My Group of Hypothetical Dead Musicians is Better Than Yours.

Drums: I find the claim that Bonham is more influential than Moon to be borderline insane. John Bonham is one of my favorite drummers, and members of any band, but Keith Moon simply did things nobody else before him did -- he set the table for the John Bonham's of the music word. Hell, Led Zeppelin even had Moon take Bonham's place during live shows on more than one occasion. ...from what I said in the first one of these I did: "Moon revolutionized a drummer's position in a band. It's akin to how Jimi Hendrix took the guitar and did things nobody else had done. In most bands, and in any band I can think of that preceded the Who, the drummer was mainly hovering around in the background; not much emphasis was put on them. But then Keith Moon came along, and not only did he stand out, but he caught the complete attention of whoever listened to him or saw him. He was the focal point of the Who; he was the first drummer that was emphasized so significantly. It wasn't a title that was given to him, either; he took it, with his destructive, energetic style. It was a style that really wasn't seen before. Nobody else had pounded on the drums and just annihilated them the way Moon did. But it's one thing to beat on the drums...it's another to do it, and continue to stand out in a band with such big rock n' roll personalities, such as Pete Townshend and Roger Daltrey. It wasn't as if Moon was a big fish in a small pond, like Page was for a time in the Yardbirds. He was surrounded by some great musicians who were as nuts as he was on stage. But Moon went the extra mile. Really, Moon deserves a lot of credit in the development of the rock n' roll star's archetype. He was all about abusing drugs, off the wall parties (he bought his own strange house, so he could have a constant party), and overall destruction. I mean, the man was incredibly famous for smashing his hotel rooms, and he even once drove a car into a pool. Many stories of Moon's violent and sociopathic behavior exist; I probably don't have enough room to fit them. Point is, Moon was the first to behave this way, and he set the stage for the Led Zeppelin's of the music world. Speaking of Zeppelin, another way to see how great Moon was is to see how Zeppelin were actually friends with Moon, and were fans of him; they supposedly wanted Moon to be in a band with them. Hell, Moon and Entwistle apparently gave Zeppelin their name (by saying they'd go over like a "lead zeppelin.) Even Jeff Beck was a Moon fan, and recorded with Moon, Page, and John Paul Jones (http://en.wikipedia.org.......)" I think, even by this, we can see how Keith Moon really smashes John Bonham in terms of influence. It's a bit of a joke, really. Moon was the cornerstone of arguably the best band of all-time. While Bonham was certainly great, and a big name, it's not easy to say that he stood out more than Plant or Page. He was a big fish with other big fish. With Moon...he was surrounded by big fish, too, but no of them matched Moon. Not even Pete Townshend. He was a d-mn whale. I also notice the bit about live performances. Ha, also not territory where anyone matches Keith Moon. Moon literally smashed his drums, put explosives in them, and played with this incredible intensity for whole shows. With the video I'm using, take notice of the part where Moon is surrounded by the remains of a drum kit, and is standing there pounding the f-ck out of the cymbals. And, well...I don't think I need to mention the Smothers Brothers incident. Btw: that video is shots of Moon when he was playing live to the song "the Ox," which is also him, as well as the rest of the Who. http://www.youtube.com... Bass: Like I said in another debate: Now, I didn't choose Entwistle because I figured he was the best dead bassist (I tend to think that's James Jamerson), but because we *know* he can keep up with Keith Moon, and can harmonize his bass with Moon's drums to form an incredible sound which was the backbone of one of the biggest bands ever -- the Who. Moon and Entwistle are a combination that we can safely say equates to serious success, and an awesome sound. The perfect rhythmic section...well, out of dead people. In essence, I think Entwistle really solidifies my hypothetical band -- the rhythmic section of a band is crazily important, and the one I have has proven to be successful, influential, and talented. The selection of Entwistle really rounds out my rhythmic section with a formula we know to be successful based on experience. Though your rhythmic section is damn talented, mine has proven to be all of the things I mentioned above -- successful, influential, and talented. I'll talk more about this later. Guitar: Ha, Zappa vs. Hendrix. This is a pretty good one. Now, I'll admit Hendrix was better at playing the guitar, but I don't think it's a beasting at all; Zappa certainly made his own contributions to the music world with his guitar. I'll also admit Hendrix has a greater following, but Zappa has his own; he's more well recognized that you're giving him credit for. I mean, how many musicians in the rock 'n roll hall of fame have a small following? Not many. But really, I think Zappa offers more to my band than Hendrix does to yours. Also from my other debate: Zappa is a perpetually underrated, innovative guitarist, who guided other musicians and got them their big break, such as the virtuoso Steve Vai. Zappa, in a way, did things that nobody else did; he had a big hand in the pioneering of guitar shredding, which has become incredibly popular (Vai, Buckethead, Malmsteen, Gilbert, Petrucci), and is the first guitarist I can think of who was completely self-taught. Not only that, but he was one of rock's greatest and first satirists (Billy the Mountain), and seems to be the one who popularized "comedy rock" (Bobby Brown Goes Down.) Zappa's influence is...well, large. Primus (http://www.reviewjournal.com......), Steve Vai (http://www.vai.com......), Alice Cooper ("Popin," issue five), System of a Down (http://www.rollingstone.com......), Black Sabbath (http://www.black-sabbath.com......), and even Weird Al (http://www.weirdal.com.......) But not only was Zappa a talented, creative, and original guitarist, but he was an extraordinary musician...maybe one of the best in modern times. Not only could he write rock songs with shredding (Montana), catchy, bluesy songs (Don't Eat the Yellow Snow), and powerful riffs (Disco Boy), but Zappa also composed classical music and orchestral music (http://en.wikipedia.org......), and was a conductor, producer, editor and, well...he wrote just about anything you can imagine, from jazz, to reggae, the blues, to hard hitting classic rock. He could play the guitar, bass, drums, keyboards, and even a synclavier. Every band needs someone to write the music, produce the hits, edit, etc., and Frank Zappa is more than capable of all of these things. The icing on the cake is that he's also an innovative guitarist, and is one of the better guitarists alive or dead. [Hendrix] simply doesn't have anywhere as much to offer to any band as Frank Zappa. And really, as with Entwistle, I think Zappa adds more than individual talents and skills; he just makes the overall make-up of the group that much better with his experience leading bands, his technical ability, and knowledge of music. The addition of Zappa really makes my band crazily diverse musically. Vocals: I won't be able to say much about this, but Ray Charles vs. Jim Morrison is clearly a beasting, but for Morrison. Like I said in my previous debate, if this position was just about singing, then I would've picked some American Idol winner. I mean, Ray Charles is some blind guy; what else can he do? Sitting/standing there and singing is great, but Morrison's powerful onstage antics, fantastic lyrics, and legendary status as a rock 'n roll star put him very, very far above Charles. I'll explain more later.