The Beatles

Discussions about the British rock group City Boy and music in general.

Moderator: rito

Dave
Doctor Doctor
Posts: 582
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Coventry, England

The Beatles

Post by Dave » Wed Sep 18, 2002 2:26 am

The Beatles are the most over-rated group ever! Discuss!! I think Abbey Road is a pile of dross, & the White Album's only got 4 decent songs on it!
Stone me, what a life !

User avatar
cockatootoo
Heavyweight
Posts: 1576
Joined: Thu May 09, 2002 1:01 am
Location: rochester, ny
Contact:

Re: The Beatles

Post by cockatootoo » Wed Sep 18, 2002 4:32 am

Ouch! Those are probably my two favorite Beatles albums - I love the eclectic nature of both. And (IMO) Abbey Road is probably one of the best engineered and produced albums ever!! The sonic quality is amazing - considering it was done thirty-some years ago on eight-track...

<Dave.>

Re: The Beatles

Post by <Dave.> » Wed Sep 18, 2002 9:12 am

Sorry Cockatoo, musically i stand my ground, production-wise they were instigaters & world leaders, for its time, "Day In The Life" is amazing!!!! (I think When I'm 64 is a load of peurile rubbish, but what do i know!) Strangely, i do like "Let It Be", except that Long & Winding Road was ruined with the "strings". I'll admit to not having heard Rubber Soul & Revolver, (would you believe), but i still think musically from '67 onwards there was far better music around: Floyd/Cream/Stones/Who/Tull/Family/Zep etc. I don't mean to upset anyone, (emotive subject), just my opinion!!

man who ate his car
Doctor Doctor
Posts: 508
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 2:01 am
Location: an auto junkyard in the deserts of New Mexico

Re: The Beatles

Post by man who ate his car » Wed Sep 18, 2002 10:17 am

Hey Dave,<BR>I agree that The Beatles are an over-rated group. But let's analyze the whole thing entirely. The Beatles are forever niched in rock n roll history mainly because they changed the face of the music. Just like Elvis got things started in the 50's, The Beatles came along and took the music to the next level. But if it wouldn't have been them, it would have been someone else. The change was inevitable. There's no question that The Beatles were extremely talented as songwriters and musicians. But as the 60's progressed, times were rapidly changing. And the demand for new Beatles music must have been extremely high. They were probably under intense pressure from the record companies to make new music. Plus, they were constantly on demand to appear in concert, all over the world. So when you consider all of that, the rapidly changing world of the 60's, the marketing pressures, the concert tours, and even the changes that were going on within themselves, it's understandable if the quality of The Beatles music was compromised somewhat during the later years because of everything that was happening with them during that time. The early Beatles music was more simple and straightforward. But the sound changed a lot as the 60's progressed and came to a close. By the end, 1969 & 70, The Beatles look and sound had become drastically different. It's not really a bad thing, I think it was just a reflection of the fast changing times of the 60's, and also all the changes & pressures The Beatles as a group were experiencing at that time. So that may explain the reason for the inconsistency The Beatles had in their music during the later years. I think their music improved during the 70's, after they all went their separate ways and embarked on solo careers. McCartney especially, is a good example of this. <P>For the record, my favorite Beatles song is "Penny Lane." A real gem from '67! :)
Munched his way to a million hearts as he ate the tires and the spare parts.

<Dave.>

Re: The Beatles

Post by <Dave.> » Wed Sep 18, 2002 10:43 am

Lee G, 'nuff said, i agree with you entirely, what more can i say? Anyone else to comment, or nail my %$£& to the wall?

User avatar
al
Heavyweight
Posts: 1663
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2001 1:01 am

Re: The Beatles

Post by al » Wed Sep 18, 2002 12:51 pm

Hey Dave,<P>I would agree to a very small extent that they are somewhat over-rated. But I do like the White album quite a bit. In fact it is their later stuff I like, not their earlier pop-music kind of stuff. <P>I could never pick a 'best' Beatle's song or album as there is quite a lot to choose from, however from the White LP I think Savoy Truffle and Sexy Sadie are good examples of the Beatle's style that I most like.<P>Al

<Rick B.>

Re: The Beatles

Post by <Rick B.> » Wed Sep 18, 2002 2:50 pm

Dave, you are just trolling, and I for one won't take the bait!

<DaDrew>

Re: The Beatles

Post by <DaDrew> » Wed Sep 18, 2002 3:40 pm

I agree that praise for The Beatles now days just does`nt ring true for folks raised in the 80`s and 90`s. <P>But most of the glorification of the Beatles is/was done by folks who grew up with the Beatles.It`s is simple as that.If you lived during that time you remember how fresh their sound was,and how they changed music.It was DAMN Exciting!<P>I can also understand that if someone comes in the backdoor and starts listening to The Beatles 20 years after the fact,that they can find When I`m 64 "trite" or not like a lot of songs on the White Album.When I had my 17 yr old daughter listen to City Boy,she thought it was crap! She is`nt into Rap or Britney etc... She likes Creed,No Doubt and also likes alot of my old stuff like Zep,Floyd and yes the Beatles.Nevertheless,she thoght CB sucked!<P>Drew

Dave
Doctor Doctor
Posts: 582
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Coventry, England

Re: The Beatles

Post by Dave » Wed Sep 18, 2002 4:15 pm

OOERR, started one 'ere 'aint i!! Just in case anyone thinks i'm some spotty kid, i'm 45, (in 2 weeks, happy b/day me!!) I can remember The Beatles splitting up, and i agree that to have been there from 64 to 68/69 time would have been an amazing experience! I grew up on sounds from 70 to 75, and there was so much diversity around then, Gentle Giant to Roy Harper, Black Sabbath to T Rex, that i honestly think a lot of bands knocked spots off The Beatles, musically at least. I also think Venus & Mars and Wings At The Speed Of Sound were brilliant LPs, but only half of Band On The Run. I'm gonna get lynched here 'aint i???? Come on Rick, take the bait! Perhaps i ought to go to Mars and stay there.
Stone me, what a life !

User avatar
cockatootoo
Heavyweight
Posts: 1576
Joined: Thu May 09, 2002 1:01 am
Location: rochester, ny
Contact:

Re: The Beatles

Post by cockatootoo » Wed Sep 18, 2002 7:53 pm

you guys are over simplifying the beatles (and their influence) - Dave, without the breatles groundwork there would not have been that diversity in the early seventies. Drew, hit it on the head, a lot of what they did sounds kinda "old hat" now but they were the FIRST to do a lot of the stuff that has been recycled so much!<P>Diversity is very important to me - and the Beatles are the ultimate in diversity and eclecticism! Everyone is not going to like the beatles and everybody is entitled to their opinion - but you can name just about any type of popular music and it owes a debt to the beatles.<P>One thing to keep in mind is that for half their career they were putting out two to three albums a year!! And still kept up a very decent quality. Bands today (and from nearly any period) can't get that sort of quality releasing one album every two years or so!<P>They were also one of the first (and definitely the most sucessful) bands to actually write their own material. Another huge change in the music business. They rarely, if ever, followed a trend - they set them!<P>I agree that "When I'm Sixty-Four" is pretty queer - it's period piece. The beauty is that McCartney wrote that song AND "Helter Skelter"!! Now that's diversity. In a nutshell, that's what separates The Beatles from any other rock band - they did every style (pop, folk, experimental, and on and on) and did them all equally well...<P>Personally, I like songs from every period of the Beatles career - I think it's cool that they changed so much (and still stayed popular, commercially and critically). I don't think there's any other band that went through those kind of changes and still sold records and influenced music the way they did.<P>I could go on and on, but I'm getting tired... BTW, I like this thread...

User avatar
cockatootoo
Heavyweight
Posts: 1576
Joined: Thu May 09, 2002 1:01 am
Location: rochester, ny
Contact:

Re: The Beatles

Post by cockatootoo » Wed Sep 18, 2002 7:56 pm

Oh yeah, Lee, the change WAS inevitable - but very unlikely to come totally from one band - and so many changes ( not just one on the way to others)! This was seven or eight straight years of groundbreaking music!! I'm not buying that argument - that it could have been anybody...

<DaDrew>

Re: The Beatles

Post by <DaDrew> » Wed Sep 18, 2002 9:01 pm

Dave,I`ll be 47 in November.And you hit it right on the head when you said-"I can remember them breaking up ".That tells me that you either were`nt paying attention to music in your English youth in the 60`s or that you did`nt hear it.<P>Do ya think that Gentle Giant or whatever,did`nt learn a lesson from Sgt.Pepper? Do ya think,you ever would have heard of them if not for musical experimentation? I think The Beatles did that.<P>And,oh sure.After growing up and listening to the Beatles and the Stones-I agree that somewhere down the line a-Sabbath,and Yes would come about.Taking the music further.I agree they knocked spots off The Beatles,after The Beatles were`nt an item anymore.Good for them!<P>You admit,that-after The Beatles you liked some solo careers.Did you ever compare "Speed of Sound"to "Sabbath Bloody Sabbath"? Why not?<BR>I think the Title track on that Sabbath LP rocks!!! It sure as HELL ain`t no "Silly Love Song".Do you like them both? Apples and Oranges.<P>Do you see what you`re doing? You`re comparing The Beatles music to what you grew up on in the 70`s! You did`nt live the music in the 60`s!!!

<Dave>

Re: The Beatles

Post by <Dave> » Thu Sep 19, 2002 1:42 am

Sorry for an antagonising topic, just an opinion, admittidely taken in hindsight. (Wish i had'nt started this now!)

polzer
Momma's Boy
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2002 1:01 am
Location: stockholm

Re: The Beatles

Post by polzer » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:40 am

No matter what you think about The Beatles, imagine what wouldn´t have seen the light of day music wise if it wasn´t for Lennon/McCartney?
So we're all part of some great galaxy<BR>when our moon is coming out<BR>It's not the only one that's meant to be<BR>we're living earth just spinning out in space<BR>In our haste to communicate we've lost the art<BR>We're not the only race to have a heart

man who ate his car
Doctor Doctor
Posts: 508
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 2:01 am
Location: an auto junkyard in the deserts of New Mexico

Re: The Beatles

Post by man who ate his car » Thu Sep 19, 2002 7:17 am

That's alright, Dave. Whenever you discuss a group such as The Beatles, you're always going to have a lot of different opinions. Makes for good discussion. I'll stick with what I posted earlier, I think I summed it up pretty well.
Munched his way to a million hearts as he ate the tires and the spare parts.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests