Boston

Not in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame

Eligible since: 2001 (The 2002 Induction Ceremony)

Previously Considered? No  what's this?


Essential Albums (?)WikipediaAmazon MP3Amazon CD
Boston (1976)

Essential Songs (?)WikipediaAmazon MP3YouTube
More Than A Feeling (1976)
Peace Of Mind (1976)
Foreplay/A Long Time (1976)

Boston @ Wikipedia

Boston Videos

Will Boston be inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame?
"Musical excellence is the essential qualification for induction."
   

Comments

109 comments so far (post your own)

They should already be in there! How many bands have had an entire album full of singles? Their whole first album is nothing but hits.

Posted by Judy on Saturday, 11.11.06 @ 00:51am


Bottom line: They should have been inducted already, and it's a travesty that they haven't been.

I can already hear the cries of "Ewww, Boston is just crappy corporate rock!!!" now, so let me try to clear up what critics have been feeding the public for decades.

1. Boston (along with other rising rock acts) helped revitalize FM rock radio, during a time when disgusting disco hits dominated the music scene. They were innovative, influenced by the sounds of Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd and others, creating a unique 'wall of sound' experience. By contrast, 'corporate' rock bands would have just followed an established formula.

2. Boston went though loads of legal wrangles with various record labels throughout most of the 80s and into the 90s, because Tom Scholz wanted to make music on his own terms. By contrast, 'corporate' rock bands would have just said "Yes sir, may I have another?"

3. Boston wrote their own songs; not something that the average 'corporate' rock band would do.

Now that I've hopefully set the record straight, you are free to say that you still don't like Boston and they shouldn't be in the HOF. But don't just parrot what the snotty critics tell you and learn to judge music by yourself, on its own merits.

Posted by Tim on Thursday, 11.16.06 @ 18:15pm


In Memory of Brad...please undo the injustice

Posted by phil c on Monday, 03.12.07 @ 16:18pm


I vacillated on this one. Yes, their sound is derivative, and the songs do sound like "corporate rock". But the music was and is incredibly popular, to the point of their first album setting a record for sales for a debut album (I believe since broken by Whitney Houston).

Posted by Joe on Monday, 03.12.07 @ 17:00pm


in memory of Brad please DO NOT undo the injustice- this band does not belong. Its a wonderful first album sure but after that not much. not much touring.They were a light weight band from the 70's. When the "hall" is celebrating Rap and ignoring bands like Purple or Yes/ they pre date Boston and have a lasting influence- Deep Purple drew 4000 in Italy last week while Boston did occasional gigs/albums
The real travesty is the hall is to celebrate in coming years newer artists like madonna,beastie boys, run dmc, Pet Shop Boys.

Posted by Steven Murdoch on Monday, 03.12.07 @ 19:11pm


while I agree with Steven's remark about bands like Purple,Yes,ELP,Rush, ect.. being in there and being in there well before Boston even, I think Boston has to be inducted. As a Guitar player there have been few with such a innovative sound as Scholtz and combine that with amazing Brad Delp vocals and you had a super sounding hard rock band...and contrary to what people might think definetly not corporate rock...they even had a number one single in 86 without a video..thats pretty good for 1986

Posted by Brian on Sunday, 03.18.07 @ 13:12pm


RE: "Its a wonderful first album sure but after that not much. not much touring.They were a light weight band from the 70's."

Are you serious?? This band is so misunderstood.

"Don't Look Back"
4,000,000 sold first month!
7,000,000 total!
#1 pop album for 1978!
"Don't Look Back" (single) #4
"A Man I'll Never Be" #31

"Third Stage"
4,000,000 total sales!
First CD ever to go gold!
Was #1 on Billboard for 4 weeks late in 1986, #3 for all of 1987
"Amanda' #1 hit!
"We're Ready" #9 hit
"Cantcha Say" #20 hit

Amazing...

This band surpasses the requirements of induction. Let's go!! :)

Posted by Dave on Monday, 03.19.07 @ 09:39am


No question Boston should be now inducted. Their legacy of music speaks for itself. Innovative, yes, influential, you bet.

Posted by Rob on Monday, 03.19.07 @ 10:44am


rock and roll hall of fame and no BOSTON, what kind of BS is in Cleveland?

Posted by Al Davis on Monday, 03.19.07 @ 12:57pm


This is ridiculous. Boston should be there already. There lead singer has the best voice in rock history. They had their own distinct sound that other bands tried to copy. Besides all the other excellent points above in record sales. The founder Scholz also has 19 music patents.

Posted by Dale Webb on Wednesday, 03.21.07 @ 15:27pm


Just wanted to put this out there - is it just me or do all Boston songs sound pretty much the same? - it does to me. I am not saying they should or should not be inducted, but I always thought there songs all sounded so similar.

Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, 03.27.07 @ 12:06pm


There is no question that Boston should already be there. Did anybody not purchase there first album? Was there first album not one of the best selling albums of all time? (17 Million) - Lets do the right thing and give credit where credit is due, as it's long overdue.

Posted by Kevin Coft on Wednesday, 03.28.07 @ 22:28pm


I have to respectfull disagree with some of Tim's comments above.

1. Boston did NOT help "revitalize" FM radio. Boston's first album was released in 1976. At that point the big disco boom on radio was still 2-3 years away (and even then it was more of a top 40 AM radio craze than an FM album radio craze). What the Boston and other similar bands did was usher in the era of the radio consultant at FM radio which helped to kill the free form FM radio format of the 60's and 70's and bring about the much more rigid playlist format which still plagues radio today. Boston also was a key player in launching the arena rock era of Foreigner, Journey, REO Speedwagon, Styx, Toto, and a slew of other "faceless" bands. Yes, Boston did much to change FM radio, but NOT for the better.

2. Yes, it is true that in terms of attitude Boston did not fully fit the notion of a corporate rock band given their desire to do things their way and the clashes that casued with their label, but stylistically they fit the term to a T -- heavy on formula, short on spontaneity files in the face of the real spirit of rock and roll.

3. Boston may have indeed written their own songs, but this is not all that unusual for corporate rock bands -- Foreigner, Journey, REO Speedwagon, Styx, Kansas, Toto, etc. all also wrote their own songs.

Posted by NFB on Wednesday, 04.4.07 @ 09:49am


Boston is one of the best sounding bands of all time. They put out three great albums that still sell today. Whether they were corporate rock? I don't think so. I think that label applies to bands like Toto, who were a bunch of studio musicians a label threw together to make a band.
And to NFB, I say that Boston was hugely influential. Who sounded like Boston before Boston? Who exactly were they derivative of? The Beatles? Well, who isn't? Now let me ask you this. While writing their own songs is not all that unique, how about making their own equipment? How many bands do that?

Posted by patrick the rogue on Wednesday, 04.4.07 @ 21:09pm


Boston was an uplifting/positive influence post Vietnam that this country needed at the time. They may only have six albums but their total sales for only six is better than some rock groups have with twice the production. Oh, by the way, in the year 2007, I can still turn on classic rock stations any day of the week and still hear Boston on the air loud and clear! Put them in the Hall!!!

Posted by Steve on Thursday, 04.5.07 @ 15:12pm


Well, making their own equipment is certainly impressive, but I'm not sure that it in any way qualifies them for induction. As for their sound, I can certainly hear echoes of Yes, and a more melodic smoothed over metal sound that hint at touches of Cream and even Led Zeppelin. Put it another way: I don't think that Boston was all THAT original.

While one could make the case that Boston was not a corporate rock band (and I agree that Toto was a corporate rock outfit from the word go) even if one accepts that argument it is clear that that Boston paved the way for the flood of corporate rock outfits that followed them in the late 70's and early 80's. Put it another way: Boston was certainly influential. It is just that their influence (aside from, perhaps, giving punk something to rebel against) was not a positive one.

Sales? Sure, they sold a ton of records, but commercial popularity should not factor into this. I mean (to take an extreme example) Milli Vanilli sold 7 million copies of their debut.

Posted by NFB on Saturday, 04.7.07 @ 11:45am


OK, alll of you who throw around the phrase "corporate rock" just the hell up and learn to appreciate good music. All high-sales music is "corporate," you idiots.

That being said. Boston is a band I'm torn on. I'm for letting all the arena bands in (again a big "screw you" to all the ignorant morons who bitch about "corporate rock") and Boston helped that particular movement in rock history gte roling with i'ts sound. The problem is that they just didn't have that many albums and "More Than A Feeling" and "Amanda" are their only really outstansding songs. Also, I never really cared for Brad Delp's voice (may he rest in peace).

Posted by Creepozoid on Tuesday, 04.10.07 @ 02:58am


I have been a bigg fan of Boston since...well,
actually it was 1977. I first heard "More than a
feeling" during it's release month, but after that, it wasn't till 1977 when I really got to hear all of the album. Why does the "b.s."
keep swinging back and forth about what Boston is and isn't? The biggest question right NOW, is
..."will Tom Sholz continue Boston"? It would in my opinion because Brad Delp was so much of an integral part of the the Boston sound as much as
Tom Sholz's guitars. If You really want it spelled out...thouroughly reread the back of the first Boston album...where Tom Scholz explains
his concept of Boston, the technology,vocals, etc. Now, fastforward say...twenty years and about seven months, Brad Delp's death. Does Boston's current status fit with that one of
1976? In other words, there was no group because
certain elements were missing before Boston became a band...and with Sholz's way of thinking as well
as his creativity, everthing had to "meticulously" be Right. And now, there is
no more Brad Delp, so logicaly, where does Tom take the band to? I really loved Boston so much and Brad Delp was my favorite singer that I spent time learning to sing the Boston songs like Brad Delp did, at least until I got it right. I used to work at the Smirnoff in Dallas.
Boston headlined the show...september 2003.
I attened the concert. That was the first time that I had seen Boston...Live. At the end odf the concert, I met Brad Delp and spoke to him for a while. I asked him what had happened to the former guys. So shortly before he headed
back to the tour bus, I called him and said to him, hey Brad, and I gave him a big golden apple,
edible of course...Beatlejuice. In one of the pictures on the Boston website, he is pictured holding an an apple and is wearing a black polo
shirt that says, BEATLES on it, so we just had a little laugh over it. I became very sensitive to his presence that to this day, I am hoping to see Boston as they were but reality kicks in and tells me...sorry, Brad is gone. I am not too
happy. Goodbye Brad

Posted by Perfecto Rodriguez II on Wednesday, 04.11.07 @ 17:05pm


I think that a good way to determine if a band fits the "corporate lable", is if they were putting out albums every year or two at the pressure of their record lable. Obviously, that isn't the route that Tom Scholz and Boston persued. Between Tom's writing, arranging, playing and Brad's vocals, nothing sounds like Boston whether in the recording studio or live in concert. There isn't a better guitar player or vocalist in rock; in my opinion. If Boston isn't inducted into the Hall of Fame, after seeing some of the groups that are already there, I won't ever understand it!

Posted by SEAN on Wednesday, 04.18.07 @ 19:49pm


WOW THEY WEREN'T EVEN NOMINATED ITS REDICULES THAT BANDS SUCH AS

KANSAS, LOVE, HEART, RUSH, JUDAS PRIEST, BOSTON, B-52'S, YES, THE GUESS WHO, LOVIN SPPONFUL, STEPPENWOLF, GENESIS, OZZY OSBOURN, TEARS FOR FEARS, THE "5" ROYALES, BLOOD, SWEAT, AND TEARS, AND KISS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by FREDDY on Tuesday, 06.26.07 @ 18:52pm


You guys way over think things. These guys made great music and wrote great songs. Plain and simple.

Posted by Love Music on Friday, 06.29.07 @ 13:07pm


For as much of a neo-hippie Tom Scholz is, the man is a genius. How many of the inducted bands are/were using equipment based on his designs and patents? We probably all are to some degree.
The point being that Boston had and still has a major influence on the whole of rock and roll. A lot of people got hooked on rock and grew up on it BECAUSE of Boston. Given the recent nominees and the whole pattern of the committee, 1) Boston may be too good for the Hall, and 2) Maybe it should be scrapped and started again by real human beings.

For the love of all things holy.....Rush, three of the most talented human beings on Earth, cant even get respect here. What's wrong with this picture.

Posted by Rufus on Tuesday, 10.2.07 @ 10:48am


I can't believe Boston is not in the Hall!
I was shocked. Millions of fans, myself included, would gladly take just the song More Than A Feeling, or perhaps Foreplay/Long Time, over the entire catalog of many artists already inducted.

Posted by Michael on Tuesday, 10.2.07 @ 11:15am


I think that it is a conspiracy they just do not like boston views. Tom and the Brad work to make rock and roll great, and they did. I will always hate the rock and roll hall of fame till the put boston in there where they sould be. For the people that do the nominating just do not like great rock and roll.

JOE

Posted by joe on Friday, 10.12.07 @ 10:47am


Boston is a severely misunderstood band. They were NOT a corporate rock band. However, I think after there phenomenal debut, many rock bands came in and took that formula for their own success (Speedwagon, Foreigner, Kansas). They were incredibally innovative and their debut album actually is pretty diverse. More proof that seventies rock was some of the best music ever.

Posted by eric on Monday, 12.10.07 @ 23:24pm


That first Boston record changed the sound of music. Period. Power chords... soaring vocals... dueling guitars... frantic keyboards... and ripping guitar solos all thrown into songs with a melody. You will not find a better example of rock vocals – anywhere. Don't listen to the idiot that claims the record is ‘corporate’ without spontaneity. Listen to the dueling guitar solos in Peace of Mind or keyboards in Hitch A Ride. They tell the true story. To this day, I get shivers at the intro of Foreplay/Long-time; IMHO it is the definitive rock anthem.

Def Leppard, Joe Satriani, Nirvana, etc. all recognize Boston’s impact – their music is directly influenced by Tom Scholz’s guitar sound. Too bad the Critics (i.e. Rolling Stone Magazine) believe music is irrelevant without a cool image. Read Rolling Stone’s original review of Don’t Look Back, it is pathetic. My interpretation is a biased review due to personality conflicts between the writer and the band. Very unprofessional. Unfortunately, lack of favor with the critics will keep them out of the hall... along with other great bands like Rush and Yes.

Posted by Zirk on Saturday, 12.22.07 @ 21:44pm


Great first album - after that, not much else. But I respect those opinions who believe they belong. Whether they make it or not, I really could not care. But then, I don't think anyone is really going to care about my opinion.

I saw Boston Live at Madison Square Garden and I can honestly say that it was the worst concert I have ever seen. After they left the stage, the audience in the orchestra just started flinging broken chairs onstage to show their displeasure.

Posted by Dameon on Sunday, 12.23.07 @ 19:10pm


I think they had a nice sound, but they had only one good album (the first one). The subsequent ones sound too similar and I think it takes more than one good album to get inducted. Plus, I am not seeing how they changed rock music or were so influential.

Posted by Ryan on Monday, 12.24.07 @ 06:10am


I am a fan of boston, but i feel their biggest problem for getting in is the fact that they only released two albums before disappearing from the music business for eight years. They didn't keep a steady trend in making albums. However there first album was tremendous selling more albums than any other debut album. But hey if the pretenders for reasons unknown can get in than maybe Boston has that chance!

Posted by Matt on Monday, 01.14.08 @ 22:05pm


I still remember that crisp September morning 32 years ago, when one of my good high school friends dragged me to his garage and put on Boston's first album.As that old familiar hiss of needle to wax morphed into the opening salvo of sound my jaw dropped to the ground.For those of us over forty-five who were there and got to experience it first hand and also having seen this group live in '79, I can't believe they haven't been inducted. But as previously posted the 'Hall" is no longer about rock music.The memory of that day so long ago still helps keep me feeling young today.

Posted by bill on Sunday, 02.3.08 @ 10:24am


If for no other reason, Boston deserve to be inducted because Tom Scholz, apart from being a brilliant guitarist, bassist and pianist, is also one of the most visionary songwriters in history. Songs like "More than a Feeling" and "Peace of Mind" are almost universally relatable and convey the purest, most beautiful and unashamed sentiment you will ever hear in rock and roll. And Brad Delp, may he rest in peace, was an incredible singer.

Posted by Metalsmith on Sunday, 02.10.08 @ 14:05pm


"Tom Scholz...is also one of the most visionary songwriters in history."

Explain this, please.

Posted by Liam on Sunday, 02.10.08 @ 14:11pm


Tom Scholz was more of an electronics and effects wiz (most MIT grads are), he was a good player, too. I don't know that their songs were all that deep. He played some catchy riffs that are definitely identifiable to those songs.

Posted by Terry on Sunday, 02.10.08 @ 14:27pm


I didn't say they were deep; they aren't. I just think they're great songs because they're easy to understand and relate to for most people, which probably doesn't include Liam. Hello, Liam, let me guess: you actually love Boston, you're just being objective.

Posted by Metalsmith on Sunday, 02.10.08 @ 15:49pm


I occasionally enjoy their debut. But no, Boston isn't one the bands I love.

Would you like me to give a list of some of the bands I love? Yes? Okay then:

The Smiths, The Cure, New Order, Joy Division, Depeche Mode, Pixies, R.E.M., Velvet Underground, Jesus & Mary Chain, Sonic Youth, Soundgarden, Pearl Jam, David Bowie, Roxy Music, T. Rex, Led Zeppelin, AC/DC, The Rolling Stones, The Byrds, The Beatles, The Kinks, The Who, Supergrass, U2, The Birthday Party, XTC, My Bloody Valentine, Cocteau Twins, Lush, Slowdive, Ride, The Clash, The Buzzcocks, The Ramones, The Stooges, MC5, Pink Floyd, Gang of Four, Wire, Siouxsie and The Banshees, Jefferson Airplane (not Starship), The Doors, Radiohead, Happy Mondays, Stone Roses, Pulp, Massive Attack, Aphex Twin, Arcade Fire, Franz Ferdiand, The New Pornographers, The Decemberists, Belle & Sebastien, Motorhead and The Cars.

Perhaps a few hundred others, but that's it.

Posted by Liam on Sunday, 02.10.08 @ 16:00pm


I see. And so I shall return the favour:

The Beatles, The Kinks, The Yardbirds, Cream, The James Gang, Steppenwolf, Canned Heat, Ten Years After, Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, UFO, Nazareth, Black Sabbath, Queen, AC/DC, Rainbow, Scorpions, Van Halen, Iron Maiden, Motorhead, Saxon, Manowar, W.A.S.P., Motley Crue, Dio, Megadeth, The Cult, Loverboy, Guns N' Roses, Skid Row, Stratovarius, The Darkness and DragonForce.

Perhaps not as diverse, but now we should be on the same page (at last).

Posted by Metalsmith on Sunday, 02.10.08 @ 16:40pm


You are kidding about Loverboy and Motley Crue, right?

And I only see a fraction of non-hardrock/metal groups in there....pretty lame, if you ask me. Might wanna try jumping outta that group....just a thought.

Posted by Liam on Sunday, 02.10.08 @ 16:48pm


They don't call me Metalsmith for no reason. You go your way and I shall go mine.

Posted by Metalsmith on Sunday, 02.10.08 @ 19:23pm


If you purposefully object to yourself looking into looking into new music, even though you know it's there, you are, in my eyes, on a lower par than fanboys.

And btw, saying "you go your way and I shall go mine" actually sounds like you think I'm going to avoid metal.

Posted by Liam on Monday, 02.11.08 @ 10:21am


how in thw world are they not in already??!! i mean come on, tom shultz invented his own amps for christ sakes. their first two albums were nothing but hits and singles, and they are considered classic rock today. undo this injustice, send Boston to the HOF.

Posted by Adam on Friday, 02.15.08 @ 12:12pm


Tom Sholz invented his own amps?? Hmmmm.....!! When I saw them in Boulder, CO in 1979 he must've temporarily changed his name to "Marshall". The only thing that sticks out about that concert was the bad sunburn I got.

Posted by Terry on Friday, 02.15.08 @ 19:52pm


Tom Scholtz has requested that candidate Mike Huckabee stop using Boston's song "More Than a Feeling" in his campaign.


I agree Terry, I saw Boston on their first tour. They couldn't even do an hour and the seats at MSG were being flung onto the stage when they left. It was the worst concert I have ever seen.

Posted by Dameon on Monday, 02.18.08 @ 06:20am


I WAS FORTUNATE TO HAVE ATTENDED THE CONCERT BOSTON HAD LAST SUMMER. I LIKE MICHAEL SWEET BUT I THINK THE GUEST SINGER TOMMY DECARLO FROM NORTH CAROLINA WAS ABSOLUTELY FANTASTIC. HE APPEARS TO HAVE A LOT MORE SHOWMANSHIP & STAGE PRESENCE AND THE FACT THAT HE IS VIRTUALY UNKNOWN IS A PLUS FOR BOSTONS UPCOMING SHOW IN CANADA. PUT HIS GUY TO WORK AS LEAD SINGER TOM.HE IS YOUNG AND FRESH AND LOADED WITH TALENT.

Posted by SALANGER on Saturday, 03.8.08 @ 07:39am


Okay, back in the 70s, people got drunk, people got stoned and just seemed to be regular idiots at concerts, whether it Boston or Fleetwood Mac. The chair throwing...frisbee throwing, what have you incidents were always happening. Fast forward more than 20 years into the future and those people that threw the chairs are dead or in jail or living somekind of life that deserves nothing better than a trailer park.

Boston fans are not like that. Those comments were made by people that saw Boston once, maybe twice but never "got" what Boston was about. They didnt make the "connection" that real Boston fans have with the band and its music.

Real Boston fans did not care that Tom may have missed a chord here or there, or that his lead may have been a note up or down off from the "studio recording", nor do they care if Brad didnt pull off that amazing "she slipped Away!" each time in More than a Feeling while in concert.

Real Boston fans indeed desired more music from Tom and the gang (mostly Tom) but at the same time, thrived on the "perfection" that Tom would put into every album that he made. Its not about "Amanda" sounding (similiar) to "My Destination" or the mislabled "corporate sound" that Boston has been unjustly identified with.

Boston songs and lyrics are not about the worst things in life....they are about the best things in life and the hopes of better things to come. They didnt live the life of the drugged out, hell bent Rolling Stones writing about everything from Lucifer (is that influential in the music world?) to Brown Sugar....anyone can write lyrics like that and Tom Scholz can definitely outplay Keith Richards ANY DAY OF THE WEEK.

Boston fans are cut from a different mold than most other fans of apparent, more popular bands/singers, etc. They tend to care more. To listen more closely to what Tom was saying when he wrote the lyrics "Life is like the coldest winter, people freeze the tears Ive cried, Words of Hail their minds are into, got to crack this ice and fly" (a scholarly poet couldnt explain life at its most basic level than this set set of lyrics.) and Tom was as everyone likes to label him, a engineer geek..wouldnt figure a guy like that could make a statement like that and then be able to put the beautiful soul catching music behind those words as he did is nothing short of influential, inspiration and remarkable.

Boston was never a band like Journey, Kansas or Toto or whoever people like to label them like. The closest bands I could relate them to would be ELO and 38 special because they all relied on the layering of vocals and each had pretty heavy guitar oriented backgrounds for the sound.

Boston, just as its fans are a selective group. They were careful about what they created and as fans, we are careful to preserve the integrity of what Tom Scholz and company gave to us. I would defend Tom to the day I die that he and Brad (in his memory) and the others associated with the group have a chance to be in the hall of fame. They deserve it...they deserve their own hallway dedicated to them. As a band, I think they have touched more people where it counts, than any other band could ever dream of doing.

Corey

PS. I was at the memorial concert too and Michael did an "excellent" job for five days of practicing his material. Tommy was great but Michael is going to be a wonderful addition.




Posted by Corey T on Tuesday, 03.11.08 @ 15:53pm


1st album was kick ass from start to finish. Wish they'd released more than 3 in 20 years.

Posted by Paul in KY on Monday, 03.17.08 @ 11:30am


Boston were definitely very influential on the progressive rock of 80s til now. Great band. Boston along with Yes, Rush, and Kansas were all great early progressive bands.

Posted by skull on Tuesday, 05.20.08 @ 21:38pm


I was 19 in 1976. When I heard my first Boston song I thought to myself,"Wow that is the cleanest Rock n' Roll I have heard in years. What other band sounded like Boston at that time? Rock changed after that giving birth to Heavy Metal and Bands like Rush and AC/DC. Boston's music was fresh and innovative and the people of my generation loved it. Nobody scalped tickets to Boston because the wanted to see for themselves the Band that had an unique sound. They deserve the Rock n' Roll Hall of Fame. They kicked ass and people noticed.

Posted by Mel on Thursday, 09.11.08 @ 16:09pm


Mel,

I like Boston also but Rush and AC/DC released their first records in 1975.

SpaceTrucker

"Gonna play a song, little bit of rock and roll"

Boston

Posted by SpaceTrucker on Thursday, 09.11.08 @ 17:22pm


I the band back in the 70's at Duke University Cameron Indoor Stadium. What a rush! I can't think of any other band from that era that deserves it more than Boston. Hey, they wrote their own music and the energy from the band was phenomenal!

Posted by Christopher R. Smith on Friday, 09.12.08 @ 09:35am


Let Boston in

Posted by Mr. Octagon on Sunday, 09.21.08 @ 16:45pm


The biggest selling debut album of all time and a Diamond award is worthy of the Hall.

Some of the most complicated music in rock and they aren't on here.

Unbelievable, much!!!

Posted by Melissa Majors on Tuesday, 09.23.08 @ 15:39pm


Boston's music is timeless and will be played for generations to come. They should be in the Hall.

Posted by Robert Gann on Tuesday, 09.23.08 @ 16:17pm


Truly pathetic that mostly no talent so called "artists" are getting in these days.Real sad,Boston should have been in imediately!!!

Posted by Jim on Tuesday, 09.23.08 @ 20:35pm


How can anybody say no to Boston!? I mean, with the entire "Boston" album and songs like "Don't Look Back," "Feelin' Satisfied," and "Amanda," how could they not be good enough! Great talent, including Brad Delp, one of the most talented singers ever!

Posted by BakerBoy86 on Tuesday, 09.23.08 @ 23:58pm


Not really a big Boston fan but would also like to add that Tom Scholz invented the Rockman box for the guitar.
Just a sidebar comment,yeah let them in I suppose.

Posted by Lynn on Wednesday, 09.24.08 @ 12:01pm


Boston rocks. Tom Scholz is a great song writer and Brad Delp's vocals are unmatched (on par with Freddie Mercury's vocals)

Let Boston in

Posted by Mr. Octagon on Wednesday, 09.24.08 @ 12:22pm


" Brad Delp's vocals are unmatched (on par with Freddie Mercury's vocals)
Let Boston in "
Wednesday, 09.24.08 @ 12:22pm

I bought the debut upon orig. release,it's very bittersweet hearing them post Brad's suicide.
Only because I was saddened by the news of his death.

Posted by Denise on Wednesday, 09.24.08 @ 12:27pm


OK, this shouldn't be a popularity contest and it certainly shouldn't be about how many albums were put out or how many tours were done. We're talking contributions to the art here. To that I say the infamous "wall of sound" the 'layered vocals', the rockman and the influance they've had on so many other artists. Based on this criteria I believe Boston should be inducted. It's that simple.

Posted by Dreamer on Friday, 09.26.08 @ 19:50pm


will radio stations wgrd grand rapids michigan be playing any new songs from upcoming new rock band boston studio album soon i hope they release new song or 2 to radio thanks jon macvean also when will 38 specials next studio album be recorded followup to drivetrain

Posted by jon macvean on Monday, 09.29.08 @ 08:37am


Of course, Boston should be in... a new and creative style of music, the success of the debut, the guitar work and vocals, the technical creations of Scholz, etc. The real question is why have they been kept out all of these years?

Posted by Badger Bob on Thursday, 10.2.08 @ 08:26am


With the pathetic bands that nominated each year, I'm actually glad great rock bands like Boston, Journey, etc. aren't nominated. It would be a disgrace.

Posted by Blow Me Hall of Fame on Friday, 10.3.08 @ 08:02am


Too many classic rock fans just don't get it. They think every band that has 3 or more songs played on "Classic Rock" radio stations deserves automatic induction into the RRHOF. It's about influence, innovation and the perpetuation of music. Many of the bands (Boston, Journey, Foreigner, etc) you are clamoring for really did nothing other than sell a ton of records and get a lot of airplay on AOR and now Classic Rock stations.

Definition of derivative: using or taken from other sources; not original.

Why did AOR fail? It was huge in the 70's. In the 80's programmers couldn't or wouldn't adjust playlists to fully reflect the signficant changes that the punk/post punk movements brought. In the mid-to-late 70's corporate rock was ushered in to keep AOR afloat, but make no mistake it was derivative. It may have had many fans, but long-term it did not perpetuate rock music, it in fact helped kill the AOR format. What was left for AOR in the 80's since fans of corporate rock were so resistant to change? Hair metal!

Boston doesn't deserve to be in RRHOF. Sorry.

Posted by ms.music on Friday, 10.3.08 @ 12:26pm


I agree that Boston shouldn't be inducted. When more people in record company boardrooms in New York and LA knew their name than people on the streets of Boston before they were signed, then that's an automatic disqualification.

Posted by classicrocker on Friday, 10.3.08 @ 14:28pm


ms music. - I loved your take on this. I don't buy it for one minute, but I love your take anyway. Did you paraphrase Wiki on this?

AOR radio never modified itself to punk and post-punk because that music didn't sell. And radio stations are all about money. Talk about Corporate. And lets not forget the impact MTV had on radio starting in 1981; "Video Killed The Radio Star" and all that bull.

Now, should Boston be inducted into the Hall - hell no! Their debut album was excellent, but not groundbreaking, such as Never Mind The Bollocks.

As for the usual ripping comment about "Hair Bands". The party rock of the early 80's, VH, Def Lep, The Crue, Ratt and Dokken served its purpose and meant a lot to the perpetuation of the artform. Unfortunately, as the decade hit 1985, bands like Bon Jovi and Poison started turning it all into pablum. But every genre has that. All genres move to the "pop" side at some point, even the beloved Punk and Post-Punk genres. Money needs to be made and there will always be a band or label that will give the paying customer what they want.

Posted by Dameon on Friday, 10.3.08 @ 15:03pm


Dameon:

No I didn't read Wiki on this but yes it's pretty much spot on and supports what I said.

I'm in my early 40's (gawd middle age sucks) so I remember FM Rock/AOR and the beginning of MTV. I was a bit too young for the first wave of punk (76/77) so my introduction to these bands came a few years later, but as an impressionable tweener I listened to what local radio was feeding me in the late 70's. That was AOR and Top 40. AOR began as a progressive alternative to the Top 40 in the late sixties, playing album tracks from popular artists as well as music from artists that were not going to have much pop chart success, like Hendrix. I think the initial punk movement (Ramones, Pistols, etc) was pretty much a reaction to how self-indulgent AOR had become. Bands influenced by punk spawned the Post Punk/New Wave movements and AOR's reaction wasn't to embrace this but to psuh forward bands like Boston, Foreigner, Journey, Styx, etc. It was pretty much spitting into the face of what was happening musically. Plus AOR needed to start replacing some of the staple artists of early AOR. The Beatles had long broken up. Hendrix and Morrison were long in their graves. Zeppelin was on the verge of breaking up. Many other artists popular in the late 60's/early 70's were gone or redundant.

So what did AOR do? The AOR stations in my city were did not want to embrace what was happening musically. When they did air a few songs by New Wave artists that charted, most of the listeners reacted negatively. The Cars, Police, and Pretenders were about the only ones that they stuck with, so they became gateway bands. Other than relying on 60's/70's staple bands they had little to rely on other than Corporate Rock. How many MAJOR AOR artists made their debuts in the 80's? SRV? Who else? You had the faceless corporate rock bands and the likes of Loverboy, Bryan Adams, Bon Jovi, Eddie Money, .38 Special, Def Leppard, trying to carry AOR through the decade. Sure Petty, Springsteen, Van Halen and others that started in the 70's were still relevant, but corporate rock couples with the punk/post punk movements pretty much killed AOR. By the end of the 80's AOR had all but died and the new format "Classic Rock" had emerged.

As for "hair metal" and party rock? It may have served it's purpose but did it really do anything to perpetuate rock, or music in general? If you are going to induct someone for being a "party rock" band, how about some of the bands that popularized the term "party rock" or "frat rock". Bands like the Kingsmen, the Trashmen, the Rivieras, Sam the Sham and the Pharoahs? Songs like "Surfin Bird", "Louie, Louie", "Wooly Bully", "California Sun", "Nobody But Me", etc were a lot more fun that the majority or hair metal/party rock of the 80's. Probably more influential than 80's hair metal/party rock as well although I don't think any deserve induction.

As for money needing to be made? Obviously. Shortly after AOR as a format died, alternative emerged. Alternative, as a radio format, quickly turned mainstream and now most of it's major chart-busting artists are as derivative as Boston. Nickelback anyone?

Posted by ms.music on Friday, 10.3.08 @ 16:35pm


Too big of a comment. Boston is an amazing band and the Bosox are better then the Rays. It's all B.J. Upton's fault copyieng Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens.

Posted by Mike on Wednesday, 10.29.08 @ 15:27pm


Boston is a place. I did not know they were a music group.

Posted by Jason on Sunday, 12.7.08 @ 12:07pm


wow that's just said Jason

Posted by Firebrick on Sunday, 12.7.08 @ 13:58pm


oH YEAH THEY MUST BE IN!

Posted by 80's on Saturday, 12.20.08 @ 19:01pm


Why is Boston's induction chance 33% and Chicago's is 9%

Posted by Roy on Wednesday, 05.20.09 @ 18:43pm


Why, is Boston higher than chicago? I seem too recall a time when Chicago honestly used the line "I can't keep away, for one more day, from your boday". What exactly is a boday? Explain that, and then chicago can get in the hall. Okay, probably not. But Boston was a much better band than Chicago, not saying that there deserving of the Hall either.

Posted by Calzone on Tuesday, 06.9.09 @ 14:35pm


There are more influencial and innovative acts than Boston, so yes they can wait. Still they are sometimes called one of the pioneers of arena rock.

Posted by Dude Man on Tuesday, 07.7.09 @ 14:37pm


Chicago's a better band than Boston AND a better city.

Posted by ShyGuy on Thursday, 08.13.09 @ 12:57pm


Chicago's a better band than Boston AND a better city.

Posted by ShyGuy on Thursday, 08.13.09 @ 12:57pm

That is an entirely subjective opinion ShyGuy

Posted by Keebord on Saturday, 09.5.09 @ 06:00am


Boston should have been inducted the second they were eligible. :]]

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 10.18.09 @ 08:37am


Instead of inducting Boston, you should of inducted the New York Yankees for wiping out the AL!

GO YANKEES!!!
RED SOX CHEATED ON ROIDS IN 04 AND 07!!

Posted by Harrison Ford on Sunday, 10.18.09 @ 15:23pm


"Boston (along with other rising rock acts) helped revitalize FM rock radio, during a time when disgusting disco hits dominated the music scene." Um... I believe Zeppelin, Aerosmith, the Stones were all popular, am I right? Rock has never been in danger of being wiped out at all.

"4,000,000 total sales!
First CD ever to go gold!" Wrong again. Iron Butterfly had the first platinum album way back in '68.

"How many of the inducted bands are/were using equipment based on his designs and patents? We probably all are to some degree.
The point being that Boston had and still has a major influence on the whole of rock and roll. A lot of people got hooked on rock and grew up on it BECAUSE of Boston." a) The only design/patent I could find was the Rockman amps, and using equipment isn't necessarily a sign of influence, it just means they like the equipment. b) Describe what influence Boston has had on Rock. Who did they influence? c) Citation needed for the "A lot of people got hooked..." bit.

"Power chords... soaring vocals... dueling guitars... frantic keyboards... and ripping guitar solos all thrown into songs with a melody." That's not original. The Yardbirds invented the twin-lead thing, Thin Lizzy had a hit with the dueling guitars before Boston, and as for the power chords, soaring vocals, frantic keyboards and ripping guitar solos... ever heard of Mk. II Deep Purple?

"Rock changed after that giving birth to Heavy Metal and Bands like Rush and AC/DC. Boston's music was fresh and innovative and the people of my generation loved it." First, Boston were nowhere near metal. Second, Rush and AC/DC preceded Boston. Third, metal has it's roots in the mid to late 60's or early 70's. Fourth, Boston are a good band and were fresh, but not really innovative, as Yes and Deep Purple had already done what most of them were doing.

"The biggest selling debut album of all time and a Diamond award is worthy of the Hall." Are you also going to make a stand for Celine Dion and the Backstreet Boys?






Posted by Sam on Wednesday, 03.3.10 @ 18:52pm


A few other points: Some people use as innovation points the fact that a) Tom Scholz recorded the demos for the first album in his own studio, b) He had all those layers of vocals and multi-tracked guitars recorded, c) That their sound was ground-breaking. Point A: Yes, Scholz is an excellent producer, but I believe the first band to use their own studios was ABBA. Many artists have recorded at Polar Studios. Point B: Mult-tracked vocals can be traced back to the Beatles, and Queen were already tracking many layers of vocals and guitars. Point C: True, they had a distinctive sound, but so do many bands. The long extended keyboard solos, long guitar parts were already being done by Yes and Deep Purple (long keyboard parts by prog bands such as ELP.) My perspective on Boston is that they had a good first album and some great music, certainly a fine band, but they didn't really shake things up or have that big an influence, and in general there are many bands waiting that have done more for the genre. They don't belong, sorry.

Posted by Sam on Wednesday, 03.3.10 @ 19:00pm


The first album to have RIAA platinum certification was "The Eagles' Greatest Hits"...

Posted by Gitarzan on Wednesday, 03.3.10 @ 23:18pm


The first band to use their own studio...does anyone remember "Apple Records"...????

Posted by Gitarzan on Wednesday, 03.3.10 @ 23:21pm


Apple Records and Abby Road... correct. When was "The Eagles' Greatest Hits" released? It's just Wikipedia lists Iron Butterfly's In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida as the first platinum album, in 1976.

Posted by Sam on Thursday, 03.4.10 @ 18:44pm


"1. Boston (along with other rising rock acts) helped revitalize FM rock radio, during a time when disgusting disco hits dominated the music scene. They were innovative, influenced by the sounds of Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd and others, creating a unique 'wall of sound' experience. By contrast, 'corporate' rock bands would have just followed an established formula." - Tim

Let's just kill the whole "corporate rock" thing. It doesn't even make sense. And considering we had Zeppelin, Aerosmith, Pink Floyd, Black Sabbath, The Who and The Stones around, the idea that FM rock radio was "dying" is ridiculous. Not to mention that the second wave of punk was coming along. And no, they still don't deserve to be in.

"That first Boston record changed the sound of music. Period. Power chords... soaring vocals... dueling guitars... frantic keyboards... and ripping guitar solos all thrown into songs with a melody. You will not find a better example of rock vocals – anywhere. Don't listen to the idiot that claims the record is ‘corporate’ without spontaneity. Listen to the dueling guitar solos in Peace of Mind or keyboards in Hitch A Ride. They tell the true story. To this day, I get shivers at the intro of Foreplay/Long-time; IMHO it is the definitive rock anthem." As I said, what were you doing when Queen, Yes and Deep Purple had that down perfectly? I'd take those bands over Boston any day.

"Def Leppard, Joe Satriani, Nirvana, etc. all recognize Boston’s impact – their music is directly influenced by Tom Scholz’s guitar sound." Actually, Def Leppard were drawing from Zeppelin, not Boston, and also from the UK glam scene (T. Rex, Queen, Slade, Bowie, Mott the Hoople, Sweet.) Nirvana's influences: The Beatles, Black Sabbath, KISS, Black Flag and various other punk bands, and the first wave of alternative. I have never heard Def Leppard or Nirvana mention Boston. If you have, do point it out to me.

As for Joe Satriani. One interview, he says that Hendrix, classical, R&B, jazz, early American R&R, Motown and British Invasion. He then inherited albums from his older siblings. This was during the early 70's, pre-Boston. Rock guitarists who have influenced him: Hendrix, Page, Clapton, Beck and Blackmore. Those are the main ones. I have read several interviews with him, and no mention of Boston. Moreover, since it's cool to bash the Hall, you'd think if somebody significant was influenced by them or thought they should be there they'd have said so. I agree the Hall sucks, but for different reasons.

Posted by Sam on Saturday, 04.24.10 @ 12:37pm


in memory of Brad please DO NOT undo the injustice- this band does not belong. Its a wonderful first album sure but after that not much. not much touring.They were a light weight band from the 70's. When the "hall" is celebrating Rap and ignoring bands like Purple or Yes/ they pre date Boston and have a lasting influence- Deep Purple drew 4000 in Italy last week while Boston did occasional gigs/albums
The real travesty is the hall is to celebrate in coming years newer artists like madonna,beastie boys, run dmc, Pet Shop Boys.

Posted by Steven Murdoch on Monday, 03.12.07 @ 19:11pm

The second part of that seems a bit puritan, but I agree with the first bit. It's nice to see a fan with perspective, especially one pulling for Deep Purple and Yes.

Posted by Sam on Wednesday, 05.5.10 @ 21:23pm


For all the idiots that drone on
about "innovation" being a must for an act to be inducted, let's remember this: It's the Hall of FAME. FAME.

I think bands that sell millions upon millions of records around the world and their music has lasting popularity, are exactly the types for the hall of fame. Maybe you don't think much about Kiss, or Boston, or Foreigner, but these groups sold a lot of records and tickets, and through that influenced generations of people to pick up instruments and play music.

The hall of fame is a farce. A bunch of snobs induct the obscure garbage they like that nobody else gave a crap about, while they leave out the icons that people actually enjoyed.

Posted by Matt on Sunday, 08.22.10 @ 10:53am


"For all the idiots that drone on
about 'innovation' being a must for an act to be inducted, let's remember this: It's the Hall of FAME. FAME." - Matt (or maybe Mike, Mk. II)

Innovation is one of the reasons why Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, Aerosmith, The Stones, The Who, The Kinks (Or are you stupid enough to lump them into your elitist "obscure garbage" category?), R.E.M. (see The Kinks), Bob Dylan, The Beatles, Van Halen, Metallica, Black Sabbath, Prince, The Doors, The Grateful Dead (see The Kinks, and I'm not even a fan of the Dead), Cream, The Yardbirds (see The Kinks), Jeff Beck (see The Kinks), The Jimi Hendrix Experience, Grandmaster Flash (see The Kinks), Run DMC (see The Kinks) and Queen were inducted. If you can't see that, I don't know what to tell you.

"I think bands that sell millions upon millions of records around the world and their music has lasting popularity, are exactly the types for the hall of fame."

So in other words we should induct anybody popular, even if rock history would be virtually unchanged if you removed them from it? Brilliant idea (sarcasm over.)

"Maybe you don't think much about Kiss, or Boston, or Foreigner, but these groups sold a lot of records and tickets, and through that influenced generations of people to pick up instruments and play music."

Actually, if you had paid slightly closer attention, you'd see I FAVOR inducting KISS. That's the first problem. The second one is that very few people have said they started playing music because of Boston or Foreigner. Third problem: If that's really your criteria for induction I guess we should rush Britney Spears in because she has millions of young female fans (even though her influence is currently minimal.)

"The hall of fame is a farce."

I'm glad we can agree on something.

"A bunch of snobs induct the obscure garbage they like that nobody else gave a crap about, while they leave out the icons that people actually enjoyed."

The Beatles, The Stones, Queen, AC/DC, Aerosmith, Van Halen, Zeppelin, Metallica, ABBA, Genesis, Floyd, The Who, U2, Michael Jackson and quite a few other mega-sellers are in (and quite rightly, all of those acts are in.) Conversely, there are very few GOOD low-sellers who have met the criteria for induction that have actually even been nominated, so obviously how you're phrasing it isn't actually how it is. I'm not even sure where you're going with that "obscure garbage" bit. Don't like the Sex Pistols, Patti Smith (not a fan), The Ramones, The Clash, The Stooges or The Velvet Underground? Too bad, because they're all much more influential than Boston or Foreigner will ever be. Since they are very influential, it obviously isn't true that "nobody else gave a crap about them"... you're an idiot, plain and simple.

Posted by Sam on Monday, 08.23.10 @ 20:16pm


I won't bother explaining anything. If you love rock music and a band with a pure sound listen to Boston. You will then understand why they belong. If you don't understand you need to go back to listening to your rap crap!

Posted by Rob on Saturday, 03.19.11 @ 22:41pm


I'd wager that Eminem, Public Enemy, Beastie Boys and Run DMC have had much more influence than boston on music as a whole.

Posted by GFW on Sunday, 03.20.11 @ 08:13am


That's a very narrow minded point of view, Rob. Taking a dump on an entire style of music (rap) just because your beloved Boston isn't in is uncalled for.

Posted by Tahvo Parvianen on Sunday, 03.20.11 @ 10:53am


"I won't bother explaining anything."

Fallacious reasoning and a superiority complex... nice combination there.

"If you love rock music and a band with a pure sound listen to Boston."

Pure sound... er, what?

"You will then understand why they belong."

You know, I enjoy that first album and still don't see why they belong, and I like to think I have a pretty good understanding of the criteria.

"If you don't understand you need to go back to listening to your rap crap!"

More fallacious reasoning. I don't listen to rap very often and the best of that genre has still done more for music than Boston. Any more myopic viewpoints?

Posted by Sam on Tuesday, 03.29.11 @ 11:58am


"I won't bother explaining anything."

Fallacious reasoning and a superiority complex... nice combination there.

"If you love rock music and a band with a pure sound listen to Boston."

Pure sound... er, what?

"You will then understand why they belong."

You know, I enjoy that first album and still don't see why they belong, and I like to think I have a pretty good understanding of the criteria.

"If you don't understand you need to go back to listening to your rap crap!"

More fallacious reasoning. I don't listen to rap very often and the best of that genre has still done more for music than Boston. Any more myopic viewpoints?

Posted by Sam on Tuesday, 03.29.11 @ 11:58am


Tough call here. Eventually, the highly-political RRHOF will figure out a way to bring the much-loathed big arena rockers into their gated community clique (I actually think Journey and Bon Jovi have a chance!). I hesitate to use a term like "corporate rock", because I always felt these bands were serious about what they were doing, and took their creative process seriously, as opposed to the big pop acts today (yes, I'm talking to you Ms. Spears and Ms. Perry). Boston and Styx were constantly battling with their record labels over creative control. Granted, Styx was quite saavy in playing the corporate marketing thing (coddling with radio consultants, recording "Babe", etc.). But that's all part of the game.

Boston was a good band with a unique sound that was copied by many others (I saw Smashing Pumpkins a few years back and I swear, I could have closed my eyes and heard Tom Scholz). Perhaps where Boston gets knocked is Scholz' meticulous nature. Those records were way too polished, and admittedly sounded somewhat sterile. Scholz, for at least one time, should have swallowed his pride and banged out a rowdy free-for-all jam record in one weekend like the Ohio Players used to do. One could say that on "More Than A Feeling", he took six years to perfect a remake of "Louie Louie"! How long did it take Nirvana to do that for "Smells Like Teen Spirit"?

Boston does have a lot of integrity. Scholz no doubt has left ridiculous amounts of money on the table over the years in order to do music how he wants. He and the others have always been heavily into political and sociological activism, even when not very popular, and were highly vocal on the animal rights/environmental causes. And yes, many, many artists have used equipment designed by Scholz.

Will they make it in? Perhaps someday. Should they? Again, perhaps, but I can think of other artists who should be in there before them. I do think Kiss should be in first (now THERE'S a corporate rock act if there ever was one!). If a band as unpopular with the gatekeeper critics as them can get in, who knows who else can?

Posted by Irish on Wednesday, 07.6.11 @ 14:12pm


I hesitate to use a term like "corporate rock", because I always felt these bands were serious about what they were doing, and took their creative process seriously, as opposed to the big pop acts today (yes, I'm talking to you Ms. Spears and Ms. Perry)

Posted by Irish on Wednesday, 07.6.11 @ 14:12pm
--------------------------------------------------
I believe I mentioned something like this on the Foreigner page. If you're interested, take a look and let me know what you think.

I'm not sure Boston will make the Hall (though I believe they should), but not for the same reasons. I simply think the Hall may dismiss them do to their lack of material. Boston doesn't have that many albums to work with here. It would be foolish to suggest that the Sex Pistols could get in off one album and Boston would be left out in the cold, but knowing the Hall they might reason something like that.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Thursday, 07.7.11 @ 07:29am


"It would be foolish to suggest that the Sex Pistols could get in off one album and Boston would be left out in the cold, but knowing the Hall they might reason something like that."

I guess it has to do with the impact of their respective debuts on the musical world, but that's been discussed already. I'm not going to write them off completely like I would, say, Foreigner (even Casper gave Scholz and co a minor on his snubs queue), I just think some of the arguments that have been given for them are slightly ludicrous. There has been a similar precedent set with other inductions, but since they won't get in without a Nominating Committee turnover it doesn't matter.

Posted by Sam on Tuesday, 07.12.11 @ 12:11pm


BOSTON

Tom Scholz (1976–present)
Brad Delp (1976–1989, 1994–2007)
Sib Hashian (1976–1983)
Fran Sheehan (1976–1983)
Barry Goudreau (1976–1981)
Gary Pihl (1985–present)

Posted by Roy on Wednesday, 10.26.11 @ 07:01am


Boston is one of the many bands that should be in there. In fact, every judge should be asked if they believe ABBA should have been inducted before Boston. If they answer yes- expell them immediatly. I will also say that, before one of you says the band was not serious about music, you do a little more research.

Posted by Nick on Wednesday, 02.1.12 @ 16:41pm


But ABBA is far better and more worthy than Boston.

Posted by GFW on Thursday, 05.31.12 @ 17:20pm


"But ABBA is far better and more worthy than Boston." Hahahahaha! A little sarcasm can light up any day.

Posted by Josh on Sunday, 09.30.12 @ 00:45am


What made you think I was being sarcastic?

Posted by GFW on Sunday, 09.30.12 @ 06:16am


It seems most of you guys make some dumb arguaments about bla bla bla and what not. Let's start with this.

As for innovation, did Boston's first album not introduce many new things for rock and roll? I mean, they may not have been the first in their genre, but neither has many inspirational bands. In fact, not a lot of the bands in the rock and roll hall of fame was "first". It was 70's for pete's sake. Rock and roll wasn't necessarily new, but it wasn't getting old yet and tons of 70's bands influenced rock and roll more than plenty of 60's bands.
As for influence, I am pretty sure they influenced many bands. I have never really met a guitarist that doesn't know how to play more than a feeling or have been influenced somewhat by Boston.
Now, for those earlier people thrashing on 80's rock bands, whats wrong with them? Toto, Styx, and etc., are really good bands. Perhaps they didn't do a ton to help the music industry, but they are great to listen to and they sound nice. Isn't that what music is about. I really hate people who thrash on 80's bands. 80's bands are perfectly good bands, not necessarily the best(other than the dire straits being one of the best in my opinion), but still good bands.

Posted by Joey on Friday, 10.5.12 @ 18:36pm


Boston not in the hall is a joke. I heard my 16 year old listening to boston the other day and he said alot of kids listen to boston, kiss, thin lizzy and deep purple almost 40 years after the fact. that's influence and the very essence for those bands being elected.

Posted by Joe on Sunday, 12.2.12 @ 22:53pm


Let me explain something to you. Boston Is unique because no other bands at all reached success the way they (in fact Tom Scholz) do. Scholz was a engineer at Polaroid and a casual musician, keyboardist in the band Mother's milk featured the original Boston lineup that was leaded by Goudrault. One day, and that is the truth, he decide to invest all is salary and to load all his credit card to produce a complete top-of-the-line quality master tape. On this tape, wich will be Boston's first album, a new vision of rock will be recorded. And some people call Boston a corporate rock band? Or traditional rock band? At this time... Not at all!
Scholz was the first to mix sophisticated pop harmony with hard-rock riff and to get a balanced sound that fall between Queen and Deep purple using pop voices and acoustic guitar to "temperate" the hard-rock feeling. He create a complete new way to write rock music for two guitars, too. And the whole thing was something new, fresh but not aggressive or too much special for the grand public. And Scholz, a genius as well, did this in his cave with local friends wo wasn't and are not sharp-edged studio musicians at all. But they achieve to be so with Scholz for leader. Nobody does that except him. Ever. That's the story behind Boston's music that's make it so interesting to listen to. And it's certainly not a corporate rock band WTF....?!

Posted by Jasbat on Saturday, 03.23.13 @ 18:12pm


Boston

01. Tom Scholz (1976-Present: guitar, bass, keyboards, percussion)
02. Brad Delp (1976-2007: vocals, guitar)
03. Fran Sheehan (1976-1986: bass)
04. Sib Hashian (1976-1986: drums)
05. Barry Goudreau (1976-1978: guitar; Orion the Hunter)
06. Jim Masdea (1976-1986: drums)
07. Gary Pihl (1986-2002: guitar, keyboards)
08. Fran Cosmo (1994-2002: vocals; Orion the Hunter)
09. David Sikes (1994-2002: bass)

Posted by Roy on Friday, 05.24.13 @ 17:40pm


Al Green is in hall so obviously having all your songs sounding pretty much the same is not a detterent.

Posted by Goldrec on Tuesday, 04.29.14 @ 10:40am


When Hootie & the Blowfish's Cracked Rear View hit it's peak, it was announced that it was the #2 selling debut album of all time.
I WAS ONE OF THE FEW PEOPLE WHO DIDN'T WONDER "WHAT WAS #1?" I ALREADY KNEW - BOSTON
Called erroneously a 1 Hit Wonder by some - THAT ALBUM HAD 3 SONGS ON SIDE 1 AND ALL 3 WERE HITS!
If it can be said that there is a symphony orchestra of rock, an argument could be made that the depth of harmony of BOSTON puts them in contention.

Posted by David Starkey on Sunday, 05.31.15 @ 01:38am


Again pretty shameful. Not the artist. What I am talking about is the Hall of Fame. This sounds unrelated but it is related. George Carlin once said in his stand up the big corporate people in their big private club don't give a rat's behind about you. Same thing with the people that are in those high rich rock discussion things for the Rock Hall of Fame. And I love how they say the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame like it encompasses all of rock n roll in general which is total bull crap. Where's T. Rex then? Pretty big loophole. Boston is another. Was it really that excuse that brought the Small Faces in? Are you kidding me? Just through the Faces? Great and incredible band but they could have gotten in without them! Remember, they didn't call it AMERICAN R&R Hall of Fame. (I hope they do not rename it that because it should be closed all together.)

Now with Boston. I'm not big on knowledge on the band Boston but Tom Scholz special effects on that album were pretty mind shattering for that time. Jeff Beck even did something for him and he couldn't believe it. Now keep in mind that this guy was a MIT-trained engineer and crafted his own stuff. Much of what he did was just in a personal home studio, and he called a friend Brad Delp (RIP) over to sing this song. (Obviously you guys know it. More Than a Feeling.) But if somebody were to bring on this band, I have my money that it would be somebody like Steve Stevens or somebody. Also, I think that Boston was DEFINITELY a new sounding band for it's time.

We should have some sort of an official blog made for the people, and put everybody who belongs in there, IN there. That should be our own Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, or blog of fame or whatever.

Posted by Carlos Bosso on Saturday, 06.11.16 @ 22:48pm


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=co_57iTPRv0

SOUNDBREAKING | Nobody Knew That Boston Wasn't Really a Band At All | PBS

Posted by Roy on Thursday, 01.19.17 @ 03:33am


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrEzoa9-I8g

Tom Scholz interview - Boston/More Than A Feeling

Posted by Roy on Thursday, 01.19.17 @ 03:46am


RIP Sib Hashian. :(

http://www.tmz.com/2017/03/23/boston-drummer-sib-hashian-dead/

Posted by dmg on Thursday, 03.23.17 @ 11:52am



Leave your comment:

Name:

Email:

Comments:


Security Question:

Which letter is Springsteen's band named after?
 

Note: Emails will not be visible or used in any way, but are required. Please keep comments relevant to the topic. Any content deemed inappropriate or offensive may be edited and/or deleted.

No HTML code is allowed.




This site is not affiliated with the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Museum.