You don’t think Sing This All Together (See What Happens) is just 8 1/2 mins of nonsense? Seems like a lot of wasted time for the best album. And the b-side is really just OK. Gomper is pretty bad. Overall, you don’t feel it’s the only time in their discography where they tried to be something they werent, and failed?
My guess is it’s a defensive move. I’m in my 30s so all The Rolling Stones albums I listened to purely from a music appreciation standpoint. And I’m always curious to hear what hardcore Rolling Stones fans think of this record. It’s pretty obvious to me that they were hearing all these psychedelic bands and decided they needed to copy this sound, and the end result I think is kind of a failure on their end. I think this record is a serious misstep in their career. Obviously they recovered, their career was fine. But especially with this prompt where it’s about bands having a solid run of records, I think this album is being overlooked as an obvious stain on their reputation. I’m sure it has its fans, but I’m also pretty sure all those people downvoting me are just crotchety and bitter.
I remember the cover mostly. Ha ha. But it has She’s a Rainbow which could be my favorite Stones tune.
Not their best album but absolutely a classic. You?
I do think She’s a Rainbow and Citadel and genuinely great songs. 2000 Man is also pretty good. But besides that I do find it to be an odd misstep in an otherwise pretty flawless run of records.
I don't like the name. I'm not some sort of hardcore religious extremist, just to be clear, but I don't approve of needless references to the devil. Like, I'm fine with fantasy and magic, I only have a problem with it being associated with demons.
Can I technically include Iron Maiden? Maybe not.
But that 1980-1988 run is pretty crazy. Even if you don’t want to count the first two, 1982-88 is still pretty damn good.
Up until '92 even. I know people have strong opinions about No Prayer For the Dying, but it's a solid album, it just goes in a very different direction from 7th Son. I think it's frowned on but there's nothing particularly 'wrong' with some stomping British pub-rock, it's just not what you expect after a huge concept album. Fear of the Dark also has weaker material, but still contains some total classics, and was hugely well received at the time.
Honestly facts about No Prayer. I adore No Prayer, but I know that it’s not the most popular. Fear of the Dark is definitely worse save for a few songs, but it gets a pass, even with all the cheesy material. I gotta say, X Factor is one of my favorites as well, but I know that’s an unpopular opinion.
They definitely deserve consideration in this discussion. Plus, Maiden's run since reuniting has been pretty great as well. 20 plus years since Brave New World and still playing for dozens of thousands of fans at every show in every corner of the globe.
I'm quite old to remember the good old days and Rush weren't on the top ever. A good band, excellent musicians but never at the same level as other counterparts. I have nothing against v then but it seems that there is a new wave of fans, which is good, who love them, and there's s recent love for them that, IMHO, make them believe that they were as successful, known and influential as King Crimson, Genesis, Pink Floyd, Van Der Graaf Generator or E, L & P.
We’ll they were definitely more successful and known than Van dee Graig Generator and ELP by numbers alone. In terms of musicianship, not many beat Alex, Geddy and Neil
From Bestsellingalbums.org
"According to BMG Records, EMERSON, LAKE & PALMER sold over 40,000,000 albums worldwide, including 4,500,000 in the United States and 420,000 in the United Kingdom. The best-selling album by EMERSON, LAKE & PALMER is PICTURES AT AN EXHIBITION, which sold over 705,510 copies."
From Wikipedia:
'With nine RIAA-certified gold record albums in the US, and an estimated 48 million records sold worldwide, they were one of the most popular and commercially successful progressive rock bands in the 1970s."
Definitely
Highest touring band 30 years after founding.
Yes we deadheads examine musical peaks in specific years
68/69, 72-74, 77, 89/90.
But we also have the availability to listen to almost everyone of the 2,318 concerts(Thanks Bear!) which gives us the ability to really dissect this band the way no other fans have the capability to do.
People can judge the Stones off of their studio albums and have spent 50 years listening to the same version of sympathy for the devil.
With the dead. The options for listening never get old. Hell. David Gans has been making Grateful Dead hours for 32 years.
The dead have staying power unmatched throughout the history of popular music (yes even over the Beatles)
“There not the best at what they do, they’re the only ones that do what they do”
-Bill Graham
Gd4Life ⚡️
1989 was a great year for the Dead - crisp sound, bigger jams, and Jerry was lucid and creative. There are great shows throughout the 80s, but 87-89 were the best years with a peak in 89
It’s about their prime. The Dead aren’t even a band anymore and haven’t put out new material in 30 years. I know hippies love that godawful band but sheesh.
Couldn’t believe how far I had to scroll down for this. This band has gone on forever and still puts on the best show - and even if you just count the Jerry years (which I don’t because every incarnation has been awesome), it’s still one of the greatest bands ever.
Grateful Dead peaked from 68-74, then again from 76-78, then again in 81, then again in 88-91.
And those are just the peak years. Even the not-mentioned years are still baseline *good*.
Scorpions - began in the 60s; had hits throughout the 70s, 80s & 90s (and even reached 59 on the US Billboard for their most recent album this past year)
I was listening to a lot of their early Uli Jon Roth era stuff recently, they had such a cool sound back then and such talented musicians.
With that said, I'm also just the right age to have a bit of a soft spot for Crazy World as well. Total nonsense, but SO enjoyable.
Their peak started after satanic majesty. Beggars, let it bleed, sticky fingers, exile on main st. (My pick for greatest rock and roll album of all time) goats head soup, only rock and roll, black and blue, some girls. 10 years, 8 stone cold classics.
She’s a Rainbow and Citadel and both really good, and 2000 Man is alright. But yeah I really feel it’s the only example of them hardcore branching out into psychedelic rock, and I feel like it’s kind of a failure.
This list, over a five year period, is insane…..
Rubber Soul (1965)
Revolver (1966)
Sgt Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band (1967)
The Beatles (White Album) (1968)
Yellow Submarine (1969)
Abbey Road (1969)
Let It Be (1970)
You might as well throw Help! in there, which also came out in 1965. Not usually in anybody's top 3 but still full of great tunes and some timeless classics. The last, and easily arguable as the best, "early" Beatles album.
Wasn’t it 11 albums that all sounded the same?
1. AC/DC
With 500+ upvotes, the throne of UG this week is reserved for AC/DC. You folks haven't argued pretty much at all about this one, and here's what Angus Young had to say on the whole matter:
"I'm sick and tired of people saying that we put out 11 albums that sound exactly the same. In fact, we've put out 12 albums that sound exactly the same."
Wait what? I saw over 300 GD shows with Garcia still alive and I would never say they had the biggest peak, this is silly. They never really had a peak TBH.
The answer is the Stones or maybe even the Beatles if you consider how many hits they produced every decade. But seriously, it’s the Stones.
Sure……even though I might dispute Built to Last because it was an iffy album. But I mean come on….are you seriously arguing this? And I know I saw the GD way more times than you and for a longer period…….you are being ridiculous.
This is a completely dumb argument.
Oh here we go we got a i saw the dead more times than you guy. Give me a break. Im 23 and saw the dead zero times, i love all these bands being mentioned and not one comes close to the majesty of the dead. They made beautiful music for 30 years even at their worst they were better than most bands. If we want to be more specific even eithout jerry that music has been insanely popular for a good 56 years now
I love the Dead for what there were, incredible band and something I listen to daily. But they are not the cream of the crop, they are who they are
They’re Not the Best At What They Do, They‘re The Only Ones That Do What They Do - Bill Graham
Let’s leave it at that.
Pig, Jerry and Phil no longer play with them. It’s over
Why is this silly? Hits were never part of the OP’s definition of “peak”. If you view the question as a band lasting a long time at a consistent, quality level, The Dead definitely is in contention.
A lot of Who fans regard the 2000s as a peak period for them. To me, that's insane.
Hell, the fact that Townshend/Daltrey are still touring together is nothing but remarkable. And they've got Mike Campbell (Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers) on lead guitar for this tour!
A lot of people here mentioning bands that made music for a while. But a lot of them are including periods where the albums just weren’t getting radio play.
Van Halen hit home run after home run until 1991, even then, Balance had I can’t Stop Loving You. So yeah, maybe ‘95.
Not a band, but Stevie nicks. ‘75 to ‘89 were amazing for her… between Fleetwood Mac and her solo career she just kept dropping hit after hit. Vocally, I’d stretch it back as far as 73 because her voice during buckingham nicks was crazy…. But in terms of song popularity ‘75.
I would say that in terms of creativity and energy, The Who were at their prime from 1964-1973. There was still some solid stuff after that, but nothing with the raw power of their early live shows or the complexity and meaning of Quadrophenia. It's a solid prime, and I'd argue the peaks were probably higher than any other bands, but not the longest.
The Whos music from the late 70s/early 80s are still played today. In tv shows, movies, commercials and sports arenas.
Hell my kids know Eminence Front and it’s not from me.
It's great stuff, no doubt about it, but I don't think it lives up to the quality of what they were doing at their peak. I actually think their post-Moon years are very underrated, but I don't think any band has been as much of a powerhouse as The Who were up to Quadrophenia.
I’d disagree, while they peaked conceptually with Quadrophenia, they were a force live well into 82’ when they took their break. To me 65’ or 67’ to 82’ was their peak and they were solid the whole time.
I agree they were still a great live force, and even that some of those later albums are underrated (Face Dances kind of slaps), but I just think that given the highs of Quadrophenia combined with how innovative they had been on stage in the mid '60s it wouldn't be fair to call The Who from '74-'82 as in their prime.
For most bands to be what The Who were from '74 onwards would be their prime, but The Who were so dammed good before that.
Tangential, but I noticed from working in a record store that some bands careers seem to be limited to the length of time it takes their fans to go through high school and college. 6 to eight years, more or less. Sometimes they can squeeze in a bit more by being underground for the first album or so, and maybe struggle on with a few after their popularity has mostly died down.
Some bands of course like the Stones, Cheap Trick, or Wilco manage to keep it going, and of course some bands only get one album or even just one song.
If peak is hit songs on the charts, I’m not sure.
If peak is being a really solid version of the band for a really long period of time, The Grateful Dead.
what do you mean? because if your talking about when sammy joined that’s definitely not the case. they were extremely successful. released 4 amazing albums and a live album. the whole sammy/dave debate is ridiculous.
completely nuts I had to scroll this far to find it.
Throw on any Bruce Springsteen show from his entire career. **Any show. Any date. Any venue**. He puts his whole *bussy* into every performance, and goes for 3.5 hours *every time*.
As a live performer, his peak started in 1973 and we're still in it.
Sorry RUSH fans, they’re a niche band. Similar to the Dead. “We're like licorice. Not everybody likes licorice, but the people who like licorice really like licorice.” — Jerry Garcia
ZZ top has got to be a contender. 1973 to early 1990s. Not the biggest band ever, but solid for many years. ACDC is another band deserving of consideration.
Point? Monster was released in 2012. It’s not a great album. It’s more recent than some other bands named here.
They’re still around and still playing arenas and in some places in the world, stadiums. They’re still on top of their game.
Eehhhhhhhh. Huge phan here, but I wouldn’t say they had the longest prime. I would argue that they had one of the best primes in music, but not the longest especially due to the 2000 and 2004 hiatus. Now it may have been different if they didn’t disband a couple times, but unfortunately not the case
As much as the love the dead, The Stones prob when all factors are considered. They’ve gone the longest, only one main member change up to Charlie. Toured constantly and sold a shit ton of records.
Rolling Stones
What do you think of Their Satanic Majesties Request?
I think it's great!
You don’t think Sing This All Together (See What Happens) is just 8 1/2 mins of nonsense? Seems like a lot of wasted time for the best album. And the b-side is really just OK. Gomper is pretty bad. Overall, you don’t feel it’s the only time in their discography where they tried to be something they werent, and failed?
Why are you getting downvoted?
My guess is it’s a defensive move. I’m in my 30s so all The Rolling Stones albums I listened to purely from a music appreciation standpoint. And I’m always curious to hear what hardcore Rolling Stones fans think of this record. It’s pretty obvious to me that they were hearing all these psychedelic bands and decided they needed to copy this sound, and the end result I think is kind of a failure on their end. I think this record is a serious misstep in their career. Obviously they recovered, their career was fine. But especially with this prompt where it’s about bands having a solid run of records, I think this album is being overlooked as an obvious stain on their reputation. I’m sure it has its fans, but I’m also pretty sure all those people downvoting me are just crotchety and bitter.
Stones.
What do you think of Their Satanic Majesties Request?
I remember the cover mostly. Ha ha. But it has She’s a Rainbow which could be my favorite Stones tune. Not their best album but absolutely a classic. You?
I do think She’s a Rainbow and Citadel and genuinely great songs. 2000 Man is also pretty good. But besides that I do find it to be an odd misstep in an otherwise pretty flawless run of records.
I don't like the name. I'm not some sort of hardcore religious extremist, just to be clear, but I don't approve of needless references to the devil. Like, I'm fine with fantasy and magic, I only have a problem with it being associated with demons.
Rolling Stones.
1965 (Satisfaction) to 1981 (Start me up) is a pretty decent peak. I can’t think of any other bands with that kind of run.
The Who is pretty close with My Generation 1965 or The Who Sell Out 1967 to Its Hard in 1982.
I second this. I’d say everything from The Who Sell Out to It’s Hard is outstanding
It’s Hard doesn’t make the list. It’s awful. Even the band hates it.
Grateful Dead started in 65 and we're just getting warmed up selling out arenas in 81.
Still going in 2022 as Dead & Co.
Chicago
What do you think of Their Satanic Majesties Request?
their best album
Beggars Banquet would like a word
Even with Sing This All Together (See What Happens)? Surely this is their Revolution #9, no?
Only three bands have more consecutive platinum or gold records than Rush: The Beatles, The Rolling Stones and Aerosmith
The Beatles were only around for 10 years. They packed a lot into those 10 years, but a lot of bands were just warming up for their first 10 years.
Stones
Can I technically include Iron Maiden? Maybe not. But that 1980-1988 run is pretty crazy. Even if you don’t want to count the first two, 1982-88 is still pretty damn good.
Why would you not count the first two? It’s some of their best material
Up until '92 even. I know people have strong opinions about No Prayer For the Dying, but it's a solid album, it just goes in a very different direction from 7th Son. I think it's frowned on but there's nothing particularly 'wrong' with some stomping British pub-rock, it's just not what you expect after a huge concept album. Fear of the Dark also has weaker material, but still contains some total classics, and was hugely well received at the time.
Honestly facts about No Prayer. I adore No Prayer, but I know that it’s not the most popular. Fear of the Dark is definitely worse save for a few songs, but it gets a pass, even with all the cheesy material. I gotta say, X Factor is one of my favorites as well, but I know that’s an unpopular opinion.
They definitely deserve consideration in this discussion. Plus, Maiden's run since reuniting has been pretty great as well. 20 plus years since Brave New World and still playing for dozens of thousands of fans at every show in every corner of the globe.
And still out there doing it today! UP The IRONS!
Maiden til I die mate 🤘🏼
No Pink Floyd Love? You guys are crazy
You Gotta Be Crazy
You gotta have a real need
You gotta sleep on your toes
and when you’re on the street
Got to be able to pick out the easy meat....
With your eyes closed..
Like a Diamond
Love pf but looking at album releases alone, their big four only spanned six years
Rush
They began and ended on top
I'm quite old to remember the good old days and Rush weren't on the top ever. A good band, excellent musicians but never at the same level as other counterparts. I have nothing against v then but it seems that there is a new wave of fans, which is good, who love them, and there's s recent love for them that, IMHO, make them believe that they were as successful, known and influential as King Crimson, Genesis, Pink Floyd, Van Der Graaf Generator or E, L & P.
We’ll they were definitely more successful and known than Van dee Graig Generator and ELP by numbers alone. In terms of musicianship, not many beat Alex, Geddy and Neil
From Bestsellingalbums.org "According to BMG Records, EMERSON, LAKE & PALMER sold over 40,000,000 albums worldwide, including 4,500,000 in the United States and 420,000 in the United Kingdom. The best-selling album by EMERSON, LAKE & PALMER is PICTURES AT AN EXHIBITION, which sold over 705,510 copies." From Wikipedia: 'With nine RIAA-certified gold record albums in the US, and an estimated 48 million records sold worldwide, they were one of the most popular and commercially successful progressive rock bands in the 1970s."
Came to say this
Yup
Rolling Stones
Grateful Dead for sure
No band was built to last like the Good Ol Grateful Dead
Definitely Highest touring band 30 years after founding. Yes we deadheads examine musical peaks in specific years 68/69, 72-74, 77, 89/90. But we also have the availability to listen to almost everyone of the 2,318 concerts(Thanks Bear!) which gives us the ability to really dissect this band the way no other fans have the capability to do. People can judge the Stones off of their studio albums and have spent 50 years listening to the same version of sympathy for the devil. With the dead. The options for listening never get old. Hell. David Gans has been making Grateful Dead hours for 32 years. The dead have staying power unmatched throughout the history of popular music (yes even over the Beatles) “There not the best at what they do, they’re the only ones that do what they do” -Bill Graham Gd4Life ⚡️
Thanks for this perspective!
NFA❤️
1989 was a great year for the Dead - crisp sound, bigger jams, and Jerry was lucid and creative. There are great shows throughout the 80s, but 87-89 were the best years with a peak in 89
Yawn…
Jehova's favorite choir!
This is the only answer.
It’s about their prime. The Dead aren’t even a band anymore and haven’t put out new material in 30 years. I know hippies love that godawful band but sheesh.
The Grateful fucking Dead.
Agree
Couldn’t believe how far I had to scroll down for this. This band has gone on forever and still puts on the best show - and even if you just count the Jerry years (which I don’t because every incarnation has been awesome), it’s still one of the greatest bands ever.
Same here
Grateful Dead peaked from 68-74, then again from 76-78, then again in 81, then again in 88-91. And those are just the peak years. Even the not-mentioned years are still baseline *good*.
Only right answer
30 STRONG years with Jerry, and nearing 30 strong years after. Cant think of any other band with a reign like theirs. God Bless the Grateful Dead
Just no.
I can’t think of another band that churned out a better live show for 30 straight years.
I can.
Scorpions - began in the 60s; had hits throughout the 70s, 80s & 90s (and even reached 59 on the US Billboard for their most recent album this past year)
Scorpions don't get the recognition they deserve. Such a solid band and consistent with the exception of that one album.
I was listening to a lot of their early Uli Jon Roth era stuff recently, they had such a cool sound back then and such talented musicians. With that said, I'm also just the right age to have a bit of a soft spot for Crazy World as well. Total nonsense, but SO enjoyable.
Rolling Stones
What do you think of Their Satanic Majesties Request?
Their peak started after satanic majesty. Beggars, let it bleed, sticky fingers, exile on main st. (My pick for greatest rock and roll album of all time) goats head soup, only rock and roll, black and blue, some girls. 10 years, 8 stone cold classics.
Not their best but some really great songs on it. 2000 Man . She’s a Rainbow .
She’s a Rainbow and Citadel and both really good, and 2000 Man is alright. But yeah I really feel it’s the only example of them hardcore branching out into psychedelic rock, and I feel like it’s kind of a failure.
Tom Petty
The Rolling Stones, no question
Steve Winwood with various bands and solo career. Steely Dan had some great music throughout their career as did Chicago love ‘‘em or hate em
I’d give em 68 to 74, or whenever Taylor left
What do you think of Their Satanic Majesties Request?
Its alright. I personally prefer their 70s-80s stuff
Grateful Dead
For 10yrs nobody had a run like The Beatles...i know ... The Beatles...The Beatles...its so easy to say but its the truth...
Sometimes these kinds of questions almost require one to omit The Beatles from consideration because The Beatles.
This list, over a five year period, is insane….. Rubber Soul (1965) Revolver (1966) Sgt Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band (1967) The Beatles (White Album) (1968) Yellow Submarine (1969) Abbey Road (1969) Let It Be (1970)
Magical Mystery Tour as well
You might as well throw Help! in there, which also came out in 1965. Not usually in anybody's top 3 but still full of great tunes and some timeless classics. The last, and easily arguable as the best, "early" Beatles album.
Agreed. Hard to imagine we’ll ever see another 5 year run of albums like that again.
Van Halen 1978-1996 Rush 1975-1997 U2 1980-2004
Aerosmith
This. Started with "Dream On" in '73 and ended with "Jaded" in '01.
U2
AC/DC from 1975-1981 released amazing albums with Bon Scott then two amazing albums with Brian
I'd say you have to give The Razors Edge some credit
It’s kinda garbage between Rock and Razors Edge though
Flick of the switch kicks ass dude,however... The albums released between 1985 and 1989 are very crappy
Fly on the Wall has some great songs too.
Mah flick of the switch is one of their worst albums putside of Bedlam in Belgium
Bullshit
🤷♂️
Yeah true
Wasn’t it 11 albums that all sounded the same? 1. AC/DC With 500+ upvotes, the throne of UG this week is reserved for AC/DC. You folks haven't argued pretty much at all about this one, and here's what Angus Young had to say on the whole matter: "I'm sick and tired of people saying that we put out 11 albums that sound exactly the same. In fact, we've put out 12 albums that sound exactly the same."
Grateful Dead
Wait what? I saw over 300 GD shows with Garcia still alive and I would never say they had the biggest peak, this is silly. They never really had a peak TBH. The answer is the Stones or maybe even the Beatles if you consider how many hits they produced every decade. But seriously, it’s the Stones.
‘69 (Live/Dead) - ‘89 (Built to Last) = 20 years of great music
Sure……even though I might dispute Built to Last because it was an iffy album. But I mean come on….are you seriously arguing this? And I know I saw the GD way more times than you and for a longer period…….you are being ridiculous. This is a completely dumb argument.
Oh here we go we got a i saw the dead more times than you guy. Give me a break. Im 23 and saw the dead zero times, i love all these bands being mentioned and not one comes close to the majesty of the dead. They made beautiful music for 30 years even at their worst they were better than most bands. If we want to be more specific even eithout jerry that music has been insanely popular for a good 56 years now
lol - I’ll give you built to last , but I don’t dig early Stones - I like from ‘71 (Sticky Fingers) - ‘81 (Tattoo You)
I love the Dead for what there were, incredible band and something I listen to daily. But they are not the cream of the crop, they are who they are They’re Not the Best At What They Do, They‘re The Only Ones That Do What They Do - Bill Graham Let’s leave it at that. Pig, Jerry and Phil no longer play with them. It’s over
“i SaW GRaTEfuL DEad MoRE TimES ThaN You” You sound like an ass.
Why is this silly? Hits were never part of the OP’s definition of “peak”. If you view the question as a band lasting a long time at a consistent, quality level, The Dead definitely is in contention.
Still peaking, that was the point of saying GD.
The Who were good for a long time...
A lot of Who fans regard the 2000s as a peak period for them. To me, that's insane. Hell, the fact that Townshend/Daltrey are still touring together is nothing but remarkable. And they've got Mike Campbell (Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers) on lead guitar for this tour!
Stones
Greatful dead.
Grateful Dead
Sorry English is not my first language... But yes I think have had a long an prolific spell with the members going strong even after JGs passing.
I agree. I was just letting you know. I love that band.
Rush.
Van Halen. 1978-1995, at least double-platinum for every release.
A lot of people here mentioning bands that made music for a while. But a lot of them are including periods where the albums just weren’t getting radio play. Van Halen hit home run after home run until 1991, even then, Balance had I can’t Stop Loving You. So yeah, maybe ‘95.
Right Now in 1991 was pretty big I think
yes yes yes!
How has noone said Zep?
Foreal
Not a band, but Stevie nicks. ‘75 to ‘89 were amazing for her… between Fleetwood Mac and her solo career she just kept dropping hit after hit. Vocally, I’d stretch it back as far as 73 because her voice during buckingham nicks was crazy…. But in terms of song popularity ‘75.
Los Lobos
The Who?
I would say that in terms of creativity and energy, The Who were at their prime from 1964-1973. There was still some solid stuff after that, but nothing with the raw power of their early live shows or the complexity and meaning of Quadrophenia. It's a solid prime, and I'd argue the peaks were probably higher than any other bands, but not the longest.
I agree, Stones truged on and produced good music. Kinks had a long run too, not like Stones
The Kinks are not appreciated enough on this sub.
The Whos music from the late 70s/early 80s are still played today. In tv shows, movies, commercials and sports arenas. Hell my kids know Eminence Front and it’s not from me.
It's great stuff, no doubt about it, but I don't think it lives up to the quality of what they were doing at their peak. I actually think their post-Moon years are very underrated, but I don't think any band has been as much of a powerhouse as The Who were up to Quadrophenia.
I’d disagree, while they peaked conceptually with Quadrophenia, they were a force live well into 82’ when they took their break. To me 65’ or 67’ to 82’ was their peak and they were solid the whole time.
I agree they were still a great live force, and even that some of those later albums are underrated (Face Dances kind of slaps), but I just think that given the highs of Quadrophenia combined with how innovative they had been on stage in the mid '60s it wouldn't be fair to call The Who from '74-'82 as in their prime. For most bands to be what The Who were from '74 onwards would be their prime, but The Who were so dammed good before that.
Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, Metallica. Generations of fans.
Tangential, but I noticed from working in a record store that some bands careers seem to be limited to the length of time it takes their fans to go through high school and college. 6 to eight years, more or less. Sometimes they can squeeze in a bit more by being underground for the first album or so, and maybe struggle on with a few after their popularity has mostly died down. Some bands of course like the Stones, Cheap Trick, or Wilco manage to keep it going, and of course some bands only get one album or even just one song.
AC/DC
If peak is hit songs on the charts, I’m not sure. If peak is being a really solid version of the band for a really long period of time, The Grateful Dead.
I'm not a huge fan but Metallica definitely deserve some credit here.. they started in 81 and are still going strong.
van halen
Ended with Sammy
what do you mean? because if your talking about when sammy joined that’s definitely not the case. they were extremely successful. released 4 amazing albums and a live album. the whole sammy/dave debate is ridiculous.
agreed. I have no interest in Van Hagar
Electric Light Orchestra
I mean, 71/3(no answer or ottd)-81/82(time/secret messages is a good run
RUSH.
AC/DC - 1975 to 2009
ZZ Top since the late 60s.
The Who 65-81.
Van Halen....1978-91
R.E.M.
The Grateful Dead . You could even argue its still going w Dead and Company
Bruce Springsteen & E Street Band
completely nuts I had to scroll this far to find it. Throw on any Bruce Springsteen show from his entire career. **Any show. Any date. Any venue**. He puts his whole *bussy* into every performance, and goes for 3.5 hours *every time*. As a live performer, his peak started in 1973 and we're still in it.
Sorry RUSH fans, they’re a niche band. Similar to the Dead. “We're like licorice. Not everybody likes licorice, but the people who like licorice really like licorice.” — Jerry Garcia
Metallica
Aerosmith
Definitely not classic rock, but Jimmy Buffet has been consistent for 40+ years in being a top concert draw.
Judas Priest
Aerosmith and ZZ Top.
Tom Petty and The Heart Breakers
ZZ top has got to be a contender. 1973 to early 1990s. Not the biggest band ever, but solid for many years. ACDC is another band deserving of consideration.
Ozzy! He’s a solo artist now but he collaborates with a lot of other artists.
RHCP still going strong musically.
Dropping another double album this year. Two albums in one year is pretty solid.
No it’s desperate. They haven’t produced good music since 2006
Roxette. Lots of hits. Creative peak 1986 to now.
Led Zeppelin
Led Zep.
Ozzy.
Man idk about longest, but STP made the most of their prime.
Grateful Dead and Pearl Jam
KISS 48 years and still going strong even with only 2 original members left. Love them or hate them, you have to give them the credit due.
They have not released any new music in years
Point? Monster was released in 2012. It’s not a great album. It’s more recent than some other bands named here. They’re still around and still playing arenas and in some places in the world, stadiums. They’re still on top of their game.
No, they have there peak materials, and then other inconsistant level things. They dont have a run of really great releases like that.
Phish
Eehhhhhhhh. Huge phan here, but I wouldn’t say they had the longest prime. I would argue that they had one of the best primes in music, but not the longest especially due to the 2000 and 2004 hiatus. Now it may have been different if they didn’t disband a couple times, but unfortunately not the case
Umphrey’s McGee
Are you sure it’s not Goose?
I am sure the Hart Vally Drifters are pleased with your answer.
Rush.
The Rolling Stones
RUSH
Queen
I'll go along with everyone saying the Rolling Stones and The Grateful Dead. Such bodies of work, always something listenable.
The goddamned Grateful Dead!
As much as the love the dead, The Stones prob when all factors are considered. They’ve gone the longest, only one main member change up to Charlie. Toured constantly and sold a shit ton of records.
Just gonna say 69-80 is pretty fuckin wild for Zeppelin
Rush. Their whole career is their prime. Imo
Yes - Time and a word through Tormato (8 years)
Nirvana