This entire poll stemmed from the fact that, in almost every discussion of rock music I've been involved- radio station call-in contests, music message boards, etc.- it's usually the same old comparisons- and the results are almost always the same. I simply threw out a more left-of-center poll out of curiosity to see what the reaction would be. It certainly has no effect on me and my tastes- as I mentioned, I expected it to be around 1% or less. This was all about LIKE, not greatness, not popularity, not anything else but LIKE and personal preference. Some just aren't into the big bands and like stuff that's more down-to-earth, simpler, etc. And as you might have noticed from the comments in the other thread, there are certainly people who can't stand Zeppelin, The Who, etc. and would actually vote for an artist significantly less popular than them. You should see some of the Amazon discussions- there are a LOT of people who don't like Led Zeppelin, I mean a LOT. If I had replaced Pink Floyd with Led Zeppelin, I guarantee you it wouldn't be that much of a difference. Again, some just aren't as into the big bands, that's all. And although I put the #3 statement on there about the "clowns," maybe that's not the case. Maybe it's just some prefer the Smithereens to Pink Floyd, Weezer to The Doors, The Pretenders to The Grateful Dead, and The Black Crowes to Led Zeppelin. And I guess that I just don't put certain groups on pedestals, either. I recognize their importance, but the gap between a band like The Beatles and a band like Dire Straits is not really that big for me. 17 votes? Isn't that something? I really expected like 2 or 3 tops and was perfectly OK with that, heck, I'd be OK with 1. 17? I don't care if that's because they hate PF or enjoy the Smithereens, that's way more than I expected. WOOT!! <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/sVhZr6AaGw4?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/sVhZr6AaGw4?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
Just really liking both of these bands right now (seriously, I have to stop this incessant video posting, it's GETTING OUT OF CONTROL!), for completely different reasons, although these 2 are more of your ethereal-sounding tunes: <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/YUdG4RiO268?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/YUdG4RiO268?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object> <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/0GMY2lxCHLo?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/0GMY2lxCHLo?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object> Then, you have... Pink Floyd's awesome female backup, Clare Torry: <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZAydj4OJnwQ?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZAydj4OJnwQ?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object> The Smithereens' awesome female backup, Suzanne Vega <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/mlOVlqUcB8A?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/mlOVlqUcB8A?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
in a lonely place got a lot of play back in high school. i like the smithereens. they are a likeable band. however, they are like nice guys who finish last. they are infinitely less original and influential compared with floyd. i respect that you love them, but there really is no point of comparison, whatsoever. none.
dando, I know that you have explained to me why you did this thread and you are going more by personal preferences and I would say that you are an anomaly. But those other handful of people who are voting against Floyd, consider this: Floyd influenced so many other groups that it is not even funny - groups like Genesis, Rush, Radiohead, even Roxy Music! Who were some bands influenced by The Smithereens, you say? Why the Gin Blossoms and Toad the Wet Sprocket, of course!
Pink Floyd: Primarily a mood enhancer for substance abusers. The only thing worse than Pink Floyd, is The Alan Parsons Project. The Smithereens: Not as good as The Smiths, but better than The Fabulous Thunderbirds. Quite honestly, this is a band that needs to be forgotten.
Wow, you two just don't get it. What, is there some kind of law that says you can't compare 2 bands on the basis of personal preference? And how many times do I need to say that this is a poll based on PERSONAL PREFERENCE as opposed to "greatness"? This is a poll based on LIKE. This is a poll based on LIKE. This is a poll based on LIKE. This is a poll based on LIKE. This is a poll based on LIKE. This is a poll based on LIKE. This is a poll based on LIKE. You know, guys, it really is possible to enjoy a band regardless of whether they are considered great or not. It IS possible. And I don't need a band to be influential, etc. in order to prefer them over an icon. Yet, in a poll that I expected there to be maybe 1-3 votes for The Smithereens, there is quite a bit more than that. You know, if someone were to tell me that they prefer Nickelback to The Who, I would not have any problem with that. If they tried to argue that Nickelback had a greater impact, I'd certainly have to disagree with them. WHICH IS NOT THE POINT OF THIS POLL!!!! (OK, end rant)
Fair enough- although I respectfully disagree with your assessment of both. I would venture to say that no musical group that has made any kind of contribution to rock and roll should be forgotten, unless you're an elitist snob who feels the sun rises and sets on The Beatles and Zeppelin. But, as I mentioned in an earlier post, I personally don't have a problem with likes and dislikes, and I can see where you may prefer the Smiths over both bands (I'm assuming it's both since you tend to be a "little" harsh towards Pink Floyd). BTW, do you know any Alan Parsons songs other than Eye in the Sky? Just curious.
^ Understand that but also understand that I seriously doubt that 18 other people besides yourself and me have EVEN heard of The Smithereens. That is why the way you asked this question was severely flawed, IMO. The Who and Led Zeppelin was one where I tried to take 2 groups that I felt were similar in many respects, not because I know one has sold way more records than the other. Even though it is hard and damn impossible to get an accurate read on these things, I am always going to lean to asking who was the greater artist than who did you like better? I don't think anything is going to be gained in asking who was better - Madonna or Joni Mitchell? I know the majority is going to vote Madonna because they are more familiar with her stuff than Joni Mitchell. To me, I think it yields better discussions (read some of the posts besides yours that make a case for The Who - they are above average posts) than a thread like this, mainly because you are going to have the majority of posts asking if you are high for doing this thread. That is why I said earlier in this thread that you were better off asking Floyd vs. Cheap Trick or even The Ramones - an act that had some commercial success and is a little more well-known than The Smithereens. So, calm down - I have understood what you have been doing all this time with this thread - I just think there are too many people voting for The Smithereens that don't have a clue of who they are.
Unfortunately, yes. I have listened to "Time" and "Games People Play", along with a few other tracks. While I appreciate Parsons' fine production work in the studio, his own material seems to be a showcasing his elite recording skills. I also find listening to Asia to be just as regrettable.
Fair enough- everyone is entitled to his/her opinion. Oh, I don't get upset about these things, believe me. This is tame compared to boards like Amazon. It's alllll goooood. But I know that all 17 of those other people didn't just vote the other way because they hate Floyd. I've noticed that some just prefer the 80s sound and favor shorter, less prog-rock stuff. If given the choice between The Ramones and Yes, I'm certainly choosing The Ramones. And if having to choose between The Pretenders and Genesis, as much as I like Genesis, particularly Duke, I choose the former. <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7elEgKqz5xU?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7elEgKqz5xU?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
Again, fair enough. There is always a point of comparison if you're talking about 2 musical groups who you consider good. I'm not comparing influence, I'm comparing quality. And although Floyd certainly has many more complex songs than the Smithereens, they also have their fair share of basics- unless you think there's something profound about "we don't need no education" and a simple riff with a basic disco beat (albeit a killer guitar solo at the end). I can compare The Beatles with Tears for Fears and, although it may be a bit one-sided, it's not completely absurd. (or maybe it is???)
Nope, a lot of people think Asia was a fluff, pre-fabricated corporate rock band who sold out. Not me, but I've heard that comment from many, many people. I like Sole Survivor. BTW, just curious, what if this poll were Pink Floyd vs. Talk Talk? Just on a personal preference basis? In your opinion, is Pink Floyd that much better than Talk Talk?
You need to check your sarcasm meter as it is broken. As I said before, I would NOT start a thread on that for the reasons I have stated on this page. Also, I have tried music threads in the past that talked about obscure and/or cult acts and found little discussion on it. So, a thread on Floyd vs. Talk Talk would deteriorate very quickly into a bunch of "LOLZ WHUT??" and "FLOYD RULES" so what is the point? But on a personal preference, it is Floyd. Talk Talk might be in my top 20 but I am not sure. Talk Talk is very influential on the post-rock movement (along with Slint) but they changed so radically over their career that about the only other artists that I can think of that did such a change were Tom Waits and Radiohead. So, that makes comparisons even tougher as Floyd really stabilized their sound starting with the Meddle album (they were lost for a couple of albums after Syd Barrett had to leave the group). A better question would be is Floyd much better than early Talk Talk and is Floyd much better than later era Talk Talk? The answer to the first is a resounding yes. The answer to the second one is still yes but closer than you think.
Manny, they're just threads. So, a Pink Floyd vs. Talk Talk would have the usual "What, are you on drugs?" responses. Maybe you get one or two that say something like, "Actually, I prefer the 80s stuff- no offense against Floyd, but I actually like T.T. better." You make it sound like the only time you can post something is if you feel it's going to receive a significant response. This is not a popularity contest- and if you've noticed, how many dumb threads do you see on this board like, "Check out this hot chick!" As if that warrants more than 1-2 responses. At least a P.F. vs. T.T. discussion has the possibility of a few interesting responses. I'm telling you, there's nothing I haven't seen used as an argument for a Led Zep vs. Who discussion- been there, done that. The likelihood of anyone convincing you that Zep is better is very, very unlikely- if that is your goal, of course. My goal with this thread was not to persuade anyone- let's face it, people are set in their musical ways, and that's all there is to it. It seems to me that, for example, you take offense that so few voted for The Who, whereas I'm so used to that response that it doesn't surprise me at all nor bother me. Unless someone says something really dumb like, "The Who never contributed anything worthwhile." Like the guy who said he hated Baba O'Riley, well, that's opinion and that's that. You have your Zep people and you have your Who people, and they will be that way till the day they die. U2 vs. The Church- now that might be interesting.
How about this band called, umm, NIRVANA??? http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/reverb/2008/05/krist_novoselic_on_rems_new_re.php Krist Novoselic: "At the time, Nirvana was into making weird punk / rock music. Things started to change course when Kurt wrote the tune "About A Girl." That song came out of his listening to Meet The Beatles. I knew what to do with the bass line because of my new fondness for pop songs. I was listening to a lot of R.E.M. and The Smithereens." "We were listening to things like the Smithereens then, and the Beatles. We had one tape we listened to in the van — this was before we recorded Bleach. On one side was the Smithereens. And on the other side was this heavy-metal band, Celtic Frost. That tape was always getting played, turned over and over again. I think back now and go, 'Yeah, maybe that was an influence.'" Krist Novoselic on Nevermind By DAVID FRICKE, Rollingstone- DAN FOR THE WIN!!!!!!!!!!!! (just kidding on the Win thing- although, hey, Nirvana was influenced by the Smithereens, and Nirvana has had its own impact on rock).
On a side note, watching The Wall right now. Fascinating. Kinda strange. I like the slightly modified versions of a few songs. It used to be a Midnight Movie staple when I was growing up, much like The Song Remains the Same.
OK, this thread deserves to die; it has served its purpose. I will leave it with one last post, my validation for both bands: <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5LwjD8z2mOg?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5LwjD8z2mOg?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object> <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/wGmIL2gtieU?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/wGmIL2gtieU?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object> Long Live the Floyd and the Smithereens!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
OK, I'm not the only crazy one, most recent poll on Amazon's rock section: The Rolling Stones vs. The Faces And a heck of a lot of people voted for the Faces, not because they hate The Stones but because they legitimately like The Faces better. An interesting story: http://addictedtovinyl.com/blog/2009/03/28/flashback-the-smithereens-and-the-kinks/ Here's an interesting note on how the collaboration with The Kinks came about, taken from a recent book, The Kinks: All Day and All of the Night: Day by Day Concerts, Recordings, and Broadcasts, 1961-1996. (purchase) The book has several different notes on Smithereens/Davies appearances, including this one: "On Friday 22nd, Ray and Dave appear at the Boston Garden in Boston, MA for the WBCN Rock Of Boston concert. Also on are The Raindogs, RTZ, The Smithereens and Foreigner, with a pre-concert set by The Stools. Originally billed as Kinks Unplugged (and supposedly with a third member), the brothers' appearance is changed to an acoustic set by "Ray & Dave Davies of The Kinks". On the spot they arrange for the New Jersey-based Smithereens to back them for the last song and a half. This provides the audience with a pleasant surprise as the closed curtain that is behind the duo for most of the set is raised in the middle of 'Lola' to reveal The Smithereens joining in. A rousing set-closer of 'You Really Got Me' follows and Ray and Dave bring the crowd to their feet. "The Kinks and The Smithereens played as if they'd almost rehearsed," writes Ted Drozdowski in Musician,"bashing along with ragged abandon while Ray pogo'd behind his microphone." Dave will later consider using The Smithereens as his first backing band in 1997, but ultimately the partnership never materializes. Dave subsequently heads back to LA while Ray remains in New York City for the next week before heading back to London."'
OK, I'm resurrecting this thread- kudos to the guy who started the UFO vs. Led Zeppelin- let's hear it for the little guy!! <iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/U5wxubRFpVU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> <iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/NN5OgiwprP8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> <iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/jEG0-3xlAkg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> <iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/BwPTYimAE7E" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
