To rank at the top, there has to be a high level in all areas: songwriting, musical construction, and technical prowess.
Songwriting: I know a lot of folks rate the Beatles very high here, but I find them HUGELY overrated in this department
Musical Construction: Genuine innovators who's innovations still hold up well decades later.
Technical prowess: their achilles heel. Even if I accept other's subjective assessment of their songwriting, on an objective level, they were not highly accomplished instrumentalists (with the possible exception of McCartney).
With so many groups that can positively nail it in all three areas, there's no reason to put the Beatles in the upper echelon.
They're not my personal favourite, but I think it's easy to make a case that they're the most significant recording artist of the recorded music era. You could argue that other acts have stronger album catalogs, but The Beatles also had very strong and successful singles.
They had two very talented people in the same band, and they emerged at the correct time to be at the forefront of a lot of innovations in popular music.
To rank at the top, there has to be a high level in all areas: songwriting, musical construction, and technical prowess.
I always think there's a horses for courses approach needed for appraising musical artists - I don't think there's a single criteria that can fit different genres, as different genres have different requirements. I would consider other categories like Emotional Connection, Influence, and Originality as well.
I don't think technical prowess is particularly important for some genres, while it's essential for others. If you judge purely on technical prowess, you end up with Dream Theater or something similar as the greatest band of all time.
I always think there's a horses for courses approach needed for appraising musical artists - I don't think there's a single criteria that can fit different genres, as different genres have different requirements. I would consider other categories like Emotional Connection, Influence, and Originality as well.
I don't think technical prowess is particularly important for some genres, while it's essential for others. If you judge purely on technical prowess, you end up with Dream Theater or something similar as the greatest band of all time.
I get you ... for the most part. Other criteria are important as well. Sure, things like emotional connection are also meaningful, but also completely subjective. The Beatles rarely touch me.
The key point is that I don't "judge purely on technical prowess". Heck, I don't even require it at all in some cases, at least with regard to enjoyment. But when I rank, it makes no sense to rank one artist who falls short in one or more criteria, especially one which can be considered objective, higher than another artist who excels in all criteria.
My favorite discussion about "technical prowess" (see video).
For me (THAT MEANS THIS IS OPINION)... I think technical prowess almost always ends up with the most boring music. That's just me. The most boring music in the world is who can run scales the fastest... I absolutely HATE Van Halen for this reason... I just feel like he runs scales really quick and calls it music. Dream Theater is also kinda boring for this reason. Animals as Leaders... the list goes on. Totally respectable, but also totally boring from my perspective. But again this is my opinion that technical prowess is boring/least interesting thing about music. Jimi Hendrix is a great example of it. Now let's not get this confused with being able to play something musically. Musically playing an instrument is the most beautiful thing in the world and you gotta have some chops/know some music theory to do that. Is it also boring when someone just knows 3 chords... sometimes. Sometimes when someone only knows 3 chords, their music can still be killer.
My favorite discussion about "technical prowess" (see video).
For me (THAT MEANS THIS IS OPINION)... I think technical prowess almost always ends up with the most boring music. That's just me. The most boring music in the world is who can run scales the fastest... I absolutely HATE Van Halen for this reason... I just feel like he runs scales really quick and calls it music. Dream Theater is also kinda boring for this reason. Animals as Leaders... the list goes on. Totally respectable, but also totally boring from my perspective. But again this is my opinion that technical prowess is boring/least interesting thing about music. Jimi Hendrix is a great example of it. Now let's not get this confused with being able to play something musically. Musically playing an instrument is the most beautiful thing in the world and you gotta have some chops/know some music theory to do that. Is it also boring when someone just knows 3 chords... sometimes. Sometimes when someone only knows 3 chords, their music can still be killer.
The key is whether or not the technical prowess is put on display as an athletic exercise or actually in service of the song. With a group like Dragonforce,I am wowed by the athleticism, but not the musicality, so they don't do much for me musically. But to me, the ultimate is when an artist has the combine the two aspects into a seamless, meaningful whole.
Some people can look at a particular mathematical equation, see the core beauty of creation through it, and actually be moved emotionally by that vision. Science and beauty need not be removed from one another; quite the contrary, they are perfectly intertwined for those who recognize it. So it can be with complex music. Studies show that the same part of the brain that processes math, also processes music, so this makes sense to me. Music is frequencies, which all have a specific relation to one another, much like numbers. Music is inherently technical, even if the people making it themselves don't realize it.
Technical wizardry is but one tool in a complete toolbox (maybe two if you thing of technical wizardry in composition and technical wizardry in playing)--the carpenter who has a full set of tools, and knows how to properly use them, can build the best. There are some great three chord songs out there, but if that's all a group can do, they won't hold my interest for long, and most likely will actually become annoying after a while. For instance, I can no longer tolerate CCR--I know a lot of people think Fogerty a great songwriter and his tunes timeless, but I'll be fine if I never hear them again. Certain albums by Dream Theater (not all, as some do seem to be nonstop athletic contests) will always hold my interest.
They're in the top 5. I don't listen extremely regularly but whenever I do revisit them I'm consistently impressed with how well they've aged, but most impressive is their wide palette. They didn't really invent anything, but they explored everything and did a good to great job at almost every popular music genre. I find it hard to take people who hate them seriously, they did so much that there's surely something for everyone?
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
