Sir_Axxewraith
cant fux widdit
I find it quite annoying that there aren't nearly as many tributes to Les Paul as there is to Michael Jackson.
What does everyone else think ?
What does everyone else think ?
-
Steam recently changed the default privacy settings for all users. This may impact tracking. Ensure your profile has the correct settings by following the guide on our forums.
Who contributed more to the music scene, Les Paul or Michael Jackson ?
- Thread starter Sir_Axxewraith
- Start date
Craig Fairfax
illuminati Vereran
Most people either thought he was already dead, or didn't know who he was to begin with.
But you gotta admire a man who was in his 90's still doing his thing every Monday.
But you gotta admire a man who was in his 90's still doing his thing every Monday.
Josey Wales
Evil Poptart
Les Paul and Micheal Jackson arent in the same category of music or music influence
You cant compare a guitar creator to a pop star
You cant compare a guitar creator to a pop star
This. A lot of people seemed to have not known he was still alive, sadly. Lot of them were my friends, too. He deserves a lot of recognition and praise for his work.
Sir_Axxewraith
cant fux widdit
1. Not once did I say who is the better artist.
2. Les Paul was a musician as well.
Dan
Contributor
Even still without one the other could not be here.
What? Without Michael Jackson the would be no Les Paul?
That makes no sense, Les became famous shortly after World War II.
He was such an inspiration, there was thing thing I saw on BBC4 not long back about Les, and at 93 he was playing at a local Jazz Club every week.
Sir_Axxewraith
cant fux widdit
No.. Trigun was right. He said without one (Les) the other (Michael) may not exist.
Only an idiot would think that without Michael, Les would not exist as a musician, especially as I know Trigun is a well educated musician himself.
Scorned
Member
But once again, you can't compare them, because of how they went about in their business.
Of course Michael Jackson would be given more credit because he reached out to people emotionally more than Les Paul. And it doesn't matter, "well if Les Paul didn't do this, then MJ wouldn't have mattered/etc".
Okay, first of all, if Les Paul didn't do what he did, you can bet your buttocks some other person would've. And second, yeah, and if MJ wasn't Michael fucking Jackson, than he wouldn't have mattered either.
Your thread title is a different question though, than your original post. Your original post is discussing the popularity contest...and you should realize hands down WHY MJ would win over Les Paul (I know its not right either, but you should know why its the way it is). Yeah, Les Paul contributed more than MJ, but see it through peoples eyes, in the fact that, who was the more socially INTERESTING one.
One more thing too, from what Les Paul has done and everything, you can almost infer that he really didn't care as much as what people thought of him. It seemed more on the lines of him trying to improve music, which deserves way more respect than he's given... But still, in a way, the fact that people praise any type of music that Les Paul created or helped to bring about, its like they praise him too, but unconsciously.
Of course Michael Jackson would be given more credit because he reached out to people emotionally more than Les Paul. And it doesn't matter, "well if Les Paul didn't do this, then MJ wouldn't have mattered/etc".
Okay, first of all, if Les Paul didn't do what he did, you can bet your buttocks some other person would've. And second, yeah, and if MJ wasn't Michael fucking Jackson, than he wouldn't have mattered either.
Your thread title is a different question though, than your original post. Your original post is discussing the popularity contest...and you should realize hands down WHY MJ would win over Les Paul (I know its not right either, but you should know why its the way it is). Yeah, Les Paul contributed more than MJ, but see it through peoples eyes, in the fact that, who was the more socially INTERESTING one.
One more thing too, from what Les Paul has done and everything, you can almost infer that he really didn't care as much as what people thought of him. It seemed more on the lines of him trying to improve music, which deserves way more respect than he's given... But still, in a way, the fact that people praise any type of music that Les Paul created or helped to bring about, its like they praise him too, but unconsciously.
Sir_Axxewraith
cant fux widdit
My post may give the wrong impression. I know why MJ is way more popular than Les Paul. I just don't like that there aren't as many tributes/coverage.
Than again, like you said, MJ had far more press coverage for a reason, Les Paul was an ordinary guy.
But to sway this thread back into the right direction. It's about who did more for the music scene. Whether it's improving it audibly or visibly (videos/dance routines etc..)
NOT, who is the better artist or who is more popular.
Than again, like you said, MJ had far more press coverage for a reason, Les Paul was an ordinary guy.
But to sway this thread back into the right direction. It's about who did more for the music scene. Whether it's improving it audibly or visibly (videos/dance routines etc..)
NOT, who is the better artist or who is more popular.
LocutusEstBorg
Active Member
I personally didn't like either of them. But I'd have to say Les Paul since he probably influenced a lot of other musicians not to mention his guitar designing.
BTW the Vote button takes me to some random topic.
BTW the Vote button takes me to some random topic.
Sir_Axxewraith
cant fux widdit
Did that to me, Serideth's pixel guide I think ?