I only mentioned "cred" because Grohl's speech showed him to be so desperate to have some. Turns out he has plenty ... as a major label, arena rock star and card-carrying member of the Grammy-approved glitterati. Unfortunately, he wants everyone to think he's still slumming it. Because, you know, those who do are perceived to have credibility. But, since you asked, Lemmy is a perfect example, especially when you can A/B the recent documentary about him and the recent documentary about Foo Fighters. Look where Lemmy lives. Look where Grohl lives. Look where Lemmy records. Look where Grohl records. That's a pretty good illustration. Someone in a thread about this topic on another forum mentioned Mike Ness. I think he also belongs in the "legitimately having cred" category. The question remains: why does Dave Grohl feel the need to publicly boast about how (allegedly) spartan his recording process was, or how genuine and full of soul his music is? I remember you having issue with the Foo doc when first discussed. You percieve Grohl as "desperate," I see him as about as un-desperate as one can be. Also, you're percieving his speech as a public "boast," while I view it as heartfelt. It's all about one's personality and perception, and what they bring to the table when forming opinions. You're a cynic, I'm a romantic. It takes a village. I have no point, really, just these observations.