smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | garymaher@juno.com |
| Subject | Re: ELO fans -- ponder this |
| Date | Fri, 9 Jul 2004 21:06:55 -0400 |
[Part 1 text/plain (1.7 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
I disagree. While ELO is clearly derivative of the Beatles in the same
way as the Zombies and the early (Beat era) Hollies, ELO had a unique
sound that has not been duplicated elsewhere, aside from a few
Lynne-produced records. Yes, there are elements that Lynne borrowed from
the Beatles, but he wouldn't have gotten anywhere if he couldn't write a
mean pop song . . .
I've actualy been on an ELO bender lately and can't get over how good the
first record still sounds 30+ years later, let alone the late 70s stuff.
I've even been grooving to the post-Discovery stuff, which never really
did much for me before.
g
P.S. What's with the name calling? You don't like Cotton Mather and
Myracle Brah? How cool of you and oh so witty.
On Fri, 09 Jul 2004 20:00:14 -0400 audities-owner@smoe.org writes:
> Hoping not to sound too hateful here, but I've always
> felt that Jeff Lynne and ELO were (and are) the
> biggest of all the Beatles ripoff bands -- EVER (even
> more than Cottoncandy Mather or Myracle Whip). I can
> find absolutely NOTHING written by Lynne/ELO that I
> cannot trace to it's EXACT Beatles source. About the
> best I can say about Lynne is that he's a skilled
> craftsman -- much like a well-trained mentally
> disabled Salvation Army worker or a Chinese
> assembly-line drone -- who has studied his craft, and
> studied it well. But he still doesn't have an original
> bone in his aging body.
________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.