You literally said The Beatles would be a singing and dancing quartet had they came around 30 years later than they did. The rest of the quote is largely irrelevant to that point.

There is a clear reason why virtually all of the greatest albums happened before both you and me were born. The Beatles may have had more musical talent than the Backstreet Boys but it doesn't matter when there really isn't a path to being able to establish themselves as a group. So, ultimately they end up like the Backstreet Boys as a really popular boy band. I don't know who you consider to be the best band since 1990 but they certainly wouldn't be viewed anywhere close to The Beatles. Now, it is possible that The Beatles were the peak of all music and not a single collection of 4 or 5 people in the world could ever even match their fifth best album since 1980 or it could have been that the similarly talented artists are limited by the same thing that would limit the 90s Beatles.

It's more fun to be a victim

There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.

You just acknowledged that my quote was not about equal music abilities but the different period of time, so thanks for settling that.

It all depends on who you ask. I like the Beatles a lot. Boyd knows a lot about music but he doesn't like them at all. I'm sure Boyd and Bagels and guys like that could easily name many better bands than the Beatles post-1990. I don't know that I would agree with the list, but that's the sort of the point.

There's no universal "these are the best bands ever" list that everybody agrees with, you're acting like there is such a list and the Beatles are at the top.

No, Brick. Your quote was saying that perhaps the best song writing duo in pop/rock history would have been nothing more than a bubble gum boy band had they been born 30 years later.

You are the one who compared one of the greatest bands ever to a dance troupe.

It's more fun to be a victim

There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.

My perception is that in general The Beatles are considered the best band ever by the most amount of people. If your stance is now that many bands post-1990 are better then I can accept that.

You can't really say that a band that wrote most of the music that they are lauded for was just wholly swept up in the cultural zeitgeist of the time.

Did you not read the post you just quoted?

I did. Your argument seems to be that people don't think The Beatles are the greatest band in history and there are many better bands since 1990. I'll accept that as a valid answer. Not everything needs to be argued against.

So that begs the question why no other group has ever been able to have anywhere close to the impact they had. Is it that it never happened that 4 people of similar ability haven't met each other in the past 40 or so years? You would think that at some point in the years that followed 1980 that someone would have stepped up to be The Beatles 2.0 or it means that they were so talented that it would be impossible to ever match them.

You were so close.

My argument is that SOME people don't think they are the greatest band. There's a significant difference between the following two sentences.

people don't think The Beatles are the greatest band in history

some people don't think The Beatles are the greatest band in history

You could say the same thing about fine art or classical music. Circumstance and talent both play into it in a fungible ratio, you can never devise a formula for it.

Also if you fuck someone like they are a millionaire they might go try to be one.

I Want To Hold Your Hand

Case closed.

You can't really say that a band that wrote most of the music that they are lauded for was just wholly swept up in the cultural zeitgeist of the time.

You could say the same thing about fine art or classical music. Circumstance and talent both play into it in a fungible ratio, you can never devise a formula for it.

Are you stoned or pissed off, or both, when you create these postings?

Correct...Beethoven, Bach, and Mozart are to this day considered the greatest classical composers ever, but much of that has to do with time and place. That's not to take anything away from their talents.

Correct...Beethoven, Bach, and Mozart are to this day considered the greatest classical composers ever, but much of that has to do with time and place. That's not to take anything away from their talents.

The internet, as a whole, has been a net detriment for humanity.

The internet, as a whole, has been a net detriment for humanity.

We lose a lot of rights when we look the other way when it doesn't affect our lives or it isn't a cause we agree with.

The internet, as a whole, has been a net detriment for humanity.

The internet, as a whole, has been a net detriment for humanity.

It's more fun to be a victim

There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.

I would argue the internet and similar information technology has been the biggest protection against a third world war.

It is at the same time both the best and worst thing to ever happen to humanity.

Michael Jackson = Mozart.

(I think his pa said that after Michael died.)