The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from jesseyeric. Show jesseyeric's posts

    The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal

    One thing you never hear in discussions has to do with the Beatles influence on Hard Rock/Heavy Metal.

    For your consideration, I give you Helter Skelter.

    Recorded in 1968 and basically a pure Paul composition. The song was his response to an interview he read where Townsend was discussing I Can See For Miles. At the time, Pete felt that "Miles" was his first genius piece of noise and rudeness. (What Pete was smoking at the time, I have no idea). Paul thought the song to be a perfect diddy and actually quite clean. And he felt that if they want noise, The Beatles would bring the noise as only they could.

    My personal opinion on Helter Skelter is simple. It is a Hard Rock/Heavy Metal masterpeice recorded a good year before Sabbath or Zep put music to tape. You cannot hear any other genre influence in this song. It is loud noise with rude lyrics.

    Tell me what you think gang?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from NumbaFouwer. Show NumbaFouwer's posts

    Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal

    The Beatles version of Helter Skelter would have had more of a Hard Rock/Heavy Metal sound to it if they would have had more modern instruments and if Paul McCartney's voice would have been more like Vince Neal of Motley Crue .... I think. 

    U2's version of Helter Skelter seems less Hard Rock/Heavy Metal overall, but at times, more so, due to technological differences .... I think.

    Aerosmith's version of Helter Skelter is interesting because of Steve Tyler's singing style/voice.

    Motley Crue's version of Helter Skelter seems to be the most Hard Rock/Heavy Metal of all of these versions, due to there being more bass, a heavier drum beat, more modern instruments, and Vince Neal's voice. This version is the bomb.

    The fact that Aerosmith and Motley Crue do this song, obviously gives credence to the fact that this song is Hard Rock/Heavy Metal. The Beatles knew what they were doing.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from LloydDobler. Show LloydDobler's posts

    Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal

    Completely agree, Jess, a heavy metal masterpiece right down to the final fade-out-fade-in and Ringo's "I've got blisters on my fingers!"

    The hilarious thing, of course, is the lyrics use the British term for a sliding board to describe the rise and fall of the Roman Empire. Unfortunately, the title became synonymous with a mass-murdering madman. (Even though the dumbazz couldn't spell it correctly).
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from jesseyeric. Show jesseyeric's posts

    Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal

    You guys are my people. Reactions to this subject are pretty straight forward but all say & admit that they never thought about it because of the overall influence on the whole 6o's decade. The Beatles were able to change their colors better than most reptilians. Speaking of such, where is the Metal Lizard?
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from william93063. Show william93063's posts

    Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal

    Sorry to be the contrarian but Are You Experienced was actually recorded in 1966 and released in '67.  Fire, Purple Haze, Manic Depression(and several other tracks) are all heavy metallish tunes and beat both Pete Townsend and The Beatles by 2 calendar years.  I am hardly alone in crediting Hendrix as the father of metal.  Jeff Beck is also a pioneer IMHO and listening to Truth released in '68 has several heavy tracks including the seminal Beck's Bolero(actually penned by Jimmy Page who plays the rythym guitar).  I am a massive Beatles fan as well but their contributions to metal are minor at best. 
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from LloydDobler. Show LloydDobler's posts

    Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal

    In Response to Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal:
    [QUOTE]You guys are my people. Reactions to this subject are pretty straight forward but all say admit that they never thought about it because of the overall influence onf the whole 6o's decade. The Beatles were able to change their colors better than most reptilians. Speaking of such, where is the Metal Lizard?
    Posted by jesseyeric[/QUOTE]

    Jess, one of the things I find so amazing about the Beatles is that Meet the Beatles was released in 1964 and Revolver in '66. Two years apart!!

    Think how much their style and sound changed in those two short years. I mean, to go from "I Want to Hold Your Hand" and "I Saw Her Standing There" -- great songs, but pretty straight-forward -- to "Eleanor Rigby," "I'm Only Sleeping," "She Said She Said," and the criminally under-appreciated "For No One" in two years ... that's amazing.

    And then, only two years after Revolver, the White Album. And then their best, in my opinion, Abbey Road. In all, only five years passed from Meet the Beatles to Abbey Road!!!

    To me, the Beatles remain underrated. I honestly compare their work to Mozart and Beethoven.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal

    In Response to Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal:
    [QUOTE]Sorry to be the contrarian but Are You Experienced was actually recorded in 1966 and released in '67.  Fire, Purple Haze, Manic Depression(and several other tracks) are all heavy metallish tunes and beat both Pete Townsend and The Beatles by 2 calendar years.  I am hardly alone in crediting Hendrix as the father of metal.  Jeff Beck is also a pioneer IMHO and listening to Truth released in '68 has several heavy tracks including the seminal Beck's Bolero(actually penned by Jimmy Page who plays the rythym guitar).  I am a massive Beatles fan as well but their contributions to metal are minor at best. 
    Posted by william93063[/QUOTE]

    Good post.  Hendrix was a huge innovator and influence for all guitarists of his time and after him. 

    I think there was a lot of cross-influencing going on among these artists.

    I also think heavy metal was a natural and inevitable development right from the beginning of rock and roll.  All you had to do was take your basic Chuck Berry boogie and make it louder, harder, faster.

    As for the question about the Beatles, I think yes, they could be very heavy when they wanted.  Healter Skelter, Revolution, I Want You...these guys could do whatever they wanted, really. 
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from jesseyeric. Show jesseyeric's posts

    Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal

    In Response to Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal:
    [QUOTE]Sorry to be the contrarian but Are You Experienced was actually recorded in 1966 and released in '67.  Fire, Purple Haze, Manic Depression(and several other tracks) are all heavy metallish tunes and beat both Pete Townsend and The Beatles by 2 calendar years.  I am hardly alone in crediting Hendrix as the father of metal.  Jeff Beck is also a pioneer IMHO and listening to Truth released in '68 has several heavy tracks including the seminal Beck's Bolero(actually penned by Jimmy Page who plays the rythym guitar).  I am a massive Beatles fan as well but their contributions to metal are minor at best. 
    Posted by william93063[/QUOTE]

    William - I would absolutely agree with you but for one small thing. The music by Hendrix and Beck, even the heaviest, you can still distinctly here the blues influence on the song.

    You can hear no such thing in Helter Skelter. And that is why I present this song.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal

    Heavy Metal as a style or genre is very hard to define ( you wouldn't think so, but it is). Is is open to interpretation.

    Some people think AC/DC are NOT Heavy Metal, Deep Purple DID NOT consider themselves Heavy Metal and there are some older folks who grew up listening to Perry Como who think the Dave Clark Five were Heavy Metal.

    If Heavy Metal is just loud music than many groups can be called Heavy Metal, who really aren't. Aerosmith are not a Heavy Metal group although I have been in record stores that categorized them as such.

    If Heavy Metal is a "style" then all you have to do is dress in leather with heels and long hair and you are a Heavy Metal band.

    I can't pinpoint the "first" Heavy Metal song , I can hear echoes of future Heavy Metal in songs by many earlier artists.

    The song by Johnny Kidd and the Pirates, 'Shakin' All Over' could be considered Heavy Metal , if redone by a group like Quiet Riot. Nazareth turned a Joni Mitchell song into Heavy Metal and Judas Priest turned songs by Joan Baez and Spooky Tooth into Heavy Metal songs.

    Is Helter Skelter Heavy Metal? Not in it's Beatlesque form as I think the Beatles are just too musically advanced to have written a Heavy Metal song. But this song , with very minor alterations, could be covered by a group like Judas Priest and instantly it would be a Heavy Metal classic.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from jesseyeric. Show jesseyeric's posts

    Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal

    In Response to Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal:
    [QUOTE]Heavy Metal as a style or genre is very hard to define ( you wouldn't think so, but it is). Is is open to interpretation. Some people think AC/DC are NOT Heavy Metal, Deep Purple DID NOT consider themselves Heavy Metal and there are some older folks who grew up listening to Perry Como who think the Dave Clark Five were Heavy Metal. If Heavy Metal is just loud music than many groups can be called Heavy Metal, who really aren't. Aerosmith are not a Heavy Metal group although I have been in record stores that categorized them as such. If Heavy Metal is a "style" then all you have to do is dress in leather with heels and long hair and you are a Heavy Metal band. I can't pinpoint the "first" Heavy Metal song , I can hear echoes of future Heavy Metal in songs by many earlier artists. The song by Johnny Kidd and the Pirates, 'Shakin' All Over' could be considered Heavy Metal , if redone by a group like Quiet Riot. Nazareth turned a Joni Mitchell song into Heavy Metal and Judas Priest turned songs by Joan Baez and Spooky Tooth into Heavy Metal songs. Is Helter Skelter Heavy Metal? Not in it's Beatlesque form as I think the Beatles are just too musically advanced to have written a Heavy Metal song. But this song , with very minor alterations, could be covered by a group like Judas Priest and instantly it would be a Heavy Metal classic.
    Posted by ZILLAGOD[/QUOTE]

    Whether people agree or disagree as to the song itself being Hard Rock/Heavy Metal. I think we can all agree that it is certainly a contributing factor and influence to the genre.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mattyhorn. Show Mattyhorn's posts

    Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal

    "Helter Skelter" is truly a great hard rock/proto-metal riff.

    As for the first hard rock/proto-metal song, I'm not so sure, but I believe before that, there was The Kinks' "You Really Got Me".
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from jesseyeric. Show jesseyeric's posts

    Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal

    In Response to Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal:
    [QUOTE]"Helter Skelter" is truly a great hard rock/proto-metal riff. As for the first hard rock/proto-metal song, I'm not so sure, but I believe before that, there was The Kinks' "You Really Got Me".
    Posted by Mattyhorn[/QUOTE]

    Agree with this. I guess the point I was trying to make is that unlike You Really Got Me and all that came before Helter Skelter - H.S. really was this strange combination of noise and vocals which to me highlights it as something special.
    And just as a sidebar - to me, noise is a good thing when done right.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from cavaliersfan. Show cavaliersfan's posts

    Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal

    In Response to Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal : Jess, one of the things I find so amazing about the Beatles is that Meet the Beatles was released in 1964 and Revolver in '66. Two years apart!! Think how much their style and sound changed in those two short years. I mean, to go from "I Want to Hold Your Hand" and "I Saw Her Standing There" -- great songs, but pretty straight-forward -- to "Eleanor Rigby," "I'm Only Sleeping," "She Said She Said," and the criminally under-appreciated "For No One" in two years ... that's amazing. And then, only two years after Revolver, the White Album. And then their best, in my opinion, Abbey Road. In all, only five years passed from Meet the Beatles to Abbey Road!!! To me, the Beatles remain underrated. I honestly compare their work to Mozart and Beethoven.
    Posted by LloydDobler[/QUOTE]        When we look at the quality and quantity of the music, during and after the Beatles were together, how can they not be compared to Mozart and Beethoven.  The Beatles are modern day musical geniuses. 

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from cavaliersfan. Show cavaliersfan's posts

    Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal

    In Response to The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal:
    [QUOTE]One thing you never hear in discussions has to do with the Beatles influence on Hard Rock/Heavy Metal. For your consideration, I give you Helter Skelter. Recorded in 1968 and basically a pure Paul composition. The song was his response to an interview he read where Townsend was discussing I Can See For Miles. At the time, Pete felt that "Miles" was his first genius piece of noise and rudeness. (What Pete was smoking at the time, I have no idea). Paul thought the song to be a perfect diddy and actually quite clean. And he felt that if they want noise, The Beatles would bring the noise as only they could. My personal opinion on Helter Skelter is simple. It is a Hard Rock/Heavy Metal masterpeice recorded a good year before Sabbath or Zep put music to tape. You cannot hear any other genre influence in this song. It is loud noise with rude lyrics. Tell me what you think gang?
    Posted by jesseyeric[/QUOTE]     Yes, Beatles dabbled in a little heavy metal.  But I've also heard or read that some music historians consider the Kinks to be proto-metal on some of their songs.  Examples: "You Really Got Me" and "All Day And All Of The Night" (both 1964).  I'm referring to the tone of the guitar rythms.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from jesseyeric. Show jesseyeric's posts

    Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal

    In Response to Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal:
    [QUOTE]In Response to The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal :      Yes, Beatles dabbled in a little heavy metal.  But I've also heard or read that some music historians consider the Kinks to be proto-metal on some of their songs.  Examples: "You Really Got Me" and "All Day And All Of The Night" (both 1964).  I'm referring to the tone of the guitar rythms.
    Posted by cavaliersfan[/QUOTE]

    It is the sustained power chord and screeching lead which leads to that conclusion. But I would say that the two songs you mention by the Kinks had greater influence on Punks than future metalheads. And I have read various members of Metallica, Megadeth and a few others who also stated this.

    I am not saying that Metal comes from H.S. What I am saying is that H.S. is pure rude noise. They may not have been the first to put it to tape, but they certainly were right there.
     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from schmangell. Show schmangell's posts

    Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal

    In Response to Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal : William - I would absolutely agree with you but for one small thing. The music by Hendrix and Beck, even the heaviest, you can still distinctly here the blues influence on the song. You can hear no such thing in Helter Skelter. And that is why I present this song.
    Posted by jesseyeric[/QUOTE]

    Yes, this is precisely correct.  Paul said he wanted the loudest, heaviest sound they could muster at the time and that's what he got.  Ozzie was listening.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal

    In Response to The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal:
    [QUOTE]One thing you never hear in discussions has to do with the Beatles influence on Hard Rock/Heavy Metal. For your consideration, I give you Helter Skelter. Recorded in 1968 and basically a pure Paul composition. The song was his response to an interview he read where Townsend was discussing I Can See For Miles. At the time, Pete felt that "Miles" was his first genius piece of noise and rudeness. (What Pete was smoking at the time, I have no idea). Paul thought the song to be a perfect diddy and actually quite clean. And he felt that if they want noise, The Beatles would bring the noise as only they could. My personal opinion on Helter Skelter is simple. It is a Hard Rock/Heavy Metal masterpeice recorded a good year before Sabbath or Zep put music to tape. You cannot hear any other genre influence in this song. It is loud noise with rude lyrics. Tell me what you think gang?
    Posted by jesseyeric[/QUOTE]

    Agreed; I've always thought that, actually.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from jesseyeric. Show jesseyeric's posts

    Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal

    In Response to Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal:
    [QUOTE]ZILLAGOD: " I think the Beatles are just too musically advanced to have written a Heavy Metal song." LOL! Too musically advanced? I love the Beatles, but give me a break. If you are knowledgeable - I mean really knowledgeable - about real heavy metal, then you would know that in the history of modern music some of the most "musically advanced" musicians and composers outside of jazz are metal musicians. When it comes to modern rock and all the subgenres that vague label currently encompasses the best rock musicians are playing and writing metal. I'm not talking the hair metal of the 80s, though I love that stuff too, for what it is. I'm talking bands like Opeth, Mastodon, Gojira, Mar de Grises, Watain, Deathspell Omega, Negura Bunget, Between the Buried and Me, etc. Old Metallica and Megadeth would qualify as well - Master of Puppets and Rust in Peace are very "musically advanced" albums with impeccable musicianship and songwriting. I'm not trying to be disrespectful with this comment. As I said, I love the Beatles and have incredible respect for their music and their place in music history and the OP has a great point about their song Helter Skelter . However, the comment I'm responding to seemed to imply that metal is an inferior artform and I felt the need to point out that such a comment could only come from an ignorance or unfamiliarity with what metal can truly be. You don't have to like it, but to imply the people who play or write it are talentless hacks is silly.
    Posted by bizona[/QUOTE]

    If I can intercede here. I do not believe that Zilla's response was in anyway a shot at Metal musicians, past or present. He is a major proponent of both the genre and the musicians. And Metal, in it's basic format is difficult and yet can be very simple in the chord structure up to the point when the guitarists start to shred. And here, Harrison and Lennon could never touch them musically. Some of these guys out there are olympian athletes on their axe.

    I believe (and I could be wrong) that the Beatles musicianship excedes all others because of their ability to write a song. I must be honest and admit that I am not familiar with many of the bands you mentioned, but then I am old. This is what they did better than anyone. Even their simplist of songs had something that other bands could only tap into every now and then. The Beatles consistency in this phase and then the experimentation they explored in the studio just takes them to another level.

    Definitely going to chekc out some of those bands you listed. Thanks.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from jesseyeric. Show jesseyeric's posts

    Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal

    When I started this thread, I wasn't sure of the responses I would get. There aren't many, but all have a very specific opinion and I thank you all for that.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal

    In Response to Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal:
    [QUOTE]ZILLAGOD: " I think the Beatles are just too musically advanced to have written a Heavy Metal song." LOL! Too musically advanced? I love the Beatles, but give me a break. If you are knowledgeable - I mean really knowledgeable - about real heavy metal, then you would know that in the history of modern music some of the most "musically advanced" musicians and composers outside of jazz are metal musicians. When it comes to modern rock and all the subgenres that vague label currently encompasses the best rock musicians are playing and writing metal. I'm not talking the hair metal of the 80s, though I love that stuff too, for what it is. I'm talking bands like Opeth, Mastodon, Gojira, Mar de Grises, Watain, Deathspell Omega, Negura Bunget, Between the Buried and Me, etc. Old Metallica and Megadeth would qualify as well - Master of Puppets and Rust in Peace are very "musically advanced" albums with impeccable musicianship and songwriting. I'm not trying to be disrespectful with this comment. As I said, I love the Beatles and have incredible respect for their music and their place in music history and the OP has a great point about their song Helter Skelter . However, the comment I'm responding to seemed to imply that metal is an inferior artform and I felt the need to point out that such a comment could only come from an ignorance or unfamiliarity with what metal can truly be. You don't have to like it, but to imply the people who play or write it are talentless hacks is silly.
    Posted by bizona[/QUOTE]

    I think , maybe, I should have worded that differently.

    As jesseyeric stated, I love Heavy Metal. The Beatles had so much talent , they didn't need to use the aggressive, hard sound of Heavy Metal, they had songs like 'Eleanor Rigby' and 'Something' that are just timeless classics covered by many big name singers. The reach of the Beatles talent and brilliance goes beyond the Rock 'n' Roll universe. 

    I just can't imagine groups like Judas Priest and Black Sabbath being covered by Ray Charles!!! ...truly Heavy Metal is great stuff, and I love it.

    What I simply meant was the Beatles were so complex and so varied in their styling ( while Heavy Metal bands typically are not) , but if the Beatles wanted to be a Heavy Metal band , I think they would have failed, because they were capable of integrating so many different types and  styles and genres into their music. As fanatastically talented as the legendary Heavy Metal bands are not many of them could ever do this. None could ever achieve the mass appeal and range of fans from the entire music audience as what the Beatles were able to do.

    Many of the great Metal bands have had some of the best musicians on the planet. They just don't get wide acceptance from the rest of the world. I guess many people are afraid of it because they think God will punish them or they will go to hell or something.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from CasinoMAn. Show CasinoMAn's posts

    Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal

    beatles music is about love, peace and harmony.
    heavy metal music came about because bands/singers couldnt sound as good as the beatles....fair enough

    they gave up trying to sound good, then someone said let's just trash this song....and heavy metal was born.

    or anti-beatle music was born.





     
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal

    In Response to Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal:
    [QUOTE]beatles music is about love, peace and harmony. heavy metal music came about because bands/singers couldnt sound as good as the beatles....fair enough they gave up trying to sound good, then someone said let's just trash this song....and heavy metal was born. or anti-beatle music was born.  
    Posted by CasinoMAn[/QUOTE]

    I have to disagree.

    Judas Priest covered a Joan Baez song "Diamonds and Rust" and it became a completely different song. Both brilliant in their own way. Not at all what I would call "trash."

    Heavy Metal was born because it was a natural progression for rock music to become louder , harder and about subjects not related to love and peace. By the time the Heavy Metal wave was in full swing , I think the majority of teen boys had just about had it with Sonny and Cher and Tony Orlando and Dawn and the Everly Brothers and all the relentless "love" songs punctuating the airwaves. Kids like me read comic books , science fiction books and watched horror movies and we wanted music that reflected our taste. The "peace and love" message of the hippie generation was dead. It wasn't working, the war was still going on, we would soon be part of it and we would die.

    Darn right we were angry about it. The music reflects the anger and resentment coming from British youth who were fed up with their government and Queen, we here in America adopted it and fell in love with music that struck back at the establishment in a way that was different from the peacenicks who passed flowers around.

    Did it work? I don't know , but it sure pissed alot of older people and religious and political people off , and it was great!
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from devildavid. Show devildavid's posts

    Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal

    In Response to Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The Beatles and Hard Rock/Heavy Metal : I have to disagree. Judas Priest covered a Joan Baez song "Diamonds and Rust" and it became a completely different song. Both brilliant in their own way. Not at all what I would call "trash." Heavy Metal was born because it was a natural progression for rock music to become louder , harder and about subjects not related to love and peace. By the time the Heavy Metal wave was in full swing , I think the majority of teen boys had just about had it with Sonny and Cher and Tony Orlando and Dawn and the Everly Brothers and all the relentless "love" songs punctuating the airwaves. Kids like me read comic books , science fiction books and watched horror movies and we wanted music that reflected our taste. The "peace and love" message of the hippie generation was dead. It wasn't working, the war was still going on, we would soon be part of it and we would die. Darn right we were angry about it. The music reflects the anger and resentment coming from British youth who were fed up with their government and Queen, we here in America adopted it and fell in love with music that struck back at the establishment in a way that was different from the peacenicks who passed flowers around. Did it work? I don't know , but it sure pissed alot of older people and religious and political people off , and it was great!
    Posted by ZILLAGOD[/QUOTE]

    Zil, i know you mean well, but how could you lump the great Everly Brothers in with Sonny and Cher and Tony Orlando and Dawn? Relentless "love" songs? The Everly Brothers' songs of love and heartache are timeless classics.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share