My Group of Hypothetical Dead Musicians is Better Than Yours.

1: Keith Moon vs. Carlo Little. There's no doubt that Little was good. Even a quick glance of his wiki page makes that obvious. But for anyone to suggest he's on the level of Keith Moon seems entirely ridiculous. Little actually taught Moon, but the student passing the teacher is hardly a ludicrous notion. To think of it, most of the famous, talented musicians around were taught by someone...someone who they've likely become better than by a whole fu-cking lot. 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....) Moon was an influential beast. Little simply doesn't offer what Moon does...not even close, really. 2: Charles Mingus vs. John Entwistle. 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. 3: Frank Zappa vs. Duane Allman. ...honestly, I think this one is a joke. Allman was a very good guitarist, but I really don't see how he's better than Frank Zappa at...well, anything. 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. Duane Allman 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. 4: Jim Morrison vs. Sam Cooke. It's really a death match for anyone to be matched up with Morrison. Vocally, nobody blows out Sam Cooke, but being the lead man of a group is more than singing. If belting out a tune was all that mattered, I would've just chosen some American Idol winner, or something. I chose Morrison because of his unpredictable charisma, his poetic and intricate lyrics, and his legendary live performances. Morrison had a powerful voice that demanded attention, but, like Moon, he was significant in the development of "rock stars." Morrison often drank, smoke weed, dropped acid, and was famous for doing things other, ignorant people couldn't get, just to test the bounds of reality and "to see what would happen." By his own words, he was interested in anything that had to do with revolt, chaos, and disorder (not that he was a sociopath, because he wasn't.) Morrison was simply the ultimate live performer. His performances were influenced by Antonin Artaud, who, in his book "Theatre and it's Double," gave that idea that one should try to affect the audience as much as possible. Morrison was erratic, spontaneous, and kept the crowd eating out of the palm of his hand. Morrison was an accomplished poet; he even had books released. So for his natural charisma, booming voice, onstage presence, poetic lyrics, and for assisting Moon in development of the rock n' roll blueprint, he is above any other lead man. They'd be able to play together as a whole with more success, with my rhythmic section having played together successfully, Zappa's fantastic musicianship, and Morrison's lyrics and awesome on stage presence. They'd also put on insane live shows, with Moon and Morrison leading the way, and they'd grab plenty of headlines. Overall, I think my band is much better. I'll explain more next round (character limit.)