- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Are the Beatles overrated?
Posted on 6/9/14 at 7:29 pm to MrFreakinMiyagi
Posted on 6/9/14 at 7:29 pm to MrFreakinMiyagi
I'm of the view that music evaluation is basically 100% subjective, but my point here is objectively based. I wish it were to easier to compartmentalize subjectivity and objectivity in a discussion of music. It isn't. They bleed over.
But what I'm talking about here is the music. Relevancy and influence are broad terms. Think about the two just in terms of the music. Pretend that Beatlemania never happened. Pretend that the Beatles' catalog was actually written by an indie band named "Sanchez Foghorn" that hipsters don't even know about yet. Now listen to that catalog. Is Sanchez Foghorn a great band? Will they ever make it big?
ETA: I have no idea why 'Sanchez Foghorn' popped in my head, but I'm pretty proud that it did.
But what I'm talking about here is the music. Relevancy and influence are broad terms. Think about the two just in terms of the music. Pretend that Beatlemania never happened. Pretend that the Beatles' catalog was actually written by an indie band named "Sanchez Foghorn" that hipsters don't even know about yet. Now listen to that catalog. Is Sanchez Foghorn a great band? Will they ever make it big?
ETA: I have no idea why 'Sanchez Foghorn' popped in my head, but I'm pretty proud that it did.
2
Posted on 6/9/14 at 7:54 pm to Kafka
quote:
Sanchez Foghorn
Would listen.
Posted on 6/9/14 at 8:01 pm to Kafka
quote:
I'm of the view that music evaluation is basically 100% subjective, but my point here is objectively based. I wish it were to easier to compartmentalize subjectivity and objectivity in a discussion of music. It isn't. They bleed over. But what I'm talking about here is the music. Relevancy and influence are broad terms. Think about the two just in terms of the music. Pretend that Beatlemania never happened. Pretend that the Beatles' catalog was actually written by an indie band named "Sanchez Foghorn" that hipsters don't even know about yet. Now listen to that catalog. Is Sanchez Foghorn a great band? Will they ever make it big?
This is pretty deep. I think from what I have heard that the Beatles were pretty good. "A day in life" I have heard and think its the Beatles best effort.
Posted on 6/9/14 at 8:34 pm to MusicMaster
Take the Sanchez Foghorn test. Use that as your guide to determine pedestalization appropriateness.
Posted on 6/9/14 at 8:58 pm to Kafka
I respect what the Beatles did and how they were pioneers blah blah.
But damn, they are a boring listen.
JMO.
But damn, they are a boring listen.
JMO.
Posted on 6/9/14 at 9:34 pm to SaintlyTiger88
Beatles are very hit or miss with me. When they're good, they're very, very good. When they're bad, it's cringe inducing with me.
The answer is no, they're not overrated.
Even if you ignore their massive popularity and influence, they did some pretty innovative things in recording. They're also one of the few bands (I can't even really think of another off of the top of my head) that did experimental pop. That's a special thing to be able to continually try new things while keeping your mass appeal.
The answer is no, they're not overrated.
Even if you ignore their massive popularity and influence, they did some pretty innovative things in recording. They're also one of the few bands (I can't even really think of another off of the top of my head) that did experimental pop. That's a special thing to be able to continually try new things while keeping your mass appeal.
Posted on 6/9/14 at 9:36 pm to Patrick O Rly
sanchezfoghorn.com
This has LOADS of possibilities. Really.
This has LOADS of possibilities. Really.
Posted on 6/9/14 at 9:38 pm to Patrick O Rly
quote:
When they're bad, it's cringe inducing with me.
Examples?
I think they´re a great band, but also think they´re overrated, BTW.
Posted on 6/9/14 at 9:43 pm to Dandy Lion
quote:
Examples?
Imagine.
I think the melody is too redundant during the verses. I hate the lyrics. To me it's a self-righteous pissing contest. Hippy-dippy BS.
If anything, I'd say Lennon was overrated and Harrison was massively underrated.
Posted on 6/9/14 at 9:46 pm to Patrick O Rly
Imagine is John Lennon, not the Beatles.
Posted on 6/9/14 at 9:49 pm to Dandy Lion
Oh yeah, that's right.
Yellow Submarine?
Idk. All I know is I either really the song or I'll skip right over it.
Yellow Submarine?
Idk. All I know is I either really the song or I'll skip right over it.
Posted on 6/9/14 at 9:52 pm to Patrick O Rly
quote:
Yellow Submarine?
Maxell´s Silver Hammer
Ob la di, ob la da
There are more, but they don´t come to mind. Their whimsical, nonsensical stuff is pretty popular, however.
Posted on 6/9/14 at 10:02 pm to Dandy Lion
quote:
Maxell´s Silver Hammer
Ob la di, ob la da
Great examples of why McCartney wrote the music and Lennon wrote the lyrics.
That said, those who didn't experience the phenomenon first hand will always have a hard time understanding the extent of the impact those guys had. They were, without a doubt, the most innovative band of the modern era.
Posted on 6/10/14 at 5:33 am to TinCupTiger
quote:
I certainly respect what they've done but there is not even one song by them that I like. Just not my style.
Jesus. Not even Hey Jude? Who doesn't like Hey Jude?
Posted on 6/10/14 at 5:40 am to Azranod
quote:
But, their music had no real soul touching depth, and has no lasting effect to it. There is not one Beatles song that I would ever download onto my phone, and on my phone I've got...Smash Mouth
Come on man. I can see why someone might dislike the Beatles. But fricking Smash Mouth?
Posted on 6/10/14 at 8:07 am to northshorebamaman
Lol youve got smash mouth on a device. Your opinion/life is invalid.
Posted on 6/10/14 at 8:11 am to JumpingTheShark
quote:
Because, overall, the Stones had much more filler music.
Since 1980 maybe...they didn't have a lot of "filler" before then.
This post was edited on 6/10/14 at 8:16 am
Posted on 6/10/14 at 9:53 am to SaintlyTiger88
The Beatles are objectively great IMO, but for whatever reason I don't really listen to their songs. It's not just because they're classic rock songs I've heard a thousand times either. I feel the same way about Radiohead.
Posted on 6/10/14 at 10:16 am to SaintlyTiger88
Based on what I've heard John Lennon say during many interviews, his answer, IMHO, would be YES.
But, his reason would be that media and fandom had elevated The Beatles into some kind of god-like, Olympian Greatness that was way overboard.
The Beatles hype was pumped so hard and for so long that, for some, it is inevitable to feel that they are over-rated.
But, his reason would be that media and fandom had elevated The Beatles into some kind of god-like, Olympian Greatness that was way overboard.
The Beatles hype was pumped so hard and for so long that, for some, it is inevitable to feel that they are over-rated.
This post was edited on 6/10/14 at 10:28 am
Posted on 6/10/14 at 10:31 am to Patrick O Rly
Sanchez Foghorn sounds like a second-wave southern rock band.
This post was edited on 6/10/14 at 10:35 am
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News