RC, SoDak 1998 - KC 2000 - Council Bluffs IA 2003 - Fargo ND 2003 - St. Paul MN 2003 - Alpine Valley 2003 - St Louis MO 2004 - Kissimmee FLA 2004 - Winnipeg 2005 - Thunder Bay 2005 - Chicago 2006 - Grand Rapids MI 2006 - Denver CO 2006 - Lollapalooza 2007 - Bonnaroo 2008 - Austin City Limits 2009 - Los Angeles 2009 - KC 2010 - St Louis MO 2010 - PJ20 Night 1 - PJ20 Night 2
Ethics - carbon mitigation, merchandise being made by high-waged labor (and the quality doesnt relfect it), PJ plays at how many benefits, Stone builds houses on the poorest indian reservations in the country.
Nostalgia - yeah, i shouldnt have listed that, totally subjective
Comradery - They have been through a ton of drummers, but PJ with Matt has still been together longer than The Beatles and they only had to keep 4 ppl together. Pearl Jam has kept 4 ppl together for 20 years and 5 ppl together for 12 years.
Still, not one of those things makes a great band. Nobody leaves a great show or listens to a classic album and exclaims, "Man, those guys are the best of friends and they do so much for the the environment!"
Ethics - carbon mitigation, merchandise being made by high-waged labor (and the quality doesnt relfect it), PJ plays at how many benefits, Stone builds houses on the poorest indian reservations in the country.
Nostalgia - yeah, i shouldnt have listed that, totally subjective
Comradery - They have been through a ton of drummers, but PJ with Matt has still been together longer than The Beatles and they only had to keep 4 ppl together. Pearl Jam has kept 4 ppl together for 20 years and 5 ppl together for 12 years.
Still, not one of those things makes a great band
are you trying to say that Pearl Jam is anything but a GREAT band?
RC, SoDak 1998 - KC 2000 - Council Bluffs IA 2003 - Fargo ND 2003 - St. Paul MN 2003 - Alpine Valley 2003 - St Louis MO 2004 - Kissimmee FLA 2004 - Winnipeg 2005 - Thunder Bay 2005 - Chicago 2006 - Grand Rapids MI 2006 - Denver CO 2006 - Lollapalooza 2007 - Bonnaroo 2008 - Austin City Limits 2009 - Los Angeles 2009 - KC 2010 - St Louis MO 2010 - PJ20 Night 1 - PJ20 Night 2
Ethics - carbon mitigation, merchandise being made by high-waged labor (and the quality doesnt relfect it), PJ plays at how many benefits, Stone builds houses on the poorest indian reservations in the country.
Nostalgia - yeah, i shouldnt have listed that, totally subjective
Comradery - They have been through a ton of drummers, but PJ with Matt has still been together longer than The Beatles and they only had to keep 4 ppl together. Pearl Jam has kept 4 ppl together for 20 years and 5 ppl together for 12 years.
Still, not one of those things makes a great band
are you trying to say that Pearl Jam is anything but a GREAT band?
Not at all, but none of the things you mentioned make me think they're a great band.
are you trying to say that Pearl Jam is anything but a GREAT band?
Not at all, but none of the things you mentioned make me think they're a great band.
You are correct in that these things alone do not make a band great. The music and the way it is presented makes a band great. There are tons of 'great' bands. But when you try to make comparisons, you have to dig a bit deeper.
I would argue that one of the main reasons The Beatles are as big as they are is because of their era. Who were they competing with? How many genres of music existed then? It's not hard to make a wave in pool that is stagnant and flat and calm, which is exactly what The Beatles did.
Meanwhile, there was a freakin musical tsunami going on starting in the 1970's. Amid huge waves, Pearl Jam still made a fuckin' huge splash, making a name for themselves even with an oversaturated music industry.
RC, SoDak 1998 - KC 2000 - Council Bluffs IA 2003 - Fargo ND 2003 - St. Paul MN 2003 - Alpine Valley 2003 - St Louis MO 2004 - Kissimmee FLA 2004 - Winnipeg 2005 - Thunder Bay 2005 - Chicago 2006 - Grand Rapids MI 2006 - Denver CO 2006 - Lollapalooza 2007 - Bonnaroo 2008 - Austin City Limits 2009 - Los Angeles 2009 - KC 2010 - St Louis MO 2010 - PJ20 Night 1 - PJ20 Night 2
are you trying to say that Pearl Jam is anything but a GREAT band?
Not at all, but none of the things you mentioned make me think they're a great band.
You are correct in that these things alone do not make a band great. The music and the way it is presented makes a band great. There are tons of 'great' bands. But when you try to make comparisons, you have to dig a bit deeper.
I would argue that one of the main reasons The Beatles are as big as they are is because of their era. Who were they competing with? How many genres of music existed then? It's not hard to make a wave in pool that is stagnant and flat and calm, which is exactly what The Beatles did.
Meanwhile, there was a freakin musical tsunami going on starting in the 1970's. Amid huge waves, Pearl Jam still made a fuckin' huge splash, making a name for themselves even with an oversaturated music industry.
what you said is partially true, but Pearl Jam purely plays rock music, albeit with various influences apparent. Instead of asking how many genres of music the Beatles competed against, you should be asking how many they created.
what you said is partially true, but Pearl Jam purely plays rock music, albeit with various influences apparent. Instead of asking how many genres of music the Beatles competed against, you should be asking how many they created.
well we know they created the boy band genre. and if you want to go down that road, I'd chalk it all up to Dylan. The Beatles made shitty, uninspiring music until Bob Dylan fed 'em LSD. So if you're going to give The Beatles all that credit, please pass 90 percent of it to Dylan.
RC, SoDak 1998 - KC 2000 - Council Bluffs IA 2003 - Fargo ND 2003 - St. Paul MN 2003 - Alpine Valley 2003 - St Louis MO 2004 - Kissimmee FLA 2004 - Winnipeg 2005 - Thunder Bay 2005 - Chicago 2006 - Grand Rapids MI 2006 - Denver CO 2006 - Lollapalooza 2007 - Bonnaroo 2008 - Austin City Limits 2009 - Los Angeles 2009 - KC 2010 - St Louis MO 2010 - PJ20 Night 1 - PJ20 Night 2
what you said is partially true, but Pearl Jam purely plays rock music, albeit with various influences apparent. Instead of asking how many genres of music the Beatles competed against, you should be asking how many they created.
well we know they created the boy band genre. and if you want to go down that road, I'd chalk it all up to Dylan. The Beatles made shitty, uninspiring music until Bob Dylan fed 'em LSD. So if you're going to give The Beatles all that credit, please pass 90 percent of it to Dylan.
how did they create boy bands? the only comparison is that both had large followings by young females. The Beatles reach was much more than that, however. They were supremely radical for their time (and probably would still be considered radical for their later work). I don't remember the KKK protesting Backstreet Boys concerts or the FBI tracking where bandmembers went.
As for Dylan, he was influential, as he was for all in the era. Of course, he was still playing folk music when the Beatles were creating psychedelic music. One could argue that the Beatles taught Dylan what rock music was.
This is not an argument about which one you or anyone likes better. Music is different for different people.
what you said is partially true, but Pearl Jam purely plays rock music, albeit with various influences apparent. Instead of asking how many genres of music the Beatles competed against, you should be asking how many they created.
[/quote]
well we know they created the boy band genre. and if you want to go down that road, I'd chalk it all up to Dylan. The Beatles made shitty, uninspiring music until Bob Dylan fed 'em LSD. So if you're going to give The Beatles all that credit, please pass 90 percent of it to Dylan.[/quote]
Dylan himself said The Beatles' early stuff was an influence on him; he said the chords they used in their early stuff were incredible. It was pot, not LSD, that he introduced them to. The Beatles inspired Dylan and vice-versa; they influenced and competed (friendly) against each other. Would Bringing It All Back Home, Highway 61 Revisited and Blonde on Blonde have been made had he not been introduced to The Beatles?
Shows: 6.27.08 Hartford, CT/5.15.10 Hartford, CT/6.18.2011 Hartford, CT (EV Solo)/10.19.13 Brooklyn/10.25.13 Hartford
"Becoming a Bruce fan is like hitting puberty as a musical fan. It's inevitable." - dcfaithful
well we know they created the boy band genre. and if you want to go down that road, I'd chalk it all up to Dylan. The Beatles made shitty, uninspiring music until Bob Dylan fed 'em LSD. So if you're going to give The Beatles all that credit, please pass 90 percent of it to Dylan.
You have no idea what you are talking about. Now it all makes sense. If you want to look to a band that started the boy band generation it was The Jackson Five not the Beatles. Get a clue.
They are the only band with 6 diamond albums, meaning sales of 10 million each: Sgt. Pepper, Abbey Road, The Beatles 1962-1966, The Beatles 1967-1970, The White Album, The Beatles 1.
The Beatles are the best-selling group of all time, estimated to have sold over one billion records worldwide. They have had more #1 singles and albums than any other musical group, and had the fastest selling single and of all time with "I Want To Hold Your Hand" and 1 respectively. They also spent the highest number of weeks at #1 in the album charts - 174 weeks in the UK and 132 weeks in the US.
In the US, they had 20 #1 hits, 43 top-20 and 53 top-40 hits.
On Rolling Stone's list of the 500 Greatest Albums of all time, The Beatles hold the #1 spot with Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, as well as the #3 and 5 spots with Revolver and Rubber Soul.The White Album was listed as #10 and Abbey Road was 14. That's 3 albums in the top 5, 4 albums in the top 10 and 5 albums in the top 15.
The most #1 albums in the US chart by a group is 19, by The Beatles. Their chart-topping tally is more than double the number of those held by Elvis Presley and The Rolling Stones, with 9. Their latest chart-topping album was aptly entitled 1 and was released in 2001 which sold 13.5 million copies around the world in its first month, making it the fastest-selling album.
They are the only band with 6 diamond albums, meaning sales of 10 million each: Sgt. Pepper, Abbey Road, The Beatles 1962-1966, The Beatles 1967-1970, The White Album, The Beatles 1.
The Beatles are the best-selling group of all time, estimated to have sold over one billion records worldwide. They have had more #1 singles and albums than any other musical group, and had the fastest selling single and of all time with "I Want To Hold Your Hand" and 1 respectively. They also spent the highest number of weeks at #1 in the album charts - 174 weeks in the UK and 132 weeks in the US.
In the US, they had 20 #1 hits, 43 top-20 and 53 top-40 hits.
On Rolling Stone's list of the 500 Greatest Albums of all time, The Beatles hold the #1 spot with Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, as well as the #3 and 5 spots with Revolver and Rubber Soul.The White Album was listed as #10 and Abbey Road was 14. That's 3 albums in the top 5, 4 albums in the top 10 and 5 albums in the top 15.
The most #1 albums in the US chart by a group is 19, by The Beatles. Their chart-topping tally is more than double the number of those held by Elvis Presley and The Rolling Stones, with 9. Their latest chart-topping album was aptly entitled 1 and was released in 2001 which sold 13.5 million copies around the world in its first month, making it the fastest-selling album.
I just want to add one more thing:
The week of April 4, 1964, The Beatles held the top 5 spots of the Billboard Hot 100 singles chart; no other band or artist has done that. The songs were, in order:
1. Can't Buy Me Love
2. Twist and Shout
3. She Loves You
4. I Want to Hold Your Hand
5. Please Please Me
Shows: 6.27.08 Hartford, CT/5.15.10 Hartford, CT/6.18.2011 Hartford, CT (EV Solo)/10.19.13 Brooklyn/10.25.13 Hartford
"Becoming a Bruce fan is like hitting puberty as a musical fan. It's inevitable." - dcfaithful
that's subjective. I would admit that The Beatles are way more popular, but that doesn't mean they are better. If you factor everything in, I'd say PJ are the champs. Longevity, concerts performed, albums sold, ethics, nostalgia, comradery, you name it, Pearl Jam is better. Matt Cameron or Ringo Starr. Give me Cameron any day of the week.
The real reason i like Pearl Jam more, bcause even after being the biggest thing since sliced bread, PJ didnt get all weird and big headed, something I cant say for The Beatles.
Hold on a second...........You are aware that The Beatles couldn't tour right? They couldn't even hear themselves on stage for the longest time and by the time they could it was just a hassle for them. You can't even imagine what their fame was like. And you said albums sold and nostalgia? Are you out of your mind? Ethics? Was their a bigger advocate for World Peace than John Lennon? I think you may want to ease up on the the pipe hitting a bit. I don't think you really want to compare John's and Paul's solo career vs Ed do you? Let's be honest Ed's first solo record was 30 minutes long and had 2 cover songs on it.
I love Pearl Jam but this comparison is silly at best and they themselves would tell you the same thing. Do you like Pearl Jam's music better, possibly but to even think PJ's impact is even close to the Beatles is laughable.
Were you in The Beatles or something?
The reason why Ed's solo career isn't much is because he has been in a band for 20 years. If Ed would have got big headed like Paul and Lennon and quit the band after only 10 years he'd probably have 5 solo albums out by now, but maybe not. Wasn't Into the Wild made for a movie? I still consider it a movie soundtrack more than i consider it a solo album.
Ill say it until the day i die, THE BEATLES ARE OVERRATED!!! :twisted:
AMEN to that my friend. Please DO NOT talk bad about the Beatles, because they invented the guitar, drums, and music. I believe Paul and John were first, or second cousins to Adam and Eve.......
Light green to green, dark green, brown..
Every life is falling down
Brown to black, it's coming back
Dies to be part of the ground
Seed to seedling, root to stem
Pearl Jam sucks. The Beatles are GOD. Nothing will ever compare and they deserve every ounce of credit they get.
Yep. I'm a believer.
RC, SoDak 1998 - KC 2000 - Council Bluffs IA 2003 - Fargo ND 2003 - St. Paul MN 2003 - Alpine Valley 2003 - St Louis MO 2004 - Kissimmee FLA 2004 - Winnipeg 2005 - Thunder Bay 2005 - Chicago 2006 - Grand Rapids MI 2006 - Denver CO 2006 - Lollapalooza 2007 - Bonnaroo 2008 - Austin City Limits 2009 - Los Angeles 2009 - KC 2010 - St Louis MO 2010 - PJ20 Night 1 - PJ20 Night 2
Pearl Jam sucks. The Beatles are GOD. Nothing will ever compare and they deserve every ounce of credit they get.
Yep. I'm a believer.
Yes, we are right and we never said Pearl Jam sucks. However they aren't comparable to the Beatles and really never will be. Quite frankly it isn't even fair to put them in the situation to even be compared to them.
They are however in my opinion a top 5 American Rock Band of all time(IMO) as well as my favorite band of all time..
Pearl Jam sucks. The Beatles are GOD. Nothing will ever compare and they deserve every ounce of credit they get.
Yep. I'm a believer.
Yes, we are right and we never said Pearl Jam sucks. However they aren't comparable to the Beatles and really never will. They are however in my opinion a top 5 American Rock Band of all time as well as my favorite band of all time..
who are the better American rock bands?
RC, SoDak 1998 - KC 2000 - Council Bluffs IA 2003 - Fargo ND 2003 - St. Paul MN 2003 - Alpine Valley 2003 - St Louis MO 2004 - Kissimmee FLA 2004 - Winnipeg 2005 - Thunder Bay 2005 - Chicago 2006 - Grand Rapids MI 2006 - Denver CO 2006 - Lollapalooza 2007 - Bonnaroo 2008 - Austin City Limits 2009 - Los Angeles 2009 - KC 2010 - St Louis MO 2010 - PJ20 Night 1 - PJ20 Night 2
When it comes to rock music that isn't far off. They pretty much are the holy grail
Oh come on.... The Beatles were lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time. If the Beatles never existed, it would have been the Stones or someone else. They influenced a lot of musicians because they were the first main stream rock band.
Light green to green, dark green, brown..
Every life is falling down
Brown to black, it's coming back
Dies to be part of the ground
Seed to seedling, root to stem
When it comes to rock music that isn't far off. They pretty much are the holy grail
Oh come on.... The Beatles were lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time. If the Beatles never existed, it would have been the Stones or someone else. They influenced a lot of musicians because they were the first main stream rock band.
Listen to the early Rolling Stones and tell me exactly who they sounded like.
When it comes to rock music that isn't far off. They pretty much are the holy grail
Oh come on.... The Beatles were lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time. If the Beatles never existed, it would have been the Stones or someone else. They influenced a lot of musicians because they were the first main stream rock band.
Listen to the early Rolling Stones and tell me exactly who they sounded like.
Agreed. Many Ice Hockey players tried to play like Howe during the 50's and 60's. Is Gordie the greatest Hockey player to grace the game (or the holy grail of hockey players)????
A style, fad, movement, or genre has to begin somewhere, it does not mean that the creator of said style was, is, and will forever be the best.
Cheers.
Light green to green, dark green, brown..
Every life is falling down
Brown to black, it's coming back
Dies to be part of the ground
Seed to seedling, root to stem
When it comes to rock music that isn't far off. They pretty much are the holy grail
Oh come on.... The Beatles were lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time. If the Beatles never existed, it would have been the Stones or someone else. They influenced a lot of musicians because they were the first main stream rock band.
You have to be kidding me. How old are you? First of all, Elvis was around long before the Beatles - they weren't just "lucky" to be in the right place and the first "main stream rock band. The Beatles also evolved immensely in their style. John Lennon and Paul McCartney are, without question, two of the greatest song writers of all time. They are each in the RnR HoF as solo artists - for their years AFTER the Beatles. Two of the greatest song writers to ever live, and they happened to be in the same band. I am guessing you have never listened to Revolver or Sgt. Peppers to proclaim that they just happened to be "the first mainstream rock band." That really is laugh out loud hilarity.
And by the way, obviously PJ is my favorite band. But you have to be kidding yourself if you think they were going to get more votes than the greatest rock band of all time on a mainstream website like espn.com.
Why does everyone shit on the early Beatles records? Some great great tunes (including one Eddie covers...)
Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
When it comes to rock music that isn't far off. They pretty much are the holy grail
Oh come on.... The Beatles were lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time. If the Beatles never existed, it would have been the Stones or someone else. They influenced a lot of musicians because they were the first main stream rock band.
although i think this is a troll, i still feel the need to respond.
buddy holly, elvis, chuck berry.... all before the beatles. the reason why they influence a lot of musicians is because they were amazing at what they did. they understood music.
They are the only band with 6 diamond albums, meaning sales of 10 million each: Sgt. Pepper, Abbey Road, The Beatles 1962-1966, The Beatles 1967-1970, The White Album, The Beatles 1.
The Beatles are the best-selling group of all time, estimated to have sold over one billion records worldwide. They have had more #1 singles and albums than any other musical group, and had the fastest selling single and of all time with "I Want To Hold Your Hand" and 1 respectively. They also spent the highest number of weeks at #1 in the album charts - 174 weeks in the UK and 132 weeks in the US.
In the US, they had 20 #1 hits, 43 top-20 and 53 top-40 hits.
On Rolling Stone's list of the 500 Greatest Albums of all time, The Beatles hold the #1 spot with Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, as well as the #3 and 5 spots with Revolver and Rubber Soul.The White Album was listed as #10 and Abbey Road was 14. That's 3 albums in the top 5, 4 albums in the top 10 and 5 albums in the top 15.
The most #1 albums in the US chart by a group is 19, by The Beatles. Their chart-topping tally is more than double the number of those held by Elvis Presley and The Rolling Stones, with 9. Their latest chart-topping album was aptly entitled 1 and was released in 2001 which sold 13.5 million copies around the world in its first month, making it the fastest-selling album.
I just want to add one more thing:
The week of April 4, 1964, The Beatles held the top 5 spots of the Billboard Hot 100 singles chart; no other band or artist has done that. The songs were, in order:
1. Can't Buy Me Love
2. Twist and Shout
3. She Loves You
4. I Want to Hold Your Hand
5. Please Please Me
Can I add something... those songs are dated as shit. Who the Hell is rocking to I wanna hold your hand... only gays and chicks I believe.... Also, you mentioned they were "one of the first" bands to write and perform their own music. SO???? What's the relevancy in that? If they hadn't started that trend you honestly think bands wouldn't be doing that today? I get it, you love The Beatles. And so do a fuuuuck load of people. But in reality, when's it comes to the music, maybe they were tooooo early in rock because they're music may have been GREAT back then, but its not nearly that good today. Maybe they are the best band ever, just not the best music.
They are the only band with 6 diamond albums, meaning sales of 10 million each: Sgt. Pepper, Abbey Road, The Beatles 1962-1966, The Beatles 1967-1970, The White Album, The Beatles 1.
The Beatles are the best-selling group of all time, estimated to have sold over one billion records worldwide. They have had more #1 singles and albums than any other musical group, and had the fastest selling single and of all time with "I Want To Hold Your Hand" and 1 respectively. They also spent the highest number of weeks at #1 in the album charts - 174 weeks in the UK and 132 weeks in the US.
In the US, they had 20 #1 hits, 43 top-20 and 53 top-40 hits.
On Rolling Stone's list of the 500 Greatest Albums of all time, The Beatles hold the #1 spot with Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, as well as the #3 and 5 spots with Revolver and Rubber Soul.The White Album was listed as #10 and Abbey Road was 14. That's 3 albums in the top 5, 4 albums in the top 10 and 5 albums in the top 15.
The most #1 albums in the US chart by a group is 19, by The Beatles. Their chart-topping tally is more than double the number of those held by Elvis Presley and The Rolling Stones, with 9. Their latest chart-topping album was aptly entitled 1 and was released in 2001 which sold 13.5 million copies around the world in its first month, making it the fastest-selling album.
I just want to add one more thing:
The week of April 4, 1964, The Beatles held the top 5 spots of the Billboard Hot 100 singles chart; no other band or artist has done that. The songs were, in order:
1. Can't Buy Me Love
2. Twist and Shout
3. She Loves You
4. I Want to Hold Your Hand
5. Please Please Me
Can I add something... those songs are dated as shit. Who the Hell is rocking to I wanna hold your hand... only gays and chicks I believe.... Also, you mentioned they were "one of the first" bands to write and perform their own music. SO???? What's the relevancy in that? If they hadn't started that trend you honestly think bands wouldn't be doing that today? I get it, you love The Beatles. And so do a fuuuuck load of people. But in reality, when's it comes to the music, maybe they were tooooo early in rock because they're music may have been GREAT back then, but its not nearly that good today. Maybe they are the best band ever, just not the best music.
like i said before, the scene was deprived of music back then. That's why they were able to have those five spots. The God's of music are more pleased with Pearl Jam than The Beatles, I just know it.
RC, SoDak 1998 - KC 2000 - Council Bluffs IA 2003 - Fargo ND 2003 - St. Paul MN 2003 - Alpine Valley 2003 - St Louis MO 2004 - Kissimmee FLA 2004 - Winnipeg 2005 - Thunder Bay 2005 - Chicago 2006 - Grand Rapids MI 2006 - Denver CO 2006 - Lollapalooza 2007 - Bonnaroo 2008 - Austin City Limits 2009 - Los Angeles 2009 - KC 2010 - St Louis MO 2010 - PJ20 Night 1 - PJ20 Night 2
Comments
he gave 700 million to an amputee once
Still, not one of those things makes a great band. Nobody leaves a great show or listens to a classic album and exclaims, "Man, those guys are the best of friends and they do so much for the the environment!"
are you trying to say that Pearl Jam is anything but a GREAT band?
Not at all, but none of the things you mentioned make me think they're a great band.
You are correct in that these things alone do not make a band great. The music and the way it is presented makes a band great. There are tons of 'great' bands. But when you try to make comparisons, you have to dig a bit deeper.
I would argue that one of the main reasons The Beatles are as big as they are is because of their era. Who were they competing with? How many genres of music existed then? It's not hard to make a wave in pool that is stagnant and flat and calm, which is exactly what The Beatles did.
Meanwhile, there was a freakin musical tsunami going on starting in the 1970's. Amid huge waves, Pearl Jam still made a fuckin' huge splash, making a name for themselves even with an oversaturated music industry.
what you said is partially true, but Pearl Jam purely plays rock music, albeit with various influences apparent. Instead of asking how many genres of music the Beatles competed against, you should be asking how many they created.
well we know they created the boy band genre. and if you want to go down that road, I'd chalk it all up to Dylan. The Beatles made shitty, uninspiring music until Bob Dylan fed 'em LSD. So if you're going to give The Beatles all that credit, please pass 90 percent of it to Dylan.
how did they create boy bands? the only comparison is that both had large followings by young females. The Beatles reach was much more than that, however. They were supremely radical for their time (and probably would still be considered radical for their later work). I don't remember the KKK protesting Backstreet Boys concerts or the FBI tracking where bandmembers went.
As for Dylan, he was influential, as he was for all in the era. Of course, he was still playing folk music when the Beatles were creating psychedelic music. One could argue that the Beatles taught Dylan what rock music was.
This is not an argument about which one you or anyone likes better. Music is different for different people.
well we know they created the boy band genre. and if you want to go down that road, I'd chalk it all up to Dylan. The Beatles made shitty, uninspiring music until Bob Dylan fed 'em LSD. So if you're going to give The Beatles all that credit, please pass 90 percent of it to Dylan.[/quote]
Dylan himself said The Beatles' early stuff was an influence on him; he said the chords they used in their early stuff were incredible. It was pot, not LSD, that he introduced them to. The Beatles inspired Dylan and vice-versa; they influenced and competed (friendly) against each other. Would Bringing It All Back Home, Highway 61 Revisited and Blonde on Blonde have been made had he not been introduced to The Beatles?
"Becoming a Bruce fan is like hitting puberty as a musical fan. It's inevitable." - dcfaithful
You have no idea what you are talking about. Now it all makes sense. If you want to look to a band that started the boy band generation it was The Jackson Five not the Beatles. Get a clue.
8/15/92, 9/28/96, 8/28/98, 8/29/98, 9/18/98, 8/3/00, 8/9/00, 8/10/00, 8/23/00, 8/25/00, 9/1/00, 9/2/00, 4/28/03, 6/18/03, 7/5/03, 7/6/03, 10/1/04, 10/3/05, 6/19/08, 10/27/09, 10/31/09, 5/21/10, 9/3/11, 9/4/11, 10/21/13
More to Come....
The Beatles are the best-selling group of all time, estimated to have sold over one billion records worldwide. They have had more #1 singles and albums than any other musical group, and had the fastest selling single and of all time with "I Want To Hold Your Hand" and 1 respectively. They also spent the highest number of weeks at #1 in the album charts - 174 weeks in the UK and 132 weeks in the US.
In the US, they had 20 #1 hits, 43 top-20 and 53 top-40 hits.
On Rolling Stone's list of the 500 Greatest Albums of all time, The Beatles hold the #1 spot with Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, as well as the #3 and 5 spots with Revolver and Rubber Soul.The White Album was listed as #10 and Abbey Road was 14. That's 3 albums in the top 5, 4 albums in the top 10 and 5 albums in the top 15.
The most #1 albums in the US chart by a group is 19, by The Beatles. Their chart-topping tally is more than double the number of those held by Elvis Presley and The Rolling Stones, with 9. Their latest chart-topping album was aptly entitled 1 and was released in 2001 which sold 13.5 million copies around the world in its first month, making it the fastest-selling album.
8/15/92, 9/28/96, 8/28/98, 8/29/98, 9/18/98, 8/3/00, 8/9/00, 8/10/00, 8/23/00, 8/25/00, 9/1/00, 9/2/00, 4/28/03, 6/18/03, 7/5/03, 7/6/03, 10/1/04, 10/3/05, 6/19/08, 10/27/09, 10/31/09, 5/21/10, 9/3/11, 9/4/11, 10/21/13
More to Come....
To hell with the Beatles!
The week of April 4, 1964, The Beatles held the top 5 spots of the Billboard Hot 100 singles chart; no other band or artist has done that. The songs were, in order:
1. Can't Buy Me Love
2. Twist and Shout
3. She Loves You
4. I Want to Hold Your Hand
5. Please Please Me
"Becoming a Bruce fan is like hitting puberty as a musical fan. It's inevitable." - dcfaithful
AMEN to that my friend. Please DO NOT talk bad about the Beatles, because they invented the guitar, drums, and music. I believe Paul and John were first, or second cousins to Adam and Eve.......
Every life is falling down
Brown to black, it's coming back
Dies to be part of the ground
Seed to seedling, root to stem
Pearl Jam sucks. The Beatles are GOD. Nothing will ever compare and they deserve every ounce of credit they get.
Yep. I'm a believer.
8/15/92, 9/28/96, 8/28/98, 8/29/98, 9/18/98, 8/3/00, 8/9/00, 8/10/00, 8/23/00, 8/25/00, 9/1/00, 9/2/00, 4/28/03, 6/18/03, 7/5/03, 7/6/03, 10/1/04, 10/3/05, 6/19/08, 10/27/09, 10/31/09, 5/21/10, 9/3/11, 9/4/11, 10/21/13
More to Come....
Yes, we are right and we never said Pearl Jam sucks. However they aren't comparable to the Beatles and really never will be. Quite frankly it isn't even fair to put them in the situation to even be compared to them.
They are however in my opinion a top 5 American Rock Band of all time(IMO) as well as my favorite band of all time..
8/15/92, 9/28/96, 8/28/98, 8/29/98, 9/18/98, 8/3/00, 8/9/00, 8/10/00, 8/23/00, 8/25/00, 9/1/00, 9/2/00, 4/28/03, 6/18/03, 7/5/03, 7/6/03, 10/1/04, 10/3/05, 6/19/08, 10/27/09, 10/31/09, 5/21/10, 9/3/11, 9/4/11, 10/21/13
More to Come....
who are the better American rock bands?
Oh come on.... The Beatles were lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time. If the Beatles never existed, it would have been the Stones or someone else. They influenced a lot of musicians because they were the first main stream rock band.
Every life is falling down
Brown to black, it's coming back
Dies to be part of the ground
Seed to seedling, root to stem
Pearl Jam
Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band
The Eagles
The Beach Boys
Metallica
Honorable Mention:
Aerosmith
Guns n Roses
Tom Petty
Van Halen
The Grateful Dead
The Doors
8/15/92, 9/28/96, 8/28/98, 8/29/98, 9/18/98, 8/3/00, 8/9/00, 8/10/00, 8/23/00, 8/25/00, 9/1/00, 9/2/00, 4/28/03, 6/18/03, 7/5/03, 7/6/03, 10/1/04, 10/3/05, 6/19/08, 10/27/09, 10/31/09, 5/21/10, 9/3/11, 9/4/11, 10/21/13
More to Come....
Listen to the early Rolling Stones and tell me exactly who they sounded like.
8/15/92, 9/28/96, 8/28/98, 8/29/98, 9/18/98, 8/3/00, 8/9/00, 8/10/00, 8/23/00, 8/25/00, 9/1/00, 9/2/00, 4/28/03, 6/18/03, 7/5/03, 7/6/03, 10/1/04, 10/3/05, 6/19/08, 10/27/09, 10/31/09, 5/21/10, 9/3/11, 9/4/11, 10/21/13
More to Come....
Agreed. Many Ice Hockey players tried to play like Howe during the 50's and 60's. Is Gordie the greatest Hockey player to grace the game (or the holy grail of hockey players)????
A style, fad, movement, or genre has to begin somewhere, it does not mean that the creator of said style was, is, and will forever be the best.
Cheers.
Every life is falling down
Brown to black, it's coming back
Dies to be part of the ground
Seed to seedling, root to stem
You have to be kidding me. How old are you? First of all, Elvis was around long before the Beatles - they weren't just "lucky" to be in the right place and the first "main stream rock band. The Beatles also evolved immensely in their style. John Lennon and Paul McCartney are, without question, two of the greatest song writers of all time. They are each in the RnR HoF as solo artists - for their years AFTER the Beatles. Two of the greatest song writers to ever live, and they happened to be in the same band. I am guessing you have never listened to Revolver or Sgt. Peppers to proclaim that they just happened to be "the first mainstream rock band." That really is laugh out loud hilarity.
And by the way, obviously PJ is my favorite band. But you have to be kidding yourself if you think they were going to get more votes than the greatest rock band of all time on a mainstream website like espn.com.
although i think this is a troll, i still feel the need to respond.
buddy holly, elvis, chuck berry.... all before the beatles. the reason why they influence a lot of musicians is because they were amazing at what they did. they understood music.
Can I add something... those songs are dated as shit. Who the Hell is rocking to I wanna hold your hand... only gays and chicks I believe.... Also, you mentioned they were "one of the first" bands to write and perform their own music. SO???? What's the relevancy in that? If they hadn't started that trend you honestly think bands wouldn't be doing that today? I get it, you love The Beatles. And so do a fuuuuck load of people. But in reality, when's it comes to the music, maybe they were tooooo early in rock because they're music may have been GREAT back then, but its not nearly that good today. Maybe they are the best band ever, just not the best music.
like i said before, the scene was deprived of music back then. That's why they were able to have those five spots. The God's of music are more pleased with Pearl Jam than The Beatles, I just know it.