Good column and interesting questions.

Maybe we won't know until more time has passed and we see what music stands the test of time. Sometimes we get in too big of a hurry to proclaim a band as the standard bearer for an era. History makes those calls.

thought-provoking mark, but dig this, The Libertines are / were IMPORTANT. they started a musical revoloution, or at least ran to the forefront. They sparked mass guerilla gigging. They inspired legions of young bucks around the country who probably still haven't been signed. They broke the boundaries between audience and performer. A fella felt like part of it all, even though here he is, sitting in the northern ireland, whilst they're galivanting around London.

There are definitely important bands around outside of the realm of critic-speak. I see these bands as being influential artists who open new avenues for the artists that come after them. Its much easier to spot a Louis Armstrong, Miles Davis or Jimi Hendrix in hindsight, but I'll bet you that seeing them perform in their time, you could see how their music would change the landscape of everything that would come after them. I think today's important bands are probably more on the fringe, not seeing radio/video play necessarily but finding their way into the right hands via word of mouth. I think Jeff Buckley is a prime example as every singer-songwriter I've talked to cites him as a major influence. Brian Eno and Aphex Twin would be perfect examples in the ambient space. But some important bands do find fame -- albeit awkwardly. Radiohead has certainly been an important band when you look at the span of their influence and the paths they've charted for progressive rock. It's a hard thing to pick out because everyone was influenced by someone else so how do you see something that is truly revolutionary and something that will mark this spot in the musical timeline? Interesting question indeed.

Cattle Decapitation

Iggy, Velvet Underground, Clash, New York Dolls, Sex Pistols, Patti Smith, Television, Ramones, MC5. All of these were important and influential.

yea, the Libertines have been on my radar for a while. i've gotta get Up The Bracket, i suppose.

When you are out shopping for the Liberitnes, try to pick up "Humanure" by Cattle Decapitation also.

gees BRICK, are you trying to drive everybody out of my house (except me)?

first Converge, now this?

Mark, I of course wish to cause no familial strife for you. Now, if you want to clear the room, may I suggest anything by Mortician? Mrs. Bricklayer and friend of Bricklayer just shook their head in sad bemusement when I played them something from those fellows!

TV On The Radio. These guys are so different, so intelligent. They manage to pick up where Talking Heads and Peter Gabriel left in about 1982 or so and carry the sound on, pushing it further into the minimal while still managing to keep it very catchy. There's a reason why they won the 2004 Shortlist prize: they're brilliant. They have a very bright, promising future.

hmmm, i checked out one of their videos. pretty cool stuff. i do like the guitar. reminds me of Fripp a little.

mark, now that the libs are disbanded, Babyshambles, fronted, of course, by libertines co-frontman Pete Doherty, are more than worthy of stepping up to the mantle. The rabid devotion they have inspired with not even an album to show for it surely suggests something special.

And they rock, also. See if you can get the video to Kilamangiro online anyplace.

THis may not be the place, but I have to put the Wildhearts on the list of "greatest bands you never heard". I came way late to the party, not buying their latest(and possibly last?) CD until last month, and I really wish they had had the exposure many lesser bands got. Everyone of the songs on "Wildhearts Must Be Destroyed" could be a hit in another, more perfect musical world, alas. I got into a similar unheralded great band, therapy?, 5 years to late too. Why is it so many crap bands (cough*Strokes*cough) are celebrated and hailed as the return of rock, when other bands have been slugging it out in the boozy, smoky beer-soaked trenches night after night, proving that rock never left.
TANJ, that's what it is, TANJ!

SFC, you'll get no argument from me man. The Wildhearts are one of my favourite bands of all time. In fact, in the sidebar there you'll see a link to my interview with Ginger, the frontman. Incredible band.

two words


The Beatles

hurm...interesting Topic...one well worthy of discussion..thanx Mark for posing the Question so clearly..i believe yer raising some fine Points here..

full disclosure: i picked up a bass in 1976 after a Rush concert at the Felt Forum for the 2112 tour..i had seen the '74 "song Remains the Same" tour at MSG, and was NOT anywhere near as impressed

what makes a band Important..my personal definition stems from their Influence stemming from their work, both onstage and in the Studio...

to me the more Important bands are not neccessarily the ones that sold the most albums...tho sometimes they are...the Beatles spring to mind as a perfect example of both commercial success and sheer Importance to both culture and other musicians

since we are talking solely about Roc and Roll here..we will skip the Important figures in jazz and the blues that influenced many great Rockers and stick with those within the genre itself..

so let's start at the Beginning, shall we...

Disclaimer: the following are merely MY Opinions as to who and what are Important bands according to my own proclivities and sensibilities...
...your mileage may vary...

Chuck Berry and his two string leads, Bo Diddly with all he brought to the electric "table"...these were the early "guitar gods" that showed the Way..

Buddy Holly redefined it all at the early stages, possibly the first "punk" with his innate ability to break "conventions" in songwriting

the 60's brought us Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young..harmony and storytelling abundant
Frank Zappa and the MOthers of Invention showed brilliant musicianship that didn't have to take itself so seriously, introducing orchestral composition..influencing so many that followed
Santana...Carlos..possibly the smoothest guitar maestro then or now...latin beats and Rock's spirit
Cream...the prototype power trio...if i have to explain it then you ain't listening
the Jimi Hendrix experience...bombastic improv..redefining what an electric guitar could do

side note..the Beatles are in a class unto themselves (as would be Elvis) and have no need of my discussion

the Doors...bringing keyboards, jazz style guitar...rock solid beats and Morrison's poetry...again, redefining what a frontman/singer/poet could be...still influencing so many singers today
Steppenwolf...the coiners of the phrase "heavy metal"..powerful, sometimes political...forget what you might have heard on the radio...try the uncut version of Monster or the Pusher, and hear how relevant it still is today
the Who...the gods of Mod, Townshend is the prototypical master of rhythym, Entwhistle can be argued the first "bass god" for sheer innovation and mastery of the four string

we have crossed the boundries into the '70s

David Bowie...you want to know what pop will be like in 3 to 5 years, listen to the newest Bowie album..androgenous Parent of all things glam
Alice Cooper...offending parents from day one...brought a deep sense of theatre to Rock
Led Zeppelin...Page and Plant...every hair band of the 80's wanted to be them...and failed miserably
Rush...couple intricate music with thoughtful poetry, defy all conventions of what radio friendly tracks could be...and then influence so many Players that came after, showed that you could play in something other than 4/4 time , 120 beats per minute and still Rock the house, introduced the 3 and 7 count times to many musicians...if you don't like these guys work, odds are you like those that listened to them...nuff said?
Motorhead...that cross between metal and punk...the founding Fathers of all things FAST!!
so many great bands after have said that Motorhead and Rush turned them on to playing well

many more here...i'm not leaving them out..just hitting the highlights to me

the "punks"..the Ramones, Iggy Pop and the Stooges, the Sex Pistols...all else was imitation and pose...these guys were for real (IMHO)

the 80's came...and not much here to see...notice i am leaving the "pop" types out of it

Elvis Costello and the Attractions...My Aim is True changed everything,,,their performance on SNL, refusing to play one of their more mainstram songs, instead playing Radio,Radio heralded the death of punk and the beginning of New Wave..for that, they did not get airplay in the US for many years..

the '90s brought about many changes...

one band had been in the "hair" contingent...took some time off, and found real Metal...Pantera redefined a sound and a sensibility that had only been seen "underground" for years and jammed it into your face with spikes on it...the best thing to come out of texas since Buddy Holly...
mix Dylan's protest and social commentary...a funky time with snap and pop bass line, things nobody thought could be done on a guitar...and you will Rage Against the Machine

and finally a band that plays still..whom, to me, are the Important band right now, second to no other..and who many musicians will claim as their Ispiration in the next generations...
pregressive sound, industrial at times...but more melodic than your Ministry et all...shifting times and motif with the wind of lyrical direction..poetry to make you think and cringe at times...
Tool stands beyond all others for scratching my sonic itch

just a sampling from my own thoughts of Rock...and what's Important

Excelsior!

sometimes it takes 20 years or more before you realise how influencial an act were. For example, all this ska-pop-punk tomfoolery has direct links to The Specials, yet if you'd thought about this, say, ten years ago, chances are The Specials would be far from a fellas mind.

And i can't belive no-one's mentioned GG Allin.

great post and thread, thanks Mark and all!

I'd say there are two distinctions to make regarding "important": there is important to music history, or put another way, to the culture, and this takes time to assess. I remember 10 years ago someone telling me Radiohead would go to the Rock Hall and I thought they were nuts - now it doesn't sound so crazy.

But the other form is personal, and everyday thousands, or millions, or individuals find someone, or a song, or an album that is important to them, and that counts for a lot too.

oh yeah..and i'm just an "all" now..gee...thanx

heh

{8^P~~~~~~~~

Excelsior!

sorry GM, no insult intended - I was more focused on the "what" rather than the "who" at the moment

heh..i know..geeez..i guess yer leg came off in my hand when i was pulling it..



Excelsior!

"But the other form is personal, and everyday thousands, or millions, or individuals find someone, or a song, or an album that is important to them, and that counts for a lot too."

I agree, Eric. Probably most folks couldn't care less about The Libertines or Selfish Cunt (although certainly a lot DO care about them), but nonetheless i find myself compelled by their every stumble.

I like to think that an artist like Beck is important: reinventing genre, breathing like into dead/obscure areas of music while maintaining a sense of humor and without making fun of the music he's vamping on (he seems to be getting more serious as he matures, but that's a different story). Whether he'll begin any kind of "movement" is also another story, but I think he defines what can be done with music in the modern age.

I think a guy like Wyclef Jean falls into this model at times. I loved The Carnival but have not enjoyed his more recent stuff as much.

Really interesting post -- great stuff.

Agree with you on The Doors, gonzo. But I probably don't count with them as they've always been one of my faves.

I've actually thought a lot about this. My personal feeling is, there are no more important bands. Haven't been for about 30 years. That's not to say there aren't any good bands, because there's still plenty of 'em. But the music industry is like a house that was built decades ago. You can paint it, you can decorate it, you can enhance it, but you didn't help build it.

Just imagine what the scene was like in 1965, when Dylan was going electric. When the Stones were putting fuzz guitar and teen angst into "Satisfaction." When the Beatles were starting to get trippy with Rubber Soul. Now, those were groundbreaking days. Nothing today comes even remotely close.

crooked, perhaps there are folks seeing The Others playing a gig in a train, as they did recently, and thinking that right there is just as groundbreaking.

Yeah, exactly Duke. The truth is that no one knows who is important until down the road you look back and say "yes, that was the moment... when the Duke invoked the tennis ball and Kirsten as She..." and so on.

YOu all are gonna hate this...U2 is the last great rock band, for any number of reasons. And I don't even like them that much.

They're the only ones who could come within striking distance of the stature of the Beatles, Stones, Zep, et. al. I mean, who else of the new (well, U2 is actually gettin' old) bands could keep company with the giants of music history?

ummm...define "giants" please..then perhaps i can respond with a modicum of panache...

heh...

as far as sales and overall "pop" magnitude...you can make a case fo ryer point..

not to run down the boys from U2..not my style..but i can appreciate it..

but really...as far as Important..besides to their recording company, and the fans that enjoy them...what elevates them to being .."Important" in your view?

Excelsior!

I think that was the point I was trying to make in #1. History decides what is/what is important in its own time. "Next Big Thing" gets tossed around all the time... even on a debut album.

How many bands flame out on the second record? And in this current music environment, a shit second record can end your career. Remember when Strokes and White Stripes were the next big thing? I am suspicious of Libertines/Babyshambles. They hit it big once and made a big splash. Will it resonate 20 minutes from now let alone 20 years from now? Maybe it will. We do not know. And we do not get to judge that. History will do it for us.

Alabama 3 was the oddest musical outfit to arise from late-'90s London. They were also the most original. The band's origins are shrouded in urban myth -- the band like to claim that the three core members met in rehab, while their Southern accents have many believing they are from the U.S. state of Alabama, although it appears vocalists Rob Spragg and Jake Black met at a London rave when Spragg heard Black singing Hank Williams' "Lost Highway." Bonding, they set out about creating an agenda of Americana, electronica, left politics, and laughter. Joined by DJ Piers Marsh, the trio issued two 12" dance singles that combined their interest in gospel and country music yet these went over the heads of the London dance scene. In Italy, where Spragg and Black began singing Howlin' Wolf songs over Marsh mixes, the idea of the band began to take shape and back in Brixton, South London, they recruited a crew of musicians to shape their vision. This, combined with brilliantly theatrical live shows, meant the band attracted a huge South London following long before they had a record deal.


Signed to One Little Indian, their 1997 debut, Exile on Coldharbour Lane, was a groundbreaking work that effortlessly fused gospel, country, blues, and house music. Dubbed "chemical country," Alabama 3 broke down the barriers between line dancers and ravers. The band's penchant for absurdity was displayed in Spragg and Black's insistence on singing, rapping, and preaching in deep Southern accents alongside samples of cult leader Jim Jones preaching Maoist philosophy and the renaming of all members -- Spragg became Larry Love, Black became the Reverend D. Wayne Love. Yet the songs were strong and imaginative and their observations on contemporary U.K. were spot on: country and blues were used to look at the excesses of dance culture. All with a pumping 808 beat behind them. The band was picked up on by U.K. roots DJs Charlie Gillet and Andy Kershaw, but the U.K. music press, in the height of its infatuation with Brit-pop, ignored the group or derided them as a novelty. Fortunately, U.S. audiences displayed a greater degree of irony and cult TV series The Sopranos employed the band's "Woke Up This Morning" as it's theme music. Unfortunately, country-lite vocal outfit Alabama sued over the group's name which means in the U.S. Alabama 3 are now known as A3.

Album number two, La Peste, followed in 2000 and found the band in more muted form. Again, the gospel-country-blues axis was there and the shows were wonderfully outrageous but it appeared that two years of touring and a stronger awareness of the mounting casualties of rave culture and New Labour Britain had made the band wear a bleaker face. Where their debut cheekily nodded at the Stones' seminal double album, La Peste shared with it a bleak, murky sound that demanded the listener dig into the songs to discover their meaning. Again, the album failed to reach beyond a cult audience which makes one wonder -- are Alabama 3 simply too original for these conformist times? ~ Garth Cartwright, All Music Guide

I'm always quick to shout "The Pixies!" when I see something like this. While they certainly weren't the first or the only to pick up the punk thread of the late seventies and early eighties and run with it, they are a solid part of the foundation of grunge and the lighter, more melodic sounds I tend to refer to as neo-punk. I am not sure that bands/performers like Sublime, Beck and Nirvana, hey, maybe even the White Stripes, definitely Modest Mouse, and tons of other people I can't think of right now would exist if it hadn't been for The Pixies.

And they're still going. So yeah, I think there are a few out there, who did something influential and important to music. The Pixies did whatever they felt like doing at the moment, with music, with language, with lyrics, and a lot of performers used that as a springboard to find their own niche(s).

I'm usually kind of thrilled when a band falls back under the radar of feeling the pressure of being the "next big thing."

It would be the best thing for everyone if a band like The White Stripes settled down into a moderately successful band. Then the fans (like me) can just sit back and take in masterpiece after masterpiece without all the media hype and bullshit.

If that's important, I'll take it!

in an era where so many people are famous for 15 minutes, I hope the entertainment and media industries forgive me if I cease to pay them so much attention.

Exactly right, alienboy.

U2 - I guess it's a number of things, each in and of itself not a big deal, but:

1) album sales
2) political / religious stance - when was thhe last time Iggy Pop got to visit a Head of State & talk about his concerns?
3) recognisable to many people in general
4) haven't changed their personnel - so have a certain consistency in image - a debateable point
5) have explored their musical roots without having done 180 degree flip flops in style - although that point is debateable too
6) have a distinct sound
7) uh, how can I put this - to my ears, they sound like a rock band, not a pop band
8) they have a traditional rock band lineup
9) their songs are catchy enough to be hummable - they're not an atonal or experimental band

10) Aw, I'm not real good at constructing arguments - would've dropped out of law school had I ever bothered to enroll. I mean, I like the Velvets, Ramones, etc. and even some more obscure stuff like Died Pretty & Green On Red & Jack Logan, but there's no way they'l impact most people in any way at all. A new U2 album or tour is still an event to both fans and critics, and U2 can still rock, which is more than you can say for some other Most Important Bands in Rock and Roll that are way past their best before date.



I mean, I know everyone has their personal faves, but really, who else would fit the profile?

I'm a little confused. Isn't this post about important bands of today? Not the past. Today. That means you can't bring up The Beatles, U2, the Pixies, etc., even Radiohead. Those are bands of the past. They have already been cemented in the annals of greatness - you're still talking about them, right? There is no question as to their placement among the greats. So let's focus on relatively new bands, which is why I brought up TV On The Radio before, and I'm doing so again.

I mention the Pixies specifically because they did come back out of nowhere, got together, started touring again, and already released a new song and have confirmed a new album.

Having seen them at Coachella last year, I can vouch that they're as amazing as ever. Though I do see your point; they are only a band of "today" by a technicality.

But very few bands are ever important at the moment they're at their peak. It takes time to establish an influence - for most bands and performers. There have been a few notable exceptions.

Point taken, Mr. Johnson. Maybe I'm just out of touch with today's music scene, but I don't think the scene (whatever that means) is the same as it used to be. Maybe there can't be any bands important in the same way as bands once were. There seems to be too much compartmentalization & fractioning in the industry for any one band or artist to build much momentum to thrust them into a position of importance.

This thread seems to have missed the challenge a bit. Retrospectively assessing importance is pretty easy - or easier, anyway - but as Tom says, what about today? When the first Ramones album came out, I knew I was hearing something new and changing. Same for the Clash, same for U2, and the same for Nirvana's "Nevermind." History may have validated the feelings I and a few hundred thousand other people had, but there was a sense in the moment that you were hearing something important. I hear a lot of music I like these days, but I'm not sure I hear anything important right now. The closest I've felt recently was seeing the Arcade Fire earliest this year, primarily because so many people were so into the show. I'm not entirely convinced, though, and fear too many bands seem content with addressing their niche markets.

It's not just that the sound is so new or groundbreaking, it's that some bands get the sound so right, two more cases in point: Webb Wilder, a man who must so obviously love music that he can play a cover faithful to the original, but so damn good at what he does he cab take those pieces of an original and make them something classic instantly. Second, the Smithereens, these guys ate, slept and lived pop and rock, and most of their songs are boht orignal but again fall right into the pop and rock classics mold in the best sense of the word.
Whoever it was who said there are few important bands because they don't stick around long enough got it half right, I believe it's that many of them never get heard for all the crap that overshadows them.

Rush suuuu uuuuuuuuu uuuuuuuuu uuuuuuuu uuuu
uuu uuuuuuuuuuuuu uuuu uucccc cccccccccccccckkkkkk kkkkk kkkkkk kkkk kkkkksssssssss ssss!

Geddy Lee can eat shit and die!
Fucking irrelevant long-haired hippies

Note to Gonzo Marx;
Your taste in music is as banal as a cornflower blue oxford shirt with pleated khakis.

Please stop being a stupid cunt.
Thanks!

Wilco - because they take classic American rock songwriting and meld it with modern sounds

Radiohead - because they keep pushing the boundaries

Queens of the Stone Age - because they pick one thing (rocking incredibly hard) and do it well

to Bromly

you are entitled to your opinion...

and fuck no

K?

thanx

Excelsior!