IT'S A GAS, GAS, GAS!!
MESSAGE BOARD ARCHIVES/WEEKLY ROCK POLL POST
Return to Gasx3/Poll Post Board Homepage
Name: Keno
E-Mail:
Subject: RE: My picks
Date: Monday, November 09, 2015
Time: 11:55:36 AM
Remote Address: 162.255.158.94
Message ID: 298487
Parent ID: 298473
Thread ID: 298473
Stones poll: I just broke my own rule and changed my vote from last night after reading the replies here. Although it's fine to change your vote, you really shouldn't let others influence you to where you vote for a song or an artist because of what you read here, or change your vote after you already voted, for the same reason, and I just did that after reading 2 of the replies. I had voted last night that they were even, then I checked the polls this morning to make sure all the new polls were working okay, and saw the results which surprised me some, and then read those replies, and after thinking it over, I changed my mind and voted for Brian instead. I guess that's not really a major crime, but I rather just go by my own feelings when I vote on anything. Plus I still feel overall the same way I did when I first voted and went year by year comparing them to determine my vote. BJ clearly was ahead of Mick in '62 and '63, then I felt they were even in '64, and by '65 Mick pulled ahead. So I first went with "even" since being the lead singer and main song/lyrics writer says a lot to me (Remember, in the '60s, MJ wrote most of the lyrics and Keith most of the music, and that would change after that to where they were almost dead even on who wrote what). So I was thinking, by '64, not only did Mick sing lead, but he wrote the lyrics and there's nothing as important than that to a band, other than I was forgetting that if BJ hadn't started the band, and almost totally alone keep it going by running it and being the band's true manager in the first 2 years, there never would be a band called the Stones for Mick to sing and write for. So that's why I changed my vote, yet still, I'm thinking, if Mick wasn't there to sing in the way he did, and write the songs, which was as important as anything else, then the Stones may not have ever made it. But BJ did hired MJ, and I guess that's the bottom line, it all goes back to that.
Rock poll: Paul Simon, and it shouldn't even be close, but it will be close and who knows who will win. All those guitarists are excellent acoustic players, but Simon does stand out and not just for his fantastic acoustic work in Simon and Garfunkel, but for his solo work, too. He gets the edge over Keith Richards who is my second pick since the Stones music didn't depend on acoustic guitars, and more so, since Keith played more electric guitar than anything else. David Gilmour and Stephen Stills would be close behind for third place, if we were to pick anything past first place.
VS poll: The Five Man Electrical Band is my pick, and on thier song this was one of those rock songs where the organ made a big difference in the song's sound. Yet the Tesla cover is great too, and after I wrote out and posted the poll post last night I went to YouTube and found Tesla's 2007 studio version of the song which I hadn't heard before (you can count either one when comparing the songs before you vote). Wow, that's even better than their live cover, and they use electric guitars instead of acoustics, no questions the guitars are better on their cover, but that cool organ sound is missed on both of their versions. So yes, Tesla impressed me on this song, but then again so did the Five Man Electrical Band, and they wrote it and did the original, and that alone is enough for me to vote for their version of the song.
Beatles poll: A 10 if any album was ever a 10, as AR is perhaps the greatest rock album ever made.
I also have a beef to bitch about here..... Some non Beatle fan rated this masterpiece a 1.... Now how can you even like rock music and rate this master LP only a 1? It's kind of like the fools who voted in the Rock Ongoing Poll for the Hall of Fame poll, who voted that both the Beatles and Stones should not be in the Hall! Each band has around 15 such votes each in that poll. Now I do understand that some younger rock fans just don't like either group (hard to believe, but it's true), and that's fine, but at least rock fans should realize there won't be rock music around today without these 2 groups. Our polls are open to all, yes, and each week I encourage everybody here to vote and wish more would, but of course I'm talking to rock, Stones, and Beatles fans only. I prefer non rock fans don't vote, since I and most rock fans don't really care how non rock fans see or judge Rock music, or any kind of music they dislike. These polls aren't for such people (and none of these people are reading this reply, including the person who voted AR a 1, that person can't be reading this I figure, as us Stones fans are smart people). If one don't like the Beatles, again, fine, just don't vote in the Beatles poll, as I've always been clear that these polls are for fans only. I totally believe that there is just no way that anybody who calls themselves a Beatles fans would or could vote less than what, a 8 or 9 for this LP? Maybe a 7 if you only really like their early pop music instead, but anybody who would vote it only a 1 isn't even a rock or Beatle fan and I wish they would just go and vote in polls that apply to what they like. Either that or get yourself a hearing aid! I guess the same person who voted AR a 1 would also vote the Stones SF a 1, too, cause again, such a person ain't a rock fan at all.... Okay, so that's my rant for this week, Ronnie!
Note: Do not hit the "Post Message" button more than once, even if it is taking a long time to post your message. Doing so may cause a double post to appear and could slow down your posting time even more.
Download your free, customizable Burton Networks Message Board now!
© 1998 - 2022 by Keno Internet Services, except where otherwise noted. All rights reserved.