|
Register | Blogging | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
05-09-2010, 03:12 AM | #2 (permalink) |
Music Addict
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 114
|
No contest. The Beatles ofcourse.
While I do like some of the BB's work it really doesn't stand up as consistantly on an album to album basis, great harmonies though.
__________________
You've claimed all this time that you would die for me. Why then are you so suprised to hear your own Eulogy? |
05-09-2010, 04:25 AM | #3 (permalink) |
Account Disabled
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Buttholeville
Posts: 100
|
Yeah...
This is the ultimate no-brainer: Beatles, hands-down. Sure, the Beach Boys had some good singles (and some good vibrations - sorry; couldn't resist) and even a couple really awesome LPs...but they can't touch the Beatles. From a musical standpoint alone - I mean, Sgt. Pepper made Brian Wilson have a nervous breakdown... He held steady in the bubblegum days, but when the sh*t got deep, Bri-Bri went to his sand box. And the Beach Boys were kaput. The Beatles on the other hand, had John Lennon going completely off the deep end in the late 60's, but were able to hold it together, because there were two other amazing writers in the band. The Beach Boys hired Van **** Parks to wrote lyrics for them and had session cats on every single record from day one. The Beatles were four multi-instrumentalists who wrote amazing songs and played almost every single instrument on almost every record themselves (notable exceptions being Andy White's drumming on the first take of Love Me Do, and the orchestra on Elenor Rigby.) so... I can't believe it's even a question in your mind. |
05-09-2010, 10:00 AM | #5 (permalink) |
The Music Guru.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Beyond the Wall
Posts: 4,858
|
Both are great and both bands had unique talents that worked for them. The Beach Boys had the ability to harmonize beautifully while the Beatles wrote complex instrumental parts. The Beatles always had more intricate bass lines, as Paul McCartney was (and still is) more competent than Brian Wilson was on the bass guitar. Also, the early music of both bands grew out of two completely different genres. The Beach Boys were more influenced by California surf music of the late 50's/early 60's, while the Beatles were heavily influenced by the DIY skiffle music that was popular among the working class people in England.
|
05-10-2010, 01:25 PM | #6 (permalink) | |
Divination
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,655
|
Reviews. Beatles & Beach Boys
Quote:
Last edited by Necromancer; 05-10-2010 at 11:17 PM. Reason: I JUST FUNKING WANTED TO! |
|
05-10-2010, 10:47 PM | #9 (permalink) |
Divination
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,655
|
Here is another opinion that suggest the Beach Boys are better also, (I stole the post from the Beach Boys thread, thats not cheating is it)?--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Listening to Pet Sounds now for the first time. I'm getting the same reaction that I think anyone my age who only new them as "Surfin USA" and their other beach surf songs, which is "Wow these guys are not **** like I had previously thought they were, in fact, they are pretty damn good". As for Pet Sounds vs Sgt Peppers, I would go with Pet Sounds. However, Sgt Peppers imo is The Beatles weakest work, post Hard Days Night. __________________ AxiomaticWiki’s Music Profile – Users at Last.fm Read more: http://www.musicbanter.com/pop/24899...#ixzz0naZYGz34 |
|