Summer Psychosis: Results for the Final Four

Hello everyone,

So, here we are in early October and Summer Psychosis is still going on. I could say that I was building suspense until the last possible moment, but I made that joke last time. No matter, because the Final Four results are finally here! We had to decide on two incredible matchups to see who gets into the championship. The Beatles, The Doors, David Bowie and Bob Dylan outlasted the 146 other fantastic artists in this bracket to get where they are right now. That's why these results are quite anticlimactic. Certainly, we would have some sort of epic showdown between the voters. Perhaps a chair would be thrown in disagreement? Nope, everyone agreed. However, this agreement will definitely change with the championship, let me tell you. After seeing these results, be prepared for the ultimate showdown and look for the poll on Frogs on a Log's facebook page.

The Beatles 5, The Doors 0

"As much as I love the Doors and as proud as I am to see them here, it’s not a tough choice when you look at the alternative. Here are a few reasons. First, Jim Morrison is quite the legendary figure. The image, the demeanor, the self-destructive behavior adds up to a terrific character. But comparing that to the legend of the Beatles’ entire career is silly. Think about it…the early matching suits and mop-tops on Ed Sullivan, the colorful Sgt. Pepper outfits, the bearded, scruffy veterans on the rooftop. No band has had that kind of incredible and iconic career trajectory.

Much has also been said in this bracket about the Doors’ terrific chemistry that is apparent in their best releases. But the juxtaposition between Lennon’s ying and McCartney’s yang balances the Beatles’ music between happiness and cynicism. The two artists vowed at the beginning of their career to credit Beatles songs that they wrote as Lennon/McCartney, and they (at least nominally) stuck to that sense of collaboration, becoming arguably the greatest songwriting duo of all time. The Doors are great, but anyone who says they are greater than the Beatles is kidding themselves. Throw out “Light My Fire”, and I would throw out “Hey Jude”, “Strawberry Fields Forever” and “A Day in the Life” against it." - John

Hey Jude, Light My Fire ... two seven-minute classics


"The Doors might have one of the most unique sounds in music. It is impossible to listen to them and not know who is singing. The mystique and intrigue of Morrison and the boys transcends just their stage presence. It is embedded in all of their music, always there. Sometimes, like in "Light My Fire", it is subtly there in the background and other times it is in your face, like in "Riders on the Storm". That personality is one of the things that makes the Doors such a worthy band for the Final Four. But now, they are up against the Fab Four, and they are out of their league.

Some people say the Beatles are overrated, I say those people don't know the Beatles. The Doors' personality transcends their music, but the Beatles' music transcends their personality. The Doors had an amazing sound, but not much more. The Beatles experimented with EVERY sound yet stayed the Beatles. Admittedly they don't have much in the way of electronica and hip-hop. But come on, if they could see twenty five years into the future then John would have created world peace, George would be the Dali Llama, Paul would have been made King, and Ringo would have made a successful solo album." - Elliott

I agree, the Beatles couldn't really do anything with electronica or hip-hop. However, Paul McCartney has released three electronic albums in a collaboration called The Fireman.


"As a music journalist (or blogger or whatever we are considered now), I think its kind of boring writing about the Beatles. What could a handsome 20-something like myself say about the most talked about rock-and–roll band of all time? That’s not even saying I think they’re the best. It’s just that anyone who knows anything about music probably knows about the Beatles, so what am I going to be able to add? It’s like yelling in a crowded room. There is really nothing I could say that hasn't been said before, but I got to say something…

The reason I chose the Beatles over the Doors was album strength. There are two Doors albums that REALLY stand out to me next to the seven stand-out Beatles albums. The Beatles had better core songwriters, as evidence by how the post-Beatle careers stand next to the post-Doors careers. Bottom line is that the Beatles are a very good band. Again I haven’t been the first one to say it, but I guess one more opinion couldn't hurt." - Mark

Here's just one (I'm assuming) of the nine albums that Mark mentioned.

"Is this even a contest? I have given the Beatles a lot of flak here on the blog, but even thinking that the Doors could be better than the Beatles is a crime. This is the kind of thing that made me upset when I saw the Doors and the Beastie Boys match up last round. While there certainly are differences between the two bands, they can be thought of in the same way here: two bands that were great fifty or so years ago. In that respect, the only difference is that one of those bands was far better without a doubt, the Beatles, and that is as simple as this needs to be. 

No disrespect to the Doors, who clearly have earned their spot in the classic rock pantheon, but they don’t match up with the Beatles. It can easily be pointed out that Morrison was a better singer than any of the Fab Four or that the sheer musician ship of the Doors was superior, but with the Beatles the whole has always been better than the sum of the parts, and the music speaks for itself (even when one of those parts was Ringo)." - Steve

Hey, you can knock Ringo all you want, but he's a pretty cool dude. Plus, his rhythm is "distinctive". 

"This matchup on the surface looks easy, at least to me. The Doors were pretty good, and The Beatles are The Mother Fucking Beatles. But upon closer inspection, it’s not hard to see why The Doors made it this far. I mean, they forewent a bassist, and used an organ. In a rock band. Who does that? The Doors did. And Jim Morrison’s lyrics were amazing. “This is the end, beautiful friend/This is the end, my only friend/The end of our elaborate plans/The end of everything that stands, the end”. That’s just so damn beautiful, especially given its simplicity. Plus his stage presence was something else and helped introduce the idea of a charismatic frontman to entertain the people while playing great music (or mediocre music, depending on the band). 

All that said, I’m going with The Beatles. And if you have to question why I’m choosing The Mother Fucking Beatles, then you clearly don’t know music, nor have you been following the competition and read my reasoning last week. I mean, they’re The Mother Fucking Beatles; there’s a reason why they’re the obvious choice for the championship round, and a reason why I call them The Mother Fucking Beatles, and it’s because they’re awesome and amazing and just better than The Doors." - Eric

You say Mother Fucking Beatles as if it only applies to them, but Mother Fucking Doors is actually just as apt. "Mother...I want to...YEAHH COME ON YEAH!" - Jim Morrison

Bob Dylan 5, David Bowie 0

"Ughh….I’m so glad I won’t have to make these decisions anymore when this is over. Now that both of these artists are so well accepted and canonized in popular culture, it’s easy to forget how challenging both of these artists were. Dylan was pushing the boundaries of songwriting and singing. His voice is not classically good, but the emotional resonance more than made up for it. To this day, many people are thrown off by what Dylan changed and how he showed that singing is more about the emotion behind the notes than the notes themselves. On the other hand, Bowie’s androgynous personas and glamorous music challenged expectations that people had for a pop star. Sure, there were bad boys, but there were never any questions of sexual orientation or hints of underground culture. In ’72, it really seemed like Bowie had dropped in from Mars. 

Without a doubt, both of these artists have the resume to move on and they would not be here otherwise. Now that I have to make a decision, I’ll look at the bigger picture. Bowie was the artist of the 70’s. He had persona after persona that kept his music fresh and excellent, even though he was strung out most of the time. But after 1983, when he really hit it big, Bowie ran into a wall. It’s almost as if he asked himself “Wait, what music should I be making? What do these people want?” instead of just doing it, like the last decade. I don’t want to say it’s a fatal flaw, but all of a sudden Bowie wanted to cater to his new audience. Even after five decades, Dylan has never catered to anyone, and for that I think he deserves to move on just a little more." - John

I lied, Bob Dylan has catered to fans...of James Cameron's "Titanic" by mentioning the movie on the epic title track of his new album, Tempest. NOOOO!

"I love Bowie, he is a pretty fantastic musician who I could easily have picked over Bob Dylan. The Chameleon should win but...Bob Dylan kinda cheats.

From a musical standpoint, I would actually put Bowie and Dylan on pretty close ground. While Dylan might write some slightly better music (in my opinion), the fact that Bowie's voice sounds better then gravel in a garbage disposal evens them out. But Bob Dylan is more then just a musician. He is a modern day bard, a 20th century Homer.

Bob Dylan might be the most influential musician of our day. I am not talking about influence on other musicians (something that I refuse to judge based on), I am talking about influence on out national consciousness. Like Homer, he watches the world spin around him and takes it all in. He then pours it out in a language so beautiful and timeless that his music should still be heard in 300 years. Like Homer, he transforms men and history into epics that resound in the hearts and souls of the people. Listen to "Hurricane" sometime. You don't have to know who Rubin Carter is to feel his pain.

In short, Dylan's music touches people's souls. Who else could even hope of taking down the Beatles in the last round?" - Elliott

Bob Dylan - Hurricane


"I have to pick Dylan over Bowie. I feel that Bowie would have to agree with me. Dylan is a musician for musicians. His music seems to embody the time period in which it was written. I would be surprised if almost all of the bands in this bracket didn’t take something from him. John Lennon, Paul McCartney, Pete Townshend, Neil Young, Bruce Springsteen, David Bowie, Bryan Ferry, Nick Cave, Patti Smith, Syd Barrett, Cat Stevens, Joni Mitchell, and Tom Waits (yes, I copied those names from Wikipedia) all directly stated Bob Dylan has been extremely important to music. He’s essentially defined a genre of music that had been around for years before his birth. 

Above all, Dylan’s greatest strength is that of a songwriter. His songs are not usually complex, his rhymes and deliveries aren’t always the most stellar, and his voice (well I’m certain everyone before me and after me has mentioned his voice so I won’t go into it.) However, these songs are some of the greatest ever. He is just simply amazing at writing songs." - Mark

I have one more artist for you who was directly influenced...Bono.


"When it comes to lyrics there is no contest here, Dylan was the voice of a generation, a generation that luckily for him had plenty to say. It should also be pointed out that Bowie's lyrics are nothing to shake a stick at, gracefully putting to words what his nation of Britain was feeling. In that respect, both men are commendable. In terms of delivery, every Dylan lyric comes packaged with real folk or blues sentimentality that kept Dylan grounded in his time, whereas Bowie's space age style often took left turns and admittedly sometimes got weird. It's worth saying that there are few Dylan covers that are better than the original article, which is saying a lot considering that Dylan is one of the most covered acts and had people like Hendrix and The Grateful Dead singing his songs. Bowie on the other hand had other artists turn well written songs into hits like "All the Young Dudes" and "The Man Who Sold the World". It's certainly not a reason by itself to count out Bowie, but it is a testament to the individual artists legacy." - Steve

One of the Bob Dylan covers that was better than the original has to be this. Meanwhile, Mott the Hoople really owned "All the Young Dudes".


"Wow, what can I say these 2 iconoclasts? Both of these men were so highly influential, you can write books on how their styles and techniques showed up in the music of others that came later. Bob Dylan makes one of the first commercial rap songs, while David Bowie showed that you can be whoever you are, even if that person is a bit more of the opposite gender than what most people are used to. And they've both been making music since forever, with Dylan just putting out a new album a few weeks ago, 50 years after his first one, and Bowie releasing an album every year from 1969 to 1980, plus all of his other ones. 

While each demigod has so many accomplishments, so much influence, and such revolutionary styles, I have to pick Dylan. The one thing I try to keep out of these votes is my own personal affinity to the music. Yes, it plays a role (it’s impossible to not include it in your consideration), but I’d rather focus on their talent, uniqueness, and influence on the industry, since those are about as objective as you’re going to get when it comes to music. But here, both of these men are pretty much equal, give or take, in those departments. So I’m going to vote for whose sound I like better. And I just have never liked glam rock. I’m not a big folk fan, and I know Bowie has reinvented himself multiple times, but I just can never get into any of his stuff. Not like Dylan’s. Dylan is just so damn accessible, and such an amazing lyricist. That’s why I have to go with him." - Eric

To cap off the sweep, here's something I forget about until about a minute ago. On "Hunky Dory", Bowie has a song called "Song For Bob Dylan". There's no "Song For David Bowie" by Bob Dylan.

That's it everyone. Two sweeps in the Final Four? Inconceivable! It also means no BMO this time. Get to thinking about Bob Dylan vs. The Beatles with this food for thought.