Started By
Message

re: Talking about hate, what is the cause for Nickleback hate?

Posted on 4/6/12 at 12:59 pm to
Posted by GrizzlePickle
Baton Rouge
Member since Apr 2011
1791 posts
Posted on 4/6/12 at 12:59 pm to
quote:

but the Beatles....seriously?


Yep... Way overrated IMO

quote:

The Beatles had no genuine thought or complexity?


I was definitely drunk and reaching when I typed that last night. However, IMHO I feel the Beatles are WAYYYYY overrated. They did have a few gems in their catalog such as "Eleanor Rigby", "While my Guitar Gently Weeps", and "A Day In the Life", but mostly, I don't feel their music was all that complex musically or lyrically. I feel that what complexity they did have came primarily from George Martin (their producer). Without him and the massive marketing machine that surrounded them, they may not have ever climbed out of obscurity to be able to write the kind of music they did later. Also, the fact that they were a studio band that did not perform live concerts past their early years suggests to me that they had plenty of time to contemplate their music. And despite doing just that, I feel it could've and should've been better.

On the subject of their "genuine" thoughts... In the early years, there wasn't much in the way of anything genuine. Toward the later years, given more leeway by their label, they did experiment... poorly. Other bands of their era, like the Stones, Led Zep, Pink Floyd, et al, were much more effective and listenable with their experimentation. Also, it seemed that their music got worse depending on how much of an LSD/weed haze hung over it.

As far as talent goes... George Harrison was easily the most talented member, musician, and songwriter in the group, but we was a poor improvisational guitarist. Ringo sucked. Paul and John were good (not great) singers, songwriters, and musicians at best.

quote:

Yeah, I guess revolutionizing rock n roll and pop music forever wasn't enough for you.


The only revolutionary accomplishments they provided IMO were writing their own music (and getting their label to sign off on it), and perfecting the mass media marketing machine. Both of these would have happened regardless by somebody else if the Beatles never came about. In the case of the latter, they didn't invent it; it was already in place for the likes of Sinatra and Elvis (who were both genuinely awesome). They simply perfected it and made themselves ubiquitous.

By the way, I do own all of their albums on vinyl and mp3 (ripped from cd's). I do listen to the Beatles. I do respect the Beatles as being one of the most popular bands of their time. I just don't subscribe to the overwhelming school of thought that they were the greatest band ever.I feel that they sold their albums the same way the Nicklebacks, Brittneys, Beibers, and Minaj's of today do... Via appealing to the masses that will buy into any hype that's thrown at them. I feel that they were good for what I see them as; a better than average pop-rock band.

The great thing about music is the subjectivity of it. To each his own.
This post was edited on 4/6/12 at 1:07 pm
Posted by RogerTheShrubber
Juneau, AK
Member since Jan 2009
262450 posts
Posted on 4/6/12 at 1:08 pm to
quote:


The great thing about music is the subjectivity of it. To each his own.


Agree. Nickleback is a sugary rock/pop band and there is much worse out there. The bashing has become the popular thing to do, so people do it. Overrating the Beatles seems to be very popular as well IMO.

Subjective stuff means it will be different to everyone and neither The Beatles or Nicleback are my thing, and both are either overrated/overstated IMO. One is overrated, one is overstated as "the worst.
This post was edited on 4/6/12 at 1:10 pm
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram