Rock n Roll Hall of Fame

jwr2 · Post by **jwr2** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:16 pm

I recently had a business trip to Cleveland and I visited the RR hall of fame ...

No Yes, No Rush, No ELP ... they seem to pretty much snub progressive rock ...

I liked seeing the Tom Petty Rickenbackers ...

bassduke49 · Post by **bassduke49** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:20 pm

When I was there in October, they had Rick James' white Rick on display, and one owned by a Sex Pistol's bassist. They were the only Rick basses in the whole place. My wife, Dorothy, liked the costumes. She pointed to one that she said she would have liked to wear (in her prime, though). It was the "dress" worn by Lenny Kravitz on (I think) the American Woman video. "You mean a GUY wore that?"

jps · Post by **jps** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:26 pm

I live here (there) and haven't been to it yet!

jwr2 · Post by **jwr2** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:41 pm

it is overpriced ...

mgauction · Post by **mgauction** » Tue Jun 19, 2007 1:58 am

I'll be there late next month on business for almost a week. Want to find time to go, Jeff?

lennon211 · Post by **lennon211** » Tue Jun 19, 2007 2:59 am

For the most part, I was really disappointed in the Hall of Fame. It was kinda lame in a lot of ways, not the least of which was the ridiculous amount of space that was devoted, at that time anyway, to the stage outfits of newer acts like...dare I say it...Britney Spears among others. Ya know, it's the Rock 'N' Roll Hall of Fame...not the ****** New Pop Music Hall of Fame. Anyway, it just seemed like a bad attempt to keep itself relevant to the teeny boppers, much the same way Rolling Stone will put new "edgy" guitarists or albums into their yearly countdowns of the best whatever, only to eventually have them dropped. Anyway, that's my rant.

jps · Post by **jps** » Tue Jun 19, 2007 3:24 am

Sure, Mike!

leftybass · Post by **leftybass** » Tue Jun 19, 2007 3:51 am

I was there not long ago, I looked at Mike Campbell's 625/12 for about an hour, LOL..

firstbassman · Post by **firstbassman** » Tue Jun 19, 2007 4:12 am

I live here (there) and haven't been to it yet!

Yeah, funny how that happens. I grew up in NYC and have never been to the Empire State Building. Though I have been to the Statue of Liberty (twice only).

steve_hershberger · Post by **steve_hershberger** » Tue Jun 19, 2007 6:31 am

The place is what it is, like it or not. But I see it as two different things - a "Hall of Fame" and also as a "Museum." In fact, I think it's still named that way too - "The Rock & Roll Hall of Fame and Museum." (emphasis added on the "and"...)

Anyway, I get so tired of the arguments of "who's in there versus who's not" kind of thing, and (IMHO) it makes arguments like that completely pointless. Got a complaint on that kind of "Hall of Fame" inclusion stuff, then write to Jann Wenner. I think he's still in charge of the nominations and induction rules and criteria...

And yeah, Jann and Rolling Stone used to be a significant "authority" that we all could rely on back in the day. Sadly, he/it got lame in the early '80s. So there you go.

As for the Museum, I think it's cool. There's a lot of cool stuff there, and some parts get rotated in/out regularly, so it's not like you're looking at ALL they've got if you only go there once. Displays change.

My wife and I are charter members, so we go at least once or twice per year. She's from Lakewood so we're up there multiple times per year visiting her family anyway, so sometimes we'll go check it out if we don't have anything to do for an afternoon, or if there's some new display we want to see. The membership gets us in for free however many times per year we want to go, so it's no big deal on the expense end.

Not to mention that some of the major exhibits have been really cool - I'm thinking the Petty, Hendrix, John Lennon, Muddy Waters, Roy Orbison, and Clash things we've seen - the exhibits that'll only be there for a few months or so.

I realize that people can have a lot of expectations to be blown away by such a place - I mean, it IS the "Rock & Roll Hall of Fame and Museum" after all, so it's GOT to be the ULTIMATE, right? Well, it's like anything else - you can't please all the people all the time...

"and I know, it's only rock'n'roll, but I like it, like it, yes I do."

wayang · Post by **wayang** » Tue Jun 19, 2007 7:00 am

The Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame is an accurate depiction of what's gone wrong with Rock & Roll over the decades...and maybe some of what was wrong with it to begin with. It's all well and good to claim that Britney's not R&R, but she ain't singin' church music. What do you think's blaring out of the windows of every trailer park in America where all the little Britney's are growing up?

Skynyrd, dude...

90% of R&R (like everything else) is *******, in my humble opinion...therefore, to load the museum with 'nothing but the best' would be dishonest, would it not? This thing is a museum, not a church...