- 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
The Beatles: does their music hold up?
Posted on 6/28/12 at 10:02 am
Posted on 6/28/12 at 10:02 am
I don't get the fuss. I've given them plenty of tries, but they don't blow my doors off. I don't dislike them, but I've never heard one of their songs and had to put it on repeat for days at a time.
If we're doing a playlist test. Which is how deep can you go on a playlist with a single artist and still lov every song, the Beatles aren't even in my top 50. Hell, top 150.
I even like bands of their same era better than them. I think the Stones are better than the Beatles. I think Led Zeppelin is way way way better than the Beatles. I think the Doors are better than the Beatles. I think Buddy Holly is better than the Beatles. Beach Boys. James Brown. Dylan. Hendrix. These are artists that I can still put their tracks on a playlist and what I'm hearing doesn't sound dated. Even in 2012 it sounds great.
Here is the deal. I'm not the only one. I have met boatloads of people who share my "what's the big deal with the Beatles, anyway?" viewpoint.
I think a statement to the effect that the Beatles music hasn't stood the test of time as well as many of their contemporaries is almost a statement of fact. Good luck finding somebody who can go deeper on a playlist with the Beatles than with Zep. And if they can, what's the ovr/und on when somebody at the party flips it over to a new playlist? about 34.5 seconds?
So here is what I'm asking. I don't care how you respect the Beatles. I don't care to hear you acknowledge how the Beatles influenced other bands. I wanna hear from people who actually like the Beatles solely for their music. In other words, they still listen to it today and listen to it frequently. And I want to hear from the people that share my viewpoint.
Basically, I'd like to know the split of people who actually like the Beatles music, or simply will talk about how great the Beatles were because that is what they think they are supposed to do.
Here is another way of framing it: assume the Beatles were never a famous band. Assume that the Beatles were something akin to Sonic Youth: a band that basically stayed indie forever. With this assumption we're judging them on their music and their music alone. How many of would still be into the Beatles if they had been as popular s Sonic Youth?
Go.
If we're doing a playlist test. Which is how deep can you go on a playlist with a single artist and still lov every song, the Beatles aren't even in my top 50. Hell, top 150.
I even like bands of their same era better than them. I think the Stones are better than the Beatles. I think Led Zeppelin is way way way better than the Beatles. I think the Doors are better than the Beatles. I think Buddy Holly is better than the Beatles. Beach Boys. James Brown. Dylan. Hendrix. These are artists that I can still put their tracks on a playlist and what I'm hearing doesn't sound dated. Even in 2012 it sounds great.
Here is the deal. I'm not the only one. I have met boatloads of people who share my "what's the big deal with the Beatles, anyway?" viewpoint.
I think a statement to the effect that the Beatles music hasn't stood the test of time as well as many of their contemporaries is almost a statement of fact. Good luck finding somebody who can go deeper on a playlist with the Beatles than with Zep. And if they can, what's the ovr/und on when somebody at the party flips it over to a new playlist? about 34.5 seconds?
So here is what I'm asking. I don't care how you respect the Beatles. I don't care to hear you acknowledge how the Beatles influenced other bands. I wanna hear from people who actually like the Beatles solely for their music. In other words, they still listen to it today and listen to it frequently. And I want to hear from the people that share my viewpoint.
Basically, I'd like to know the split of people who actually like the Beatles music, or simply will talk about how great the Beatles were because that is what they think they are supposed to do.
Here is another way of framing it: assume the Beatles were never a famous band. Assume that the Beatles were something akin to Sonic Youth: a band that basically stayed indie forever. With this assumption we're judging them on their music and their music alone. How many of would still be into the Beatles if they had been as popular s Sonic Youth?
Go.
This post was edited on 6/28/12 at 10:32 am
31
Posted on 6/28/12 at 10:09 am to bobbyray21
they have a few tunes that i really enjoy, but i just don't get the love either
there are easily 100+ other bands i personally prefer
there are easily 100+ other bands i personally prefer
Posted on 6/28/12 at 10:09 am to bobbyray21
I am with you here in that now I find their music kind of bland. There aren't any of their songs that would be in my top 20 songs, but as a band, highly respect them though.
Posted on 6/28/12 at 10:12 am to bobbyray21
First, please change your thread title to be more specific.
Something like "Are the Beatles Overrated?"
Second, I love listening to the Beatles music.
They are respected so highly because of the effect they had on music.
This was just as important as the music itself.
Something like "Are the Beatles Overrated?"
Second, I love listening to the Beatles music.
They are respected so highly because of the effect they had on music.
This was just as important as the music itself.
This post was edited on 6/28/12 at 10:13 am
Posted on 6/28/12 at 10:17 am to bobbyray21
I think it's just a matter of you not liking their sound, style, feel, or whatever.
I do enjoy them and go through phases, but I can see people not being wowed by them.
I will add this, sometimes you have to be the first in something (not that they were the first, but you could argue they were the first worldwide band sensation)
I mean they made that volume of music in 7-8 years times, that's insane.
Bands came along and times were changing and people's taste grew more ecclectic (even the beatles wanted out at the end)
But when I think of some of the stuff they were doing on revolver and such I really believe they set a lot of future bands up for greatness
I do enjoy them and go through phases, but I can see people not being wowed by them.
I will add this, sometimes you have to be the first in something (not that they were the first, but you could argue they were the first worldwide band sensation)
I mean they made that volume of music in 7-8 years times, that's insane.
Bands came along and times were changing and people's taste grew more ecclectic (even the beatles wanted out at the end)
But when I think of some of the stuff they were doing on revolver and such I really believe they set a lot of future bands up for greatness
This post was edited on 6/28/12 at 10:22 am
Posted on 6/28/12 at 10:19 am to bobbyray21
I don't consider myself a Beatles fanboy. In fact, I prefer the Stones to the Beatles in almost any kind of comparison.
Having said that, I do enjoy their music. I honestly think I would like them more if they had not gained so much popularity. This is a good example of The Beatles that I enjoy.
Having said that, I do enjoy their music. I honestly think I would like them more if they had not gained so much popularity. This is a good example of The Beatles that I enjoy.
Posted on 6/28/12 at 10:21 am to Hugo Stiglitz
quote:
Something like "Are the Beatles Overrated?"
That isn't exactly what I'm asking, though.
I'll think of something to change it to.
I don't think the beatles music has aged well. All kinds of people under the age of 35 rock out to led zeppelin all the time. I've never ever ever met anybody who listened to the beatles as like "their band". This has to mean something. It means the Beatles weren't as great musically as they are reputationally...or at least I think that's what it means. I'm waiting to hear on the masses.
Posted on 6/28/12 at 10:22 am to bobbyray21
First off Led Zepp, The stones, Hendrix.....ect. were not in the same era. Beatles were from the 60's while those bands you mentioned were from the 70's.
To answer your question, Paul and John were terrific song writers. But as a whole the Beatles were not exceptional musicians. Ringo was a very average drummer and George was also a very average guitar player. Also the methods for recording in the days of the Beatles and some of the other bands mentions made a big difference in the quality of the music.
I do like the melodies in many Beatle songs. I like the stories told. That being said, I'm sure I'd still be a fan of the Beatles had they not been successful. But I can see how some people are not turned on to them.
But the style of music they played in the era they were in will hold weight with many people. You just can't ignore the fact that they laid the brick work down for what is rock today. I'm not saying they invented it, but they were the first to get it out.
To answer your question, Paul and John were terrific song writers. But as a whole the Beatles were not exceptional musicians. Ringo was a very average drummer and George was also a very average guitar player. Also the methods for recording in the days of the Beatles and some of the other bands mentions made a big difference in the quality of the music.
I do like the melodies in many Beatle songs. I like the stories told. That being said, I'm sure I'd still be a fan of the Beatles had they not been successful. But I can see how some people are not turned on to them.
But the style of music they played in the era they were in will hold weight with many people. You just can't ignore the fact that they laid the brick work down for what is rock today. I'm not saying they invented it, but they were the first to get it out.
Posted on 6/28/12 at 10:24 am to bobbyray21
quote:
I don't think the beatles music has aged well. All kinds of people under the age of 35 rock out to led zeppelin all the time. I've never ever ever met anybody who listened to the beatles as like "their band". This has to mean something. It means the Beatles weren't as great musically as they are reputationally...or at least I think that's what it means. I'm waiting to hear on the masses.
you have to remember that someone has to come first, and future bands have the benefit of altering, enhancing, and expanding on their predecessors
This post was edited on 6/28/12 at 10:26 am
Posted on 6/28/12 at 10:26 am to bobbyray21
Didn't read all of this, but I agree with what I did read. I was actually thinking of starting a similar thread but never got around to it. I commend you for standing up. 
I just think the reason they are so popular is that they were the first, so everyone says you have to respect them. Kinda like a reverse Nickelback effect. I have only listened to their popular songs, and I could take it or leave it. I just don't see the appeal that made them SO popular....
I just think the reason they are so popular is that they were the first, so everyone says you have to respect them. Kinda like a reverse Nickelback effect. I have only listened to their popular songs, and I could take it or leave it. I just don't see the appeal that made them SO popular....
Posted on 6/28/12 at 10:30 am to TheEye
quote:
You just can't ignore the fact that they laid the brick work down for what is rock today. I'm not saying they invented it, but they were the first to get it out.
But I'm asking you to. Forget about what they inspired, and just play their music. Does it speak to you? Do you like it? Love it. Eh?
Posted on 6/28/12 at 10:57 am to bobbyray21
quote:
I even like bands of their same era better than them. I think the Stones are better than the Beatles. I think Led Zeppelin is way way way better than the Beatles. I think the Doors are better than the Beatles. I think Buddy Holly is better than the Beatles. Beach Boys. James Brown. Dylan. Hendrix. These are artists that I can still put their tracks on a playlist and what I'm hearing doesn't sound dated. Even in 2012 it sounds great.
I agree with all of this.
What is amazing to me about the Beatles is I like almost every remake of a Beatles' song more than the original. The best example I can think of is the music in Across the Universe. It took the melodies and lyrics of the Beatles and infused good music and singing...the two things the Beatles were lacking.
Posted on 6/28/12 at 11:03 am to bobbyray21
quote:
I don't get the fuss. I've given them plenty of tries, but they don't blow my doors off. I don't dislike them, but I've never heard one of their songs and had to put it on repeat for days at a time.
I feel the same way. You say don't mention how they influenced other bands. I think that is actually the main reason why their music is not as captivating today. It influenced so many other people and so much music that they got outdone by the people they influenced and the music that they changed. I think it's because of how old it is. Fast forward a few years and there's a lot of different music that I love.
I have wanted to start this exact thread for a long time. I never just turn on a beatles song.
If I had never heard the beatles and listened to them right now, I would barely notice them and move on to the next artist. If I did the same with Zeppelin, I would keep listening.
And with all due respect, modern day Paul McCartney fricking sucks. I mean reeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaal bad.
This post was edited on 6/28/12 at 11:13 am
Posted on 6/28/12 at 11:06 am to TheEye
quote:
First off Led Zepp, The stones, Hendrix.....ect. were not in the same era. Beatles were from the 60's while those bands you mentioned were from the 70's.
Waits for Marciano1
This post was edited on 6/28/12 at 11:12 am
Posted on 6/28/12 at 11:12 am to Tds & Beer
quote:
I have wanted to start this exact thread for a long time.
So that's 3 of us
The new opinion of the music board is BEATLES SUCK!!!!
Posted on 6/28/12 at 11:19 am to bobbyray21
before the Beatles you had doowop and surf music.
they changed all that.
personally, I don't listen to much of the early Beatles. But albums like Rubber Soul, Revolver and Abby Road are some of the best music I've ever heard.
they changed all that.
personally, I don't listen to much of the early Beatles. But albums like Rubber Soul, Revolver and Abby Road are some of the best music I've ever heard.
Posted on 6/28/12 at 11:31 am to redneck hippie
Their music holds up to anything being churned out today. Part of the legacy of the Beatles is while continuous crap is streamed out of every major musical orifice their music still shines. Remember the Beatles were as main stream as it gets. The music from Rubber Soul-Abbey Road>>>>than any single bands contribution to popular music since.
Posted on 6/28/12 at 12:13 pm to TheEye
quote:
First off Led Zepp, The stones, Hendrix.....ect. were not in the same era. Beatles were from the 60's while those bands you mentioned were from the 70's.
Stones started in '62. They had at least 4 number one hits in the US in the 60's.
Posted on 6/28/12 at 12:30 pm to Hugo Stiglitz
quote:
They are respected so highly because of the effect they had on music.
This was just as important as the music itself.
For my entertainment? Nah. For music historians, definitely.
Posted on 6/28/12 at 12:33 pm to bobbyray21
Beatles music holds up well
Rap music holds up liquor stores
Rap music holds up liquor stores
Page 1 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News