2006-09-05 11:57:01 · 9 answers · asked by CYNICAL 2 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Music
some that come to mind are:
Rusty(canadian band from early 90's)
Blind melon(please do not refer to No Rain as it was spun out of control by the media hype)
I mother Earth with Edwin on vocals
2006-09-05 12:30:51 · update #1
I dont think PANTERA recieved enough airplay! Know that there guitarist & co-founder was murdered on stage, it seems like Ihear them a little more now
A LITTLE TOO LATE DONT U THINK?
2006-09-05 12:02:13 · answer #1 · answered by blak2thgrin 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
X. Too punk for some, not punk enough for others. The best band out of L.A. since the Doors, but...
Sparks. Especially the first few albums. One of the quintessential links between the late '60s/ early '70s hippie rock and the mid-to-late '70s new wave.
2006-09-05 19:21:47 · answer #2 · answered by answermann 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
May sound crazy, but Styx & Kansas. Huge in their day, yeah, but have since been unfairly labeled "corporate rock".
For Styx, all people know are "Mr. Roboto", & "Come Sail Away". For Kanas, all ppl know are "Dust in the Wind" & "Carry On My Wayward Son".
But both bands did some great, unheard work early on before they hit it big.
Another sadly unsung band is Van Der Graaf Generator.
2006-09-05 19:03:30 · answer #3 · answered by Fonzie T 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
probably MxPx. they wern't a copy of blink-182 because they were older. they wern't a copy of green day, because their lyrical content is largly different. they are actually very original, but there was the aformention groups that came soon afterward and completely crushed them underfoot. true, their instrumentation is simple, and their lyrics poppy. i perfer sum 41 and rise against, but those are slightly newer. them and good charlotte can be good examples, not neccecarily for their music (because it gets boring) but because they started from nothing. for my second, i think guns and roses, despite being a massive group, never got full appreciation. they took rock out of the hair metal age, which is awesome, and lead to such groups as nirvana, beastie boys, and metallica, all differant, but VERY influential. i don't think axl can be blamed for the spiltup. it was kind of the entire band. i just think that they should be called a rock legend. they are worthy of it. i think thats it.
2006-09-05 19:17:22 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
They're a fairly new band I think but I've heard Matchbook Romance once or twice on some stupid TV show that's probably never been heard of. I don't even know the name of it but they always call them My Chemical Romance. But I can see how that went wrong.
2006-09-05 19:00:22 · answer #5 · answered by Maniac 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I say "King's X", if you listen to some of the vocals, you'll totally understand why.
"Veruca Salt" About the same reason, many of their lyrics strike a nerve.
"Queen" You have a GIGANTIC catalog of great songs, but not too many of them get recognized. "We Will Rock You", "Bohemian Rhapsody" etc, get too much airplay, and thats just scratching the surface.
"Vangelis" I dare you to find another composer who can write a score that is better than the ones he wrote for "Blade Runner", "1492", "Antarctica", etc...
2006-09-05 19:10:33 · answer #6 · answered by jeff the drunk 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This may sound funny, but I think Journey isn't truly remembered for how great they were. I think other 80's rock bands who didn't have half the number of hits are remembered more frequently
2006-09-05 19:55:18 · answer #7 · answered by paul_bar_1 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Triumph
Saxon
Great musicians, but always seemed overshadowed by the other bands of their era.
2006-09-05 19:03:00 · answer #8 · answered by BARD 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
hot red chilli peper....because we want more but they don't play often...
2006-09-05 19:01:14 · answer #9 · answered by Max 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋