The REAL greatest bands

[Arwen Undomiel]

What a heap of ****... you had loads of good bands in the 60s all competing for sales, in a time where people were less economically affluent, which makes it even more competative.

You're assuming that all Beatles album sales were during that time. Not true. The mere fact they've been around so long gives them more years to rack up all those numbers.

 

[oldrooster]

The Beatles, period.....followed by the Beach Boys....

 

[propane]

^ Sure.

 

[cartridge]

Is that sort of language necessary?

I'm sorry I never consdered "cr@p", to be particularly bad language.



You're assuming that all Beatles album sales were during that time.

Where did I say that? However The beatles did sell millions of Albums and singles in their six years.

 

[KristianJ]

I'm sorry I never consdered "cr@p", to be particularly bad language.

Well use the word then. I have no real problems with it, but I have problems with the lack of respect that you've shown to my post. I can quite easily prove my point, but I doubt that my efforts would be worthwhile if I was to be insulted like I was previously. I have studied popular music as part of my education and I think I know what I'm talking about. But since this thread is really going nowhere, I might as well shut up.

 

[cartridge]

Well use the word then. I have no real problems with it, but I have problems with the lack of respect that you've shown to my post. I can quite easily prove my point, but I doubt that my efforts would be worthwhile if I was to be insulted like I was previously. I have studied popular music as part of my education and I think I know what I'm talking about. But since this thread is really going nowhere, I might as well shut up.

I have no real problems with it

then stop whining.

but I have problems with the lack of respect that you've shown to my post.

if you dont want your views attacked then keep them to your self.

I can quite easily prove my point

really? Well you see the debut album Help entered the charts at number one, they had the number one single and number one album both at #1 for 7 weeks at the same time. (a record)

You see despite your apparent ability to prove me wrong, at your leasure, the beatles albums often went to numebr one as soon as if not before they were released, and stayed their for a long time, they were incredibly popular, despite your assertation that it took 40 years for them to reach that stage.

if I was to be insulted like I was previously

I do dislike it when people fail to distinguish between themselves and the points they make. I never insulted you, I insulted your argument, their is a significant differance.

I have studied popular music as part of my education and I think I know what I'm talking about.

Well your not doing a good job in proving it, are you?

I might as well shut up.

Do what you like mate.

 

[Arwen Undomiel]

I have no real problems with it

then stop whining.

but I have problems with the lack of respect that you've shown to my post.

if you dont want your views attacked then keep them to your self.

Attacking? If that's what you're calling your posts then it's against CF rules. Please don't.

I can quite easily prove my point

really? Well you see the debut album Help entered the charts at number one, they had the number one single and number one album both at #1 for 7 weeks at the same time. (a record)

You see despite your apparent ability to prove me wrong, at your leasure, the beatles albums often went to numebr one as soon as if not before they were released, and stayed their for a long time, they were incredibly popular, despite your assertation that it took 40 years for them to reach that stage.

Re-read, please. That was me that commented on the years they've been around.

if I was to be insulted like I was previously

I do dislike it when people fail to distinguish between themselves and the points they make. I never insulted you, I insulted your argument, their is a significant differance.

I have studied popular music as part of my education and I think I know what I'm talking about.

Well your not doing a good job in proving it, are you?

I might as well shut up.

Do what you like mate.

Lighten up. IT'S ONLY A FORUM ABOUT MUSIC WHICH HAS A VERY DIVERSE MEMBERSHIP! Everyone has different tastes. Or would you prefer us all to be clones of you?

 

[Arwen Undomiel]

really? Well you see the debut album Help entered the charts at number one, they had the number one single and number one album both at #1 for 7 weeks at the same time. (a record)

Oh, cartridge - one more thing? If you are using record sales to prove who the best band is, let's just take a look at that. Sure, the Beatles are #1. But who is number 2? Last time I checked it was Garth Brooks.

 

[cartridge]

Attacking? If that's what you're calling your posts then it's against CF rules. Please don't.




Re-read, please. That was me that commented on the years they've been around.



Lighten up. IT'S ONLY A FORUM ABOUT MUSIC WHICH HAS A VERY DIVERSE MEMBERSHIP! Everyone has different tastes. Or would you prefer us all to be clones of you?

If that's what you're calling your posts then it's against CF rules.

Ohh i'm sorry I never knew it was against the rules to contradict a falicy regarding record sales of major bands of the 60's, I will be sure to make note of it for the future.

Re-read, please. That was me that commented on the years they've been around.

Your quite right it was, but now its your turn to re-read because you said: -

"If you are using record sales to prove who the best band is, let's just take a look at that. Sure, the Beatles are #1. But who is number 2? Last time I checked it was Garth Brooks."


I've already addessed this point, twice.

Of course this test is not infalible crappy stuff sometimes gets high album ratings, and some truly amazing bands have only one if any, but singles charts are far worse.

Lighten up.

Its not me who's throwing a hissy fit for daring to raise the possibility that U2 are not one of the greatest band of all time, if anyones got to lighten up, its you lot.

 

[KristianJ]

If that's what you're calling your posts then it's against CF rules.

Ohh i'm sorry I never knew it was against the rules to contradict a falicy regarding record sales of major bands of the 60's, I will be sure to make note of it for the future.

Re-read, please. That was me that commented on the years they've been around.

Your quite right it was, but now its your turn to re-read because you said: -

"If you are using record sales to prove who the best band is, let's just take a look at that. Sure, the Beatles are #1. But who is number 2? Last time I checked it was Garth Brooks."


I've already addessed this point, twice.

Of course this test is not infalible crappy stuff sometimes gets high album ratings, and some truly amazing bands have only one if any, but singles charts are far worse.

Lighten up.

Its not me who's throwing a hissy fit for daring to raise the possibility that U2 are not one of the greatest band of all time, if anyones got to lighten up, its you lot.

Rule No. 1 - No "Flaming"

1) You will not post any messages that harass, insult, belittle, threaten or flame another member or guest. This will include misquoting another member out of context. You may discuss another member's beliefs but there will be no personal attacks on the member himself or herself. This includes implied accusations that another member is not a Christian.

You have done a lot of this in this thread, cartridge. I don't really want to descend into the sort of childish and unnecessary comments that have offended me personally, but I have serious problems with this thread and hope someone locks it asap.

 

[DJ B.K.]

You might as well close this thread because debating about the ""real"" greatest bands of all time can't be done. Greatness is subjective. The most influencial band could be debated however. If people are going to say you have to taste in music if you think "..." is a great band, that is just stupid.

 

[cartridge]

Rule No. 1 - No "Flaming"

1) You will not post any messages that harass, insult, belittle, threaten or flame another member or guest. This will include misquoting another member out of context. You may discuss another member's beliefs but there will be no personal attacks on the member himself or herself. This includes implied accusations that another member is not a Christian.

You have done a lot of this in this thread, cartridge. I don't really want to descend into the sort of childish and unnecessary comments that have offended me personally, but I have serious problems with this thread and hope someone locks it asap.

You quote where I have directed an an insult at any person, show me where.

The only rules which have been broken , is the posting of knowingly false information, you know quite well I have not directed an insult at anyone in this thread, yet you accuse me of flaming. Tell me are you lying, or do you fal to understand what flaming actualy is?

and do you mean David Gilmour rather than Andy Gilmour?

Yeah I did, for some reason I confused Andy Gilmour with David Gilmour, Andy Gilmour is the bass player of 100 reasons.

 

[nadroj1985]

Hey guys, can we let this go? Forgive and forget, eh?

 

[cartridge]

Hey guys, can we let this go? Forgive and forget, eh?

the most sensible suggestion of this thread.

Can we now return to making suggestion of the greatest bands, without tedious interuption?

 

[nadroj1985]

Can we now return to making suggestion of the greatest bands.........?

Yes, let's.

I said the Velvet Underground already, right? What more needs to be said?

 

[angrypanda]

Greatest rock band ever? U2, of course! That is, of coure, in my opinion, and nothing some music snob tells me is going to change MY opinion.

How can I compare the Edge with David Gilmour or Jimi Hendrix? I can't, really; they all have their own playing styles. I love Pink Floyd and I love Hendrix, but the Edge isn't even TRYING to play the way conventional rock guitarists play; he's a lot more concerned with the sound, and he's very conservative with notes. Cartridge, you probably know that, you seem very concerned about proving how much you know about rock music. A lot of their contemporaries are still impressed with the music they produce today, 20-plus years after their founding; the same can't be said about the Rolling Stones.

Not only are they great musicians who put on a great show, but I've always been impressed with U2's loyalty to each other, their manager, and their label. Then there's Bono's crusades to try and end third-world debt and raise AIDS awareness, instead of sleeping with floozies and doing lines. Now THAT is actual greatness.

It's funny that U2 was dimissed out of hand with some vagaries about accusing their fans of not knowing music, but without any actual reasoning. It would be easy to dismiss rock music altogother, because while I like it, listening to Bach or Mozart makes me realize all this rock/pop stuff, even the best of it, is just so much flash-in-the-pan tripe.

Dan

 

[KristianJ]

Hey guys, can we let this go? Forgive and forget, eh?

I'll second cartridge on his response. And forget about any of the posts beforehand too.

 

[nadroj1985]

It would be easy to dismiss rock music altogother, because while I like it, listening to Bach or Mozart makes me realize all this rock/pop stuff, even the best of it, is just so much flash-in-the-pan tripe.

Can't let this one go. Care to explain how rock music is "flash-in-the-pan tripe?"

 

[ps139]

Its not flash in the pan at all. Its a new expression of some of the same stuff that Bach and Mozart were doing. Listen to Dreamtheater. Their composition is like if Bach was a heavy metal star. Its the same stuff just expressed through different instruments, different sounds. When I say "same stuff" I dont mean to imply that its not good, but that its the same great sort of music.

 

[Pope Gonzo]

Now... I like rock music and I understand that most everyone else does too. However, since classical music was brought up... I can't imagine how anyone could make the argument that rock can hold a candle to the great classical composers.