The Beatles

Started by Ashley, December 16, 2002, 00:21:41 am

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Ian Hills

Quote

I remember this being discussed before....there are some really funny mp3's with "Beatles-songs with a Metallica twist".....can be downloaded here:

http://music.metafilter.com/index.php?q=f&f=%2FBeatallica
lmao lmao lmao
Quality!!!
Hammersmith Odeon May 1979
Stafford Bingley Hall Sept. 1979
Hammersmith Odeon June 1980
Wembley Arena November 1981
Wembley Arena May 1983
Birmingham NEC April 1988
Wembley  April 1988
Wembley  April 1992
Wembley  September 2004
Wembley October 2007-cancelled!
O2 Arena May 2001

TomC

Sorry to mention Classic Rock again, but the current copy has 100 reasons why the Beatles are overrated on it's inside back page. Hysterically funny!

I found little of value in the constituent parts of the beatles after they split, with the exception of the first 2 -3 Wings albums. So their value to music is based purely on their output as a band.

Early to mid 60's the Stones were the band that your parents hated, whilst the Beatles were portrayed as good, home lovin, innocents (yes we all know that to be nonsense, but still). The Stones were real rock n roll, the Kinks wrote better songs and Bill Haley et al actually changed music before the Beatles.
The amount of rubbish they produced is always ignored or called "genius" or "before it's time". MMT is indulgence - first concept album, first vanity project. The White Album is actually unlistenable. The dreamy hippy drug stuff is better done by the REAL hippies and many of the lyrics are twee and embarrasing.

However, I cannot deny they way that they tapped into the psyche of a generation, in the same way that the Sex Pistols, Nirvana and Oasis also did in later decades. Despite their limitations, they came to define everything about the decade and have been credited, very unfairly, with being responsible for the huge societal change of the time.
They did write some great songs - Let it Be and Help being my favourites - but Lennon was no philosopher and they had very little to say other than in the hopes and desires place on them by an angry and disollusioned generation.
70's rock rules!!!

Slim

April 06, 2005, 19:37:20 pm #47 Last Edit: April 06, 2005, 19:42:13 pm by Slim
QuoteEarly to mid 60's the Stones were the band that your parents hated, whilst the Beatles were portrayed as good, home lovin, innocents (yes we all know that to be nonsense, but still). The Stones were real rock n roll, the Kinks wrote better songs and Bill Haley et al actually changed music before the Beatles.
Well, Ray Davies wrote some fantastic songs, of course. But better than Lennon, McCartney, or even Harrison at their best? No. And no-one's claiming that they were the only individuals ever to change music; nonetheless the influence they brought to bear in the '60s was dramatic - off the scale.

QuoteThe amount of rubbish they produced is always ignored or called "genius" or "before it's time". MMT is indulgence - first concept album, first vanity project. The White Album is actually unlistenable. The dreamy hippy drug stuff is better done by the REAL hippies and many of the lyrics are twee and embarrasing.
Hmm - a great many people find the 'white' album very listenable indeed! It's not one of my favourites, but it's a long way from unlistenable.

QuoteHowever, I cannot deny they way that they tapped into the psyche of a generation, in the same way that the Sex Pistols, Nirvana and Oasis also did in later decades. Despite their limitations, they came to define everything about the decade and have been credited, very unfairly, with being responsible for the huge societal change of the time.
Why do you think it's "very unfair"? I don't think they were solely responsible for the cultural and societal change of the '60s, but I think they played a massive, critical part - as I observe in my first post in this thread, they were at the very epicentre of the global cultural explosion which occurred in that decade, and more than any other cultural component, they more or less define it.

Quote70's rock rules!!!
Well, that says it all really lol Without the Beatles, '70s rock would be unrecognisable as we know it today, if it even existed.


captainkurtz

The White Album 'Unlistenable'?  Are you mad?  ???
Anger is a gift.

Micke.K

Quote

Well, that says it all really lol Without the Beatles, '70s rock would be unrecognisable as we know it today, if it even existed.


What the man said... :)

Analog RH

QuoteThe White Album is actually unlistenable.

You're quite wrong there. I'm listening to it right now actually.

Micke.K

April 06, 2005, 20:38:39 pm #51 Last Edit: April 06, 2005, 20:39:54 pm by Micke.K
Quote

You're quite wrong there. I'm listening to it right now actually.

yeah....but you're doing drugs, mate... ;) ;D ;D

 :-X

(I actually like "the white album" a lot myself.....even without drugs...loads of great songs on that one....and a couple of real mingers too...."Revolution 9", anyone..?) ;D

Slim

Actually I really like Revolution 9. It's not a piece of music, but it is a rather captivating sound collage .. it has a really profound cinematic effect, for me anyway - it paints fascinating mental images.

It does sound out of place on there, though, granted. It doesn't do anything for the album as a whole.

Micke.K

QuoteActually I really like Revolution 9. It's not a piece of music, but it is a rather captivating sound collage .. it has a really profound cinematic effect, for me anyway - it paints fascinating mental images.

It does sound out of place on there, though, granted. It doesn't do anything for the album as a whole.

Well, I can't say I like it... :-/

"Revolution" (without the 9 ::)) on the other hand, is a very nice song. I like the slow "White Album"-version better than the rockier version....

Thailand Express

I love the White Album in all its jumbled up glory. I've never been one of those to say that it should have been only a single album, but, if it was it most certainly would have been a killer.
The question is what would you leave of it to cut it down to the then maximum running time of around 45 minutes?
It goes without saying that Revolution 9 would be first for the chop, and after that Honey Pie / Wild Honey Pie, Don't Pass Me By, Bungalow Bill would be teetering on the precipice.

Slim

Quote
The question is what would you leave of it to cut it down to the then maximum running time of around 45 minutes?
A good question, and one that's in discussion here

Pudders

Quote
A good question, and one that's in discussion here

..and I'd love to participate bit I still can't stay logged in >:(

Sary

April 07, 2005, 01:55:05 am #57 Last Edit: April 07, 2005, 01:57:13 am by Sary
Quote

..and I'd love to participate bit I still can't stay logged in >:(

Oh, what a shame, Neil, I hope our dear Admin is able to rectify that asap. :) Unless the problem lies in your end, of course... :-/

Pudders

Quote

Oh, what a shame, Neil, I hope our dear Admin is able to rectify that asap. :) Unless the problem lies in your end, of course... :-/

I'm pretty sure i don't have any problems 'in my end' Sary  ;D ;)

Seriously - it's bloody frustrating. As I've said to Slim, i can stay logged in on the laptop - I'd just prefer to be using my main pc

Slim

Try deleting all your beatles.dyndns.org cookies, Neil. Sorry you've been having problems over there. If all else fails I can delete your account and set up a new one if you'd like to perserve with it, your participation would certainly be very welcome.