The argument is very daft, you act like the beatles had NO inspirations at all... like they created all the music in the world as a pedestal to ALL other groups.

I think they all inspired people in their own way so why compare at all. They were all legends in their respective times.

Harsh but true


Agreed.

How is it true?

Beatle fans are like Man U fans, self observed and ignorant to any other contributions without making it about them lol

Certainly not... music has influenced my life more than anything.
It is better to have a choice of four than one entertainer.
Now if you had the Stranglers up there and the likes of England Dan & John Ford Coley etc etc etc, You see I would just be adding and adding and adding to the list....

Oasis minus Liam.

I wasnt trying to be rude, just meant maybe you thought the choice was too hard to pick lol


Why?

That's incorrect.

I have a few Beatles albums but I'm not a big fan.
Even so, it's hard to ignore the impact Elvis and The Beatles had on modern music.

It's like asking whether the Model T or the Datsun Cherry was the most important car of all time.

It is true to the majority Beatles fans I know

The Beatles are over-rated. But they influenced music so much more than anyone has or ever will.

Oasis are just horrid monotone drivvel. I agree with those who say that to mention them here is ludicrous.

Oasis should not even be mentioned in the same sentence as the others. They don't even compare. Anyway, in terms of electrifying performances, Michael Jackson takes the crown.

Edit: Not that keen on Elvis' music, but quite like his films though.

Doesn't it largely depend on your age ?

I'm of the Beatles generation so i think they're the tops

By the time i was into pop music Elvis had already become like Matt Monro or Andy Williams.......middle of the road balladeer, too square !

I like Jacko and Oasis but wouldn't put them in the same bracket as the Fab Four

top 3 music artist then please mr know it all ;p

BeeGees

That's a bit harsh Thought my contribution was alright.

They're all over-rated really. They're only musicians.

The Beatles kick started the popular music genre as we know it today so for me should be No;1. They were also creative not just performers. (I don't own a single Beatles record, not my sort of music)
Elvis was a radical performer in his day (post war austerity), he helped create a youth music following. However the one thing he lacked was musical creativity and his movies were dire.
Michael Jackson would be my third choice, not so much for the music, but for his groundbreaking performances. Musically his stuff is OK but not exactly innovative.
Oasis, well I'm not going there and neither should they as the Beatles and Lennon had done it all before.

I don't quite follow why people need to equate appreciation of music with ones age. Those who do should try opening their minds and broaden their listening. There's some incredible stuff out there across all ages if you are prepared to look and listen with an open mind.

I never thought you were being rude...
I was just saying I wasn't copping out.

No-one can beat the velvet tones of Elvis!

The beatles - every song is just well written, perfect lyrics, great tunes generally and have a mass of brilliant brilliant hits and are consistently excellent. Enjoyed by every generation too.

Simon and Garfunkel/Bob Dylan - Bob Dylan moreso, was so vital to the developement of music, i just like them both.

The smiths/Morrissey - Personally one of my favourites, so thought they should be mentioned.

The kinks maybe with the beach boys, the byrds and james taylor following close behind. - Some other greats in the late 60s, so thought they should be mentioned too.

Then a million miles below, elvis and MJ.- hate them both. Jackson is overrated, both personally and musically.

Imagine I'm in love with you, it's easy cos I know
It's been a hard days night
it's close to midnight and something evils lurking in the dark
Show me who you are
I'll show you what you love
My hands are shaky and my knees are weak
I can't seem to stand on my own two feet

I don't get the music snobbery. All of the artists mentioned in the OP heavily borrowed from musicians that had gone before them. Even the Beatles. Yeah, they brought together certain genres, but that didn't make them the first artists to pick up a guitar. They borrowed heavily from American Rock and roll, which borrowed heavily from blues and so on and so on. Oasis weren't meagre blots on the musical landscape, they along with the other britpop bands brought "indie" music into the mainstream. We're still seeing the effects of that in todays chart, they were very important in the 90's.

I don't think it does so much nowadays with the advent of the net, You Tube ect.
Unlike my generation, my children can access and listen to anything, whenever they want to.

And have to say that the only ones on the list the teens that I've met through my children seem to still rate so highly is The Beatles.

But all of them at some point are listening to Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, Jimi Hendrix, and The Beatles (those are the ones that seem to be universally admired).

Can't stand Michael Jackson and Elvis' later stuff makes me vomit :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSeSR-of9Es

My Personal Top 10
1. The Beatles
2. The Kinks
3. Paul McCartney
4. Bob Dylan
5. Pink Floyd
6. The Rolling Stones
7. George Harrison
8. David Bowie
9. Led Zeppelin
10. The Beach Boys

I didn't mean that aspect of it so much.........more that people tend to think the 'best' or 'most important' are the artists that were new and exciting during their own formative years