Tropical Island Music Artist Draft - FINIS

[Bricklayer]

Sigh. Got no good clear play here. With classic rock titans flying off the shelves I know who I SHOULD pick but I figure I go 20+ groups deep there, so I'll live. With no idea of the tastes of the people who follow, I'm going to change things up a bit and maybe get a little different flavor on my isle:

Green Day

Sometimes the best things in life are the simplest, and my island instantly feels a little more fun for having them. With somewhere around 15-20 of their songs in my ipod rotations, figure I am a fan. Some of the great hook writers in the business, and then they grew up and showed there was a lot more to them, which was actually key because I didn't want to go so one note here that I spent the next three picks trying to get a little variety on my island.

 

[Jespher]

Time to add some blues to this draft. Sure it's an obvious choice, but even so I had to re-read through the rules about 3 times before I was sure this was the best incarnation of this pick. Can't argue with the man's catalog, and he was the centerpiece of several bands before going solo. I wanted to make sure I could also have access to his early stuff too, which he has rerecorded on several occasions. With my 1st choice, I select:

Eric Clapton

And no...not just a rock God of guitar, but also a personal favorite as well. Long live the scale riff!

More: http://www.allmusic.com/artist/eric-clapton-p64692

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

I find it hard to rate them among the best bands ever because of all the plagiarism talk.

I knew someone would bring this up. It’s taken on a life of its own in the internet age. I've never understood that rationale, though. First off, they're far from the only artist to do it. They just happened to be one of the ones who were sued for it. Reworking other artists work was a staple of the blues. All the British invasion bands did it, too. Led Zeppelin just made the mistake of not giving credit to the original artists where they should have. That's an ethical issue though, not a musical one. It doesn't make much sense to say that had they paid royalties to use those songs they'd be a great band but since they didn't (although they did eventually) they're not.

On top of all that, most of the music on those Led Zeppelin versions was radically different from the original versions. They were reworking and covering those songs, not stealing them. The plagiarism suits had to do with them not changing the original lyrics in a few cases, which Page has blamed on Plant, not the music.

And it’s a relatively small percentage of their catalog that’s even in question. It’s a shame that so many folks tend to focus on that and ignore the vast amount of original, innovative, timeless compositions they created themselves.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I'm sorry but LZ's plagiarism was far, far greater than just about any band has done. Sure people nick a lick or a riff or two. But the documented history of Page being some place, playing with an artist and what not and then soon after introducing that work as his own is off the charts. And he NEVER, EVER gave credit, whether it was to the original, original artist, or the Small Faces, Jake Holmes, etc. But you know what's funny, I could almost totally overlook that if he hadn't turned around and accused every crappy 80s blues metal act of ripping him off and acted like he invented playing guitar with a bow, etc etc... And this is something that people discussed long before the internet age. Just because the internet opened more people's eyes to it doesn't make that a bad thing.

I will say that yes, Page introduced a raw energy that had never been heard in many of those songs before and also say that he may have just been the best session guitarist working in the 60s. So he does have that going for him.

 

[kingsnation]

Great picks everyone! MJ was on my list for sure as was the Stones! Clapton and Green Day are great too!

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

I'm sorry but LZ's plagiarism was far, far greater than just about any band has done. Sure people nick a lick or a riff or two.

That is just flat out wrong. I could name many artists who match them in that regard but I won’t because they haven’t been drafted. Led Zeppelin are just the token, high profile case. It’s kind like Bill Clinton getting caught with his pants down, he goes down is history as the slime ball while the countless politicians who did similar things but never got caught get off Scott free.

But the documented history of Page being some place, playing with an artist and what not and then soon after introducing that work as his own is off the charts.

No it’s not. That’s a big exaggeration. And the stuff that’s in question there is stuff like the intro to Stairway which was probably inspired by another group’s song that they played with. But so what? You think that kind of thing doesn’t happen all the time in music? Trust me, it does. Heck, as a musician, I’ve lifted little things here and there without even realizing I’d done it till much later.

And he NEVER, EVER gave credit, whether it was to the original, original artist, or the Small Faces, Jake Holmes, etc. But you know what's funny,

Which is an ethical issue, not a musical one. It’s not as if them having gave credit would have somehow made those recordings better. When I rate a recording, I’m rating the sounds, production and performance, not the circumstances behind it.

 

[kingsnation]

Eric Clapton

Jespher, I ask you this because you chose "Phenomenon," in the movie draft..

Remember this one? One of my favorites by him:

 

[Jespher]

Jespher, I ask you this because you chose "Phenomenon," in the movie draft..

Remember this one? One of my favorites by him:

I do remember this one. I still have the cassette tape of the Phenomenon soundtrack. Nice, smooth tune .

Hey, remember cassette tapes?

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

More on the Led Zeppelin thing...

If you look at almost any classic blues albums, you’ll see that they’re almost always comprised of mostly cover songs. Usually they’d have the artist covering a few standards, a few more obscure numbers, and a few original compositions.

Being hugely influenced by the blues, Led Zeppelin carried on that tradition on their first few albums, as did quite a few other British blues bands.

That’s all it was. They were covering those songs. The only thing that separates them from most others who did the same thing is that Led Zeppelin made a poor ethical move by not giving credit where they should have. Their record label and management share as much blame for that as the band.

It’s not as if they were trying to get away with some big crime, it was more of an oversight than anything. Most of the songs they covered were well known blues standards.

But any way you slice it, it has absolutely nothing to do with the music. It’s a character and ethics issue.

You can certainly say they’re scumbags for it, but to act like it somehow makes them lesser musicians or a lesser band is silly.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Which is an ethical issue, not a musical one. It’s not as if them having gave credit would have somehow made those recordings better. When I rate a recording, I’m rating the sounds, production and performance, not the circumstances behind it.

How can you excuse it as only an ethical issue? When you borrow someone's work, you give credit. It isn't just a musical issue. If they were scientists or academics they would be disgraced and thrown out of their field. As musicians they are heralded? Eff that. Especially when dozens of other artists are written off for covering or borrowing material and giving proper credit.

Here's probably the most thorough documentation of Page's "borrowing". It's a lot more than just the stupid Taurus song that was reworked into Stairway.
http://www.furious.com/perfect/jimmypage.html

There are dozens and dozens of cases where an artist likely ripped off another without credit - the whole Satriani vs. Coldplay thing (there is a third song in that mix too), but they are usually isolated incidents and not an entire legacy. If you can name someone worse than Page please do.

And again, I say this issue is compounded by the fact that in the 80s before they started getting sued left and right, they were critical of everyone under the sun for borrowing from them. So it's hard for me to accept it as an oversight.

You can certainly say they’re scumbags for it, but to act like it somehow makes them lesser musicians or a lesser band is silly.

For the record I did give him credit for his musicianship in my original post.

As for Zep the band, I don't care for them. Tried. When I was in the height of my metal years I tried. They just didn't ever do it for me. Before I was ever aware of the plagiarism issue. Of course once it was brought to my attention I stopped bothering to "get it".

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

How can you excuse it as only an ethical issue?

I’m not excusing it. They should have given credit. I’m simply pointing out that it has nothing to do with the music itself. Their version of Dazed and Confused would have sounded exactly the same if credit had been given. It has no effect on the music.

Here's probably the most thorough documentation of Page's "borrowing". It's a lot more than just the stupid Taurus song that was reworked into Stairway.

Snooze. Seen it all before. The same could be done with many bands if one were inclined to take the time to do so. There was actually a site that did that and one band which I won't name now came out looking worse than Led zeppelin. metallica was on there too. They've lifted their fair share of stuff over their career. if i can find the site again I'll link it. The person who created that Led Zeppelin one obviously has a limited knowledge of music. Otherwise they wouldn’t be presenting it as if it’s something that’s somehow exclusive to Led Zeppelin.

There are dozens and dozens of cases where an artist likely ripped off another without credit - the whole Satriani vs. Coldplay thing (there is a third song in that mix too), but they are usually isolated incidents and not an entire legacy. If you can name someone worse than Page please do.

It doesn’t really matter if there’s anyone worse or not. The point is that there’s plenty as bad. The volume shouldn’t matter anyways though. If it’s wrong to lift something, then it’s wrong. You shouldn’t get a pass because you only lifted a song or two. That’s like saying, well...he only killed a few people, it’s not like he was Ted Bundy or something.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

It does matter the amount they borrowed because there is only so much you can do musically. You are a musician, you know. The same chord progressions get repeated ad nauseum. Sometimes people get accused of stealing when they had no friggin clue. It is the very fact that it is a repeated pattern and that it can be documented that Page performed, recorded or otherwise was in the general presence of the artists he is accused from borrowing that makes the case against him so damning.

And as an aside, you should look at the Perfect Sound Forever site instead of quickly writing it off, it is an amazing wealth of musical knowledge.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

It does matter the amount they borrowed because there is only so much you can do musically. You are a musician, you know. The same chord progressions get repeated ad nauseum. Sometimes people get accused of stealing when they had no friggin clue. It is the very fact that it is a repeated pattern and that it can be documented that Page performed, recorded or otherwise was in the general presence of the artists he is accused from borrowing that makes the case against him so damning.

And as an aside, you should look at the Perfect Sound Forever site instead of quickly writing it off, it is an amazing wealth of musical knowledge.

I'm not writing it off. I've seen that exact article before. I'm not trying to exonerate Led Zeppelin here I'm just pointing out that they are far from the only band to be guilty of it. The focus on them as if they're the sole offenders is what annoys me because it's completely false. It's just a case of people perpetuating something until it develops an urban legend like status. That phenomena is further fueled in Led Zeppelin's case because they also happen to be one of the most high profile bands in history as it is and they were actually sued by some of the artists they covered. All that together creates the perfect storm for a musical villain. People like when people with great power, wealth, or fame get caught in transgressions. Folks love to see the very successful taken down a few pegs. That's why so many are so adamant about insisting that Led Zeppelin's plagiarism is on a level that no one else has ever stooped to. If i point out how The Joe Schmo band ripped off a bunch of stuff, no one is going to care. But when the band is as famous as Led Zeppelin, the story takes on a life of its own.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

But it is precisely their stature as a legendary act and it went under the radar for almost 20 years that is exactly why it is a big deal. Who cares when 80s hair metal band rips off 70s glam band? Nobody. Because nobody takes the musical legacy of the 80s hair metal acts seriously. It was just good cocaine induced fun that was mildly amusing in the 80s and is perhaps ironically or nostalgically enjoyable today.

I get that we're not gonna see eye to eye on this so I'll drop it. And I imagine you'll get a chuckle when I pick a predominant cover artist as soon as Warhawk makes uolj's pick. C'est la vie. I never intended to bring it up, but once the cat was out of the bag I felt your defence was a bit trying to sweep it under the rug and had to say something.

And again, much respect to their musicianship, which is undeniable. For the record it is Plant's vocals that is the predominant reason I do not care for them.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

But it is precisely their stature as a legendary act and it went under the radar for almost 20 years that is exactly why it is a big deal. Who cares when 80s hair metal band rips off 70s glam band?

That makes zero sense to me on a conceptual level. Wrong is wrong. Stealing music doesn’t somehow become exponentially more wrong the more famous you are.

Nobody. Because nobody takes the musical legacy of the 80s hair metal acts seriously.

Hey now, speak for yourself. I take quite a few hair bands very seriously on a musical level. In fact, depending on how this draft goes I may end up taking one or two. There were some great musicians and writers in some of those bands. It’s a shame that so many folks can’t get past the image.

I get that we're not gonna see eye to eye on this so I'll drop it. And I imagine you'll get a chuckle when I pick a predominant cover artist as soon as Warhawk makes uolj's pick. C'est la vie. I never intended to bring it up, but once the cat was out of the bag I felt your defence was a bit trying to sweep it under the rug and had to say something.

I’m not trying to sweep anything under the rug at all. Just trying to bring a little perspective. No other artist takes anywhere near the level of heat for plagiarism that Led Zeppelin does and that’s just wrong.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

For the record I was referencing two specific bands without naming names re: hair metal. I know damn well who could play and who couldn't. Not to mention that plenty of talented acts were written off or reclassified as hair bands because the record labels made it so.

 

[GoGoGadget]

Hmmm... so far this is looking like the video game draft was for me. Stayed out of it because I thought for sure that I wouldn't be able to go that deep (taking the entire career thing quite seriously) and that my big favorites would be gone right away, but so far no one's even going near that direction and I'm suddenly wishing I'd taken the plunge.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Strange, I assumed you were in this one. That certainly changes my mid-round strategy

I skipped the video game draft due to the no online rule, I would like to see that revisited with that rule waived. I'm gaming a lot less these days though. I could have sworn you got into that one. didn't you take shadow of collosus?

 

[William Blake]

With Led Zep gone now there are still about 3 or 4 classics that I hope are taken before my turn so I won't feel guilty for passing on them.

 

[jalfa]

Seeing how the draft has progressed so far: I'm planning on taking one, at best three artists/bands that started making music before the year 1990. Thought I might save people some time in their rankings, since they can now already put me at #16

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

With Led Zep gone now there are still about 3 or 4 classics that I hope are taken before my turn so I won't feel guilty for passing on them.

Why would you feel guilt if they're not your first choice?

 

[William Blake]

Why would you feel guilt if they're not your first choice?

I'd feel guilty for jeopardizing my chances of winning. But I decided to play for fun so I'm not going to pick a widely acclaimed band/artist that I like but isn't anywhere near my top 20 favourites.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

I'd feel guilty for jeopardizing my chances of winning. But I decided to play for fun so I'm not going to pick a widely acclaimed band/artist that I like but isn't anywhere near my top 20 favourites.

I'm not sure going with widely acclaimed increase your chances of winning much anyways. 3/4 of my film picks were widely praised critically acclaimed classics but i lost in the first round to a guy with Hook, Back to the Future III, and TRON: Legacy on his list, LOL.

 

[Dime Dropper]

I'm not sure going with widely acclaimed increase your chances of winning much anyways. 3/4 of my film picks were widely praised critically acclaimed classics but i lost in the first round to a guy with Hook, Back to the Future III, and TRON: Legacy on his list, LOL.

I can sympathise with you there. I guess the answer is that you can't account for the wide variety of tastes on a message board. I do agree that some lists shouldn't have made it anywhere near as far as they did, and some of the best lists went early, but then again that's completely subjective, and just my personal opinion.

I'm going to completely disregard status or popularity in this, just going to take my favourite artists. I won't have a shot at winning, but who cares.

 

[William Blake]

I'm not sure going with widely acclaimed increase your chances of winning much anyways. 3/4 of my film picks were widely praised critically acclaimed classics but i lost in the first round to a guy with Hook, Back to the Future III, and TRON: Legacy on his list, LOL.

I agree, but picking obscure Japanese noise rockers instead of guys who sold millions of albums isn't going to help my chances either

 

[SacKings7]

Strange, I assumed you were in this one. That certainly changes my mid-round strategy

I skipped the video game draft due to the no online rule, I would like to see that revisited with that rule waived. I'm gaming a lot less these days though. I could have sworn you got into that one. didn't you take shadow of collosus?

Haha I'll take the blame for that one, I took the whole "island" thing too seriously. But I did suggest doing a revisit of the video game draft (and even volunteered to be commish again) in the TDOS drafts thread, but nobody acknowledged it so there's probably not enough interest/time

 

[GoGoGadget]

I skipped the video game draft due to the no online rule, I would like to see that revisited with that rule waived. I'm gaming a lot less these days though. I could have sworn you got into that one. didn't you take shadow of collosus?

Yeah, I was able to sneak into that one late. Ended up taking over for someone in the 5th or 6th round.

 

[Bricklayer]

I'm not sure going with widely acclaimed increase your chances of winning much anyways. 3/4 of my film picks were widely praised critically acclaimed classics but i lost in the first round to a guy with Hook, Back to the Future III, and TRON: Legacy on his list, LOL.

There were several widely disparate strategies going on in the Movies draft. Almsot several parallel drafts running. Some people were picking up critically acclaimed movies left and right as if it was a competition to see who could put together the strongest accumulation of critically acclimaed movies, some were picking wildly quirky and unique lists which I have to assume were a little exaggerated, and some people, like myself mostly, were playing the island scenario and just trying to pick fun and entertaining rewatchable stuff. In the end I think the voting has favored the latter kind of lists, but it really was apples and oranges.

 

[Bricklayer]

I agree, but picking obscure Japanese noise rockers instead of guys who sold millions of albums isn't going to help my chances either

Well the question would be whether you need to waste your #1 pick on obscure Japanese noise rockers. They will probably still be there in a few rounds

 

[SacKings7]

Anybody PM Warhawk?