The Greatest Band Ever ?

[the science eel]

I've never heard that before, but I guess it's a deliberate homage to Serge Gainsbourg, no?

If anything, it's about Mark's dad.

[Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth]

Edit: Hang on, you like ambient music. I can't make sense of your hang-up on vocal melody and ballads at all.

Maybe it's just that Smith is a tuneless old cock.

[NoSleep]

No entries that aren't rock bands, yet (boringly & obviously).

Sun Ra & His Arkestra are the best band beyond space & time.

[Howj Begg]

No entries that aren't rock bands, yet (boringly & obviously).

It's a deal. The Grumiaux Ensemble, if only for the versions of the Mozart String Quintets they recorded in the 60's. Other than that, The King's Consort for all their Purcell recordings which remain awesome.

[Jemble Fred]

No entries that aren't rock bands, yet (boringly & obviously).

Well it depends on how you look at it. The best bands aren't 'rock' or any one genre – The Beatles and The Bonzos being good examples. You could call The Beatles a rock band or a pop band for a short-hand, but their body of work is impossible to pigeonhole. The Bonzos are a jazz band, a comedy band, a rock band, and then you have Innes' beautiful ballads...

If any band is easily pigeonholed into any one genre, they're hard to call truly 'Great', I'd say.

[Howj Begg]

Well it depends on how you look at it. The best bands aren't 'rock' or any one genre – The Beatles and The Bonzos being good examples. You could call The Beatles a rock band or a pop band for a short-hand, but their body of work is impossible to pigeonhole. The Bonzos are a jazz band, a comedy band, a rock band, and then you have Innes' beautiful ballads...

If any band is easily pigeonholed into any one genre, they're hard to call truly 'Great', I'd say.

Which is basically more unthinking propaganda for The Beatles cos they're so, oooo 'varied'. Never mind that they can basically be happily called '60's pop' without much problems. And of course Miles Davis 1965 quintet could never be the greatest band cos they can be accurately labelled under jazz.

[Jemble Fred]

I've not even mentioned The Beatles or nominated them up til now, I was just using them as an example.

The idea that The Beatles need propaganda is just fucking priceless. You only need ears, facts and sense. And what I said above is just factual – their output covers many genres.

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

Edit: Hang on, you like ambient music. I can't make sense of your hang-up on vocal melody and ballads at all.

Maybe, freakish though it would be, he likes other types of music as well.

[Howj Begg]

The Beatles don't need propaganda, I agree, so there's no need to spout gibberish about how greatest bands (as a plural this has meaning and usefulness, in terms of collecting and recommending the best music so people can discover it and debate it) have to be anything to basically make it so that no other band but the one that fit the narrow requirements can be given the title.

Which, as I say, is bollocks anyway. The Beatles essayed some different genres from the one(s) they started with but it always comes out sounding like them and can happily, easily, and comfortably fit under the rubric of '60's pop', especially as it became common by 1966 for british bands to try something a bit jazzy, a bit psychedelic, a bit r'n'b, a bit avant-garde, a bit bluesy etc on their albums or in a middle eight or whatever. It was within the remit. They were never anything other than a pop band on record, though I'm happy to concede they started as rock n roll/skiffle.

I'm thinking it makes more sense to argue that the greatest bands are the ones who define a genre, and make the greatest music within it. There's no artists who have excelled at scatter-shot musicmaking, to me, though some, eg Jerry Lee Lewis, have been superb at more than one (rock n roll and country).
Incidentally, the Beatles, as one of the best practitioners of 60's pop, happily fit within this category.

[NoSleep]

Which is basically more unthinking propaganda for The Beatles cos they're so, oooo 'varied'. Never mind that they can basically be happily called '60's pop' without much problems. And of course Miles Davis 1965 quintet could never be the greatest band cos they can be accurately labelled under jazz.

But the term Jazz describes an evolutionary process, over many decades, of an approach to playing that initially used songs merely as a platform for performance, and then went on to make the concept of the  song redundant. Performers were given the opportunity to leave the cage and fly.

Whereas rock (apart from a few exceptions, like Can) has walked around with that one foot nailed to the floor for 40-50 years, still promoting the outdated concept of a song. And has (thanks to music journos, I suppose) revered the text above the music. The song is the most saleable package from the point of view of the music industry, so it is always worth hearing out artists who are prepared to challenge its ubiquity. Those would be the great ones.

[Jemble Fred]

All I was doing above was putting forward the suggestion that variety is an arguable sign of greatness. Which seems a perfectly reasonable suggestion. You don't need to be quite so aggravating if you don't agree.

[Howj Begg]

All I was doing above was putting forward the suggestion that variety is an arguable sign of greatness. Which seems a perfectly reasonable suggestion.

I agree. Bobby Darin or Tony Orlando and Dawn are the Greatest Bands.

[Jemble Fred]

I knew I should have used the Pet Shop Boys rather than The Beatles as an example. People would call them electropop, but their best work to me was with Johnny Marr, and their orchestral recordings, Noel Coward covers etc.

[Howj Begg]

I knew I should have used the Pet Shop Boys rather than The Beatles as an example. People would call them electropop, but their best work to me was with Johnny Marr, and their orchestral recordings, Noel Coward covers etc.

Now you've said something interesting and I'm interested, like most (I imagine) I know nothing about that. Certainly PSB is a pretty left-field nom for GBE for you and the board. Still, despite those things you mention, most would agree that in the genre of electropop PSB are masters, and that's what makes them a potential GBE.

[the science eel]

Pet Shop Boys have too many thingies that prevent them from being liked by many. And being liked by many is a prerequisite, I'd say, for being GBE.

Anyway, nobody would seriously suggest they ARE the Greatest Band Ever. That's silly.

[Jemble Fred]

I wasn't nominating PSB for GBE, but they are certainly more popular, all over the world, than most of the bands already mentioned on this thread.

And being liked by many is a prerequisite, I'd say, for being GBE.

Weren't you arguing for The Fall? Popularity doesn't equal 'greatest band ever', but if it did, you'd have to be blind to deny that most people have never heard of The Fall or Mark E Smith at all. Everyone's at least heard of PSB.

EDIT: But yes, two obvious things, popularity doesn't always equal greatness and, yes, the whole concept of this thread is impossible, strictly speaking.

[Howj Begg]

Pet Shop Boys have too many thingies that prevent them from being liked by many.

like what?

And being liked by many is a prerequisite, I'd say, for being GBE.

isn't that most popular band ever?

Anyway, nobody would seriously suggest they ARE the Greatest Band Ever. That's silly.

why?

[Marvin]

Whilst arguing about this it's probably important to remember that the whole concept of The Greatest Band Ever is utterly ridiculous. We might as well just be honest and call this thread 'Bands who I think are good'.

That said, what's this obsession with popularity=greatness here? Bar The Beatles, Westlife and Take That are easily more popular than the rest of the bands mentioned in this thread.

[Howj Begg]

I forgot the Busch Quartet. They genuinely are the greatest band ever.

[CaledonianGonzo]

But the term Jazz describes an evolutionary process, over many decades, of an approach to playing that initially used songs merely as a platform for performance, and then went on to make the concept of the  song redundant. Performers were given the opportunity to leave the cage and fly.

Whereas rock (apart from a few exceptions, like Can) has walked around with that one foot nailed to the floor for 40-50 years, still promoting the outdated concept of a song. And has (thanks to music journos, I suppose) revered the text above the music. The song is the most saleable package from the point of view of the music industry, so it is always worth hearing out artists who are prepared to challenge its ubiquity. Those would be the great ones.

No need to sound quite so condescending about those who practice songwriting - or those who prefer listening to songs over other types of more abstract/free-form music. 

The converse argument would be that writing a good song is really, really hard, but almost anyone can waffle and tootle around in a challenging, incoherent manner.  Paul McCartney probably could produce a ten-minute squall of atonal saxophone honks or have focussed solely on things like Carnival of Light if he chose to; but not every jazz musician could turn their hands to his standards of tunesmithery.

Whilst arguing about this it's probably important to remember that the whole concept of The Greatest Band Ever is utterly ridiculous. We might as well just be honest and call this thread 'Bands who I think are good'.

Never a truer, etc. 

[Jemble Fred]

Paul McCartney probably could produce a ten-minute squall of atonal saxophone honks or have focussed solely on things like Carnival of Light if he chose to

Well, to be fair, he does all that kind of thing as well. There's very little he hasn't tried, musically.

"Do what you wanna do, do what you wanna do, do what you wanna do, do...."

[Howj Begg]

Good lord I bet carnival of light would blow away most of his output of recent decades. Why doesn't  he release it :(

The blanding of McCartney since the 70's has been an utter shame.

[CaledonianGonzo]

No, but, but because McCartney is constrained by such outmoded and obvious conventions as "songs" and is crafty with a "melody", he's sequestered in a straightjacket of conformist convention imposed upon him by "the man", appreciated only by boring, hidebound reactionaries, unable to evolve past primitive means of expression, etc. etc.

(Sorry NoSleep - only joshing, and I do agree that the likes of Sun Ra, Miles Davis, etc. are worthy mentions in this thread.  I just really, really like songs.  Nothing so revolutionary as a good tune, and all that).

[Howj Begg]

I know you're kidding and all that, but certainly when you look at his 60's work it's clear he has strait-jacketed himself, though the seeds of his decline were there in a lot of it too. That's clearly a reason to think he wasn't replaced by William Campbell.

[Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth]

Isn't it often said that people produce their best work when they do so within a tighter framework?

[Johnny Yesno]

Maybe, freakish though it would be, he likes other types of music as well.

My point was that if purlieu likes music with no vocals why insist that a band can't be "great" unless they do a ballad? Duh!

[the super moop]

It's The Fall, of course.

Is it fuck!

It's clearly the Velvet Underground, who are better than most things in the world.

The Fall are fun, but minor.

Not that I blame you for liking them, of course.

[Johnny Yesno]

The idea that The Beatles need propaganda is just fucking priceless. You only need ears, facts and sense. And what I said above is just factual – their output covers many genres.

If it's about covering genres then this must be the greatest piece of music ever:

Naked City - Speedfreaks

Actually, it is the greatest piece of music ever. As you were.

[Ballad of Ballard Berkley]

If anything, it's about Mark's dad.

Ah, no, I meant the actual sound of it, rather than the lyrical content.

[VegaLA]

The actual best band ever is quite clearly New Order.

The statement above is TRUE.

You can close this thread now.