I generally dislike The Beatles. - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Lemonade Stand > Just the Bang and the Clatter
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-13-2010, 07:34 PM   #16
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
iron yuppie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,448
Local Time: 08:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lazarus View Post
I'm not sure what could be "further" or "more accomplished" than Strawberry Fields Forever or I Am The Walrus, but I'm curious to know who's surpassed them.
Well, just off the top of my head, I would argue that Radiohead is a more accomplished band. In my opinion, every member is more adept with their respective instrument than their counterparts in the Beatles, the albums have more nuance and direction, and the songcraft is more daring in terms of time signatures, chord changes, and the like.

I say all this realizing that "more accomplished" is an ambiguous term, and again I do not want to insinuate in any way that "Strawberry Fields" or "A Day in the Life" are not brilliant pieces of music. They just may not be the most brilliant things ever committed to tape.
__________________

__________________
iron yuppie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2010, 09:44 PM   #17
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
blueeyedgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Bottom of the earth
Posts: 6,774
Local Time: 01:04 AM
To put your comment into context, you have to imagine that Radiohead started off as a Jonas Brothers, and then became the Radiohead of Hail to the Thief. All in 7 years. That's what people maybe forget: that at the start the Beatles were a pop band, not expected to last, and then they turned the whole thing on its head and took their music into totally unexpected, unexplored areas.

Noone has really done that since, imo.
__________________

__________________
blueeyedgirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2010, 10:40 PM   #18
Blue Crack Addict
 
GirlsAloudFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 25,289
Local Time: 08:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueeyedgirl View Post
To put your comment into context, you have to imagine that Radiohead started off as a Jonas Brothers, and then became the Radiohead of Hail to the Thief. All in 7 years. That's what people maybe forget: that at the start the Beatles were a pop band, not expected to last, and then they turned the whole thing on its head and took their music into totally unexpected, unexplored areas.

Noone has really done that since, imo.
You could make the argument that Radiohead did indeed start off as a pedestrian rock band (Pablo Honey) and then took off into crazy awesome unexpected territory.

But I get what you're saying.
__________________
GirlsAloudFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2010, 12:29 AM   #19
The Male
 
LemonMelon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hollywoo
Posts: 65,813
Local Time: 06:34 AM
The fact that someone disliking The Beatles is apparently threadworthy (while someone disliking, say, Vampire Weekend is merely ignored) should be sufficient evidence of how awesome the Beatles are.
__________________


Now.
LemonMelon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2010, 12:38 AM   #20
Blue Crack Supplier
 
lazarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 38,007
Local Time: 06:34 AM
The key word there being "apparently".
__________________
lazarus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2010, 12:53 AM   #21
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 26,959
Local Time: 06:34 AM
Yeah. I still think it should just be merged.
__________________
the tourist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2010, 12:57 AM   #22
Blue Crack Distributor
 
bono_212's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 81,105
Local Time: 06:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jive Turkey View Post
I genuinely like it
I've never been sure if I genuinely like it or just have some cool memories associated with it. When I was in 8th grade, we did a play (I think it was called "Who Done It"?), but it was kind of short, so to fill in the time, there was a talent show added in. A friend of mine did a tap dance routine to "Maxwell's Silver Hammer" and since I was a stage hand on the play, I heard the song a hell of a lot. Add to that the fact that that was the same time I first got into U2 and I was listening to Achtung Baby a lot during the rehearsals, and it's just some fine musical and life memories. I do recognize that the song is incredibly fluffy, but it makes me smile.
__________________
bono_212 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2010, 01:58 PM   #23
Blue Crack Addict
 
Screwtape2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Omaha, Nebraska “With Screwtape on Kettle Drum and Wormwood on Harpsichord!”
Posts: 18,353
Local Time: 09:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adypole View Post
Yes, you read it correctly. It seems that everywhere I go I notice this craze for the Beatles, but it seems that-judging by what music I have heard of them so far-I generally dislike them. I have heard Abbey Road all the way through and most of the white album, and yes-the high points are very good but it seems I find it incredibbly hard to sit all the way through one of their albums. I tried listening to revolver and rubber soul but after about 5 minutes I simply gave up. I'm wondering if any of you have any recomendations regarding the Beatles-IE, their most accesible songs that might, perhaps, alter my opinion?

It's strange because I'm a big fan of Lennon's solo work and it seems most of the Beatles songs I can abide are written by him-IE, 'come together' or 'I want you' (both, coincedentally on Abbey Road)
First off, you need to listen to Sgt. Peppers and especially Magical Mystery Tour before giving up on The Beatles.

The downside of having three great songwriters (and Ringo) was that the albums featured songs that greatly differed in quality. That is the reality but I can still enjoy Help! or Revolver even if I dislike a couple tracks. If you cannot do that then The Beatles just may not be for you. You should respect their quality of work in terms of the sheer number of amazing songs though.
__________________
Screwtape2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2010, 02:03 PM   #24
Blue Crack Supplier
 
elevated_u2_fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: I'm here 'cus I don't want to go home
Posts: 31,694
Local Time: 09:34 AM
pssh, you might as well "generally dislike" modern music then...

Quote:
Originally Posted by bono_212 View Post
I've never been sure if I genuinely like it or just have some cool memories associated with it.
I'll second this, I like several Beattles songs which are not considered their "A Material" simply because I associate them with my childhood. Maxwell is a good example of this which is kind of fucked up when I think about the subject matter...
__________________
elevated_u2_fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2010, 02:10 PM   #25
you are what you is
 
Salome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 22,016
Local Time: 03:34 PM
I never had any sort of reaction to their music
that's not judging the quality, just that it's not for me
__________________
“Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe.”
~Frank Zappa
Salome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2010, 03:46 PM   #26
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,271
Local Time: 08:34 AM
I think Sicy hit it on the head. I think it may just be an age thing for some people, too. I personally love the Beatles' music, think they wrote some absolutely brilliant, lovely songs ("Eleanor Rigby" and "Penny Lane" being a couple personal favorites-probably tie for my favorite Beatles song, and I like some of the goofy songs, myself. I love "Octopus's Garden" and "Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da". But that's just me).

But they're not going to have the exact same meaning to me as they would to someone who actually grew up with them when they were together and making all these songs and putting them out. I'll never truly understand the firsthand experience of "Beatlemania" or seeing them on 'Ed Sullivan' or seeing them change right before my eyes from 1964 to 1969 or whatever, and I do think older generations should take that into account somewhat. I'm always going to like them, though, because I have memories of my parents playing their music, so there's that aspect of it all, and because without them pretty much every band I love now would likely not exist (or if they did, I can't imagine what they'd sound like otherwise), and because I just personally do really like their songs. They made fun, beautiful, heartfelt music, and any band that makes music like that, old or new, will always get my attention. If they had another name and still made that music, if they were new and still made that music, given my personal tastes and styles, I'd still like what I heard.

It seems Paul's songs just don't seem to generally be your thing, you're more toward Lennon's side, as you said. So liking half of what the two main contributors like does pose a bit of an issue. How do you feel about George Harrison's contributions to the group? I would ask about Ringo, too, but he wrote some of the group's "goofy" songs, too, so if you're not big on that from Paul... Though I could be wrong.

Angela
__________________
Moonlit_Angel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2010, 05:30 PM   #27
Blue Crack Supplier
 
IWasBored's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 36,505
Local Time: 10:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronnie269 View Post
Couldn't agree more, The Beatles are a band most people are born into liking these days, its considered quit odd not to like them, not many people actually (IMO) stand back and take a good view of the music and say I actually like that, its just considered as a given, I am a big fan of them, I suppose I'd be in the minority of been a bigger fan of there earlier stuff, I like their rock and roll albums, If I hadnt have read your post I would have recommended Revolver, its there most accessible IMO, but I guess if you don't like them you don't have to, no big deal and yeah I agree there has been bands in recent years that have took music further than The Beatles.

i haven't had enough coffee yet to really wade through that giant run-on sentence of yours there, but i think somewhere in its midst you mentioned being in the minority of liking the early stuff. i definitely am. it goes hand in hand with that whole being born into liking the beatles thing, really. anyone with parents or a local classic rock station who introduced them to the beatles heard larger quantities of post-rubber soul beatles than anything from . oasis built an entire career off middle-era beatles. anything remotely psychedellic owes something to them. indie rock kids say they like the beatles because they can't get away from the influences from the later years as well. anytime anyone throws a sitar into a rock band, unless i'm mistaken, george harrison did it first...whereas please please me through beatles for sale was still a lot of emulating then-contemporary rock n roll. most casual, non-obsessive types don't even realize please please me was an album, because those local classic rock stations write anything pre-revolver off as standard oldies stuff. and if anyone else's mom is anything like mine, they grew up not even know please please me was an album (partly because of that whole stupid american vs. UK releases thing, partly as a result of the culture thing vs. an actual band people sit down and listen to thing).

i'll take "i feel fine" over "i am the walrus" any day, but that's just how i've been since i was 6. so if the original poster is saying he likes "i want you (she's so heavy)" and "come together," i can't imagine we're ever going to see eye to eye on this band.
__________________
IWasBored is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2010, 05:38 PM   #28
Blue Crack Supplier
 
IWasBored's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 36,505
Local Time: 10:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jive Turkey View Post
.... As I grew up, I realized how staggering their discography actually is. Their catalog is so dense that no other band can come close to touching them. I mean, think about everything you know about the Beatles. All the songs, all the experimentation, all the styles; all of that happened in a time span of seven years. That's unheard of. Can you imagine if a band came along in 2003 and changed the musical landscape in the way the Beatles did? If you dont like them, thats fine, but to imply that others like them only because they think they're supposed to is very short sighted. There are plenty of bands that I'm 'supposed' to like, but cant stand (Pink Floyd off the top of my head).

amen. i mean, i realized it was pretty staggering as a kid, which is kind of why until i was 14 or so i had decided that i'd never really need to listen to any other bands. who puts out that many albums in such a short span of time that are that diverse? no one. and fuck radiohead. the absence of structure and sonic incoherencies/dissonance just for the sake of dissonance, computer noises and goddamn wailing in between bells ringing or whatever bullshit thom yorke is now up to is about as stupid as jackson pollock throwing paint around and calling it art. 2 year olds do both of these things with art supplies, pots, and pans respectively. it's not genius, it's just annoying. at least the beatles had the decency to limit that stuff to revolution #9 and wild honey pie.

pink floyd = my favorite example of a band you're "suppposed to like," more specifically the wall. my rant regarding that usually has something to do with the stones' exile on main street, and i'm sure i've beaten that dead horse of a point in a few threads 'round these parts over the years. the older i get, the more equine deaths seem to follow...
__________________
IWasBored is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2010, 06:50 AM   #29
War Child
 
ultraviolet87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 949
Local Time: 09:34 AM
I dont think that they suck or anything. I just think they are disgustingly overrated. I enjoy them sometimes though.
I also feel the same way about Bob Dylan, maybe its a sixties thing....i dont get it.
__________________
ultraviolet87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2010, 07:13 AM   #30
Blue Crack Addict
 
The Sad Punk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: VEGA INTL NITE SKOOL
Posts: 28,691
Local Time: 12:04 AM
If you truly dislike the Beatles, you most likely haven't listened to enough of their discography.

And just while I'm here, can I just say I've totally gone on the McCartney>Lennon steamboat lately? McCartney's output is full of hidden surprises, but Lennon just couldn't write a complete song for shit. Both are great, of course, I'm just throwing it in here.
__________________

__________________
The Sad Punk is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com