Most overrated bands ever?

[boo boo]

Originally Posted by Rainard Jalen

Good grief. You made so many overbloated claims in that post I don't even know where to begin, we'd be writing replies the size of essays. Let's start here. Not direct imitations of anything, all hybrids. What a load of utter nonsense. I can barely believe you said that, and question whether or not you've even listened to The White Album and Abbey Road.

Are these their only albums now?

The former is intentional imitations the whole way through

The Beatles could do any style and did do every style, they still made them sound like Beatles songs.

right up to Revolution 9, a pathetic imitation of the avant garde that had been doing the same thing 2 years earlier. Then there's Abbey Road. Have you ever listened to Maxwell's Silver Hammer, for example? It's not even rock, for heaven's sake. It's music hall. It sounds RETRO by 1969's standards. What about Oh Darling? It sounds like a 50s Doo Wop ballad.

And yet Freak Out, which itself consists mostly of doo wop, motown, psychedelic rock and blues parodies is a sheer example of musical innovation?

The faux-conceptual faux-opera on the second side also is just an imitation of what the Kinks, The Who and Zappa had been doing earlier on in the period.

Say what now?

So they did what is basically a medley of songs and now you're telling me they were ripping off The Who and trying to do a rock opera?

WHERE do you come up with this stuff?

When everybody else was doing long suites, they were still doing 3 and a half minute ditties a la 40s/50s music hall and Vaudeville. The most innovative band of the rock era? They basically were hardly even PART of the rock era.

.......

Now you're starting to scare me. That may be the most ridiculous generalization about The Beatles I've ever heard.

Nah, you know what, screw it. I'm not well at the moment

I can tell.

and I certainly haven't got the energy to reply to a bunch of clasp-at-straws statements with no foundation whatsoever.

I know what you are but what am I.

I mean, for heaven's sake, if you'd even HEARD Freak Out! and other early Zappa, for one, you would never have been able to make a claim like there'd be no prog without Sgt Pepper or the Beatles.

Now that is completely uncalled for, you're sounding like an elitist smug douche.

Of course I've heard Freak Out, and sorry I must be crazy but when I listen to that album I don't think to myself "you know, this sounds like Sgt Peppers", because it dosen't.

Also you're OBSESSED with bringing up the whole "mixing styles is not unoriginal" stuff. I never claimed it was unoriginal. What I'm saying is that they were NOT fusing styles or genres together.

They fused psychedelic with pop and even classical music. I Am The Walrus, Day in the Life, Strawberry Fields, these are the examples I've been giving over and over again. Lennon was the more original one. Paul was the one who liked to do the Tin Pan Alley thing.

They simply were not. Unless you consider fusing styles together taking the popular forms of the moment and turning it into pop.

THAT is fusing genres, sheesh. Listen to yourself.

That's about the extent of their fusion/merging/hybridisation. Plus fusing a style together would involve creating a style and playing it consistently and over the course of at least one record.

Oh, well shame on The Beatles for wanting to offer a different listening experience with every song, what a bunch of unoriginal hacks.

The Beatles did nothing of the sort. Their last two albums are all OVER the place in terms of ideas.

And that is bad because?

They just took any form/genre and played it themselves, shifting from song to song. That was it. Yes, it's VERY enjoyable to listen to, but it is NOT cutting-edge innovation by any idiot's standards.

Making rock albums that were a complete melting pot of genres was itself an incredibly original idea. Not to mention a commercial risk. The Beatles took risks, you make it out like everything they did was safe.

Whatever. I can't be arsed anymore. I just cannot believe people will still dare to give the Beatles more importance as innovators than those who were really changing the face of music altogether.

Like who? A few California bands who thought it would be cool to play folk songs on electric instruments?

Hell, there wouldn't even have BEEN a Sgt Pepper if it wasn't for Pet Sounds. And Brian Wilson produced that whole album himself.

Yay, you learned what influence is, good for you.

The genius of the instrumental arrangements on Sgt Pepper is the work of Martin. I don't believe ONE instrument is played by any of the Beatles on She's Leaving Home, for example.

What other pop/rock group was doing this kinda thing?

EDIT: PS there's no point continuing unless we do it point by point, it's silly to just battle seventeen thousand counter claims at once.

Thats my style, sorry.