We started with 512, now we are down to 2... vote for your champion, results posted tomorrow:

The Beatles vs. Bruce Springsteen

Bruce Springsteen

SPRINGSTEEN - The Boss, has made an unlikely run to the championship. Radiohead, Dylan, Zeppelin, The Who, Cash, Sam Cooke, Seger... all artists I voted for over The Beatles.

As boring as it is...The Beatles

The Beatles (can't lie to myself)

Bruce

Prince





And the Beatles...yes.

The Beatles

Bruce had a good run, probably a better one than he deserved.

The Beatles

Bruce Springsteen

Bruce Springsteen

Beatles

BRUCE

Beatles

THE BEATLES. I have been spared a difficult decision.

On October 23, 2007, I posted on the “Reorder the Top 20 Acclaimed Artists” thread. My musical tastes have changed a bit since then, so, rather than write another novella on the subject, I will account for my vote by how I would reorder them now (my 2007 rankings in parentheses):

1. (tie) The Beatles (1)
1. (tie) Radiohead (18)
3. R.E.M. (2)
4. The Clash (4)
5. Bob Dylan (3)
6. David Bowie (8)
7. The Velvet Underground (5)
8. Nirvana (10)
9. Prince (7)
10. The Rolling Stones (6)
11. Marvin Gaye (17)
12. Neil Young (9)
13. Stevie Wonder (11)
14. The Who (15)
15. The Beach Boys (12)
16. Jimi Hendrix (13)
17. Led Zeppelin (20)
18. U2 (14)
19. Bruce Springsteen (16)
20. Elvis Presley (19)

(Three artists jumped ahead of Bruce in my rankings: Radiohead, Marvin Gaye and Led Zeppelin. It was not until the following year that Radiohead finally clicked with me. I have also developed an appreciation for the impact of Marvin Gaye’s long and productive career, and a begrudging respect for the undeniable innovation, influence and power of Led Zeppelin.)

I do not mean to tread on the feelings of people who love Springsteen. As I indicated yesterday, I respect the man and I think he’s done some good work. But for the collective wisdom of the UMT to have him ahead of the Clash, Prince, R.E.M. and, potentially, the effing Beatles? I find that absolutely bewildering.

To end on a more positive note, I think the Forum is at its best when every acclaimed artist has their partisans. As BillAdama pointed out yesterday, for the longest time, Bruce was not held in high regard around here. That has obviously changed. So I’m going to shut up and turn the mike over to the Bruce fans…Henrik, Schwah and nicolas have all weighed in, but anybody else want to answer the question: Why Bruce?

Beatles

I'll start by saying that while I wouldn't put Bruce above the Beatles, on a good day they would both occupy my top 3 all-time artists.

schleuse, earlier you posted about "masks" and how Bruce has comparatively few compared to The Beatles or Prince or Bowie or whoever. I'm going to disagree with you on two counts:

- First, Bruce has as many "masks" as any of those artists, and
- Second, those adopted personas are richer and explored at more depth than a great majority of artists.

First: the masks. Don't let the familiar backing of the E Street Band or the middle-of-the-roadness of Bruce fans fool you: Springsteen is more than a reflection of blue-collar America. His characters are in fact usually quite out-of-the-ordinary: gamblers, murderers, cops, street racers, 'Nam vets, teenagers-on-the-move, mobsters, old men, all with a story to tell. Are they always "earnest"? No, Springsteen spends a lot of time exploring the seedier side of his characters. And while they usually topically concern what Americans would call the "heartland", everything about Bruce is blown way out of proportion. Each "mask" is simply larger-than-life, a myth that only wears blue jeans on the outside. It's true that most of these masks are lyrical and not sonically different. But you can hear a decent amount of variance from album to album: the bombast of Born to Run to the acoustic dirges of Nebraska to the slick synthesizers of Born in the U.S.A. The only thing you might blame Bruce for is that all the masks inhabit the same world; whereas Ziggy Stardust would never meet the Thin White Duke, most of Bruce's characters probably still live in Asbury Park.

Second: the depth. The trick of the hugeness of The Boss sound is that it takes the "earnest" and amplifies it to a work of semi-fiction. Does the hard-luck criminal in "Meeting Across the River" really have "a meeting with the man on the other side"? Is the song's tale even plausible? It doesn't really matter; you can listen to the song ten times and come up with a different answer every time. Either way, the desperation comes across each time. And that's what Bruce does best: explore and elicit human emotion through song. For example, here are some of the lyrics to "Racing in the Street":

The beginning sets up the theme of street racing, presenting it all as just a good time:

"We only run for the money, got no strings attached
We shut 'em up and then we shut 'em down

Tonight, tonight the strip's just right
I wanna blow 'em off in my first heat
Summer's here and the time is right
For racin' in the street"

Then we learn it isn't all what it's cracked up to be; it's a good time, but it's an escape from what is a harsh life:

"Some guys they just give up living
And start dying little by little, piece by piece,
Some guys come home from work and wash up,
And go racin' in the street."

The fun of the racetrack obscures the reality of everyday life, and the relationship of the singer to the racetrack is complicated by his love affair:

"I blew that Camaro off my back,
and drove that little girl away,
But now there's wrinkles around my baby's eyes
And she cries herself to sleep at night
When I come home the house is dark
She sighs, 'Baby did you make it all right,'"

Then we have an ambiguous ending:

"For all the shut down strangers and hot rod angels,
Rumbling through this promised land
Tonight my baby and me, we're gonna ride to the sea
And wash these sins off our hands."

It's about as close as you can get to a movie in song form. The images form crystal-clear (in my head at least) as he recites the lyrics. On top of that, there's an awfully deep exploration of character(s) for a seven-minute song with instrumental interludes of decent length. Yes, it's straightforward, and the characters inhabit a world we all know. Nonetheless, the concept is top-notch and the execution is basically flawless. This might be an exceptionally good example, but there are plenty of Springsteen songs with this kind of poetry that really rewards repeated listenings. I think only Dylan and Young are the only lyricists who really can rival Springsteen in this respect.

And that's why Bruce.

I was intending to elaborate a little further on my one word answer on this thread and now is a perfect time.

Why Bruce? Because while his songs are indeed quite typical "heartland" rock, that is not to say that he doesn't portray a lot of emotions - joy, hope, despair, longing, love (of course), I can feel the whole range of emotions simply on one album, which is Darkness on the Edge of Town (which if you haven't heard properly, I urge you to, it's absolutely magnificent, the only Bruce album in my mind better than Revolver). For every moment in my life (ok maybe that's exaggerating a little bit, but i'll continue regardless), there's a song of Bruce's which encapsulates that moment and how I feel, it's something quite extraordinary. When I desire to just "forget about it all", I listen to Racing in the Street, and when something just makes me happy and full of hope, you can certainly say that I'm a believer in "The Promised Land". I agree that he figuratively wears less masks than Lennon, Yorke and Bowie to name a few, but the one he does wear - that of the human heart - is so multifaceted and few, if any, wear it better.

Sorry for a rather tacky reply!

Edit: One last thing to mention, and I don't think anyone's mentioned it yet, since we've been too bogged down talking about Bruce's "message" - he just makes good albums. I'm not talking about ideas and emotion (which for me is probably the most important thing), but also about flow and consistency. Does one song on an album in Bruce's golden period from 1973 - 1984 flow straight to the next? Are the songs on any one album consistently good? He could be talking about something really stupid like the Cheeky Girls but the answer is still almost inevitably yes. He just makes good albums.

The Beatles

Beatles

Beat Alls

Jimi Hendrix

Err...Beatles

The Beatles, and I don't think it's a boring choice at all.

Just an observation, but there seem to be a lot of acts in your top 20 that you don't actually like all that much???

Yeah, I'm with BillAdama.
The original UMT had a much better finale.
Maybe it's just me, but the decade separation ruined the poll.
The Beatles

It's not, it's AM's top 20, which he's reordered.

Beatles

A bit harsh for someone who particpated every day faithfully, don't you think?

Probably a little harsh. It didn't ruin the poll, it just made it less exciting. What's the fun it matching up artists of the same time and (for the most part) genre the whole way?

Bruce.

Why? Better lyrics, better musicianship, better songwriting, better songs, better albums, more likeable person; it's not even close.

This may be my first vote for Bruce Springsteen in this tournament. Dud final for me, but the masses have spoken!

Bruce Springsteen for the win.

I can see his point, the 50/60's region was loaded with legends. Every year this tourney is going to have a different spin and every year there will be likes and dislikes in the format.

I actually like the decade breakdown, but I would have paired the 50s/60s winner against the 70s winner, and the 80s winner against the 90s/00s winner.

The 50s and 60s are way overrated.

Yes,what Stephan said

BRUCE SPRINGSTEEN - I can connect with the lyrics of so many of his songs,I don't know if there's one Beatles song that really struck a chord with me lyrically. Maybe just Yesterday...

I've felt with a lot of Springsteen songs he was playing a character, even if that character was based on his real experiences, I still associate that character more with his 'brand' than his person. (Which I relate to my previous classification of him as a 'demagogue'.)

Whereas with Beatles songs, at least with the John and George songs, I've felt the lyrics were very personal and based on something they want to express to the world and a desire to change peoples' perspectives.

I dunno, of the four Beatles and Bruce, I find George the most likable, and John the most authentic.

Beatles...again.