Who was the first group to use backwards guitar?
Who had the best songwriting duo in rock and roll history?
Who had 27 #1 hits in America?

Let me give you a hint, it wasn't the Who.

The only things I can say for The Who is that they are superior talent wise in nearly every aspect, and also that they reached higher highs than the Beatles. The Beatles beat them in terms of number of good songs, but The Who's great songs were much better than the Beatles great songs.

[QUOTE=Woodstock]The Beatles had over 5 movies, many which were hits.
Paul M/John L/George H were the best songwriters to ever grace your ungrateful ears.
The Beatles changed pop culture in a way The Who couldn't even begin to imagine.

I'm not denying the fact that they had the first rock opera, good for them. But that doesn't equal anything compared to the revolutionary ideas the Beatles had.[/QUOTE]
Wow, way to wake me from my fantasy that The Who were the greatest. Now my life is incomplete. :upset:

[QUOTE=xxxRoCkJuNkiExxx]Who had 27 #1 hits in America?[/QUOTE]

Yea, because popularity to the ignorant public determines how good a band is. :rolleyes:

[QUOTE=lunch998]Yea, because popularity to the ignorant public determines how good a band is. :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
stupid public.

[QUOTE=lunch998]Yea, because popularity to the ignorant public determines how good a band is. :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
Or because of the fact that they were revolutionary?

[QUOTE=xxxRoCkJuNkiExxx]Who was the first group to use backwards guitar?
Who had the best songwriting duo in rock and roll history?
Who had 27 #1 hits in America?

Let me give you a hint, it wasn't the Who.[/QUOTE]

Boy, you really shattered my world there. :rolleyes:

Acutally...i think its argueable that beatles did have the first rock opera, since its been debated that Sgt Peppers was totally focused around the same theme throughout all the songs in a specific order, with the re-occuring Sgt Peppers Song in it, unless you want to consider that a concept album

Also, Townshend, Jagger/Richards, and Bob Dylan were better than Lennon and McCartney, at the very least. Sh[SIZE=2]i[/SIZE]t, George Harrison was better than Lennon and McCartney.

[QUOTE=Woodstock]Or because of the fact that they were revolutionary?[/QUOTE]

Many great bands aren't popular, so does that make them less of a great band? No.

No one is denying that The Beatles changed a lot, but that doesn't mean that the quality of each of their 27 #1s is superior to that of The Who's best songs.

[QUOTE=Distant Echoes]Acutally...i think its argueable that beatles did have the first rock opera, since its been debated that Sgt Peppers was totally focused around the same theme throughout all the songs in a specific order, with the re-occuring Sgt Peppers Song in it, unless you want to consider that a concept album[/QUOTE]
That's a concept album, a rock opera has whole story not just a theme.

[QUOTE=Disconnection Notice]Also, Townshend, Jagger/Richards, and Bob Dylan were better than Lennon and McCartney, at the very least. Sh[SIZE=2]i[/SIZE]t, George Harrison was better than Lennon and McCartney.[/QUOTE]
I always did like George best and felt he was taken advantage of.

[QUOTE=Disconnection Notice]Also, Townshend, Jagger/Richards, and Bob Dylan were better than Lennon and McCartney, at the very least. Sh[SIZE=2]i[/SIZE]t, George Harrison was better than Lennon and McCartney.[/QUOTE]

The only songwriter in that list that is better than Lennon/McCartney is Bob Dylan.

[QUOTE=lunch998]Many great bands aren't popular, so does that make them less of a great band? No.

No one is denying that The Beatles changed a lot, but that doesn't mean that the quality of each of their 27 #1s is superior to that of The Who's best songs.[/QUOTE]
Some of the Beatles' B-sides are arguably greater than any Who song.

[QUOTE=xxxRoCkJuNkiExxx]The only songwriter in that list that is better than Lennon/McCartney is Bob Dylan.[/QUOTE]

Nope.

[QUOTE=Woodstock]Some of the Beatles' B-sides are arguably greater than any Who song.[/QUOTE]
such as?

[QUOTE=Johnny B. Good]That's a concept album, a rock opera has whole story not just a theme.[/QUOTE]

I just said what the article said...probably a bit mistated though. It does follow a rough storyline though.

I have great respect for the beatles, but i thihnk their far from the greatest band ever. On counts of inspiration, maybe, but compared to others, probably within top 20, no higher

[QUOTE=Johnny B. Good]I always did like George best and felt he was taken advantage of.[/QUOTE]
Harrison was not taken advantage of. He was a horrible writer at first, but throught the help of Paul and John, he became fantastic.

[QUOTE=Woodstock]Some of the Beatles' B-sides are arguably greater than any Who song.[/QUOTE]

:lol:

Gee, I didn't even want to bring up The Who's live performance and how much better it was than the Beatles'.

See what I mean? When they want to be, Beatles fans can be the most unbearable people on Earth.

What makes you think The Who's live performance was better than the Beatles'?

[QUOTE=lunch998]:lol:

Gee, I didn't even want to bring up The Who's live performance and how much better it was than the Beatles'.[/QUOTE]
I doubt the Who would enjoy playing live if they couldn't hear themselves.

[QUOTE=lunch998]:lol:

Gee, I didn't even want to bring up The Who's live performance and how much better it was than the Beatles'.[/QUOTE]
The Who even beat out Jimi Hendrix at the Monterey Pop Festival for best performance.

[QUOTE=Disconnection Notice]See what I mean? When they want to be, Beatles fans can be the most unbearable people on Earth.[/QUOTE]

Probably.

/looks at Woodstock.

[QUOTE=xxxRoCkJuNkiExxx]What makes you think The Who's live performance was better than the Beatles'?[/QUOTE]
Demolishing the stage=cool

[QUOTE=Disconnection Notice]See what I mean? When they want to be, Beatles fans can be the most unbearable people on Earth.[/QUOTE]
Not any more unbearable than you, bringing up other pointless writers who had nothing to do with the present arguement.

[QUOTE=xxxRoCkJuNkiExxx]What makes you think The Who's live performance was better than the Beatles'?[/QUOTE]

Better material + more energy tends to equal better live performance.

[QUOTE=Woodstock]I doubt the Who would enjoy playing live if they couldn't hear themselves.[/QUOTE]

Apparently you have no argument for the Beatles live performance.

I wouldnt doubt the who live. Probably one of the only bands that could even release a live album and make it comparible or better then their original albums i.e. Live at Leeds

[QUOTE=Woodstock]Not any more unbearable than you, bringing up other pointless writers who had nothing to do with the present arguement.[/QUOTE]

Well, when you snobby bastards like to bring up, "LENNON AND MCCARTNEY WERE THE BEST SONGWRITERS EVER!!!" I tend to get a little irritated.