Why are Yes King Crimson Pink Floyd Deep Purple Led Zeppelin never described as a boy band image?
The Beatles indeed ...with the screaming silly girls which were awful and horrible
Their show act was lousy and their gear, sound system were poorly arranged
- Anonymous2 months agoFavorite Answer
The Beatles was honesty a happy shitty band who sang the sappy love songs almost all the time...they had collected mostly the girl fans based community during their heyday.
The other names which you just mentioned above, are far more aggressive, more experimental and louder...not everyone love the heavy rock bands.
Boybands generally sucks
- Huh?Lv 72 months ago
Because they weren't. Whether or not you actually like them, the bands you list consisted of very talented individuals who largely wrote and arranged their own music. Many of their members went on to have long and successful careers after their bands folded.
Boy bands, on the other hand, are assembled via auditions to look good or at least to appeal to a particular fanbase. Their songs are written for them, all they have to be able to do is sing (or mime) well and move in time. They are what were once known, in the days of music hall, as 'song and dance acts'.
- 2 months ago
In common use of the words, 'boy band' generally means a group of guys that just sing, whereas the term 'group' generally refers to a group of musicians each of whom plays an instrument.