RE: Beatles Who and Scooby Doo

["L. Bird" <pkeets@hotmail.com>]

> >The Beatles definitely have a broader appeal--Who music has too much of a 
>discordant edge to it for some folks.  BUT, much of Who music still sounds 
>contemporary for that same reason.  The dissonance cuts across styles, as 
>well, and makes it serious rather than pop.
>
>Most intelligent thing written on this list in a long time.
>Yea!  Keets and I agreeing again!

Why, thank you!  :)


>The *above* is the difference between The Beatles and The Who.
>What made the Beatles so "important" though, was that they were literally 
>guiding society through a change.  They were changing more than just music. 
>They were changing societies outlook.

I don't know that they actually led the change, but they did become a major 
symbol for it.


> >You obviously have no taste  in music except for liking The Who. :)
> >Deni
>
>Deni, statements like that are gonna get folk pissed off at you.
>Just a friendly warning.

Now, now.  She did include a smiley.  It sounds like sarcasm.  (Where's that 
emoticon?  We really DO need it.)


>Now you're pulling a "Keets".  You don't believe that The Beatles can be 
>compared to Michael Jackson or GB.  Do you??  What kind of CD store are you 
>runnin' down there???  Is it the heat??

Don't sell Michael Jackson short.  He's gotten mega-weird just lately, but 
for a while there he ruled.  He's on the pop side, but he deserves  respect 
for seriously raising the bar on music video.  THRILLER and BAD compare very 
favorably to The Who's rock opera.

Also, a comment on Bjorn's disco collection--disco may be passe in the US, 
but it seems very popular in Europe.


keets

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp