quote:

---

Durple wrote:

The greatest pop group of all the time are without a doubt the Bee Gees, followed by Abba...
I'm talking about pop music here as the title already said...

---

quote:

---

Rahul wrote:

quote:

---

britstyx wrote:

quote:

---

TONY MANERO wrote:

quote:

---

Rezi wrote:

Normally, I would say DP (because that's what I think).

But let's say The Smiths.

---

Let's say WHAT???? Rezi, let me guess - you must be british right? Since I'm sure you're not gay!

---

I have no idea if he's British, but he's certainly lacking a sense of taste!
For the record, I am British ( had you guessed that already?! ) and I can tell you without any shadow of a doubt, that the Smiths were pure, unadulterated, over-blown boring crap. Now THAT's a fact!

The Smiths - music to watch grass grow to!

---

The Smiths had their place in music. Give them their due. They put guitar music back in the UK top 40 during the mid-80s dirge of electro-pop. That to me deserves a pat on the back. But they had some decent tunes too.

And I don't see how The Smiths can be described as overblown. Their three-minute guitar pop tunes have nothing on Jon Anderson and co.

---

quote:

---

britstyx wrote:

quote:

---

Rezi wrote:


1) Britstyx, I don't think presenting a strict matter of taste ... as a "FACT" is going to serve your purposes

2) (which is, I recon, trying to assure me/anybody of your opinion on The Smiths).

3) Like my original post suggets, The Smiths aren't my favourite pop band (for my understanding "pop" in the context topic, see above).

4) Deep Purple are, and I've yet to hear a band who could seriously challenge their position.

5) But I think adding the quality of the music (you don't have to agree on that)

6) ...to the cultural significance The Smiths had,

7) and - indeed - continue to have (if you don't agree with this, you haven't looked around that much) is something quite remarkable.

8) Now, The Beatles would probably beat The Smiths almost hands down in this "competition" (see the topic's title), but then I did put it "let's say...".

---

1) Rezi, it was hyperbole; the overstatement (claiming an opinion to be a fact) for effect, rhetoric. I thought that was obvious from all the smileys, but never mind!

2) Yep, you're quire correct there. And my opinion is/was that they sucked.

3) Then I'm curious why you nominated them, but maybe I'm missing soemthing

4) I'm not sure I would class Deep Purple as "pop" music; rather I would class them as rock. But if we are including pop in the broadest terms possible, then yes, Purple, Styx, Maiden would be my favourites. But GREATEST? I woudl have to say the Beatles, if nothing else, for their enduring influence, if not for their music.

5) That's handy, because I don't!

6) Cultural significane?!! What cultural significance? Now if you had mentioned UB40, Billy Bragg (OK, I know he's not a group), The Specials, Madness, or even The pogues or the Sex Pistols, I would agree. But The Smiths? As the late Kenny Everett would have said, you canNOT be serious!

7) Now, why would I look around to see how significant The Smiths are now, or even if they exist now, when I thougth that they were utter tosh first time around, hmm?!

8) The Beatles would PROBABLY beat The Smiths hands down? Are you mad? The Beatles woudl beat ANYONE hands down in terms of the greatest (most influential) group of the twentieth century, including the likes of Led Zeppelin, and, yes, Deep Purple. The Smiths wouldn't be in the same race, far less come close. And that really is a fact, no hyperbole or opinionating, and has nothing to do with my like or dislike of the band.

---