tomk Posted January 22, 2013 Report Share Posted January 22, 2013 Think popular music: you've got Beatles and Dylan, and that's pretty much it. That's if you're too myopic to listen to non-white performers like Ray Charles or James Brown, or to listen to music from different eras like Bing Crosby or Louis Armstrong. The goal should be to expose yourself to a larger net of candidates from variety of cultures and eras. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted January 22, 2013 Report Share Posted January 22, 2013 I don't want to derail this thread, but I don't think there's any argument at all to put Charles, Brown, Crosby or Armstrong (or indeed Sinatra) in the same conversation as Dylan or the Beatles. I can see real jazz fans making an argument for Miles Davis, but then you're getting into a different ballpark. I have listened to every album by all of the people named there and they are not at Dylan levels peak or otherwise. Beatles are a rare case of only being peak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohtani's jacket Posted January 22, 2013 Report Share Posted January 22, 2013 I don't want to derail this thread, but I don't think there's any argument at all to put Charles, Brown, Crosby or Armstrong (or indeed Sinatra) in the same conversation as Dylan or the Beatles. I can see real jazz fans making an argument for Miles Davis, but then you're getting into a different ballpark. I have listened to every album by all of the people named there and they are not at Dylan levels peak or otherwise. Beatles are a rare case of only being peak. Dylan and the Beatles... That's ridiculous. That's like claiming that there's never been a better pair of actors than De Niro and Pacino. If you wanted to take this to its obvious extremes, Dylan doesn't have anywhere near the record sales of other artists. Elvis Presley and other 100 million sellers would have to be in the discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted January 22, 2013 Report Share Posted January 22, 2013 This is Pro Wrestling Only so I have nothing else to say on music. Acting wise, I think there are probably 10-15 more people in the discussion with Pacino and De Niro. I will not get drawn on that beyond saying that either though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted January 22, 2013 Report Share Posted January 22, 2013 I'd be surprised if anyone arguing Bob Dylan cares about his record sales. After all, I don't think "Hulk Hogan" has been given much thought in this thread... other than posters who set out extremely low numbers. Folks generally had other wrestlers in mind, because they're thinking "work". So mixing De Niro, Pacino, Dylan and Elvis together is mixing apples and oranges on some level. That's not even getting to the obvious: Elvis = singer of other folk's songs Dylan = songwriter + performer They are two different beasts. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badlittlekitten Posted January 23, 2013 Report Share Posted January 23, 2013 The music analogy is ridiculous. So rock music is all that's relevant yeah? Bollocks. I've not a clue on what my 'bar' is as I've not a clue who my GOAT's are outside of maybe two people. So, um . . . two then. It's all pretty interchangeable after that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted January 23, 2013 Report Share Posted January 23, 2013 The music analogy is ridiculous. So rock music is all that's relevant yeah? Bollocks. What you're going to put Notorious BIG against Dylan? How about Prodigy? How about DJ Shadow? Once another genre produces a Dylan, maybe then they'll get brought up in GOAT conversations. It hasn't happened yet. It will. There just aren't any other people with 9-10+ bona-fide ***** albums. That is why it is just Beatles and Dylan. Obviously classical music is another ball game. And for other genres, I did mention Miles Davis as someone you might want to put forward ... (I have no truck with jazz myself, just don't get it) To bring this back to wrestling ... there's nothing to say that GOAT candidates must come from a certain style or a certain genre. The guys who are in the frame are in the frame because they have careers that put them in the frame and they just so happen to come from a particular promotion at a particular time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted January 23, 2013 Report Share Posted January 23, 2013 I was going to pull a tomk with that last post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badlittlekitten Posted January 23, 2013 Report Share Posted January 23, 2013 The music analogy is ridiculous. So rock music is all that's relevant yeah? Bollocks. What you're going to put Notorious BIG against Dylan? How about Prodigy? How about DJ Shadow? Once another genre produces a Dylan, maybe then they'll get brought up in GOAT conversations. It hasn't happened yet. It will. There just aren't any other people with 9-10+ bona-fide ***** albums. That is why it is just Beatles and Dylan. Why can't I put BIG against Dylan? Cos he didn't sell as much records? Cos he weren't 60's? Cos he, dear me, doesn't play 'real' instruments? I missed the memo that said music is objective. Mojo magazine says Dylan released 9 '*****' albums so it must be true I guess. There's no doubt that Dylan and Beatles are a huge influence on Rock music if that's what you're getting at. But rock music is not the world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohtani's jacket Posted January 23, 2013 Report Share Posted January 23, 2013 The idea that Mahalia Jackson, Billie Holiday, Robert Johnson, Muddy Waters, Miles Davis, Louie Armstrong, John Coltrane, Sam Cooke and a host of other artists can't compete with Dylan is bollocks. If other genres could produce a Dylan? Dylan wouldn't have existed without other genres. To argue that popular music begins and ends with Dylan and the Beatles is like arguing that wrestling begins and ends with Hulk Hogan and Ric Flair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted January 23, 2013 Report Share Posted January 23, 2013 Because BIG doesn't have the ammo to go up against Dylan that's why. The best you can hope for in hip-hop, is to take the entire output of the Wu-Tang Clan and put that against Dylan, and even then it's not really a conversation. I am the wrong person to try to argue this with since I'm one of the biggest hip-hop fans going. There is no Dylan of hip-hop yet. There may be in time. I will not discuss music anymore because I believe it's against the rules to go this off topic. EDIT: Robert Johnson recorded 31 songs, total. He's not in contention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueminister Posted January 23, 2013 Report Share Posted January 23, 2013 The music analogy is ridiculous. So rock music is all that's relevant yeah? Bollocks. What you're going to put Notorious BIG against Dylan? How about Prodigy? How about DJ Shadow? Once another genre produces a Dylan, maybe then they'll get brought up in GOAT conversations. May I point out that other musical genres existed before 1995? Also sticking Dylan as representative of "pop-rock" like he's some sort of lone standard banner for Artful White Guitar Music is actually a hella complicated proposition? Also there's no reason other than the uh, particular ethnic cultural sensibilities that Prince or Stevie Wonder haven't been mentioned even though they are easily Dylan's superior in composition, arrangement, performance, singing and consistency of output? (And this is speaking as a hardcore Dylan fan.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueminister Posted January 23, 2013 Report Share Posted January 23, 2013 Because BIG doesn't have the ammo to go up against Dylan that's why. The best you can hope for in hip-hop, is to take the entire output of the Wu-Tang Clan and put that against Dylan, and even then it's not really a conversation. fffffffff EDIT: Robert Johnson recorded 31 songs, total. He's not in contention. It is a well known fact that the greatest musicians of all time are immune from being murdered or being born before the establishment of the modern recording industry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted January 23, 2013 Report Share Posted January 23, 2013 Are you calling Prince consistent now? lol We must stop this now. PM me if you must, but this is going too far. We should stick to wrestling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted January 23, 2013 Report Share Posted January 23, 2013 I'm going to split this off and send it to Pro Wrestling Mostly, but I'm finding this conversation amusing, and encourage you all to continue it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted January 23, 2013 Report Share Posted January 23, 2013 I was named after Bob Dylan, but I like Phil Ochs better as a songwriter from that era. I will not discuss The Beatles as I don't want Will to have a stroke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Crackers Posted January 23, 2013 Report Share Posted January 23, 2013 Are you calling Prince consistent now? lol We must stop this now. PM me if you must, but this is going too far. We should stick to wrestling. Dylan was arguably consistent from 63-69. Prince was consistent from 80-88. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted January 23, 2013 Report Share Posted January 23, 2013 I'm totally opposite of my views on wrestling in my views on music, where I am blissfully dense and possibly a little shallow. Synthesizers are more interesting than "real" instruments. Bob Dylan is boring. Can we talk about New Order? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Crackers Posted January 23, 2013 Report Share Posted January 23, 2013 I'm totally opposite of my views on wrestling in my views on music, where I am blissfully dense and possibly a little shallow. Synthesizers are more interesting than "real" instruments. Bob Dylan is boring. Can we talk about New Order?I'd rather listen to Power, Corruption, & Lies than any Dylan or Beatles album. My favorite genres are funk, jazz, hardcore punk, hip-hop, blues, and soul. P. Funk is my favorite band of all time. My other GOAT candidates are Charles Mingus, Sun Ra, Bad Brains, Howlin Wolf, Fugazi, Minutemen, Fela Kuti, Talking Heads, Wu Tang, Frank Zappa, Captain Beefheart, and Sam Cooke. Grew up listening to Dylan and the Beatles when my mom played them but I pretty much never want to listen them anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted January 23, 2013 Report Share Posted January 23, 2013 I am really not keen to discuss this further. I love music from all ages, from all genres (except jazz, never jazz). My interest in these things goes deep, I really like Prince a hell of a lot. I like a lot of people. I like 30s Delta Blues. I like 80s synth. I like 60s psychedelic power pop. I like hip-hop. Hell, I even like The Residents. My nerdery for this -- as well as for film -- is probably as deep as Dylan Waco's nerdery for wrestling. The GOAT argument in music is not one I enjoy having. People like what they like. People have gaps. People have received opinions. So when all is said and done, I'd rather leave it. The way I see it, Dylan is an artist approaching Shakespeare levels and he will be remembered as such. They don't come along very often. That's my view, I'm not interested in getting people who don't see it that way to see it that way -- I'm not a preacher, I don't want to convert anyone. For someone who thinks that of Dylan, having a conversation with someone who doesn't like Dylan is probably the worst thing in the world. I can't be bothered with it. If you want to think he never recorded a great album after 69, or after 76, or even ever. So be it. If you want to think Eric B. and Rakim are The GOAT. So be it. I do not want to argue the case one way or the other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueminister Posted January 23, 2013 Report Share Posted January 23, 2013 Are you calling Prince consistent now? lol Compared to Bob Dylan, who's gone through extended spurts as a less-than-compelling live performer and lost at least two decades as a top tier creative force to alcoholism and annoyance with the studio process? God yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomk Posted January 23, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 23, 2013 Super dissapointed that this was cut off from wrestling thread as the point I was making holds both places The music analogy is ridiculous. So rock music is all that's relevant yeah? Bollocks. What you're going to put Notorious BIG against Dylan? How about Prodigy? How about DJ Shadow? Once another genre produces a Dylan, maybe then they'll get brought up in GOAT conversations. It hasn't happened yet. It will. There just aren't any other people with 9-10+ bona-fide ***** albums. That is why it is just Beatles and Dylan. Not sure why you can only look to post Dylan music. I don't know anything about UK music pre-Joe Meek, but in the US we have a rich history of popular music on record, where you can find spectacular stuff going back to 1893. There is a giant history of recorded French popular music as well as Spanish recorded pop music. The amount of recorded Portugese pop music from Brazil alone is amazing. The idea that two English speaking 60s artists are all that's relevant to pop music history, comes off as willfully ignorant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted January 23, 2013 Report Share Posted January 23, 2013 No I'm a big fan of the Library Congress recordings. There's tons of great stuff from the 20s and 30 and 40s. I listen to that stuff a lot. I spent a day wandering around New York once looking for a Mississippi Sheiks album (my wife wasn't very pleased, we were only there a week). I just haven't come across anyone I consider on that level. These aren't views I've just made up on the spot, they are views I've come to from years of obsessively being into things, seeking things out, and so on. It's not a lazy view. You have assumed it is a lazy view. As I said though, I am not interested in having this out. People can think what they want to. The conclusion I have come to, is that Dylan is without peer, and the Beatles are in the conversation with him because as far as I can see, they only made great albums. There are a handful of other bands with shorter runs -- Talking Heads, The Smiths, a few others -- who also only have great (or interesting) albums. I didn't say they are the be all and end all. I said they are the only ones in the GOAT conversation. Thinking Flair is the GOAT does not preclude you from watching all other wrestling. Why would it? I might go a year without listening to a Bob record. I've spent the last month mainly listening to Of Montreal. I've said my piece now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badlittlekitten Posted January 23, 2013 Report Share Posted January 23, 2013 The way I see it, Dylan is an artist approaching Shakespeare levels and he will be remembered as such. They don't come along very often. That's my view, I'm not interested in getting people who don't see it that way to see it that way -- I'm not a preacher, I don't want to convert anyone. For someone who thinks that of Dylan, having a conversation with someone who doesn't like Dylan is probably the worst thing in the world. I can't be bothered with it. If you want to think he never recorded a great album after 69, or after 76, or even ever. So be it. If you want to think Eric B. and Rakim are The GOAT. So be it. I do not want to argue the case one way or the other. If you'd said something like that in the first place instead of drivel like "I don't think there's any argument at all to put Charles, Brown, Crosby or Armstrong (or indeed Sinatra) in the same conversation as Dylan or the Beatles" then no one would have called you up for such narrow/dim views. You're a Residents fan though so you can't be all bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueminister Posted January 23, 2013 Report Share Posted January 23, 2013 Can we talk about New Order?I've got an opinion about New Order and here it is: I like the first album a lot more than other people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.