Unpopular Music Opinions (lyrics, rock, beatles, pink floyd, neil young) - Music Banter Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > The Music Forums > General Music
Register Blogging Today's Posts
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-24-2008, 03:26 PM   #1191 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy jack fire drill View Post
Who else sounded like the Beatles?
Nobody - they had their own sound, but they didn't invent either the styles or ideas they experimented with - which is unfortunately what various corners of the music fan community, in a state of denial, wish to assert.
Rainard Jalen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2008, 03:27 PM   #1192 (permalink)
isfckingdead
 
sleepy jack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 18,967
Default

Did they sound like their underground counterparts they supposedly ripped off?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by METALLICA89 View Post
Ive seen you on muiltipul forums saying Metallica and slayer are the worst **** you kid go suck your **** while you listen to your ****ing emo **** I bet you do listen to emo music
sleepy jack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2008, 03:32 PM   #1193 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy jack fire drill View Post
Did they sound like their underground counterparts they supposedly ripped off?
Crikey, I'm not claiming they ripped off the underground. I'm just saying that virtually everything they did was inspired by other ideas of the time. No doubt, whatever they took, they made their own and unmistakenly crafted it into the Beatles, fashioning their own sound out of it. And besides, of course they'd never sounded like their inspirations - The Beatles' overwhelming focus remained melody and pop, while the other bands were trying to do the exact opposite.

So it's not a claim against their credibility, but against those who try to assert that they invented all of their ideas organically and were therefore the great innovators of the rock era - which they were not. They were the greatest songwriters of the rock era...
Rainard Jalen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2008, 03:42 PM   #1194 (permalink)
isfckingdead
 
sleepy jack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 18,967
Default

I don't know anyone who claims everything they did came from their own heads but its how they did that makes them the most important band ever and if you deny that then you're the one in denial not everyone else.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by METALLICA89 View Post
Ive seen you on muiltipul forums saying Metallica and slayer are the worst **** you kid go suck your **** while you listen to your ****ing emo **** I bet you do listen to emo music
sleepy jack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2008, 05:20 PM   #1195 (permalink)
Back to mono
 
WaspStar's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 509
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy jack fire drill View Post
I was speaking purely of lyrical content, I love the song but someone had said if you took away Dylan's lyrics you wouldn't have anything that could stand on it's own but lets face it Dylan wrote some pretty crap lyrics in some pretty amazing songs.

I'll agree that some great Dylan songs have some pretty bad lines ("jeeze, I can't find my knees" comes to mind), but a lot of Dylan can be enjoyed without necessarily listening to the lyrics. As someone said, HW61 and BOB are enjoyable on a purely musical level. So are Nashville Skyline, New Morning, Planet Waves, Desire, and a few others. None are innovative, but so what? There's a special feeling to albums like Nashville Skyline that's just as meaningful as the lyrics to Desolation Row. Dylan's main strength may be as a lyricist, but it's definitely not his only virtue. Listen to Live 66; Dylan had a voice to match any rocker.
WaspStar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2008, 05:29 PM   #1196 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy jack fire drill View Post
I don't know anyone who claims everything they did came from their own heads but its how they did that makes them the most important band ever and if you deny that then you're the one in denial not everyone else.
Seriously dude, I just don't know. The Beatles are my favourite band ever, but I cannot help thinking that there was probably very little that they really innovated into rock music.

And then there are other niggling little things that nag at me, like the huge importance of George Martin to their ingenious arrangements, and just how much he really was responsible for getting the clever things done......and also the point that they had so much more studio time and state of the art equipment/engineers at their disposal etc.

I think they're the best band ever, but I don't think they were anything like the most important. You could probably blot them out of the book of music history without that causing much of a difference to the development of rock music on the whole. Like I said, I reckon they were pretty retro overall, with their real roots in the 40s/50s, not the late 60s.

I think ultimately if somebody's going to say they were the most innovative band of the rock era, they should be able to bring some substantial justification. It is necessary to show what they innovated and what they influenced. For too long people just make these blanket statements without caring to explain why. I used to say and think those things and then realized that I couldn't justify it and neither could I find anybody else who could. So I became content to love the Beatles just for what they were instead.
Rainard Jalen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2008, 05:32 PM   #1197 (permalink)
isfckingdead
 
sleepy jack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 18,967
Default

Yeah but if someone's going to claim you could erase the Beatles from rock history and nothing would be changed don't you think they should provide evidence as well? You've given nothing concrete at all just a few guesses at all and you even contradict yourself, you say they were just stealing from underground bands that were around at the same time then turn around and say their roots were in the 50s and 40s? Maybe you should get your own accusations straight before you make them.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by METALLICA89 View Post
Ive seen you on muiltipul forums saying Metallica and slayer are the worst **** you kid go suck your **** while you listen to your ****ing emo **** I bet you do listen to emo music
sleepy jack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2008, 05:45 PM   #1198 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy jack fire drill View Post
Yeah but if someone's going to claim you could erase the Beatles from rock history and nothing would be changed don't you think they should provide evidence as well? You've given nothing concrete at all just a few guesses at all and you even contradict yourself, you say they were just stealing from underground bands that were around at the same time then turn around and say their roots were in the 50s and 40s? Maybe you should get your own accusations straight before you make them.
I didn't say they stole from the underground, this is about influence. They took on and adapted both obscure and popular styles of the times. As for their roots being in the 40s and 50s, by that I'm referring to their focus on melody and song. So basically, putting the two claims together, I'm saying that they took the new emerging styles of the 60s but with the twist of putting them into their own retro pop format.

About being able to erase them from history, I say that because if you look at the music that came in the next decade and onwards, for the most part it has its roots in the 60s but very rarely seems to owe much to the Beatles. At least I don't see how it would, anyway. I haven't heard all that much from the 70s that really sounds like it's descended from the Beatles. But plenty that sounds like it has descended from a lot of the other popular bands of the era.

Last edited by Rainard Jalen; 05-24-2008 at 05:56 PM.
Rainard Jalen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2008, 06:16 PM   #1199 (permalink)
Moodswings n' Roundabouts
 
Piss Me Off's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: At the corner of Dude and Catastrophe
Posts: 4,512
Default

I think the thing about the Beatles was that they took what these underground bands where doing and then made something a whole lot more accessible from it, they managed to make what was quite avantgarde at the time into something poppy which many people could enjoy, that's why they deserve the credit they have.
__________________


Last FM
Rate Yr Music
Muxtape
Piss Me Off is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2008, 06:51 PM   #1200 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piss Me Off View Post
I think the thing about the Beatles was that they took what these underground bands where doing and then made something a whole lot more accessible from it, they managed to make what was quite avantgarde at the time into something poppy which many people could enjoy, that's why they deserve the credit they have.
Yes, that about sums it up pretty well.
Rainard Jalen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Similar Threads



© 2003-2024 Advameg, Inc.