DDD Forum
https://digitaldreamdoor.com/forum/

100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
https://digitaldreamdoor.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=259		 Page 17 of 457
Author:  corrections [ Wed Dec 01, 2010 11:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
Bruce wrote:
ClashWho wrote:
Musicfan67 wrote:
I also have a hard time believing that Elvis was the first to actually act on stage with a overt sexual manner also.


He was the first to have a major impact on popular music and popular culture with it.


What you actually mean is the he was the first to have a major impact on "white" music and "white" culture with it. Lots of black artists were doing it and having an impact on black music and black culture with it. Wynonie Harris, Sonny Til, Howlin' Wolf with the soda bottle trick, etc...

Rock and roll didn't suddenly become important merely because the geeky white suburban kids finally discovered it with Elvis.


True but it became by far the biggest genre of popular music because of it.
Author:  Bruce [ Wed Dec 01, 2010 11:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
corrections wrote:
Bruce wrote:
quote="Musicfan67"]What you actually mean is the he was the first to have a major impact on "white" music and "white" culture with it. Lots of black artists were doing it and having an impact on black music and black culture with it. Wynonie Harris, Sonny Til, Howlin' Wolf with the soda bottle trick, etc...

Rock and roll didn't suddenly become important merely because the geeky white suburban kids finally discovered it with Elvis.


True but it became by far the biggest genre of popular music because of it.
[/quote]

So the contest is rigged. Unless the unhip white kids finally know about it, it can't be the biggest. So we measure the "biggest" and the "greatest" by the lowest common denominator.

Hip hop only became really significant when the geeky 10 year old suburban white kids became aware of it.
Author:  ClashWho [ Wed Dec 01, 2010 11:28 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
Bruce wrote:
Unless the unhip white kids finally know about it, it can't be the biggest.


I don't know about "unhip," but as far as whites go, given the demographics of the population, of course it can't be the biggest without them.

Bruce wrote:
So the contest is rigged.


It's not rigged. It's reality.
Author:  Bruce [ Wed Dec 01, 2010 11:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
ClashWho wrote:
Bruce wrote:
Unless the unhip white kids finally know about it, it can't be the biggest.


I don't know about "unhip," but as far as whites go, given the demographics of the population, of course it can't be the biggest without them.



There are more non whites in the world than whites.

Julio Iglesias has sold a lot more records than The Who, for instance.

Luis Miguel has sold more records than Bob Dylan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_be ... ic_artists
Author:  Musicfan67 [ Thu Dec 02, 2010 12:20 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
Corrections do you anything about music theory? There have been plenty written how the Beatles harmonic and melodic tendencies differred from the American rock and roll and R&B music that came before them.

Do you actually know anything about music theory again? I don't anyone prior to rock and roll whose music who had classical musicians compare rock artists to the Schubert like flow of musical invention. Also the Beatles went way beyond their rock and roll and pop roots. Yeh they were well versed in pop, country, R&B, assorted styles in rock and roll, European Folk and Skiffle. But went way beyond that with, bolero, ska, reggae, vaudeville, cabaret, musical hall, modern aleatory, musique concrete, atonality, electronic music, avant garde, jazz, baroque and the extended dissonant sonorities George Harrison would explore on "I Want to Tell You"and "Only a Northern Song". Again people like George Gershwin did nothing of the sort. The Beatles freely added jazz harmonies, unusual time signatures and employed varying styles of vocal harmonies to their music. They composed long songs, short songs to songs with many parts. Any listen to songs like "Blue Jay Way" or "Within You Without You" and they went way beyond the norms of popular music convention.

You know what Pete Townshend is right in terms of broadening the canvas and scope of rock and roll songwriting the Beatles are by far a bigger influence than anyone I can think of came before them. You know what these people agree and they know more music theory than you and me.

Roger McGuinn of the Byrds

"As I said, we were influenced by The Beatles, and we wanted to be a band like that, and when I was working with Bobby Darin, and then in the Brill Building, my job was to listen to the radio, and emulate the songs that were out there. I had already been working on mixing The Beatles’ music with folk music in Greenwich Village, and I had noticed that they were using folk-influenced chords in their music. They used passing chords that were not common in rock’n’roll and pop songs of that time. I remember listening to them, and thinking that the Beatles were using folding chord construction. That comes from their skiffle roots, they will have learned those chords in their skiffle days, and just brought them into their own writing.”

Pete Townshend of the Who

"In a 1967 interview Pete Townshend of the Who commented "I think "Eleanor Rigby" was a very important musical move forward. It certainly inspired me to write and listen to things in that vein"

Bob Dylan

"They were doing things nobody was doing. Their chords were outrageous, just outrageous, and their harmonies made it all valid. They were pointing the direction music had to go.

Do yourself read the book "The Songwriting Secrets of The Beatles" by Dominic Pedler
Author:  Musicfan67 [ Thu Dec 02, 2010 12:31 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
ClashWho wrote:
Musicfan67 wrote:
ClashWho wrote:
If it's rock, all of them.



The sad thing you can't name any and you resort to saying that. You are actually saying rock and roll hasn't progressed since 1956.


No, I'm not.

Musicfan67 wrote:
As it is a lot of people will tell you that rock and roll and rock music are different.


Ignorant people.

Musicfan67 wrote:
Maybe that's not true but I am throwing that out.


More like shoveling it out.



Honestly ClashWho you are sad IMO. You knock the Beatles but you can't name one song or major band that Elvis has influenced in the last 20 years. When the reality is the Beatles have more musicians ranging from alternative rock to hip-hop being influenced by them. I respect Elvis but the facts are in terms of musical, songwriting, lyrical and recording point of view the Beatles dust him in all areas.

Then you have nerve to call people ignorant to debate if their is the difference between rock and roll and rock music. Whether there is a difference or not people see the difference between both like they do rockabilly and country rock.
Author:  corrections [ Thu Dec 02, 2010 12:58 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
Bruce wrote:
corrections wrote:
Bruce wrote:
quote="Musicfan67"]What you actually mean is the he was the first to have a major impact on "white" music and "white" culture with it. Lots of black artists were doing it and having an impact on black music and black culture with it. Wynonie Harris, Sonny Til, Howlin' Wolf with the soda bottle trick, etc...

Rock and roll didn't suddenly become important merely because the geeky white suburban kids finally discovered it with Elvis.


True but it became by far the biggest genre of popular music because of it.


So the contest is rigged. Unless the unhip white kids finally know about it, it can't be the biggest. So we measure the "biggest" and the "greatest" by the lowest common denominator.

Hip hop only became really significant when the geeky 10 year old suburban white kids became aware of it.[/quote]

:roll:

Interesting that you are throwing "white suburban kids" and "lowest common denominator" together as if they are synonymous but leaving aside that lovely non-point you completely sidestepped the argument. And it isn't just about white kids. Elvis expanded it there and for the first time kids had a musical taste that was really distinct from their parents (of course Elvis wasn't the only one involved in doing this). Popular culture became driven by teens and young adults taste rather than the old (whether this was good for music and culture is an open matter of debate but it has nothing to do with influence). Add to this the fact that Elvis brought this new style into wide awareness among culture. Without Elvis rock doesn't become the popular genre and as such all of music history as we know it changes. There is no British Invasion because there is no market to receive it. Changing the market like Elvis did is the single most important thing that ever happened to the popular music landscape.
Author:  Musicfan67 [ Thu Dec 02, 2010 1:07 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
Of course I disagree and others have agreed with me. You know what other musicians feel the same way. The recent Rolling Stone Immortal Poll and VH1 POLLs both voted by musicians and record producers both have the Beatles as the greatest rock artist. I know for some people here scoff at it but in the end this list you have is a subjective. You said the Beatles influence is not as ubiquitouse as some would believe. Ok I will take that one and remember the biggest pop stars ranging from Lady Gaga to Coldplay all are influenced by the Beatles. Since this kind of studio experimentation with a strong pop structure is common throughout pop music maybe you would know better.

I give credit to James Brown by stripping soul music down to a one-or-two-chord vamp, he invented funk most likely. He is even more influential to music than Elvis IMO. Much of modern pop music owes a lot to him.

Where, I think the Beatles seriously one upped James Brown is on "Tomorrow Never Knows". The track is one or two chords it depends on how you see it. They added multiple loops layered them by them fading in and out all over the track, processed vocals, one bass line note and Ringo basically playing a drum bar loop. The style of that track basically all over the place in pop music today to the point even people in hip-hop have acknowledged it's influence.

http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,588111,00.html

Also on "Taxman" in which the "The Word" also uses the Hendric chord. The song has one mean mother of a funk riff under a slashing dominant 7th/ sharp 9 chord (often called "The Jimi Hendrix Chord") with a distorted slashing guitar riff. Also incorporating some ingenious key changes and some great unison riffing in the last verse that completely outclasses IMO what the Rolling Stones were doing in guitar based rock and roll.

Both songs are I think are two of many of the Beatles songs where there is a more direct link to modern music, like alternative and modern electronic music than to the original 50's rock and roll the Beatles were first influenced
Author:  Bruce [ Thu Dec 02, 2010 1:13 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
corrections wrote:
Changing the market like Elvis did is the single most important thing that ever happened to the popular music landscape.


I've already shown that the market had changed before Elvis had ever made the national charts in March of 1956. There were rock and roll hits in the top ten of the pop charts already by 1954. Teenagers all over the country were digging rock and roll. Elvis didn't create that, he just jumped in and became the biggest artist.

Here's a link for you.

http://books.google.com/books?id=VxMEAAAAMBAJ

Browse through the 1955 issues of Billboard. You'll see plenty of articles about how big rock and roll had become already, before most of the country ever heard of Presley.
Author:  Musicfan67 [ Thu Dec 02, 2010 1:15 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
Rock and Roll was already big before Elvis arrived on the scene he just made it bigger. As for the British Invasion it took eight years after Elvis made it big before the British Invasion started by that time Elvis was doing movies and was basically a shell of himself.

As for the Beatles cultural impact and this is a music website. I thought we were discussing music.

The Beatles - Impact, Influence and Empowerment


It all started on February 1964. In the words of David Copperfield, "I am born."

Beginning with their Ed Sullivan Show appearance, the Beatles brought to a new generation, much more than just a great, new sound and long hair for boys. The Beatles changed our lives. Out of a group of ten baby boomers, at least seven of them would say the same thing. The other three would be in the throes of a mid-life crisis, and deny being "old enough" to remember the impact of the Beatles.

The "Fab Four" is now two, and it's difficult to get used to that.

The copyright of the article The Beatles - Impact, Influence and Empowerment

John, Paul, George, and Ringo were working-class guys with no formal music education. Yet they were changing the world.

They offered the first real ray of sunshine since the assassination of President Kennedy, and were a much needed distraction to the morose melancholy of the "cold war." Despite the screaming, fainting fans and frenzy for the Fab Four, they were not like the musical heartthrobs who came before them.

The Beatles did not have the suave, aloof sophistication of Frank Sinatra. The "Chairman of the Board" was just that, and seemed to exude an attitude of, "Don't try this at home, kids. I AM Sinatra. You're not."

On the other hand, Elvis Presley's subliminal message (even in his early years), seemed to be: "I'm desperately lonely up here on this Pop throne, just a "hunka, hunka burnin' OUT." But, the Beatles had an exciting, creative energy and momentum about them.

Of course, Sinatra and Elvis did not write their own songs, either. I am sure that was a big part of what was intriguing about the Beatles. Like others before them, the Beatles were vilified and accused of corrupting the youth of America. But that sort of condemnation and associated record banning and burning is practically standard procedure for anything new that is feared or misunderstood by "the establishment."

On the contrary, the Beatles' influence kept millions of bored American adolescents "off the streets." Realizing the guitar was easily self-taught and much cheaper than a piano, garage bands sprang up all over the United States. Suddenly, kids were spending Friday and Saturday nights rehearsing with their "combo", instead of roaming the neighborhood, ringing doorbells, rolling houses, and egging cars.

Sure, many of the guys just picked up guitar and got in bands to "get girls." But for many, making music with friends was exactly the creative outlet we needed. We taught ourselves a few guitar chords and put music to our words. And it no longer mattered that we didn't have the vocal power of Judy Garland or Connie Francis. Thanks to the Beatles, we learned to harmonize.
Author:  Bruce [ Thu Dec 02, 2010 1:19 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
Musicfan67 wrote:
Then you have nerve to call people ignorant to debate if their is the difference between rock and roll and rock music. Whether there is a difference or not people see the difference between both like they do rockabilly and country rock.


I'm with the Clasher here......there's no such genre or sub-genre as "rock." Rock and roll changed as much from 1951 to 1956 as it did from 1963 to 1968. That didn't mean that it needed a new name. "Rock" is just short for "rock and roll."

Late 60s and 70s rock and roll sounds a lot different in most cases than 50s rock and roll, and calling it "rock" is nothing but an abbreviation of the name of the genre.
Author:  Bruce [ Thu Dec 02, 2010 1:26 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
Musicfan67 wrote:
It all started on February 1964. In the words of David Copperfield, "I am born." .


No wonder most of the world hates us Americans....people like you who think that nothing matters until it's happening in America. Beatlemania was huge all over the place already by the fall of 1963.

Musicfan67 wrote:
And it no longer mattered that we didn't have the vocal power of Judy Garland or Connie Francis. Thanks to the Beatles, we learned to harmonize.


Are you fucking insane?

Teenagers were harmonizing to vocal groups all through the 50s and early 60s and still do. Harmonizing was huge long before anybody ever heard of the Beatles. Before the 50s you had all kinds of harmony groups going back the the early 1900s. Groups like the Peeerless Quartet were among the biggest acts in the country for decades.

http://digitaldreamdoor.com/pages/best_ ... roups.html

http://digitaldreamdoor.com/pages/best_ ... songs.html

http://digitaldreamdoor.com/pages/best_ ... llads.html
Author:  Musicfan67 [ Thu Dec 02, 2010 1:33 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
Bruce wrote:
Musicfan67 wrote:
Then you have nerve to call people ignorant to debate if their is the difference between rock and roll and rock music. Whether there is a difference or not people see the difference between both like they do rockabilly and country rock.


I'm with the Clasher here......there's no such genre or sub-genre as "rock." Rock and roll changed as much from 1951 to 1956 as it did from 1963 to 1968. That didn't mean that it needed a new name. "Rock" is just short for "rock and roll."

Late 60s and 70s rock and roll sounds a lot different in most cases than 50s rock and roll, and calling it "rock" is nothing but an abbreviation of the name of the genre.


Well I don't agree totally either but I can see some major differences between the decades. If you're playing something outside of 4/4 without that smacking backbeat you're no longer playing rock and roll, IMO. Pure pop elements also deviate from "rock and roll." Or is it from the distorted guitar-oriented rock of the 60s and later.

'Rock & Roll' sort of changed sometime in 1965 when the most popular groups
expanded their musical vision to create eclectic genre-bending music on 'rock'
instruments that was difficult or impossible to dance to. Examples that come to
mind as far as LPs:
THE BEATLES - Rubber Soul
THE BEACH BOYS - Today (side 2 at least)
THE BYRDS - Mr. Tambourine Man (except for a couple of upbeat rockers)
BOB DYLAN - Highway 61 Revisited (very few hot dance tracks on this one)
There was plenty of danceable rock & roll after that (see Paul Revere
& the Raiders for instance),
Author:  Musicfan67 [ Thu Dec 02, 2010 1:35 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
Bruce wrote:
Musicfan67 wrote:
It all started on February 1964. In the words of David Copperfield, "I am born." .


No wonder most of the world hates us Americans....people like you who think that nothing matters until it's happening in America. Beatlemania was huge all over the place already by the fall of 1963.

Musicfan67 wrote:
And it no longer mattered that we didn't have the vocal power of Judy Garland or Connie Francis. Thanks to the Beatles, we learned to harmonize.


Are you fucking insane?

Teenagers were harmonizing to vocal groups all through the 50s and early 60s and still do. Harmonizing was huge long before anybody ever heard of the Beatles. Before the 50s you had all kinds of harmony groups going back the the early 1900s. Groups like the Peeerless Quartet were among the biggest acts in the country for decades.

http://digitaldreamdoor.com/pages/best_ ... roups.html

http://digitaldreamdoor.com/pages/best_ ... songs.html

http://digitaldreamdoor.com/pages/best_ ... llads.html


Well I didn't write the article did I. It was from that person perspective.

Well of course I know the Beatles broke through in England in 1963. Bruce you don't know me either I lived in England for about six years and was married to an English girl so I know what English people think about Americans.

A lot of guys need to chill out and calm down with the insults. From a music point of view I have read some crazy opinions here and I don't resort or try to insult people to make a point.
Author:  Bruce [ Thu Dec 02, 2010 1:40 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)
Musicfan67 wrote:
Bruce wrote:
Musicfan67 wrote:
It all started on February 1964. In the words of David Copperfield, "I am born." .


No wonder most of the world hates us Americans....people like you who think that nothing matters until it's happening in America. Beatlemania was huge all over the place already by the fall of 1963.

Musicfan67 wrote:
And it no longer mattered that we didn't have the vocal power of Judy Garland or Connie Francis. Thanks to the Beatles, we learned to harmonize.


Are you fucking insane?

Teenagers were harmonizing to vocal groups all through the 50s and early 60s and still do. Harmonizing was huge long before anybody ever heard of the Beatles. Before the 50s you had all kinds of harmony groups going back the the early 1900s. Groups like the Peeerless Quartet were among the biggest acts in the country for decades.

http://digitaldreamdoor.com/pages/best_ ... roups.html

http://digitaldreamdoor.com/pages/best_ ... songs.html

http://digitaldreamdoor.com/pages/best_ ... llads.html


Well I didn't write the article did I. Well of course I know the Beatles broke through in England in 1963. Bruce you don't know me either I lived in England for about six years and was married to an English girl so I know what English people think about Americans.

A lot of guys need to chill out and calm down with the insults.


Sorry, I thought you were stating that yourself.
Page 17 of 457 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/