The Instigator
feverish
Pro (for)
Winning
24 Points
The Contender
leet4A1
Con (against)
Losing
7 Points

My hypothetical group of dead musicians is better than yours (BAND VERSION)

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/8/2009 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,270 times Debate No: 9992
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (14)
Votes (6)

 

feverish

Pro

This is intended as a fun debate where we argue about the brilliance of talented musicians who are no longer with us.

FORMAT/RULES:

1. In round 1 both debaters shall present their hypothetical band line-up.

2. All band members must be referenced by at least a Wikipedia source.

3. All band members will be generally recognised as dead. Conspiracy speculation will not be given credit, Tupac and Elvis are dead, Paul McCartney is not.

4. Bands must contain exactly four members and no more.

5. The band must include a drummer, a bass player, a vocalist and one other instrument. Musicians can also be singers and multi instrumentalists are allowed as long as these roles are permanently filled.

6. We will debate drummer vs. drummer, singer vs. singer etc. as well as discussing the group as a whole.

7. Con may choose to start debating in round 1 or wait for me to begin in round 2.

8. We will be considering the general talents, technical abilities, creativity, charisma, popularity, body of work, attractiveness and just about any other factor my opponent wishes (rights reserved) in discussing the merits of our bands and the individuals that comprise them.

9.Obviously in a debate like this, a lot of our points will be based on opinion but we should attempt to back up our opinions with reliable sources that reaffirm them.

10. No blatant disrespect to any of the artists (RIP).

__________________

My band:

Drums: Keith Moon http://en.wikipedia.org...
Bass: Charles Mingus http://en.wikipedia.org...
Guitar: Jimi Hendrix http://en.wikipedia.org...
Vocals: John Lennon http://en.wikipedia.org...

Any questions ask me in the comments.

Thanks and good luck to my opponent.
leet4A1

Con

Thanks much to Feverish for allowing me to debate what should be an interesting and enjoyable debate.

Rule 7 of the debate requires me to either start debating now or just post my line-up and let Feverish kick it off in Round 2. I believe I'll do the latter.

Here is my line-up:

Drums: John Bonham - http://en.wikipedia.org...
Bass: Cliff Burton - http://en.wikipedia.org...
Guitar: Stevie Ray Vaughan - http://en.wikipedia.org...
Vocals: Freddie Mercury - http://en.wikipedia.org...

Cheers Feverish, I'll pass it over to you.
Debate Round No. 1
feverish

Pro

Thanks Leet and I must say you have an awesome selection of band members and I am really looking forward to the debate.

I shall first compare individuals before making some overall points about song writing and live performance.

________

1. Keith Moon vs. John Bonham.

This is a tough one as these two are both without doubt among the greatest drummers in rock history.

Bonham is amazing. His powerful solid style with perhaps the strongest right foot in rock and roll make him a legend and an idol to many aspiring drummers.

But he is no Keith Moon.

What makes Keith Moon almost unique is that, while in most bands the drummer tends to fade into the background, Keith was effectively the front man and the star of The Who. Despite the artistic genius of his band mates, Keith was the one who got all the media and groupie attention.

A good indication of this is the simple exercise of typing the names of Who band members into Google. Keith gets a whopping 5,320,000 hits, http://www.google.co.uk...= way more than the other members of The Who combined (Townshend gets 971,000 http://www.google.co.uk...+ Daltrey a paltry 727,000 http://www.google.co.uk...= and Entwhistle just 357,000.) I doubt comparing Bonham to his more celebrated band mates would yield similar results.

Jimmy Page and John-Paul Jones were in fact huge fans of Moon and The Who and recorded with him and Jeff Beck. http://en.wikipedia.org... Page wanted to form a group with Moon and Moon is rumoured to have come up with the name Led Zeppelin. http://en.wikipedia.org... It is likely that if Moon had not been committed to The Who he would have been Led Zep's first choice ahead of John Bonham. Indeed they invited him to perform with them live on many occasions.

While Bonham's playing was solid and heavy, Moon's was much more creative and complex.

The Who have had several hits with Moon on lead vocals (Bell-boy is perhaps the most well known).

Moon epitomises the rock and roll lifestyle with his reputation for excess, drug abuse, destruction, marital strife, cars in swimming pools etc. Bonham's life was somewhat dull and unremarkable in comparison.

In the vast majority of online polls between the two drummers, Moon wins. http://www.democraticunderground.com... http://www.rockband.com... This may seem like a baseless appeal to authority but it reaffirms my opinion and evidences his popularity.

Keith clearly pwns John in the categories of looks and charisma. He also wins because he had the biggest kits. http://farm4.static.flickr.com...

___________

Charles Mingus vs. Cliff Burton.

This is not much of a contest really.

Mingus is one of the greatest composers of the last century http://www.loc.gov... and radically re-defined his instrument. http://www.allsands.com...

Burton played simple riffs competently in a Heavy Metal band and pounded the distortion pedal mercilessly.

Mingus' abilities as a composer, arranger, organiser, pianist and performer plus his far superior understanding of musical texture and harmony, besides the fact he was an absolute virtuoso make him a clear winner in the bass category.

___________

Jimi Hendrix vs. Stevie Ray Vaughan.

Who? (jk)

Again Google is an illuminating tool here. Try searching for "greatest guitarist" or "best guitarist" and have a guess who's name consistently appears at the top of every list (it's not Stevie's). http://www.google.co.uk...= http://www.google.co.uk...=

Vaughan's own Wiki page notes the debt he owes to Hendrix as an inspiration. http://en.wikipedia.org... This is further evidenced by the fact he has covered several Hendrix tunes.

Jimi's songs are much more well known and his singing style and composition skills would be more of an asset to any band than Stevie's.

To give my opponent a chance I left the option of a third instrument open, not specifying guitar. I would contend that in trying to put ANY guitarist up against Jimi, my opponent has automatically forfeited this section of the debate.

Again charisma and looks hardly need commenting on.

Hendrix is a global icon in Blues and Rock. Vaughan is a niche market success in White Blues.

______________

John Lennon vs. Freddie Mercury.

Freddie was an incredible entertainer but Lennon was a musical and visionary genius.

Lennon is far more celebrated as a composer and lyricist having written many of the most poplar and most covered songs of all time. Although Mercury did write some of Queen's songs he is generally regarded first and foremost as a singer, with Brian May receiving most of the musical credit for Queen.

John Lennon had a highly successful solo career, proving his worth beyond the scope of The Beatles.

The Beatles were (and still are) bigger than Jesus. http://www.guardian.co.uk...

Mercury played a bit of piano but had nothing on fellow homosexual rocker Elton John. Lennon could stroke the ivories with the best of them and was a fierce axe man to boot.

____________

Song writing and Composition.

I really don't see where the hits are going to come from in Leet's group. I'm not sure Vaughan's blues by numbers and Freddie's melodramatic operatics will be the best combination and I expect the rhythm section to be solid but unimaginative.

In my band, John's poetic and powerful lyrics should connect well with Jimi's inspired psychadelia and they can both write killer love songs. Lennon's emotive chord progressions will enhance Hendrix's bluesy licks.

The genius of Mingus will guide the structure and arrangement of the tunes and he and John's shared tastes in Eastern harmonies will also complement each other.

The rhythm section of Keith and Charles will spark with improvisational vitality as these two spontaneous individuals feed off each others groove.

__________

Live performance.

With the exception of the histrionics of their gifted front man, my opponent's team will represent a rather bland prospect at their live shows. The musicians are all very serious guys and while their gigs will be efficient and tight they won't bring the noise like my bunch of hell raisers will.

Keith Moon was not known as the "patented British exploding drummer" for nothing. http://cd1059cdtv.blogspot.com...

Hendrix of course shared The Who's onstage appetite for destruction. http://en.wikipedia.org...

The Beatles held some of the biggest and most successful concerts ever. John Lennon was a raucous rock and roller.

Mingus developed his craft on the live scene and his shows were notorious for tension, drama and occasional onstage violence. http://www.nytimes.com... http://www.amazon.com...

______________

Thanks, back to you Leet.
leet4A1

Con

Thanks Fever. I was almost going to forfeit this round due to lack of time and that I am at work right now, but have decided to quickly rush through this round and allow more time for myself for the next two.

First of all, I concede John Bonham. My opponent has presented his case (although mostly opinion), and I have to agree that on the whole, Keith Moon just surpasses John Bonham.

_____
BASS

"This is not much of a contest really."

You're telling me… :D

"Mingus is one of the greatest composers of the last century http://www.loc.gov...... and radically re-defined his instrument."

This may be so, but the fact that he is a good composer and "re-defined" the bass doesn't mean much in this contest. I contend that a band should be more than the sum of its parts, and the inclusion of Charles Mingus to my opponent's line-up is ill-conceived at best, for the following reasons:

- The man deserves much respect for the impact he had on his instrument and on future generations of bass players and composers, but this alone doesn't make him better than Cliff Burton. I liken it to Lenny Bruce and the many comedians who were influenced by his comedy… there is no denying that comedy after Lenny Bruce (and bass after Mingus) is better off because of their genius and their influence, but this is no reason to suggest they are the "best". The most influential, perhaps, but not the best.
- He was, by all accounts, not a pleasant man. From Wikipedia: "he was sometimes feared for his occasional violent onstage temper, which was at times directed at members of his band, and other times aimed at the audience. He was physically large, prone to obesity (especially in his later years), and was by all accounts often intimidating and frightening when expressing anger or displeasure. Mingus was prone to depression. He tended to have brief periods of extreme creative activity, intermixed with fairly long periods of greatly decreased output." http://en.wikipedia.org... I will continue this point in the "Live Performance" section later, but suffice it to say now that a man like this has no place in a band with the greats that make up the other � of my opponent's band.

"Burton played simple riffs competently in a Heavy Metal band..."

My opponent has clearly not read much about Burton if this is the extent to which he can praise his musical ability. Burton was trained in classical composition and his "early influence was essential in creating the unique musical style for which Metallica became famous." Metallica, the band that Burton essentially led musically until his untimely death, has gone on to sell 100 million albums. http://en.wikipedia.org... My opponent may say that they sold a majority of those albums without Burton's aide, but what we need to consider is that not only did Cliff Burton influence the band more than any other member, but that after his death, the band has only declined in quality. I propose that had Cliff Burton remained alive, that figure of 100 million would be much higher.

_______
GUITAR

"Who? (jk)"

JK alright! My first argument for the guitarist section, voters, is a video:

I will leave it to the voters to watch that video and tell me with a straight face that Vaughan doesn't outplay Jimi on that tune 10-fold.

"Again Google is an illuminating tool here. Try searching for "greatest guitarist" or "best guitarist" and have a guess who's name consistently appears at the top of every list (it's not Stevie's). http://www.google.co.uk......= http://www.google.co.uk...;

What my opponent has failed to mention is that these lists are more often than not created by idiots. When asked who the greatest guitarist is, those who don't know much about music always resort to Hendrix. It's the fall-back selection to make them seem like they know what's going on in the world of music. I would suggest that this "evidence" is no evidence at all, it's just an accumulation of idiots and no-nothings who have fallen into the "Jimi is the best" trap.

"Vaughan's own Wiki page notes the debt he owes to Hendrix as an inspiration. http://en.wikipedia.org...... This is further evidenced by the fact he has covered several Hendrix tunes."

Certainly, he's an influence, but is he better? That is what we are trying to find here. The video I've provided above is what we should be using to guage our opinions on, and I leave it to the voters to do so.

"Jimi's songs are much more well known and his singing style and composition skills would be more of an asset to any band than Stevie's."

Jimi was a terrible singer. I love Bob Dylan, he's my favourite performer, but I'm not going to sit here and pretend he was a good singer. Likewise Jimi. Stevie Ray Vaughan trumps my opponent in the singing department.

______________
SINGER

"Freddie was an incredible entertainer but Lennon was a musical and visionary genius."

I would say that they were both musical and visionary geniuses, on a par with one-another in this department.

"Lennon is far more celebrated as a composer and lyricist having written many of the most poplar and most covered songs of all time. Although Mercury did write some of Queen's songs he is generally regarded first and foremost as a singer, with Brian May receiving most of the musical credit for Queen."

Right, but we are talking about our singers as singers. Anyone who thinks Lennon has a more distinctive, versatile and overall better singing voice than Freddie Mercury is sadly mistaken. John Lennon has pretty much one voice he uses for every song, and a slight scream he uses in some songs, 'Mother' for example. Freddie Mercury is a virtuoso, he can sing the very high and the very low. He is also a far more entertaining and exciting front-man than Lennon, hands-down.

"Mercury played a bit of piano but had nothing on fellow homosexual rocker Elton John. Lennon could stroke the ivories with the best of them and was a fierce axe man to boot."

Elton John is not in my opponent's band so I don't know why he mentioned this.

____________

SONG WRITING & COMPOSITION

I'm going to argue this one by contending that for a band to write good songs, they must work together as a team. I will show in the next section that in my opponent's band, this would be very difficult indeed. My opponent's band's inability to work together would extend to song writing as much as live performance.

__________

LIVE PERFORMANCE

My opponent has argued the Live Performance section by treating the individuals separately, but I think it's obvious that how the band works together is more important.

As I've stated earlier, Charles Mingus was an often-times depressed, angry, violent man, with that violence often aimed at his own band members, the rest of the time at the audience who paid to go see him play.

Keith Moon was known to fall asleep on stage, mid-song, due to excessive drug use. http://en.wikipedia.org...

Yoko Ono would no doubt ensure that John Lennon would not get along with the rest of the band members, due to the undeniable fact that she's a bitch. She broke the Beatles up, she'd no doubt break this band up too. A band filled with tension is no band at all, it is a bunch of individuals playing their instruments. This would show on stage.

Hendrix was, by all accounts, a professional and a brilliant live player. But even Jimi would struggle to maintain his onstage grace when accompanied by the band of misfits my opponent has presented.

My band, on the other hand, were all a part of a successful band at one stage or another, their untimely deaths the only things that forced their departure. Once again, a band is a group of musicians playing together, not a group of destructive, comatose individuals who despise and act violently towards one-another.

----
Thanks mate, back to you.
Debate Round No. 2
feverish

Pro

Thanks Leet for the fantastic response. This is indeed a most enjoyable debate.
______
DRUMS

I am pleased to note my opponent's concession that Moon the loon surpasses Bonzo Bonham.
_____
BASS

My opponent attempts to side step Mingus' accomplishments as a musician, band leader and composer to focus on the negatives of his personality.

Mingus was, like many artistic geniuses, a troubled man. He had a terrible temper and did not suffer fools gladly. It was however a mere handful of incidents, throughout a career spanning 4 decades, that earned him his reputation for beating up his band mates.

On the whole Charles Mingus was a very warm and forgiving individual. If he was such a nightmare to work with then how come some of the biggest jazz names of the forties and fifties hired him on bass? How come he led so many successful ensembles and attracted the hottest rising jazz stars of the sixties and seventies to his groups?

A few of the jazz greats who chose to work with Mingus: Lionel Hampton, Oscar Pettiford, Bud Powell, Charlie Parker, Miles Davis, Dizzy Gillespie, Thad Jones, Quincy Jones, Gunther Schuller, Billie Holiday, Max Roach, Bill Evans, Eric Dolphy, Yusef Lateef, Roland Kirk, Thelonius Monk, John Coltrane, Herbie Hancock, Gerry Mulligan, Lee Konitz, The Brecker brothers. This really is just a fraction of the more well known names. http://www.jazzdisco.org...

Clearly this was a very sociable individual who could get along and work well with others.

Many of the above listed (eg. Parker, Monk) have personalities every bit as temperamental as the members of my band and Mingus had no problems collaborating with and working alongside them.

Some players, such as Dannie Richmond and Jimmy Knepper worked consistently with Mingus for decades and even after disputes (such as the one between Mingus' fist and Knepper's lip) they always made up and continued to work together.

My opponent's assumption that Mingus would not get on or cooperate with the rest of my band and would be disruptive is not supported by the evidence.

I will address the issue of how being the most innovative and influential relates to being better, in the guitar section below.

I can't find any evidence for my opponent's claim that "Burton essentially led [Metallica] musically until his untimely death". From looking at the Wiki page http://en.wikipedia.org... it seems that Burton was not a founding member and that if anyone it was Lars Ulrich who was the band leader. It also notes that Dave Mustaine feels that the band continued to use his ideas and recycle his guitar riffs after his departure.

My opponent attempts to prove Burton's worth by quoting record sales but as he points out the majority of Metallica's sales were after his death and the Wiki page informs us that their record sales actually increased after Burton's passing, "And Justice For All" being their first top ten album.

_______
GUITAR

My opponent invites us to judge Vaughan's performance of a Hendrix tune and decide for ourselves who is the better guitarist. To make this a fair comparison I have linked a video of Hendrix himself performing a slightly different version of the song.

I also invite readers to judge for themselves but with an entirely straight face I can indeed say that Jimi's performance is better.

I'm not a guitarist myself so perhaps Leet can point out some of the finer points but I see no difference in technical ability here. What I can observe is that Jimi feels more comfortable, he moves around freely and is much more fluid and relaxed in his playing style. He also doesn't need to keep glancing at the fret board every two seconds like Stevie seems to.

We should also take into account the fact that Jimi was creating and pioneering a whole new style of guitar playing. He combined the Blues playing of his heroes with cutting edge technology and effects such as wah and distortion to create a style of playing undreamed of before. Later musicians such as Vaughan were able to build on his innovations but would probably not have had the vision to even try them were it not for the example of Jimi. This links nicely with my next point.

My opponent is superficially correct in saying that being the most influential does not necessarily make someone "the best" but what we must consider is why someone becomes the most influential in the first place.

Both Mingus and Hendrix became the most influential in their fields, not only because they were virtuosos on their respective instruments but also because of the way they innovated and altered the instruments roles. Mingus utilised the bass as a lead instrument, often presenting the main theme of a piece on the bass first. Hendrix gave the electric guitar its own voice, rather than being merely an amped acoustic, it became the iconic instrument for a generation.

Had they lived on, they would almost certainly have been unsatisfied with the musical status quo and would have continued to innovate and develop their craft. That is what makes them the best.

The "idiots" who compile the guitar lists in my link include the leading rock journalists in the industry (Rolling Stone magazine) as well as the general public. Readers, my opponent thinks that those who go along with the accepted consensus that Jimi was the best are "idiots and no-nothings". Are you gonna stand for that Hendrix fans?

As far as comparing these two guitarists vocally, while I accept that Jimi is not a singer of the calibre of Lennon or Mercury. I find his laid-back, semi-spoken style very appealing. I think he is a soulful and expressive singer with a very pleasant natural tone. Stevie sounds dry in comparison and I don't think my opponent's video source backs up his assertion.

Leet seems to have ignored the comparisons on song-writing, charisma and good looks. I wonder why.

____
VOX

I will concede that Freddie's voice is a better instrument than John's and that the Queen frontman is a marginally better singer.

However the rules clearly state that technical ability is only one category to judge our individuals on.

Lennon was a far, far greater songwriter than Mercury was. Count the hits. Bohemian Rhapsody was Freddie's only composition to make UK number 1 http://www.funtrivia.com... Parlophone managed to fit 23 Lennon/McCartney no.1s on one album. http://www.aboutthebeatles.com...

The Elton John comment was partly an aside in reference to a recent debate of my opponent's (Eminem) but also just to illustrate that Lennon is a better guitarist and pianist. Mercury did play both but generally utilised other musicians for recordings and concerts.

____________
SONG WRITING

My opponent says: "for a band to write good songs, they must work together as a team."

This is however a completely false statement.

Most great songs have in actual fact been written by just one individual. Most Beatles songs are credited to John and Paul but it is a well known fact that they mostly wrote separately. Queen also wrote independently, as does my opponent's favourite, Dylan.

_________
PERFORMANCE

As argued above, there is every reason to believe that Mingus would cooperate fine with the rest of the group.

Who wants to go to a concert and watch a group of stiff musos backing Freddie when they can see a real rock and roll show.

My opponent says "A band filled with tension is no band at all" but is this true? Some of the greatest bands ever were fraught with tension, including Led Zep, The Beatles, The Who, The Clash, The Velvet Underground and The Ramones to name just a few. If you don't believe me you should start reading band biogs.

____

I'm out of space but there were also some points from my last round that weren't responded to.

Thanks.
leet4A1

Con

leet4A1 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
feverish

Pro

It's a shame about the forfeit as I was really looking forward to Leet's arguments.

In this final round, I'll just summarise each category as well as providing some video sources of the members of my band.

DRUMS:

As conceded by Con, Keith Moon wins the drummer duel. I went into detail before about his technical ability, star quality and the extra spark and dynamism he could bring to any band.

BASS:

Mingus clearly wins over Burton. He is one of the most respected composers of the last century (see source in round 2) and was a devastatingly competent bass player. I showed in the last round that despite his temper he was most definitely a team player, which was my opponent's only real argument in this category.

GUITAR:

Please, just look at these two guitarists in terms of the impact they made and the legacy they left behind. Jimi wins, even if you accept Vaughan as a technically better player, which I do not.

VOCALS:

Perhaps the closest category, I still believe this is a walkover for my guy. Because we are considering categories such as song-writing, lyrics and general musicianship rather than just vocal ability, John pees all over Freddie's chips.

SONG-WRITING:

In round 2, I pointed out the compositional achievements and talents in my band. Because Leet could not rebut this, he made the same argument about teamwork he has made throughout this debate. Although I examined early on how the styles of my band members would complement each other, I also had to explain in the last round that successful song writing is most often a solo activity.

The depth and range of material my group would be able to come up with would be immense with three amazing and prolific composers working individually as well as building on each other's ideas. One successful formula could be Jimi coming up with a chord progression, John setting lyrics to it and Mingus arranging the piece. I personally would love to hear the results.

LIVE PERORMANCE:

Again Leet could not say much about his group in this category, so he attempted to cast dispersions on the potential cohesion of my band, focusing mostly on the personality foibles of Mingus and Moon.

All of my band were professional musicians who had extremely successful careers within band line-ups. They would all have immense respect and admiration for each others abilities and this would encourage a great group dynamic with no one holding back the flow of creativity.

Sure there might be occasional power struggles between the potentially grouchy Lennon and Mingus but who could stay angry with the antics of Keith and the serenity of Jimi to break and/or calm the tension. In any case, this kind of dynamic was a winning formula for many bands, as discussed last round.

CONCLUSION:

I invite readers to suspend their own favouritism and look through the categories above to decide which would be the greater band.

Thanks to my opponent for a great debate, hopefully he will stick to refutations and summary in this last round as I won't be able to respond to any brand new arguments.

Thanks.

Pro.
leet4A1

Con

leet4A1 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
14 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by leet4A1 7 years ago
leet4A1
Thanks for RFD Lwerd. Feverish should obviously win by default though due to my forfeits. I'm glad someone voted because neither Feverish nor myself can. Cheers.
Posted by Danielle 7 years ago
Danielle
Mother effer! I just wrote a whole RFD but then voted before I posted and my comment got deleted lol. So here we go -- Pro won for drums and bass (I'm a jazz fan, so props for using Mingus) but Con won for guitar and vox. I love Hendrix to death, but acknowledge that he can be a bit overrated at times. Jimi might be well more known than Stevie but Stevie's a genius in his own right with his own following. Plus, while Lenon may be the superior musician, Freddie's the better singer. John Lenon may have had more hits and whatnot, but remember that he and the Beatles were a product of their time and practically defined a generation; meanwhile Freddie was just some queen :P

Anyway, I thought that the most interesting aspect of this debate was seeing how these musicians would fare as an actual band. As Pro pointed out, it's very possible that these guys could still write great music independently. However, considering the type of rock that they enjoy a individuals, it's important to ensure that the band would play cohesively as a unit. In the end, I think Con's band might win (thanks to things like disposition and attitude differences as well as strengths and weaknesses). It's too bad I had to deduct a conduct point for Lee's forfeits; I would have liked to see his side :)

I voted like this: Before (Pro), After (Con), Conduct (Pro), S/G (tie), Arguments (Pro) and Sources (tie). Yes, I agreed with Con after the debate that his band would be better; however, Pro made the better arguments... if that makes sense. Good job to both of you guys though -- I hope to do a debate like this in the future! Seems fun.
Posted by feverish 7 years ago
feverish
lol.

I think that part of the debate is already conceded by Leet but you raise an interesting and valid point.
Posted by USAPitBull63 7 years ago
USAPitBull63
Bonham seals it.

He was no Keith Moon indeed. No offense to Moon, but that works in Bonham's favor.
Posted by leet4A1 7 years ago
leet4A1
From Round 2, "no-nothings" should be "know-nothings". I realize it's not going to impact upon the spelling/grammar vote too much, I just hate spelling errors.
Posted by leet4A1 7 years ago
leet4A1
I'm not exactly happy with my guitar selection, but how can you take on Hendrix. If only Jimmy Page were dead... :D
Posted by leet4A1 7 years ago
leet4A1
Haha, it was a toss-up between the two.
Posted by feverish 7 years ago
feverish
I was expecting Jim Morrisson to be honest but I'm happy to take on Freddie.
Posted by JBlake 7 years ago
JBlake
.... and....

Freddie Mercury FTW!

Feverish has his work cut out for him.
Posted by JBlake 7 years ago
JBlake
Great idea for a debate, feverish. I only wish I would have seen it before Hal. He always seems to steal the most fun debates. Should be interesting to read!
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by Udel 9 months ago
Udel
feverishleet4A1Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Bonham and Moon are 2 of the best drummers. Hendrix and Vaughn have different styles. Ultimately Jimi is better. Pro uses Charles Mingus as his bassist which is sweet because Mingus mixed with Jimi would provide a unique, soulful sound to the rock group. But Con's vocalist is far better and John Lennon's voice would not go with Pro's band. But I think Lennon's band would have a smoother sound. They would provide better musicianship. Pro's band is better and Con forfeited a few times for loss of conduct.
Vote Placed by zabrak 6 years ago
zabrak
feverishleet4A1Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by dankeyes11 7 years ago
dankeyes11
feverishleet4A1Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Nails 7 years ago
Nails
feverishleet4A1Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by patsox834 7 years ago
patsox834
feverishleet4A1Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Vote Placed by Danielle 7 years ago
Danielle
feverishleet4A1Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40