Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all. Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
^ Technically a lot better, but compositionally... the Beatles have the edge imo.
"Larks' tongues. Wrens' livers. Chaffinch brains. Jaguars' earlobes. Wolf nipple chips. Get 'em while they're hot. They're lovely. Dromedary pretzels, only half a denar."
Joined: June 18 2009
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 12609
Posted: November 23 2017 at 17:34
Douglas wrote:
The Jester wrote:
What's the connection? It's like trying to compare Beethoven with Charles Mingus... I voted for The Beatles though...
My thoughts exactly!
Well, they both created music. Any of us can prefer one over the other. We might just as well vote for who we prefer, Yes or Justin Bieber. Both styles are completley different, but we must like better one over the other all the same.
Quite amusing idea to think No Beatles no Rush. Perhaps no Rolling Stones or Who. Nor forgetting the Yardbirds who had a bit of influence guitar wise... American music being resold to America - (country, blues and soul respectively).
When rock was in the doldums c. 1962 the Beatles arrived and people, as ever listening with their eyes saw and heard nice white boys playing country pop music and everyone felt safe. And thrilled. The Stones were not so lucky getting booed off stage at times when first touring. (But they played dangerous race records...)
Of course you can't get much more white than Rush (Geddy rap....??) but talk about an advance on the Beatles. 35 years of innovation and top performances.
Joined: September 21 2016
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 577
Posted: September 29 2017 at 07:11
In terms of impact and importantance in rock history The Beatles are miles ahead of Rush. And that's not an opinion, that's a fact. Rush will never be nowhere near gigantic rock band as The Beatles, Led Zeppelin, Rolling Stones or Black Sabbath.
But when it comes to my personal music preference between these two bands I have to say Rush is a band that I prefer and listen to much more often.
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
Posted: March 02 2013 at 20:11
NYSPORTSFAN wrote:
[Q
"Stawberry Fields Forever" interestingly enough has odd time signatures & mellotrons and maybe one of the first examples of doing so?.
Leaving aside the time sigs, the melody of Strawberry is a beast in itself. Again, I cannot offhand think of many Rush tracks, if any, that achieve so much contrast in just the melodic element. Their songs are either all-dark or all-happy. Tom Sawyer is one of those songs that does combine happy and dark shades very well and is my favourite Rush track of all time. They rarely lived up to those standards, compositionally, though.
Joined: January 07 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 64
Posted: March 02 2013 at 09:17
giselle wrote:
NYSPORTSFAN wrote:
Argonaught wrote:
Dayvenkirq wrote:
^ So, The Beatles are at rank 0?
Hey, people come here to discuss odd time signatures, mellotrons and cool stuff like that; no need to force arithmetic's down their throats
"Stawberry Fields Forever" interestingly enough has odd time signatures & mellotrons and maybe one of the first examples of doing so?. So is that the real start of prog or were bands like King Crimson expanding what The Beatles did in 1969? My point is The Beatles did everything well enough that the majority of what came after drew some inspiration from them. I hear many people say The Beatles didn't invent a genre or subgenre but that's not the point for example The Beatles were already kicking in things like folk rock and country rock in 1964 influenced The Byrds and others who formulated it. I think The Beatles did the same thing with Progressive Rock with say "Strawberry Fields Forever" and "A Day in The Life" songs that were key influences to bands who formulated Progressive Rock.
If you listen to The Clouds Scrapbook, the album that links 60s pop with 70s prog, The Beatles definitely influenced
this band who then influenced Yes, Crimson, ELP etc. And apart from that crucial link, the Beatles were a huge influence on almost everything that followed them anyway.
It' hard to compare Rush to The Beatles as I think Rush was more geared toward Led Zeppelin though I hear some Yes influence from Rush. The Beatles could be liked by people who don't anything about music through their catch melodies and beat, people who study music theory could spend hours on The Beatles odd chord usage, people on the other hand could describe how they innovated fusing different sources into a 3 minute pop song and music producers could study how they recorded their music. What I am saying Rush were better instrumentally but The Beatles appeal to wider audience because The Beatles have more layers or dynamics in their music compared to Rush.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.246 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Rush vs The Beatles
Topic Options
Douglas wrote:
