- 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: The Beatles: does their music hold up?
Posted on 6/29/12 at 4:24 am to Freauxzen
Posted on 6/29/12 at 4:24 am to Freauxzen
quote:
Yes they do, but they are easily thrown aside for two reasons:
1) It's impossible to live up to the legacy. Impossible. Nothing is the best ever, simple as that. The more the Beatles fans push, the more people push back.
2) Their attachment to culture makes them undiscovered for anyone. And try as we might, music is partially about FINDING something we CONNECT with. That's hard to do when...well, see #1.
These are good points.
0
Posted on 6/29/12 at 4:34 am to Dr. 3
quote:
No one says the Beatles for the sake of it.
Yeah, they sort of do. Most people are sheep. Every rock n roll list they've ever seen has The Beatles at the top. These magazines can't all be wrong, think the sheep. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
They've done studies on this sort of thing: LINK
Luckily I'm not much of a sheep. I ask the hard-hitting questions like "hold up, are The Beatles actually any good?"
Posted on 6/29/12 at 7:29 am to bobbyray21
I think you confuse..
With your opinion. Look YOU may think the Beatles aren't any good. That is fine. Some bands are listed all the time with GOAT discussions because they are that good.
They are still damned good today and for the time they were writing music that people would copy for years. They were talented enough to overcome being a "boy band" and become musical royalty. That is not that easy.
To dismiss them is like dismissing Bluegrass music as "shite". May not be a style I like to listen to but I can appreciate that it is some damned hard music to play. Same with Beatles when you take into account their vocals, ability on their instruments, and writing!!! C'mon???
I like the Stones more. I LOVE Zepplin. Hell I RELATE to Pearl Jam more due to my age and graduating HS in 1991. But I know the Beatles are damned good and need to be in any GOAT discussion.
While they are not MY favorite I CANNOT make an intelligent argument against them.
quote:
hard-hitting questions
With your opinion. Look YOU may think the Beatles aren't any good. That is fine. Some bands are listed all the time with GOAT discussions because they are that good.
They are still damned good today and for the time they were writing music that people would copy for years. They were talented enough to overcome being a "boy band" and become musical royalty. That is not that easy.
To dismiss them is like dismissing Bluegrass music as "shite". May not be a style I like to listen to but I can appreciate that it is some damned hard music to play. Same with Beatles when you take into account their vocals, ability on their instruments, and writing!!! C'mon???
I like the Stones more. I LOVE Zepplin. Hell I RELATE to Pearl Jam more due to my age and graduating HS in 1991. But I know the Beatles are damned good and need to be in any GOAT discussion.
While they are not MY favorite I CANNOT make an intelligent argument against them.
Posted on 6/29/12 at 7:37 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.
Wrong
Posted on 6/29/12 at 7:49 am to TheDoc
To answer the OP's question, I believe their music holds up and here's why..
I work/teach music to people of all ages and I swear that when I play songs like get back, daytripper, hey jude, let it be on my guitar about 8 out of every 10 students recognize the music. Young or old.
I think the reemergence of the Beatles because of Beatles rockband and the fact that apple made a big deal about them being on itunes has turned on many new fans from this generation. So in that respect, I definitely think the music holds up (for the most part) and is actually relevant to today.
I work/teach music to people of all ages and I swear that when I play songs like get back, daytripper, hey jude, let it be on my guitar about 8 out of every 10 students recognize the music. Young or old.
I think the reemergence of the Beatles because of Beatles rockband and the fact that apple made a big deal about them being on itunes has turned on many new fans from this generation. So in that respect, I definitely think the music holds up (for the most part) and is actually relevant to today.
This post was edited on 6/29/12 at 7:50 am
Posted on 6/29/12 at 7:56 am to StarSaint
I don't care for the Beatles. Sure, some songs are nice such as Yesterday and Let It Be, but for the most part I find them very boring. I mean, Yellow Submarines was a number one hit and that song is awful. Just goes to show how the following outgrew the music because of who they were ... Not what they did. Which I feel is what's going on today.
I much prefer the Stones or Led Zepp.
I much prefer the Stones or Led Zepp.
Posted on 6/29/12 at 8:19 am to bobbyray21
first off, of course every discussion about whether a particular band is "good" or not is completely subjective.
i think the OP is just trying to say that he doesnt see why the beatles are regarded as gods so much more than say, the stones or zeppelin.
i often ask myself the same question. i think the real answer is that their music is much more accessable. it's "pop" as much as any music can be "pop", and a lot of it is very easy to listen to. that being said, there are also some pretty cool songs that are a deeper and less poppy. Happiness is a Warm Gun and Day in the Life spring to mind. there is no doubt that the beatles collection of music is extensive and varied.
i still don't see why everyone slobs all over their knobs all day. you don't see the same unquestioning adulation for zep or the stones or the who or ANYone for that matter.
personally i have listened to Rocky Raccoon, Happiness is a Warm Gun on repeat, and i've tried a couple of their albums (Sgt Peppers and the White Album) but i could never get into it like i've gotten into Led Zeppelin 1, 2, & 4, Lonesome Crowded West, Pearl Jam VS, The Strokes first two albums, the Yeah Yeah Yeahs, Aeroplane Over the Sea, Radiohead #'s 2, 3, &4. the beatles just don't do it for me.
i know they were infinitely creative and all that crap, and they deserve a lot of credit for it, and maybe their music just isn't for me.
but i also don't understand why they are held in higher regard than anyone else ever.
i think the OP is just trying to say that he doesnt see why the beatles are regarded as gods so much more than say, the stones or zeppelin.
i often ask myself the same question. i think the real answer is that their music is much more accessable. it's "pop" as much as any music can be "pop", and a lot of it is very easy to listen to. that being said, there are also some pretty cool songs that are a deeper and less poppy. Happiness is a Warm Gun and Day in the Life spring to mind. there is no doubt that the beatles collection of music is extensive and varied.
i still don't see why everyone slobs all over their knobs all day. you don't see the same unquestioning adulation for zep or the stones or the who or ANYone for that matter.
personally i have listened to Rocky Raccoon, Happiness is a Warm Gun on repeat, and i've tried a couple of their albums (Sgt Peppers and the White Album) but i could never get into it like i've gotten into Led Zeppelin 1, 2, & 4, Lonesome Crowded West, Pearl Jam VS, The Strokes first two albums, the Yeah Yeah Yeahs, Aeroplane Over the Sea, Radiohead #'s 2, 3, &4. the beatles just don't do it for me.
i know they were infinitely creative and all that crap, and they deserve a lot of credit for it, and maybe their music just isn't for me.
but i also don't understand why they are held in higher regard than anyone else ever.
Posted on 6/29/12 at 8:22 am to LSU alum wannabe
quote:
With your opinion. Look YOU may think the Beatles aren't any good. That is fine. Some bands are listed all the time with GOAT discussions because they are that good.
They are still damned good today and for the time they were writing music that people would copy for years. They were talented enough to overcome being a "boy band" and become musical royalty. That is not that easy.
To dismiss them is like dismissing Bluegrass music as "shite". May not be a style I like to listen to but I can appreciate that it is some damned hard music to play. Same with Beatles when you take into account their vocals, ability on their instruments, and writing!!! C'mon???
I like the Stones more. I LOVE Zepplin. Hell I RELATE to Pearl Jam more due to my age and graduating HS in 1991. But I know the Beatles are damned good and need to be in any GOAT discussion.
While they are not MY favorite I CANNOT make an intelligent argument against them.
You're getting needlessly defensive, dude. I'm not saying The Beatles suck. I wouldn't start a thread to say the beatles suck. First of all, I don't think they suck. Second of all, a "beatles suck" thread would be stupid and an epic fail. I mean, I hate Nickelback probably more than you've ever hated anything, and I don't go around starting "nickelback sucks" threads.
Here is what I'm saying.
1. The Beatles were long ago crowned as the best band of all time. If there is a list of best bands -- and there are many -- it will have The Beatles at the very top.
2. The Beatles' music doesn't blow my doors off. And I don't do preconceived notions: I gave them a fair shake.
3. Other music from that time period does blow my doors off. A lot of it. I even like a lot of Buddy Holly's stuff, which is pre-Beatles.
4. I don't know anybody who is big into The Beatles.
5. I do know people who are big into various bands that are before their time. Led Zep is of coure a major one that remains popular today, and so that is the easiest example, but it isn't the only one.
6. I'm a fairly sociable person, I live in a large city, and I LOVE music and talking about music.
7. The Beatles' music is not at all pervasive in pop culture. I don't hear their songs in movies. Or on advertisements. I don't hear it being blasted into bars. I don't hear it at house parties. I've never in my life heard a person playing the beatles in their car.
8. Other older music is quite pervasive in pop culture. Examples available upon request.
9. The items mentioned above would tend to suggest The Beatles' music has not aged nearly as well as music made by their contemporaries.
Question 1: do you mr. poster agree or disagree with item #9.
Question 2: if you agree, then why have The Beatles remained pedestalized as the greatest band ever?
Discuss
I think it's an interesting topic for discussion. The fact that several people posted that they had thought about starting a thread similar to this leads me to believe that the questions being raised are completely reasonable.
This post was edited on 6/29/12 at 8:23 am
Posted on 6/29/12 at 8:26 am to gorillacoco
quote:
first off, of course every discussion about whether a particular band is "good" or not is completely subjective.
i think the OP is just trying to say that he doesnt see why the beatles are regarded as gods so much more than say, the stones or zeppelin.
i often ask myself the same question. i think the real answer is that their music is much more accessable. it's "pop" as much as any music can be "pop", and a lot of it is very easy to listen to. that being said, there are also some pretty cool songs that are a deeper and less poppy. Happiness is a Warm Gun and Day in the Life spring to mind. there is no doubt that the beatles collection of music is extensive and varied.
i still don't see why everyone slobs all over their knobs all day. you don't see the same unquestioning adulation for zep or the stones or the who or ANYone for that matter.
personally i have listened to Rocky Raccoon, Happiness is a Warm Gun on repeat, and i've tried a couple of their albums (Sgt Peppers and the White Album) but i could never get into it like i've gotten into Led Zeppelin 1, 2, & 4, Lonesome Crowded West, Pearl Jam VS, The Strokes first two albums, the Yeah Yeah Yeahs, Aeroplane Over the Sea, Radiohead #'s 2, 3, &4. the beatles just don't do it for me.
i know they were infinitely creative and all that crap, and they deserve a lot of credit for it, and maybe their music just isn't for me.
but i also don't understand why they are held in higher regard than anyone else ever.
Well put
Posted on 6/29/12 at 8:30 am to Spaulding Smails
quote:I wanted to vomit when I heard Zep on commercials for Cadillac. Talk about selling out.
How mad would you be if I told you Zeppelin sucks, and I don't think there music holds up? Taking all your criteria about regardless of spawning other genres and styles? Then I told you that Zeppelin makes my ears bleed and that they are very bland. I can't listen to their songs on my ipod all day/ The Doors, the beatles, Stones, Hendrix are all better than Zeppelin? These are all my statements, so everyone is wrong. That's what you are doing.
Posted on 6/29/12 at 8:37 am to LSU alum wannabe
quote:
I like the Stones more. I LOVE Zepplin. Hell I RELATE to Pearl Jam more due to my age and graduating HS in 1991. But I know the Beatles are damned good and need to be in any GOAT discussion.
(Instead of writing that long post, I should have responded to you like this.)
I think what you're saying in the above is pretty common. And if we assume for the sake of argument that it is in fact very common, then why are The Beatles still pedestalized as the best band ever?
Are they famous solely for their music? Or are they famous for being famous?
Posted on 6/29/12 at 8:38 am to Poodlebrain
quote:
I wanted to vomit when I heard Zep on commercials for Cadillac. Talk about selling out.
Drugs ain't free.*
*I actually have no idea whether those guys still do drugs.
Posted on 6/29/12 at 8:45 am to bobbyray21
The Beatles are music legends and will forever be seen as such. They are up there with the likes of Bach.
Bands like Pearl Jam on the other hand will be forgotten about in 60 years.
Bands like Pearl Jam on the other hand will be forgotten about in 60 years.
This post was edited on 6/29/12 at 8:46 am
Posted on 6/29/12 at 8:45 am to bobbyray21
quote:
1. The Beatles were long ago crowned as the best band of all time. If there is a list of best bands -- and there are many -- it will have The Beatles at the very top.
Musical tastes are opinionated. Everyone has different tastes. They are usually at the top of the lists because their impact on culture went beyond music. The recording techniques, the creation of the music video, the mop top hair. Making a lists of "best-sounding band" is different from "greatest". They are without the most influential band of all time, and that's why they top these lists.
quote:
2. The Beatles' music doesn't blow my doors off. And I don't do preconceived notions: I gave them a fair shake.
They don't usually. They weren't great technical musicians by any means. But notice, you said they don't blow YOUR doors off. Again, opinionated.
quote:
3. Other music from that time period does blow my doors off. A lot of it. I even like a lot of Buddy Holly's stuff, which is pre-Beatles.
Cool. I like The Beatles more than Buddy Holly. So do a lot of people. Opinions.
quote:
4. I don't know anybody who is big into The Beatles.
Cool again. I do.
quote:
5. I do know people who are big into various bands that are before their time. Led Zep is of coure a major one that remains popular today, and so that is the easiest example, but it isn't the only one.
I do too. I know people who are big into Zeppelin. And I know people big into the Beatles. I don't see how you not knowing any HUGE Beatles fan is moving the discussion along.
quote:
6. I'm a fairly sociable person, I live in a large city, and I LOVE music and talking about music.
quote:
7. The Beatles' music is not at all pervasive in pop culture. I don't hear their songs in movies. Or on advertisements. I don't hear it being blasted into bars. I don't hear it at house parties. I've never in my life heard a person playing the beatles in their car.
Well you must not get out much. I've heard "Good Day Sunshine" and "All You Need is Love" both on commercials within the last week. I always hear their songs on the radio. Their catalog is pretty expensive if you didn't know. It's not like you can just hand over a few hundred bucks to use their music.
quote:
8. Other older music is quite pervasive in pop culture. Examples available upon request.
Cool again. You think perhaps these film companies, commercials, etc. thought it might be cheaper to use other music besides the Beatles?
quote:
9. The items mentioned above would tend to suggest The Beatles' music has not aged nearly as well as music made by their contemporaries.
I don't see how. "Hey, I don't hear Beatles on tv so they must of not aged well".
From 2000-2010, a time where kids who's parents weren't even born when the Beatles broke up, a time when there was an emergence of downloadable music and just an overall easier access to music, a Beatles' compilation album outsold every album. A BILLION records sold. That's nearly 1/6th of the world's population owning a Beatles record.
Posted on 6/29/12 at 8:46 am to GeorgeTheGreek
Well you're talking about a band with 2 prolific songwriters and over 25 number 1 hits.
Their songs on white album, abbey road, rubber soul and let it be are classics.
The songs are still relevant. But it's now cool to hate the Beatles apparently
Their songs on white album, abbey road, rubber soul and let it be are classics.
The songs are still relevant. But it's now cool to hate the Beatles apparently
Posted on 6/29/12 at 9:05 am to TheDoc
Well i've always disliked the beatles, honestly. I never understood the fascination since i was young.
No doubt they had a ton of #1 hits and so i don't disagree with them being GOAT. That fact doesn't bother me.
They just aren't for me. I don't care for them. I wish people could understand how much i dislike them as much as i understand why people do like them.
No doubt they had a ton of #1 hits and so i don't disagree with them being GOAT. That fact doesn't bother me.
They just aren't for me. I don't care for them. I wish people could understand how much i dislike them as much as i understand why people do like them.
Posted on 6/29/12 at 9:37 am to GeorgeTheGreek
It's been discussed on here many times. Great technical players don't necessarily equate to great music/songs. The Beatles were not great technical players as has been mentioned already. What they did do, was experiment and move in many different directions with their music. Most of this was completely new ground at the time. Some songs were great, some were meh. That's what happens when you experiment.
The thing you need to remember most, is that their catalog is so varied, it's accessible to almost any musical tastes. Maybe not all, but there is something for just about everyone. My mom and dad have very different musical tastes. But they both can listen to the Beatles because the music is so varied. Growing up, I heard mostly the songs from a greatest hits album my dad had and thought it was pretty good stuff. Then I listened to their albums later and found stuff that I really connected to.
I think they are great. They are not my favorite. You asked a question, does their music hold up? I say yes, if you don't want other people's opinions then don't start the thread.
The thing you need to remember most, is that their catalog is so varied, it's accessible to almost any musical tastes. Maybe not all, but there is something for just about everyone. My mom and dad have very different musical tastes. But they both can listen to the Beatles because the music is so varied. Growing up, I heard mostly the songs from a greatest hits album my dad had and thought it was pretty good stuff. Then I listened to their albums later and found stuff that I really connected to.
I think they are great. They are not my favorite. You asked a question, does their music hold up? I say yes, if you don't want other people's opinions then don't start the thread.
Posted on 6/29/12 at 10:27 am to GeorgeTheGreek
quote:
They just aren't for me. I don't care for them. I wish people could understand how much i dislike them as much as i understand why people do like them.
I feel the same way about pearl jam
The fricking bane of my Existence
Posted on 6/29/12 at 11:10 am to Loubacca
quote:
The Beatles were not great technical players as has been mentioned already. What they did do, was experiment and move in many different directions with their music. Most of this was completely new ground at the time. Some songs were great, some were meh. That's what happens when you experiment. The thing you need to remember most, is that their catalog is so varied, it's accessible to almost any musical tastes. Maybe not all, but there is something for just about everyone.
For me, Paul McCartney is a great bass player.
Not every Beatles album has the same appeal (particularly some of the early ones) but they have a whole lot of music that is absolutely timeless. Took me a very long time to realize this, although I always considered them the most important/influential band of all time.
Posted on 6/29/12 at 11:35 am to Poodlebrain
quote:
I wanted to vomit when I heard Zep on commercials for Cadillac. Talk about selling out.
I am not sure why anyone considers making money off of music "selling out." All music is commercial to some extent.
Page 4 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News