Complete this chart
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /mu/ - Music
You are currently reading a thread in /mu/ - Music
Complete this chart
>>61986280
Btw this is for the most significant rock acts of each decade, not "best" or "most influential".
>>61986280
70s: Led Zeppelin
80's: Van Halen or some shit
>>61986280
70s = Bowie
80s = Michael Jackson
>>61986280
>Led Zeppelin
>AC/DC
70s is Led Zeppelin
80s is obviously Michael Jackson
>>61986280
70s would be sex pistols/ramones
80s would be pixies i guess, there wasnt much huge rock in that decade
>>61986327
>70s = Bowie
>>61986334
this
>>61986318
>>61986328
>>61986334
ok led zepplin fits in perfectly but michael jackson is more pop than he is rock.
>>61986318
i dont think van halen are significant enough, at least relatively speaking when compared to the rest of the acts on the chart
>>61986334
This is actually correct. Changing my answer from >>61986328
Anything otherwise is wrong.
>>61986334
This
>>61986318
>>61986327
>>61986328
>>61986334
>>61986348
'70s is Queen, you tards
>>61986382
Sinatra isn't rock either, he's blues
Rock didn't exist in the '40s
>>61986382
>>61986382
fucking frank sinatra isn't rock
>>61986318
this seems right, with led zep having an almost godly presence with the 18-35 demo (lots of interviews showed people talking about no matter when they were touring, everybody poured out to see them)
van halen fits because there is not other band that defined the decade's excess...metal wasnt mainstream, motley crue copied them, and they're rock.
MJ is a strong case though
>>61986436
you know what he meant, stop being a dick
70's - Pink Floyd
80's - Queen
>>61986434
>70s is Queen
>a singles band
>the most significant of the 70s
alright lad
>>61986612
This
>>61986280
40s is Bing Crosby, Sinatra wasn't really that big until he released Songs for Young Lovers in 1954
neither of them are rock though, you should've started the chart in the 50's, OP
>>61986612
Queen was much more popular in the 70s than in the 80s
>>61986612
nah, queen was burnt out til Live Aid and their videos stalled their popularity in the US
Queen's peak was in the 70s, but they don't define that decade either, bc pink floyd and others
>>61986434
>70s anything other than Zeppelin
No. You could argue against MJ for the 80s - you'd probably be wrong but you could still argue against it. But you can't argue against Zeppelin for the 70s.
Anyone who thinks 80s is anything but Michael Jackson can leave.
>>61986708
>you can't argue against zeppelin for the 70s
pink floyd
>>61986532
If we're talking about music in general, I'd say MJ for the 80's EASILY. If it's strictly rock then GNR, AC/DC, and Van Halen all have a case.
2001-2006: music is changing
>>61986718
>michael jackson
>rock
terminate thyself
>>61986727
I love Pink Floyd, but Zeppelin is tied for the most significant group of the last 60 years with the Beatles.
>>61986745
>Frank Sinatra
>rock
>>61986745
>Frank Sinatra
>rock
>>61986280
'10s is beiber according to your pattern thus far
'00s has gotta be like ludacris or something
'70s is zeppelin for sure and anyone who says otherwise is a faggot
'80s... i dunno...
>>61986760
>>61986763
it's proto-rock faggots
>>61986775
'00 is probably Eminem
got rid of sinatra
still no consensus for 80s, mj was pop
who is 80's?
who is 00's?
>>61986788
how the fuck is Vocal Jazz "proto-rock"?
70s is ABBA
>>61986791
>>61986775
>eminem
>ludacris
>bieber
none of these musicians are rock
see>>61986299
>>61986806
So this is only for rock then?
Probably should've clarified that in the OP considering you put fucking Frank Sinatra.
>>61986806
Metallica?
>>61986841
sinatra is 100% rock n roll
>>61986280
70s Zeppelin
80s Depeche Mode
00s Coldplay or Muse
>>61986775
>2000's
>anyone but kanye
>>61986806
>still no consensus for 80s
Dio.
>50s
Elvis
>60s
The Beatles
>70s
Led Zeppelin
>80s
Guns n Roses
>90s
Nirvana
>00s
Coldplay
>10s
some shit like Mumford & Sons or Arctic Monkeys
>>61986813
use yer head boyo
>>61986791
agreed, good call anon.
>>61986838
bieber is probably the most comparable artist to 40's sinatra
pop icon created by executives to sing simple songs and appeal to young girls.
>>61986806
00s is obviously The Strokes
>>61986862
>>61986895
so rock n roll
>>61986897
>pop icon created by executives to sing simple songs and appeal to young girls.
i see your point but that's not the comparisons we're trying to make nor is it a criteria for the kind of musician to appear on this chart. *tips fedora* though
>>61986887
>>61986889
accurate
>>61986889
no one remembers coldplay the same way they remember the beatles zeppelin, nirvana etc...
IF WE CAN'T HAVE BIEBER THEN WE CAN'T HAVE SINATRA GOD DAMNIT
>>61986862
Sinatra fucking hated rock'n'roll, he despised Elvs
>80's
fucking easy, it's michael jackson and there's not even a question
>>61987013
not rock
Complain all you want, but it's Nickelback for the 2000s. You know it's true.
>>61986759
lol people actually believe this
>>61987032
they're a singles band, no one actually buys their albums
00s is Coldplay, no discussion
>>61987031
>beat it
>not rock
k
>>61987081
>implying anyone has even purchased full albums since iTunes
CANDIDATES FOR 80s:
Prince
U2
Bruce
I kind of think it's gotta be Prince, no?
and I"m always with anon >>61987032
rock just died with cobain and we need to accept that.
>>61987129
80s is either Guns n Roses or AC/DC, stop being retarded
>Led Zeppelin most influential band of the 70s
Is this literally Reddit the thread? They didnt influence shit, in fact most of their songs were stolen
>>61987129
>Prince
No.
U2 and Bruce have an argument. Strawpoll time?
>Candidates for 80s
Van Halen
U2
AC/DC
Guns N Roses
Bruce Springsteen
Metallica
Any others that should be added? How 80s was Aerosmith? I don't listen to them so I don't know if they're more 70s or 80s.
>>61987159
>Guns n Roses
appetite for destruction: 87
use your illusion 1: 91
sorry anon, just didn't span the decade
>AC/DC
>80s
credibility lost
>>61986280
00's The Strokes
>>61986555
The hell did he mean then? Excluding people because they aren't rock but starting the chart off with Sinatra? Fucking what? There are rock artists he could list from the 40s so I have no idea why he chose him.
>>61987176
>>61987176
they influenced a bunch of hacks to try to copy them down to a tee and ruined rock and roll
they were great themselves though
>>61987251
>There are rock artists he could list from the 40s
such as....?
80s is no doubt some kind of metal
00s
>>61987176
>most of their songs were stolen
>most
good one anon, so they ripped off a few poor niggers that no one else had heard of? it's art, everyone does shit like that.
>not influential
do you even metal?
>>61987176
agreed desu. bowie was much more influential, not just in music but in fashion as well and how artists portrayed themselves
zeppelin heavily influenced all that godawful 80s buttrock shit like Van Halen and hair metal
>>61987228
80's could be The Smiths, REM, Sonic Youth etc
I'd probably go with Metallica tho. Seems to fit your chart a lot better.
>>61987176
they literally invented Hard Rock
>>61987176
Read the first post, this is not for the most influential. If it was we wouldn't have had beatles or nirvana.
If we are going by "most significant, not 'best' or 'most influential'" I think 80s is no doubt Michael Jackson and 70s is no doubt Led Zeppelin. Who was a more popular rock group during those decades?
And yeah, rock being the popular music died after Nirvana. There's good stuff still today, just not popular anymore.
>Elvis
>Not Bo Diddley or Chuck Berry
sure is reddit in here
Don't even get me started on Sinatra
the creation of this chart proves the 80s was a shit lost decade.
born in the 90s, fuck the 80s.
10s
>>61987367
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fvJEpdq8a8
>>61986992
From what I've heard he like Elvis as a person but didn't understand Rock in the sightest. But when it first came around what you said would be fair to say
>>61987200
Do a strawpoll
>>61987386
80s underground music was fantastic, it's the mainstream that sucked
>god-tier no wave, dream pop, industrial, post-punk, noise rock, jangle pop, lo-fi indie and gothic rock
Michael Jackson for the 70s
>>61987480
This desu
Shouldn't even be a question.
>>61987480
lol
>>61986327
This obviously
>>61986318
iirc Zep was only appreciated in hindsight and didn't do that well commercially at the time. I think Pink Floyd was actually bigger
>>61987433
>>61987433
>>61987433
http://strawpoll.me/6631088
http://strawpoll.me/6631088
http://strawpoll.me/6631088
>>61987480
his first relevant album (Off the Wall) was released in '79 and the peak of his career was in the 80s, how does he represent the 70s?
Pink Floyd and Metallica
00s is lil jon
>>61987522
Led Zeppelin redefined commercial success
They were the first band to get a private jet
>>61987548
>someone voted for Journey
poll results now invalid
>>61987614
kek
>>61987598
I mean, to be fair I think they split costs with other people, but I still agree with you.
>>61987548
>Leaving out Michael Jackson
someone make a new poll
>>61987522
iirc you're fucking wrong
>>61987522
I think led zeppelin was very commercially successful, but most critics didn't like what they were doing.
>>61987632
It's rock only
>>61987667
Michael Jackson has literally been inducted in the rock hall of fame twice
Prince for 80s
>>61987591
wat?
>>61987686
so has NWA
>>61987686
Non-rock artists can be inducted. Biggie and Pac will both be inducted the first time they're eligible. MJ was pop, not rock.
>>61987666
the fact that we need to argue the 80s proves this is right
>>61987666
now slap nickelback on there and close out the thread.
do it you faggot.
Definitive 80s poll
http://strawpoll.me/6631178
>>61987756
>including MJ
Fuck off, he's not rock and Prince just sucks. The other poll was perfectly fine.
>>61987773
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRdxUFDoQe0
Protip, rock and pop aren't mutually exclusive you mongoloid.
>>61987756
No matter who you vote for
>>61987666
Satan is objectivly correct.
The 80s mainstream is literally the least influential decade of rock music so far.
All the bands from this time that get sited were underground-not given a fuck about at all.
>>61987773
>pop artists cannot be rock artists
>meanwhile the biggest pop group of all time are already on the chart
:^)
>>61987773
Well they are the two most influential on that poll.
And rock is a very very broad term.
>>61987548
Surprised nobody even brought up Ozzy before this poll honestly. In hindsight he might be the closest artist to an 80s Led Zeppelin in the sense that he almost had a "godly presence" and was sort of a legend. Not sure his music was the best of the 80s though
God damnit wtf is ACDC still doing on here.
>TNT, Dirty Deeds, Highway to Hell all pre 1980
>Bon Scott dead 1980, have one more good album: Back in Black 1980
80s should be U2, they invented arena rock and being a huge faggot political philanthropist and are still huge today. The 80s was shit and thats the best it offered.
>>61987815
I don't know how you can say Michael Jackson isn't influential.
>>61987818
>they had plenty of rock songs though.
>>61987796
No shit, but nobody considers MJ a rock artist though
>>61987176
read the first post ITT. if this was about influence then TVU wouldve taken over the beatles for the 60s
>>61987838
I'd say he was at his peak in the 70s with Black Sabbath
>>61987852
you're missing the point lad
pop is anything but an exclusive solitary genre
you can be pop-x with x being just about any genre with mainstream appeal
Michael Jackson has a large chunk of his discography that can be called pop-rock. To argue against him being the biggest act of the 80s is just asinine.
>>61987873
It's not just about influence but also mainstream staying power.
TVU barely have the second one, and Cream was more influential than they were anyway.
>>61987852
They have a lot of songs you could easily consider 60's pop music.
>>61987879
This desu.
>>61987916
Cream fucking rules.
Also, why is anyone even considering GnR for this?
>>61987912
He is the biggest act of the 80s, we established that at the beginning of the thread - but he's not a rock artist in the same way Kendrick isn't a funk artist just because TPAB was heavily funk-influenced. If you try arguing MJ was the greatest "rock" act of the 80s you're literally a retard.
Hows the 80s even still up for debate
Voting for MJ t b h
>>61986791
this, nickelbacks and coldplays are not even close
>>61987989
>>61987999
>what is rock n roll
>>61987666
>a dead void of horrible mainstream garbage
So basically how hip hop people in the 2020s-30s will view this decade?
>>61987548
Springsteen if you're from NJ, Metallica if you're from anywhere else.
>>61988014
one of many genres that MJ frequently worked in
p easy to grasp
>>61987773
>Prince just sucks
kys
>>61988029
What? This decade has been fucking great for hip-hop, at least since 2012. The 2000s was the decade that will be, and already is, viewed as the shit era of hip-hop. There was only like 5 good albums from 2005 to 2009.
Holy shit I forgot about Coldplay but that's a good one for 00's.
>>61987848
>he's really not.
he created a formula for big wigs to force on top 40 poptism, but he really had very little influence elsewhere.
YOU'RE ALL KNOW NOTHiNG FAGGOTS
80s rock was 100% defined, owned, and operated by Jon Bon Jovi.
Put him on the board OP.
90= nin, mercury rev, metallica, Korn, tool, oasis, Marilyn manson
Sooooo, are we just doing rock now? Cause 80's should be Metallica realistically if it's rock music, but MJ if it's anything. If it's anything, it should be Eminem for the 00's. Dude sold like 120 million albums in 10 years during the download era.
>>61988146
mercury rev weren't popular enough
>>61988085
but most of the innovative and original stuff is underground still. this decade is barely even a change.
>>61988115
Literally has a wikipedia page and numerous other sites dedicated to listing artists who name him as an influence.
>>61986299
>Btw this is for the most significant rock acts of each decade, not "best" or "most influential".
>rock acts
>frank sinatra
kill self
>>61988130
this
>>61988150
>who innovated mallcore and literally nothing else.
>who are losing staying power except in mall metal land
>>61988177
But is far better than nirvana :)
>>61988130
>nobody gives a fuck about him anymore
>>61986681
>What is Live Aid 1985
>>61988130
just loose women like your mom were into bon jovi you fucking bastard child
>>61988220
Metallica started thrash metal with a few other bands, but were the most successful at it. In my opinion, they started a chain of different metal genres, and influence bands still till this day. I would put Metallica above Bon jovi in significance.
Where is Frank Zappa
>>61988286
u wot m8.
best selling rocker in the 80s.
best.
>>61988181
>most of the innovative and original stuff is underground still
No, only hipsters who pretend to like Death Grips and RTJ think that.
think we have a winner boys
>>61988365
>If I don't like music then people who do must be pretending
You have to be above 18 to post here lad.
>>61987176
So tired of the "they stole music, they can't be good" argument. Led Zeppelin excelled in terms of arranging and performing (from a studio standpoint, I can understand complaints of them sucking live). Also even if they influenced bad music that doesn't belittle their significance.
>>61988410
congratulations MJ
>>61988410
wait I thought we were only doing rock?
ITT: Arguments over genre
>>61988507
michael jackson will rock you in your ass you little white boy
>>61988552
well i guess that settles it.
>>61986887
Wasn't metallica huge in the 80's? Kill 'Em All, Ride The Lighting, Master Of Puppets, And Justice For All.
>>61986806
led zeppelin? really?
>>61986280
Made a non shit version tbqhwyfam
>>61986806
Some punk band
>>61989015
Right, they didnt get radio play, forgot
>>61988937
fuq off post ironic hipster fag
>>>/mu/
>>61986280
i tried
>>61986806
00s
>>61986806
the police
>>61986646
implying queen didnt have a couple of great albums u dip
>queen
>queen II
>sheer heart attack
>a night at the opera
>>61987873
TVU are NOT more influential than the beatles
>>61988031
im from NJ and fuck the boss
>>61988931
Led Zeppelin sold almost as many studio albums than the Beatles in the US despite having released only 9 albums.
Led Zeppelin had so many drones that Gary Moore and Ozzy felt the need to write a fucking song about it.
Anything else than Led Zeppelin would be a joke for the 70s.
70's
>Bowie
80's
>Kate Bush
there.
>>61988937
only recognize john zorn
>>61988085
implying hip-hop is serious music
>>61989292
>bowie
>good
kek, funny stuff m8.
>>61989396
>bowie
>not good
Everybody laugh at him
>>61989316
Olivier Messiaen
John Cage
AMM
Anthony Braxton
John Zorn
Ground Zero/Otomo Yoshihide
>>61989396
>bowie
>not good
>>61987953
Sinatra isn't a rock artist in the slightest and he starts off the chart. There are dozens of rhythm and blues/honky tonk/western swing/electric blues/etc artists more of him being in the 40s slot if we're being exclusive to rock artists/influence on rock.
>>61986299
>Frank Sinatra
>rock
Other than Elvis, the Beatles, and Nirvana, who in those respective decades are more influential?
>>61986280
70s Queen
80s NWA
>>61989396
>bowie
>not god
>>61989482
>bowie
>good
he's an overrated hack who managed to market himself as a master of the avant-garde but really just produced bland pop music that should have been forgotten long ago.
Make no mistake, Bowie was not a good musician but a good marketer, he's not the heir to The Beatles but the heir to the marketing department of Anheuser-Busch. The musical equivalent of a mass produced tasteless fizzy lager marketed as a quality ale. Literally the epitome of faux-music masquerading as art.
>>61986976
thats what you think, some people already consider them a classic act
>>61989570
>i just say what scaruffi says: the post
>>61989513
Nirvana???
>>61989511
>Sinatra isn't a rock artist in the slightest and he starts off the chart
Read the fucking thread dumbass, we took him off because OP doesn't know what the hell he's talking about.
>>61989603
Yes, what rock act, or ANY act for that matter, was more influential in the 90s?
>>61989599
>I just listen to what's popular :~)
>>61989650
Korn, Nine inch Nails. the Stone roses, Rage against the machine...
>>61989663
>i just dont listen to something because it is too popular ;^)
>>61989570
This
Bowie was literally an overrated hack more known for his wild appearance than his (lack of) talent at composing or perfoming. He was a trendhopper who basically ripped off other shit that was going on around him and watered it down for a mainstream audience, his few good albums were collabs with more talented musicians like Eno and Mick Ronson
>>61986532
Motley Crue is the best "80s Rock" band. Waaaaay better than van halen.
>>61989700
>he praises the beatles in his post
>but he dislikes bowie, it must be because he's popular
yes, I can't see a single flaw in your thought process
>>61988937
>contemporary
>>61989761
>his critique to bowie is that he is too popular
>he also listens to popular music
>void critique
>>61986280
I'd be hard pressed to call Sinatra a 40s singer, but he definitely can't edge out Elvis.
80s is Michael Jackson. 70s are tough. Elton John or Pink Floyd seem like the right answers for the 70s.
>>61989809
my critique to bowie is not that he's too popular, it's that he's a non-musician without an ounce of musical talent, stop projecting.
>>61989841
>stop projecting
>we both listen to popular music too
WTF is it that i am projecting.
Also bowie was of course not an amazing musician, still he knew how to play guitar, piano, sax etc. The thing is millions of people around the world know how to play instruments, that doesnt make them better than bowie at music. The important part of it all is composing the music, thats the hard part, and that is where he was outstanding
>>61989910
you're projecting disingenuous reasons for listening to music.
Bowie was not a great composer, compositionally his songs are nothing special and not even particularly interesting. They're bland, samey and indistinct from other pop music of the time. If blackstar had been released by another (non famous) artist nobody would have given it the slightest interest.
>>61989841
>Not an ounce of musical talent
>>61986708
This. Zeppelin had a better run than Pink Floyd, little to no misteps whereas Floyd crumbled without Waters to hold their hands.
>>61990008
>you're projecting disingenuous reasons for listening to music.
What? You are the one who literally said
>he listens to popular music
>Bowie was not a great composer, compositionally his songs are nothing special and not even particularly interesting. They're bland, samey and indistinct from other pop music of the time. If blackstar had been released by another (non famous) artist nobody would have given it the slightest interest.
>they're samey
>samey
Enough with the b8
>>61990056
found the /b/tard or /v/irgin who came over when bowie died
bowie was a bad musician in all important respects.
>>61990095
Zeppelin petered out creatively by the mid 70s.
>>61986732
For 80's? Nah, Prince or Bruce Springsteen would probably fill that criteria. Way more of a cultural touchstone than all three of those. Van Halen (and their best stuff is from the 70's) is pretty much a singles band who don't reach too far outside their comfort zone, AC/DC isn't just 80's, and Guns 'N Roses didn't do much except for Appetite and Illusion 1. If we're just talking about bands, Metallica had a better run than all three (Kill Em All, Ride The Lightning, Master of Puppets, ...And Justice For All are bona fide classics).
>>61990151
That's an easy argument for any act or artist, but as in terms of objectivity, everything they did (except Presence) is a classic. Nirvana also petered out by the mid-90's (for different reasons, obviously) but they're still fondly remembered as the most important of their era.
>>61986280
I don't like U2 but they probably were the biggest band of the '80s t.b.h.
>>61990148
How in the name of all that is holy was he a bad musician? You can hear his merit in tracks like Sweet Thing or Station to Station? And if not those tracks, then Life On Mars? That song is literally pop perfection.
>>61990315
I was just b8ing m8
>>61990340
God damn it.
>>61990430
Sorry anon
>>61990458
No problem man, take care.
>>61990315
>Life On Mars
A glacial song about as entertaining as watching paint dry.
Completely dull compared to literally any song from The Beatles from Rubber Soul onward. The same glacial rhythm continues throughout the entire song, little in the way of dynamics, the same chord progression and lyrics just repeat without any development. The accompaniment is amateurishly composed and sounds like a dollar store rip off of a Phil Spector orchestral accompaniment. Lyrics are random dogshite, trying to sound like a stream of consciousness writer but without any talent.
>>61990430
>>61990340 is not me
2000s and 2010s would be rappers
There are no true rockstars today. 2000s you could maaaaaaybe argue for foo fighters or coldplay or some shit but they're weren't as massive in the mainstream and well known by EVERYONE
>>61990617
Agree. 2000s is probably Kanye. Not sure about 10s.
>>61990604
Dull? did you actually listen to Life On Mars?
>A Little Help From My Friends
> Not a heap of shit
>>61990617
2000s contenders:
Foo Fighters
Coldplay
Linkin Park
Blink-182
Green Day
Fall Out Boy
My Chemical Romance
Queens of the Stone Age
System of a Down
Nickelback
>>61990733
Linkin Park would prob be it t.b.h.
>>61989129
Post Punk elitists are worse than mall fags.
80s was literally Glam rock/Hair metal, so Bon Jovi, Van Halen or GnR
>>61990733
actual list:
None.
80s are irrelevant because 80s music is objectively bad
>>61990710
I've listened to it, yes. It's exceedingly dull
>A Little Help From My Friends
Better than Life on Mars. It's a little comical I suppose, but it shows talent and original song writing. It's a great song, I suppose it's not a tour de force of late Bealtes song writing, but it shows the strength and talent of great pop writing that even their worst songs are still far better than most artists' best.
>>61990875
This is bullshit. You clearly don't know what you are talking about.
>>61990968
your opinions are objectively wrong.
>>61991021
Not him, but see pic related please
>>61990650
10's is Kendrick, easy. He's like a marketable Public Enemy.
>>61991041
wow, real mature
>>61990733
not radiohead?
also, no one has mentioned talking heads or pixies for the 80's, surely they are widely regarded as influential "rock" acts?
>>61991140
Radiohead for 2000s tbqhwyf
>>61991041
Was this supposed to kill me?
>>61989695
stone roses were 80's desu
gotta be this
>>61991337
just wait a few days, it will kick in ;)
>>61986327
jesus fuck /mu/, it's very obviously this.
>>61987773
>prince sucks
>>61991842
60's should be the Doors
>>61990733
Green Day and Blink were 90s. MCR and SoaD are just no. Queens of the Stone Age were probably the best of that list but not nearly big enough. Nickelback was the biggest of that list but not nearly good enough. Fall Out Boy has Pete Wentz. That leaves Foo Fighters, Coldplay, and Linkin Park.
>>61986841
jesus christ he got rid of sinatra, what the hell do you want
>>61992425
Prince is garbage, and he was less rock than MJ
>>61987208
this
GNR came out way too late to define a decade
I mean, it might be a stretch to put Bruce Springsteen, but AC DC is way more of a stretch
>70s: Floyd
>80s: Depeche Mode
>90s: Nirvana
>00s: Muse
>10s: music are u ok? music is dead.
>>61987640
lol
>>61986889
Guns was late 80's early 90's
>>61990279
U2 went from post-punk underground to arena rock in less than a decade. definitely defined the 80s
80s should be Butthole Surfers
![jew-pepe[2].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/kmxb37f.jpg "jew-pepe[2].jpg")
80's should be Sonic Youth, Pixies or Metallica
70s = Queen
80s = Queen
Not that hard guys
