- 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
Beatles obsession thread
Posted on 11/28/23 at 12:31 pm
Posted on 11/28/23 at 12:31 pm
I've been in a MASSIVE Beatles phase for the past 3-4 months. I've always been a big fan, but this has been next level for some reason. I would like this thread to gather facts/thoughts/info/etc. for those that are like-minded.
Here are the books I've read recently:
Love and Let Die - sort of a parallel history of James Bond and The Beatles
The Last Days of John Lennon - James Patterson book released during the pandemic...can't believe I wasn't aware of this
Love Me Do: The Beatles' Progress - released in 1964
Here, There and Everywhere: My Life Recording The Beatles - written by sound engineer Geoff Emerick from the POV of the studio
Yeah! Yeah! Yeah! - a short book with a very concise view on their impact
George Harrison - The Reluctant Beatle - just came out last month
I've tried to develop a good, holistic sense of the true impact The Beatles had on EVERYTHING, and I think I'm getting there.
ETA: Books I've read since this thread kicked off:
Living the Beatles Legend: The Untold Story of Mal Evans
Ticket to Ride: Inside the Beatles' 1964 and 1965 Tours That Changed the World
Lennon Revealed
Riding So High: The Beatles and Drugs
All You Need Is Love: The Beatles in Their Own Words
With the Beatles
As Time Goes By
The Longest Cocktail Party
Here are the books I've read recently:
Love and Let Die - sort of a parallel history of James Bond and The Beatles
The Last Days of John Lennon - James Patterson book released during the pandemic...can't believe I wasn't aware of this
Love Me Do: The Beatles' Progress - released in 1964
Here, There and Everywhere: My Life Recording The Beatles - written by sound engineer Geoff Emerick from the POV of the studio
Yeah! Yeah! Yeah! - a short book with a very concise view on their impact
George Harrison - The Reluctant Beatle - just came out last month
I've tried to develop a good, holistic sense of the true impact The Beatles had on EVERYTHING, and I think I'm getting there.
ETA: Books I've read since this thread kicked off:
Living the Beatles Legend: The Untold Story of Mal Evans
Ticket to Ride: Inside the Beatles' 1964 and 1965 Tours That Changed the World
Lennon Revealed
Riding So High: The Beatles and Drugs
All You Need Is Love: The Beatles in Their Own Words
With the Beatles
As Time Goes By
The Longest Cocktail Party
This post was edited on 8/20/24 at 6:05 pm
32
Posted on 11/28/23 at 12:36 pm to Big Scrub TX
It's unreal to me how fast it went once it started actually going. They really languished for almost 5 years - with some of them actually taking actual jobs instead of focusing on the band.
It's really ridiculous that they didn't even have much of a UK presence until the summer of 1962. Then, all of 1963, they lived with Beatlemania, with the States and even the rest of Europe completely ignorant or just shrugging.
Ed Sullivan was February 1964 - literally less than 2 years after EMI signed them in June 1962.
Rubber soul was released in December 1965.
Revolver was released in August 1966. Just think about that. Less than 2.5 years after Sullivan, they had changed things at least twice over (and that's completely ignoring, you know, the 3 other albums in the interim!)
It's really ridiculous that they didn't even have much of a UK presence until the summer of 1962. Then, all of 1963, they lived with Beatlemania, with the States and even the rest of Europe completely ignorant or just shrugging.
Ed Sullivan was February 1964 - literally less than 2 years after EMI signed them in June 1962.
Rubber soul was released in December 1965.
Revolver was released in August 1966. Just think about that. Less than 2.5 years after Sullivan, they had changed things at least twice over (and that's completely ignoring, you know, the 3 other albums in the interim!)
Posted on 11/28/23 at 12:38 pm to Big Scrub TX
I now it was the age of singles, but come on: for a band that was renowned for ground-breaking albums, The Beatles' catalogue of non-album singles is truly absurd. I'll pick 5 that will blow your mind - and it will be easy for you to pick 5 (or 10) others that would be equally mind-blowing:
Hey Jude
The Fool on the Hill
She Loves You
Your Mother Should Know
Hello, Goodbye
LINK
Hey Jude
The Fool on the Hill
She Loves You
Your Mother Should Know
Hello, Goodbye
LINK
Posted on 11/28/23 at 2:45 pm to Big Scrub TX
The amount of quality stuff and true studio innovation they put out in such a short time is jaw dropping.
I think from Love Me Do to Let it Be was only 7 years.
I fully believe that they would have reunited in the early 80s if John were still living. What makes it so sad is that from what I have read, John was hungry to tour again and really missing the guys around the time he died. He had booked studio time to record a song with Ringo.
I think from Love Me Do to Let it Be was only 7 years.
I fully believe that they would have reunited in the early 80s if John were still living. What makes it so sad is that from what I have read, John was hungry to tour again and really missing the guys around the time he died. He had booked studio time to record a song with Ringo.
Posted on 11/28/23 at 3:11 pm to Rhio
quote:Yes. Reading all these books, it really stands out to me how willing they were to keep putting in the work despite what their status had become. Even when things got rough between them, they were recording an insane amount.
The amount of quality stuff and true studio innovation they put out in such a short time is jaw dropping.
quote:Yep. Only 6.5!
I think from Love Me Do to Let it Be was only 7 years.
quote:Agreed. I think their middle-age would have given them lots of perspective to heal old wounds - many of which were already beginning to be healed by the time John died.
I fully believe that they would have reunited in the early 80s if John were still living. What makes it so sad is that from what I have read, John was hungry to tour again and really missing the guys around the time he died. He had booked studio time to record a song with Ringo.
I only recently got to watch Get Back, and I was struck by how "normal" they seemed despite the insanity of the situation.
Posted on 11/28/23 at 3:32 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:
It's unreal to me how fast it went once it started actually going. They really languished for almost 5 years - with some of them actually taking actual jobs instead of focusing on the band.
It's really ridiculous that they didn't even have much of a UK presence until the summer of 1962. Then, all of 1963, they lived with Beatlemania, with the States and even the rest of Europe completely ignorant or just shrugging.
Ed Sullivan was February 1964 - literally less than 2 years after EMI signed them in June 1962.
Rubber soul was released in December 1965.
Revolver was released in August 1966. Just think about that. Less than 2.5 years after Sullivan, they had changed things at least twice over (and that's completely ignoring, you know, the 3 other albums in the interim!)
CCR might be even more crazy. They released their first four albums in a 15 month span between summer of 1968 and the fall of 1969. Just insane creative output. I also didn’t know that Creedence was battling the Beatles for most popular band in the world for a time.
Posted on 11/28/23 at 3:35 pm to Big Scrub TX
I lived through it all. Still cannot put my head around the fact that I Want To Hold Your Hand was released in 1964, and A Day In The Life was.........1967. Three years, and yet it sounds/feels like a century apart. Simply astonishing.
Posted on 11/28/23 at 3:53 pm to BigOrangeBri
quote:I love CCR and am fond of quoting the fecundity of their "it" couple of years. On a "let's put out a lot of music quickly" basis, yes, they are right up there. But they didn't really change the world or anything. And the offerings were more or less all of the same type.
CCR might be even more crazy. They released their first four albums in a 15 month span between summer of 1968 and the fall of 1969. Just insane creative output.
quote:It's pretty true, but the Beatles were essentially broken up just a year after CCR's first came out.
I also didn’t know that Creedence was battling the Beatles for most popular band in the world for a time.
Posted on 11/28/23 at 3:55 pm to pmacneworleans
quote:Were you old enough in '64 to have watched Sullivan and known what was going on? If so...please say more!
I lived through it all.
quote:Yeah, it's insane. And Yesterday. Eleanor Rigby. Tomorrow Never Knows. How could ANYONE have predicted in February 1964 that this was just barely over the horizon?
Still cannot put my head around the fact that I Want To Hold Your Hand was released in 1964, and A Day In The Life was.........1967. Three years, and yet it sounds/feels like a century apart. Simply astonishing.
Posted on 11/28/23 at 4:51 pm to Big Scrub TX
the Beatles changed everything and they did it all in less time than most band take between albums or tours
there is no comparison and they have no peers
there is no comparison and they have no peers
Posted on 11/28/23 at 4:58 pm to cgrand
quote:I just don't see any other way to summarize it. It seems like there's a bit of a push to deconstruct their influence, but you just can't.
the Beatles changed everything and they did it all in less time than most band take between albums or tours
there is no comparison and they have no peers
I've really enjoyed discovering some of their catalogue I never paid much attention to. e.g. Ticket to Ride. I think I always just sort of lazily wrote this one off. But it's for real - almost a metal vibe in a way.
She's Leaving Home is a revelation I don't ever remember listening to, despite the fact it's on Pepper's.
Posted on 11/28/23 at 5:21 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:
Were you old enough in '64 to have watched Sullivan and known what was going on? If so...please say more!
Laid on the living room floor, a B&W television with the whole family watching the Ed Sullivan Show....same thing with The Rolling Stones, Herman's Hermits, Petula Clark, The Young Rascals, Eric Burden and the Animals, Steppenwolf, CCR. I watched a lot of early Rock and Roll acts on a B&W television (eventually color TV) watching Ed Sullivan.
Posted on 11/28/23 at 5:54 pm to Bass Tiger
quote:Do you remember it being notable in the moment or was it more just like any other thing?
Laid on the living room floor, a B&W television with the whole family watching the Ed Sullivan Show.
One of the books mentioned that the cast of Oliver! was on Sullivan earlier in that same show...and Davy Jones was in the cast!
Posted on 11/28/23 at 5:56 pm to Big Scrub TX
I love the Beatles. I'm amazed when someone says they don't like them. I just don't get it. But different strokes for different folks I guess.
Posted on 11/28/23 at 6:15 pm to Shanegolang
quote:To me it's crazy to just outright not like them. But even if that's the overall judgment, the output is so varied, it seems hard to believe there's NOTHING to be found of interest.
I love the Beatles. I'm amazed when someone says they don't like them. I just don't get it. But different strokes for different folks I guess.
I'm fascinated at how often they would produce a song as pastiche, only for it to be, essentially, one of the greatest songs ever in that genre. Examples:
Blues - Yer Blues This is definitely one of the greatest blues songs ever written
Louisiana Swamp Rock - Oh, Darling! Seriously, who doesn't like this song?
Folk - pick one of many
Showtune-esque - Your Mother Should Know
Rockabilly - What Goes On
BarrelHouse - Rocky Raccoon
Posted on 11/28/23 at 6:29 pm to Shanegolang
quote:
I'm amazed when someone says they don't like them.
More amazing is the amount of posts on this site that say they were overrated or just a boy band.
SMDH
Posted on 11/28/23 at 7:40 pm to Shanegolang
quote:
I love the Beatles. I'm amazed when someone says they don't like them. I just don't get it. But different strokes for different folks I guess.
It just typically means that person has never sat down and actually listened to them.
Posted on 11/28/23 at 8:09 pm to Big Scrub TX
what blows my mind about them from revolver on is that they wrote and recorded so many classic original songs and then…never played them again
Posted on 11/28/23 at 8:35 pm to cgrand
quote:Yeah, the brevity of their actual touring career is pretty crazy.
what blows my mind about them from revolver on is that they wrote and recorded so many classic original songs and then…never played them again
In reading all these books, it's abundantly clear that touring was brutal. Despite being the most sought after act in the world, they were still basically just mistreated grist in the machine.
Posted on 11/28/23 at 8:35 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:
Ticket to Ride. I think I always just sort of lazily wrote this one off. But it's for real - almost a metal vibe in a way.
This has always been my favorite Beatles song.. I know John also claimed this was the first heavy metal song... I've never really understood that.. but Ive never had the perspective of hearing it for the first time when it was released, relative to what was on the radio at the time..
This post was edited on 11/28/23 at 8:37 pm
Page 1 of 34
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News