Loaded and excluding non-Exile Stones albums don't seem as clear-cut as the example you give.

xpost to balls

hai guyz i have no pony in this race cos too many polls plus i don't really care about what ROCKS right now

BUT

i think the attempt to define an aesthetic here is kinda interesting, and i'm also interested in the attitude of people to borderline cases. it raises a few questions for me.

a) ordinarily i wd be wary of arguments that say "you just know when something is x" but i feel like knowing when something ROCKS is, for the huge majority of cases, pretty obvious

b) so why do quibbles arise? do people genuinely have a different conception of what ROCKING is? how diffuse is this conception? are there people out there - maybe not on ILX - who think the Ted Heath Orchestra ROCKS LIKE FUCK?

c) or are the borderline cases more often a result of people who know in their hearts that record x doesn't ROCK but really want to talk about it anyway? cos imo there's a big wide board out there to start threads - or polls, god help us - with any criteria you as an individual fancy

d) i figure the criteria here aren't nearly as abstruse as people wanna make them, and most of the blur is the result of point c. as i said, some of the arguments over the borderline cases are illuminating but still, they're borderline cases because they don't really ROCK

e) AG, this is your poll really. if i was you i'd drop the consensus-building shtick, invite the noms, then wield the veto with despotic abandon. every genre-esque poll on this board immediately invites peeps who take delight in challenging our conceptions of what a genre is. good for them. take it outside.

peace.

loaded is only velvets nominated right? i probably would've had 3 stones - sticky fingers, exile, some girls - and if only one some girls but i also argued that any not obv hard rock album better be able to hold it's own w/ heavy sabbath, ac/dc/ motorhead, etc. and that ag should err on side of caution; ag decided 'one stones album' as a compromise between anti-rolling stone canonicity and the absurdity of not having any stones in the poll (tbh i would've liked to have seen tattoo you in 80s poll but not shedding any tears). there's also only one who album fwiw. meat puppets were an sst band and up on the sun was their least rawk album in the poll, pointing out that the feelies most rawk album maybe rocks as hard as the meat puppets least rawk album isn't exactly a winning argument, it's like pointing out don mattingly had better numbers than bill mazeroski or ozzie smith and then ignoring that maz and oz aren't in the hof cuz of their numbers. also should be noted that xhuxk didn't call teena marie a heavy metal artist, he called emerald city a heavy metal album - and a good chunk of it, the first 3/4 iirc, is as hard rock as 'computer blue' if not 'let's go crazy'. personally would've liked to have seen more moroder jordache flashdance aor disco on it (if only cuz then that spotify playlist would actually the greatest rock radio station of all time) but i'm not mystified about why 'beat it' or 'call me' aren't on there. loaded i'd have no problem excluding personally (ie i'm not voting for it) but it seems fair to include since god knows the other vu would qualify. if it had been a zombies album it could sound the same but probably wouldn't be in there. cue timellison to wonder in what way 'sister ray' rocks more than 'a rose for emily'.

durr any not obv hard rock ARTIST'S album better be able to blah blah blah rather

idk I do tend to be more attracted to 'rock' as a vehicle for conceptual excess rather than any sort of headbanger purity quotient. Fables of the Reconstruction made the lower half of my ballot, and tho it probably doesn't RAWK as much as Document, let alone any metal band, I feel like it's moodier, murkier, less immediate, seems less concerned with songwriting or pop pleasure than with capturing an altered state of consciousness, a certain surrealism (regrettably understated), which is one of the big things I go to for rock, though that certainly isn't the strongest example of it (xp to Noodle)

Balls I am flattered you engaged with all my assertions \m/ I am still convinced rock and pop are harder to parse than yall are making it out to be, but you've convinced me that my use if the word 'arbitrary' was perhaps a bit wrong-headed

fwiw i go thru this process a lot when i'm trying to decide what folders to store my mp3s in and my decisions are often pretty arbitrary too but i think in this poll the distinction between ROCKING and rock is central

yeah that's why i've used the term rawk cuz rock can be a very different thing - ie fables the least rawk rem of the 80s but i could see an argument for being their most rock album (i'm not sure even i'm following me here so don't feel bad if you're not).

i think my basic working definition of rawk is that it's the non-sublimated expression of aggression. that is why a lot of rem and intellectualised indie pop would fail to qualify, but why a lot of eg free jazz and industrial and techno and "classical" should

by rawk i mean that which rocks

aggression is the wrong word, but there should be some basic level of kick out the jams animal energy involved

bingo! albert ayler rawks. rem don't.

wd argue that, say, Ayler might rawk, but doesn't ROCK

See, when you dilute "aggression" into "energy", that's where AG is getting the Springsteen problem from.

i think if you're gonna ROCK then you must make prominent use of overdriven guitars or machines aping overdriven guitars

bingo. right there.

yeah but then again stravinsky's rite of spring ROCKS and that's just a bunch of bassoon bullshit

dude swung harder than branca too

yes, the idea that rock has to feature guitars or machines aping guitars just doesn't compute with me (and that's not a justification for the nice).

This probably doesn't help AG at all but I'd much prefer a 70s poll of everything other than rock or music that rocks. If it even remotely swings, fuggedabahdit.

AG needs a time out. Better to think about ideas than poll them.

I think AG knows ehat he's doing if we let him go ahead and do it. There was a Nurse with Wound album that made the 80s album poll--whose name escaspes me atm--that doesn't ROCK in any kind of received sense, but everybody congratulated each other on it making the poll nonetheless.

Raspberries, Blue Ash, Shoes = hard rock. As Metal Mike Saunders once pointed out, Raspberries had the balls to open for B.O.C.

pointing out that the feelies most rawk album maybe rocks as hard as the meat puppets least rawk album isn't exactly a winning argument

Huh, must have missed that argument.

loaded is only velvets nominated right?

It's the only one they released with Lou Reed in the 70s. I wouldn't comment on it if it were a matter of the albums with Cale.

ag decided 'one stones album' as a compromise between anti-rolling stone canonicity and the absurdity of not having any stones in the poll (tbh i would've liked to have seen tattoo you in 80s poll but not shedding any tears).

Well, is 'anti-RS canonicity' the point or is polling albums that rock the point? Including stuff like VU and Television would seem to make the poll MORE pro-RS than even the average FM classic rock station.

there's also only one who album fwiw.

There are two listed on the spreadsheet.

loaded i'd have no problem excluding personally (ie i'm not voting for it) but it seems fair to include since god knows the other vu would qualify.

Ah, OK, I see your point here.

I don't want to be a dick. It's AG's poll and it's up to him to decide what's included. The last one turned out great. I just think it would help to have clearer guidelines off the bat, like we had with the other poll.

I love Television and would likely vote for them in any case whereas I'm personally not as enthusiastic about Springsteen and non-Exile Stones. So maybe it's a little odd that I'm questioning/arguing this.

It's nice that so many care about this.
Most of these arguments make it look like another all-genre poll would be better but to get crazy results everyone would need to vote in the style of the 80s poll. Would that happen? I would definitely have to make the no more than 2 albums by one band rule. (bowie counts as a band in this case) even if it means i cant vote all the funkadelic and break my heart)

If enough agree to vote in that style ie rocking or experimental (ie krautrock or weird nww type) then an all genre poll could work.
To get crazy results has nothing to do with the nominations its up to those who vote.

After reading this thread I've changed my mind and I'm convinced this is the way forward. I know jf has said there's 2 polls already on this but his poll excluded the previous results so another all-time poll wont just be the 3rd poll with the same results as the previous 2.

Thewhole point of my polls is to introduce music to everyone. We can do it with a larger rollout, something an all-genre 70s poll hasn't had. It will in no way diminish jf's previous poll or the other one. That would not be the point of it.

And at the end of the day, I am running it so need to make the ultimate decisions but I'd like to know most will agree with what we do.

I say CALL it the 70s things that rock poll but establish no stated boundaries, and let ppl vote in that spirit (whatever that means to them in their personal relationship w/jesus)

There was a Nurse with Wound album that made the 80s album poll--whose name escaspes me atm--that doesn't ROCK in any kind of received sense, but everybody congratulated each other on it making the poll nonetheless.

it was soliloquy for lilith. agreed it was an odd choice for that poll but seeing it there there was no way i wasn't going to vote for it and perhaps someone will now be intrigued to check it out. as it's an exquisite record, surely that can only be a good thing?

I'm prob repeating myself now but really I don't why this has to be a difficult process. In my head it works like -
(1) People nominate albums that they think should be included in the poll
(2) If an album nominated feels like a bit of a borderline case, there will prob be a bit of discussion with people making some arguments as to whether it does or doesn't rock (these can be interesting and don't have to involve people shouting at each other).
(3) AG then gets the final say as to whether the nominations are accepted as he's the one running the poll.
Can't see why anyone would have a problem with that?

stirmonster do you agree then an all-genre poll but we trust everyone to vote in the albums that rock style of the 80s poll to get good results?
xp

xp or as Edward usefully put it in the other thread 'just nominate it dudes, it if gets shot down you can tell yr therapist about it'.

sure AG. also agree with the above that it's your poll so you should have final say. i've run out of things i want to talk to my therapist about anyway.

xp or as Edward usefully put it in the other thread 'just nominate it dudes, it if gets shot down you can tell yr therapist about it'.

― Sock Puppets II (Mr Andy M)

This is def. my attitude as well. Make yer case, and if the Emperor of Rock Polls goes thumbs-down, OH WELL -- it's not like we're going to have a shortage of other polls in the future...

But then again I'm AGs friend and have a similar "arbitrary" outlook on what rawks. I think we pretty much only disagree on Rush.

no you like Yes and Gentle Giant and Jethro Tull and ELP

Well hell, JT won a Metal grammy - isn't that rawking?? ;P

Who let Chuck on the voting panel that year?

The National Association for the Promotion of Flute Solos.

If Gentle Giant don't rock then Battles and King Crimson - Discipline don't rock.

yes you are correct, none of those 3 rock

jethro tull rocks only because of aqualung. as we determined on the other thread they are the iron maiden of prog.

ELP, eh.

I mean nobody cried because marillion was missing from the 80s poll

edward wanna help run the poll?

you and hellhouse were the ones who understood what i was after with the 80s poll from the off and you can help weed out the albums that dont rock that might slip by me (like happened in 80s poll) if we do go the rock poll route.

shouldn't these polls have to wait in the queue like the rest of them?

― la goonies (k3vin k.), Friday, October 5, 2012 9:08 AM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

these arent artist polls k3vin

― Algerian Goalkeeper, Friday, October 5, 2012 9:11 AM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

fyi that doesn't matter -- if you look at the queue Thread for coordinating the order and timing of ILM ballot polls there are several past and future polls that are entire genres or not limited to single artists (including Disco and "The Classic Rock Canon," which would arguably be a suitable tracks poll companion to this one). the polls in that queue also take a break to give the end of year albums/tracks polls breathing room. none of this stuff is really enforced but imo you should really just get in line with everybody else instead of doing two giant polls in a row without any regard to the system that dozens of other people have had no problem operating within.

and have you and kevin said the same thing on the electronic polls that have been running?

i dunno if k3v has -- i haven't been one to force the issue but i felt like saying something since you batted off his question with faulty logic

more than anything i'm just dreading you plowing ahead with '90s and '00s polls right after the '70s one

don't forget the 10s one.

poor some dude, such troubles

the problem with acting "above it all" on a message board is you have to get your own hands dirty with trivial bullshit in order to zing other people for talking about trivial bullshit

haha i am 'above' openly and repeatedly agonizing at the possibility someone will run a poll of 90s rock albums on ilx. not afraid to get my 'hands dirty' though.

i repeatedly agonized over the 90s poll? w/e man.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrmZAXezkhA

Automatic thread bump. This poll's results are now in.

Can we unlock the other thread now so I can nominate some Cactus?

edward wanna help run the poll?

― Algerian Goalkeeper, Saturday, October 6, 2012 4:44 PM (6 hours ago)

I'm a lil drunk right now so sure why not

if we do a 'rock' poll we need to decide the parameters. I think sund4r said i probably mean fm rock rather than rolling stone. And hes probably right. or maybe a mix of fm rock/rs/mojo.

Its just hard to do a 70s version of the 80s poll. Things were so much more blurred then.

I just cant but help think allow nominations of any kind of rock (or even any genre) and just hope people go for the more acid fried rock of early funkadelic/black rock with punk/harder post punk/proper out there stuff like Chrome and DIJ and NWW and co that got in the 80s poll.

I honestly do not see a point in a poll with styx or journey or foreigner (nothing against them but theyre in shitloads of 70s lists) yet i cant really say hey vote for the isley brothers and exclude them.
an all-genre or at least loosely rock based poll but hope ppl vote for the harder/weirder/experimental/fuck you stuff like in the 80s poll.
But then you get hit with the "i want disco i want reggae i want salsa" type stuff.

I honestly just dont know.

Anyone got any ideas we can try agree on? Remember the poll is to be fun, crazy results and introduce a lot of music that gets ignored to wider ilx as well as celebrate some obvious classic albums. But we dont need a top 100 of the same old albums either. Its been done twice on ilm.

Thanks edward btw.

And as for heavy rock. Who decides whats heavy rock? Things that were heavy then aren't now.

Its just not as clearcut as the 80s poll was for rock.

And the reason the 80s poll turned out as it did was because a lot of stuff wasn't allowed to be nominated. If it had been allowed the results would have been different. But clearly it did put off some from participating.

I think it'd help to look at it on a genre by genre (or subgenre by subgenre) basis? Like look at the parameters for funk, for fusion stuff, for punk or whatever.

I just cant but help think allow nominations of any kind of rock (or even any genre) and just hope people go for the more acid fried rock of early funkadelic/black rock with punk/harder post punk/proper out there stuff like Chrome and DIJ and NWW and co that got in the 80s poll.

This could work too - I know in the '80s poll I was quite strict and eschewed some favourites on the basis that I didn't feel they rocked enough. Not everyone is going to agree with my definition of rocking though, obviously.

Well first of all it's worth remembering that we don't have to rush in to this, there's plenty time to thresh out parameters itt before we go any further.
Also something that occurred to me - if & when we reopen the nomination thread it might be useful to include quotes from/links to the parameters that were set up for the 80s poll, maybe also the results of the 80s poll too, that way people joining in will have some idea of the aesthetic we're looking for and hopefully nominations would be guided in a sensible direction.

Posting at length in a meta discussion about how to run a poll = I feel like I belong here now. ;)

Its just hard to do a 70s version of the 80s poll. Things were so much more blurred then.

I just cant but help think allow nominations of any kind of rock (or even any genre) and just hope people go for the more acid fried rock of early funkadelic/black rock with punk/harder post punk/proper out there stuff like Chrome and DIJ and NWW and co that got in the 80s poll.

I honestly do not see a point in a poll with styx or journey or foreigner (nothing against them but theyre in shitloads of 70s lists) yet i cant really say hey vote for the isley brothers and exclude them.
an all-genre or at least loosely rock based poll but hope ppl vote for the harder/weirder/experimental/fuck you stuff like in the 80s poll.
But then you get hit with the "i want disco i want reggae i want salsa" type stuff.

you're OTM re: "things were so much more blurred then". my 10 cents (ha!): a number of books covering punk and postpunk and no wave of the 70s refer to the disco, electro, dub, funk, etc. influences of the music, acknowledging them w/out delving further into the matter b/c they’re are simply not the topic at hand. in other words, excluding these various types of non-rock-based music is somewhat necessary f/focus. I think what you’re looking for is an exploded view of hard rock that is in some ways a map to the present. to that end, I would include hard rock, psych, krautrock, punk, postpunk (including early industrial, no wave and even new wave, which before the 80s tends to be weird and interesting), and any music that is heavy and substantially rock-based, “noisy” (ie: aesthetically aggressive) anti-rock, or hybrid music that rocks hard enough to fit v. comfortably within rock parameters. for instance, there was a lot of free/out/underground jazz in the 80s, but the 80s list had only Naked City and Massacre (and maybe a couple of others I'm overlooking), both of which have clear ties w/no wave/punk. admittedly, there’s a lot more “fusion” in the 70s, especially of the jazz-rock variety. you also have the “problems” of VU, who are a seminal punk influence but not always rocking, and the Stones, who have a handful of influential recs and a lot of crap. f/the Stones, I might include anything up through and including Exile (and that’s it). f/VU, most of their real work was IMO done in the 60s, so I might either exclude them as being somewhat irrelevant f/a 70s poll, or perhaps just include their live documents like 1969 Velvet Underground Live w/Lou Reed, which do indeed rock. re: jazz-rock fusion like Miles, doesn’t his “rock-ish” era basically just encompass three recs (Bitches Brew, Live Evil, On the Corner)? I suppose similar judgments could be made re: other fusion recs. you can see that I’m basically laying out the approach of the selective discography (generally by aesthetic period).

I would, as per my krautrock/postpunk inclusion, include Can, but also Throbbing Gristle, NWW, Gary Numan, etc. I would also consider the Residents and other art bands, as they operated within/pushed back against a rock framework (and are part of this imaginary map to the present). again, I think that you’re going f/an Exploded 70s Hard Rock Map to the Present. at least that’s what I’d be trying to go for. you may have an entirely different approach in mind. I would also throw out “rock” that is more “folk” or “prog” than rock, as well any mainstream recs operating p. clearly w/in rather established singer-songwriter/vaudeville/showtune/showbiz parameters (f/me that would mean goodbye to Springsteen and Randy Newman and Jackson Brown and maybe Bob Segar; idk, it all gets into alien territory f/me, so I can only speak v. generally about this crap). as f/Styx, Journey, Foreigner, Boston, etc., I suppose that you could let people nominate mainstream hard rock in the same way that they were allowed in the 80s poll to nominate Bon Jovi and Van Halen, and the voters can decide on a case-by-case basis whether or not these recs in a sense bring us to the present or represent aesthetic dead ends. just throwing some ideas out there, feel free to use or not use any or all of them.

I honestly do not see a point in a poll with styx or journey or foreigner (nothing against them but theyre in shitloads of 70s lists) yet i cant really say hey vote for the isley brothers and exclude them.
an all-genre or at least loosely rock based poll but hope ppl vote for the harder/weirder/experimental/fuck you stuff like in the 80s poll.
But then you get hit with the "i want disco i want reggae i want salsa" type stuff.

I may be totally off-base with this assumption, but I'll bet there are plenty of people on this board who have never actually listened to a Styx or Bad Company record all the way through, who have just heard the big singles on rock radio and beer commercials and feel like they know the band (which of course one one level they do). If one of the overarching aims of this poll is truly to introduce people to new-to-them music, then I think there's room to explore here.

One of the things I loved about the '80s poll is the way it unearthed a lot of stuff that is both slightly too old for people my age (early 30s) to have been involved with during its time and not quite at the level of canonization for people my age to have necessarily checked out later. I guess I feel like early postpunk and "protopunk" and krautrock has all been pretty much thoroughly canonized, anthologized, etc, in certain circles, at least far, far beyond the degree to which much of the most interesting stuff on the '80s poll has been. Maybe that's not the case for younger listeners who don't remember as well the whole krautrock and postpunk revivals of the recent past, but I dunno. (Maybe listeners 8-10 years older than me felt similarly about the '80s poll?)

Either way, my hope for this '70s poll would not just be to rehash a bunch of alternate-canon '70s records from various genres that only qualify as rock by some "clever" "stretching" of the notion, but to really explore the roots of punk, hard rock, proto-metal, post-garage, straight-up butt rock, stomping swamp rock, etc. This poll runs the danger of many of us just patting ourselves on the back from liking all these art bands that are really just as firmly canonized in their alternate canons as Springsteen and the Stones are in the world of Rolling Stone and FM radio.

lol, I was thinking of an "exploded" diagram, which may not really apply to a map, so maybe refer to it as an Expanded 70s Hard Rock Map to the Present or w/e (no matter what it'll be a freeze-frame of a car-wreck-in-progress).

xp

x-post

Also, I love Miles Davis's '70s work with a fierce burning intensity, but the only records that I think maginally qualifies for this poll are Aghartha and Pangaea. People talk about Bitches Brew having "rock influences" and all that, blah blah, but if you actually LISTEN to the damn thing it is about as far from rock as you can get.

Just because there's a guitar involved doesn't mean the music is in any sense rock music. That's like saying a sax makes something jazz.

Hellhouse, I appreciate where you're coming from, but I think the danger in drawing such an exploded diagram is that it potentially involves a sketchy reliance on the power of influence.

I would also throw out “rock” that is more “folk” or “prog” than rock, as well any mainstream recs operating p. clearly w/in rather established singer-songwriter/vaudeville/showtune/showbiz parameters (f/me that would mean goodbye to Springsteen and Randy Newman and Jackson Brown and maybe Bob Segar; idk, it all gets into alien territory f/me, so I can only speak v. generally about this crap).

This one's easy for me; Newman doesn't rock, Seger does!

Either way, my hope for this '70s poll would not just be to rehash a bunch of alternate-canon '70s records from various genres that only qualify as rock by some "clever" "stretching" of the notion, but to really explore the roots of punk, hard rock, proto-metal, post-garage, straight-up butt rock, stomping swamp rock, etc. This poll runs the danger of many of us just patting ourselves on the back from liking all these art bands that are really just as firmly canonized in their alternate canons as Springsteen and the Stones are in the world of Rolling Stone and FM radio.\

I'm not sure if you're addressing any of my particular arguments, but I don't think we really disagree. when I say "punk" or "postpunk" I'm obv not just talking about throwing in the token Sex Pistols, Clash and PIL records, but rather going much further underground into, again, industrial and other noise-related weirdness.

regarding Styx, Boston, Foreigner, you're essentially talking about a "deep cuts" approach to well-known recs (lol at AOR talk), which might more usefully be employed in a tracks poll. the other issue is that because the 70s are now roughly forty years ago, almost everything has been "canonized" by someone, but I think that AG wants to make a hybrid canon that breaks out of the traditional classification ghettos while still maintaining a rock underpinning. more-or-less, I think that including music that has already been "canonized" (if even on a smaller, more specialized level that might contradict the all-encompassing notion of canon), is inevitable. that being said, yeah, the emphasis should be on introducing as much "undiscovered" music as possible (though w/any hybrid canon everyone will find a bit of undiscovered music).
'

Also, I love Miles Davis's '70s work with a fierce burning intensity, but the only records that I think maginally qualifies for this poll are Aghartha and Pangaea. People talk about Bitches Brew having "rock influences" and all that, blah blah, but if you actually LISTEN to the damn thing it is about as far from rock as you can get.

Just because there's a guitar involved doesn't mean the music is in any sense rock music. That's like saying a sax makes something jazz.

this is exactly why I made my particular suggestion; it's IMO a workable compromise between the pro- and anti- Miles camps.

Hellhouse, I appreciate where you're coming from, but I think the danger in drawing such an exploded diagram is that it potentially involves a sketchy reliance on the power of influence.

not sure exactly what you're talking about here.

Also, I love Miles Davis's '70s work with a fierce burning intensity, but the only records that I think maginally qualifies for this poll are Aghartha and Pangaea. People talk about Bitches Brew having "rock influences" and all that, blah blah, but if you actually LISTEN to the damn thing it is about as far from rock as you can get.

Just because there's a guitar involved doesn't mean the music is in any sense rock music. That's like saying a sax makes something jazz.

I'll also say that I'm not in any way a Miles expert. if he has a different period, or group of touchstone recs that most people agree are closer to rock than the three I mention above, then I would obv suggest going w/those. my real point is, again, the notion of a selective discography based around periods when it comes to borderline artists (or, if absolutely necessary, individual recs, though this is something of a last resort b/c of the inherently contentious nature of trying to include only one rec).

all these art bands that are really just as firmly canonized in their alternate canons as Springsteen and the Stones are in the world of Rolling Stone and FM radio.

this actually brings up the v. real issue of the necessity f/an "alt." canon re: the 70s. it's possible that the passage of time has been such that most sectors of 70s rock have been mapped, and that more useful alt. canons can (and should) focus on the 90s and 00s. of course, there's a difference between saying that "everyone" knows about postpunk and saying that "everyone" knows that Throbbing Gristle's First Annual Report is fucking great. and, of course, the paradox is that while the lengthy passage of time means that quite a bit of of excavation has been conducted, it also means that there are more and more people to whom the 70s are v. far off and alien. splitting the diff, I think that giving an oddball canon like the one I've described would still be useful and interesting, but there are prob. people who might think a true alt. canon would right off the bat boot Zep, Sabbath, Stooges and Pistols.

I would, as per my krautrock/postpunk inclusion, include Can, but also Throbbing Gristle, NWW, Gary Numan, etc. I would also consider the Residents and other art bands, as they operated within/pushed back against a rock framework (and are part of this imaginary map to the present). again, I think that you’re going f/an Exploded 70s Hard Rock Map to the Present. at least that’s what I’d be trying to go for.

I think I have a problem with including the art bands that feel like they're just playing with rock-as-form. I used to really prize music that could "wrily comment on rock" or whatever, but I've lost a lot of that. I'd much rather listen to (and heap praise upon) a band that can actually just inhabit rock and do it really well. Those things aren't mutually exclusive, as I think Can and Faust both rock pretty mightily when they want to. But the Residents? No way. Nor NWW. That's, to me, the danger of defining the parameters of this poll in a micro-genre way or a super-specific way rather than a looser, more intuitive, more direct "does this rock?" way. It strikes me that you'd have to do a fair bit of intellectual calisthenics to say that the Residents rock. I'm not necessarily satisfied with the circularity of it all (it's in if it ROCKS), but I do think there's a certain level on which the '80s poll reflected a collective intuition about rocking that we are having a lot more difficulty achieving thus far with the '70s.

x-post to Hellhouse: I think you're OTM about "it's possible that the passage of time has been such that most sectors of 70s rock have been mapped"... That's one of the things I think that's making it hard for us! But I just know there's a ton of stuff out there that fewer of us know about. The problem is, it's even more hidden than the '80s stuff if it's neither part of the canon nor the alternate canons. I mean, I think someone like Scott could pull 20 records out of the ether in 30 seconds that would blow our minds and that we've never heard or likely even heard of. I mean, I just bought my first Uriah Heep record the other day, and they were a huge band. It rocks!

A Tribute to Jack Johnson is the most rock Miles, right?

I'll have much more to say when I have a moment later on.

I think I have a problem with including the art bands that feel like they're just playing with rock-as-form. I used to really prize music that could "wrily comment on rock" or whatever, but I've lost a lot of that. I'd much rather listen to (and heap praise upon) a band that can actually just inhabit rock and do it really well. Those things aren't mutually exclusive, as I think Can and Faust both rock pretty mightily when they want to. But the Residents? No way. Nor NWW. That's, to me, the danger of defining the parameters of this poll in a micro-genre way or a super-specific way rather than a looser, more intuitive, more direct "does this rock?" way. It strikes me that you'd have to do a fair bit of intellectual calisthenics to say that the Residents rock. I'm not necessarily satisfied with the circularity of it all (it's in if it ROCKS), but I do think there's a certain level on which the '80s poll reflected a collective intuition about rocking that we are having a lot more difficulty achieving thus far with the '70s.

I know what yr. saying, but f/the 80s poll AG v. specifically accepted nominations like SPK and Neubauten and DAF, b/c even though they don't necessarily rock in trad sense, they're engaged in an aggressive aesthetic dialogue w/rock that in a sense constructs rock (in its "fuck-you" essence, or as I mention in the 80s album rollout thread, "[from] a distillate of the contrarian euphoria of rock and roll") out of anti-rock. this is obv v. different from a band like REM that simply takes a straightforward but v. light approach to rock. I'm not saying that you're wrong, btw, I'm just trying to convey my understanding of the parameters of the 80s poll.

Including transgressive non-rock things really overemphasizes transgression as a significant factor in rock.

I haven't read the Carducci book in twenty years, so I don't remember the extent to which he might have been making this argument, but I'll say this: I've always thought there was too much reactionary response to melodicism as something that counters rock qualities in music. One example would be the Bobby Fuller Four and the Remains, who were a couple of the most bad-ass bands of their time.

I understand the premise of light vs. heavy, but the melodicism argument is more about light vs. dark. The Raspberries were sunshine but they were heavy.

Come on you titans of intellect! I want someone to start gunning for Dark Magus and Get Up With It to be included. All I can weakly offer is that Miles alienated the jazz purists so it must be rock! It would be very offside and even slightly suspect to include Can/omit Miles. I have just blasted out Honky Tonk on the Bose and can confirm it fucking rocks!

And they're the exact definition of balls' "cruising with the top down" archetype. And yet, he chooses to include Pere Ubu instead in his list of bands that fit that archetype.

xp

Including transgressive non-rock things really overemphasizes transgression as a significant factor in rock.

I haven't read the Carducci book in twenty years, so I don't remember the extent to which he might have been making this argument, but I'll say this: I've always thought there was too much reactionary response to melodicism as something that counters rock qualities in music. One example would be the Bobby Fuller Four and the Remains, who were a couple of the most bad-ass bands of their time.

Carducci did not at all consider bands like SPK and Neubauten to be rock in any conceivable sense (f/him it's all about the live rhythm section and the small-band, guitar-based approach). I see bands like the above as engaged in a v. specific destroying-rock-to-save-rock (and even elevate rock) project that's less about any kind of moral/social/civil "transgression" than it is about destroying what's seen as the stifling formal conventions of rock in the name of recapturing the initial excitement of rock and its sense of possibility.

Including transgressive non-rock things really overemphasizes transgression as a significant factor in rock.

Tim, thank you for expressing what I've been trying to say so much more succinctly than I was! OTM. (Although I do think some early Pere Ubu rocks pretty hard. "Final Solution"?)

Come on you titans of intellect! I want someone to start gunning for Dark Magus and Get Up With It to be included. All I can weakly offer is that Miles alienated the jazz purists so it must be rock! It would be very offside and even slightly suspect to include Can/omit Miles. I have just blasted out Honky Tonk on the Bose and can confirm it fucking rocks!

― Damo Suzuki's Parrot, Sunday, October 7, 2012 1:04 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Fair enough re: Dark Magus and Get Up With It (parts at least), and I suppose I'd far rather than non-rock music that actually rocks than stuff like the Residents that takes a self-consciously outside-of-rock approach.

Yeah, "Final Solution" was the one I thought of, too!

But the fact that we both had to think hard to find something that rocked does kind of say something, I suppose.

i have no problems with agharta, pangea, jack johnson, dark magus being in it.
i dont even have a problem with the residents or the arty stuff.

I see bands like the above as engaged in a v. specific destroying-rock-to-save-rock (and even elevate rock) project that's less about any kind of moral/social/civil "transgression" than it is about destroying what's seen as the stifling formal conventions of rock in the name of recapturing the initial excitement of rock and its sense of possibility.

― Hellhouse, Sunday, October 7, 2012 1:14 PM (6 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I think you're imbuing art-school antics with way more missionary zeal than their practicioners ever would have. This makes for an appealing alternate-canon historical thread, maybe, but it's too neat and clean for me.

I think a good rule of thumb is to keep bands out of the thread that you can seriously imagine describing the "formal conventions" of '70s rock as "stifling"...

A couple of things: before we talked about it, AG, I honestly thought stuff like Boston, Styx, and Foreigner was exactly what you were looking for, or at least one part of what you were looking for, in an 'anti-RS' 70s hard rock poll. Pop-metal and AOR were included in the 80s poll, including two Journey albums. Many of us have been using Stairway to Hell as a reference point for these polls: Boston and Foreigner are included there. While Sonic Youth, Glenn Branca, Miles Davis, Metal Machine Music, and Swans are all in there too, they place lower than Def Leppard and Guns n Roses. Rating mainstream AOR/hard rock was a large part of what made that book anti-canonical or even 'anti-RS'. There's nothing wrong with choosing parameters for a poll that would exclude those bands but then it needs to be clear what we're looking for. If the focus is more 'acid-fried' or experimental rock, then pre-DSotM Pink Floyd should probably be included. If the focus is simply introducing people to more obscure music, then perhaps gold-selling albums or albums in the RS 70s list should be excluded?

Also, I listened to the Shoes tracks Tim recommended. I do think stuff like this and Big Star is more hard-edged than 80s REM, not that far away from Cheap Trick, possibly even Kiss. ("Down the Street" was even used as the theme song for That 70s Show, as a 'cruising' rock song.)

(I forgot that side 2 of Jack Johnson doesn't rock quite as hard as side 1 btw, although I'd still include it in a rock poll myself.)

I think a good rule of thumb is to keep bands out of the thread that you can seriously imagine describing the "formal conventions" of '70s rock as "stifling"...

you have to realize that b/c of forty years of punk/industrial/metal and MTV and the Internet and etc, etc, that the taste of the average listener today is vastly more catholic that it was then. you can't project your v. contemporary and vaguely postmodern, it's-all-good approach onto the 70s. perceptions of rock were far narrower, and many of the bands critics today see as essential and influential didn't really have big audiences at all, and were generally fairly obscure.

yeah ok i love big star and the raspberries are ok so yeah if cheap trick and big star are in then why not. I guess the aor stuff is the equivalent of hair metal in that poll.

but we're gonna end up just being all-genre arent we?

tbf if cheap trick makes it (and they should) then raspberries and arguably shoes do (i mean i wouldn't nominate shoes but more power to whoever does), i think you just want to not say 'since cheap trick and raspberries qualify therefore power pop qualifies therefore shake some action qualifies when shake some action, as great as it is, doesn't really rawk (flamin' groovies definitely have other records that rawk fwiw). the process should be, again, if the act doesn't have some degree of rawk heaviosity so to speak at its core then the record nominated better fucking rawk. first two big star? sure, ok. 3rd? c'mon, no. even though it's their most 'rock' record.

will the people who vote for the least rocking acts only vote for the least rocking acts?

So only Julian Cope approved singles get to be nommed?

ag if it worries you most of the huge aor stuff was in the 80s really. boston's a lock for the final results (and should be) but the biggest foreigner album and journey album were 80s and didn't sully the joint too much (journey actually breath of fresh air amidst skinny puppy and neubauten).

i think we have to face the facts we cannot replicate the 80s poll.

Eg: pink fairies - do it, can - turtles have short legs, hawkwind - silver machine, schizo - schizo and the little girl

I think really you just have to keep appealing to people to apply their inner 'does it rock?' test when putting together nominations. And not be afraid to veto.

will the people who vote for the least rocking acts only vote for the least rocking acts?

ha, yes, of course. people still voted f/that one sad REM rec in the last poll (and would've voted f/any others were included). letting people nominate and vote f/anything as a kind of liberal gesture is fine, but IMO if you really want an alt. canon of sorts you need to define the parameters before the voting. if you can't you might think about scrapping it f/a 90s poll where it would easier to establish an anti-canon of sorts.

The problems are as such

Cheap Trick and Big Star are in but not all power pop should be.
Funkadelic and Mandrill are in but not all funk is in (parliament, james brown,stevie etc)
Some 'aor' acts are in but some shouldn't be.
A few miles rock albums get in but not all fusion.

So bands/albums need to be excluded but a) someone's gonna get offended and take their ball and refuse to play.
b) more people fall out with me!
c) it becomes not fun

Then you have stones/bowie/springsteen

xpost It saddens me that having a band/album they like be excluded from a message-board poll on a specific subject would be enough to offend someone!

it really is ridiculous that we have to have a meta thread for a poll, innit?

I think this meta-thread is lots of fun...

i think all aor is safe ag, this is ilx not sure why you're worried about foreigner and styx domination. for stones/bowie/springsteen/neil just put a quota in place and/or wield a heavy veto. perfection's not neccessary nor desired, it's not like 80s poll was perfect. it just wasn't dull.

Why can't we make it a "'70s Hard Rock Poll"?

Or a "Hard/Heavy Rock Poll"? I think that would more neatly capture a similar spirit to the '80s poll.

That would get us lots of early- and proto-metal, lots of "acid-fried" stuff, the edgier and harder fringe of power pop but not the overly poppy stuff, the singer-songwriter-leaning stuff that's harder and more rocking but without the more folky stuff, etc, etc.

That would also get us lots of canon, sure, but I think with a 400- or 500-album rollout we'd get tons of obscure awesomeness to delve into for weeks and months afterward.

Anyway, for the next little while I'll be concentrating on the 90s electronic poll (which at least in terms of tracks looks likely to be the 90s DANCE poll in disguise, so yay for that) but if the nominations thread reopens I'll make it a point to pop in.

yeah i voted in that

I mean, I think someone like Scott could pull 20 records out of the ether in 30 seconds that would blow our minds and that we've never heard or likely even heard of.

xpost JUST OVER 24 HOURS LEFT TO VOTE FOLKS, YOUR VOTE MATTERS etc etc.

x-post to AG:

Even though Scott himself won't participate, I'll bet a lot of us who will, though, do have at least a handful of '70s treasures that aren't widely known. As long as we champion those (the way you did with the great early doom records in the '80s poll), I think we'll get a lot of interesting variety. I just re-read the now-locked nominations poll, and there are already a TON of things on there that I have no idea about, and that are piquing my curiosity. I think things only started to go downhill when people started being self-consciously contrarian and trying to stretch the boundaries in a way they (rightfully) anticipated would ruffle a bunch of feathers. Most people seemed to have gotten your point pretty well.

so can we agree on anything?

I kinda wish a few of us could get together and make a shortlist of some of the stuff we want then post it and people *try* to nominate other similar stuff, with edward and i vetoing anything we believe doesnt fit (i have finalsay obviously).

So i was thinking apart from edward and i would balls,hellhouse , sund4r care to help with that and would anyone else like to join in?

Clarke you in?

xp

that is the key thing. That poll worked because people campaigned for obscure stuff. Campaigning really works and is vital to the success

Agreed... What led me to check out records in the '80s thread most was those impassioned and articulate campaigning-style testimonials, rather than the mere presence of records I'd never heard of. I mean, how could you read something like this and not want to immediately hear the record? (From Edward III) "early swans was all about brutality, and public castration is the purest distillation. everything gira had done prior was a build-up to that material, and after the wave broke and receded they'd never get back there again. as an absurd reduction of rock's dionysian din to its elemental roots in the suffering of the blues, it exists outside of genre with even a barely tangential relationship to music itself. yet it's so compelling, sounds so massive, hasn't aged at all, and I still haven't heard a more harrowing record. a leviathan."

AG, I'd ostensibly be willing to help out with that, sure, sounds fun... My only hesitations are: (1) I'm pretty steeped in the '70s, but I'm by no means familiar with oodles upon oodles of things; and (2) my job keeps me away from a computer for hours at a time during the work week.

Yup. That's why I do wish Skot could be persuaded to participate because him and others do that sort of thing really well. Even if it was just to nominate albums and discuss them, he doesn't have to vote if he doesn't want to! Him, smithy,phil, noodle vague,chuck, george ,pashmina and a host of others may all hate polls but they love discussion so its a real shame they won't discuss anything on the poll threads. I just want wider ilx to discover lots of good music that most of us are unaware of. And everyone has valuable opinions. Its not just about lists, the discussion is the best part.

The 80s poll discussions were great. Polls do not automatically equal rubbish discussion. Its who takes parts and how much one puts in. I cant articulate like all these guys (and edward,hellhouse,nakh and others) but thankfully I don't need to. I think most get the passion I have for the music and its enough while others do the great posts.

Would love it one day if we could have a poll that every regular on ilm would nominate,discuss and vote in. The all-time poll didn't even get that.

Clarke thats why lots of us could pool together to do something then let the rest of ilx join in.
We already have the start of a noms list anyway. We can go through that and add/remove stuff.

Sure, I don't mind helping with a shortlist, although this is true of me as well:

I'm pretty steeped in the '70s, but I'm by no means familiar with oodles upon oodles of things

I also strongly support changing the name from "Anti-Rolling Stone Albums Poll" to something like "70s Heavy Rock Poll".

but like the 80s poll its not exclusively 'heavy'

Even "70s Albums That Rock Poll" isn't bad.

'Orrible rock of the 70s

That's pretty good.

yeah, better.
xp
hah

"Very 'Eavy, Very 'Umble Rock of the 70s"?

I think we will stick with 'Albums That Rock'
I assume no-one wants (to help with) a tracks poll?

yeah i'll help, fwiw i'll probably be pretty liberal and catholic in letting stuff in cuz i think w/ 70s even borderline stuff is gonna rawk in ways that borderline stuff in the 80s didn't. just a reflection of the decades and rock's centrality to it. eg i was gonna nominate the first or second mother's finest album and then i listened to them and decided that on second thought the albums as a whole didn't rock hard enough to submit BUT if someone else nominated i wouldn't veto mother's finest. also think that 80s poll success may have been due to it being top 400 as opposed to top 100 so would very much argue for a huge results list again. somehow just having it in the runner up tally at the end isn't the same. would also maybe argue for relatively brief nominating period (just long enough so most ilxors get a shot, 2-3 days i'd argue but end of week at latest) but relatively long voting period (like ballots due by halloween maybe or maybe even election day in usa), alot of this stuff might be hard to track down and there's alot to consider etc and i know some ppl (eg me w/ 80s poll) might think 'there's no way i have enough time to deal w/ that' but if due date is far off enough they might be thinking of it on coffee breaks, on commute, whatever and be able to throw a ballot together.

xpost - nominate 'into the void: ilx 70s rawk poll - metal, punk, buttrock, acid burnouts, aor and more. rip lester bangs' for poll title!

not doing tracks poll does feel weird but doing tracks poll seems like minefield. i mean i think we can agree that elton john and donna summer don't belong in albums poll but there's totally stuff i'd allow (but i'm not sure others would) in tracks poll.

also think that 80s poll success may have been due to it being top 400 as opposed to top 100 so would very much argue for a huge results list again. somehow just having it in the runner up tally at the end isn't the same.

BINGO

See in a tracks poll Saturday Nights All Right For Fighting or Crazy Horses or Devil Woman or Rock On totally belong.

mother's Finest would get in under funk rock tbh. Very much in the Funkadelic lineage.

Anyone want to try persuade Scott,chuck and others to join in?

Anti Parochial Music Press 70's Rock Poll? How long to you guys re-open the nomination thread? I have dug up a few albums I would love to nominate.

well if the rest of us can get together on FB or something just now and get something done tonight then I can start a new thread as soon as i can.

xpost - nominate 'into the void: ilx 70s rawk poll - metal, punk, buttrock, acid burnouts, aor and more. rip lester bangs' for poll title!

Really like this one.

we can discuss that too. sund4r any of these guys on your fb?

That is a well cool title!

I could help you w/the nominations. I'm also far more conversant w/the 80s than the 70s, but I have a few things in mind.

just need to get your FB then. I emailed edward with the username i have.

or webmail me your email addy and i'll get back to you

Tracks poll please!

not enough time passed between 80s rock monster poll and the sequel. i'm kinda burnt out on rock polls at the moment or else i would've considered casting a ballot. if a 90s equivalent happens in a month or 2 i'm dtf.

in case anyone cares.

hellhouse you didnt give me your email in webmail.

there is no way to contact you or find you

we've sorted most things out so the nominations should start tonight

Cool. Is the existing thread just getting unlocked? I thought we made a decent start and maybe even fuckwits like me are a bit more in tune to the poll now! I swear someone hacked my account. Honest I never nommed Pink Moon ;)

nah a new one with a new name. And we will need to play hardball with some stuff. So no nick drake folk (and i love that stuff)

I think im gonna allow guitar based funk like Slave,isleys just because it usually gets overlooked. Why? because its my poll!

the way i discussed it with the others was "its the equivalent of industrial in the 80s poll" it will all be like the 200+ mark but hey!

but will make the results a wee bit weirder along with the nww/slapp happy type stuff

also i think im less likely to veto obscure stuff as long as a good case is made. Which is what chuck is great at.

and the shoes will be allowed. the heavier end of power pop as tim asked for.

nominate 'into the void: ilx 70s rawk poll - metal, punk, buttrock, acid burnouts, aor and more. rip lester bangs'

This has to be the title, its fucking beautiful.

that can be its subtext!

1967-1979 WTF - The Hard 'n' Heavy 'n' Loud + Krautrock, Arty, Noisy, Weird, Funky, Punky Shit - Albums Poll! Nominations ! (ends Oct 15)