POLL: Better body of album work: 50s Sinatra or 60s Beatles?

How about both bodies of work being extremely influential and necessary to understanding the history of popular music?

 

I like them both so for me it's impossible to choose.

 

And, hey, let's be honest. Sinatra's run from 1953-1959 is just highlight after highlight. You'd be hard-pressed to find a bad song on the concept albums and there are a lot of gems in the singles collections.

Revolver is sort of a mess and so is half of Magical Mystery Tour (cobbled together for a US LP release).

Sinatra serves as the capstone for 50 years of advances in popular singing. With the humor of Crosby, the honest of Holiday and his own brand of unfettered masculinity, he refined what The Great American Songbook is and defined what a troubador should do. There's really been nobody else like him since to advance the art form. There are many people holding the tradition and keeping it alive, but it's a niche.

The Beatles hold just as much influence, but they came to existence during the nascent days of a new genre of music and advanced that form. And that form is still extremely popular.

 

Great bodies of work, not sure if there's anything to be learned or gained by pitting 'em against one another, they're very different.

Personally, I prefer to listen to Sinatra's mid '50s through mid '60s recordings. I find I rarely spin a Beatles record at all these days, even though 30 and 40 years ago, I spent a fair amount of time listening to that stuff. The Beatles are a group whose work I kind of admire intellectually -- how can you not admire the craftsmanship and inventiveness? -- more than connect with in any kind of emotional way. At this point I might get the urge to spin a Beatles record once or twice every couple of years. But I return to the Sinatra '50s and '60s stuff, in particular Songs for Young Lovers, Swing Easy, Songs for Swingin' Lovers, A Swingin' Affair, Only the Lonely, and a couple of the archival live recordings -- the sextet Paris show; the '57 Seattle show, the '59 Austrialia show w/ Red Norvo -- all the time.

 

The Beatles.

 

Just an addendum to the above, I think it's clear from the list of the Sinatra stuff that I find myself returning to most often that I'm particularly fond not just of Sinatra the storytelling singer (and musician singer, nothing better to me than hearing Sinatra on the '60 tour singing "Moonlight in Vermont") but also with Nelson Riddle's amazing work on those records I wind up listening to most -- kind of modernist flirtations with, even polytonality, all hidden in these immaculate, easily to listen to, toe-tapping fox trots, the great way he manages to clear room for and support the vocal but still have a lot of musical interest going going on-- he was an alchemist....and the great obbligatos and ocassional solos that pop up... those are great Sinatra records, but there's more than Sinatra to love, enjoy and marvel at in 'em.

 

I'll say The Beatles.

What about Elton in the 70's? That run from Elton John through Blue Moves was pretty strong..

 

It's apples and oranges but both are great.

 

Sinatra conducted at least 7 studio albums and some live orchestra performances as well. So...no.

from '56:

 

I'm not sure those conducting albums are any kind of proof, but I think saying Sinatra was "just a singer" is like saying Louis Armstrong was just a trumpet player or Heifetz was just a violin player. The guy was the act, his name's on the marquee, he's choosing the material, the arrangers, the content. The album that goes out under his name is the one that expresses his vision and ideas. A guy singing McDonald's jingles is just a singer.

 

One wouldn't exist without the other. It's all music.

 

See thread: —> Frank Sinatra Conducts
__________________
~ Frank's Albums

 

Some people underrate singers/interpreters - it's an art form like anything else. Frank was perhaps the greatest American singer - not "just a singer". He was an artist.

 

The poll question asked about the "body of work"—not musical roles or personal likes and dislikes.

Speaking of polls: The musicians themselves did not share this distaste for Frank Sinatra's singing. He was named "Male Vocalist Of The Year" in the Playboy Jazz poll five times in a row, 1957-1962. Note that this was the musicians poll, not the readers poll. The number of jazz musicians who credit Sinatra's interpretations of lyrics as a major influence is large. (Miles Davis and Oscar Peterson come to mind from mentions in recent forum posts.)

And to quote Paul McCartney himself from a concert: "I was never a big fan of Frank Sinatra's (when young), but now I've listened to a lot of his songs and see what people were on about. It's nice to have come to him later, and there's a lot of his that I like, for example, 'A Lovely Way To Spend An Evening.' "

 

Well, it was Ava Gardner...

 

Well, they are certainly part of the proof. You are spot on with the rest of your post.

 

I did like 'My Way'... when Sid Vicious sings it!!!!! (on the album 'Sid Sings'. lol. Seriously.

 

Beatles and there's not even a contest.

 

Somewhat true in the end but reading a bit about Ava I'd say he was on a long list of guys who received that treatment just not publicly.

 

I love both artists, both left incredible bodies of work. But I voted Frank Sinatra, the Capitol period is nothing but legendary and rebuilt his career from the bottom.

 

If you want to give Sinatra a real chance of winning in this poll, you'd have to pit Frank against Ringo's solo body of work.

 

I love Frank but I also like me some guilty pleasure 70's Ringo Albums. Anybody else like Ringo the 4th and play it somewhat regularly Disco Ringo! Speaking of Frank, I love his version of Something. But it is apples to oranges, as others have said.

 

The Beatles body of work (as a group) ran from 1960 to 1970. Frank Sinatra recorded from 1939 to 1994, with the pinnacle of his output being the work performed at Capitol Records from 1953 to 1962. Not even a contest. (And that's ignoring his work in radio, television, films, nightclubs, and concerts.)

 

He's called the Entertainer of the Century for a reason.