Saying you are a music journalist and that you write for blender is the same as saying you're a political journalist and you write for the enquirer.

The only way you could get lower is being the guys who write the even less adequate reviews for maxim itself. If I wanted my music tastes dictated to me by the jocks and frat boy republicans, I would just go to the bars so I could hear how "DAVE" totally makes all along the watchtower his own, and John Mayer totally rules. But Journey is absolutely better than the beatles.

while I agree that blender was a shit magazine, I have to state that John Mayer does rule. I take it you've never picked up a guitar then, because if you had you would realize that he is a fantastic guitar player.

Its funny that Mayer gets criticism from guys like you that clearly have no musical background. Let me make this clear for you, Mayer could play circles around any member of the beatles during their prime (based on your name, I assume that is who you think is "good"). Most beatles songs are incredibly simple and easy to play.

I have played guitar, however, I fail to see where this ad hominem attack fits in with your obviously defensive love of John Mayer.

Let me make this clear for you - "Guys like me" who criticize John Mayer, do it not because we don't know that he went to school for music, and can play, but because the music he releases is about as edgy or emotional as a Lionel Richie record. Or better yet, Kenny G. Another person who was a "fantastic" musician but also made schlock.

And about the Beatles, yes I am a big fan. Not obsessive, but I respect their place in the history of rock as being important and influential on top of making music I like. John Mayer is not, and will never be any of these things. It's funny that little fanboys like you who must play guitar, because who would attack someone for not playing guitar if they didn't play? choose to defend the fact that John Mayer knows the E dorian scale as somehow making "waiting on the world to change" or "your body is a playground?" equal to any track on Abbey Road/Peppers/Revolver/Rubber Soul/even to Please Please Me.

If you like John Mayer, that's fine by me. HOWEVER, again let me MAKE THIS CLEAR FOR YOU (do you see how unnecessarily derogatory that term is yet), he makes what is called "WUSS ROCK". For other examples, see loggins and messina, hall and oates, air supply and bread. The Beatles, who were a pop band, made actual music, oh and for the record, Paul could probably outplay John Mayer any day, but it wasn't necessary for him to display his chops on every instrument any more than it is for John. But whereas Paul had John/George/Ringo to say wtf is this "your mother should know" crap, and continue to write real rock and roll, John never had that voice saying "seriously man, play something that isn't weak for once."

Simplistic and easy to play don't mean not good. The beatles wrote songs that influenced EVERY band, that everyone knows, that will be in our "lexicon" for hundreds of years, that had intricacy in the vocals, musical harmonies et al, but they didn't play (insert drop dadgad tuning etc here) so clearly Mayer is better.

Whatever. Enjoy your wuss rock. Just don't start telling me your boy "DAVE" does the best all along the watch tower either.

John Mayer is a great guitar player. Pop excursions aside, he has turned into a great promoter of the blues, and the older generation of musicians who played the blues. I think to call his music "wuss rock" is incredibly silly. His pop is what it is, but it is not really "rock". His blues playing, however, is very highly regarded.

Ok, I don't think I ever said John Mayer was an enemy of good music, or that he can't play. I apparently need to make that clear. I don't think calling his music he records "wuss rock" is silly at all though. Especially when your next sentence admits it's not rock, which is exactly the point of calling it wuss rock.

However, I never disparaged him as a person, or as a promoter of other music. I've seen interviews and clips of him outside of his pop albums, and he's funny and intelligent, and seems like a good person. I'm glad he's promoting real music, and I"m sure he can play great. that still doesn't make waiting on the world to change any more significant.

"Most beatles songs are incredibly simple and easy to play."

Anyone who uses difficulty of playing to equate to quality of the music has also disqualified himself from commenting further.

Technique =/= art.

lol for sure. and if you were really worried about "difficulty of playing" you'd only listen to what, dream theater....King Crimson....Rush...and other random extreme metal, etc? And who wants to just do that?

Though Raining Blood will always be one of the best metal songs. even if it is the only song people know, there's a reason.

Prytania3:

"Most beatles songs are incredibly simple and easy to play."

Anyone who uses difficulty of playing to equate to quality of the music has also disqualified himself from commenting further.

Technique =/= art.

Anyone who resorts to canned, cliche'd responses disqualifies himself from speaking at all, since he lacks any originality of thought whatsoever...

the beyatles:

Please Me. If you like John Mayer, that's fine by me. HOWEVER, again let me MAKE THIS CLEAR FOR YOU (do you see how unnecessarily derogatory that term is yet), he makes what is called "WUSS ROCK". For other examples, see loggins and messina, hall and oates, air supply and bread. The Beatles, who were a pop band, made actual music, oh and for the record, Paul could probably outplay John Mayer any day, but it wasn't necessary for him to display his chops on every instrument any more than it is for John.

Please. Name a single song of the Beatles that wouldn't also be classified as "WUSS ROCK." Your classification of good music is beyond inane. According to that theory, Pantera is the best band of all time because they are "edgy." What nonsense. And if you are going to go the route of bashing on someone for playing "wuss rock" you ought to at least like a band that isn't EVEN WUSSIER. Seriously, McCartney is about the biggest wuss on the planet. I'm not even saying that just to argue, thats pretty much fact.

And Paul can play better than John? BWAHAHAHAHHAHA. Show me one clip to prove it. JUST ONE. That's all it takes. In the era of youtube you can't just make statements like that, you better back it up. My proof? Go watch John Mayer play "California Dreamin'" on Conan's Tonight Show. The level of difficulty of that is WAY beyond Paul's level ever was.

The fact that you think that playing with different tunings, or using modal scales has ANYTHING to do with difficulty of a song, pretty much means you know very little about music. Seriously, I get sick and tired of all you wanna-be experts that have never seriously studied an instrument going on about how your favorite band was the epitome of music and they were the best players of all time. I even LIKE the Beatles, I can play almost every one of their famous songs, yet I can't help but bash them when you try to compare their level of playing with someone who MANY levels above them. You just got caught up in the fanboy/fangirl love of the beatles like everyone else. You aren't looking at this OBJECTIVELY.

Really? You are hilarious. Getting called subjective by someone who admittedly is a john Mayer Fanboy?

Your first argument? A single song by the beatles that wouldn't be considered wuss rock? how about most of their first three albums? How about Sgt. Peppers (the song(s))? how about a day in the life? (simply because a song is a ballad doesn't make it wuss rock) How about Revolution number 1, or for that matter revolution number 9? Or Let it Be, basically their final album, and almost as pure rock and roll as any of their material.

As far as "edginess" making a band good, I never make that point. And Pantera isn't "edgy" they are...WHITE TRASH. There's a big difference between rednecks screaming, and actually being edgy, but I wouldn't expect someone this passionate about john mayer to understand.

And of COURSE Paul is a wuss, particularly his post beatles crap, and if you read my whole first statement, I SAID THAT MYSELF. But the other beatles rejected his wussiness what they could "so your mother should know" aside.

And Paul could play. If you actually read any books about the beatles, or studied anything at all, you'd know that paul could pretty much master any instrument he picked up, and was an out and out musician, which seems to be your criteria for talent. That doesn't mean he was yngwie malmsteem, who I have never listened to or ever will, but he could play. John admitted he was never the greatest guitarist in technical skill, something that you again seem to cherish.

And I'm sorry that we "wanna be experts" irritate you so. I never stated the beatles are my favorite band or best players ever, and in fact it's quite clear to any one else that I don't say they are the best ever, but their impact is undeniable.

But to say JOHN MAYER is better than the beatles? Ok, again, you're right, I don't apparently know how you define difficulty of song. If it's not scales, then that's fine. If it's intricacy of playing, I've unfortunately heard Mayer's Commercial material, and IT"S NOT THERE. You can't help but be a hypocrite, when you complain about one band being the greatest ever, then say how your favorite band is such a great musician.

Fucking John Mayer is wuss rock. Ask someone besides your Mayer and "DAVE" friends what the shit that he plays is called, and they will say WUSS ROCK. Fucking air supply light. Coldplay is harder edged than his shit. That doesn't make it bad...necessarily.

and all you little fan boys espousing how he helps the blues, or real musicians, or how he went where the fuck ever to play music, and the others just don't get it? If your only defense is that "NO he's really a great musician, just he plays (what, SCHLOCK) on the radio", you have no defense. My GF likes john mayer, and she's had me listen to it, and his cover as bold as love? Boring and soulless.

But that's the difference. I don't judge bands by whether or not they are the greatest musicians, but whether the sum of their parts, of having soul, and a unique voice, and playing their own style to name just a few of my criteria, seem authentic. I don't give a SHIT that john mayer or Kenny G are practiced "accomplished" musicians. THEY HAVE NO SOUL. But I wouldn't expect a fanboy of Mayer who gets this worked up to understand the difference in something basically untangible between celine dion and otis redding, for example. Or John Mayer and real music.

You want to look at it subjectively? On the terms of their own music? 200 years from now, the beatles will be amongst about 10 bands of the 20th century still remembered in rock and roll. And John Mayer will be no more remembered than at best Kenny G/Kenny Wayne Shepherd. And probably not.

FirstInLastOut: accusing me of writing cliches, as if you know what those are--

You are a dick.

Original enough, dick?

I happen to think, by the way, that John Mayer's instrumental work is pleasant enough--I'd be happy to go see him (if you gave me free tickets) if he'd just agree to play and not open his mouth to mewl.

But anyone who compares John "Your Torso is an Amusing Place" Mayer with the Beatles is not onlya fanboy but a troll who thinks rather too much of his own skills as a debater.

And, based on the evidence available "In these days of YouTube," Liszt was a sucky pianist, wuddent he?

Prytania3:

I happen to think, by the way, that John Mayer's instrumental work is pleasant enough--I'd be happy to go see him (if you gave me free tickets) if he'd just agree to play and not open his mouth to mewl.

But anyone who compares John "Your Torso is an Amusing Place" Mayer with the Beatles is not onlya fanboy but a troll who thinks rather too much of his own skills as a debater.

And, based on the evidence available "In these days of YouTube," Liszt was a sucky pianist, wuddent he?

Oh for sure. same goes for Satie. Oh, and John Coltrane. My ACTUAL favorite music..."artist". Even though all he did was basically reinvent chords and use different scales. which are only reasons that the wanna bes like me use. Whereas real musicianship is reflected in "waiting on the world to change" and Jimi covers. But Hey!!! Johnny supports the blues!! (even if he doesn't, you know, FUCKING PLAY THE BLUES. Or write the songs. But Howlin' wolf rules. even if he can't play like (heart flutter) Joooooohhhhnnnnnnnnn!!!)

Prytania3:

FirstInLastOut: accusing me of writing cliches, as if you know what those are--

You are a dick.

Original enough, dick?

I am a dick? YOU are the one who started discourse with a playground attack.

But since thats what you want to do, here you go, you are a mentally-retarded little bitch. And you apparently have a dick obsession. Ok, fine, I'll reassess you now: Fucking retarded, dick-obsessed, AND no originality of thought.

Prytania3:

I happen to think, by the way, that John Mayer's instrumental work is pleasant enough--I'd be happy to go see him (if you gave me free tickets) if he'd just agree to play and not open his mouth to mewl.

But anyone who compares John "Your Torso is an Amusing Place" Mayer with the Beatles is not onlya fanboy but a troll who thinks rather too much of his own skills as a debater.

And, based on the evidence available "In these days of YouTube," Liszt was a sucky pianist, wuddent he?

I love your little attempt at "shutting me down" by essential saying "Anyone who doesn't agree with my taste in music has no skills as a debater." Yeah, that'll fly in a court of law. You must be a FANTASTIC debater, you were somehow able to contradict yourself within a single run-on sentence. Amazing skill, seriously. You are hilarious. Seriously dude, just slap yourself. You need a good slapping.

Anyone who resorts in more lame cliched sayings really doesn't have ANY capacity to think whatsoever. I mean seriously man, at least TRY a little. TRY and think for yourself. Just once in your entire life. That's all I ask, just TRY. You don't have to like things just because your mommy and daddy told you to. You don't have to fear daddy's belt any more, you are a big kid now.

Say it with me:

Its ok to NOT like the beatles, Daddy won't beat me anymore.

Its ok to NOT like the beatles, Daddy won't beat me anymore.

Its ok to NOT like the beatles, Daddy won't beat me anymore.