Prince Sphinc-Tor Posted August 15, 2009 Share Posted August 15, 2009 QUOTE (GeddyRulz @ Aug 15 2009, 05:25 AM) Oh goody, another thread boo-hooing the fact that Michael Jackson's death got more attention than Les Paul's. Do you realize that any comparison between the two of them is inappropriate? Yes, Les did some performing, but not very much in the grand scheme of things. What you're praising Les for is his INVENTIONS. Is it sad that we devote more emotional energy to high-profile celebrities than inventors? Maybe. Is it wrong that Marilyn Monroe's death got more attention than Thomas Edison's??? Personally, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. Who gives a crap! That's the way it is in this country, and it's no big deal. When they die, Kenny Rogers (I intentionally chose a lame celebrity) will get more attention than the man who invented the artificial heart. Are all of you going to bitch about that, too? (FWIW, because I know how things get mis-interpreted and/or "spun" on this board: I'm not belittling Les Paul. He was brilliant and we all owe him a debt, because his inventions revolutionized music. But he was an INVENTOR, not a superstar celebrity in front of the cameras. In this country, good or bad, we give more attention to the latter.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xanadu93 Posted August 15, 2009 Share Posted August 15, 2009 QUOTE (GeddyRulz @ Aug 15 2009, 05:25 AM) Oh goody, another thread boo-hooing the fact that Michael Jackson's death got more attention than Les Paul's. Do you realize that any comparison between the two of them is inappropriate? Yes, Les did some performing, but not very much in the grand scheme of things. What you're praising Les for is his INVENTIONS. Is it sad that we devote more emotional energy to high-profile celebrities than inventors? Maybe. Is it wrong that Marilyn Monroe's death got more attention than Thomas Edison's??? Personally, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. Who gives a crap! That's the way it is in this country, and it's no big deal. When they die, Kenny Rogers (I intentionally chose a lame celebrity) will get more attention than the man who invented the artificial heart. Are all of you going to bitch about that, too? (FWIW, because I know how things get mis-interpreted and/or "spun" on this board: I'm not belittling Les Paul. He was brilliant and we all owe him a debt, because his inventions revolutionized music. But he was an INVENTOR, not a superstar celebrity in front of the cameras. In this country, good or bad, we give more attention to the latter.) Couldn't have said it better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LakesideMaiden Posted August 15, 2009 Share Posted August 15, 2009 QUOTE (GeddyRulz @ Aug 15 2009, 05:25 AM) Yes, Les did some performing, but not very much in the grand scheme of things. What you're praising Les for is his INVENTIONS. Sorry for paraphrasing, but this one comment was glaring at me in your post. Les Paul was an EXTREMELY talented guitarist. He didn't just invent - he played amazingly. He and his trio played with acts like Bing Crosby, and his recordings with his late ex-wife Mary Ford are legendary. Take a look at his Wiki Article and you'll see how long he had been in the business of recording and performing, along with his inventions and innovation contributions that changed the world of music forever. He is one of the guitarists that I idolize (as does my father - in fact my fathers playing style is a mixture of Les and Chet Atkins) and to say that he was not a "performer in the grand scheme of things" is a serious insult to his memory. Sorry, man, you and I have always seen eye to eye on things, but this is something that I can't let stand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LakesideMaiden Posted August 15, 2009 Share Posted August 15, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCFIELDS Posted August 15, 2009 Share Posted August 15, 2009 QUOTE (Earthshine @ Aug 15 2009, 03:46 AM) QUOTE (GeddyRulz @ Aug 15 2009, 04:25 AM) What you're praising Les for is his INVENTIONS. Les knew about music and could play. Jackson did not. oh man......Jackson knew nothing about music he says........yeah, sure man........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Show Don't Tell Posted August 15, 2009 Share Posted August 15, 2009 http://www.absoluteguitartuition.com/Gibson-Les-Paul-Classic.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xanadu93 Posted August 15, 2009 Share Posted August 15, 2009 QUOTE (WCFIELDS @ Aug 15 2009, 03:15 PM) QUOTE (Earthshine @ Aug 15 2009, 03:46 AM) QUOTE (GeddyRulz @ Aug 15 2009, 04:25 AM) What you're praising Les for is his INVENTIONS. Les knew about music and could play. Jackson did not. oh man......Jackson knew nothing about music he says........yeah, sure man........ Neither did The Beatles! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Money Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 Les Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
third hand grace Posted August 17, 2009 Share Posted August 17, 2009 Jackson had a bigger impact on ENTERTAINMENT. To me there is a difference in today's world. Music as ART vs. music as entertainment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metaldad Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 i was afraid to look and see some ass munch voted M.J. thank you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReRushed Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 QUOTE (Earthshine @ Aug 15 2009, 05:46 AM) QUOTE (GeddyRulz @ Aug 15 2009, 04:25 AM) What you're praising Les for is his INVENTIONS. Les knew about music and could play. Jackson did not. This is ridiculous! No matter you personally think of Michael Jackson or his music - the man knew how to make music. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Cocky Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 (shakes his head in disbelief that this thread is still active, and moves on) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lerxt1990 Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 QUOTE (ReRushed @ Aug 17 2009, 09:18 PM) QUOTE (Earthshine @ Aug 15 2009, 05:46 AM) QUOTE (GeddyRulz @ Aug 15 2009, 04:25 AM) What you're praising Les for is his INVENTIONS. Les knew about music and could play. Jackson did not. This is ridiculous! No matter you personally think of Michael Jackson or his music - the man knew how to make music. Im not being a wise guy, I truly dont know, did Michael write or arrange his music or lyrics? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lerxt1990 Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lerxt1990 Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 [edit] Recording Jackson reunited with Off the Wall producer Quincy Jones to record his sixth studio album. The pair worked together on 300 songs, nine of which were eventually included.[21] Thriller was recorded between April and November 1982, with a production budget of $750,000. Several members of the band Toto were also involved in the album's recording and production.[21] Jackson wrote four songs for the record: "Wanna Be Startin' Somethin'", "The Girl Is Mine" (with Paul McCartney), "Beat It" and "Billie Jean".[22] Unlike many artists, Jackson did not write these songs on paper. Instead, he would dictate into a sound recorder; when recording he would sing from memory.[23][24] The relationship between Jackson and Jones became strained during the album's recording. Jackson spent much of his time rehearsing dance steps alone.[24] When the album's nine songs were completed, both Jones and Jackson were unhappy with the result and remixed every song, spending a week on each.[24] Jones believed that "Billie Jean" was not strong enough to be included on the record, but Jackson disagreed and kept it. Jones told Jackson that Thriller would be unlikely to sell successfully like Off the Wall had, because the market had since weakened. In response, Jackson threatened to cancel the album's release.[21] Jackson was inspired to create an album where "every song was a killer," as with Tchaikovsky's The Nutcracker, and developed Thriller on that concept.[25][26] Jones and songwriter Rod Temperton gave detailed accounts of what occurred for the 2001 reissue of the album. Jones discussed "Billie Jean" and why it was so personal to Jackson, who struggled to deal with a number of obsessed fans. Jones wanted the long introduction on the song to be shortened; however, Jackson insisted that it remain because it made him want to dance.[22] The ongoing backlash against disco made it necessary to move in a different musical direction from the disco-heavy Off the Wall.[26] Jones and Jackson were determined to make a rock song that would appeal to all tastes and spent weeks looking for a suitable guitarist for the song "Beat It", a song Jackson wrote and played drums on. Eventually, they found Eddie Van Halen of the rock band Van Halen.[22][24] When Rod Temperton wrote the song "Thriller", he originally wanted to call it "Starlight" or "Midnight Man" but settled on "Thriller" because he felt the name had merchandising potential.[24] Always wanting a notable person to recite the closing lyrics, Temperton brought in actor Vincent Price, who completed his part in just two takes. Temperton wrote the spoken portion in a taxi on the way to the recording studio. Jones and Temperton said that some recordings were left off the final cut because they did not have the "edginess" of other album tracks.[22] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pags Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 QUOTE (VarianStar @ Aug 14 2009, 08:30 AM) Les Paul. The real shame is that he won't get anywhere near the amount of attention that MJ got, yet he deserves triple than that of MJ. wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Presto-digitation Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 In the end who gets covered more is irrelevant. If Gene Simmons dies, I guarantee the press will cover it MORE than if Geddy Lee dies...simply because Gene is more well known the world over. It has little to do with who's better or even more influential. Paris Hilton dying would get more coverage than if a plane carrying all of Rush's members crashed on tour. * * * On a side note, we're certainly more celebrity oriented today than before cable news. You know how much time my local news spent on John Lennon?? About 3 minutes. "This out of NY tonight.....(talks a couple minutes)....and in sports...!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rushbass Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Les Paul, without a doubt! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tangy Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 QUOTE (Presto-digitation @ Aug 18 2009, 01:06 PM) In the end who gets covered more is irrelevant. If Gene Simmons dies, I guarantee the press will cover it MORE than if Geddy Lee dies...simply because Gene is more well known the world over. It has little to do with who's better or even more influential. Paris Hilton dying would get more coverage than if a plane carrying all of Rush's members crashed on tour. boy isn't that the truth! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MULTIPLIED REACTION Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Les Paul Without a doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReRushed Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Does anyone here know what Michael Jackson actually accomplished musically? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.