Greatest Band of all time

No such thing as THE GREATEST BAND EVER...As for the Fab4 - Overrated and repetitively boring. They made 5-6 pretty good pop tunes and thats it. Funny nobody mentioned the ROLLING STONES ! (LOL)...Or the RAMONES for that matter.

Velvet would have gone for MARIAH CAREY ! ! !

_______

Lunar

yes there is




()

There is actually this TF show in France "nouvelle Star" where they reduce from week to week 30.000 potential pop stars (everybody can be a star for 15 minutes) to the one and onlyNumber One. 

I think this is realy a mirror of our society, instead of pointing out individual particularities, you have to choose a "winner" who reflects the majority.  We have had a lot of polls, best this, best that but Yanns question :  Greatest band of all times reflects our state of mind in excellence, because it implies the existence of an absolute measure.

 My personal favourite would be Gentle Giant, but that was not the question.On the other hand I love filing music, (I am the guy in High Fidelity , I just bought new shelfs and I'am already elaborating a new classification system) I am a typical "product" of our society, always comparing, classifying : is this the best product I get for my money, are the new boxes worth the price, can I get a cheaper flight with this company...

So yes, The Beatles , I agree with Reed, what they have done at their time in their categorie is cool, but then ... is there  a  Greatest band of all times?

Trouserpress wrote: The Beatles might be successful and more than a little influential, but for me, these chaps: are the greatest band of all time. That's right. Gentle Giant are the greatest band of all time. You heard me. Why? Well, apart from all five being hugely adept musicians, capable of playing countless instruments to astonishingly high standards, their music pushed the boundaries of modern composition more effectively than any "modern classical" composer, avant garde nutter writing symphonies for choir and toaster or indeed any other rock band by drawing on more genres than you can shake a stick at, adapting them to their own unique sound, arranging and composing their work in a supremely rich and dense manner and all the while writing songs that YOU COULD SING ALONG TO. They could be catchy, quirky, powerful, humourous, heart-wrenchingly beautiful and downright surreal, but they always always always sounded like themselves. Okay, so they produced some dud albums. I'd maintain that so did the Beatles. They didn't have the money, the far-reaching success of the former, but artistically no one can top them. And what's music about - money or art?

I had thought of answering this band. Gentle Giant is one of the bands that indeed has the most artistic level on the entire progressive rock scope. Only Frank Zappa's band rivals these guys. So if I had to choose those, I would be torn up which one. Joren pointed to Frank Zappa, and rightly so, because [the yellow snow crystals...] there is no band as tight and musically powerful as his bands. Not even Gentle Giant. But Gentle Giant has the 'bandness' which I miss with FZ. His songs are a bit too static for me I guess. I'm sure Joren will rebuke me on that

To all of you Beatle loving fools out there. There is way more to a band than influence. Indeed, if we are talking about 'greatest' band than it is mostly about how the band is! in that regard, the beatles are a bunch of overrated childish ninkapoops. And saying that they were the first is nonsense, because jazz was kicking musical arse before that and the first arsekicking progband was the first arsekicking progband. They didn't have the beatles as example to arsekicking, because they don't.

WYWH 

except for George W. Bush right???????ha ha ha

Meddle

Which floyd album would be best example?

I was actually refering to Rush's consistancy as in their responsibility to their fans is of the most have ever seen.  That is a statement hardly to be debated and everyone knows that 80's rush after Signals was pretty bad.  If that wasn't implied now it is for those who like to argue, bring it

Massive Combine wrote: The Beatles without a doubt are the saturation of the most influential period of music, by the most influential band.  A complete phenomenon.  However their reign was a period of early punk music that evolved into the epic Abby Road over a period of 6-7 years, so how could that brief enigma be considered the best.  On the other hand, the band Rush is one of the most consistant bands of all time and have a 30 year reign but not one of their albums top the beatles from Rubber Soul through Abby Road. So if not the Beatles or Rush for the given reasons, I vote KING Crimson as the greatest because they qualify both amazing standards.

I totally & utterly disagree

If you read my thread futher before i stated that they were actually the greatest band due to the greatest ever song writing of John & Paul,i did say as musicians alone they are not so hot...

But to claim that Rush were a more consistant band that is rubbish.Rush had a fine period around 'A farewell to the kings' but were no way consistant after the late 70's.Anyone can spew crap after crap out to keep a contract going...Buisness you see!

Although King Crimson are one of the bands in my top 10 i'm afraid that they were Beatles infuenced & if you actually read about the 'Lizard' album you'll find it's Beatles orientated.

 

Well blow me down.Is'nt that the beatles around that letter 'I'?

Edited by Karnevil9