Poll: Who is more influential to Modern Rock Music?

[rusty_cage]

Led Zeppelin. Although I do find it scary - I know a person who hasn't heard of LZ...

Many people I know haven't even heard of Led Zeppelin and I don't know why. It's the second best selling band ever damn it!

I voted for Led Zeppelin because it's one of my favourite bands.

Also isn't Black Sabbath a metal band?

...metal is pretty much a rock spin off its normally included in the whole "rock" category like mind numbing repetitiveness and dance music

black sabbath all the way, ozzy ate a freekin bats head..... its whole head!

And you show us exactly why he is famous. Good job!...

if thats sarcasm im not sure why you say that, of course it helped him become famous bats.....frikin....head!!!!

He didn't bite the head off a bat. A bat was thrown on stage and he thought it was a rubber bat, so he picked it up and put it in his mouth and accidentally bit into it. He then ran off stage, vomited and got rabies shots.

If you're going to use something to show how metal Ozzy is go with the dove incident. At least there he did it somewhat deliberately in a drunken stuper.

Btw, Beatles were the reason Ozzy became a singer... so I'd flat out cross him off as most influential when one of his competitors was his influence. Although I guess the rest of Sabbath could still count, but in my opinion they wouldn't have been Sabbath without him.

 

[rowan-thats-me]

I am suprised of the voting. I would have thought more people would have voted for Dylan or the Kinks.

acording to a story I once heard, the kinks guitarist (think it was ray davis, could have been his brother, not sure) invented one of the early types of distortion when he got so frustrated while trying to find a new sound that he stabbed one of his mothers knitting needles through his amp, and that is how the guitar sounds are made on some of the demos of "all day and all of the night"

 

[Auron555]

The Beatles pretty much invented rock, so I'm going with them.
They were the ore that was refined, if you will.


wow, that was a terrible metaphor...

 

[EzraPound]

As far as musicianship goes, I'd say it's mixed. Keith Richards is a better overall guitarist than George Harrison. I'd say Charlie Watts and Ringo are about the same. As for the bass, they're also about on the same level, though I'm inclined to give McCartney the edge over Bill Wyman.

Is that a joke? Charlie Watts destroys Ringo Starr - Starr used so many monotonous drumrolls, and couldn't keep a groove to save his life. That said, Paul McCartney was a far better bass player than Bill Wyman, albeit in a very different, more melodic way, and Jagger is as good a vocalist - for what he does - as either Lennon or McCartney. And Richards' guitar is so different from Harrison's they're hard to compare: Richards was a better songwriter, obviously, but not a tremondous technical player (he played rhythm), whereas Harrison was a lead guitarist with a penchant for impeccable fills.

 

[Lyri]

Is that a joke? Charlie Watts destroys Ringo Starr - Starr used so many monotonous drumrolls, and couldn't keep a groove to save his life. That said, Paul McCartney was a far better bass player than Bill Wyman, albeit in a very different, more melodic way, and Jagger is as good a vocalist - for what he does - as either Lennon or McCartney. And Richards' guitar is so different from Harrison's they're hard to compare: Richards was a better songwriter, obviously, but not a tremondous technical player (he played rhythm), whereas Harrison was a lead guitarist with a penchant for impeccable fills.

What she said, it's early and using someone elses brain works just fine for me right now.
Thanks Ezra =D

 

[aruseusx]

What about Slade.
Led Zepplin fueled the stereotype of rockers. So it might be them.