I will pass on both, give me the rolling stones instead.

arent the beatles some kind of bugs thats needed to be step on?

The Beatles. I was 16 when they went on Ed Sullivan and the United States paid total attention. I was in love and when they sang "I Want To Hold Your Hand" I got light-headed and cried.

Please don't laugh at me, at this old and hardened fool of a once-bouncy bon-vivante. But every time I play the VHS tape of either "A Hard Day's Night" or else the "The First US Tour" which featured the Ed Sullivan show, I start to ball my eyes out in the first twenty seconds into the movie, and cry and howl and weep non-stop to the very last glorious moment of it.

Nothing compares. It is Beethoven, it is Hume, it is Kostas Socrates. It is unvelievably unbelievable.

Nothing compares.

Edit (two minutes later:)

Shyt, I've done it. I'm crying now.

Kizz Rockz. You can't compare Kizz and the Beatles. There is no debate when it come to Music, Beauty is in the Ear of the Beholder. Now if you had a Battle of The Bands, Kizz would Kickazz.

Here's Kizz- Beth http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emsQZ69OUE4

Bob Out

I do despise their music. However, I do admire the lengths at which they've gone to market themselves. I've never had any problems with Kiss making a zillion dollars.

They can be as rich as Croesus as far as I'm concerned, but it does not change my opinion (and 999 out of 1000 critics opinions) that they are in large part minimally talented hacks who've made the most of a gimmick!

It is great to live in a country where you can sell anything and make an honest living.

999 out of 1000, huh? Tell me, where did you get those statistics? By the way, you might want to try telling that to the tens of thousands of fans who show up their shows every time they play a concert.

Okay 1000 out of a 1000. I've NEVER read a music critic that likes the band's SOUND.

Kiss has always had a large army of fans. Once again, I must point out that lots of fans and commercial success does not always equal artistic virtuousity. I will refer you to certain rap and hip hop artists you loathe.

Obviously. And why would you? Since you personally loathe them so much (without a valid, legitimate reason, I might add), why would you even take the time to read ANY reviews about them?

I've read reviews. Adnittedly not a 1000 since I'm totally uninterested in any music they release. I'm sure there are those that think the sun shines out of Gene Simmons butt crack. Every critical review I've ever read says essentially the same thing.

If you do not think the fact I hate their sound is a legitimate reason to not like them then this discussion is pointless. In the meantime, I will continue to listen to what sounds good to my ear and appeals to my soul.

Beatles. Never really caught on to Kiss. And even today, as I come around to some of the stuff I didn't listen to when I was younger (AC/DC for instance), I still haven't taken much of a shine to Kiss.

Yes....like the incredible vocal quality of Bob Dylan.

Apples and oranges. Dylan is about a lot more than "vocal quality." However, that is my opinion just as Kiss being a great band is your opinion. We all listen to what appeals to our ears, intellect, and soul.

'You see I don't believe in Dylan. I don't believe in Tom Jones either in that way. Zimmerman is his name. My name isn't John Beatle,it's John Lennon. You know,just like that.'...John Lennon,The Rolling Stone Interviews. be seeing you

if ya wanna talk actual vocal quality


their are very few good singers out there

in any music area other than opera

and frankly i do not care for opera


every group has their fan base

and if yer not in it then aviod them


it is not rocket science


if ya like it listen

if ya don't hit the next button

John Lennon was a kook

i thought that was yoko

That's what ya call a waste of sperm

John Lennon was far from perfect,but I will always love his cynical and jaded attitude. be seeing you

I always liked George

I thought he was a gentle soul!