Vote for your winners, results posted tomorrow:
#1 The Rolling Stones vs. #16 The Delfonics
#8 B.B. King vs. #9 King Crimson
#5 Buddy Holly vs. #12 Booker T. & The MG’s
#4 Little Richard vs. #13 The Monkees
#3 The Doors vs. #14 Scott Walker
#6 The Everly Brothers vs. #11 The Jackson Five
#7 Patsy Cline vs. #10 Duke Ellington
#2 Marvin Gaye vs. #15 The Turtles
#1 The Rolling Stones
#8 B.B. King
#5 Buddy Holly
#4 Little Richard - Close call. I have been critical of Little Richard in the past, and the Monkees had some good hits and a little more to them besides, but Richard is simply more substantial.
#14 Scott Walker
#11 The Jackson 5 - Blow out of the day. For my money, their first four singles, all #1, is the greatest four single run in history.
#10 Duke Ellington - Love Patsy. But Ellington is on the Mount Rushmore of popular artists of the 20th century.
#2 Marvin Gaye
#9 King Crimson (surprising myself a bit with this one)
#5 Buddy Holly
#4 Little Richard (Yes, the Monkees have been underappreciated, and have a reasonable level of achievement. But that only brings them up to the level of, say, Herman’s Hermits, not a titan like Little Richard.)
#14 Scott Walker (So, so much more than an anti-Doors vote, which I’m happy to provide anyway.)
#6 Everly Brothers (Jackson 5 might have a shot if they’d had more than one great song.)
#7 Patsy Cline (I’ve been a champion of Duke Ellington in the past, and if we’re just going on musical achievement, this is no contest. What can I say? I went with my heart, rather than my brain, on this one.)
#2 Marvin Gaye (“Got to Give It Up” might currently be my favorite song by any of today’s artists.)
#1 The Rolling Stones
#9 King Crimson
#5 Buddy Holly
#13 The Monkees (Love Little Richard too)
#3 The Doors
#6 The Everly Brothers
#10 Duke Ellington
#15 The Turtles
The Rolling Stones
King Crimson
Buddy Holly
Little Richard (this was REALLY close actually...The Monkees were great, but just not as consistent)
Scott Walker (go Scott, please kill Jim)
The Jackson Five
Duke Ellington
Marvin Gaye
The Monkees -- Maybe its that the reincnation of Little Richard that occasionally happens on TV shows and commercials that bug me. Plus I kinda like a good portion of The Monkees music.
The Doors -- Listened to Scott Walker, did not care for him.
#1 The Rolling Stones
#8 B.B. King
#5 Buddy Holly
#4 Little Richard - close call actually
#3 The Doors
#6 The Everly Brothers
#10 Duke Ellington
#2 Marvin Gaye
#1 The Rolling Stones: I'm no Stones fan, but they have a few songs I enjoy.
#8 B.B. King: I'm not a big prog guy, although I appreciate Fripp's contributions to Bowie records.
#5 Buddy Holly: A legend beats out a near-legend.
#4 Little Richard: A legend beats out a cliche.
#3 The Doors: Legends beat out another legend. I've explored a lot of 60s lately, and Scott 4 was my favorite. Still, I love The Doors.
#6 The Everly Brothers: If only for "All I Have to Do Is Dream", they would win. I was never big on The Jackson 5, and only like Jackson output from 1978 onward, when they were known as The Jacksons.
#10 Duke Ellington: He shares my birthday!
#2 Marvin Gaye: I like "Happy Together", but Marvin easily wins.
Probably in the truest sense of what a boy band is. You could argue for some 50's groups but the Monkees fit the description on all levels. There's a big difference though because while "good music" is subjective, at the very least The Monkees were putting out music that was similar to the critically acclaimed music of the time. So, I won't say the Monkees music was good and current boy bands music sucks but I will say that The Monkees music is more in line of what is critically acclaimed. If they let the guys play their respective instruments there would be no debate about their place in rock history and since they all were capable as shown on later records, there really shouldn't be a debate in the first place.
Probably in the truest sense of what a boy band is. You could argue for some 50's groups but the Monkees fit the description on all levels. There's a big difference though because while "good music" is subjective, at the very least The Monkees were putting out music that was similar to the critically acclaimed music of the time. So, I won't say the Monkees music was good and current boy bands music sucks but I will say that The Monkees music is more in line of what is critically acclaimed. If they let the guys play their respective instruments there would be no debate about their place in rock history and since they all were capable as shown on later records, there really shouldn't be a debate in the first place.
Looking at some of the bands of the time in the R&R Hall of Fame - The Hollies,Lovin' Spoonful,Dave Clark Five - there's no doubt the Monkees would be in if not for that manufactured image of them...
Probably in the truest sense of what a boy band is. You could argue for some 50's groups but the Monkees fit the description on all levels. There's a big difference though because while "good music" is subjective, at the very least The Monkees were putting out music that was similar to the critically acclaimed music of the time. So, I won't say the Monkees music was good and current boy bands music sucks but I will say that The Monkees music is more in line of what is critically acclaimed. If they let the guys play their respective instruments there would be no debate about their place in rock history and since they all were capable as shown on later records, there really shouldn't be a debate in the first place.
Looking at some of the bands of the time in the R&R Hall of Fame - The Hollies,Lovin' Spoonful,Dave Clark Five - there's no doubt the Monkees would be in if not for that manufactured image of them...
The difference is that all of those bands had great songwriters while the Monkees played songs written by a team in the background. Motown artists are a better comparison. For the most part, they sang the songs and that's about it. You could argue that anyone could have sang those songs and made them hits but you can't change history and those artists are revered as some of the greatest to ever cut a record. It's an absolute shame that The Monkees aren't given the same respect.
RESULTS:
The Rolling Stones 96.4% / The Delfonics 3.6%
B.B. King 60.7% / King Crimson 39.3%
Buddy Holly 85.7% / Booker T. & The MG's 14.3%
Little Richard 65.5% / The Monkees 34.5%
The Doors 89.3% / Scott Walker 10.7%
The Jackson Five 55.5% / The Everly Brothers 44.5%
Duke Ellington 53.6% / Patsy Cline 46.4%
Marvin Gaye 92.6% / The Turtles 7.4%
Probably in the truest sense of what a boy band is. You could argue for some 50's groups but the Monkees fit the description on all levels. There's a big difference though because while "good music" is subjective, at the very least The Monkees were putting out music that was similar to the critically acclaimed music of the time. So, I won't say the Monkees music was good and current boy bands music sucks but I will say that The Monkees music is more in line of what is critically acclaimed. If they let the guys play their respective instruments there would be no debate about their place in rock history and since they all were capable as shown on later records, there really shouldn't be a debate in the first place.
Looking at some of the bands of the time in the R&R Hall of Fame - The Hollies,Lovin' Spoonful,Dave Clark Five - there's no doubt the Monkees would be in if not for that manufactured image of them...
The difference is that all of those bands had great songwriters while the Monkees played songs written by a team in the background. Motown artists are a better comparison. For the most part, they sang the songs and that's about it. You could argue that anyone could have sang those songs and made them hits but you can't change history and those artists are revered as some of the greatest to ever cut a record. It's an absolute shame that The Monkees aren't given the same respect.
I agree with this sentimenet, though it should be remembered that later on Nesmith and Tork both wrote a lot of stuff, and some of it is among the band's best.
Also, the other bands at the time met each other naturally. They got together and played the kind of music they wanted to play. The Monkees were auditioned and assembled by the record company for a specific purpose: To replicate the phenomenon of the Beatles. Before the Monkees, the music came first and the marketing later. The Monkees were the first rock band where the marketing came first and the music later.
Even though, yes, they are of higher quality than modern boy bands.