top of page

Grupo Rubymar Marthyns

Público·1 membro

Creedence Clearwater Revival-Rock Legends Full Album Zip


In 2018, alternative legends Radiohead threatened legal action against American singer Lana Del Ray over similarities between her song, "Get Free," and their first big hit, "Creep." Despite Del Ray's claim that she'd been sued, Radiohead's publishers said they never filed a lawsuit and Del Ray announced, without further explanation, that the legal dispute was "over." The ironic twist: Radiohead was successfully sued for plagiarism by songwriters Albert Hammond and Mike Hazlewood over Creep's similarities to their tune, "The Air That I Breathe," a 70s hit for The Hollies. Hammond and Hazlewood are now credited as Creep co-writers.




Creedence Clearwater Revival-Rock Legends full album zip


Download Zip: https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Furlcod.com%2F2u8D2i&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AOvVaw1XZLZtqfVablzSGokwJl_U



Twisting my words around, now, aren't you?I said that popular music trends could change, not that they would change. If the millennials actually cared about music, they'd be buying copies of Billie Holiday and Hank Williams Sr. albums by the truckloads. Thankfully, I'm among the more enlightened millennials who respect the classics and expose them to others.And you should know that current popularity is no indication of how well music can stand the test of time. Sisqo, The Spin Doctors, Lionel Richie, Peter Paul and Mary, Johnnie Ray, Captain and Tennille, and Lawrence Welk all sold tons of records and were popular in their days, but nowadays you can't give any of their crap away for free. In other words, their music has not stood the test of time, and I don't foresee Lay-Z faring any better.


I've been away from FRL for a few weeks due to several factors (With the weather getting warmer, I don't expect to be online all that much to begin with) but have decided to return to address some posts made in my absence.Cheesecrop, I've attacked the bulk of modern music, not all of it. I've never made such a blanketed statement like the one you falsely attributed to me. In fact, allow me to name a few post-1990 acts who are favorites of mine:Norah JonesSmashing PumpkinsNine Inch NailsBig Bad Voodoo DaddyJ.D. McPhersonThe Brian Setzer OrchestraThere's still others who I haven't listed, but that should give you an impression of what I like in music after the 1980s."When I read your posts, I get the weird impression that you are outraged that other people at diff. times came along & changed rock to suit there own needs. I get this feeling that you are thinking to yourself "how dare the Beatles & the Stones change rock w/out my permission! This must be stopped!" Thing is, it already happened."And you would be completely wrong because I, like you and millions of others, am just a fan. None of us posting here have the power to really affect where music will go. Musicians do not need my permission any more than they needs yours or anyone else's to change music. I may not like the directions that rock 'n roll and music in general have taken in recent years, but I don't allow them to stress me out. The truth is, I hardly ever think about The Rolling Stones or The Beatles. I don't deny their importance, it's just that I get tired of seeing their names and wish my generation would be more willing to dig deeper in regards to older music. I don't oppose changes to rock 'n roll, just as long as we all remember the roots and continue to preserve them. God knows I do a lot of that already."It's the reason why the very slogan you keep pitching, about give me more past so I can enjoy the present, doesn't have any legs to stand on. Just now, you say you can build the future w/out knowing about the past. Yet in the very same breath, you are denying the world you want to change here! How on Earth are you going to affect some kind of "change" if you've cut yourself off from the past 23 yrs. of music, while claiming moral superiority over your own peers - who, btw, are creating the modern, active world, as we speak?"I actually didn't create that "give me more of the past, etc." slogan. It came from a member of a wrestling message board I talk to frequently.Ever since I was a young child, I have preferred most films, singers, and TV shows from the past over contemporary examples. Just as I prefer Cab Calloway to Jay-Z, I like The Marx Brothers better than Judd Apatow's disgraceful comedies and Green Acres better than Modern Family. I'm not going to allow peer pressure to change me. At this point in my life, I am perfectly set in my ways. If a film or an album comes out and it connects with me deeply, then I'll be the first to sing its praises. Just recently, I saw 42 (the Jackie Robinson biopic) and fell in love with it immediately. It's a well-acted, beautifully told story that can favorably compare with the classics of yesteryear. Even if you're not a baseball fan, I still recommend it highly.The past 23 years just don't offer the quantity and quality of what came between 1900-1990. What musical movements in the last decade alone can compare favorably with the Jazz Age, the swing era, the British Invasion, rock 'n roll's first golden age, bebop, honky-tonk country, postwar electric blues, rockabilly, the punk/new wave explosion, U.K. glam rock, etc.? I just don't see anything recent (meaning the last five or so years) that can be spoken of in the same breath as Louis Armstrong's Hot Five and Hot Seven Sessions, Elvis Presley's Sun Sessions, Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band (See Dezmond, I can be objective about The Beatles), or Hank Williams' 1947-1953 run.Although I'm not very keen on the future of music, I haven't entirely separated myself from discovering the occasional saving grace. When someone like J.D. McPherson comes along, I have to stand up and take notice. But while I enjoy discussing and reading about music, it's not my main passion in life. Movies will always be my first love as far as hobbies go, and as such they occupy more of my time than music.In case you haven't already noticed, my negative posts sadly attract more attention and response from other FRL posters than my positive, knowledgeable postings do. That's depressing, because I have a lot to share and hate to see my less harsh posts go unanswered. Just hop on over to the Bill Haley page or The Cars page and you'll see evidence of my knowledge and insight. Now if you'll pardon me, I've got to run to the John Lee Hooker page, as I've been listening to a 2-disc retrospective I picked up from the library. He is just fantastic!


Andrew,I don't see how you agreed with Dezmond and then moved the most legendary artists to the last slots. I do have to ask, what is your goal with this list? If it is merely a favorites list then it should be set in stone and not see much change. If you are going for an objective greatest list you need to have some definition of why you are putting any single artist in a spot. You can't just toss The Smiths in and not have a reasoning for placing them way at the back. You just dropped Tammy Wynette back 36 spots when nothing in your own estimation has changed. She was pointed out twice as an artist that was far too low.I am going to try a different approach and just argue for two artists at a time and give you the choice on whether they are rightly placed on an objective list. I will start at the back of the list with spots 742 & 741.742. AC/DCOf the multitude of Rock bands few have the iconic status that AC/DC holds. One of the few Australian acts to go onto global dominance. They have left one of the biggest marks on Hard Rock. It isn't because they were some virtuoso act or because they wrote these grand epics. It was all about that simple sound they created. It hasn't ever been duplicated, and I doubt it ever can be. A vast number of imitators have tried. Go to any place in the Country walk into a random cover band gig and watch them do an AC/DC jam. I think I have heard more horrible versions of AC/DC than maybe any other act. They embody that raunchiness that Rock'N'Roll was established on, and they do it just as well as the 50's rockers that paved the way. They beat all but a handful of artists here in popularity. They are one of the top selling acts, top album charting acts, and top touring acts. Their type of music wasn't played on FM in their heyday and it still found a way to chart on the singles charts despite that. "You Shook Me All Night Long" is, without a doubt, one of the standout tracks of the century. You have them lodged behind everyone here, but I am going to just point out their peers in style.No case could be made for them to be behind: 713. Queens of the Stone Age613. Danzig 515. Billy Squier 323. Humble Pie 247. Quiet Riot160. Joan Jett & The Blackhearts153. ZZ Top66. MotorheadThat is just a random sampling. Looking at just the top 50 you have AC/DC outdoes these acts by a large margin:43. Heart41. Journey22. Electric Light Orchestra20. YesLooking at acts you have in the top 25 I would agree could be argued:7. Rush9. Cream13. Fleetwood Mac11. Creedence Clearwater Revival14. Jefferson Airplane23. Bob Seger & The Silver Bullet Band25. MetallicaSo by that system AC/DC should currently be at #6 on your list. They beat Rush, as much as Enig is going to take me to task for it. Do I think they are rightfully placed there? No, but the top 100 on your list is a bit skewed to a type of music that isn't allowing artists who should be there room. I would say AC/DC borders at the 100 spot. However the fact they are at 742 now makes the whole list go into question. When you see an act of that renown at the back of the class you brace yourself for what is coming up.I'll be tackling spot 741 here in a bit. Dezmond did a much better job at building up a case for AC/DC, so I hope you read his post.


Andrew,Glad to see you added the 5 rap acts in. There are plenty more if and when you are wanting to add them but I thought I would make an argument for some more of the artists at the back of your list that deserve a spot closer to #1.I am going to grab three this time and point out why they deserve a bit of a higher spot. I will also suggest three to come closer to the back to help balance it out.739. The Smiths - Of all the acts in Alternative music I don't think I have seen a more rabid fan base. So there are plenty of people who could argue their placement better than I could ever imagine. You have one of Rock's great frontmen in Morrisey, who also happens to be one of the style's most applauded lyricists. "The Queen Is Dead" is a must own album for any serious music fan. That devoted fan base has served them well over the years. They score well in Popularity, and even greater points in influence. So checking out Alternative Artists you have:The Smith's easily beat:616. Soul Asylum 603. The Cranberries 595. XTC 583. The Afghan Whigs They should be in front of:642. Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds 639. New Order 620. The Flaming Lips587. Depeche Mode 128. SoundgardenThey are competitive with:649. Sonic Youth 83. Elvis Costello & The AttractionsI would say they should be in front of Elvis Costello who is now somewhere around 83. They are definitely not ahead of Louis Armstrong who is right in front of Elvis Costello at 82. So I would say some spot around the #85 but behind Armstrong.738. Charlie Parker - The Jazz great and legend one of the first artists on this list that I can staunchly say is in the top 50. A short career that revolutionized Jazz and the exploration of musical themes. He didn't innovate Bop music but he was one of it's most important pioneers. Add to that his iconic status, lasting popularity, and unbelievable talent on the Sax and you are dealing with someone who falls well into the top tier of acts. I am not going to compare anyone to him, because Jazz takes a heavy hit on your list as an important music. I will say he beats:10. Billy Joel9. Cream8. Elton John7. RushWhich means Parker should be holding a #6 spot. That doesn't mean it is where he belongs overall but the man outweighs those four very popular acts you have in the top 10. I would say he truthfully falls into a spot between #25-#50. So if you like slide him right in front of Electric Light Orchestra who is around #21 currently. There are other legends outside your top 100 who can easily compete with Parker, but we can discuss them when we get there.737. Merle Haggard - Country music is not well represented on your list overall. So Haggard is sitting back here. In the Country genre however he is a peer and competitor of Johnny Cash. He also managed to be the face of The Bakersfield Sound style that dominated Country for years. A wonderful lyricist, and an honest performer. Haggard is a top 10 Country act. Merle Haggard easily beats:703. The Flying Burrito Brothers 633. Hank Williams III 499. Roseanne Cash 486. Gram Parsons 149. Lyle LovettHe should be ahead of:562. Shania Twain 469. Hank Snow 225. Buck OwensCompetitive with506. Dolly Parton 399. Waylon Jennings264. Jimmie Rodgers235. Garth Brooks183. Willie NelsonWith him easily beating Lyle Lovett (149ish) I would say Haggard should be right in front of him. He is probably top 100 worthy but that is a more nuanced discussion and we are looking at this in chunks. He beats Whitesnake also who sit right in front of Lovett. I would say he loses to Miles Davis who is right around spot 147 right now. So the spot behind Davis should be a better fit for him.If you take those three up I would suggest moving three more down. I only mention that because I see three artists sitting here in the back 100 that are probably less deserving than the artists they are ahead of.You added 5 names to the list so we are now dealing with 747 acts (I believe) which means my numbering is off in those lists. I am going to try and update the spreadsheet I have your list in tonight with the new additions and changed spots. With that said keeping spots 747-745 (Dexy's to My Chemical Romance) looking the same. I would say your new number 744 should be:Wyclef Jean. He is currently at 708. Wyclef, while a pretty solid human being, achieved much of his fame as a member of The Fugees. You have them on here already so that means only his solo work is getting him a spot here. The Carnival was a great album, but his work with Shakira, his tip of the hat to the Beatles and his guest stars are what tend to make him such a cool musician to know. A great Caribbean artist, but the split between solo and group career works against him here.The new 743 slot should go to:The Traveling Wilburys - I will probably get flack for this from someone. But the Wilburys were a super group of legendary musicians who all made their mark outside of that group to a much greater degree. Their records would not have had that impact if they weren't already the icons they were. It did help reinvigorate public interest in Roy Orbison, but his solo stuff made him unforgettable already.The new 742 slot:The Sir Douglas Quintet - Music was weird in 1965 just an eclectic mix of all things good. Somewhere in there The Sir Douglas Quintet emerged seeming like a British Invasion band (they weren't). I am giving them points for being a bigger group outside of the States. But I disagree with evaluations that say they were innovators in introductions of Cajun music to Rock. Fats Domino lived and breathed New Orleans, that sound was already there. A great song, but not a band of true merit that can sit in front of many the artists they currently do.


Informações

Bem-vindo ao grupo! Você pode se conectar com outros membros...
bottom of page