10 most important bands in the history of Rock music

[Perpetual Change]

I'd say they're far more important than Crimson. They're not only important to all the prog bands that came afterwards, as well as to a good deal of indie bands, but they're important because they represent the golden age of commercial rock, when record companies were letting artists fully develop and release albums full of 20 minute suites with no "hit singles," and people still bought it in droves.

[El Barto]

People seem to be approaching this entirely from the standpoint of a band's influence on musicians who followed.  I think a bands affect on society should also be considered.  From that angle, I'd consider Yes pretty important.  They made prog accessible to everybody, whereas KC was almost entirely a musician's band. 

[skydivingninja]

Which Indie bands cite Yes as an influence?  I've never heard that.

El Barto, I'd consider Pink Floyd to be a much better candidate for making prog accessible to everybody.  I assume you've seen Dark Side's record sales.

[Gorille85]

I don't know yet about my whole list, but Beatles and Floyd sure are at the top of it already.

[Accelerando]

The lack of Queen in this thread is very disturbing


1. The Beatles
2. Led Zeppelin
3. Black Sabbath
4. Queen
5. Pink Floyd
6. The Who
7. The Jimi Hendrix Experience
8. The Rolling Stones
9. U2
10. The Ramones

[SoundscapeMN]

there's a number of bands, including college rock bands, who cite Yes as an influence. More than Crimson? debatable, but as whole, Yes has reached a slightly wider audience. But in terms of the 10 most significant artists in the history of Rock music, I wouldn't include either of them.

[wolfking]

The Beatles
The Rolling Stones
THe Who
Jimi Hendrix
Chuck Berry
Led Zeppelin
Metallica
The Doors
Pink Floyd
Queen

[hefdaddy42]

I think Yes need to be there, really. If the world of poetry is divided between Dante and Shakespeare, the world of rock is divided between Zeppelin and Yes.

No way.  If you narrow it to two, the world of rock is divided between Beatles and Stones.

[KevShmev]

Yes is definitely more important than King Crimson, who aren't even universally loved in prog circles, as opposed to Yes (as much as a band can be universally loved), but the only progish band who comes close to making this top 10 is Pink Floyd (and they should be in it).

I love Queen, but I wouldn't put them top 10.  Maybe top 20.  Maybe.

And I honestly cannot believe how much many of you are overlooking Bob Dylan.  You might not like him (and I don't that much either), but he is a no-brainer top 5 in this category, and quite possibly top 3.  

[Jamesman42]

I went with bands, not individuals.

[hefdaddy42]

The Beatles
The Rolling Stones
The Who
Jimi Hendrix
Pink Floyd
Led Zeppelin
Metallica
Cream
Elvis Presley
Run DMC

[EPICVIEW]

1) The Beatles
2) The Doors
3) Hendrix
4) The Who
5) Cream
6) Thin Lizzy
7) The Ramones
8) Nirvana
9) Judas Priest
10 Rush

** Deep Purple and Queen were very close to making my list**

[orcus116]

The Early Years

Robert Johnson
The Robert Johnson of Crossroads fame, he wrote 26 songs that influenced I can't even tell you how many blues rock guitarists. Unfortunately Johnson's life was cut short after being poisoned by a bartender for oogling the guy's wife but his legacy lives on through guitar players such as Eric Clapton (who he influenced heavily) and Jimmy Page.

1950s

Buddy Holly and the Crickets
As mentioned before, Buddy Holly and his band are more important than people might think. He was the first rock front-man to gain a positive reptutation amongst family members since Elvis Presley and Chuck Berry were mucking up kids minds with their gyrations and thrusting. The Crickets were also the first band to popularize atypical chord progressions in their music. At that time the only rock chord progression was the I-IV-V blues progression which Little Richard built a career on. Probably the most important, though, as kingshmegland pointed out, they were the first band to have two guitarists in their group as one rhythm, one lead set up. This setup was modeled by none other than The Beatles (and tons of other rock bands) a decade later.

1960s

Bob Dylan
Kev's right, Dylan needs to be here. Why? Well for as much as I personally can't stand his voice for more than two songs the one thing Dylan did was something that no one had really done before: make songs matter. He was all about the message and despite his songs usually consisting of one or two repeated patterns his lyrics are usually so brash and truthful that people were shocked and impressed. It's funny to think that during a time where everyone was afraid to say something this 21 year old kid moves to New York and boldly sang stuff like "Blowin' In The Wind". He even inspired the next band to "say something" with their music (as well as introduce them to pot), effectively inadvertently changing the course of music.

The Beatles
Here for obvious reasons and not only because of their music but for how much them and producer George Martin pushed the envelope in terms of production. All four eras of the Beatles left their marks in a lot of ways musically but what they did with a 4-track multi-track recorder on some of their songs, namely "Tomorrow Never Knows", "For The Benefit Of Mr. Kite", and "A Day In The Life" is downright incredible. There's no use going more into the band because if you haven't seen the widespread influence of what they did to rock music then you probably haven't been born yet.

Jimi Hendrix
I used to be one of those "Hendrix is overrated" guys. I have no idea why. Then I actually listened to him and ate some crow. While some people nowadays can listen to his stuff and think it's not impressive for a variety of reasons it's best to understand the situation in which he came up. Back when he was in his late teens/early 20s Eric Clapton was god. So here comes along Hendrix as an early 20 something (after he was fired for out showing Little Richard) and not only does he blow everyone away but he outplayed Eric Clapton on Clapton's own stage. Hendrix's foray into drugs and whatnot ultimately lead to his downfall but in the process his vices (or muses if you wanna look at it that way) and love of playing with the guitar transformed what was simply an electronic instrument into the sole symbol of rock and roll. The sounds and style he created were unreal at the time he was alive and it's obvious that his legacy lives in countless guitar players throughout the rest of the history of rock music.

[orcus116]

The 1970s

Pink Floyd
Easily the most commercially successful prog rock (or space rock for you nitpickers) band from this era but they truly redefined what a studio band was. Studio bands started awhile back with The Beach Boys (Pet Sounds) and The Beatles (Sgt. Pepper) but Floyd made it an art form. They're probably one of the first bands that you could truly label as artists because of meticulously crafted their works were. Instead of hard hitting rock and roll they often slowed down and let the music build and ebb and flow, something I'm not sure anyone else really cared to do before this time, at least on the level Floyd did.

Black Sabbath
Who would've thought one little metal shop accident would've changed the course of rock music? With Tony Iommi determined to make his guitar playing a little easier he down-tuned simple blues rock and ended up created a menacing sound that, which resembling more doom metal than heavy metal, scared enough parents to make their mark on the world. Everything that is heavy metal can be found in Black Sabbath: dark themes, down-tuned guitars, heavy distortion (for the time it was heavy), dissonance. While not the true masters of their craft they were one of the first, if not the first, dark band to break through and create a real interest in the type of music they played.

Led Zeppelin
It pains me to list Zeppelin here only because I like The Who better but I can't deny the hard rock explosion they ignited. Many call them the start of heavy metal but with bands exploring actual dark themes like Black Sabbath I simply cannot do that, though they turned blues rock into something much more rhythm driven and heavy hitting. Page also perfected the art of riffing as he created (or stole if you wanna go down that route) dozens of riffs that you'd instantly recognize upon hearing two or three notes from. Truly a unique band and along with The Who transformed the art of performing on stage instead of just playing the music.

The Ramones
Why not The Clash or The Sex Pistols? Well you see kids the reason those two bands actually got around to playing music is because they learned to play their instruments by listening to The Ramones (true story). They started the punk rock look, the punk rock attitude and the punk rock life style. The Sex Pistols might've taken it and "perfected" it but ask any member of any of those bands where it all started and they'll point you to The Ramones.

The 1980s

Metallica (with slight nod to Dave Mustaine)
For all you purists out there I included Mustaine only for the fact that he and Hetfield either crafted or heavily modified the art of duel guitarists for pretty much every single band to try metal since Metallica's inception. Naturally when Mustaine left Hammett and Hetfield perfected that art. Since then, the influence they've had on any number of bands is startling. It's true that Metallica and thrash are more American styles to their British speed metal brethren but what they did with virtually no radio or media exposure is astounding.

[King Postwhore]

orcus116, that is a great write up.  I guess that class paid off!

[Perpetual Change]

I think Yes need to be there, really. If the world of poetry is divided between Dante and Shakespeare, the world of rock is divided between Zeppelin and Yes.

No way.  If you narrow it to two, the world of rock is divided between Beatles and Stones.

Nah. Yes are Shakespeare. Zeppelin are Dante. I guess that means that The Beatles are Chaucer. The Stones, while important for their time, are a group of sellouts who've kept their fanbase but managed to lose the love of creative people in music over the last 3 decades.

[Perpetual Change]

Yes is definitely more important than King Crimson, who aren't even universally loved in prog circles, as opposed to Yes (as much as a band can be universally loved), but the only progish band who comes close to making this top 10 is Pink Floyd (and they should be in it).

I love Queen, but I wouldn't put them top 10.  Maybe top 20.  Maybe.

And I honestly cannot believe how much many of you are overlooking Bob Dylan.  You might not like him (and I don't that much either), but he is a no-brainer top 5 in this category, and quite possibly top 3.  

My problem with Floyd is that they ARE "just proggish." They really don't account for or represent the progressive music of the 70s in any accurate way.

[King Postwhore]

Yes is definitely more important than King Crimson, who aren't even universally loved in prog circles, as opposed to Yes (as much as a band can be universally loved), but the only progish band who comes close to making this top 10 is Pink Floyd (and they should be in it).

I love Queen, but I wouldn't put them top 10.  Maybe top 20.  Maybe.

And I honestly cannot believe how much many of you are overlooking Bob Dylan.  You might not like him (and I don't that much either), but he is a no-brainer top 5 in this category, and quite possibly top 3.  

My problem with Floyd is that they ARE "just proggish." They really don't account for or represent the progressive music of the 70s in any accurate way.

I disagree with you PC.  Bands in the 70's didn't think of themselves as proggish and look at the sales and the influence Pink Floyd had durring the 70's.

[TempusVox]

  1. Elvis Presley
  2. The Beatles
  3. James Brown
  4. Bob Dylan
  5. Chuck Berry
  6. Jimi Hendrix
  7. Ray Charles
  8. Led Zeppelin
  9. Fats Domino
10. Aretha Franklin

Since were talking about Most Important in Rock HISTORY, I'd say these.  Most influential, I would have another list, because to me they are two different things.

[King Postwhore]

Aretha Franklin is a fantastic pic.

[zxlkho]

 1. Elvis Presley

Absolutely this. No one changed music the way he did.

[sneakyblueberry]

Just want to point out that orcus is the baaaeest for having Dead Leaves in his recent plays.

And in keeping on topic, I agree with many of the sentiments shared in this here thread.

[Perpetual Change]

I disagree with you PC.  Bands in the 70's didn't think of themselves as proggish and look at the sales and the influence Pink Floyd had durring the 70's.

I just don't see how Pink Floyd can do a better job of representing Genesis, KC, ELP, Gentle Giant, VDG, Camel, Marillion, Rush, and so many others than Yes.

But hey! That's why everyone gets to make their own list.

On my list, Pink Floyd wouldn't be representing prog at all. Yes would. Pink Floyd would still be on the list, but for different reasons. I haven't made my list yet, of course, but I think both deserve to be on it.

[glaurung]

 1. Elvis Presley

Absolutely this. No one changed music the way he did.

Serious question. How did he change music?

[73109]

He brought showmanship and upbeatness to music which eventually formed rock. Jerry Lee Lewis did the same but not as much.

[skydivingninja]

Great writeup, Orcus!  If it was the "twelve most important bands" I'd include U2 and Radiohead to that and it would be perfect.

[Adami]

I think one of the problems is how back you want to trace the influence.

For instance, you could say Metallica. But then you have to point out a band like Black Sabbath influenced them to the point that Metallica would have never existed without them. But then you have to realize that Black Sabbath would have never existed without The Beatles. Then you have to realize that The Beatles wouldn't have existed without...whoever, and so forth and so forth. Eventually it goes back to some classical music or ethnic music most likely. Are just claiming THOSE artists are the more influental? Or bands like Sabbath?

[LieLowTheWantedMan]

A band thats not so famous yet I find is quite important is Van der Graaf Generator. David Bowie was influenced by their vocalist, and I find many sections of songs that seem to try to emulate the chaoticness present on their Pawn Hearts album.

Not to mention that (to my knowledge) they made the first sidelong epic in rock music history.

[orcus116]

He brought showmanship and upbeatness to music which eventually formed rock. Jerry Lee Lewis did the same but not as much.

Not really. He just did things that black people were doing and made it ok for white people to do.

[orcus116]

I think one of the problems is how back you want to trace the influence.

For instance, you could say Metallica. But then you have to point out a band like Black Sabbath influenced them to the point that Metallica would have never existed without them. But then you have to realize that Black Sabbath would have never existed without The Beatles. Then you have to realize that The Beatles wouldn't have existed without...whoever, and so forth and so forth. Eventually it goes back to some classical music or ethnic music most likely. Are just claiming THOSE artists are the more influental? Or bands like Sabbath?

I tried to pick gateway bands for various genres or else you'd be right in that we would only be naming classical composeers and blues artists.

[hefdaddy42]

I think Yes need to be there, really. If the world of poetry is divided between Dante and Shakespeare, the world of rock is divided between Zeppelin and Yes.

No way.  If you narrow it to two, the world of rock is divided between Beatles and Stones.

Nah. Yes are Shakespeare. Zeppelin are Dante. I guess that means that The Beatles are Chaucer. The Stones, while important for their time, are a group of sellouts who've kept their fanbase but managed to lose the love of creative people in music over the last 3 decades.

What?

Look, EVERYBODY knows who the Beatles and Stones are, and most know who Led Zeppelin are.  Yes is not in the same league as those 3 (or 4, if you wanted to include The Who).

[LieLowTheWantedMan]

He brought showmanship and upbeatness to music which eventually formed rock. Jerry Lee Lewis did the same but not as much.

Not really. He just did things that black people were doing and made it ok for white people to do.

I wish there was a clapping hands emoticon. If there was, I'd be using it.

[zxlkho]

He brought showmanship and upbeatness to music which eventually formed rock. Jerry Lee Lewis did the same but not as much.

Not really. He just did things that black people were doing and made it ok for white people to do.

I wish there was a clapping hands emoticon. If there was, I'd be using it.

But seriously though, that was huge for music back then...

[Perpetual Change]

I think Yes need to be there, really. If the world of poetry is divided between Dante and Shakespeare, the world of rock is divided between Zeppelin and Yes.

No way.  If you narrow it to two, the world of rock is divided between Beatles and Stones.

Nah. Yes are Shakespeare. Zeppelin are Dante. I guess that means that The Beatles are Chaucer. The Stones, while important for their time, are a group of sellouts who've kept their fanbase but managed to lose the love of creative people in music over the last 3 decades.

What?

Look, EVERYBODY knows who the Beatles and Stones are, and most know who Led Zeppelin are.  Yes is not in the same league as those 3 (or 4, if you wanted to include The Who).

Fine, because there's at least 6 more spots yes could fill after that!

It's not "10 most popular bands" its "10 most impotant bands." The Stones haven't been important from a musical standpoint for the past 30 years. Yes were very important in the 70s, kind of important in the 80s, and still inspire tons of musicians today.

Again, this is why everyone gets to make their own list...

[KevShmev]

On my list, Pink Floyd wouldn't be representing prog at all. 

They aren't on my list to represent prog; they are on my list as one of the most important ROCK bands ever. 

And nice write-up, orcus.