Battle of the Bands The Who v.s. Sabbath

Who dominates the other musically


  • Total voters
    22
  • Poll closed .

TVvoodoo

Ambassador of The Comfortably Slung
Country flag
Led Zeppelin edges out Rush, but not as much as I thought they would, seems a bit of
FM radio classics fatigue has settled in.

tourney ladder .jpg

Now we are in the semi-finals, the final four, and it doesn't seem too weird. Brings us to the right side of the ladder, but should be noted,
all who remain are British bands, so ultimately, the Limeys win every way it shakes out.

I know there are gonna be possible continued attempt to shame one particular musician. I remind everyone: No charges. No incriminating
material found on his computer, nor reason to believe he was collecting, or distributing illegal materials. This is not a defense on my part,
just laying out the facts. Anything else is 100% PURE speculation and possible slander, and even bringing it up in light of this contest is reprehensible.

Instead lets keep our focus on the art and performance, not personal lives- members of the other side of this particular contest, and the ladder
certainly not morally perfect either.

With that, we pit Black Sabbath against The Who


 
As far as my opinion goes and it's apparently worthless in this thing? One band shouldn't even be in contention here, just as it's believed that others should not have been even in contention.

The mention of a certain guitarist and "accusations" is a direct jab at me and I'll gladly own that because unlike this statement? I can back up the receipts ( check out Operation One 2003 UK) and if anyone wants to discuss after this contest is over? We can. That aside, on with the show

My vote is going to Sabbath because they are true innovators and can actually lay claim to starting an entirely new genre of music, that spawned countless subgenres. Iommi is a riff master that is unrivaled, Geezer is a vivid lyricist, Ward is a powerhouse drummer and Ozzy has never had a replicant of his vocals.

Sabbath, no contest

 
Last edited:
As far as my opinion goes and it's apparently worthless in this thing? One band shouldn't even be in contention here, just as it's believed that others should not have been even in contention.

The cold truth is, that a certain guitarist in one of these bands WAS arrested in 2003 under the UKs Operation One sting, for using his credit card to access an illegal website containing an unmentionable topic. Though he was cleared of not downloading illicit materials, he was registered as an offender for failing to show up to court and used an excuse that it was all for research purposes. For that alone, I think they should be removed from contention but hey, whatever. On with the show.
I just didn't want to say anything about it, but ...yeah.
 
As far as my opinion goes and it's apparently worthless in this thing? One band shouldn't even be in contention here, just as it's believed that others should not have been even in contention.

The mention of a certain guitarist and "accusations" is a direct jab at me and I'll gladly own that because unlike this statement? I can back up the receipts ( check out Operation One 2003 UK) and if anyone wants to discuss after this contest is over? We can. That aside, on with the show

My vote is going to Sabbath because they are true innovators and can actually lay claim to starting an entirely new genre of music, that spawned countless subgenres. Iommi is a riff master that is unrivaled, Geezer is a vivid lyricist, Ward is a powerhouse drummer and Ozzy has never had a replicant of his vocals.

Sabbath, no contest

Yep.
 
My vote is going to Sabbath because they are true innovators and can actually lay claim to starting an entirely new genre of music, that spawned countless subgenres. Iommi is a riff master that is unrivaled, Geezer is a vivid lyricist, Ward is a powerhouse drummer and Ozzy has never had a replicant of his vocals.

Sabbath, no contest

^^^^ 100% THIS!!!
Could not have said it better.

Mike, I don’t care what anybody says. You are alright in my book for a closet fan Dave Matthew’s Band Meth-Head.
 
As I said in the matchup with ZZ Top against Black Sabbath, I'm not a Black Sabbath fan.

I have no emotional tie to them. I do like some of Tony Iommi's work, but that's about as far as it goes.

But, I'm voting for Sabbath in this contest for similar reasons as the ZZ Top and Black Sabbath matchup.
 
How can it be that the final four are all British bands? Didn't Americans invent rock and roll?

Yeah, but that doesn't mean the British can't perfect it!

The British Invasion, coupled with another British product which forever changed rock music - the Marshall amplifier - completely changed the complexion of rock music. Then, of course, the New Wave of British Heavy Metal further sealed the deal.

One could almost say that the Americans invented it, but the British reinvented.
 
Yeah, but that doesn't mean the British can't perfect it!

The British Invasion, coupled with another British product which forever changed rock music - the Marshall amplifier - completely changed the complexion of rock music. Then, of course, the New Wave of British Heavy Metal further sealed the deal.

One could almost say that the Americans invented it, but the British reinvented.
We built the guitars, but the Brits built the amps basically lol in the end, we formed rock N roll, they perfected it and created metal
 
Just a couple more hours to get this done my brothers!

I note there are fewer people suddenlyy interested in this contest than we've seen prior ... perhaps the well has been poisoned with, despite my asking that it not be.

As far as clockworks argument regarding Sabbath birthing a whole new genre, I gotta agree that's inarguable. However, what is also inarguable is the fact Pete and Co. not only birthed progressive rock, but many also attribute the very beginnings of Punk AND New Wave to The Who as well. So they can lay claim to THREE genres.

I fully get TTR may be the wrong place to argue metal may not be as important in the general "grand scheme" history of modern popular music, as I know here some believe it is the Best Genre Ever! I've listened plenty, and dropped a dollar or two into it myself over the years but that doesn't force a deaf allegiance in me to the larger picture culturally.

Taking into to account prog, punk and New Wave and the sweeping effects they had on popular culture in the latter years of the 1970's (for good and bad,) well, it appears to me a band happily riding a publicity wave of dark controversies for PR purposes seems minimally important. They certainly had a singular sound and fury, but the reality is Metal didn't really happen, or just barely did, until in the early 80's because one band does not a genre make.
 
Yeah, but that doesn't mean the British can't perfect it!

The British Invasion, coupled with another British product which forever changed rock music - the Marshall amplifier - completely changed the complexion of rock music. Then, of course, the New Wave of British Heavy Metal further sealed the deal.

One could almost say that the Americans invented it, but the British reinvented.
While the English were creating Heavy Metal and many other types of loud wonderful music, the U.S. gave us Yacht Rock.
 
Last edited:
Just a couple more hours to get this done my brothers!

I note there are fewer people suddenlyy interested in this contest than we've seen prior ... perhaps the well has been poisoned with, despite my asking that it not be.

As far as clockworks argument regarding Sabbath birthing a whole new genre, I gotta agree that's inarguable. However, what is also inarguable is the fact Pete and Co. not only birthed progressive rock, but many also attribute the very beginnings of Punk AND New Wave to The Who as well. So they can lay claim to THREE genres.

I fully get TTR may be the wrong place to argue metal may not be as important in the general "grand scheme" history of modern popular music, as I know here some believe it is the Best Genre Ever! I've listened plenty, and dropped a dollar or two into it myself over the years but that doesn't force a deaf allegiance in me to the larger picture culturally.

Taking into to account prog, punk and New Wave and the sweeping effects they had on popular culture in the latter years of the 1970's (for good and bad,) well, it appears to me a band happily riding a publicity wave of dark controversies for PR purposes seems minimally important. They certainly had a singular sound and fury, but the reality is Metal didn't really happen, or just barely did, until in the early 80's because one band does not a genre make.
I won't argue that The Who helped spark Punk, but you could argue that The MC5, The Stooges, The Velvet Undergound and The New York Dolls were just as influential. So it's roots are a little murkier. As metal goes? It's believed Sabbath is the single band that launched it but there's arguments for Deep Purple, Led Zeppelin and Blue Cheer played a significant role too.

But you want to know why I am a devout metal fan, despite the fact I openly love nearly every genre of music except Nu Metal and nearly all pop? I can't speak for the rest, but I know there are many like me and the answer is really simple: Metal is the outcast.

Metal is the music for the people who don't typically fit in; the people who either aren't popular, felt like they never belonged or are even social awkward. It gave everyone of those people who chose to listen to it, an identity and even made them feel self-worth and empowerment when they didn't have it before.

Look at Kirk Hammett from Metallica for example: he was by his own admission, a geek in school and bullied relentlessly. He picked up the guitar and discovered the early hard rock/metal bands and it gave him an identity and purpose. He grew his hair out, changed his image because of metal and went on to be in two influential thrash bands: Exodus and obviously Metallica.
7f3mh335d1iy.jpg

I'm gonna be VERY transparent for the first time because I feel this is important to me: I can personally say that I 100% am one of these people. I didn't have hardly any friends (really only 3, one of them is @froman5150 who I am friends with to this day). I wore geeky, cheap Jeffery Dahmer glasses because my folks didn't want to spend any money . I had and still have an overbite that my parents never got me braces for and I got picked on about it constantly, mercilessly actually. My parents didn't let me go and do a lot of things that other kids did, so I had a minimal social life. I sucked at sports and couldn't make it on a team. So I pretty much was an absolute zero

Then one day on my 12th birthday, my dad gives me his guitar that be bought in a mid-life crisis, that he couldn't actually play ( The Telecaster I've used in videos posted on here) and told me " Happy Birthday, now learn it" despite not wanting a guitar. I played classic rock stuff to start out but when I began playing metal and listening to more and more metal, I suddenly began to have my own Kirk Hammett moment: I ditched the glasses ( though I wear them again these days because who cares?) , I started wearing band t shirts and dressing like a typical metal kid and then formed a garage band ( Stormbringer, stolen from the Deep Purple album of the same name). Suddenly, I wasn't a total zero. I wasn't Mr. Popularity but now people at least knew who I was. And I began almost being drawn towards other kids like me, who had the same connection to metal.

So yeah, that's why I am the big cheerleader for this genre and go on the defensive for it. I get why a generation above me might not be fans (though there are PLENTY who are): it's because it wasn't the popular music of their youth and it was still new, almost unformed still. For me? It was still unpopular and always will be, but there were many others now like me and it gave us that identity. So I'll always wave the flag for it, because honestly? I don't know if I would be me today, if it wasn't for it helping me out then when I needed it most
 
Back
Top