IF YOU COULD ADD ONE ARTIST TO HH...

[glam_junkie]

Aussie band Teargas should be on here.

 

ok, first EP was only 3 tracks, but it was better that 90% of the other stuff on HH even if was only 3 tracks.

[Geoff]

Aussie band Teargas should be on here.

 

ok, first EP was only 3 tracks, but it was better that 90% of the other stuff on HH even if was only 3 tracks.

Have they been rejected, or just not submitted?

 

Red Hot Chili Peppers (same as above but their later stuff is pop crap);

Sorry mate, would have to object to this one heavily.

[edwithmj]

Red Hot Chili Peppers (same as above but their later stuff is pop crap);

Sorry mate, would have to object to this one heavily.

 

Object to what? That their later stuff is pop crap or that their early stuff is OK?

[glam_junkie]

Aussie band Teargas should be on here.

 

ok, first EP was only 3 tracks, but it was better that 90% of the other stuff on HH even if was only 3 tracks.

Have they been rejected, or just not submitted?

 

 

 

I submitted them but believe they got rejected cos the disc needed to be minimum 4 tracks to qualify. That was years, and years ago now. Things may have changed since then.

[Geoff]

Red Hot Chili Peppers (same as above but their later stuff is pop crap);

Sorry mate, would have to object to this one heavily.

 

Object to what? That their later stuff is pop crap or that their early stuff is OK?

Haha... whoops... sorry to be unclear but it would definitely be an objection to any suggestion that they deserve a place here. I consider their music to be close to the opposite of what this site is all about. IMO, anyway.

[Geoff]

Aussie band Teargas should be on here.

 

ok, first EP was only 3 tracks, but it was better that 90% of the other stuff on HH even if was only 3 tracks.

Have they been rejected, or just not submitted?

 

 

 

I submitted them but believe they got rejected cos the disc needed to be minimum 4 tracks to qualify. That was years, and years ago now. Things may have changed since then.

I see. And I guess you didn't try the second one because of your hatred for it at the time?

 

Anyway, if it's policy that nothing under 4 tracks gets submitted I'm cool with that, but I agree that on paper a band like Teargas certainly deserve a spot here.

[edwithmj]

Red Hot Chili Peppers (same as above but their later stuff is pop crap);

Sorry mate, would have to object to this one heavily.

 

Object to what? That their later stuff is pop crap or that their early stuff is OK?

Haha... whoops... sorry to be unclear but it would definitely be an objection to any suggestion that they deserve a place here. I consider their music to be close to the opposite of what this site is all about. IMO, anyway.

 

Oh OK. That's fair enough. They're definitely at the bottom of my little list anyway and I have no problem with their not being included.

[JamesEagle]

Red Hot Chili Peppers (same as above but their later stuff is pop crap);

Sorry mate, would have to object to this one heavily.

 

Object to what? That their later stuff is pop crap or that their early stuff is OK?

Haha... whoops... sorry to be unclear but it would definitely be an objection to any suggestion that they deserve a place here. I consider their music to be close to the opposite of what this site is all about. IMO, anyway.

 

Oh OK. That's fair enough. They're definitely at the bottom of my little list anyway and I have no problem with their not being included.

 

Phew! This is one band I really can't stand. For the sake of 2 or 3 good songs on 'Mother's Milk', I can't believe the amount of aural torture I've been subjected to by this lot. 'Zephyr Song' would be in my top 5 most hated songs of all time.

[Swazi]

Red Hot Chili Peppers (same as above but their later stuff is pop crap);

Sorry mate, would have to object to this one heavily.

 

Object to what? That their later stuff is pop crap or that their early stuff is OK?

Haha... whoops... sorry to be unclear but it would definitely be an objection to any suggestion that they deserve a place here. I consider their music to be close to the opposite of what this site is all about. IMO, anyway.

 

Oh OK. That's fair enough. They're definitely at the bottom of my little list anyway and I have no problem with their not being included.

 

Phew! This is one band I really can't stand.

 

Which is very true for a lot of bands on this great site, but I still don't mind them being listed here. I think we should be a little more open-minded towards different tastes. After all it's all about "Heavy Harmonies". Some like them, others don't. But that's not necessary, imo.

 

You win some, you lose some ... you can't have them all !!

[JamesEagle]

 

Phew! This is one band I really can't stand.

 

Which is very true for a lot of bands on this great site, but I still don't mind them being listed here. I think we should be a little more open-minded towards different tastes. After all it's all about "Heavy Harmonies". Some like them, others don't. But that's not necessary, imo.

 

You win some, you lose some ... you can't have them all !!

 

Totally agree, but come on, this is the Red Hot Chili Peppers!

[Captain Howdy]

Some really good ones (and a bad one or two).

 

Of those listed so far I'd say that in my worthless opinion both The Ramones and Crack The Sky should certainly be included on the HH site.

 

My ONE pick would be SR-71. They are melodic, rockin', catchy choruses and the songs are some of the best written in the last 10 or 12 years.

 

Seems strange that there are 2 off-shoot bands from SR-71 on the site (Cinder Road & Charm City Devils).

 

SR-71...

I agree with SR-71, and would include Bowling For Soup as well as along with SR-71 and Marvelous 3, are what I would call the modern equivalent of hair metal.

Hell, Butch has worked with both SR-71 and BFS as well.

[Geoff]

 

Phew! This is one band I really can't stand.

 

Which is very true for a lot of bands on this great site, but I still don't mind them being listed here. I think we should be a little more open-minded towards different tastes. After all it's all about "Heavy Harmonies". Some like them, others don't. But that's not necessary, imo.

 

You win some, you lose some ... you can't have them all !!

 

Totally agree, but come on, this is the Red Hot Chili Peppers!

Yeah, I'll be totally honest. About 99% of the bands mentioned in this thread so far I don't actually like at all... in fact most I strongly dislike. As is the same for hundreds of bands included on the site already. You are correct, Bernd, that we cannot all like everything on here... but yeah, there's just something about Red Hot Chilli Peppers. They are just that bad (to the point of being offensive) that it would somehow ruin my day if they ever graced these pages.

 

Good call on BFS, Colonel Howdy. SR-71, Butch Walker, Bowling For Soup and Donots were the first of these types of bands that led me to "modern rock" because they bridged that gap so deliciously between "hair" and "modern" rock.

[Nelson]

So, will Dan have his say (Yes or No) on some of the artists mentioned here?

 

Here are mine:

 

COLIN JAMES

CRAZYHEAD

THE JEFF HEALEY BAND

 

and if I can only find this in CD form I would definitely add this because this is 101% heavy harmonies:

 

SMASH L.A.

[edwithmj]

 

Phew! This is one band I really can't stand.

 

Which is very true for a lot of bands on this great site, but I still don't mind them being listed here. I think we should be a little more open-minded towards different tastes. After all it's all about "Heavy Harmonies". Some like them, others don't. But that's not necessary, imo.

 

You win some, you lose some ... you can't have them all !!

 

Totally agree, but come on, this is the Red Hot Chili Peppers!

Yeah, I'll be totally honest. About 99% of the bands mentioned in this thread so far I don't actually like at all... in fact most I strongly dislike. As is the same for hundreds of bands included on the site already. You are correct, Bernd, that we cannot all like everything on here... but yeah, there's just something about Red Hot Chilli Peppers. They are just that bad (to the point of being offensive) that it would somehow ruin my day if they ever graced these pages.

 

I wish I'd never mentioned them now.

[Evil Rick]

THE JEFF HEALEY BAND

Oh good one! I think that would be a nice add to HH.

[Captain Howdy]

 

Phew! This is one band I really can't stand.

 

Which is very true for a lot of bands on this great site, but I still don't mind them being listed here. I think we should be a little more open-minded towards different tastes. After all it's all about "Heavy Harmonies". Some like them, others don't. But that's not necessary, imo.

 

You win some, you lose some ... you can't have them all !!

 

Totally agree, but come on, this is the Red Hot Chili Peppers!

Yeah, I'll be totally honest. About 99% of the bands mentioned in this thread so far I don't actually like at all... in fact most I strongly dislike. As is the same for hundreds of bands included on the site already. You are correct, Bernd, that we cannot all like everything on here... but yeah, there's just something about Red Hot Chilli Peppers. They are just that bad (to the point of being offensive) that it would somehow ruin my day if they ever graced these pages.

 

Good call on BFS, Colonel Howdy. SR-71, Butch Walker, Bowling For Soup and Donots were the first of these types of bands that led me to "modern rock" because they bridged that gap so deliciously between "hair" and "modern" rock.

I remember reading Classic Rock magazine around the time BFS, Marvelous 3 and Sr-71 were coming along, and there was a journo who used to write for Kerrang years ago who's speciality was the melodic rock/hair/aor/glam bands (cant remember if it was Dave Reynolds or Dave Ling as they were the two at Kerrang who specialised in it) who used to write for them.

This was around the time of Nu-metal getting big as well, and he started talking about bands dubbed Nu-breed, which he claimed were the modern equivalent of a Poison, Bon Jovi or Van Halen etc. And those were three of the bands he mentioned, that I had never heard of. I seem to remember he also classified American Hi/Fi in the genre as well.

 

I've been to see BFS a few times as well, and several times their intro tape has been Wildside by Motley Crue, and midway through the set when they do their "photo opportunity" joke, they play a tape of Yankee Rose by DLR.

If that doesnt show where there roots are, I dunno what does.

[heaven&hell]

 

Phew! This is one band I really can't stand.

 

Which is very true for a lot of bands on this great site, but I still don't mind them being listed here. I think we should be a little more open-minded towards different tastes. After all it's all about "Heavy Harmonies". Some like them, others don't. But that's not necessary, imo.

 

You win some, you lose some ... you can't have them all !!

 

Totally agree, but come on, this is the Red Hot Chili Peppers!

Yeah, I'll be totally honest. About 99% of the bands mentioned in this thread so far I don't actually like at all... in fact most I strongly dislike. As is the same for hundreds of bands included on the site already. You are correct, Bernd, that we cannot all like everything on here... but yeah, there's just something about Red Hot Chilli Peppers. They are just that bad (to the point of being offensive) that it would somehow ruin my day if they ever graced these pages.

 

Good call on BFS, Colonel Howdy. SR-71, Butch Walker, Bowling For Soup and Donots were the first of these types of bands that led me to "modern rock" because they bridged that gap so deliciously between "hair" and "modern" rock.

I remember reading Classic Rock magazine around the time BFS, Marvelous 3 and Sr-71 were coming along, and there was a journo who used to write for Kerrang years ago who's speciality was the melodic rock/hair/aor/glam bands (cant remember if it was Dave Reynolds or Dave Ling as they were the two at Kerrang who specialised in it) who used to write for them.

This was around the time of Nu-metal getting big as well, and he started talking about bands dubbed Nu-breed, which he claimed were the modern equivalent of a Poison, Bon Jovi or Van Halen etc. And those were three of the bands he mentioned, that I had never heard of. I seem to remember he also classified American Hi/Fi in the genre as well.

 

I've been to see BFS a few times as well, and several times their intro tape has been Wildside by Motley Crue, and midway through the set when they do their "photo opportunity" joke, they play a tape of Yankee Rose by DLR.

If that doesnt show where there roots are, I dunno what does.

 

It was Dave Reynolds that did the Hair Metal section and I remember him always talking about those bands.

[Captain Howdy]

I had a feeling it was Reynolds as I am sure he was one of the people who was instrumental in creating the magazine in the first place (and was unhappy when other people started gaining control and started bringing in all the overly modern stuff).

[Nick C]

Porcupine Tree probably or Yes

[Jez]

Porcupine Tree probably or Yes

 

 

There used to be alot more Proggy bands on the main pages but alot aren't there anymore. Some are still there, so I don't get why for example Arena and Pendragon were left on and Marillion were taken off. Personally I think the prog stuff should be put back on.