# The 'Three Bs'



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

Bordering on off-topic, the image of God:


----------



## Rachmanijohn (Jan 2, 2014)

You just made my year.


----------



## ahammel (Oct 10, 2012)

Three B's? Bruckner, Berg, and Britten, right?


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

ahammel said:


> Three B's? Bruckner, Berg, and Britten, right?


I thought it was Boulez, Berlioz, and Bartok...


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

Mahlerian said:


> I thought it was Boulez, Berlioz, and Bartok...


I thought it was Milton Babbitt.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Mahlerian said:


> I thought it was Boulez, Berlioz, and Bartok...


Combining Pierre's 1970's combover with the mega bouffant of Hector? I just don't want to go there! :lol:


----------



## ahammel (Oct 10, 2012)

Mein musikalisches Glaubensbekenntniss steht in H-dur, mit seiben B-en in der Vorzeichnung: Bartók und Bruckner und Babbitt und Berg und Boulez und Britten und Berlioz!


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

ahammel said:


> Mein musikalisches Glaubensbekenntniss steht in H-dur, mit seiben B-en in der Vorzeichnung: Bartók und Bruckner und Babbitt und Berg und Boulez und Britten und Berlioz!


An enharmonic relationship, eh?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

All these years I though it was Bernstein, Baguer, and the Bee Gees.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

KenOC said:


> All these years I though it was Bernstein, Baguer, and the Bee Gees.


Ha, Baguer, the little Spanish Haydn.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Three under-appreciated master composers: Buxtehude, Byrd and Busoni.


----------



## Rachmanijohn (Jan 2, 2014)

Mahlerian said:


> I thought it was Boulez, Berlioz, and Bartok...


You're kidding right?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

clavichorder said:


> Ha, Baguer, the little Spanish Haydn.


Seems to have been a popular insult in those days. Boccherini was called "the wife of Haydn."


----------



## Guest (Jan 16, 2014)

That's OK.

Haydn's wife was always referred to as "Luigi."


----------



## Rapide (Oct 11, 2011)

Bach
Beethoven
*Boulez*


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

correcting everybody, the Three B's are:
Berg, Bartok, Berio.

Yes, I am just as earnest as everyone else who is being ridiculous to think to give much of any weight to the value of any list of a triumvirate of any "3B's"

To even take with as much as a grain of salt a German critic-journlist's list of the three greatest composers, written with an ardor of nationalism and intent on making no more than a clever pun on enharmonic spellings of notes in the German language while leaving out the other hundred or more "world's greatest composers," is to far overvalue any squib which has similar goals.


----------



## concerto for cowbell (Jan 13, 2014)

We've had a lot of fun here today, but let's just clarify for any newbies who are confused at this point, the three Bs are:
Bach, Beethoven and Mel B.


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

*B*ig *B*ill *B*roonzy has it all to himself!

Others could include Hildergard of *B*ingen, *B*acharach and the name's *B*ond, Capel *B*ond!

You could jazz it up with Basie, Beiderbecke and Brubeck.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

As John Cage would say, had he been TC user, OH, NO, NOT THE B'S! NOT THE B'S!


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

This discussion reminds me of a classic Red Dwarf line: don't you listen to something really classical, like Mozart, Mendelssohn or Motorhead?


----------



## quack (Oct 13, 2011)

B major, B minor and B-flat is the right answer.


----------



## Guest (Jan 16, 2014)

PetrB said:


> a German critic-journlist's list


Which he stole from the German composer Peter Cornelius, whose three B's were Bach, Beethoven, and Berlioz, which at least makes a little more sense, musically. And was simply an expression of Cornelius' personal trinity. (Yeah, it had to be three because of the Christian Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.)

Funny the things that get to seem as if etched in stone. I learned "the three B's" in a music class, no history, no explanation of origins (no sense even that it had an origin), nothing. Just "the three B's"--Bach, Beethoven, Brahms. Straight from von Buelow's mouth but with no whisper of its having come from there, so of course no sense of the original three coined by Cornelius.

Anyway, this is all just sheer silly childishness compared with the three X's: Xenakis, um... Xenakis.

Uh.

Xenakis and the other two X's.

Yeah. That's the good stuff.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

For me it's Beethoven, Beethoven, and Beethoven!


----------



## GioCar (Oct 30, 2013)

This reminds me a game when I was a kid, that is to name as much as possible composers with a given letter as initial...

The B was always winning.


----------



## lupinix (Jan 9, 2014)

Bach, Bartok and the Beatles?


----------



## ahammel (Oct 10, 2012)

some guy said:


> Anyway, this is all just sheer silly childishness compared with the three X's: Xenakis, um... Xenakis.
> 
> Uh.
> 
> ...


Wikipedia suggests Xian Xinghai and the impossibly-awesomely-named Spyridon Xyndas. Who looked like this:









I've never heard any of his music, but I'm going to go ahead and declare him the best composer ever anyway.


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

Boulez, Babbitt, Barraqué.


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

Beethoven, Boenberg, and Bakemitsu.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Vesuvius said:


> Bakemitsu


Ah, yes, he of the "transfigured light" (化け光)


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Mahlerian said:


> Ah, yes, he of the "transfigured light" (化け光)


and all this time I thought it was "Transfigured light bulb."


----------



## worov (Oct 12, 2012)

I'm sorry, but you got it all wrong.

Antonio Francisco Braga, Giovanni de Bardi and John Bedyngham.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Fun's over guys. Stop pretending. The three B's are B good, B careful, and B quiet.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

And the one B a lot of folks seem to forget in their excessive, endless bloviating, *B Humble!!!*


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

hpowders said:


> And the one B a lot of folks seem to forget in their excessive, endless bloviating, *B Humble!!!*


Never heard of him. I suspect you're just making stuff up now.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

science said:


> Never heard of him. I suspect you're just making stuff up now.


Caught me! Yes, the last real B was B Quiet. I'm so embarrassed!


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

hpowders said:


> Caught me! Yes, the last real B was B Quiet. I'm so embarrassed!


That's ok. The truth is that although "B Humble" is just an urban legend, it frightens me anyway.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

science said:


> That's ok. The truth is that although "B Humble" is just an urban legend, it frightens me anyway.


I would order "B Humble" as my vanity license plate, but someone might rear end me just for spite.


----------



## Guest (Jan 17, 2014)

I want more of this here bloviatin' stuff. That sounds like fun!!

Bashing, Bitching, and Bloviating. The three B's of internettery. (So I hear. I mean. I've never done any of those myself.)


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

Biber, Bieber and Bach


----------



## SimonNZ (Jul 12, 2012)

Binchois, Busnois and Brumel

It was all downhill after that


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

Bach, Beethoven, and Bartok.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

SimonNZ said:


> Binchois, Busnois and Brumel
> 
> It was all downhill after that


Damn! You beat me to my 3 favorites!


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

Beatles, Beach Boys, Bieber


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

Uh Bieber. Makes me nauseous seeing that name. I however have Biber fever.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

neoshredder said:


> Uh Bieber. Makes me nauseous seeing that name.


Seriously?

I'm perfectly apathetic. Why do you care so much?


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

science said:


> Seriously?
> 
> I'm perfectly apathetic. Why do you care so much?


Yeah, he's no worse (or better) than the last or next pre-teen girl pop sensation. Just ignore him, and he'll go away. Isn't his career already over?


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

science said:


> Seriously?
> 
> I'm perfectly apathetic. Why do you care so much?


I have a disdain for his music.


----------



## ahammel (Oct 10, 2012)

science said:


> Seriously?
> 
> I'm perfectly apathetic. Why do you care so much?


It has always struck me as very odd that grown-*** adult people should feel the need to point out that they dislike music written by and for adolescents.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

ahammel said:


> It has always struck me as very odd that grown-*** adult people should feel the need to point out that they dislike music written by and for adolescents.


I wish the general public liked better music? Like in the 70's and 80's for example. So yeah I'm a little bitter at the direction music is going as I'm a big rock fan. I still got the old stuff thankfully.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

neoshredder said:


> I have a disdain for his music.


I guess I do too, but it's fine with me if other people (of any age) like it. I don't entirely understand those people and they certainly don't understand me, but the world is big enough for all of us. We've just got to let each other listen to different stuff without getting worked up about it.



Mahlerian said:


> Yeah, he's no worse (or better) than the last or next pre-teen girl pop sensation. Just ignore him, and he'll go away. Isn't his career already over?


I don't know. Isn't Justin Timberlake still around? And is he Timbalake or whatever? Anybody know about this stuff? I'm so out of touch that when my students talk about their music I don't even know which groups are K-pop and which are Western.

I do have one problem though: K-Pop Star, the Korean equivalent of American Idol but for kids. (And, to be fair to the Koreans, K-Pop Star really does seem to be, um, more _about the music_. The judges are famous people but they don't make the show about themselves, and the contestants just perform without any Jerry Springer sort of nonsense.) The problem for me is that my wife loves this show and literally never tires of playing the videos - repeatedly and repeatedly and over and over and repeatedly. Worse, she has developed the ability to block out the music that I'm listening to, so she actually forgets that I'm listening to music, and so I can be right in the dang middle of a wonderful part of some symphony, and suddenly I'll hear it mixed with a 9-year-old kid singing "Somewhere Over the Rainbow."

Marry a classical music lover, if it's not too late!


----------



## ahammel (Oct 10, 2012)

neoshredder said:


> I wish the general public liked better music? Like in the 70's and 80's for example.


Yes, the general public obviously had impeccable taste in the age of goddamned disco.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

ahammel said:


> Yes, the general public obviously had impeccable taste in the age of goddamned disco.


Disco wasn't that bad. And outside of disco, rock music was booming. Boston, Kansas, Styx, The Moody Blues, Electric Light Orchestra, Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin and etc.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

neoshredder said:


> I wish the general public liked better music? Like in the 70's and 80's for example. So yeah I'm a little bitter at the direction music is going as I'm a big rock fan. I still got the old stuff thankfully.


You've forgotten what it was actually like at the time. I'm guessing you don't mean Tiffany or Culture Club or Kenny Rogers or the Bay City Rollers or Bobby Sherman or even the Bee Gees.

Rock and roll isn't dead. It's always been this way. Well, maybe not always, but at least since Pat Boone.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

science said:


> You've forgotten what it was actually like at the time. I'm guessing you don't mean Tiffany or Culture Club or Kenny Rogers or the Bay City Rollers or Bobby Sherman or even the Bee Gees.
> 
> Rock and roll isn't dead. It's always been this way. Well, maybe not always, but at least since Pat Boone.


I'm thinking more of bands like Night Ranger, Autograph, Journey, Survivor, White Lion, Whitesnake, Def Leppard, Dokken, the Outfield, the Scorpions, early Metallica, Savatage, and etc. Rock isn't dead. But it's not heading the right direction imo.


----------



## ahammel (Oct 10, 2012)

neoshredder said:


> Disco wasn't that bad.


Yes it was.



neoshredder said:


> And outside of disco, rock music was booming. Boston, Kansas, Styx, The Moody Blues, Electric Light Orchestra, Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin and etc.


There was never a time when those bands were as popular as Justin Bieber is now. Of the acts you list, only Boston, Pink Floyd, and Styx ever had a number 1 hit in the US (and frankly, given the choice of listening to _Mr. Roboto_ and throwing myself under a train, I would have some thinking to do). Having one number one hit in the US makes you approximately as popular as the Archies, who reached number 1 in 1969 with _Sugar Sugar_, which is, I think we can agree, the nadir of Western music to date.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

ahammel said:


> ..._Sugar Sugar_, which is, I think we can agree, the nadir of Western music to date.


The operative words are "to date." This is clearly a challenge to reach new and even more glorious lows, a challenge to which I'm sure we can rise. If that's the right word.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

ahammel said:


> ... the Archies, who reached number 1 in 1969 with _Sugar Sugar_, which is, I think we can agree, the nadir of Western music to date.


We cannot agree. I'm not sure Ricky Nelson ever had a song that good, and he had some #1s.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

ahammel said:


> the Archies, who reached number 1 in 1969 with _Sugar Sugar_, which is, I think we can agree, the nadir of Western music to date.


Sugar Sugar is a good song for what it is, which isn't much. Not my cup of tea. Actually might have been a predecessor to disco.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

some guy said:


> Anyway, this is all just sheer silly childishness compared with the three X's: Xenakis, um... Xenakis.
> 
> Uh.
> 
> ...


You can also have Khrennikov and Khachaturian if you're willing to include the Cyrillic 'X'.


----------



## ahammel (Oct 10, 2012)

Florestan said:


> Sugar Sugar is a good song for what it is[...]


Prefabricated, poorly performed dross written to sell amazingly boring comic books?


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Florestan said:


> Sugar Sugar is a good song for what it is, which isn't much. Not my cup of tea. Actually might have been a predecessor to disco.


Agree. Not much inspiration there. Boring on repeated hearings.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

ahammel said:


> Prefabricated, poorly performed dross written to sell amazingly boring comic books?


or the cartoon series. Wow, there are over a dozen cover versons listed at at Wikipedia


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

neoshredder said:


> Disco wasn't that bad.


 I have to disagree, but I will point out that there is one disco album that is probably worth a listen (though I haven't) Who would have expected the great R&B musician, Edgar Winter, to put out a disco album, but you can be sure it is the best disco album ever:








BTW, In the day I was a card carrying member of a local Detroit rock radio station's club DREAD which stood for "Detroit Rockers Engaged in the Abolition of Disco." :lol:

Hey, I guess we really sidetracked off from the three Bs, eh? Ah well, I think that topic was pretty much spent anyway.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

The disaster that was Disco Demolition Night at Comiskey Park - can any of our American members remember if there was ever any film footage of it?


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Disco influenced some great musical acts, for example - The Rolling Stones, The Smiths, Michael Jackson and Daft Punk. Guys like Nile Rodgers and Bernard Edwards were/are pretty great. Rodgers helped create some really great stuff with acts like David Bowie, Duran Duran and Daft Punk.

Its the same as any form of music, there is good and bad stuff.


----------



## SimonNZ (Jul 12, 2012)

I'd like to change my vote:

Bernart de Ventadorm, Bertrand Born and Beatriz de Dia

it was all wibbly-wobbly noise after them


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

tdc said:


> Disco influenced some great musical acts, for example - The Rolling Stones, The Smiths, Michael Jackson and Daft Punk. Guys like Nile Rodgers and Bernard Edwards were/are pretty great. Rodgers helped create some *really great stuff *with acts like David Bowie, *Duran Duran *and Daft Punk.


If one of the best things you can say about disco is it begot Duran Duran, then that doesn't say much for disco.


----------



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

One for the French, one for the Russian, one for the Hungarian; the image of Sauron:


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

GreenMamba said:


> If one of the best things you can say about disco is it begot Duran Duran, then that doesn't say much for disco.


Well, I don't actually listen to them much, but as far as pop goes they were quite good. Due to their somewhat "glam" pretty boy image I think many people lump them into the "boy band" category, but they weren't anything like that. They wrote their own music and lyrics and compared to other bands in the pop genre they were far above average.

If you are the kind of person that writes off most or all pop music as crap, then I could never convince you. But if you are at all interested in the style then you should maybe take a closer look at some of their music, you might be surprised.


----------



## TurnaboutVox (Sep 22, 2013)

SimonNZ said:


> I'd like to change my vote:
> 
> Bernart de Ventadorm, Bertrand Born and Beatriz de Dia
> 
> it was all wibbly-wobbly noise after them


I haven't had a prior vote to change, but in the light of SimonNZ's I'd like to nominate* Boulez*, *Beefheart* and *Brian* Eno - it was all syrup-sweet harmonies before them


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

lupinix said:


> Bach, Bartok and the Beatles?


There was a time in my life when I would have put the Beatles over anyone and everyone!


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

hpowders said:


> There was a time in my life when I would have put the Beatles over anyone and everyone!


Same here. Most accessible band ever.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

neoshredder said:


> Same here. Most accessible band ever.


I was sick when they were bickering and finally broke up. Only 2 left.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

hpowders said:


> There was a time in my life when I would have put the Beatles over anyone and everyone!


They *were* over anyone and everyone.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Itullian said:


> They *were* over anyone and everyone.


McCartney releases solo albums and it's just not the same.


----------



## ahammel (Oct 10, 2012)

Itullian said:


> They *were* over anyone and everyone.


Bigger than Jesus and all that.


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

hpowders said:


> McCartney releases solo albums and it's just not the same.


Because Lennon and Harrison were the true visionaries.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

hpowders said:


> McCartney releases solo albums and it's just not the same.


McCartney solo sucked imho.
Lennon somewhat better
Harrison was great for a few albums.
Together they were the greatest.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Itullian said:


> McCartney solo sucked imho.
> Lennon somewhat better
> Harrison was great for a few albums.
> Together they were the greatest.


What's that expression? "The whole is greater than the sum of its parts." Were they ever!!


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

Also the 70's happened. Not sure the Beatles could still write great music in the 70's style. Abbey Road was proof they could. But not sure they could sustain that ambition. Btw there are some really good lesser known british bands in the 60's. In particular, from 1966-1968 they excelled. Odessey and Oracle is a Beatleish album that is very underrated imo.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

hpowders said:


> What's that expression? "The whole is greater than the sum of its parts." Were they ever!!


Even though sometimes they didn't record together, knowing each others opinions
and standards kept them from over indulgences.
Its one of musics great tragedies that they broke up.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

neoshredder said:


> Also the 70's happened. Not sure the Beatles could still write great music in the 70's style. Abbey Road was proof they could. But not sure they could sustain that ambition. Btw there are some really good lesser known british bands in the 60's. In particular, from 1966-1968 they excelled. Odessey and Oracle is a Beatleish album that is very underrated imo.


Sergeant Pepper made a huge impression on me. Like every track was a masterpiece!


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

hpowders said:


> Sergeant Pepper made a huge impression on me. Like every track was a masterpiece!


The first album that grabbed me was Beatles 65. 
But from Rubber Soul on..........wow.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

hpowders said:


> Sergeant Pepper made a huge impression on me. Like every track was a masterpiece!


I remember at that time that most albums had one or two good songs and the rest were...well...mediocre. Beatles albums were special because many or most tracks were, indeed masterpieces or at least superior. Even the Stones couldn't match them in this.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

KenOC said:


> I remember at that time that most albums had one or two good songs and the rest were...well...mediocre. Beatles albums were special because many or most tracks were, indeed masterpieces or at least superior. Even the Stones couldn't match them in this.


I can give you a list of albums that have more than 1 or 2 good songs on it. Amazon has been my friend in this department. The Zombies, The Kinks, and Love all had their moment in 67-68. And of course Pet Sounds was a great one as well. But yeah the Beatles made multiple great albums. Which was hard to beat. Though I arguably could say the Moody Blues did the same. Just not as radio friendly songs.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

KenOC said:


> I remember at that time that most albums had one or two good songs and the rest were...well...mediocre. Beatles albums were special because many or most tracks were, indeed masterpieces or at least superior. Even the Stones couldn't match them in this.


At the time, I was deeply into classical and I must say, this is one of the few LP's I bought where I really didn't feel like I paid enough for it. Just spectacular! I don't know how many times I played it. Classical was put on hold for a while.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

neoshredder said:


> I can give you a list of albums that have more than 1 or 2 good songs on it. Amazon has been my friend in this department. The Zombies, The Kinks, and Love all had their moment in 67-68. And of course Pet Sounds was a great one as well. But yeah the Beatles made multiple great albums. Which was hard to beat. Though I arguably could say the Moody Blues did the same. Just not as radio friendly songs.


I have Pet Sounds by the Beach Boys, but it didn't impress me much as a whole album; just 2-3 songs did.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

And I never cared for the Rolling Stones much. Their Satanic Majesties Request was a failed attempt at trying to imitate Sgt. Pepper or a response to it.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

neoshredder said:


> I can give you a list of albums that have more than 1 or 2 good songs on it. Amazon has been my friend in this department. The Zombies, The Kinks, and Love all had their moment in 67-68. And of course Pet Sounds was a great one as well. But yeah the Beatles made multiple great albums. Which was hard to beat. Though I arguably could say the Moody Blues did the same. Just not as radio friendly songs.


Also, the Beatles made it cool to buy albums.
Before that singles were king.
Also the group as one concept.
Before them it was a headliner plus the group.
Like Buddy Holly AND the Crickets.

Also, the Beatles flip side of their singles was as good as the first side.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

hpowders said:


> I have Pet Sounds by the Beach Boys, but it didn't impress me much as a whole album; just 2-3 songs did.


Wouldn't It Be Nice, You Still Believe in Me, Sloop John B, and God Only Knows. That's 4 songs.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

neoshredder said:


> I can give you a list of albums that have more than 1 or 2 good songs on it. Amazon has been my friend in this department. The Zombies, The Kinks, and Love all had their moment in 67-68. And of course Pet Sounds was a great one as well. But yeah the Beatles made multiple great albums. Which was hard to beat. Though I arguably could say the Moody Blues did the same. Just not as radio friendly songs.


The Moodys were great. I had all there albums up until Pinder left.
I missed his mellotron.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

neoshredder said:


> And I never cared for the Rolling Stones much. Their Satanic Majesties Request was a failed attempt at trying to imitate Sgt. Pepper or a response to it.


You need to get into Tull.
Ian is the genius of geniuses.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

Itullian said:


> The Moodys were great. I had all there albums up until Pinder left.
> I missed his mellotron.


Yep from 67-73, they wrote great album after great album. Amazing consistency from that band during that time. Days of Future Passed, In Search of the Lost Chord, On the Threshold of a Dream, To Our Children's Children's Children, Question of Balance, Every Good Boy Deserves Favour, and Seventh Sojourn. Also Justin Hayward had a better album than any of the Beatles solo efforts with Blue Jay.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

neoshredder said:


> Yep from 67-73, they wrote great album after great album. Amazing consistency from that band during that time. Days of Future Passed, In Search of the Lost Chord, On the Threshold of a Dream, To Our Children's Children's Children, Question of Balance, Every Good Boy Deserves Favour, and Seventh Sojourn. Also Justin Hayward had a better album than any of the Beatles solo efforts with Blue Jay.


Yup, agreed. they were prolific song writers.
one of the truly great bands.


----------

