Greatest band of all time?

What is the greatest band of all time?

  • Total voters
    57
unix-guy said:
I think you've got some grammatic errors here.

The word "outstanding" literally means "to stand out", there is nothing constraining that to a singular element. Oxford dictionary defines it as "exceptionally good".

The word "greatest" is a measure and as @TG3K says, that has to be measured by a metric... And with art, there is no absolute metric (this is the same to me as "best").

You could say greatest based on album sales, or concert revenue, or largest catalog of songs, etc. Anything that is not actually measurable can not by definition be used to assign the label of "greatest" except subjectively.
Click to expand...

No errors.


Correct, greatest is a measure, and in the absence of a specific metric (as in this case), and in this context, I would default to impact on music and culture. And yes, we could debate what constitutes "impact" . But let me put it to you this way, has there ever been a band that had a larger impact on music and culture than the Beatles? Who was bigger (measure) than the Beatles? The only thing even close is Elvis, but he's obviously not a band.

Better yet, would any member of any band listed in this thread claim that they are greater than the Beatles? (man I hope Alcatrazz or Oasis wasn't mentioned)
 
Project Mayhem said:
No errors.


Correct, greatest is a measure, and in the absence of a specific metric (as in this case), and in this context, I would default to impact on music and culture. And yes, we could debate what constitutes "impact" . But let me put it to you this way, has there ever been a band that had a larger impact on music and culture than the Beatles? Who was bigger (measure) than the Beatles? The only thing even close is Elvis, but he's obviously not a band.

Better yet, would any member of any band listed in this thread claim that they are greater than the Beatles? (man I hope Alcatrazz or Oasis wasn't mentioned)
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with what you're saying, but this is still a case of subjectivity unless everyone agrees with your metric ;)

Now, if this thread was titled "band with greatest impact on music", I think you'd have very little argument.
 
Project Mayhem said:
would default to impact on music and culture. And yes, we could debate what constitutes "impact" . But let me put it to you this way, has there ever been a band that had a larger impact on music and culture than the Beatles? Who was bigger (measure) than the Beatles? The only thing even close is Elvis, but he's obviously not a band.
Click to expand...

Bob Dylan and The Band? Chuck Berry?

...and let us never forget Zager & Evans! I cannot believe we are almost there. :D
 
unix-guy said:
I don't disagree with what you're saying, but this is still a case of subjectivity unless everyone agrees with your metric ;)

Now, if this thread was titled "band with greatest impact on music", I think you'd have very little argument.
Click to expand...

Sure, But I would ask you this:

If we agree that "greatest" is a measure i.e. "Biggest/Largest" and the Metric I applied was "Impact on music and Culture"... then I would ask by what metric, would one arrive at Rush, Sabbath, Zeppelin, insert favorite non Beatles answer here....be the largest? And then, objectively contrast the metrics.
 
Project Mayhem said:
Has any band had an impact on music of a greater magnitude? Better, preferred, etc, are all debatable as they are indeed subjective...Greatest is not.
Click to expand...
To me, none had the cultural and musical impact of the Beatles. They were both a cause and a product of the times - they launched the 60's, and also rode the wave that the culture brought forth. They were the center around which everyone else revolved - Stones, Who, Floyd, Doors, Cream, Kinks, Airplane, Yardbirds, Dylan, Byrds, Jimi...

But for someone younger maybe the world changed with Nirvana and Pearl Jam, or U2, or Radiohead, or the Sex Pistols, and so that's their reference point for the greatest/most influential band - after all, the Beatles happened a long time ago. And for the rest of the world who aren't male rock guitarists like us, maybe it was the rappers like LL Cool J and ice Cube - or Madonna and Taylor Swift. So really who's to say? It's all a matter of perspective.
 
GlennO said:
After all these years, the production on the Zeppelin studio albums still holds up. Some of those recordings would sound fresh and modern if they were released today.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. The drums are always so crisp and powerful. I’ve been listening to a lot of other early 70’s rock lately and there’s just no comparison. Obviously much of it is Bonham himself but the way they recorded him captured his giant sound so well.
 
Project Mayhem said:
No errors.


Correct, greatest is a measure, and in the absence of a specific metric (as in this case), and in this context, I would default to impact on music and culture. And yes, we could debate what constitutes "impact" . But let me put it to you this way, has there ever been a band that had a larger impact on music and culture than the Beatles? Who was bigger (measure) than the Beatles? The only thing even close is Elvis, but he's obviously not a band.

Better yet, would any member of any band listed in this thread claim that they are greater than the Beatles? (man I hope Alcatrazz or Oasis wasn't mentioned)
Click to expand...

Why should there be a difference between individual artists and bands? You can argue that yes, bands are more then the sum of the whole, while the individual artist only brings his own genius to the table. But then again so many bands had only one creative genius and the rest of the band just coasted along on that genius. Dire Straits was a good band, but Mark Knopfler on his own sounds just the same, whereas the rest of Dire Straits have accomplished exactly what on their own? Does anyone still remember the other guy from Wham!? Even the Mighty Floyd became a one man show by the time of The Wall and The Final Cut. And it can be argued that when Waters left the band they just became a greatest hits touring act, with a new CD just an excuse to go on tour again.

GlennO said:
After all these years, the production on the Zeppelin studio albums still holds up. Some of those recordings would sound fresh and modern if they were released today.
Click to expand...

It probably helped that their albums were mixed and mastered in an age before the LOUDNESS war.
 
GlennO said:
After all these years, the production on the Zeppelin studio albums still holds up. Some of those recordings would sound fresh and modern if they were released today.
Click to expand...

I recently listened to Zeppelin on the original, pristine 70s vinyl records compared with the most recent remasters/releases and, for me, the production more then holds up today...the late 60s to late 70s recordings/productions are my absolute favorite. Page really was amazing in that regard.

The greatest of all time can only be a personal thing, so, if I had to list my all time top favorite/greatest bands ever (in no particular order):

The Beatles
Pink Floyd
Rush
Deep Purple
Black Sabbath
Led Zeppelin
Rainbow
Kiss
 
A lot of seventies drum recordings were actually very dry and with few mic placements, just using a echo rich room like the Led Zep recordings was a revolution -- they still used few mics.

All the processing and tweaking that is done today with all the rock-pop records have basically killed any nice drum sounds as it all sounds so processed to Nth degree.
 
Project Mayhem said:
Sure, But I would ask you this:

If we agree that "greatest" is a measure i.e. "Biggest/Largest" and the Metric I applied was "Impact on music and Culture"... then I would ask by what metric, would one arrive at Rush, Sabbath, Zeppelin, insert favorite non Beatles answer here....be the largest? And then, objectively contrast the metrics.
Click to expand...
I don't think you would - I definitely wouldn't.

BUT that is NOT what the metric is in this thread... At least, not explicitly. ;)
 
Project Mayhem said:
Sure, But I would ask you this:

If we agree that "greatest" is a measure i.e. "Biggest/Largest" and the Metric I applied was "Impact on music and Culture"... then I would ask by what metric, would one arrive at Rush, Sabbath, Zeppelin, insert favorite non Beatles answer here....be the largest? And then, objectively contrast the metrics.
Click to expand...

How do you measure "biggest/largest"? Number of members? Total revenue? Cumulative concert attendance? Similarly, there's no real way to measure the amount of impact a band or artist has had on music. Did Bach or Beethoven influence music and culture more than Lightnin' Hopkins or Muddy Waters? It depends who you ask and where their tastes lie.

The metric that others use to determine their favorite non-Beatles band will likely be a different one that you or I would use. As I said, art is not measurable in a finite sense, and the only way to determine the "greatest" is by purely subjective (and individual) choice.

As an example, I think you have the greatest avatar here on the forum, but others here might have a different favorite for their own personal reasons. (Not that there's anything wrong with that, lol.)
 
Music tastes are objective. That's why there are so many of 'em.

As for most popular being the best, maybe one of the current Korean boy-bands will take the title then. Wonder if they use Fractal gear?
 
Probably based on what you listen to. I'm a metalhead, so it would be hard to argue Black Sabbath was not the greatest, and had the most influence. They might be in a tie with Deep Purple though. Both bands pretty much influenced the rest of the bands I listen to regularly.
 
unix-guy said:
I don't think you would - I definitely wouldn't.

BUT that is NOT what the metric is in this thread... At least, not explicitly. ;)
Click to expand...

"This isn't Nam Smokey...".
-Walter Solchuk

As stated previously, that was the metric I supplied. My point being, that because the original question did not specify a metric, the differing answers are due to the metrics applied, which is really the more interesting part. For example, you answered "Kiss", my question is what metric did you use?...you stated that's who got you playing or something to that effect....again, specific to "you."

So if an Alien landed on your lawn and asked you the same question (greatest band of all time?) your answer would be Kiss...and then if the alien asked you how you know this to be? your answer would be because that's why "I" started playing guitar? Then I would say you don't understand the intent of the question. Yes, it's a flawed question that can't be answered as written...I think everyone gets that and thats part of the fun these things generate. In the absence of a metric, everyone supplies their own, effectively changing the original question to "What band had the greatest impact on me"? Remove "me" from the metric and replace to with "everyone" and see If your answer changes.

Apologize for the length, I may have gone a bowl too deep.

And let's leave the CAPS to the kids...were all adults here capable of civil discourse.

Peace, Beatles and V-amps to all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom