Rage Against the Machine

Not in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame

Eligible in: 2017 (The 2018 Induction Ceremony)


Inducted into Rock Hall Projected in 2018 (ranked #136) .


Essential Albums (?)WikipediaAmazon MP3Amazon CD
Rage Against The Machine (1992)
The Battle Of Los Angeles (1999)

Essential Songs (?)WikipediaAmazon MP3YouTube
Killing in the Name (1992)
Bulls On Parade (1996)
Guerilla Radio (1999)

Rage Against the Machine @ Wikipedia

Rage Against the Machine Videos

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

Comments

183 comments so far (post your own)

The best group i've ever heard

Posted by Roméo Leriche on Wednesday, 09.13.06 @ 06:38am


One of the greatest Bands ever!
Tom Morello is one of the few guitarists who still revolutionizes guitars as instruments.
Legends! Amazing!

Posted by Flo on Tuesday, 10.3.06 @ 17:22pm


Morello is the best guitarist of the world.
Commerford an amazing bassman
Wilk a very good drummer
De la rocha a revolutionnary singer
Their songs are the best of the 90s

Posted by roméo on Friday, 10.6.06 @ 12:18pm


are you kidding? rage is just a bunch of untalented karl marx wannabes. they suck.

Posted by Alice on Monday, 01.1.07 @ 13:18pm


And shockingly, me and Alice agree. Any band that preaches psuedo-communism and smashing the state while signed to Sony and making me pay 20 dollars so I can hear how much they love their effect pedals can go suck on it.

Posted by Kit on Monday, 01.1.07 @ 19:19pm


hmm lets see.. if rage wasnt signed to a big label how would anyone know about them? how were they supposed to get their message out? exactly... havent you ever heard of fighting fire with fire... using the same capitalistic label as the catalyst of your message

Posted by ed on Monday, 01.8.07 @ 14:24pm


And another thing, if there was one sentence to describe the impact of RATM it would be from the august 2005 issue of guitar world when they stated, "As a member of RATM Morello helped pioneer the fusion of heavy metal and rap, adding impassioned political invective to create a musical Molotov Cocktail that shook nineties rock to its foundation." 'Nuff said

Posted by ed on Monday, 01.8.07 @ 15:01pm


Yes, I've heard of fighting fire with fire, but I've yet to hear of fighting capitalism by signing to a label notorious for price-gouging. Pearl Jam, Tom Petty, and The Clash did much more to fight record labels while not being obnoxious about it. Rage were nothing but flat hypocrites being contentious hypocrites to sell records.

Posted by Kit on Monday, 01.8.07 @ 15:31pm


Zack was the only one of the group who ever really backed up his political views, and even then, signing to Sony was a big mistake. He also happened to be a fairly talented writer, rapper, and singer (if you're familiar with his work in Inside Out).

Morello is a pretentious piece of shit who could not play an acoustic song to save his life. If I wanted to hear a good guitarist play with effects, I'd listen to some Steve Albini or Buckethead.

Posted by William on Monday, 01.8.07 @ 17:15pm


They would certainly won an activist award, but they would also be a great rock band due to the experimental Tom Morello and his revolutionary guitar playing(as well as political ideas :P).

Posted by TRTRZ on Friday, 01.19.07 @ 09:29am


I'm extremely shocked by what i've just read.
OK I live in france and I don't know their place in American medias. De la rocha was cetainly the soul of the group( that's why audioslave is so bad). But I really really think of Morello as a very great guitarist and even if you don't like their ideas they had ideas and they had their own sound. I can't immagine someone think of them as crap

Posted by roméo on Friday, 01.19.07 @ 09:44am


Name me one thing Morello "revolutionized." He's one in a long line of effects players and ranks near the bottom. Give him an acoustic and it would sound absolutely awful.

And their politics were almost completely undermined my the Sony fiasco. Zack's the only one with any real claim to his beliefs. The rest are genuine, literal sellouts.

Posted by William on Friday, 01.19.07 @ 17:45pm


just listen to Morello as the nightwatchman it is not so awful

Posted by roméo on Friday, 01.19.07 @ 23:06pm


Morello was great, man. His sound was unique and his riffs and solos were brilliant. He was a huge influence on me. I don't think they're quite HOF material, but they were a hell of a band all around.

Posted by Al on Wednesday, 01.24.07 @ 09:11am


They created their own sound, combined rap with funk and metal and created their own riffs. However, don't expect them to show up at the hall...or if they do, expect them to show up naked.

Posted by maplejet on Friday, 03.2.07 @ 06:31am


Zack will present Patti Smith it is a good sign. It shows that they are considered

Posted by roméo on Sunday, 03.4.07 @ 11:36am


Horrible, horrible band. They were the first group to make me feel old, in my early twenties, no less. Why? They're literally all noise and shouting, nothing but feedback and screaming. Horrible band. I'd sooner see a fire alarm inducted than these charlatans.

Posted by RATM Sucks on Wednesday, 03.7.07 @ 01:00am


Horrible! noise! Have you only listen to one album i would even say one song. I know so many people that hate this group before thei realy listen to them. Generally I argue that Morello is great he lyrics interrestings that they have a great sound, That they were creatives etc... And very often when people make an effort to really listen to them they admitt that they have great qualities( even if it is bot what they listen to). I know all what they made and apart from a couple of songs on The battle of LA and maybe one or to others their songs are really great.And Renegades of funk proves that they really like good music because the songs they chose are good songs from great groups/singers(DYlan/Stones) and more interresting great songs from less known artists

Posted by roméo on Friday, 03.9.07 @ 11:32am


If Rage doesnt get it, i may just have to shoot myself-they are amazing, double amazing...they win hands down!

Posted by Maria on Thursday, 03.15.07 @ 14:46pm


oh hell yeah they should morello is one of the few that still use their guitar as their voice i say they should cause they used a big label to get their message out. yeah it sucks that they broke up but they are still on of the fewest rock bands that i like. good luck guys

Posted by chris on Thursday, 03.15.07 @ 15:29pm


Update...Zack did show up to honor Patti, so I bet the band themselves will show up if they get inducted.

Posted by maplejet on Thursday, 04.5.07 @ 14:39pm


WOW. anybody who said that tom morello cant play guitar and that rage is noise and screaming, OBVIOUSLy, i repeat, OBVIOUSLY knows ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about Rage Against The Machine. Go back and listen to your no talent sissy rock on mtv.
First off, Tom Morello can shred. Crazy. but of course ignorant minds dont see that because they haven't seen rage from the years 1992 to about 1996. Tom Morello had the most original riffs and shredded in the songs, "Know your enemy", "Clear The Lane", "Mindsets a threat", "Take the power back" and many others. He is a very technical guitarist as well. he does classical and jazz. and whoever said that he can't play an acoustic guitar to save his life shows that this person knows nothing about tom. You ever heard of the NIGHTWATCHMAN? no. Also, Rage is an AMAZINGLY respected band. Chuck D from Public enemy has done concerts with rage, James Maynard from Tool is also Tom's good friend. Rage has influenced SOOO many bands over the years. ALSO, Zack De La rocha was the most intense and passionate singer in rock, which is pretty much non-existent in music today. and of course this was in the period from about 1992 to 1996. Zack was INTENSE in this era. I honestly don't think any other band topped their energy and intensity. But when all of you mainstream trendies saw rage, it was in 1999 to 2000, when rage broke up. Nevermind the "Guerrilla Radio" video on this page. Look at old rage videos from back in the day. Look at "Bullet in the Head", "Know Your Enemy", "Bulls On Parade", "Killing In the Name", "Snakecharmer" and my favorite, "TOWNSHIP REBELLION", and other old videos. Your little minds will be blown away. From the words of Pantera- "They're the Led Zeppelin of their genre, there it." coming from somone who knows music. and anybody who knows music and their history knows that Rage against absolutely belongs in the Rock N Roll Hall of Fame. Its all about innovation and influence.

Posted by BurningMonk on Thursday, 04.5.07 @ 16:59pm


Yeah, I've heard his acoustic work. Like the rest of his stuff, it's only slightly above average technically, but idiots like yourself gobble it up because it's "OMG DIFFERENT!"

So what were you doing when Steve Albini was doing similar but better stuff in the '80s (and the '90s, and today)?

I don't exactly monitor the channel 24/7, so pardon my ignorance, but I don't recall ever hearing Shellac on MTV. RATM, on the other hand...

Posted by William on Thursday, 04.5.07 @ 17:07pm


First things first, fuck anyone who disses rage. Rage was one of the best and highly influential bands of the 1990s that practically created their own genre (along with other experimental acts near the same time-public enemy/anthrax, and run dmc). Rage was the first band that actualy pushed through with it. The sound, the message (which u probly dont know), the raw energy, it was all new. I'll admit as a true rage fan that there are positive and negative sides of the band (like many others, no body is perfect), that they started to sell out near the end of their careers, doing that stupid rage tv on mtv bullshit and playing at the music video awards. Rages music videos had messages, videos that had purpose, except near of the end of their careers again, and i wish they barely did any videos like pearl jam (another great band for hall of fame). MTV started in the 80s, and MTV WAS IN THE 90S AS WELL AS TODAY MORONS! NIRVANA, ERIC CLAPTON who was inducted three times, and others were doing mtv shows, so watch what you are saying. For the record i like nirvana and clapton, and i dont think nirvana is in the hall of fame either which is odd. Going threw a label is still a big debate and they could have possibly gone another way to widespread their music and become noticed. Music shouldnt b for a price, but we live in a capitalist society, so download it if you dont want to pay. They have many influences such as marx and are not wanabes.
Anyone who says morello is just an effects guitarist, go fuck yourself, he isnt, morello is in the top 100 guitarists of all time, and you dont make it for just effects, that guy has talent, period. Some solos are all natural fingering, and i dont know how he does it with the odd sound that tricks you. Heck that list isnt even that accurate because theres a bunch of guitarists on there that shouldnt b ahead of him and others that have much more talent(Rolling stone cant get their shit together-check the list out for yourself and you see what im talking about). And accoustic isnt new to him either. Hes been playing accoustic for years. Watch nightwatchman (which is actually fairly recent and also good example),its not phenomenal, but he can play acoustic real good, although i dont like his singing one bit for those gigs.
In Terms of Zach, he is a great song writer with good lyrics and also plays guitar (started back in high school), but his screaming aint great and he cant actualy sing,(ive heard him try) but then again, i was wrong. Recently i heard him do folk acoustic in chile and mexico and holly shit, the stuff he was singing in spanish or whatever language it was, this guy has hidden talent no one has ever seen before. No record labels or any of that, just straight up folk style instead of popular culture which most of us are used to. He can play guitar, and ACTUALLY sing, there is now proof of that (i cant remember the link tho, try youtube). Tim and brad are just the back up guys that play fine, no need to comment on them. I believe hidden talent came out of zach and tom when they seperated, but now a rage reunion is ahead of us and maybe amercia will finaly wake the fuck up towards major issues.
Dont diss unless you got the fucking facts to back your bullshit up. NO talent!? You guys wouldnt know talent if it fell from the sky and hit you right in the fucking face. I really hope the people that dissed rage die of goneria or get kidney stones. I really hope you guys do. SO go fuck yourselves. Rage was a great band, simple as that. NOw that thats out of the way, Rage in the hall of fame? tough question, i think it should b taken in consideration, but no follow through yet, there are lots of other bands that should b inducted to the hall of fame that have been around longer. So we'll have to wait and see what comes up.

Posted by Dave on Wednesday, 04.11.07 @ 13:48pm


The only thing Rolling Stone gets right anymore is the page numbers. So what if they put Morello in the top 100? They put Kurt Cobain in there too.

Don't trust a magazine for objectivity. They have a huge conflict of interests thanks to advertisers and their own incentive to sell more magazines.

Posted by William on Wednesday, 04.11.07 @ 18:59pm


Morello has more talent then kurt when it comes to guitar playing, kurt was a great musician but no extraordinary guitar player. Lots of people on that list were in spots where they shouldnt be. Not just kurt and morello. And u are right about using certain magazines for references, they are not always accurate, for example that list.

Posted by Dave on Wednesday, 04.11.07 @ 21:00pm


RATM couldnt be any more pretentious if they tried. Morello is an interesting guitarist, yes, but DeLaBoring is annoying and whiny with his Marxist wannabe lyrics. That a-hole can blather on all day, but he has yet to show me a working model of communism...you know, one where they dont shoot you for having an opposing viewpoint. (tiennaman square, anyone?)

If these morons are so unhappy with the US, let them go live somehwere else. The capitalist system has allowed them many luxuries, trust me. They arent exactly begging for change in front of the check cashing place.

And please spare us the "they couldnt get the messgae out if they didnt sing to Sony" BS. Theres such a thing as independent labels.
(Look at Fugazi)
All they ever did was convince a bunch of idiots to wear Che Guevara t-shirts. That really made the world a better place, guys. Good job.

Oh, and if you want a REALLY good laugh, listen to their cover of Springsteens "Ghost Of Tom Joad." I've heard bums on the subway sing better than that.

Posted by DonkeySquirts on Thursday, 04.12.07 @ 23:33pm


k, well first off, yes RATM should be in the hall of fame they are 1 of the first of their kind and realy are talented musicians. They undoubtibly opened the doors for many rap metal bands of today. And if you knew anything about Tom Morello you would know that he has been playing the acoustic guitar since he started out on the guitar. Second of all i must agree that sometimes they come off to me as b/s while they sit as a sony signed band who charges 20 dollars for music, which should be free.

Posted by tom on Saturday, 04.14.07 @ 19:37pm


I'm not really a big fan of Rage's style, but I did like them overall, too bad they weren't here for all of Bush's term lol. Anyways, I am a HUGE fan of Morello's style though, especially with Audioslave, I LOVED his riffs.

Posted by Robert on Wednesday, 05.2.07 @ 22:06pm


Rage=awesome...people who say morrello sucks at the guitar obviously don't know how to play one. I would like to see them try and do 1/64th of the shit he does on that guitar...ive been playing for 5 years and still don't know how to get some of the effects he produces...i don't necessarily agree with all of their ideas but who gives a crap their music rocks nonetheless...I really hope they stay together this time too, they have been greatly missed.

Posted by Dave on Friday, 05.4.07 @ 13:57pm


Are u guys serious? Does anyone know how politically active ratm has been outside of their music career? RATM has donated massive amounts of money and time to an incredibly wide array of causes. If you're gonna say that ratm are a bunch of hypocrites, do your research first. Also, Zach is incredibly well versed in marxist theory, which is something most of you idiots dont even understand. Even if you dont agree with it, you have to acknowledge and appreciate the sheer intellectual substance of the subject matter. I mean, isnt it better than listening to other bands like greenday or My Chemical romance???? If you wanna call anyone a hypocrite, its those guys. Anyone posing as a pseudo-skater/emo piece of sh*t is fake (and their music takes no talent!!!!!) In addition, RATM pioneered a sound that no one ever reproduced. In fact, i think it's kinda sad that they opened the gates for bands like limp bizkit. RATM were always in a league of their own.

Posted by soren on Monday, 05.7.07 @ 11:57am


Listen to Big Black and tell me it doesn't sound similar.

Posted by William on Monday, 05.7.07 @ 17:26pm


Rag is the best band ever i dont know why you guys hate them.

Posted by rockrockandroll on Friday, 05.25.07 @ 18:39pm


I think RATm is much more funky than Big Black.Yes the singer can be compared(but I think De la rocha can be compared with the singer of at the drive in and with the beastie boys a little).
The rythmic section is very different between Big Black and RATM

Posted by roméo on Tuesday, 06.5.07 @ 13:51pm


Don't forget that Morello is the oldest of the group, he was born in 1964 and Albini in 1962 so they are actually part of the same generation.
Morello was a guitarist a long time before RATM.
He played with Adam Jones when they were in high school in 1980.He is to take apart from the others. pergaps he is not the greatest innovator of the universe but he has his own style and is talented, i mean try to do what he does.
And de la Rocha is a truely activist, he has lived a couple of days with mexican revolutionnaries, his energy and his personality are to be recognised

Posted by roméo on Wednesday, 06.6.07 @ 15:43pm


For once, Kit is actually right. RATM actually has the ability to make you dumber when you listen to them. IMO, anyone who ever actually bought an album by these buttbandits shouldn't be allowed to vote.

And spare the line about how they were one of the most influential bands of the 90s. For the love of God, that is NOT something to be proud of.

Posted by Creepozoid on Monday, 06.25.07 @ 09:13am


"For once, Kit is actually right. RATM actually has the ability to make you dumber when you listen to them. IMO, anyone who ever actually bought an album by these buttbandits shouldn't be allowed to vote."Creepo the asshole

First Kit did not insult Ratm fans, he criticized the way they made their popularity by saying they were against the society and being in a major label at the same time

Don't insult fans I'm not dumb because i listen to rage it is stupid.
You have the right to hate their music, even the musicians. But their message is thought and it is not thoughts that make you dumb

Posted by roméo on Monday, 06.25.07 @ 11:02am


Wow Romeo. You sure put me in place with that piece of incoherent blather you call a rebuttal (or does someone of your non-existent intellect even know what that word means?). But in all seriousness, you're right. It was wrong of me to suggest that RATM fans are dumb as that is a slap in the face to dumb people the world over. I'll have to think of a more appropriate insult to people who endorse such garbage. An insult that reflects exactly how stupid they really are. Oh, I know. How about "RATM fans".

Posted by Creepozoid on Tuesday, 06.26.07 @ 01:08am


first , if what i say don't seem to be very clever it is probablby because I am French and I am not totally perfect in English.Just would like to know what is your beloved group to see what is the real way to musical acknowledege.Seriously i don't know what they did in the media, maybe their way to give their message is unappropriate but seriously it is not garbage musically speaking. They were really creative, and sure everybody cannot love their sound but it was and is original.Audioslave reavealed that they are able to make some of the worst shitts ever.But Zack has alwys been true, he has toured with small bands(a traditionnal mexican group, i don't remember his name, in example). He quitted the group because the political aim was not at the time a success and because he probably saw that the band was going to be more commercial(just like audioslave).

Posted by roméo on Tuesday, 06.26.07 @ 02:09am


"if what i say don't seem to be very clever it is probablby because I am French"

Well that WOULD explain it

Posted by Creepozoid on Wednesday, 06.27.07 @ 02:21am


elaborate on the "listening to rage makes u dumber" part. im curious lol

Posted by Dave on Thursday, 06.28.07 @ 17:40pm


Dave, it's kinda like being in a college social studies class. These elitist morons have convinced themselves they are "educating" you but if you take anything they say to heart your IQ will instantly drop about 100 points.

Let me put it this way. If Stalin were alive today, he would jerk off to this music.

Posted by Creepozoid on Saturday, 06.30.07 @ 00:55am


awesome band my favorite. Nonconformist that change the world include the door, black sabbath, the clash, and jimi hendrix so of corse they diserve to be in. Also Rage is awesome and honestly few bands succesully fight against the government. I don't know if they had any effects in other countries beside U.S.A. One of their concerts by the staples center while the democrat party was having a rally RATM had a concert outside and for some reason the police come and arrest most of the people at the concert even though they really didn't do anything.

Posted by Stephanie on Tuesday, 07.17.07 @ 18:34pm


oh dear

leats NOT bring roll-ing-stone magazine into this as its the most pretentious, scummy, sellout piece of shit to stain the shelves since, well, it wanted money not music.

read NME instead maybe it gets it wrong now and again but it tends to see a decent band when theres one out there.

good. but not legendary as alot of people make them out to be.

Posted by liam on Wednesday, 08.29.07 @ 12:52pm


clear cut yes. in terms of longevity, there is no question that rage will remain relevant in the coming years. no band can match rage against the machine's intensity. with the onslaught of de la rocha's lyrics, wilke's and commerfords ability to lay down insanely infectious grooves and tom morello's unparalleled creativity as a guitarist, it is truly hard to even fathom the idea that ratm will not make it into the rock n roll hall of fame. at the very least, the band's willingness to fully submit themselves to a cause (even though i don't completely agree with them in every way) warrants some sort of acknowledgement from the hall.

Posted by zack on Thursday, 09.13.07 @ 03:09am


worst band ever to play anything...I hope they dont get back together permanently.

Posted by jeff on Friday, 09.28.07 @ 01:06am


Very good chance.

Rage definitely made a lot of contributions to the development of new styles of Rock & Roll.

I'm not sure if the US will ever be ready for them in the hall though.

I would like to see it happen though if possible.

Posted by Jonathan on Friday, 09.28.07 @ 11:10am


"worst band ever to play anything...I hope they dont get back together permanently."

oh, come on. surely Orson gets that reward

"Rage definitely made a lot of contributions to the development of new styles of Rock & Roll."

bullshit. go listem to the beastie boys or something

Posted by liam on Sunday, 10.21.07 @ 12:39pm


who gives a crap about the beastie boys lol

Posted by dave on Saturday, 11.3.07 @ 14:25pm


Good band. Good musicians. Even though I think they have more than just a few screws loose when it comes to politics, I think they deserve a spot in the RHoF.

Posted by Spud on Tuesday, 11.6.07 @ 22:53pm


I dont see how people think morello revolutionized anything. He plays the same 3 notes over and over. As for lyrics there should really be more than 2 verses on a 5 minute song. I think this band shows how bad you can suck and still be popular.

Posted by Elwood on Sunday, 12.2.07 @ 21:51pm


Ha, Tom would laugh at that statement.

Posted by BurningMonk on Sunday, 12.23.07 @ 15:49pm


If Rage doesnt get it, i may just have to shoot myself-they are amazing, double amazing...they win hands down!

Maria - To what cemetary to we send the dead roses to?

I was more into their political activism and support, where they have played multiple benifit concerts such as free tibet and raising money for mumia and peltier.

What the f'k does a cop killer have to do with the RnR HoF? Definitely the wrong cause they chose with Mumia.

RATM - I must admit that I just never got this band. I can hear the talent in the music. The only problem is that I never heard the song in the music. I know they were the kings of their genre. They are certainly well respected amongst other musicians. I cannot say that I found their belief system to be very credible. A bit too over the top for me. However, I do think they knew how to market themselves pretty damn well and they certainly cultivated that image. I would think that RATM would never want or accept such an honor (dishonor) anyway.

If I am not mistaken, wasn't this whole "loud activism" thing done before with the MC5?

I think when they start sorting out the post grunge era in another 10 years, RATM will certainly have a shot to get in.

I have no opinion on their inclusion one way or another. I am still trying to figure out why Deep Purple and Alice Cooper are not yet in. Oh, that's right - because the Hall is a sham.

I cannot believe that I actually found myself agreeing with Kit.






Posted by Dameon on Wednesday, 01.2.08 @ 06:00am


WOW "I'm Tom Morello. I can rub my guitar strings!!! I am so good at the guitar. No one can rub strings like me!! My solos are so good!! String rubbing, WOOT.

Posted by OMG on Thursday, 01.10.08 @ 18:39pm


seriously, how you can say that Morello or any other members of RATM are not talented I will never know. It's like, if their famous then it gives people the right to say that they are crap even though if any of you lot could play the guitar like he can then you would think that you are amazing guitar players. They're all awesome and they remind of the constant injustice that is continuing to happen in the world and the open your eyes to things that a lot of people flatly ignore as they're too preoccupied with critiscing how someone chooses to play theire guitar. For god's sake.

Posted by Luke Sandle on Saturday, 01.12.08 @ 07:24am


"They're all awesome and they remind of the constant injustice that is continuing to happen in the world"

Yeah, like when an artist is allowed to preach pseudo-communism whilst working on a major label.

"they're too preoccupied with critiscing how someone chooses to play theire guitar. For god's sake."

With Morello, it's more a case of "how someone is able to play guitar".

Posted by liam on Saturday, 01.12.08 @ 15:11pm


Just because someone is signed to a major record label, doesn't make them not able to remind me that there is injustice in the world that needs to be acted upon?!

Posted by Luke Sandle on Wednesday, 01.16.08 @ 12:01pm


There's a difference between directly referencing Communism and Chomsky in songs, and general political views mixed in with songs. You're contradicting yourself on this; you're the one who slammed the Pistols for putting their views across in songs.

Not that I don't detest arse-wipes, like John Lennon, Bono and Bob Geldof; who actually thought/think they're/were making a difference.

And besides - RATM is a f*cking awful group.

Posted by liam on Wednesday, 01.16.08 @ 12:31pm


Talented musicians: sure. Well recorded: absolutely. But ultimately, these guys were signed to sell merchandise.. and it worked. For every high school kid who has ever written "The government sucks" or some such on a notebook cover, and thusly fancied himself/herself a revolutionary, well, the Sony marketing dept was right there to make some cash. Maybe there was/is some well intentioned "meaning" going on with the band itself, but for those actually interested in politics, it's well known that the message can get lost in the medium. If someone likes the music, great, no one can judge taste, but don't be fooled. This was no more revolutionary than anything elese on the radio. Whining and complaining has been around for a long, long time and has been a reliable tool for selling music. Offering solutions, not just problems, now that's something rather special.

So, although I've personally seen no evidence of such, if Rage Against The Machine did actually inspire anyone further than to yell "Down with the man brah!" and purchase a t-shirt with a picture of Che Guevarra, or a so-called anarchy symbol (bought with Capitalist currency), good for them. It's a big world.

Posted by dzb on Monday, 01.21.08 @ 17:24pm


yeah you talk of it as a completely money making scheme. But what about the free concerts they played? What about all the rallies they played at? This isn't just a band that goes on the same typical tours that most bands go on. Whether or not you agree on their political stance is a different matter, but you cannot say they were only in it for the money. That is a joke.

Posted by Luke on Sunday, 01.27.08 @ 15:26pm


It's not that they didn't believe what they were saying, just that they were awfully hypocritical about it. A hypocrite can still believe every single word of his own delusion.

Posted by William on Sunday, 01.27.08 @ 18:26pm


What about all the rallies they played at?

I especially like the one for a cop killer!

Posted by Dameon on Monday, 01.28.08 @ 06:34am


Not trying to be overly critical, but you need to do something to distinguish a quote from the rest of your post. I can't immediately tell what's being said.

Posted by William on Monday, 01.28.08 @ 06:54am


The lyrics my sound rapish but sound is rock at one of its multiple high points.

Posted by tyler on Tuesday, 01.29.08 @ 04:53am


I would disagree- the definition of hypocrite is someone who says one thing and does the other. If you say one thing & do the other you can't possible believe in what you say. Otherwise why would you do the other?

Posted by Luke on Tuesday, 01.29.08 @ 15:14pm


"Listen to Big Black and tell me it doesn't sound similar."

I'm pretty sure that RATM have cited Gang of Four, too.

It's funny how many people think that this lot "invented" rap/rock, when rap/rock's roots came about around 15 years earlier.

Posted by Liam on Saturday, 02.2.08 @ 07:17am


A legit contender for gayest band ever.

Posted by Eddie on Wednesday, 03.12.08 @ 16:47pm


all of you are retarded. really.

Posted by dave on Friday, 03.21.08 @ 16:35pm


Well...I love their politics, but in terms of revolutionizing guitar, etc...I would place the canon of great American 80s indie bands on a higher throne...Mission of Burma, Big Black, SONIC YOUTH (Thurston Moore has got to be one of the best guitarists around today), My Bloody Valentine, Husker
Du, Pylon, Dinosaur Jr...and in terms of the whole funk+hard rock deal, I would agree that Gang of Four and others preceeded them by some time...

Posted by ry on Saturday, 03.22.08 @ 10:47am


Rage=Creed

Posted by chchchchch on Saturday, 03.29.08 @ 00:40am


L-I-A_M is so ridiculously self-rightous it's not even healthy.

Who are you anyways?

your type is so defined, and your views are so predictable,

pseudo-communism..that's what they were preaching. not quite. their message was definitely a bit over the top, and their ultimate goals and views were not exactly clear to anyone, probably even them.

Who made you an expert on Rage's motives anyway?

Put your wasted passion to something useful, like obtaining a real education

Posted by jonathan on Friday, 04.4.08 @ 15:47pm


"pseudo-communism..that's what they were preaching. not quite. their message was definitely a bit over the top, and their ultimate goals and views were not exactly clear to anyone, probably even them.

Who made you an expert on Rage's motives anyway?"

Preaching Chomsky whilst signed to a major label is hypocrisy at the highest level. It's pseudo-communism because they were using it as a ploy to increase sales.

I absolutely love the "Who made you expert on....?" argument. My opinion must be wrong because it contradicts yours, right?

Posted by Liam on Friday, 04.4.08 @ 15:58pm


Axis of Justice? This just a money making scheme as well I suppose?
I believe these guys were genuine.

Posted by Luke on Saturday, 04.5.08 @ 14:15pm


I really don't see how Axis of Love made a blind bit of difference to the fact that Morello is a hypocritical bag of crap. It was of no expense to him, the band or the label, and actually got him a pretty big amount of exposure (not that he needed it).

Still makes no difference to the fact that they preached communist values while they were signed to a major.

Posted by Liam on Saturday, 04.5.08 @ 14:27pm


So Liam, let's say RATM didn't sign to Sony or any other major label; would you then like them? Like would you be sympathetic to what they were fighting for and would you enjoy the music etc?

Posted by Luke on Tuesday, 04.8.08 @ 10:42am


please, for the love of all that is good and holy, no! i honestly can't understand what could possibly be appealing about rage's music. it's basically screaming over weirdass amelodic guitar scratches. and bad catch phrases (five sided fistagon?) it's not musical. it's not appealing. it's not good just because it's political. they're just awful.

Posted by willay on Tuesday, 04.22.08 @ 22:49pm


I hear no screaming, and the assertion that it's "not musical" is good for a laugh. Ask any musician whether he or she thinks dissonance isn't music and you'll get a similar response.

Posted by William on Tuesday, 04.22.08 @ 23:02pm


Personally, I agree with willay, especially when it comes to politics. Music and politics need to live each other alone. But I also find nothing special about Rage Against the Machine's music. The only that redeems them to me is the fact that I like what some of them did with Chris Cornell in Audioslave.

Posted by Metalsmith on Wednesday, 04.23.08 @ 16:58pm


of course they should be in morello changed the way we heard guitar and they were one of the first bands to mix rap/hip hop nad rock together

Posted by the pac on Sunday, 06.1.08 @ 17:16pm


ok i see all these people, saying "blah blah theyre signed to a major label! they is teh fakeness!!!11one!1 They is hypocrites." In an interview Tom Morello says: "Would Noam Chomsky object to his works being sold at Barnes & Noble? No, because it's where people buy books." So true, so true. Tom can shred also, its not all just crazy effects my man, i see good examples up there. Really, actually take a good listen to them, and if its not your cup of tea, dont bother with it anymore.

Posted by LAWLZ! on Wednesday, 06.11.08 @ 13:38pm


No, I see people saying "they're a latent bunch of hypocrites who were only ever in it for the money," and things to that effect.

Absolutely loving the Chomsky comparison. I could tell Morello was arrogant aswell as hypocritical, but that just confirmed it.

Posted by Liam on Wednesday, 06.11.08 @ 13:53pm


Gunnin' down Yo family..... Wit' a pocket full of shells !!!

Posted by Joe-Skee on Wednesday, 06.11.08 @ 14:58pm


"In an interview Tom Morello says: "Would Noam Chomsky object to his works being sold at Barnes & Noble? No, because it's where people buy books.""-LAWLZ!

A better analogy would be, "Would Noam Chomsky sign an exclusive deal with B&N for the purpose of marketing his books?" And the answer is no, he would not. Sony is not a store, it is a publisher and a marketer.

Posted by William on Wednesday, 06.11.08 @ 16:32pm


Isn't SIR Mick jagger the same person who sing Street fighting man?
The Sex Pistols are touring i did not think it was an anarchist idea to make money with old work.

By the way Brad Wilk said he does not care about the political aim of the band and that he was there because of the music and I think that he is right and that we should keep judging their sound and not their personnalities or the way they sell their work.

Posted by roméo on Thursday, 06.12.08 @ 02:50am


Mick Jagger wasn't a Sir when he first sang "Street Fighting Man," and as much as I wish the guy would retire some time soon, he's not quite up there with RATM. I'm not going to deny that The Sex Pistols have been hypocritical, but a bloated reunion tour doesn't quite match RATM's signing to a major.

To try and ignore such monumental hypocrisy displayed by the group (especially Morello) would be absolutely impossible.

Posted by Liam on Thursday, 06.12.08 @ 04:02am


Rage should get in no doubt about it. They had a unique, original sound and were at the front of their era in rock for many years and albums.

Haha, I remember hearing "Killing In the Name Of" when I was like 7 years old and it scared the crap out of me. Now, thought, it's one of the best songs from the early 90's.

Posted by Mountaineer on Tuesday, 07.15.08 @ 13:42pm


Rage is my favorite band ever and i dont agree with what they say but its great music. They won two Grammy awards, every one of there 5 cds went platinum and they mastered the mixture of rap and rock you can not deny there succsess wether you like them or not.Also they had a cover cd and all the songs they covered became more popular than they originals. they also had at least 3 hits on each cd and were the most popular band in the country from late 96 to early 99

Posted by Bob on Saturday, 08.9.08 @ 22:53pm


Don't you guys get it? They protest because the can!

Posted by Muzach on Thursday, 10.2.08 @ 22:11pm


er...because they can. not because of the can.

Posted by Muzach on Thursday, 10.2.08 @ 22:13pm


Definitely! RATM is incredible. All their members are great at what they do. Tom is a very innovative guitarist with his experimentation with pedals and the whammy bar. For example, his solo in Sleep Now In The Fire is him just using the feedback from his amp and bending it with his whammy bar. Who would think to do that? Their drummer Brad Wilk is very talented and is always original with his drumming. Tim Commerford is an awesome bassist too. Zack de la Rocha is an awesome singer with very deep lyrics. RATM is incredible.

Posted by Joey on Thursday, 10.9.08 @ 12:27pm


Forgot to mention.......Tom's effects aren't always just pedals. In some of his songs he actually used a pencil, and just tapped the strings of his guitar with it to create the desired effect. Another song he used a wrench and slid across the strings for the desired effect.

Don't you call that innovative?

Posted by Joey on Thursday, 10.23.08 @ 14:43pm


Innovative?! If that's innovative then so is farting into a microphone.

Posted by Fubbo on Thursday, 10.23.08 @ 18:03pm


>>If you're gonna say that ratm are a bunch of hypocrites, do your research first. Also, Zach is incredibly well versed in marxist theory, which is something most of you idiots dont even understand.<<

Oh please, the only ones that need to do research are yourself and the band. They purport to tear down the hypocrisies and tyrannies of capitalism, but in the same hand they attempt to perpetuate the Golden Calf status of figures like Che Guevarra as a noble freedom fighter, who in reality sent many innocents to firing squads and concentration camps.
Guanahacabibes; why don't you take your own advice and do some research.

Posted by Cody on Saturday, 11.8.08 @ 16:41pm


>>and they were one of the first bands to mix rap/hip hop nad rock together<<


I think Aerosmith/RunDMC, Living Colour, the Beastie Boys and others would disagree.

Posted by Cody on Saturday, 11.8.08 @ 16:46pm


An underated band.

Posted by Mike on Tuesday, 11.11.08 @ 09:37am


1.compromise 2.brutality 3.conformity 4.ignorance 5.submission 6.assimilation 7.hypocrisy 8.the elite

Posted by king floyd on Friday, 11.21.08 @ 20:26pm


All of which are American dreams.

Posted by denyo on Saturday, 11.22.08 @ 12:44pm


I'm the 100th person to comment on Rage Aganist the Machine. It's such an honor.

Posted by Mike on Monday, 11.24.08 @ 14:19pm


What a stupid, clunky, unnecessary name. Screw them!! They should have just called themselves either "Rage Against" or "The Machine" or better yet, "The Fags"

Posted by Gorgon on Saturday, 12.27.08 @ 10:05am


''The Machine'' is the stupiest name for a band,that i have heard recently,Gorgon.

Posted by S.R on Friday, 01.16.09 @ 18:53pm


Worst band of all time. There I said it.

Posted by Randy on Wednesday, 01.21.09 @ 09:49am


90% people will disagree with you there.

Posted by RATM rocks on Monday, 02.23.09 @ 00:57am


I honestly think Rage Against the Machine will be inducted within their first couple of years eligible. They definitely have innovation and influence in spades, plus Tom Morello is one of the most original (and delightfully throwback) guitarist of the 90s

Posted by Jonny on Tuesday, 02.24.09 @ 00:11am


I love the music but they are hypocrites to the highest extent. Signed to a major label, make music videos and put them on TV, allow their music to be edited in order for it to receive airtime, sell overpriced concert tickets, sell CD's, own cars, allow their music to be put onto mass produced games like Guitar Hero and edited once again......not to mention when you open the Renegades CD, in the sleeve it says "you are not a slave" on a dollar bill, that's funny, because I literally spent 14.99 to buy the CD 5 minutes prior and RATM now has my money.

Posted by Chris on Thursday, 02.26.09 @ 13:57pm


I love the music but they are hypocrites to the highest extent. (etc.)

Posted by Chris on Thursday, 02.26.09 @ 13:57pm
--------------------------------------------------
Are they really anymore hypocritical than so many others down the line who've either done something like this, or at least suggested something along these lines?

Lennon/Yoko, MC5, Billy Bragg, Rage - At some point or another they've said the same "power to the people" line, while charging plenty of moolah to do so. If you ever get a chance, check out the video/dvd/whatever, caleed "Message to Love". It's about the 1970 Isle of Wight festival. About halfway through, Joan Baez gives an awesome explanantion of why kids should revolt against the idea of paying for concerts, yet at the same time notes you should pay to see her. She's put on the spot, and it's a gem of a comeback she uses to try and get around the jam she's in!

Ah, how sweet it is to have your cake & eat it too!

Posted by Cheesecrop on Thursday, 02.26.09 @ 16:51pm


Chris on Thursday, 02.26.09 @ 13:57pm
-----------------------------------------
Matter of fact, I think I wrote something about this a couple months ago on the Def Leppard site, partially regarding the same thing (think it was around October - right around the time St. Jimmy & the Coven fans were sweeping across the site). If you find yourself w/a free minute & your interested...

Don't feel so bad about Rage's hypocritical end though - there only mining a tried & true way to catch the public's attention.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Thursday, 02.26.09 @ 16:57pm


It's kind of strange that people always use the argument that RAM is using a major label like Sony to get their message out to a large audience. What about all of the musicians who were able to get their message out by starting their OWN labels (Dead Kennedys, Crass, Zappa, etc.). A major label doesn't aid a message, it hinders it.
And what about their dichotomy of message and activism. Only a true coward would work a mob into a frenzy, only to run away instead of staying to fight. Even if the band as a whole don't agree with the message, don't you think that those members who do should at least back it? That's why a label like Sony doesn't mind if RAM claims to be anti-capitalism or against a certain political party. The fact that Rage doesn't do anything about it makes them seem less serious, less of a threat, and fosters political apathy. Instead of evoking the visage of Che Guevara to sell records and t-shirts, they should take a lesson from a life ended in a struggle for freedom.

Posted by Dub Housing on Tuesday, 03.3.09 @ 14:10pm


To me, any band which goes out there preaching and shoving their beliefs in people's faces should not be signed up to 'the machine' they keep complaining about. They were offered plenty of record deals, for me the biggest problem isn't that they initially went with Epic Records but that they stuck with them. Look at it like this. For every record they sold about the state of capitalist society, they were giving Sony a share of those profits, they were choosing to give them money, they were helping and aiding that which they got so much publicity slagging off. I think it was a mainly a publicity stunt, don't get me wrong, I think those were their beliefs, but I think they realised that the best way to get publicity is to be controversial and they ran all the way to the bank with it. All that money that they handed to Sony from every record sale etc they did knowingly. They could have moved labels or created their own once they were established and had the attention they needed. Or they could have been even better and just gone with an indie and with views such as theirs they still wouldn't have stayed anonymous for long. I don't like their music or agree with many of their views anyway but what gets me most wound up is the money they got from being hypocrites and selling out

Posted by Laura on Monday, 04.6.09 @ 15:54pm


comment6,

Posted by avrille on Monday, 07.20.09 @ 06:04am


comment4

Posted by anatole on Tuesday, 07.28.09 @ 17:19pm


excuse me.
those shits should not n wont be there.
they stagnated rock with that shit rap.
n they are not even much a rock band
they suck

Posted by liv4rockk on Saturday, 08.1.09 @ 07:53am


Orginally posted by liv4rockk
"excuse me.
those shits should not n wont be there.
they stagnated rock with that shit rap.
n they are not even much a rock band
they suck"

Tom Morello is a guitar god. He did things with a guitar no one had ever done before. Also WHO CARES if they intergrated Rap with Rock. They did it well and the influenced many bands that came after them. They have the inovation, influnce, activist message, and they generally kick ass. They do little but suck.

Posted by Gassman on Saturday, 08.1.09 @ 10:57am


I just feel like planting a little seed for a debate: Rage Against the Machine are nü-metal.

Posted by Dude Man on Wednesday, 09.2.09 @ 09:50am


I just feel like planting a little seed for a debate: Rage Against the Machine are nü-metal.

Posted by Dude Man on Wednesday, 09.2.09 @ 09:50am
--------------------------------------------------
I would say no. They arrived on the scene before nu-metal, their first record coming out in 92. They definitely fit what would be loosely termed rap-rock, though even then not many acts, outside of maybe Faith No More and Anthrax, we're attempting to employ rap in any way in their material (though I don't know how you personally classify the Beatsie Boys - rap or rock?).

They we're very novel at the time, and a lot of straight rap fans did sit up and take notice, as well as rock fans. Compared to:

Grunge (Nirvana/PJ/ etc.)
Industrial (NIN, Ministry, etc.)
Punk (if you wish) (Green Day, Rancid)
Metal (White Zombie, Pantera)
Britpop (Blur, Oasis)

they very much stood out from the pack.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Wednesday, 09.2.09 @ 18:30pm


Well, there were other metal bands that were using rap around the same time of Anthrax and Faith No More. Suicidal Tendencies were borderline rap and Biohazard were openly using rap influences, but those and are usually classed as crossover thrash. And Rise era Bad Brains(thier metal phase) kind of sounds like Korn one year before Korn. I consider all rap metal under the "nu metal" label. RATM were nu metal.

I have problems classing Beastie Boys(I'm actually a fan of thiers). They did start out as a hardcore punk band and they were the most rock influenced hip hop group. I really don't know where to put them.

Posted by Dude Man on Wednesday, 09.2.09 @ 20:30pm


Dude - First you say "I just feel like planting a little seed for a debate" when you state that Rage is nu-metal.

Then you say "I consider all rap metal under the nu metal label. RATM were nu metal."


Why didn't you just come out and say this in the first place? I was under the assumption you really wanted to hear a differing opinion. If you had your mind made up already, why didn't you say so? I wouldn't have wasted my time w/that posting! (lol)

Posted by Cheesecrop on Thursday, 09.3.09 @ 06:10am


Cheesecrop, you have to realize that Dude Man is just trying to draw reactions. He says outrageous things to try and prove how smart he is, but the fact of the matter is that he has his head up his ass.

Exhibit A: Black Sabbath are a Christain band.

Exhibit B: The Ramones were not the first punk band.

I could continue, but you get the point.

Posted by Ralph on Thursday, 09.3.09 @ 07:12am


Black Sabbath had crosses all over the stage and sang about satan being something to fear.

The Ramones are the most influencial punk band, but not the first punk band. The Stooges, MC5, New York Dolls, etc. all had albums out before them.

"He says outrageous things to try and prove how smart he is, but the fact of the matter is that he has his head up his ass."-Ralph

I take offense to that.

Posted by Dude Man on Thursday, 09.3.09 @ 09:14am


They are, without a doubt, the worst that has ever happened to music. Pop-punk/emo/grunge/alternative/industrial/nu-metal/whatever is all the same crap and it has sent rock intoa dark age from which it has yet to recover

Posted by Renaldo on Thursday, 11.12.09 @ 02:39am


They are, without a doubt, the worst that has ever happened to music. Pop-punk/emo/grunge/alternative/industrial/nu-metal/whatever is all the same crap and it has sent rock intoa dark age from which it has yet to recover

Posted by Renaldo on Thursday, 11.12.09 @ 02:39am
--------------------------------------------------
Standard issue griping over the changes in new music.

Recently I was reading an article online that tossed out the stereotypical 'rock is dead" crapola. One guy wrote in, and he put it better than anyone I've heard so far. He noted, quite correctly, that people's viewpoints on everything change over time, so that you will always see things from multiple p.o.v. over the course of your lifetime.

This same thing could have been written about the 1970's,from a 1950's viewpoint: "With the overemphasis on senseless screaming and lack of any subtlety in musical vision, artists such as Led Zeppelin, Alice Cooper, etc., have ruined the great art form brought to such heights by Elvis, Little Richard, etc. Now we have pathetic artiste's like David Bowie, Elton John, etc., who, unlike their forebearers, must resort to silly costumes and lightshows to fool us that they are in fact the honest to goodness heirs to the throne of Chuck Berry, Ricky Nelson, & Bo Diddley. Oh, how the mighty have fallen".

See how easy that was? I made this up in the middle of the night while I was sleep deprived. CATCH ME IN THE DAYTIME HOURS & I'LL KILL IT ALL!

Posted by Cheesecrop on Thursday, 11.12.09 @ 03:28am


>>Also, Zach is incredibly well versed in marxist theory, which is something most of you idiots dont even understand. Even if you dont agree with it, you have to acknowledge and appreciate the sheer intellectual substance of the subject matter.<<



Exactly what is there to "appreciate" about a bunch of ignorant, misinformed hypocritical tools glorifying a political ideology responsible for the deaths of 100 million people and the oppression of millions more?

Posted by Marxist Hypocrisy 101 on Tuesday, 01.5.10 @ 02:56am


>>In an interview Tom Morello says: "Would Noam Chomsky object to his works being sold at Barnes & Noble? No, because it's where people buy books." So true, so true.<<



That's not true at all, that's just more double standarding bullshit. YES, it's hypocritical of them and YES it's hypocritical that propaganda-spewing asshat Chomsky. They both have an anti-Intellectual property viewpoint despite the fact that they make millions off of IPs and they're both outspoken against the upper clas despite the fact that they've made themselves rich off of IPs.


It's not difficult to grasp their flagrant hypocrisy, it's just that you conformist sheep refuse to acknowledge it. Because you're a brainless joiner tool.

Posted by Marxist Hypocrisy 101 on Tuesday, 01.5.10 @ 03:01am


The major label thing is pretty sad, and I think if they had gone the indie way and then gotten big more people would have taken them seriously. I suppose Morello's effects could be considered innovative, but other than that I'll have to say no to their induction until some influence starts to develop, then maybe. Great band, even if they are hypocrites. I think they will be inducted.

Posted by Sam on Wednesday, 02.17.10 @ 21:18pm


The major label thing is pretty sad, and I think if they had gone the indie way and then gotten big more people would have taken them seriously. I suppose Morello's effects could be considered innovative, but other than that I'll have to say no to their induction until some influence starts to develop, then maybe. Great band, even if they are hypocrites. I think they will be inducted.

Posted by Sam on Wednesday, 02.17.10 @ 21:18pm


"As a member of RATM Morello helped pioneer the fusion of heavy metal and rap, adding impassioned political invective to create a musical Molotov Cocktail that shook nineties rock to its foundation." - ed

Influential? Possibly. Great band? Yes, but I think Anthrax, Public Enemy and Faith No More would all like a word with GW about the pioneering of rap-metal.

Posted by Sam on Wednesday, 05.5.10 @ 21:47pm


Innovative?! If that's innovative then so is farting into a microphone.

Posted by Fubbo on Thursday, 10.23.08 @ 18:03pm

Well since Pet Sounds (the most overrated album of all time) is considered innovative simply because animal noises were recorded, I suppose anything goes. So yes Morello could be considered innovative.

Anyhow, that's my last Rage comment for now.

Posted by Sam on Thursday, 05.6.10 @ 22:06pm


i'm from indonesia .... weelll ... if RATM didnt sign with sony and didnt show up in MTV ..... i will never knew about malcolm x public enemy tom paine afrika bambaataa james brown parrliament and funkadelic

Posted by rony on Saturday, 07.31.10 @ 18:55pm


chief sitting bull and whole native american story (before watched renegades of funk vid in mtv i always thought native american finally live happily ever after with the pilgrims)

nat turner mumia abu jamal leonard peltier case the whole story about black panther party marcus garvey rigoberta manchu cesar chavez

maybe u have to know my whole idea about america before i saw renegades of funk, in late night show on MTV, its all about britney spears backstreet boys guns and roses and .... michael jackson.

Posted by rony on Saturday, 07.31.10 @ 18:57pm


sad but true but its not your fugazi or dead kennedys or minor threat or the clash that introduce me with the "whole package idea of western civilization" ....

Posted by rony on Saturday, 07.31.10 @ 18:59pm



There is no doubt that RATM are fantastic musicians, but their hypocrisy overshadows their talent. They preach how Americans are the murderers of the world, yet their symbol is Che Guevara, who was reponsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent Cubans, but you'll never hear about his crimes in Zach De la Rocha's lyrics. If they hate America so much, the same country that made them rich, the same country that lets them speak out against us without being persecuted, why don't they just move to Cuba or North Korea, so they can live out their communist paradise? As far as I'm concerned, the only thing they deserve is a good swift kick in the ass out of this country!

Posted by Chris on Tuesday, 08.10.10 @ 02:39am


Yes Chris, Cuba was a capitalist paradise under Bautista. How in the world did those 4 or 5 rebels (including Che) manage to turn Cuba commie?!

Posted by Paul in KY on Tuesday, 08.10.10 @ 06:09am


I agree with Chris, Paul (although the major label upsets people more), but you're comment was a little confusing. Were you agreeing or disagreeing with him? Personally, I've gone from thinking Rage should definitely be inducted to leaning "no" to leaning "yes" over the last 9 months or so, all while being a fan.

Posted by Sam on Thursday, 08.12.10 @ 17:07pm


All of your egos are over inflated - take a load off and take a crap. Then take a deep breathe and your big heads will feel better. Hopefully soon you will think clearly and your mouths will become untwisted.

de la Rocha

Posted by de la Rocha on Tuesday, 09.7.10 @ 15:23pm


I like them sometimes

Posted by mrxyzomg on Thursday, 09.30.10 @ 00:11am


Great band.

Their politics are laughably neïve, but in America freedom applies to everyone, including fools.

Politics aside, there was intensity to Rage that was absolutely overpowering. Sure, they limited themselves to politically correct topics, but few bands have ever approached the primal fury they achieved. They tapped into a power that most bands simply never reach.

Tom Morello is an amazing, innovative, influential guitar player. There are a lot of folks who call it “noise,” but I have a suspicion that in most cases, they’re simply closing their minds to something that they can’t grasp. Guitar has historically been used as a melodic instrument. Even rhythm guitar players are for the most part use chords and single note progressions. Tom pioneered the use of the guitar as percussion. Sure, he’s not the first, nor the only guy, to ever bang on his guitar, but he was the first to make that percussive style the fundamental core of his playing style and do so in a successful band. Much like greats like BB King, Tom can express more with 2 or 3 notes than all of the various prog bands can trying to cram 50 triplets into the same space.

Sadly, most of the acts that he influenced lacked his taste, but you could say the same thing about the masterbatory wankers who played overbearing Bach-inspired sweeping arpeggios while following in the footsteps of Randy Rhoads. When Randy did it, it was brilliant, new, innovative, etc. But not everybody had his exquisite taste. They may have been largely mediocre players, but there were legions of percussive rap-rock and nu-metal players following in Morello’s footsteps, much to the horror of their parents with their more orthodox 50’s, 60’s, & 70’s tastes.

I suspect Rage are probably pretentious, hypocritical fools as people, but I also think they’re absolutely Hall of Famers as a band.

Love ‘em or hate ‘em, I suspect we all pretty much agree that The Committee will put them in. When they do, for a change, it will be an honor that the band truly deserves.

Posted by Ralph on Friday, 10.15.10 @ 08:31am


"Sadly, most of the acts that he influenced lacked his taste, but you could say the same thing about the masterbatory wankers who played overbearing Bach-inspired sweeping arpeggios while following in the footsteps of Randy Rhoads. When Randy did it, it was brilliant, new, innovative, etc."

(Applauds.) Eddie Van Halen and Ritchie Blackmore were also using brilliant and innovative techniques and they also inspired legions. Sure, guitar playing got a bit self-indulgent thanks to those two, but even though there were dull noodlers in their wake there were guys like Randy doing new and creative things based on those two (yes, Randy apparently knew Eddie, so it's widely suspected that they influenced each other.) Randy's classical stylings can be traced back to Ritchie (he invented the neo-classical thing, and also laid out the blueprint for shredding.) Tom Morello also loves Ritchie. Which brings me to Tom himself... I actually enjoy his style, though I can see why others wouldn't.

As for the band themselves: They weren't the first to do rap-rock (I'd trace that back to Red Hot Chili Peppers, with the second-in-line being either Beastie Boys or that Aerosmith/Run DMC remake of "Walk This Way.") Nor did they invent rap-metal, which has been suggested here (that honor would go back to Anthrax' "I'm The Man" or Faith No More, with the latter really putting it out there in the mainstream with "Epic." It was then kept in the mainstream with the Anthrax and Public Enemy re-make of "Bring the Noise", and I don't know how succesful Rage would've been without that.) So, they weren't as original as some people on here are making them out to be, but they did put their own touch on rap-metal and make it into something exclusively (people may have been using those effects before Morello, but nobody was doing so within a rap-rock/rap-metal context.) As Ralph noted, they did for better or worse influence a great deal of nu-metal (alongside Faith No More); for examples, the guitarists from Linkin Park or Korn were using that same straightforward, going-for-the-gut rhythm guitar style, and obviously rap-rock and nu-metal both became huge trends in the late 90's and early 2000's. A lot of people feel that when it became majorly commercialized, the spirit of it got dumbed down and/or watered down for the sheep; Rage seems to get blamed quite a bit for this, as evidenced by their #9 placement on the "Great Bands that Helped Inadvertently Ruin Metal" list by MetalSucks (a name full of irony, by the way.) http://www.metalsucks.net/2010/03/16/9-rage-against-the-machine/

Despite that, they still deserve credit, as it's a little unfair to hold that against them (you can bet The Beatles, Metallica, Alice in Chains, Prince and some of the other greats have had plenty of negative influence.) So even though they may be a bit off on their politics, and probably didn't accomplish much with their activism and messages, they're musically top-notch. I think they'll be inducted at some point, though it may not be right away.

Posted by Sam on Monday, 10.18.10 @ 11:24am


NOW TESTIFY!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by Mike on Friday, 11.5.10 @ 08:38am


Anyone who shits on RATM is conservative, fascist twat who doesn't understand what their music is about & is just looking for a reason to piss off anyone who doesn't agree with them.

Posted by ed on Sunday, 12.19.10 @ 13:20pm


Well I don't like RATM much and last time I checked I wasn't attending a neo nazi gathering. Maybe if Tom Morello could stop abusing Guitar effects I could listen to them without getting bored.

Posted by GFW on Sunday, 12.19.10 @ 14:08pm


Political persuasion doesn't make Zach de la Rocha's voice less annoying.

Posted by DarinRG on Sunday, 12.19.10 @ 15:09pm


I actually like them, but I can understand why other people don't (musically speaking).

Posted by Chalkie on Sunday, 12.19.10 @ 16:24pm


I appreciate their message and musicianship, it really just comes down to the voice standing in the way of me enjoying them.

Posted by DarinRG on Sunday, 12.19.10 @ 17:27pm


Who cares? Pearl Jam sucks, I used to be the biggest fan around of this band, and then I grew up and did the math, instead of continuing to pretending "I don't want to be rich and famous," when rock n roll fans hate on bands just because its cool and don't really inspire or care about there fans. You are no different than the bands you criticise, hypocrite.

Posted by Old PJ Fan on Saturday, 01.22.11 @ 22:57pm


Haters will hate. I don't mind though, because every band and every genre of music has people for and against it. So if you want to hate, be my guest, you're not changing anything in my point of view.

Posted by Sean on Monday, 04.25.11 @ 19:28pm


Its kinda cool how they took Afrikaa Bambatta's Renegades of Funk and completly changed it a good way

Posted by Mike on Friday, 04.29.11 @ 10:09am


People say that Rage Against the Machine has no talent and that all they are is a screamer and a guitarist that can only use sound effects and thats it. Well instead of me ranting on about my opinion on why think Rage Against the Machine is a great band I'll just say this: all of Rage Against the Machine's albums have gone at least platinum in RIAA ratings with there first two albums reaching Triple Platinum. That is 3,000,000 more people listening to their music than the music you play in your mother's basement

Posted by Robert on Thursday, 06.30.11 @ 12:54pm


Meh. I like them enough. Used to like them a lot when I was younger. Kinda feels like they never reached their potential though. Basically, I don't care either way if they get inducted or not.

Posted by Chalkie on Thursday, 06.30.11 @ 13:24pm


discount Abilify cheap 50 mg
- http://cheapestpriceforabilify.weebly.com/

Posted by smoopayIdonna on Saturday, 10.29.11 @ 17:19pm


Hell no! As much as I loathe the Rock 'n Roll Hall of Fame, they'd gain a crumb of respect from me if they never induct these whiny pansies. As it's been accurately pointed out, if Rage against the Machine really believed what they said, they wouldn't have signed up with a corporate record label (Epic Records, owned by Sony). I don't buy the whole "it's so they can expose their messages to a wider audience" argument. I can't take a band seriously that says they oppose corporations and get their checks from a corporate-owned music label.

RATM is really nothing more than a poor man's Dead Kennedys (another band I intensely hate), just with a bigger pulpit to spew their opinions. I can't stand any bands or singers who use their music as a platform for their political/social views. Newsflash, sheeple: you're being paid to sing and play instruments, not preach to the choir. It doesn't whether they argue from a con-servative or a lie-bral position, they're all a bunch of

Rage against the Machine? More like Rage against the Septic Tank, considering how shitty their music is. To quote my good friend, their music is a diarrhetic fart festival. If you seriously want to change the world, do something constructive about it. Don't make my ears bleed with your obnoxious music.

Posted by Zach on Wednesday, 11.9.11 @ 20:39pm


I always thought Dead Kennedys were alot better than RATM, even if you don't care about politics you can still enjoy it, plus they stayed true to their ideals (well maybe not when Jello left but oh well)
But with RATM... no. Whiney and they go against what they say. How can you "Rage Against The Machine" when you're working for it?

Posted by GFW on Thursday, 11.10.11 @ 11:36am


I've never cared enough about RATM to get any sort of emotion worked up about them either way, but they did always strike me as hypocrites.

I agree with GFW that the Dead Kennedys were much better, never been a fan of them either, though. (However, unlike RATM they have quite a few songs I like)

"I can't stand any bands or singers who use their music as a platform for their political/social views. "

I don't think most people do.

"It doesn't whether they argue from a con-servative or a lie-bral position, they're all a bunch of"

con-servative/lie-bral. I like that!

Posted by Tahvo Parvianen on Thursday, 11.10.11 @ 13:29pm


THe occasional political song is okay, but I don't want to listen to a guy/girl who'se library consists of "obama/cameron you bastard stop nicking my money"

Posted by GFW on Thursday, 11.10.11 @ 14:16pm


Thanks, Tahvo! Feel free to use my nicknames for conservatives and liberals whenever you get involved in a political debate. I find that those whose ideas stray away from the two-headed conservative/liberal monster are usually the best.

But back to music, I don't see any constructive reason why Rage against the Septic Tank (my nickname for RATM) should be inducted into any hall of fame. The Beastie Boys and Anthrax successfully mixed rock and rap before Rage against the Septic Tank and did a far better job. The Dead Kennedys (not favorites of mine, but I have to give the devils their due) were doing politically-oriented anthems before RATM and never strayed away from their rebellious roots. Like most '90s cookie-cutter rock bands (i.e., Blues Traveler, Matchbox 20, Green Day, etc.), Rage against the Septic Tank didn't add anything fresh or exciting to music and were only following in the footsteps of others. Besides starting the annoying fashion trend of bored, sheep-like high-school/college kids wearing Che Guevara T-shirts (has nothing to with music and only reinforces their stupidity), I can't think of anything else notable that Rage against the Septic Tank ever did.

Posted by Zach on Tuesday, 11.22.11 @ 20:32pm


The Beastie Boys and Anthrax successfully mixed rock and rap before Rage against the Septic Tank and did a far better job. The Dead Kennedys (not favorites of mine, but I have to give the devils their due) were doing politically-oriented anthems before RATM and never strayed away from their rebellious roots.

Posted by Zach on Tuesday, 11.22.11 @ 20:32pm
--------------------------------------------------
I might disagree w/you, if only slightly, on this one. The Beasties clearly started it. However, they were a rock band that strayed over to hip-hop, & then went back to rock in order to grab some familiar riffs. They were looking to sell hip-hop to rock fans.

Yes, I am aware that Anthrax added something that resembled raps into the mix. The Velvet Underground were doing something along the lines of spoken word material 20 years prior, but I've never heard anyone say they were a direct influence on hip-hop. Same here.

For all of it, Rage has a genuine rock band dynamic going on. You may not care for the political end, but from the music spectrum this is a much more organic sound that the Beasties or Anthrax ever came close to achieving. This is a band that could drop the hip-hop element (if it chose to) and still create a powerful rock sound (as the best stuff w/Audioslave showed).

Don't know whether this gives them a ticket to Cleveland, but from a strictly rock perspective, it does matter.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Wednesday, 11.23.11 @ 07:25am


Actually cheese, the punk aspect of Fight For Your Right To Party is what made the Beasties hate that song. They considered themselves hip-hoppers first and foremost, but I think that song did help make possible some of their later work like Sabotage and No Sleep Til Brooklyn.

As for RATM, DeLaRocha inducted Patti Smith, and did it while slamming then-President Bush and being condescendingly liberal in the process. Wenner's crowd will happily welcome them in due course.

Posted by Philip on Wednesday, 11.23.11 @ 14:10pm


Nirvana sucks. RATM are waaay more talented and better.

Posted by Ale on Wednesday, 12.7.11 @ 01:44am


Without wishing to get too far into this whole thing, I still say yes but with reservations like the ones pointed out above. The mixing rap with metal, you have Anthrax and Public Enemy, however Rage's sound WAS different from either of them or the Beasties (albeit I believe they have cited both the Beasties and PE as influences; I think I once heard them described as the missing link between PE and The Clash). However, this has hardly been the only scam in rock music:

-Millionare John Lennon singing "Imagine no possessions". This one often gets overlooked.
-Damon Albarn and his fake working class shtick which so annoyed some of his contemporaries, helped along the way by Justine Frischmmann.
-Let's not even go into John Lydon flogging butter... oh.

Point is, while some of Rage's conduct has been dubious, there are many rockers who haven't stuck to their principles.

Posted by Sam on Sunday, 12.18.11 @ 18:48pm


Oh and two better guitar players become eligible that year, in Adam Jones and Bernard Butler.

Posted by Sam on Sunday, 12.18.11 @ 18:52pm


Sam, you make some good points about rockers who can't stick to their principles and constantly contradict themselves. Regarding John Lennon, let's not forget that he's the same guy who preached for love and peace (an unattainable goal, because there are too many factors that cancel out the existence of world peace), yet he never showed love for his son Julian and first wife Cynthia. While I generally prefer to separate the artist from the person when it comes to any form of art, I can't excuse the fact that Lennon's choice to leave his first wife and son and not support them contradicted what he tried to preach (more like try to brainwash).

Phillip, it doesn't surprise me that the brainwashed fools in Rage against the Septic Tank used an induction ceremony as an excuse to spout off their political views. While I never voted for Dubya and would never call myself a supporter of his, there was no excuse for Rage against the Septic Tank to make a diatribe against him when they inducted Patti Smith.

I laugh at the legions of brainwashed zombies who think Tom Morello and his compatriots are some kind of geniuses who have all the answers to the world's problems. There's no place for political brainwashing in music, regardless of what side of the spectrum they fall on. I just want to enjoy the lyrics and the instruments, thank you very much. All political ideologies are intended to be consumed by weak, easily-manipulatable people who can't think for themselves and need to cling all their hopes and dreams on a political party. The bands and singers who insert these messages into their songs are just toeing the line for their masters.

Still, I can't help but think how hilarious it is that Rage against the Machine supports the very same machine they claim to despise so much. The whole "they just wanted to expose their messages to a wider audience" talking point doesn't fly with me. If you truly believe in what you're saying, you should live by it and promote your messages in an honest manner. A band like Rage against the Septic Tank shouldn't be listened to, since nothing they say is of any importance or relevance. I can't think of a single noteworthy they contributed to music and society in general (and no, turning Che Guevara into a fashion industry doesn't count). The only future RATM has is in bargain bins and trivia books.

Posted by Zach on Saturday, 12.31.11 @ 23:37pm


If RATM isn'nt inducted into the Hall of Fame than I dont know who should be

Posted by Whatever on Sunday, 01.15.12 @ 10:31am


These haters are arm chair thinkers who can't do shit.

Posted by RKP on Wednesday, 01.18.12 @ 04:20am


Hmmm. Looks like the RATM fan posse have begun playing the "hater card" and have also begun resorting to insults. This always happens when a fan group has nothing of substance left to discuss. More insults and bottomless accusations may follow shortly...

Posted by Tahvo Parvianen on Wednesday, 01.18.12 @ 09:05am


unlike you, rxp, who is capable of so much!

Posted by GFW on Wednesday, 01.18.12 @ 11:38am


Wouldn't let me post. F U I won't do what you tell me. BS

Posted by booooo on Saturday, 02.4.12 @ 10:32am


It will be interesting t see how the Hall handles Soundgarden/Rage Against the Machine/Audioslave.
Rage was an innovator their energy was insane live. Morello used the guitar unlike anyone(anyone successful) atleast. For better or worse they are responsible for the NuMetal movement. Just don't tell the Hall to put them in. they may respond by jumping up and down screaming "Fuk YOU I WON'T DO WHAT YOU TELL ME!"

Posted by krusher on Saturday, 02.4.12 @ 10:33am


Krusher said,

"For better or worse they are responsible for the NuMetal movement."

I wouldn't exactly call that an accomplishment to be proud of. When you consider that nu-metal has unleashed equally worthless bands upon an unsuspecting public (i.e., Korn, Rob Zombie, Limp Bizkit, Godsmack, Linkin Park, etc.), it's not exactly a genre that deserves critical respect or serious attention.

Rage Against the Septic Tank (we should seriously start calling Tom Morello and his braindead butt-buddies that from now on) didn't exactly break any new ground, as I pointed out earlier. Mark my words, in 50 years they'll be a minor footnote in music history.

Posted by Zach on Monday, 02.6.12 @ 20:25pm


If musical excellence is the question for RATM, then they surpass the mark. Like I saw in a previous comment, Morello revolutionizes the guitar, Commerford has the sickest bass lines, Wilk holds the awesomeness together and kills it on the drums, de la Rocha is one of the very few rappers where you can feel the emotion in his rapping. Rage can take an annoying guitar sound, use it, then makes it sound freaking amazing with a killer bassline and awesome drumbeat to back it all up. Rage Against The Machine NEEDS (well they technically need it), but definitely SHOULD be in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. They completely deserve to be in the Hall without a doubt!!

Posted by Sawyer on Sunday, 07.15.12 @ 00:12am


This band deserves to be in the Rock n Roll Hall of fame. I used to not like them but theyve grown into one of my fav bands. You have to listen to their whole catalogue to rate them. Those that say Tom is nothing but effects and couldnt play acoustic and saying that Zach only shouts obviously hasnt heard their cover of beautiful World.

Posted by Jozef on Sunday, 12.2.12 @ 18:12pm


"Mark my words, in 50 years they'll be a minor footnote in music history."

Well, if by that time some combination of EDM and hip hop ends up displacing rock as the default genre of popular music - which is already starting to happen - then most bands on this site will be minor footnotes in music history.

Even then, I think Rage will be remembered more clearly than most comparable bands of their era, not just because of their hip hop and funk leanings, but also because I can't listen to a Tom Morello solo these days without wondering how big of an influence he was on Skrillex.

Posted by Idlewild on Sunday, 11.10.13 @ 16:59pm


Idewild, I believe hip hop already supplanted rock 'n roll as the default genre of popular music at least a decade ago. The verdict is still out on electronic dance music, but since I pay very little attention to what's popular in current music, I don't care enough to debate the point. I'm not concerned with what's popular and what isn't. We're not in high school anymore.

However, I must emphasize that current popularity for any genre or act is never a strong indication of lasting influence and impact. Jazz hasn't been a popular form of music in the U.S.A. since the 1940s, but that hasn't diminished the lasting significance of Louis Armstrong, Duke Ellington, Fats Waller, and other jazz pioneers. Rage Against the Septic Tank released their first album about 21 or so years ago, which is chump change compared to when Louis Armstrong organized his first recording session with his Hot Five band in 1925, which occurred almost 90 years ago (1925, to be exact). There's a lot in jazz, and popular music in general, that may not have occurred without Armstrong's innovations and achievements. Conversely, very little, if anything, would change musically if RATST were wiped off the map completely. Others beat them to the punch with the whole rap-rock/metal crossover. RATST only managed to gain the publicity they did because they managed to find a marketing gimmick and milk it to its extremes, not because of any musical innovations. Had they not created that image, no one would have paid attention to RATST

If Tom Morello (a truly horrific guitarist without any traces of natural ability) did indeed influence Skrillex, then I suppose it's further evidence of the decline of American popular music.

I still stand by my contention that the Septic Tank dwellers will eventually fade into the dust and be forgotten. Meanwhile, the true innovators and legends, from Charlie Parker and Sister Rosetta Tharpe to Link Wray and T. Rex (among others), will always be remembered and honored.

Posted by Zach on Monday, 11.11.13 @ 20:10pm


Zach,

While I admire your enthusiasm for the classic artist of Popular Music. I have to strongly disagree with your assessment of Rage Against the Machine as some kind of minor footnote in music history. In 50 years Rage will still most likely be considered an important band of it's era, and overall one of the more important bands of Popular Music in general.

I am not saying they are the pinnacle of music, but to ignore them is also unnecessary. Fans of music tend to make a huge mistake in putting too much emphasis on who does what first. While that does make an artist innovative it is those artists who spread and reaffirm a concept that generally are influential. Of the four artists you mention (Parker, Tharpe, Wray, and T. Rex), none were actually innovators, they popularized concepts and sounds that had been done already. Tharpe's mainstream crossover appeal on R&B radio is what made her legendary, but she isn't the first Gospel artist to go off the beaten path. Parker was following in Coleman Hawkins footsteps. Link Wray popularized the power chord, he didn't invent it. While Rage wasn't innovative in the merger of Hip-Hop, Funk, and Metal they were most certainly the top act (everyone else either dabbled or was less important).

"If Tom Morello (a truly horrific guitarist without any traces of natural ability)". I rarely find the use of horrific applicable to known musicians (Mrs. Miller from the 60s I would say is an exception). Maybe every once in a blue moon you can use it to describe a period, or a particular song/album of an artists. However Morello is a well respected, and gifted guitarist. Rage was, if nothing else, an incredibly tight group of musicians.

I love the pre-Rock era, more than most, it is just where my taste lie. However current music is just as remarkable and memorable as all that came before it. Does every artist stand the test of time? No, but neither did three of your four examples. They are important, highly regarded, and talented but they aren't well known anymore. Elvis Presley, Bing Crosby, Sinatra, Holiday, Armstrong, and to an extent Jolson have are still well known. And I agree that those kind of decades lasting popularity are essential to greatness. However music now is just as healthy, vibrant, diverse, and amazing as any era before it. And bands from the 80s, 90s, and 2000s will have their key acts remembered and exalted decades from now. At least until Pop music fails as a medium (which I don't see happening anytime soon).

Posted by Chris F. on Tuesday, 11.12.13 @ 16:15pm


Chris F., I wasn't planning on embroiling myself in another debate about the merits of Rage Against the Machine, but Idlewild and you have touched a few nerves with me that I cannot allow to go uncontested.

"In 50 years Rage will still most likely be considered an important band of it's era, and overall one of the more important bands of Popular Music in general. "

The first statement in the above sentence is debatable, but since I detest most 1990s rock music, I'm not interested enough to go on a diatribe about RATM's place in '90s rock.

However, the second statement cannot go unchallenged. What exactly does this band have going for them that gives them the right to rank with the true immortals, including but not limited to:

Al Jolson
Louis Armstrong
Billie Holiday
Frank Sinatra
Bill Monroe
Hank Williams (the first)
Muddy Waters
Elvis Presley
Chuck Berry
Ray Charles
The Beatles
David Bowie
Michael Jackson

All of the above stand at the vanguard of their respective genres, or blur the lines between genres so much that they defy categorization, or both. I see none of that with RATM, an overblown, cliched band that marrIied pseudo-rap with lame guitar effects and tried to pass it off as something innovative and new (Faith No More, Anthrax and The Beastie Boys all combined rap with rock 'n roll before and did it better). Trust me, the only way RATM will ever be ranked among the immortals is if future historians become lazy and decide to rewrite musical history to fit their warped agendas.

"Of the four artists you mention (Parker, Tharpe, Wray, and T. Rex), none were actually innovators, they popularized concepts and sounds that had been done already. Tharpe's mainstream crossover appeal on R&B radio is what made her legendary, but she isn't the first Gospel artist to go off the beaten path. Parker was following in Coleman Hawkins footsteps. Link Wray popularized the power chord, he didn't invent it."

Sister Rosetta Tharpe's crossover appeal isn't the only facet of her career that makes her a significant figure. Her ablity to meld gospel with secular music and be one of the few female recording artists of her generations to write her own music and play an instrument make her stand out that much more. You're selling her way too short. Go read some of my comments on the respective page for Sister Rosetta Tharpe and you'll understand why she is rightfully venerated.

I'm no expert on Charlie Parker or bebop jazz, but claiming that he wasn't innovative is laughable. I recommend you post that remark a jazz message board, like All About Jazz or Sax on the Web, and see what kind of responses you receive.

Ditto with Link Wray. Along with Dick Dale and a few others from the 1950s and early 1960s, he is one of the original rock 'n roll guitar gods and cited as an influence by countless names. I've posted about Wray before, so I'm not going to reiterate the list of his followers. You can peruse it on his respective page.

"They are important, highly regarded, and talented but they aren't well known anymore."

If more people actually cared about preserving musical history and stopped being so ignorant, the four names I mentioned would be household names. As it stands, I'm currently working on exposing the music of the aforementioned to my peers and family so that they will always be remembered. Informed music fans like myself certainly won't forget Bird, Wray, the Sister, or T. Rex.

"And bands from the 80s, 90s, and 2000s will have their key acts remembered and exalted decades from now. At least until Pop music fails as a medium (which I don't see happening anytime soon)."

I certainly won't deny this. Every decade produces its defining acts that will be honored by subsequent generations. However, based on what I've observed, I still don't consider RATM to be on the same plane as their more successful peers from the same timeframe (Nirvana, Radiohead, etc.) I'll leave it to others to determine the lasting power of modern recording acts, as I have little interest in most post-'80s music, aside from some revivalists who are schooled in early rock and pre-rock music and a few unique names. I proudly consider myself a cultural hermit, as I've been exposed to old music since my infancy and naturally grew to love what I didn't experience firsthand. Modern music just doesn't move me like the classics do. I refuse to change my musical tastes just to fit in with what's popular and "hip" now. That mentality reeks of high school freshmen and crowd-following.

"I love the pre-Rock era, more than most, it is just where my taste lie."

I agree with you entirely on this. My musical interests primarily lie in the era spanning from the late 1800s (when the Edison cylinders first became prevalent) up through the early 1960s, before the Beatles exploded onto the scene. I do enjoy plenty of later 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s music, too.

Posted by Zach on Tuesday, 11.12.13 @ 17:44pm


Zach,

"RATM to be on the same plane as their more successful peers from the same timeframe (Nirvana, Radiohead, etc"

I wouldn't rank them as highly as Nirvana or Radiohead. Both of those bands tend to be at the top of anyone talking about 20th century music as a whole. As for Faith No More and Anthrax they more dabbled with Rap than were firmly in the the Rage vein. The Beastie Boys dabbled in Hard Rock but are firmly a Rap act on the other hand. I think it is important to point out that I see Rage as an important band, not necessarily in a top 100 Artists of All Time. Quite possibly in a top 100 bands of all time however.

On your list of 13 artists, I wouldn't even begin to compare Rage against them. They are as you say some of the top artists of the century. I was merely pointing out that Rage will be well remembered, and deservedly so. They are the major Rap-Metal act out there. And dominate the style. The artists you mentioned are all classic and timeless, and will be recognized as such for several more decades.

As for the three acts (Tharpe, Wray, and Parker) being discussed. I am an fan of all three, and in the case of Parker and Tharpe a bit of an extreme fan. I think all three were influential, but few artists are true innovators. Established themes and concepts in music are built up over years and then pushed into the mainstream by someone. All three did that for their respective styles. That is influence, but it isn't innovation.

Wray was a "guitar hero", but as you point out not the only one. It is his popularizing of the power chord and that fantastic talent at the guitar which endear him to music historians and critics. He didn't come up with it, the chord was being used already.

Tharpe's crossover appeal is what makes her a standout and landmark artist. Gospel was incredibly popular already, and many of the acts that were her peers were already influencing the music that became Rock'N'Roll. She played a huge part in that (really one of the largest). And I do agree more people should know about her. She also happens to be a phenomenal guitarist (one of the best in her era, which is saying something). But again that is influence and not necessarily innovation. Innovators are far and few between, largely because few records are ever an honest beginning to a sound. That happens over years and by multiple artists.

Tharpe was not a unique act in the idea she wrote her stuff. That was pretty common among women, Rock'N'Roll's rampant sexism put a stop to it. At least until the late 60s when women re-established themselves in the genre as more than just vocalists. Mary Lou Williams for example wrote and arranged for Duke Ellington. Dorothy Fields was a prolific and popular lyricist. Billie Holiday penned a number of her biggest hits.

As for Parker, I own most of his stuff. He was the greatest of the Be-Bop musicians. I don't need to go to a forum to be told that. However Coleman Hawkins is really where you see that style come into existence. Parker grabbed that and ran with it making amazing music. But he didn't create Be-Bop, nor was he alone in constructing what it became.

That isn't a slight on any of them, as I have said I consider them among the true greats.

" I refuse to change my musical tastes just to fit in with what's popular and "hip" now"

I don't think anyone is asking you too. But taste and historical relevance are not the same thing. And for whatever it is worth, music today will become part of that historical legacy. And artists will be forgotten and some person down the line will think they are a cultural hermit because all they listen to is the old school political Rap-Metal of Rage Against The Machine.

"That mentality reeks of high school freshmen and crowd-following. "

All of the artists you mention at one time were loved by high school freshmen and people just following a crowd. That is the reason it is called the music industry. Just because your personal favorites were popular before TV came along doesn't make them any less a part of the machine.

" My musical interests primarily lie in the era spanning from the late 1800s (when the Edison cylinders first became prevalent"

I am always surprised at how much crap can be found in those cylinder recordings. There are gems, and plenty of them, but Popular Music was an ugly child at it's birth. Then it moved into that strange Novelty phase at the turn of the century. My personal tastes are inclusive to just about every era and genre, and I really only have a dislike for about three artists. Even then I recognize them for their talent.

Posted by Chris F. on Tuesday, 11.12.13 @ 18:47pm


Chris F, if you don't mind me saying, I also love Rage Against The Machine mainly because they mixed metal, punk and rap into a supreb form of music and while this group wasn't the first to mix rock and rap, they sure were one of the best.

By the way, Zach, I still don't agree with you on Rage Again The Machine. I just wish that you would give this kind of music a chance before saying that its good or bad.

Posted by Andrew on Wednesday, 11.13.13 @ 14:54pm


Sorry, Andrew, but we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this one and close the book on this discussion. I've heard enough Rage Against the Machine, and I consider them one of the worst recording acts I've ever heard (I'm actually creating a RateYourMusic list of my 10 least favorite recording acts, and RATM is ranked at #6). Killing in the Name is a sure bet for worst song I ever heard, as it contains an absurd overuse of profanity (I'm not offended by profane words, but rather the overuse of them), cliched anarchist lyrics, Zach de la Rocha's nauseating screaming that passes for "singing," and Tom Morello's discordant, headache-inducing guitar work. I despise any kind of shameless political propaganda in music, so RATM doesn't win any favors with me on that end. I'd despise them just as much if they were preaching Nazism. I listen to music primarily for its aesthetic qualities, and pay little attention to lyrics unless I have a vested interest in a certain songwriter or if the lyrics are clever or humorous.

This quotation from the great Edgar Allan Poe is just as applicable to songs as it is to poems, and perfectly describes my attitude on music:

"There neither exists nor can exist any work more thoroughly dignified — more supremely noble than this very poem — this poem per se — this poem which is a poem and nothing more — this poem written solely for the poem's sake."
Poe, Edgar Allan. The Poetic Principle. 1850.

Posted by Zach on Wednesday, 11.13.13 @ 17:17pm


I also think that we should stop this debate too, Zach.

By the way, do you hate me now as a result of this talk?

Posted by Andrew on Wednesday, 11.13.13 @ 18:15pm


Absolutely not, Andrew! Why would you even ask a question like that? I've always gotten along fine with you. The only way I could honesty dislike or despise anyone I encounter online would be if he or she levied a false, potentially harmful accusation against me or attacked me based on my disability (I'm on the autism spectrum, BTW). I'm fine with civil disagreements, and there's nothing in your posts that makes me think of you as the scum of the earth. You're OK in my book.

Posted by Zach on Wednesday, 11.13.13 @ 18:46pm


"...or attacked me based on my disability (I'm on the autism spectrum, BTW)"

Zach - I know that we've had some ugly encounters in the past and have chosen to pretty much ignore each other for the past year or so, but I appreciate you opening up about this. It gives me a more understanding view on how you communicate with others.

Posted by DarinRG on Wednesday, 11.13.13 @ 18:58pm


The Internet is such a difficult place to truly convey one's emotions or opinions, especially for those who have some kind of mental handicap. Subtle cues like reading body language and understanding sarcasm aren't possible online. Sometimes I allow myself to get worked up too much over certain things (music being one of those topics) and oftentimes what I write online can come out in a way I didn't envision in my mind. In face-to-face, normal conversations, I'm a lot more reserved about voicing my dislike of certain artists and don't rant like I do sometimes when I'm on an online forum. Right now, if we were all sitting at a table and someone were to mention a band I don't like, such as Led Zeppelin, I'd shrug my shoulders and keep quiet. However, I've had a few real-life, face-to-face conversations with others who took my polite rejection of a band I don't like too personally. You wouldn't believe some of my peers in college who thought I was committing a sacrilegious offense just by simply stating "I think the Beatles are overrated." Even when I would calmly explain my reasons, I'd still be excoriated or given strange looks. At that point, I would excuse myself and just drop the conversation.

Although I do genuinely dislike RATM, the truth is I rarely think about them offline. Since this is a public site, I felt the need to explain why I don't like their music. I admit I made some remarks that were rather crass and I've definitely overused the nickname I made up for RATM. I should have resisted the need to come up with colorful insults or write up a diatribe. If someone wants to enjoy Bulls on Parade or Killing in the Name, I won't prevent them from enjoying those songs or tell them to stop listening to their music.

Oftentimes when I'm typing a post outlining my reasons for disliking an artist, I get too carried away and just start "virtually hyperventilating." Looking back on the negative comments I've written about Neil Young and others, I should have just said I don't like him and moved on from there, rather than getting into online pissing matches with others.

DarinRG, when you and Gassman were having a dialogue about Neil Young the other day, I was considering writing a differing opinion, but then I decided, what's the point? People using this site already know I don't like his music, so there's really no need for me to reiterate that distaste into a dozen variations.

I apologize for any regrettable encounters we've had in the past and would prefer to move on at this point.

I've also had some unfortunate life experiences in the last few months that have unfortunately caused me to misdirect my anger towards people that didn't deserve it.

Posted by Zach on Wednesday, 11.13.13 @ 19:35pm


I appreciate all of that, Zach. I'm someone who can lash out pretty harshly if someone pushes one of my buttons, but I'm not someone who likes carrying a grudge.

I understand your point about how things can come off differently in person vs the internet. I tend to have a sharp, sarcastic sense of humor that tends to come off really dickish online as opposed to in person.

So, all said, I'm willing to leave the past in the past as well.

And, I did take your advice and check out JD McPherson - Signs & Signifiers and absolutely love it.

Posted by DarinRG on Wednesday, 11.13.13 @ 19:49pm


Zach, I just wanted to tell you that I too am disabled mentially.

Trying to convey the way one feels personally on the internet is never done easily as I can never understand when a person is being sarcastic or not. I too have a tendency to rant a little too much about music and bands that I hate when I'm taking about music with someone and it can get out of control. In the past, I would get quite mad if a person bashed a group or a singer that I liked or said that one singer was better then another, now I'm trying to not get upset when that happens. All I say is it's thier taste in music and that I don't care for that kind of music, but if that person wants to listen to Lady Gaga, then I don't have an issue with that.

By the way, DarinRG, you and I should have another talk one of these days.

Posted by Andrew on Wednesday, 11.13.13 @ 22:21pm


d-does that mean you don't even h8 me zachy bbz?

also yung autistic g's be the clique i'm reppin'

Posted by GFW on Thursday, 11.14.13 @ 17:18pm


This band are amazing, I never used to like rap music at all and I didn't like Rage against the machine when I first listened to them but I gave them another shot and I don't know how I didn't love them at first. Morellos guitar is incredible and Zacks rapping is so powerful. Yes they are loud and aggressive but that's just from the passion they put into their music. They have honestly inspired me to be more open minded about music and I owe so much of what I listen to now to them. Great band and should definitely be inducted.

Posted by Jack Ashton on Tuesday, 08.19.14 @ 08:37am


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. Basically, this sums up our policy.

No HTML code is allowed.




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