Most Influential Rock Artist Ever

dac · 11-26-2008, 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rainard Jalen

Dude, the point is not complicated. The Byrds, in their recording days, were never NOT an electric band. Do you get that? They never recorded and released anything that wasn't electric. Their first album and their first single were all totally electric. Whatever they were before they started releasing music is totally irrelevant to the general public. So you can say that the Beatles were the reason they decided to be an electric band in the first instance. You cannot say that they went electric, however, because there was nothing that wasn't electric in their discrography. When we talk about a band changing from one thing into another, we are generally talking about a great shift evidenced in their discography (e.g. Prince's 180 degree shift from light disco artist into new wave with Dirty Mind). We don't care what somebody was before they even started recording.

We weren't discussing the Grateful Dead.

Yes. And for a large part, they were. This however does not indicate that it was the Beatles that convinced Dylan to go electric. Like I said, he went electric in 1965, LONG after the onset of Beatlemania.

The point is that all 3 of those examples were INFLUENCED by The Beatles, which was the point he was trying to make and is coincidentally the point of this thread... Biggest Influence.

jazzrocks · 11-26-2008, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rainard Jalen

Dude, the point is not complicated. The Byrds, in their recording days, were never NOT an electric band. Do you get that? They never recorded and released anything that wasn't electric. Their first album and their first single were all totally electric. Whatever they were before they started releasing music is totally irrelevant to the general public. So you can say that the Beatles were the reason they decided to be an electric band in the first instance. You cannot say that they went electric, however, because there was nothing that wasn't electric in their discrography. When we talk about a band changing from one thing into another, we are generally talking about a great shift evidenced in their discography (e.g. Prince's 180 degree shift from light disco artist into new wave with Dirty Mind). We don't care what somebody was before they even started recording.

We weren't discussing the Grateful Dead.

Yes. And for a large part, they were. This however does not indicate that it was the Beatles that convinced Dylan to go electric. Like I said, he went electric in 1965, LONG after the onset of Beatlemania.

You must be joking changing a band musicial direction is most likely the biggest influence anyone can have on a musician. The Byrds based their jangle sound on the Beatles. The Byrds just did it better. Just being honest there I don't like everything the Beatles did. There influence on music though has been huge.

When the Byrds saw that movie -- when Roger McGuinn, specifically, saw that movie -- he wanted to play that 12-string electric Rickenbacker guitar. When A Hard Day's Night came out, they went to the movie and took notes on the instruments the Beatles were using. Roger McGuinn decided he definitely wanted the same guitar that George Harrison was using, and that little tinkling riff that you hear at the very end (of "A Hard Day's Night") that 12-string guitar riff, that's the pretty much the blueprint for the sound, the jingle-jangle sound that the Byrds perfected with Roger McGuinn on lead guitar on "Mr. Tambourine Man" and most of the songs that they did during their first three years or so, up through 1968.

"So the Beatles kind of re-energized it for me. I thought it was natural to put the Beatles' beat and the energy of the Beatles into folk music. And in fact, I heard folk chord changes in the Beatles' music when I listened to their early stuff like 'She Loves You' and 'I Want To Hold Your Hand.' I could hear the passing chords that we always use in folk music: the G-Em-Am-B kind of stuff. So I really think the Beatles invented folk-rock. They just didn't know it."

ProggyMan · 11-26-2008, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FaSho

It's ridiculous to have a different taste in music then you?

What does that have to with what I said? It's ridiculous to measure influence by the amount of music you consider good, as opposed to amount of music. Nothing to do with our differing tastes in music.

FaSho · 11-26-2008, 12:27 PM

I don't care how much music an artist influeneces, if it's terrible music, then they're a terrible influence.

Akira · 11-26-2008, 12:32 PM

The question is about influence, not the quality of the influence

ProggyMan · 11-26-2008, 12:54 PM

Yeh, it's supposed to be an objective measuring stick.

Rainard Jalen · 11-27-2008, 03:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jazzrocks

You must be joking changing a band musicial direction is most likely the biggest influence anyone can have on a musician. The Byrds based their jangle sound on the Beatles. The Byrds just did it better. Just being honest there I don't like everything the Beatles did. There influence on music though has been huge.

Dude. You do NOT read what I'm saying. If you're going to do that, then it's a total waste of time talking to you. OBVIOUSLY changing a band's musical direction is the biggest influence you can have. What I was saying is that The Byrds, in their recording days, were ALWAYS an electric band. They were never anything else. What they were before they started recording is completely irrelevant. As recording artists, they never changed from folk to electric. They were always electric. At most, it is possible to say that The Beatles were the reason that the individuals who constituted The Byrds decided to be a rock band as opposed to another sort of band. But, unlike Dylan, they did not start out recording folk music, and then start recording electric music some time later. They always recorded electric. End of story.

Guybrush · 11-27-2008, 04:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rainard Jalen

Dude. You do NOT read what I'm saying. If you're going to do that, then it's a total waste of time talking to you. OBVIOUSLY changing a band's musical direction is the biggest influence you can have. What I was saying is that The Byrds, in their recording days, were ALWAYS an electric band. They were never anything else. What they were before they started recording is completely irrelevant. As recording artists, they never changed from folk to electric. They were always electric. At most, it is possible to say that The Beatles were the reason that the individuals who constituted The Byrds decided to be a rock band as opposed to another sort of band. But, unlike Dylan, they did not start out recording folk music, and then start recording electric music some time later. They always recorded electric. End of story.

Alright, we get your point. Do you think it is an important one?

jazzrocks · 11-27-2008, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rainard Jalen

Dude. You do NOT read what I'm saying. If you're going to do that, then it's a total waste of time talking to you. OBVIOUSLY changing a band's musical direction is the biggest influence you can have. What I was saying is that The Byrds, in their recording days, were ALWAYS an electric band. They were never anything else. What they were before they started recording is completely irrelevant. As recording artists, they never changed from folk to electric. They were always electric. At most, it is possible to say that The Beatles were the reason that the individuals who constituted The Byrds decided to be a rock band as opposed to another sort of band. But, unlike Dylan, they did not start out recording folk music, and then start recording electric music some time later. They always recorded electric. End of story.

I think you are not hearing what the musicians are saying and what people hear are telling you. Bottom line the Beatles influenced a folk band to turn electric based on what the Beatles were doing musically. The Beatles were using folk chord changes with a rock beat they liked. They based their jangle sound on hearing "A Hard Days Night". I mean dude they took notes on what they were playing. Thats what the Byrds based their electric sound on. If thats not influence then I don't know what influence means. The influence basically extended while the Byrds were a electric band till really "Younger than Yesterday".

Rainard Jalen · 11-27-2008, 01:01 PM

In the end I think there can hardly be any real doubt that the Beatles were the most influential band of all time. That's not to say they were the most edgy, or the most innovative/cutting edge, or the most sophisticated, or the cleverest...but in terms of the sheer amount of influence they had upon other artists, whatever the influence might have been, there can really be no comparison. They reached more audiences than everybody else and inspired more than anybody else. It seems silly to question it, really.

View Poll Results: The Most Influential Rock Artist
The Rolling Stones	12	3.74%
The Beatles	152	47.35%
The Who	12	3.74%
Led Zeppelin	28	8.72%
The Kinks	4	1.25%
Bob Dylan	41	12.77%
Jim Hendrix	37	11.53%
The Velvet Underground	35	10.90%
Voters: 321. You may not vote on this poll

11-26-2008, 12:54 PM	#186 (permalink)
ProggyMan Reformed Jackass Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 3,964	Yeh, it's supposed to be an objective measuring stick.

11-27-2008, 01:01 PM	#190 (permalink)
Rainard Jalen Music Addict Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 2,221	In the end I think there can hardly be any real doubt that the Beatles were the most influential band of all time. That's not to say they were the most edgy, or the most innovative/cutting edge, or the most sophisticated, or the cleverest...but in terms of the sheer amount of influence they had upon other artists, whatever the influence might have been, there can really be no comparison. They reached more audiences than everybody else and inspired more than anybody else. It seems silly to question it, really.