Conquer Club

.....are the greatest rock and roll band of all time. prove me wrong.....

they rock, but best... idk






one word for ya

RUSH



































































































































(u no u set urself up for this one)

Im tired of you talking about Rush, they suck, and always will!

J/K, i dont care who you like...

And oh yeah, Led Zepplin has had a much greater impact than the Allman Brothers, alot of people probably dont even know who they are.

Gold Knight wrote:And oh yeah, Led Zepplin has had a much greater impact than the Allman Brothers, alot of people probably dont even know who they are.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't they write the theme tune for Top Gear?

Nephilim wrote:.....are the greatest rock and roll band of all time. prove me wrong.....

Seems like a hick like yourslef would listen to this shiot

I think they blow theres your proof

Vincent M wrote:

Nephilim wrote:.....are the greatest rock and roll band of all time. prove me wrong.....

Seems like a hick like yourslef would listen to this shiot

I think they blow theres your proof

very nice, so your opinion constitutes "proof"? how can one boy hate himself so much and yet pretend to be so arrogant?

anyways......gold knight, of course zeppelin rules and the allmans aren't as well known as plenty of acts.....but notoriety doesn't equate quality, does it? so the allman's relative lack of popularity isn't an argument. neither is the range of influence, by itself.....

one reason i think the allmans are so great: they've been around forever and the quality is still there. zeppelin didn't even last 10 years. the allmans have been thru hell as a band but are still going. imagine if zeppelin had lost jimmy page after only a couple of albums......what would have happened?

and n8, i love me some rush, but they're from fucking canada. we're talking real rock and roll.....gotta have some blues influence, gotta be southern boys


oh and yes, i think the tune to topgear is by them. and misterman, why would we care what vh1 says about the subject?

Nephilim wrote:very nice, so your opinion constitutes "proof"? how can one boy hate himself so much and yet pretend to be so arrogant?

Nephilim wrote:and misterman, why would we care what vh1 says about the subject?

Who is the one who started this thread by stating their opinion of "the allman brothers are the greatest rock and roll band"

So basically, you can say your opinion and its totally fine, but nobody else can. Before making statements like you have in your first post, be ready to defend yourself.

misterman10 wrote:

Nephilim wrote:very nice, so your opinion constitutes "proof"? how can one boy hate himself so much and yet pretend to be so arrogant?

Nephilim wrote:and misterman, why would we care what vh1 says about the subject?

Who is the one who started this thread by stating their opinion of "the allman brothers are the greatest rock and roll band"

So basically, you can say your opinion and its totally fine, but nobody else can. Before making statements like you have in your first post, be ready to defend yourself.

hee hee, the thread is about defending my proposition. i'm just saying that vh1's gay little poll isn't very strong evidence of "best band ever."

Nephilim wrote:

misterman10 wrote:

Nephilim wrote:very nice, so your opinion constitutes "proof"? how can one boy hate himself so much and yet pretend to be so arrogant?

Nephilim wrote:and misterman, why would we care what vh1 says about the subject?

Who is the one who started this thread by stating their opinion of "the allman brothers are the greatest rock and roll band"

So basically, you can say your opinion and its totally fine, but nobody else can. Before making statements like you have in your first post, be ready to defend yourself.

hee hee, the thread is about defending my proposition. i'm just saying that vh1's gay little poll isn't very strong evidence of "best band ever."

Neither is you stating that they are the best band any good evidence

Good, but I can think of a couple better.

Led Zeppelin
Grateful Dead
Jefferson Airplane
Beatles
Pink Floyd
and
Rolling Stones
come to mind at first.

reverend_kyle wrote:Good, but I can think of a couple better.

Led Zeppelin
Grateful Dead
Jefferson Airplane
Beatles
Pink Floyd
and
Rolling Stones
come to mind at first.

oooh thanks kyle, i thought this was dead....

come on man, jefferson airplane? are you kidding me? they sucked!

also, pink floyd couldn't rock to save their lives. i'm talking raunchy, bluesy, nasty rock and roll, baby. and the stones, i've always thought they were overrated. i guess they were ahead of their time and had a couple of groundbreaking albums, but they've ridden that shit for way too long. plus, the allmans shows still rock, as opposed to the crapfests that the stones call concerts....

i'm a huge dead fan, but let's not forget: the allmans are still going strong! and they've always been crunchier and meaner than the dead, i don't know if that counts for something.

again, and of course this is debatable, i assert that true rock and roll bands better be from the american south, where blues and rock were born. i assert that all those above bands merely imitated the great blues and rock men of the south. the allmans actually ARE those same men.....

Nephilim wrote:

Vincent M wrote:

Nephilim wrote:.....are the greatest rock and roll band of all time. prove me wrong.....

Seems like a hick like yourslef would listen to this shiot

I think they blow theres your proof

very nice, so your opinion constitutes "proof"? how can one boy hate himself so much and yet pretend to be so arrogant?

anyways......gold knight, of course zeppelin rules and the allmans aren't as well known as plenty of acts.....but notoriety doesn't equate quality, does it? so the allman's relative lack of popularity isn't an argument. neither is the range of influence, by itself.....

one reason i think the allmans are so great: they've been around forever and the quality is still there. zeppelin didn't even last 10 years. the allmans have been thru hell as a band but are still going. imagine if zeppelin had lost jimmy page after only a couple of albums......what would have happened?

and n8, i love me some rush, but they're from fucking canada. we're talking real rock and roll.....gotta have some blues influence, gotta be southern boys


oh and yes, i think the tune to topgear is by them. and misterman, why would we care what vh1 says about the subject?

rush has been around just as long

allman brothers formed in 1969, rush 1968

they allman brothers have had many lineup changes, rush just one
in 1974 they switched drummers because their original drummer john rutsney, became sick and couldnt tour

they have stayed the same for over 30 years, have the allmans?
also are the allman brothers still releasing new material, rush released an album this may, and two others in the 2000's


rush- 19 studio albums
allmans- 12

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush_awards_list_and_RIAA_certifications
here is all of the awards rush has recieved

i hear you, n8, rush definitely gets credit for longevity. the allmans have had several different lineups. their last studio album was 4 years ago (though they tour like crazy and have several live albums since then).

but you haven't answered two of my points:

1) the allmans have had different lineups b/c of adversity. duane allman, by many accounts one of the greatest guitar players ever, died very early on in the band's career. but they are still shredding 30 years later. how would rush have fared if lifeson died in 1973 or something? the allmans have also lost 2 bass players. i think the band should get extra points b/c both duane and one of the bass players died in motorcycle accidents--that's badass.

2) rush is canadian. allman brothers southern. thoughts?

wats wrong with canadians?
are u canadian-ist?

also i dont think the allmans are they same without duane


since none of rush has died it shows they have some brains not to do stupid things

like riding a motorcylce, most likely without a helmet, correct me if im wrong(sry if i am)
or doing drugs or something like that

n8freeman wrote:wats wrong with canadians?
are u canadian-ist?

also i dont think the allmans are they same without duane


since none of rush has died it shows they have some brains not to do stupid things

like riding a motorcylce, most likely without a helmet, correct me if im wrong(sry if i am)
or doing drugs or something like that

but n8, there's a fine line between being stupid and crazy, and walking that line is what rock is all about! therefore, rush has always had a problem appealing to "dirtier" rockers......rush is just too brainy for a lot of people.....not much soul in their music, one might say.....

i guess that makes some sense...

but i wouldnt consider the allman brothers "dirtier" rockers


when i hear dirtier rockers i think judas priest, iron maiden, poison, def leppard, scorpians, stuff like that

n8freeman wrote:i guess that makes some sense...

but i wouldnt consider the allman brothers "dirtier" rockers


when i hear dirtier rockers i think judas priest, iron maiden, poison, def leppard, scorpians, stuff like that

well, i hope you'd consider them "dirtier" than rush, which is the point....

and that other shit is weak. those bands are either queer glam rock or pseudo-metal.....

i'm talkin dirty like loud, bluesy, and crunchy. a lot of the allmans stuff is like this, esp live stuff. but if you only hear the old radio songs you might not think so.....

reverend_kyle wrote:Good, but I can think of a couple better.

Led Zeppelin
Grateful Dead
Jefferson Airplane
Beatles
Pink Floyd
and
Rolling Stones
come to mind at first.

Yeah Rev, thats what im talking about.

And i dont really undestand this argument. You asked for the best rock and roll band of all time, now its being narrowed down to bluesy, raunchy music. IT should have been stated "The Allman Brothers are the blusiest, raunchiest rock and roll band ever", then maybe id agree. And i wouldnt say longevity makes a band better. Rock band such as Red Hot Chili Peppers and Rush may be touring for multiple years, but in my opinion band usually dont get better the older they get, and they are never better than when they are most known, with a few exceptions. Just my opinion though...

Gold Knight wrote:

reverend_kyle wrote:Good, but I can think of a couple better.

Led Zeppelin
Grateful Dead
Jefferson Airplane
Beatles
Pink Floyd
and
Rolling Stones
come to mind at first.

Yeah Rev, thats what im talking about.

And i dont really undestand this argument. You asked for the best rock and roll band of all time, now its being narrowed down to bluesy, raunchy music. IT should have been stated "The Allman Brothers are the blusiest, raunchiest rock and roll band ever", then maybe id agree. And i wouldnt say longevity makes a band better. Rock band such as Red Hot Chili Peppers and Rush may be touring for multiple years, but in my opinion band usually dont get better the older they get, and they are never better than when they are most known, with a few exceptions. Just my opinion though...

i hear ya, gk. i guess you could think of it this way: i'm sort of defining "real" rock and roll as bluesy and gritty. i'm saying this in part b/c it came from the blues, and both were born in the dirty south.

thus, although i would definitely consider zeppelin bluesy and gritty, and one of the best ever, i'm just saying the allmans have the advantage of being closer to the bluesy south, physically and spiritually.

and you're rite, longevity alone doesn't mean much. but the allmans are still super high quality after all these years. recovering from huge losses like duane also plays in here.

finally, i can flatly disagree w/ you last statement: bands " are never better than when they are most known, with a few exceptions." notoriety/popularity certainly doesn't have a direct correlation to quality. currently, everyone knows kelly clarkson, shakira, daughtry, shit like that. how many people have never heard of, say, my morning jacket, wilco, king crimson, the electric six? see what i mean?

Nephilim wrote:.....are the greatest rock and roll band of all time. prove me wrong.....

Ok, challenge accepted.....



3 brothers!

f*ck the south.

that is all.

Wow, what a babe. I could definitely go for her.

Any day of the week.

IMO rush is a better band then the allman brothers, one reason i say this is im not as much a fan of a huge band with multiple guitarist, a singer that doesnt play an instrument, a keyboardist, etc

because a band with so many people is harder to keep together for a long time
i like rush alot because evryone is multitalented.
-neil part plays all forms of percussion, plays the drum set and is the lyricist
-geddy lee is lead vocals, plays bass, plays the keyboard (with his feet at times)
-alex lifeson plays the guitar, is backup vocals, and controls the synthesizer with his feet while he plays guitar

this multitalentedness is one of the reasons i like rush so much


there cant be one best rock and roll band, because rock and roll is different for every person

u think its "bluesy, and gritty"
i dont rly

some say led zeppelin is the best
others like heavier metal rock, such as say judas priest
and others think rock and roll is chuck barry

They;re both good but neither of them were good enough. Think about it if they are as good as you think they are they why weren't they ever REALLY actually famous not just behind the scenes maybe one hit song. The thing is they never really were big because they never really were good enough. I hadn't even heard of either of them until Guitar Hero II unlike MANY other bands that have managed to be recognized....there