eh, my dad is 52. he loves rush.

I'd say great but best of all time :shake:

As voted on by Other Musicians.

Neil just won Best drummer AGAIN. Geddy has won it multiple times as well as Alex.

How many Best musician awards has Ringo won-lol

There's great musicians, then there's great music. I'd place Rush around the same level as Yes and a level below Styx and Jethro Tull. Certainly not in the circle of all time greats.

Woody Guthrie, Hank Williams, Andrews Sisters, Judy Garland.....to name a few.

Hank and Woody would fall in the category of timeless music. Your Cheatin' Heart is as classic as classic gets.

Rush fans are a strange breed, totally devoted to their band and totally convinced of their musical genius and unsurpassed virtuosity. For me it is all pretentious noise, I can't watch Spinal Tap without hearing Rush.

But to each his own, there is plenty of music/art/literature, etc, that I like and others don't. I'm a big Tom Waits fan. Many find that puzzling.

Perhaps one of my five favorite albums of all time

Check out the tracks, start with Ramblin' Round.

http://www.amazon.com/Tribute-Woody-.../dp/B000002LJG

Rush has been playing and consistently putting out new music for around 35 years. They're already most of the way there. Love them or hate them, you can't deny their world wide following. They have arguably the greatest drummer of all time, and if not the greatest bassist, one who pioneered and ushered in the rest in the group. For a 3 man band, they are amazing and simply 1 of a kind.

All of that said, I don't know if they'll be remembered 50 years from now. But I wouldn't blame them for that at all.

You know how we all have music that takes us back to a certain place and time in our past? What's cool about Woody Guthrie and Hank Williams is that they take me back to a time and place where I've never even been. Yet, despite never having been there, the music makes me feel like I can see and feel the places they were.

There's a heck of a lot of truthiness in this statement.

Still, you begin from where you are at the time, Mr. Baby Lee. It's fair to say that, had the Beatles not been inspired by Elvis, rock-a-billy, and up-tempo blues, they might have been inspired by someone or something else and we might be listening to a whole lot more accordion duos on satellite radio. It doesn't necessarily mean that their impact would be any less ... just very different.

Although Elvis was hugely important to the emergence and wide, cultural acceptance of "rock & roll", to me, the breadth and depth of the Beatles' influence - not to mention the lasting appeal of their songs - gives them the nod. And it shouldn't even be close.

FAX

Simmah!!! Simmah down nah!!!

Ringo is one of the most underrated drummers of all times. He could put a back beat on a fart, dude. And has. Don't be dissing Ringo.

FAX

Besides, it can be well argued that, were it not for Ringo, those guys might not even have jobs.

FAX

There must be a lot of young people taking this poll.

Really? :rolleyes:

Rush has won a number of Juno awards, inducted into the Candian Hall of Fame and has influenced countless bands from Tool to Metallica. Oh and received the Royal Order of Canada award. The highest honor given in that country.

As a group Rush posess 24 Gold and 14 Platinum records placing them 4th behind only the Beatles, Stones, and Kiss-also 4th for consecutive Gold-a Very tough thing to do.

Over the course of their careers, the individual members of Rush have been acknowledged as being the most proficient players of their instraments with each winning multiple awards. Neil has won more drumming awards than any Other musician in the history of music. Even his instructional videos have won awards. He has won for best live performace, best drum solo, best recorded drumming, Best Rock drumming, ect ect-NOONE is even close-ask any drummer.

Like I said-Best musicians of all time-hands down-not even close.

:spock: Yeah, all the young people I know are listening to the Beatles.

They won a Canadian award? Well, all right then.

FAX

Maybe they should have had matching haircuts and suits instead of long ass hair and komona's-lol

Rush was just in the number one ranked movie-on several important news shows and just had a two year world tour.

I think people will remember them.

LMAO

Similar to being Knighted in England-Sir Paul, Sir Elton, Sir Madonna ect

do yourself a favor, don't get into it about rush with halfcan.

Elvis..it's not even close.

ROFL I am just stating facts- I am not a fanboy really-lol

















okay yeah I am. :D

I think it would be an interesting exercise to try and develop a taxonomy of music that identifies the major branches in styles that have occurred over the years.

I think I'd probably disagree with you about Zeppelin in the sense that they would be one of those bands that started a "branch." They were arguably the band that started the heavy metal genre, so they will be important for a while in that sense.

I can understand how you might feel this way, Mr. stevieray. I just hope that First Down George doesn't see this post.

FAX

Jeez,did I even mention Ringo?

Personally,I'm a Rush fan,I just wouldn't suck their dick like you.

All true, but I think you're ignoring all the other artists besides the Beatles that Elvis influenced. British rockers, American rockers and even R&B groups were influenced and affected by his music and performances. Music and culture changed forever in the 60's and Elvis had a lot to do with that.

Now, if I'm grabbing a CD to listen to, I'm much more likely to pick the Beatles. I enjoy their music far more. But I think they're equally influential, so since Elvis came first I give him the nod.

first with the crib, first with the plane. first with the posse. (which everyone now copies) private home named a national landmark....first to be paid a million dollars...only artist named to country, rock and gospel HOF. over a billion records sold, miilions made thirty years after his death...etc.etc

Although I can see the argument for Elvis I agree with others that when you factor in the writing of one's own lyrics,the experimentation and the like The Beatles are far superior,hell,I've often said had Buddy Holly lived to a ripe old age we'd all consider him the real king of rock-n-roll.

The Beatles, no argument. And I'm not even a fan.

hahahaha you talk about elvis and the beatles, and then some rush fan comes into the elevator and rips ass

From wiki - i am sure there is more to this story.

Well, its well known that you have shitty taste.

BTW -- I voted The Beatles.

And I love how the best of Rush gets compared to Ringo. Yeah, don't bring up guys named Lennon and McCartney or anything.
Posted via Mobile Device

Ringo was a product of his time. He was GREAT at doing exactly what drummers did at the time.

Over the years, I've read many quotes by famous, respected musicians who have mentioned that Ringo was one hell of a drummer. Guys like Clapton and Page and Townsend and Gabriel. Just underrated. His talent was merely eclipsed by the other three Fabs.

A lot of bands would be damn happy to have Ringo as their drummer.

You can POH but not OR.

FAX

I'm just guessing here, but if Ringo wasn't a very good drummer I think they could have found a replacement.

Not. Even. Close.

There are some very sweet drum parts on Abbey Road. There's one that goes, "bam, de bam, de bam bam bam bam bam de bam, de bam bam". And that's just one of the toms. Not counting the other drum stuff he hit along with it.

FAX

It seems that only studio musicians, people of that era and music producers "get" Ringo.

Ringo was and is a badass. More importantly, he's a great person and easy to get along with (which 9 times out of 10 is half the battle).

Furthermore, Ringo doesn't need to win awards.

He's ****ing Ringo, k?

While I would agree that Neil Peart IS, in fact, a badass drummer, there are others who are just as flashy & badass. See Carl Palmer.

In the 60's? After he served? No way. The 50's, absolutely.

If Elvis "changed the culture" as you describe, it's much in the way Nirvana washed away the "Hair Metal" bands of the 80's.

No one tried to be Elvis after the Beatles arrived on the scene.

I HATE Carl Palmer.

He's always rushing and pushing the beat.

Yuck.

Cliff Richard did a pretty good job of exactly that in the UK.

Well, Bernard Purdie will tell you all day long that he played on a few Beatles tracks.

But I think that's just Bernard.

:)

Didn't the Beatles do part of a tour with a replacement while Ringo was ill?

Before the Beatles, I'd agree.

Put he pretty much fell off a cliff after 1965.

Ringo is like Bonzo...it's not just waht they did, it's what they didn't do...both played on small kits...

(though bonham had Ludwig custom make him a huge bass drum.)

not to mention nobody could, anyway...everything else is a mere copy.

Very truthy. Very, very truthy, indeed.

FAX

:rockon:

I dunno, Dane... According to wikipedia:
(these are in the UK, mind you...)
Top 10 hits in the 50's: 5
60's: 34
70's: 4
80's: 15
90's: 7
00's: 4

While it's true that a lot of those were pre-invasion, 30 top 10's post 1970 is nothing to sneeze at.

BACK OFF BOOGALOO

How big were the Beatles? People know the names of their roadies, their wives, their former girlfriends, their kids, their childhood friends.
Pretty insane.
Posted via Mobile Device

You think any influence Elvis had on music and culture is comparable to Nirvana's? Or am I misunderstanding your point?

What I always found interesting was that, for the longest time, McCartney sold more albums with Wings than he did with the Beatles.

I think the thing we all have to remember is that it's ART. Everything is a product of its time, so you can't really directly compare ANYTHING.

In Greenwich Village everybody who was cool just sat around all day long and smoked weed and dropped acid and listened to Revolver when it came out. Over and over and over. Those guys are all retired bank presidents and politicians now. But, they still know all the lyrics to all the songs. It just doesn't seem right somehow.

FAX

Yeah, misunderstanding.

What I'm saying is that the Beatles ushered in a new era of popular music. While their earlier recordings were definitely rockabilly influenced (they loved Buddy Holly and Elvis), they didn't spend much time mining that genre.

Music changed with the Beatles, especially "A Hard Day's Night" in 1964 (much like the arrival of Nirvana, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden and the rest of the bands that helped create the "Seattle Sound"). "Mop-Top" bands were everywhere, song structures changed as well as vocal arrangements.

Nonsense.

That's like saying that I can't compare a Van Gogh painting to an Andy Warhol work. They can both be pleasing and annoying at the same time.

It's all in the eye (or ear, in this case) of the beholder.

That's my point. It's almost 100% subjective.

Last time I checked, the Beatles didn't have to be on TV from the waist up..from perry como to Hound Dog....not only music, but a culture itself.

if anything elvis ushered in a new style of music, and subsequently ushered in the Beatles. didn't help that his career was interrupted by the service and movies. to be able to come back years after the British invasion, speaks volumes...Something tells me there is a reason why they sought out the King...paying homage, IMO.

I don't understand why Jackson is even on this list.

Hell, I'd argue Madonna or the Beach Boys had a bigger impact on pop music...

Michael Jackson influenced today's artists to the nth degree. The list is endless.

Madonna? She didn't write her music and she's more of a "celeb" than an artist.

The Beach Boys were absolutely amazing but rarely, if ever, emulated.

One of my earlier posts received a response comprised solely of one of those goofy smiley things that looks like a little, bald, blue dumbass sucking on a gobstopper when all I did was mention that I didn't recall John Lennon having a funeral as extravagant as Jacko's which didn't make sense because the Beatles had a greater influence on pop music than Michael Jackson. Ergo, the gauntlet was thrown, the poll options determined as shown, and the little, bald, blue, gobstopper sucking dumbass exposed as a freakish, uncultured, irritating pain in the ass.

FAX

Odd, the Beatles listed them as an influence...

The Beatles and the Beach Boys were engaged in a friendly competition.

Brian Wilson heard "Sergeant Pepper's" and set out to create it's rival.

That album is called "Pet Sounds".

So you could say there was a "gentlemen's duel" between the two?

Perhaps.

WTF emulated Jackson? WHO? Sure, a lot of people bought his $3it. I did, my family loved most of it. But what did he do that people emulate other than the cinematic music video?...

Absolutely. This has been well documented and is not in any way, "privileged" information.

Much of the music that came from the 60's was created this same way. Everyone wanted to write a better record than other artists, whether it was the Beatles, Beach Boys, The Who, The Stones, Hendrix, Cream, etc.

It's very easy to hear the artistic growth from album to album from all of those artists. They were pushing each other to new heights, which is one of the reasons why that era was so special.

Since then? Usher, Justin Timberlake, Mariah Carey, Backstreet Boys, N'Sync - the list is literally endless.

The overwhelming majority of male R&B artists emulate two people: Stevie Wonder and Michael Jackson.

Stevie's much more difficult to pull off, though D'Angelo did his best in 1996 and did pretty well, IMO.

But Michael is the inspiration for most in that field.

And mostly soul-less $#it.

Just pop with nothing behind it. That's his legacy?

Timberlake, the Backstreet Boys, and N'Synch?

That's not a legacy that's a ****ing apology demanded and deserved...

:thumb: high five FDE !

http://bigeastmeadow.files.wordpress...8-comeback.jpg


I love the Beatles for the catalog of music they produced.

I just think Elvis is more iconic in his influence on many genres of music.

Listen to " You gave me a mountain"(penned by Marty Robbins) and you can see not only his range but,his dedication for remembering where he came from.

I agree.

The Beatles

and I couldn't stand them.

Really?

I love the beatles, they most definitely were the gateway to my generation.

That being said, elvis opened them doors.

Yes but as we all know Ringo got the gig because John and Paul could not handle Pete Best pulling all the top shelf ass after the shows.

ROFL

You're in prime form

Elvis. Not even remotely close.

Michael Jackson had one good album - Off The Wall, a small handful of good songs over the course of his career on his other albums and an understanding/taking advantage of being in the "right place at the right time" and utilizing a relatively new avenue/medium (MTV) to it's fullest extent for maximum impact. In addition, he was constantly in the public's eye for not his music, but his excentricities in his private life; e.g., trying to turn himself into a white pixie elf, sleeping in a hyperbolic chamber, Bobo, snuggling up with kids, Neverland, etc. While Thriller remains the highest selling album of all time, remember that the current biggest selling act in music right now is the Jonas Brothers.

The Beatles pushed the boundaries of rock in terms of melody, song writing and instrumentation, but they were almost unique in a sense rather than paving a road that a multitude of bands followed. More of their generations Nirvana than an overall influence of other bands. They were simply better in terms of overall creativity and musical understanding. Sure, St. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club was a genre shattering record that pushed the boundaries of creativity, and did spawn numerous imitators, but one would have to argue that the Rolling Stones or Led Zeppelin (at the tail end of the Beatles musical collective life) were actually more important in terms of overall impact and influence to music than the Beatles. Yes, their catalog of music, in a relatively short amount of time is nothing less than stunning (SPLHCB, Revolver, Let It Be, etc.), but they were more of being simply better than any other band at the time rather than being a bigger influence than any other band at the time.

Elvis, however, "invented" Rock and Roll. Redefined the whole concept of popular music in terms of what the buying public understood popular music to be. Without Elvis, there would be no "British Invasion," no Beatles, Rolling Stones, Led Zeppelin, etc. No appreciation nor widespread public acceptance of the black blues influeneces that shaped not only Rock 'n Roll, but the Motown sound and numerous other styles. Elvis brought together a number of musical influences (such as blues, gospel, country/western, poppy bugglegum WWII Andrew Sisters stuff, Bing Crosby crooning, etc, etc, etc.) and combined them with raw sex appeal and an understanding of showmanship and entertaining that the world had never seen before and reinvented music as the world knew it.

Again, it's Elvis, and it's not even remotely close.

KEEP F-IN' DOUBTING CHARLIE DANIELS.

ROFL

FAX

Racist.