[swspiers]

For some reason, this thread has stuck with me since I read it a few days ago.  Maybe I feel I have something to add, which is funny since I consider most threads such as this pointless regarding my participation.  Don't get me wrong- I understand completely that exploring these topics is very important in keeping music alive, but there gets to be a point where it's like comic book fans arguing about which hero is stronger than this one...
 
Anyway, I am really not a Beatles fan.  I have an ambivalence toward them that has mellowed over the years, and I used to be quite obnoxious about it.  I hope I am no longer as obnoxious.  We'll see...
 
I've owned one Beatles album in my 50 years on this planet, and that was the 'White Album'.  Pretty good album.  I remember the exact moment that I never listened to it again.  It was when I bought 'In the Court of the Crimson King' at Peaches records.  From that moment on, the Beatles seemed a bit juvenile to me.  Crimson was this massive what the f___ is this!? for me, and it utterly changed my direction in music. From there my musical journey took off in all sorts of interesting directions, and looking back on it, it was not entirely a waste of time.  I won't bore y'all with the details- that's for other threads.
 
Like I wrote earlier, I used to be quite obnoxious in my disdain for the Fab-Four, and that has tempered a lot over the years.  I have a great respect for them and their accomplishments.  And yes, they have influenced A LOT of bands since then, and most of those bands I simply find more interesting.  But isn't that what made the Beatles great?  They excited a lot of people, from Clapton to Ozzy.  In the end, it was their influence on the times that turned around and made them the icons that they are.  In other words, without all of those other bands riffing on what they got out of the Beatles, the Beatles would have been just another British band. 
 
For the record- Sgt. Pepper would never had been made without Les Paul.
 
Led Zeppelin would have existed even if the Beatles never had- they stole all their stuff from people like Robert Johnson.
 

 

[RUMAY408]

I think the easiest way to check out The Beatles is watching the documentary on Youtube.  Don't skip through and definitely start at the beginning.  I think it will give the scope and depth of what they were about.  2nd from beginning to end go through all their albums.  Commenting on The Beatles without actually listening to them would be like me comparing my T1 with and LCD3 without ever auditioning the LCD3.

 

[tru blu]

Sure, they were overrated…it has to do with the uniqueness and quality of what they were doing at the moment in time it appeared. But since they were also great, it's a bit silly to act as if the actual work is diminished in some way. It really did "change the world", even if the world caught up in a hurry…

 

[RUMAY408]

Quote:

Sure, they were overrated…it has to do with the uniqueness and quality of what they were doing at the moment in time it appeared. But since they were also great, it's a bit silly to act as if the actual work is diminished in some way. It really did "change the world", even if the world caught up in a hurry…

Nice take.  "Can't Buy Me Love" is the best Beatle book I've read that traces the social times and how they influenced The Beatles, and how The Beatles subsequently changed the world around them.  A very detailed and well researched book.  One of the three better Beatle books I've read.  

 

[tru blu]

 
…luv hearing Ringo bash around back there…

 

[RUMAY408]

That's the Washington DC show.  It was the first American show prior to the Sullivan appearance.  The stage they are on was set up for boxing so they would rotate around after each song, to give the fans a chance to see them from every direction. Since this was prior to feedback speakers and IEM's they could literally not hear what they were playing. This show is better than most they were very tight musically at this point and had become accustomed to playing above the screams.  Singing off a single mike was done so they could see and sometimes hear the other primary singer.
 
One of the better recorded concerts of the Beatles.

 

[p a t r i c k]

I think something that is distinctive about The Beatles is how they popularised the idea of dropping out for british youth.
 
The Beatles did not invent dropping out but they did communicate to a great many british youths that this was a good thing to do.
 
If The Beatles has never existed I think that there would still have been british youths dropping out and experimenting with alternative lifestyles, but it would not have been as widespread.
 
The other great thing that enable british youth to drop out of what we would think of as conventionally productive lifestyles, was unemployment benefit of course

 

[duncan1]

Patrick- As someone who lives in Brighton you must have heard of the "Mods+Rockers". There were many clashes in the 60s. The Mods more likely to work in office jobs and the Rockers in engineering factories aka "greasers" As some one who lived in London in the 60s  there were plenty of both there mods with Lambrettas and Vespas. Rockers with  truimph/ bsa/ norton/etc motorcycles. I was in the rocker camp and still have my membership card for the "59 club"and badge. when it was in the North Circular Road.Things did change when the Beatles arrived and followers from both camps followed the Beatles. Although the top Mod group was the Who as they were all Mods at the time. I remember buying my  first baked potato from a stall[portable] at the end of Brighton pier. In the summertime in London it got very hot and not much air everybody went to the seaside resorts . Big queues to get out of London. No shortage of motorbike/scooter shops in London at the time.     

 

[christian u]

  There were many other bands then that were similar to them. They just got more air time and became more famous than the rest.

Which bands?
and which of those bands excelled in so many areas;sound,style,innovation...

 

[Origin89]

  Which bands?
and which of those bands excelled in so many areas;sound,style,innovation...

 
There were plenty of bands doing similar things at that time. I don't feel like typing a list, but you have a computer so I'm sure you know how to surf the net. The Beatles just did it much better and were more innovative within the style they were operating from. 

 

[rmsanger]

I have every Beatles record and highly respect their talent and ability.  I do however enjoy listening to music by the Zombies over the Beatles any day of the week.  I also can understand that they are technically an inferior but just enjoy their music more.

 

[Iann]

So then, would you care to kindly DEFINE "rock" and also DEFINE "pop" for us?

 

[Iann]

So then, would you kindly care to DEFINE the word "rock" and the word "pop" for us?

 

[Iann]

The Beatles were mainly talented SONGWRITERS and COMPOSERS, probably among the best in "rock/pop" music at that time period and still some of the best from a historical perspective. But this oafus makes allot of their PLAYING, .. . well they were ADEQUATE at THAT.

 

[Iann]

  They were very mediocre musicians who wrote very catchy tunes. I'm a big Rock n Roll guy, who played the guitar for years, and I don't own 1 Beatles album because their instrumental ability was nothing inspiring to me. I do like several of their songs, but I always looked at them as bubblegum pop. I don't want to take too much away from them, as they were inspirational to many. However, when I think Rock, I don't think of the The Beatles.... I think Led Zeppelin. 

So it sounds like to YOU there exist only TWO kinds of music, .. . "Rock n Roll" or "bubblegum pop", one or the other? And "mediocre musicians" ( by the way, I'd deffinitely call that "taking away from them" ), fpor ****s sake!! .. just WHAT do musicians have to do to impress YOU anyway? . . play jam sessions with their dicks while simultaniously juggling??