Each one of these bands were only able to release 2 studio albums: Joy Division My Bloody Valentine The Stone Roses I have a feeling that most people are going to vote for Joy Division here but they did outside of their lead singer, who was well, dead, did continue but under a different name in New Order. So really MBV and The Stone Roses had less of a discography to go by but I'm keeping Joy Division as one of the choices. Okay, so which band do you think was the best out of what was listed and why? My choice may shock some people but I am going with not Joy Division nor My Bloody Valentine. I'm going with the Stone Roses - a band that was the forerunner for Brit Pop and especially for groups like Oasis, Blur, Radiohead (to a degree) and later Coldplay.
My favorite is My Bloody Valentine, but I love all three bands. I guess Joy Division is the most influential.
Joy Division arguably altered the course of popular music. True, the members continued on as New Order (adding Gillian), but they took a dramatically different approach (even evident on Movement). MBV is a great band. They have influenced pop music as well, but not even close to the level of Joy Division. The Stone Roses also were an influential band. However, there were other bands already making music in that vein who just didn't quite grab the public the way they did. As far as musicianship goes, I'm certain MBV and The Stone Roses have players that far exceed anything the members of Joy Division could accomplish. Those fellows were admitted amateurs. Much of their unique sound is due in large part because they basically didn't know what they were doing. So, "greater" is obviously a rather subjective term. For me, Joy Division wins this one hands-down. I can see how others could/would choose either of the other options. I like all three bands a great deal. Joy Division changed my life. Cheers.
I agree with a lot of what has been said as far as influence and innovation. I think I would put it, in this order. 1. Joy Division 2. My Bloody Valentine 3. Stone Roses. Though technically I think the Stone Roses first album is better than what MBV has done by a hair, their influence isn't quite as large. But the influence of Stone Roses was great but for only a few years, really. MBV seems to continue to influence music as they've done from the beginning.
Apples to oranges... Not to derail, but I'm getting tired of the "better than/greater than" arguments I've encountered lately (not specific to ClutchFans). Is it not possible to like all of the above without declaring one greater than the other? They were all pretty influential, they all have solid work, and I enjoy each of them. I definitely listen to JD/MBV more than The Stone Roses, but I wouldn't say that's a good enough reason to declare them as greater than The Stone Roses. And actually, I thought Ian Brown's solo effort last year was actually pretty damn good.
Sorry to be a dick, but this is a teachable moment... If you have more than two choices, you are asking for the "greatest" of the three. Greater implies specifically two.
you got to be a fan of brit pop to like the Stone Roses, they didn't get much radio play here. Iam Brown and company were fantastic.
