"Townshend's ROCK wouldn't exist without Lennon and McCartney's ROCK."
Jesus Christ...I advanced only an opinion, to which I am entitled. I never said "The Who is better than the Beatles" as an objective statement. To me, they are. But that's me!!!
And much of Lennon and McCartney's rock is borrowed straight out of 1950s Little Richard et al.
Are we supposed to label "whoever came first" as autmatically better than what followed? If that's the case, then Lennon and McCartney's rock/pop wouldn't exist without Elvis, et al.
Is there a point to this pissing match? I prefer Townshend and his cohorts. I think their music's better. But you can like whoever the fuck you want.
Jim
