I really dislike the beatles

[BAW]

Can anyone name a band from the Beatles era that didn't smoke marijuana? It was a way of life for most musicians in the 60's and I don't think that has changed much 40 years later. U2 is probably one of the exceptions to the rule as far as marijuana is concerned but even that has been questioned at times.

Everyone has the right to have their own likes and dislikes when it comes to music but to dismiss the Beatles as "a stoned pop group" is completely overlooking their enormous influence in the world of music for the past 40 years.

They may not be your cup of tea and that's fine but they were so much more than stoned pop singers.

 

[Salome]

Originally posted by DoTheEvolution:
Yeah OK! I still think The Beatles are beyond overrated!

I agree
if you should believe all that you are told every melody/harmony out there was invented by The Beatles (Brian Wilson - maybe, The Beatles - no)

The Beatles did manage to achieve that (unlike the US) the European music world seems to have lost almost all of its musical roots that existed before the 60's (on the mainland only the fado seems to have survived)
we've gone that far in our beatles worshipping that our musicians aren't anymore able to dig from a source even richer then Beatles pop
US artists (and I'm not talking about Britney Spears) still have their roots in blues/country/soul and are able to develop from there on

it's not by accident that U2 (by far the best european band) are from Ireland, the only European country left with very strong musical roots

the only thing Europe has going for itselves since the end of The Beatles is it's electronic music scene (a thing a band like Radiohead seems to understand very well)


p.s. - The Beatles owed Brian Wilson big time

------------------
Salome
Shake it, shake it, shake it

[This message has been edited by Salome (edited 05-01-2002).]

 

[brettig]

Originally posted by Salome:
p.s. - The Beatles owed Brian Wilson big time

If u look at the history, I actually think Pet Sounds was very derivative of Rubber Soul, so I think the Beatles/Beach Boys thing runs both ways. Im a great fan of the Beatles, but there were other great bands out there, and there still are.

 

[Salome]

Rubber Soul was a tremendous influence for The Beach Boys (= Brian Wilson) in that it was the first pop album which really was "an album" instead of a bunch of singles + fillers
that possibility didn't even occur to people until then

Pet Sounds then showed the world how exactly to create pop music (harmonies, melodies, inventive use of instruments etc.)

------------------
Salome
Shake it, shake it, shake it

 

[brettig]

Originally posted by Salome:
Pet Sounds then showed the world how exactly to create pop music (harmonies, melodies, inventive use of instruments etc.)

Actually Rubber Soul was 1st to that punch too. Lemme Demonstrate...the track by track innovations.

Drive My Car (lyrics, melody)
Norwegian Wood (lyrics, use of sitar)
You Won't See Me
Nowhere Man (harmonies, lyrics)
Think For Yourself (fuzz bass)
The Word (harmonies, lyrics)
Michelle (lyrics- namely their frenchness)
What Goes On (Ringo's 1st song he had a part in writing, a miracle in itself i guess

)
Girl (harmonies)
I'm Looking Through You (harmonies, lyrics)
In My Life (use of piano taped at double speed for baroque/harpsichord type sound, lyrics)
Wait
If I Needed Someone
Run For Your Life

When I mention lyrics, I mean songs that weren't your classic 'i love you' staples we'd seen up to this point.

It was the 1st album of quality from start to finish, although the final 3 tracks werent quite as original as the others. Nevertheless, without Rubber Soul there'd have been no Pet Sounds.

 

[joyfulgirl]

I guess we're just focusing on the music here, but I wanted to point out that what the Beatles were about were much more than the music. Their cultural influence was huge. Brian Wilson may have been a musical genius (did you know he heard every note of every instrument as complete and finished compositions in his head before he sat down at the piano to write the songs? Extraordinary), but the Beatles influenced everything from hair styles to pop art. They are credited with introducing eastern philosophy to the western world which is of enormous importance to me personally. They pretty much originated the concept album with Sgt. Pepper and turned pop music into an art form. They weren't just hit songwriters who wrote catchy tunes; they were artists. Maybe that isn't so obvious today because in my opinion so many people have surpassed what the Beatles started, but at the time they were absolutely revolutionary.

But like I said before, I can totally understand not being into them today. I almost never listen to them myself and I have almost every Beatles CD.

 

[Salome]

Originally posted by brettig:
Actually Rubber Soul was 1st to that punch too. Lemme Demonstrate...the track by track innovations.

somehow I just don't see it that way
I agree there would have been no Pet Sounds without Rubber Soul
but Rubber Soul in no way prepared the world for Pet Sounds

all the elements on Rubber Soul you mentioned are there
The Beatles were probably the first who recognized the possibility of integrating those elements in pop music
but they know they didn't achieve this with Rubber Soul
I think the main reason that McCartney was/is blown away by Pet Sounds is because he knows that Pet Sounds is the album he wanted to make, but he didn't fully realize it was possible/how to do it until he heard that album

The Beatles were Brian Wilson's main source of inspiration
Brian Wilson's inspiration the main source of music as we know it today


I love Pet Sounds because of the songs though

------------------
Salome
Shake it, shake it, shake it

 

[RavenStar]

I think the reason the beatles bug me so much is my dad. He is always telling me that drugs are bad, dont do them, etc. Then, a beatles song comes on the radio. I comment on how the beatles were more than likely stoned when they wrote the song. My dad goes "yeah!" like he is proud of that. I could probably write songs like them with enough drugs. But my dad doesnt think so. I really just think they were overrated. Some people try to get to much out of them. They were a band, thats all. Now, of course ppl are gonna say stuff like "U2 is just a band" but they are not just a band. They are political activists. They are (insert word saying that they did so much for live shows it just blows your mind). One thing I liked about this thread was the responses I got. They were intelligent and thoughtful. It sure beat the "They just are" response.

(edited for poor english)
------------------
He who stands atop the highest pyramid of skulls can see the farthest.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://all.at/bag <--friends site

[This message has been edited by RavenStar (edited 05-02-2002).]

 

[brettig]

points taken Salome

but I'm sure if u ask Brian Wilson, he'll say he got a heck of alot outta Rubber Soul...

as for the beatles' standing in music, i can recall Paul McCartney saying once 'We all thought the Beatles were a good little band, nothing more nothing less.' and Im happy with that. They werent the best thing since sliced bread, but they were and are fun to listen to...

 

[~LadyLemon~]

My favorite McCartney quote is as follows:

"Looking back on the Lennon and McCartney stuff, I think we were fuckin' great!"

[This message has been edited by ~LadyLemon~ (edited 05-03-2002).]

 

[joyfulgirl]

I guess for me, a band being 'just' a band is quite enough. I don't need them to be more than that to hold a meaningful place in my life because music is already so important to me. It's great that U2 are activists as well as musicians, but to me that doesn't mean that a band who is 'just' a band is less significant. But you're right, RavenStar--the Beatles weren't activists, although they took a stab at some political songs. John & Yoko were the activists, but not the Beatles as a band.

I think the reason the beatles bug me so much is my dad.

A-ha, now we're getting to the bottom of this.

I understand--my Dad ruined Beethoven for me.

 

[Judah]

Whether you like the Beatles' music or not, it's hard not to be impressed by their accomplishments and their progression. Basically, their original albums came out between 1963 and 1970 (think of 1983 to 1990 or 1993 to 2000 re: U2).

I like this write-up Spin had few months ago re: the 50 best bands ever (i like the "who they influenced" bit at the end):
http://www.spin.com/new/features/videofeatures/february2002top50.html

1
THE BEATLES
With John Lennon's legacy turned into an advertising fire sale, with Paul McCartney's 400 silly-ass love songs to wife Linda, with legions of baby-boom Beatlemaniacs still nattering on about "real music," why do these blokes remain so beloved? And why are they Spin's No. 1 band, more than 30 years after their last proper album? Well, check this scenario: Imagine if, over the course of about five years, 'N Sync (circa "Bye Bye Bye") evolved into Radiohead (circa The Bends), into the Chemical Brothers (circa Exit Planet Dust), and into Nirvana (circa In Utero). That was the Beatles from, say, 1964 to 1969. Their music didn't quite revolutionize the planet, but it blew up the world of pop culture and basically created the rock-band statutes that all musical youth end up following, sooner or later. (For instance, they're the reason your favorite band is so annoyingly anxious to "experiment" with its "sound.") They also made shaggy hair, acid-as-inspiration, and sampling (via the Mellotron) almost acceptable. And, oh yeah, they managed to break up before they started to suck (which cannot be said of most of their peers). After they disbanded, Lennon angrily sang, "I don't believe in Beatles," but the rest of us better recognize. P.S.: R.I.P., George. CHARLES AARON

Influenced: Beastie Boys, Blur, Oasis, the Chemical Brothers, Steve Earle, the Flaming Lips, Elliott Smith, Aimee Mann, Elvis Costello, Public Enemy, De La Soul, Jimi Hendrix, all boy bands -- oh, forget it: everyone!

 

[Hallelujah Here She Comes]

Originally posted by Judah:


1
Imagine if, over the course of about five years, 'N Sync (circa "Bye Bye Bye") evolved into Radiohead (circa The Bends), into the Chemical Brothers (circa Exit Planet Dust), and into Nirvana (circa In Utero). That was the Beatles from, say, 1964 to 1969. And, oh yeah, they managed to break up before they started to suck
CHARLES AARON

Amen, bruthah.

 

[RavenStar]

I would have preffered the beatles to be activists. People would have listened to them.

------------------
He who stands atop the highest pyramid of skulls can see the farthest.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://all.at/bag <--friends site

 

[melon]

At some point, you learn that you can appreciate a work of art, while also feeling free to register a personal dislike of it. I certainly acknowledge the Beatles' place in music history, but, personally, I don't like much of their work, especially their early stuff.

Melon

------------------
"Still, I never understood the elevation of greed as a political credo. Why would anyone want to base a political programme on bottomless dissatisfaction and the impossibility of happiness? Perhaps that was its appeal: the promise of luxury that in fact promoted endless work." - Hanif Kureishi, Intimacy

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

Originally posted by melon:
At some point, you learn that you can appreciate a work of art, while also feeling free to register a personal dislike of it. I certainly acknowledge the Beatles' place in music history, but, personally, I don't like much of their work, especially their early stuff.

i agree. i will never understand, though, how people can make them out to be gods.

 

[~LadyLemon~]

Originally posted by RavenStar:
I would have preffered the beatles to be activists. People would have listened to them.

John Lennon was an activist in his later years (ever hear of his Bed-In for peace?? and his song Give Peace A Chance?)...and George began the first rock n roll concert for charity with his Concert for
Bangledesh which spawned such later events such as Live Aid, Band Aid, and Farm Aid!