TexasCHLforum.com

I'm not an expert or an authority on much of anything...and, I hate that.

Keith B wrote:Discussing tastes in music and who the best musician/group is will get you as many or more opposing opinions as trying to argue which gun is best for concealed carry.

No kidding.

For the record, I am not trying to suggest that the Beatles are the best, were any good, or that your taste is wrong, etc. I am talking about the impact they had on popular music. There is no basis to argue about taste. Everyone is equally entitled to their opinion.

mr.72 wrote:

Keith B wrote:Discussing tastes in music and who the best musician/group is will get you as many or more opposing opinions as trying to argue which gun is best for concealed carry.

No kidding.

For the record, I am not trying to suggest that the Beatles are the best, were any good, or that your taste is wrong, etc. I am talking about the impact they had on popular music. There is no basis to argue about taste. Everyone is equally entitled to their opinion.

mr.72 wrote:

Keith B wrote:Discussing tastes in music and who the best musician/group is will get you as many or more opposing opinions as trying to argue which gun is best for concealed carry.

No kidding.

For the record, I am not trying to suggest that the Beatles are the best, were any good, or that your taste is wrong, etc. I am talking about the impact they had on popular music. There is no basis to argue about taste. Everyone is equally entitled to their opinion.

Understand. I think it is that way for a lot of musicians/musical groups though. While I was just a little tike when the mop-tops came over, their bringing their Liverpool sound to the U.S. was huge. But then, so was Elvis before them, and Jimmy Dorsey way before Elvis! LOL

I can think of other bands that had extremely large influences on rock because of their unique styles, like CSN&Y, Led Zeppelin, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, The Eagles, Boston, Fleetwood Mac ad nauseum. All of these have held their places in music history post the Beatles. For them and many of the rest, a lot of it is a matter of being at the right place at the right time, but you still have to be talented.

Oldgringo wrote: I'm not an expert or an authority on much of anything...and, I hate that.

Wow...we could never tell by the content and intensity of your posts. You do post with authority.

"Don't matter how you do it, just do it like you know it." Jerry Jeff Walker in "Gettin' By".



Anygunanywhere

Keith B wrote:I can think of other bands that had extremely large influences on rock because of their unique styles, like CSN&Y, Led Zeppelin, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, The Eagles, Boston, Fleetwood Mac ad nauseum.

Given these choices of bands, I vote for "ad nauseum".

Keith B wrote: I can think of other bands that had extremely large influences on rock because of their unique styles, like CSN&Y, Led Zeppelin, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, The Eagles, Boston, Fleetwood Mac ad nauseum.

I'm sorry I replied in this thread.

george wrote:"Happiness is a warm gun...."


Just to bring it back on topic.

That song isn't really about guns, you know. There's two different things it could be about, one of which would completely violate the 10 year old daughter rule, and one that would slightly violate it...

mr.72 wrote:

Keith B wrote: I can think of other bands that had extremely large influences on rock because of their unique styles, like CSN&Y, Led Zeppelin, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, The Eagles, Boston, Fleetwood Mac ad nauseum.

I'm sorry I replied in this thread.

Why? You a country fan?

mr.72 wrote:You can't seriously be suggesting that the Big Bopper, Buddy Holly, and Richie Valens could compare favorably to the Beatles, can you?

You can't seriously be suggesting that the Beatles are even in the same league as Big Bopper, Buddy Holly, and Richie Valens, are you???

I never listen to Big Bopper, Buddy Holly, and Richie Valens...but the Beatles suck badly!
Would much rather listen to some good 'ol heavy metal / hard rock than anything the Beatles ever did.

Heck, I'd rather listen to either COUNTRY or WESTERN than the Beatles!

Rockrz wrote: Would much rather listen to some good 'ol heavy metal / hard rock than anything the Beatles ever did.

You would not be listening to any heavy metal or hard rock, if it weren't for the what the Beatles did.

That's the point.

Well, that's probably true but I just haven't ever been able to listen to the beatles.
I've had friends that liked 'em which is where I've heard some of their music.

Just seems to dated to me, but I'm sure what I like seems dated to today's young 'uns

mr.72 wrote:

Keith B wrote:Discussing tastes in music and who the best musician/group is will get you as many or more opposing opinions as trying to argue which gun is best for concealed carry.

No kidding.
For the record, I am not trying to suggest that the Beatles are the best, were any good, or that your taste is wrong, etc. I am talking about the impact they had on popular music. There is no basis to argue about taste. Everyone is equally entitled to their opinion.

In addition to the topics of this forum [CHL, guns, shooting and reloading], I have many other interests. I enjoy listening and collecting music of many types. I don't want to beat a dead horse, but I enjoy talking about music and this has been a lively and interesting thread IMO. This thread has drifted way off topic, so maybe I should start my own.

I am suggesting that the Beatles were the best rock group of all time, both for the quality of their output and long-lasting influence on popular music. At the same time, Roy Orbison was one of my favorite singers. Just because someone didn't sell many records doesn't mean that they weren't a good or great singer or musician. Is the Ford Taurus a better car than a Porsche 911 just because Ford sold more cars? Just as you can compare a Taurus to a Porsche 911, you can compare Orbison to the Beatles, but within certain boundaries. Orbison was not a band, so that is a valid comparison, but you could compare Orbison's voice with any of the singers in a band.

I also believe that there is a valid basis to argue about taste. There is some music that is not to my taste, but I can still say that it is good music. I think that Jimmie Rodgers is a perfect example. I don't particularly like his singing, but I can't deny his place in music history.

mr.72 wrote:

Rockrz wrote: Would much rather listen to some good 'ol heavy metal / hard rock than anything the Beatles ever did.

You would not be listening to any heavy metal or hard rock, if it weren't for the what the Beatles did.

That's the point.

And I don't listen to heavy metal or hard rock, specifically because of what the beatles did, and they were not all that great, just in the right place at the right time.