I like Abba, but when it comes to two men, two women vocal groups the Mamas and the Papas really were the bees knees (imo). "California Dreaming" is for me one of the greatest songs ever.



Synths were certainly around in the sixties, but were thankfully not that prevalent. I use the word "thankfully" because the idea of a brilliant sixties track like "House Of The Rising Sun" by the Animals or "96 Tears" by ? and the Mysterians with a synth instead of an electric organ just doesn't bear thinking about!

Abba Gold does not tell you all you need to know about the band, and not by a long way! That album actually gives a very false impression of the band!
Many of their best/most experimental,most interesting and progressive songs were never released as singles, so those that never bought their albums would never have heard them.

Unfortunately when they were around the singles market completely dominated daytime radio airplay with almost no other stations other than radio one playing pop music. The tv's shows were the same, so Abba's album tracks never got a look in.

But even many of the so-called classic albums have some turkeys on them. Oasis's Morning Glory is filled with a lot of very,very medicore songs,yet it was seen as a classic.
Abba's Voulez Vous had 5 top5 singles on it and another couple of good songs on it,so that makes 7 good songs on an album.
Arrival has a couple of stinkers on it, but again,at least 5 or 6 songs that were as good as they made.

As i said in my previous post, their albums suffered from a lack of exposure even though they were number one albums.

Btw. I think i'm right in saying that Abba have spent more weeks at number one in the UK album charts than anyother act apart the Beatles. They were the only 'pop band' at that time who were having number one albums and singles.
Yes, the Bee Gee's came along with Saturday Night Fever but they were nowhere near as successful with their albums as singles up until then.

Nobody mentioned Morning Glory, and personally it's not a great album as its pretty dull, there's at least 3 better Oasis albums.

interesting article here from Brian Eno, who briefly discusses his issues in regards to music snobbery and ABBA appreciation.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2010...ew-paul-morley

Well - I like The Beatles, & I also like ABBA.....

But - which one is best?

There's only one way to find out - FIGHT!!!!!!!

I've always found The Mamas & the Papas to be pretty underrated. John Phillips songwriting, the harmonies and the arrangements are all fantastic. They're a band who have so much more to them than "California Dreamin'" and "Monday Monday". Songs like "Safe in My Garden", "Look Through My Window", "Dancing Bear", "Twelve Thirty", "Spanish Harlem", "Snowqueen of Texas", "Shooting Star", "Mansions", "Free Advice", "No Salt on Her Tail" are all fantastic songs.


I've never understood why people have dismiss Abba's albums and insist that they're strictly a singles act. "Abba", "Arrival", "The Album", "Voulez-Vous" and "The Visitors" are all strong albums that have sold extremely well and received strong reviews. They've got some hidden gems like "Eagle", "I Wonder", "Why Did It Have to Be Me", "I've Been Waiting for You", "Hole In Your Soul", "If It Wasn't for the Nights", "When I Kissed the Teacher", "One Man, One Woman", "Should I Laugh or Cry", etc.

In the UK, ABBA have spent longer at No.1 than any Group, except The Beatles.

GROUPS WITH THE MOST WEEKS AT No.1 (UK)

S = Singles No.1 Weeks
A = Albums No.1 Weeks

1) Beatles - S - 69 + A - 174 = 243 Weeks
2) ABBA - S - 31 + A - 57 = 88 Weeks
3) Shadows - S - 44 + A - 42 = 86 Weeks
4) Rolling Stones - S - 18 + A - 45 = 63 Weeks
5) Take That - S - 28 + A - 28 = 56 Weeks
6) Queen - S - 21 + A - 21 = 42 Weeks

The only other Act to beat ABBA is Elvis Presley - S - 80 + A - 63 = 143 Weeks.

Besides ABBA's Agnetha & Frida, the only other Female Artist in the Top 10 is
Madonna, who is in 7th place - S - 29 Weeks + A - 29 Weeks = 58 Weeks.

one thing i know...you can't get people dancing to Beatles music. Game over.

Are you serious? At a club I used to go to they had a 15 minute slot devoted to them every Friday where everyone was dancing to Twist and Shout, amongst many others.

Well you can.
And being able to dance to a record proves nothing otherwise The Timewarp or YMCA or the Macarena ot something similar would be the greatest song ever.

ABBA are Class, but head to head with the Beatles?

Is that a sign of quality? You can't dance to them?

The only people you can't get dancing to the Beatles are those brainwashed into thinking that the only sort of music you can dance to is this repetitive dross known as "Dance Music". In their early days the Beatles played a lot of rock 'n' roll, a genre which when it started in the fifties was essentially dance music, and bloody good dance music too.

Anyway, as someone else has said, what has being able or unable to dance to the Beatles' music got to do with it how good it is anyway?

30 years from now would show longevity which is a great measure of quality. But The Beatles made modern pop music possible and it's hard to better that.

Indeed, and by that reckoning Katy Perry is better than Katy Bush! Oh, some foolish DS posters - you gotta love em ...

wow... for someone born ? in 1964 you should know better then to make a statement like that... which has rightly been rounded on.

Thanks for posting those stats.

What they show is just how remarkable the success Abba and the Beatles had during their time.
Unlike all the other major sellers over the years, those two came and went in less than a decade while the others had careers that spanned into decades.
Abba's success was remarkable, but the Beatles are in yet another league all on their own! The Beatles success is almost unbelievable!