In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
In response to 42AND46's comment:
In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
In response to mrmojo1120's comment:
I put Hootie and the Blowfish in the same category as the Black Crowes.Both bands were OK,but nothing special.They had their 15 minutes of fame and I doubt we'll hear too much from either one again.
If the Russian President stepped on a cracker,he'd be Putin on the Ritz.
I am assuming you're kidding here? The Crowes are WIDELY, WIDELY considered to be the ones carrying the torch of rock and roll, at least in this country, for the last 20 years, at least from that era (1990s).
No one could touch them in the mid 1990s. No one, at least live. Many feel they are up there with some of the best rock bands ever. They had argubaly the best debut album of any band of the last 30 years, their second record is top 5 desert isle disc EVER (yep), and their 3rd was supposed to be a double album, and is a classic, quirky gem.
I am sorry you missed all this genius in the early/mid 90s. Christ, their B-Sides and unreleased material would make most band from the 1990s BLUSH.
They are on a very short list with a band like Pearl Jam. That's really the only competitor in that area as far as songwriting consistency and impact from that era. PJ just did a better job staying sober. lol
Drugs and infighting derailed them many times, but they couldn't be followed on stage. They were asked to headline Horde in 1995 by the Allmans, and this was after opening for the Dead, and two months opening for the Stones and Page and Plant in Europe.
When Page and Plant needed a band worthy enough to open for them in S. America, who did they call? Yep. Sorry, but Hootie and the Blowfish were busy playing festivals by 1996 and the jig was up.
I don't care if you don't like them, but that's one of them most uneducated comments I've ever seen on messageboard anywhere, on any topic.
After Garcia died and Weir/Lesh started the Furthur Festival in 1996, a band outside the Dead family headlined it that summer. What band? The Crowes. Sorry, but you don't get to be in those positions if you are some average band.
Page personally picked them to be his backing band for his solo Page thing playing Zeppelin and Crowes songs in 2000. The tour was widely seen as a massive success.
I'd also put their 1992-1997 run up against any bandd's peak era in terms of songwriting and musicanship/live show combo. They're incroporated everything a person would like from the 1960s and 1970s and wrapped it up into a big ball of genius.
I could go on and on.
Lastly, I'd put their best lead player, Marc Ford up against any lead player of his generation whether it be Warren Haynes, Craig Ross, Slash, Trey Anastasio, MIkey HOuser, etc.
No lie. Incredible lead player. A genius who changed their sound after their first album.
Rich Robinson plays a good Keith Richards too.
Hootie = The Black Crowes
My god. Sorry, bro, but that is just not going to fly. That's like saying The Bay City Rollers are the Rolling Stones.
Watch this and then tell me you feel the same way. And, this is just a jam that leads into a song:
I'd also put their 1992-1997 run up against any bandd's peak era in terms of songwriting and musicanship/live show combo.
now as you are wont to do ur taking a legitimate point and overstating it ridiculously...how can u say this with a straight face?
Well, many people feel that way. Like I said, they left so much material on the floor, it would make even the most popular bands as their peers, blush.
Many equated "Tall" or what that was going to be in 1994, as a double album (ending up being a single album Amorica), as good as Exile on Main St by the Stones. I can't argue with it. The quality of what they left off is as strong as anything the Stones had on Exile. It may be harder or darker material, but the quality cannot be denied.
Some of it was put out a Lost Crowes in 2006 with a completey unreleased record that was supposed to be released in 1997, which wasn't, yet again due to record label issues, infighting and drug problems.
I am not saying it's quite Stones, Who or Zeppelin, but from a live band level and musicianship level, absolutely. No question about it. Page never would have attached hsi wagon to people he didn't think could cut it.
Pearl Jam I would also put into that discussion. Yes.
Most great bands or artists have a 6-7 year peak window. Yes. You might get a few gems for songs here and there on albums after that peak era, but to continue it on, it just doesn't occur.
Zeppelin - '69-'75
The Who - '69-'75
Stones - '68-74
Dead - '70-77
These are bands, whether you like one more than the other or not, are considered all time iconic bands both in the studio and live.
You get the idea.
I get the idea but in no way shape or form will i put the Crowes with the bands above
I respected and liked them and i agree with the ridiculousness of the Hootie comparison but they were limited to a format and one they copied to begin with...and while their musicianship was very good for what they did it wasn't gonna keep up with the other bands above for the demands their music made, especially the Who and Zep. It was good blues rock but well trod territory and having seen them live they were good, fun but nothing that was going to leave any great impression or be blown away by.
Andn when we are talking the record/live peaks i would put many ahead of them based on the above