Can you match up these classic rock bands with 90's artists in terms of influence, impact, and importance ?

Question

Led Zeppelin = ?
Black Sabbath = ?
Pink Floyd = ?
Doors = ?
Beach Boys = ?
The Velvet Underground = ?
Jimi Hendrix = ?
The Who = ?

Explain....

You are obviously musically inferior if you honestly believe that the entire decade of the 90's could have never happened and we would still be where we are today in music.

Answer 1

This is easy.


Pearl Jam = Led Zeppelin (Two of the most influential bands)
Soundgarden = Black Sabbath
Radiohead = Pink Floyd
Alice in Chains = the Doors
the Smashing Pumpkins = the Beach Boys
Tool = The Velvet Underground
Nirvana = the Jimi Hendrix experience (in terms of impact, yeah, although the guitar playing was obviously much different)
And even though the White Stripes came later, the White Stripes would = the Who

Answer 2

All of these bands (well, except for the Beach Boys and Black Sabbath) were all highly experimental in the music they wrote -- it was extremely varied in tone, form and the message they delivered. As for Black Sabbath and the Beach Boys, they had their own unique sounds that no one could really copy, nor did anyone really try. So one could say that any band that gets an album into mass circulation that goes off in a different direction from the mainstream might have the same level of impact on our culture. Also, you might want to think of bands as being representative of their generation as well -- you might not like them, but they were the distinctive sound of a decade, just like you personally might not like Sly and the Family Stone or the BeeGees from the 70's, but no one can erase the music they produced in their heyday (as much as one might want to) So the same goes for bands like Green Day, Beck, The Mighty Mighty Bosstones, Spin Doctors, Collective Soul, Counting Crows, or even Sheryl Crow, Alanis Morissette, Enya, or Ricky Martin.

As for the actual cultural influence of any band, it really depends on who's listening. There are bands or individual singers I absolutely hate, personally, but who are liked and listened to by a large enough following that they've become cultural icons. Bob Dylan is a brilliant songwriter and lyricist, but his singing actually causes me to twitch uncontrollably and lurch spastically for the button to change the channel. So while there are a LOT of 90's artists that I personally think have about the same musical talent as my cat running across an untumed piano, they do have an impact on the generation of listeners who follow those bands. I can think of Nirvana as an example of a band for whom an entire generation was affected, positively or negatively. And some performers have crossed that boundary between the 70's through the decades into the new millennium, because their sound is either timeless or because they change with the times. Although I don't like everything Madonna has done, she is able to adjust with the times and continue putting out albums and selling out concerts. Sting's continued success arises from his refusal to adhere to any one formula -- I'm sure his backup band sometimes twitches when they discover he's written something in 7/4 time, or the couple of times he decided to go a little country. Experiments don't always work, but at least it shows that an artist or band is trying not to get stuck in a rut.

Answer 3

There is no way to do this. Most 90's artists suck. Pearl Jam was ok, but can't compare them to anyone on the list.