Well, when the man is inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame as one of the inventors and pioneers of Rock and Roll, I think (as does the whole of the music industry) that qualifies him as being Rock and Roll.Donkey wrote:I am not being 'contrary' sorry for having an opinion that differs from you.kidlogic wrote:Stop being so contrary for the sake of it. Every title is applied in retrospect. No one comes up for a name of a kind of music before its ever made. It all has to start somewhere as something else.Donkey wrote:tbh that is something that has been retrospectively applied to him as a pioneer, when at the time he was making rhythm and blues, as were carl perkins, elvis presley etc. It may be seen as the precursor to rock 'n roll but it wasn't seen like that at the time.kidlogic wrote:Donkey wrote: erm, chuck berry was rhythm and blues
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Berry
Dubstep wasnt called dubstep until a few years ago even though the pioneering tracks far predate the term.
A lot of the reason for the classification of chuck berry et al as rock n' roll is that a lot of the english bands - the stones, beatles, yardbirds etc - covered a lot of r&b on their early records. It doesn't make it rock n roll, despite having a clear influence.
The english bands you mentioned werent even around yet when he came up with the sound that would shape and become Rock N Roll. The Beatles formed in '57, the Stones in '62 and etc... much later than the early '50s when Chuck was signed to Chess for the first time and creating his personal sound. Im really not even sure why you mentioned them. They have nothing to do with Chuck Berry and the emergence of Rock and Roll from Rythym and Blues. The term Rock and Roll was even coined before they exsited, in '56 by Alan Freed.