I don’t think Appetite was hugely influential. It wins this thread because it was the debut album of one of the most popular rock bands of all time and it hit the world like a nuke immediately. There really wasn’t any warming up to GnR. First they weren’t there, and then they were THE shit around the world right when this album dropped. This is not a one hit album either, there are many huge radio hits and other memorable tracks on this one. Paradise City, love it or not, has to be one of, if not THE, most larger than life tunes of the 80’s. In fact, I would say that cock rock, hair bands, dirt rock or whatever you want to call it was fading out of existence and was on the verge of disappearing before this album was released. Yeah it kept a lot of shitty bands alive longer than they should have, but GnR was probably the last-band-standing heading into the grunge era, at which point regular guitar driven rock went into hibernation for about 10-15 years.
I understand your point, but I must strongly disagree with the above quote. This album was out for nearly a YEAR before it became a hit. “Welcome to the Jungle” had some moderate success, but it wasn’t until “Sweet Child O’Mine” was released in 1988 (album was released in 1987) that the album exploded in sales. I do recall reading that the record company was about to give up on promoting this album, and told GnR to stop touring and start writing material for a new record, until “Sweet” blew up the charts, which got them a headlining tour and promoted the release of “Paradise City” as a single.
Not exactly an “immediate nuke.” It took some time before this band hit worldwide status.
You know, I posted almost the exact same point a couple of hours ago. That is how I remember it, too.
Hmm…disqualified:
Either Stills or Nash came from The Hollies
Crosby came from Buffalo Springfield, for what it’s worth…
Crosby pulled an old Buffalo colleague in to round out the quartet with lead guitar: Niel Young
—G!
Stills came from Buffalo Springfield. Nash was from The Hollies. Crosby was from The Byrds.
It’s an opinion thread. Nothing “wins” the thread. And I say that as someone who agrees AfD was a hell of a debut album.
Me, I think I’d have a hard time deciding between The Clash, and The Pogues “Red Roses For Me”. But I’d probably give the edge to The Pogues.
I don’t mean to get all snarky, but the rules are right there in the title and yet half the people seem to ignore them:
Best.
Rock.
Band.
Debut.
Album.
Not your list of top ten albums. Not alternative or psychadelic albums. Not the second album produced. Not the first album produced by a particular band that you think is better than some of the other stuff it later produced but rather as compared to every other rock band ever in existence.
Best.
Rock.
Band.
Debut.
Album.
And I’d vote Boston as well.
Who are you to say The Clash or The Stone Roses or The Pogues or Gang Of Four or the Violent Femmes aren’t “rock”? Just because they don’t fit some limited '70s AOR definition of what’s rock doesn’t disqualify them. Rock encompasses more than long-haired white guys playing recycled blues riffs.
I’m Ender. Nice to meet you.
Well, why don’t we make this easy on everyone: you give us a complete list of what you consider to be valid “Rock. Bands.” so we won’t go sullying things up with our silly different opinions on what that might be.
For your information: rock music.
My vote is for The Ramones. I listen to that album way too often to not vote for it. It has the best guitar sound ever. If you don’t agree, It’ll meet you in the alley after the show and kill you. If that’s not enough; it’s got a great set of songs on it, and it substantially changed music for years afterward.
Violent Femmes.
Thank you. I always mentally shuffle the names and faces around, even after meeting them twice. :o
Kill em all Metallica
Granted, Page was a Yardbird, but did Led I sound like a Yardbird album?
I’d argue that most of those bands are more “rock” than Boston.
OK, honestly, the issue on the debate over the definition of “rock” was the least of my concerns. If we want to put them everyone under the tent of rock, I don’t care. I think we can all agree that a solo artist isn’t a band and I think we can all agree that a top ten list isn’t “the best”
Past that, I guess there’s room for speculation on whether people are choosing bands so far off the beaten path because they truly, honestly believe it fits the category of #1 rock album debut ever or because they’re attempting to seem hip and worldly about their music selections.
I would not consider any of the bands mentioned here “far off the beaten path.” A few like Television or Gang of Four or whatnot may be not be considered mainstream, but I wouldn’t consider any of those obscure. If you want to name-check bands in order to establish “worldliness” or whatever you think people are trying to do, these would not be the bands you would name. These are established and highly influential rock bands. You’ll find them in that Rolling Stone Top 500 albums of all time list, I’m confident.
Pretty Hate Machine by Nine Inch Nails is, I think, a pretty strong contender.