Look, I hear you. This is another case where I don't have to be right personally for the other guy to be wrong, and I CLEARLY think WildRanger is wrong.
Whether you, I or anyone else is right or wrong, it's pretty much a given that WildRanger is wrong.Personally, I don't think YSMANL or SCOM are "hard rock" songs. They're songs by hard rock acts, no question, but the appeal of those songs are that they transcend.
I have to wonder what the definition of "hard rock" is that leads to those songs not being "hard rock" songs, but the second sentence here is more perplexing. "[T]he appeal of those songs [is] that they transcend"? Transcend what, and why does "transcending" make the songs appealing (or more or less so)? In the same sentence, it sounds like you're saying that they're
not "hard rock" songs
because they appeal to folks who aren't ordinarily fans of "hard rock" (which is what I assume you meant by "transcend"), but you also seem to be acknowledging that they
are "hard rock" songs that are popular among folks who like "hard rock" and who ordinarily don't.
Having said that, if I'm wrong - or if the group just votes me off the island - I don't think it changes the lack of credibility that "hard rock is the most popular type of rock".
Completely concur.
I'll fistfight you on Boston though. That's not a "hard rock" record. It's an awesome record, it's a genre-influencing record, but it's not a "hard rock" record. Can you have handclaps (like on "Let Me Take You Home Tonight") on a hard rock record? C'mon! 
(Though they are listed as "hard rock" on Wikipedia, and that's gospel, so...)
Bring it on!You say it's "genre-influencing" (and I agree), but which genre did it influence? I would say the "hard rock" (sub-)genre. Can you have handclaps on a hard rock record? Yes, you can, because they did, and I'd respond by saying that LMTYHT is a non-hard rock song on an otherwise "hard rock" album.
Certainly, "because Wikipedia says" isn't at all conclusive, but let's look at what Wikipedia says "hard rock" is.
"[A] loosely defined subgenre of rock music." I agree
"It is typified by a heavy use of aggressive vocals, distorted electric guitars, bass guitar, drums, and often accompanied with keyboards." That doesn't really help us because, if it did, then Bruce Springsteen or Tom Petty might be/have been "hard rock" artists, and they aren't/weren't.
"Hard rock is a form of loud, aggressive rock music. The electric guitar is often emphasised [
sic], used with distortion and other effects, both as a rhythm instrument using repetitive riffs with a varying degree of complexity, and as a solo lead instrument. Drumming characteristically focuses on driving rhythms, strong bass drum and a backbeat on snare, sometimes using cymbals for emphasis. The bass guitar works in conjunction with the drums, occasionally playing riffs, but usually providing a backing for the rhythm and lead guitars. Vocals are often [but not always] growling, raspy, or involve screaming or wailing, sometimes in a high range, or even falsetto voice." I don't know that I'd call Boston "aggressive" (a loose term in its own right), and Brad Delp was never "growling" or "raspy," but this otherwise characterizes Boston's debut album. (and, harkening back to AC/DC, all of this describes YSMANL and SCOM to a "T").
Topic: Is Rush more appealing and accessible than other classic prog rock bands? (Read 8093 times)