All is said
I don't see anyone banging on and on about other great Liverpudlian bands
Woody - Member
"What I find annoying is statements like 'they were rubbish' when quite evidently they had more talent in their little fingers (including Ringo) than the poster of the comment. Musical (s)nobbery at its best"
Ah, I see- so you can't criticise a band unless you're more musically talented then them? Fair dos, that's 99% of people disqualified from having any opinion about any music but if those are the rules...
"They were rubbish" is a statement of opinion, that's all. Now I am aware that there are people out there who can't recognise a statement of opinion unless it has "In my opinion" right beside it but that's their problem.
Octopus's Garden=Classic
Yellow Submarine=Awesome
Ob-La-Di Ob-La-Da=Choon
😀
I love this song... really couldn't give a flying fk what any of you's think on the matter.
Some of you... enjoy.
The rest... mleh. 😛
All music criticism on here is just bunkum, it's just verbose justification for not liking something. I dislike most of the beatles output, especially the pop stuff, I'm allowed to dislike it yeah? This is still a free country?
That being said if I had a choice between Beatles and Oasis then I would be the greatest beatles supporter ever..
Woody - Member
The point was that it is ok not to like them, but you cannot say they were rubbish.
Indeed.What I find annoying is statements like 'they were rubbish' when quite evidently they had more talent in their little fingers (including Ringo) than the poster of the comment. Musical (s)nobbery at its best
Entertaining thread however and I'd be very interested to hear from the anti-Beetles lot as to who they think are the iconic bands or individuals who have shaped contemporary music
OK, so you think I'm a musical snob because I dont share the same musical taste as yourself? That seems like musical snobbery to me....
Just because a band is seen as iconic and to have shaped contemporary music... well that doesn't mean that everyone should like them surely?!
The spice girls had a massive influence and were seen as iconic, representing both women and britain across the world... doesnt mean they were amazing and I should like them.
You snobs... feel free to rip into as many bands as you like in the hope it'll offend my musical preferences, it'll be impossible as I understand that just because I like it... well that doesnt mean that everyone else should does it?
😀 What a beautiful morning for checking this thread hahaaaa
Oh yeah, and in your anger you appear to have made an assumption that I have no musical talent.... you know that is subjective and down to opinion too right? I could bang twigs on wheelie-bins and certain cultures would consider me as more talented than the beatles. Music is a form of art, and one man's Da Vinci is another man's Damien Hurst.
wow, reading that back once i've had coffee and woken up... it appears as if i was angry when writing it, i really wasnt, was dozy, wrapped up in a cold room eating eggs and toast and my eyes weren't open.
my point about the spice girls still stands 😛
All I need to know is:
Do people really think Helter Skelter is "rubbish"?
The spice girls had a massive influence and were seen as iconic, representing both women and britain across the world...
Wait 40 years till after they have split and when half of them are dead and see if people even know who they are. You also seem to have mistaken hype for talent in the Spice Girls case- influential - well they had their moment in the sun but so did new kids on the block and a variety of other forgetable bands
Just because a band is seen as iconic and to have shaped contemporary music... well that doesn't mean that everyone should like them surely
Yes you can fail to see their genuis and not like them if you wish and of course you can hold the opinion that they are rubbish - even idiots have the right to free speech 😉 I dont think anyone is preventing anyone from saying they do not like them. It is another thing to say they are rubbish when they just are not for you. I can name loads of music that I dont personally like but I can see that it is not rubbish just not my cup of tea.
I could bang twigs on wheelie-bins and certain cultures would consider me as more talented than the beatles
Even for here that is one of the most ridiculous pieces of hyperbole I have ever seen
junkyard... i think it is you who fails to see the genius in spice girls!
Yes you can fail to see their genuis and not like them if you wish and of course you can hold the opinion that they are rubbish - even idiots have the right to free speech I dont think anyone is preventing anyone from saying they do not like them. It is another thing to say they are rubbish when they just are not for you. I can name loads of music that I dont personally like but I can see that it is not rubbish just not my cup of tea.
i dont like the rolling stones or queen, but i can appreciate they were 'good'
the beatles (in my opinion, and seemingly quite a few more on here) were rubbish cos they didnt seem to have any particular talent for playing music. waaaaaaay over-rated. id see ringo tapping away at his drums with the crowd screaming and think "what the ****????"
on the flip side, i love the sex pistols, and can also say they were 'rubbish' too. no particular talent but just loved what they stood for and the noise they made.
so just cos you 'love' the beatles doesnt stop them from being over-rated sh*t. (IMHO) 🙂
anyone else still chuckling over the 'my wife is a-musical' followed by 'some bird called Michelle'
Na - don't like Beatles either.
A former Mrs MTG never used to miss an opportunity to tell me how much she hated the Beatles.
One day, we were listening to the radio and they played Get back.
"Is this the Beatles" she said, "I hate the Beatles"
"No 🙄 " I said, "It's the Rolling Stones"
"That's OK then, 'cos I'd turn it off if it was the Beatles"
anyone else still chuckling over the 'my wife is a-musical' followed by 'some bird called Michelle'
I'm still chuckling that a perfectly innocent comment about my wife not knowing of the song by The Beatles seems to have spawned one of the bloodiest debates in STW history.
I mean its the bloody Beatles for god's sake! Yes they were significant and yes they were popular and yes there are people who like them and people who don't.
But really. I mean is it really worth all this arguing?
yes! cos they need to be told! 🙂
I'm no fan either although normally i keep it to myself as the beatles attract scary people who can't handle the possibility that someone might not be 100% enthusiastic about them and who feel they have to re-educate those who doubt.
this is STW, of course it's worth arguing about
we've been here before, more than once
The Beatles are a "red flag" - same as Macs, iphone, coffee, immigrants, muslims and all the rest
I think the problem with the whole Beatles thing is that a lot of people are happy to think of them as "Just a band", and have an opinion on whether they like them or not based on that. (which is fine)
Other people like to think about them in context of all the cultural and musical changes that were taking place in the 60s - and then they become a lot more than "just a band". I love the music, but I'm also fascinated by the story of the Beatles.
I've said this on here before - but if you are a music geek you can have a very interesting time with a stack of Beatles CDs and the book "Revolution in the Head".
FTR - I can see the impact that Beatles 62-66 had on mainstream music to this day but frankly I find it a bit throwaway. Maybe because of the impact it had meaning we hear so much derivative stuff nowadays.
66-70 is a different thing though, groundbreaking. I still don't listen to it much, as my tastes are different but I can see that what they did was way out there compared to their previous stuff.
Doors FTW.
A former Mrs MTG never used to miss an opportunity to tell me how much she hated the Beatles.
One day, we were listening to the radio and they played Get back.
"Is this the Beatles" she said, "I hate the Beatles"
"No " I said, "It's the Rolling Stones"
"That's OK then, 'cos I'd turn it off if it was the Beatles"
sad as it may seem i can relate to that. im a bit the same with the beatles, and also oasis. i have to like the 'whole package' really, including who they are. i can hear a track on the radio, like it, find out its by a group i cant stick, and that puts me off it.
i can appreciate oasis have done some pretty decent choons, but just cos i cant stick the gallaghers, it puts me off their music and i just cant listen to em.
but.......for all those about to slag me off for being shallow mebbes......anyone here still like gary glitters stuff?
used to love it, but for obvious reasons i cant stand him now. and hate his music too.
weird how music gets you innit 🙂
junkyard... i think it is you who fails to see the genius in spice girls!
We shall let history decide and ban you from all topics of taste 😯 and 😉
The Beatles were an English rock band, formed in Liverpool in 1960, and one of the most commercially successful and critically acclaimed acts in the history of popular music
no one will ever be more revolutionary, more creative and more distinctive than The Beatles were."
Former Rolling Stone associate editor Robert Greenfield
In 2008, Billboard magazine released a list of the all-time top-selling Hot 100 artists to celebrate the US singles chart's fiftieth anniversary—the Beatles ranked number one.[4] In 2009, the Recording Industry Association of America certified that The Beatles have sold more albums in the US than any other artist.[3] The Beatles have had more number one albums, 15, on the UK charts and held down the top spot longer, 174 weeks, than any other musical act.[2] The Beatles were collectively included in Time magazine's compilation of the 20th century's 100 most influential people
Perhaps it is just that some people under rate them because they are not too their taste? What next Mozart he was cr@p wasnt he?Dali - he was a rubbish painter - My three year old can draw better. As I said it is not the law you must like them but it is foolish to try and suggest that the best selling band of all time were over rated and are actually rubbish
hehe i wonder if i hadnt have had the sneaky troll inside me urging to get out when it was first posted and jsut kept quiet... would the thread have brought out such gems?
i hope so.
truth be told... they were just another band... must've appealed to the masses to sell records, not awful musicians, and did have a massive impact on the music scene at the time, played a part in influencing the future music scene (as did any musician who ever released a track you could argue) and a huge variety of modern bands will list them as an influence.
unfortunately for those beatle lovers on here, the bands that list them as an influence tend to sound rubbish, as do most of the beatles songs to my highly trained super musical and superior ears.
i dont like the spice girls, but i'd rather listen to TJ lecture about helmets, or beatles fans cry about people not loving them as much as they do than endure a beatles track itself.
beatles fans are like metallica fans 😆
Interesting comment about Gary Glitter from sadexpunk.
I always wonder what would have happened if Michael Jackson had been found guilty. Would he have become an unperson like Gary Glitter or Jonathon King ?
I don't get how people can hate the entire works of a band though.
Fair enough with someone like Status Quo, if you don't like Down Down, it's a safe bet you're not going to like Sweet Caroline or Whatever You Want.
Those who hate everything from Please Please Me to Get Back, is it because it's the Beatles or do you hate every similar song by every other band ?
Answer the bloody question!
Do people really think Helter Skelter is "rubbish"?
I don't like The Beatles, there I've said it, can I get on with my life now?
sad as it may seem i can relate to that. im a bit the same with the beatles, and also oasis. i have to like the 'whole package' really, including who they are. i can hear a track on the radio, like it, find out its by a group i cant stick, and that puts me off it.
Answer the bloody question!Do people really think Helter Skelter is "rubbish"?
by the beatles, yes its rubbish.
by siouxsie and the banshees, top track 🙂
I don't like The Beatles, there I've said it, can I get on with my life now?
Yes, but it will be so empty it hardly seems worth it.
**add smiley of your own choice**
So now - tell me about Oasis...
[i]by the beatles, yes its rubbish.
by siouxsie and the banshees, top track [/i]
1 then who admits they aren't rubbish. There are 100s of other songs that aren't Ob-la-de-o-bla-da or I Wanna Hold Your Hand etc etc.
I don't like the Beatles either, no great hatred of them, just found them a bit mleh.
My take on their importance is that they were in the right place at the right time, and took full advantage of the way that popular music was entering society and becoming much more than just entertainment. They were the first real global 'pop' band.
Tis interesting to think how they would be recieved now; all that teenage screaming would send the true muso types running away as fast as possible...
There is also an age thing; as sadexpunk hints, if you got into music later, you probably don't see the significance as others do.
Ultimately, just a band.
Yes, but it will be so empty it hardly seems worth it.
No change there, then. 😆
Amazing thread for a band that split up 40 years ago and stopped playing live 45 years ago.
The impact of the Beatles was huge at the time! Now they just seem to be another band from a previous time. But all musicians live in a particular time, very few manage to transition through different eras.
Some of their later Albums (Sgt Pepper and The While Album) showed what could be done in a studio to produce new sounds and sell this to the public. They may not have been the first, but they were in the right place at the right time.
Whether you like them or not is a personal taste. I like some of their stuff and other I can easily do without, very much like most artists.
My take on their importance is that they were in the right place at the right time
sure, but that in itself would not have been enough, lots of other bands were in the same place at the same time. What set the Beatles apart might be that they had spent so long playing together (and so much) in Hamburg, that when the right time came along, they were ready. So, some luck, but not all luck.
but they were in the right place at the right time.
Yes that is what I think about olympic gold medal winners - certainly talent did not get them to the right place at the right time
Exactly Junkyard. In fact anyone who happened to be at the start line and then at the finishing line 9.6 seconds later would probably have got the gold medal
*is a little surprised that nobody took the bait with my metallica comment*
*runs off to a music forum to see if it gets a reaction*
[i]but they were in the right place at the right time.[/i]
This is music we're talking about - saying that is like saying some of them played guitars! You can't get more bleeeedin obvious.
Hee hee, I'll tell you what, them Beatlers don't like it up 'em.
"... and for all the little piggies, life is getting worse..."
😆 😆 😆
"In their eyes there's something lacking, what they need's a damn good thrashing."
😈
so which musical is she?
<AlanPartridge>
Wings... the band the Beatles could have been!
</AlanPartridge>
so which musical is she?
If she were 'a musical' she'd be either Evita or Cats or more likely a combination of the two.
Cavita???
Cavita???
Isn't that something your shock does when it's trying to cycle too much damping fluid?
Where is Beatles Band?
You had to be there to 'get it' boys. 🙄
So much tosh on this thread.
Crikey, if you lot think the Beatles were derivative and crap ......
What about Oasis, pulp, Kaiser Chiefs, Coldplay Snow Patrol et al? I'm not a big Beatles fan, but surely most 'modern' pop music owes them a nod?
Richard Thompson's still doing some fairly unclassifiable stuff. I've just got a CD from a band called Erland and the Carnival that is a bit different, but even that sounds vaguely 60's ish in parts. Anyone remember the Incredible String Band?
In their [eyes there's something lacking, what they need's a damn good [s]thrashing[/s] whacking
I did not even have to google for that 😳
Who are The Beatles?
gary a rather straightforwrd unimaginative troll there, you can usully muster something so much more offensive than that. You just tired today ? Has winding people up got too much for you? Lost all your bile on the Mc cann thread? Perhaps a poor taste joke about the dead ones or Mc cartneys late wife?
[i]You had to be there to 'get it' boys.[/i]
That's what my Gran says! 😳
JOKE ALERT....
harvey was filmed and released long before i was born, but i didnt have to be there to appreciate it as a great film... i appreciate lots of stuff, just not the beatles 😉
You had to be there to 'get it' boys.
have you not just lost the 'argument' with that staement? :-p
you didnt have to 'be there' when mozart or beethoven were alive to recognise their skill. you didnt have to 'be there' when dali was painting to recognise his art.
you just admire the skill and artistry without having to like it.
and of course, in a few years time, nobody will listen to the spice girls for the first time and say its any good, unless they were there.
if you can only 'not think theyre rubbish' unless you were there, id suggest theyre actually a bit sh*t 😉
have i won now? 🙂
Who is Junkyard?
Good call over Harvey you have gone up in my esteem I am sure this means a lot to you
EDIT: I can't type for the laughter tears ....keep it up gary loving your stuff hilarious no really you are.
it does, lets hug.
What does that even mean Junkyard?
Am I detecting a hint of sarcasm amongst the bad grammar?
😉
I was thinking of wading in at this point.. flashing some rock n roll credentials and scattering some phillistines like unrequited love notes blowing in the breeze... but then I remembered that some people actually really enjoy listening to soft rock..
so it really does take all sorts to make a world..
wierd
Are we still not allowed to dislike the Beatles!
Junkyard - Member
"it is foolish to try and suggest that the best selling band of all time were over rated"
Seems blindingly obvious that the more records you sell, the more [i]likely[/i] it is that you're overrated, to me.
Just got in from work and PMSL @ Northwind and philconsequence
Rather an amusing non-argument and assumptions that I am/was angry and a Beetles fan. Wrong on both counts.
However, Philc - I did assume (wrongly?) that you have less talent than any of The Beetles, so if you really are an undiscovered musical genius or even a mega star trolling on STW, please accept my apologies.
Simon cowell says the beatles wouldn't have made in todays pop world or the X factor
The 49 year-old pop mogul said drummer Ringo Starr would not have made the grade during the gruelling auditions for the ITV reality show.
Speaking to actress and fellow Britain's Got Talent judge Amanda Holden, Cowell said that only Paul McCartney, John Lennon and George Harrison would have ticked all the boxes.
As a result, he admitted, the Fab Four would have failed to get through the early stages in their orginal form.
so there you have the beatles are a crap as Jedward officially
CASE CLOSED! ALL YOU SAD BEATLES FANS MAY AS WELL JUST GO AND JOIN JEDWARD.NET
Simon Cowell is 3 days younger than me - he is NOT 49 🙁
Guys - I can put up with all the insults. At my age I've heard them all. 🙄
OK, I never really liked The Beatles, the Stones were so much more ... ahem ... exciting and b*a*d. 😉
But they were unique and, importantly, evolved. Made a huge contribution to 'modern music' and whilst I was a little young, I do remember the fever with which they were received.
But in the wings was Hendrix and, to me, he was just AWESOME! So cool, was doing stuff nobody had ever seen or heard of before.
Of course, if The Beatles were such rubbish, why are they still being talked about?
Some people have made some very good observations on this thread, funnily enough most of you just don't 'get it'.
Were they not simply the first Boy band? The main reason that they became so sucessful was a......the marketing hype ( beatles wigs? dolls ?), and b....... they were fairly bland and offended the least possible number of people thus helping to shift the maximum number of units, that always works... just look at the X Factor.
They were very tight and well rehearsed in the early days, but in essence they were an American r'n b cover band for years. Then they just started mimicing what bands in the US were doing, If all they had to compete with in the UK was "Itsy bitsy teeny weeny yellow polka dot bikini" I'm not surprised they did quite well. I work in the music industry and I know very few people who consider the Beatles to have been an influence on their music.
Apart rom paperback writer and here comes the sun, I always thought they were pretty dull That however is just my opinion.:)
this thread is something else.... interesting that the beatles are referred to as a boy band, they were formed by John Lennon and few managers or labels would give them the time of day at first. If we are going to point the boy band finger at any of the other bands mentioned, it would be the Sex Pistols, formed by a manager to fulfil a recording contract already in place.
as for Cowells comments about the Beatles not getting past the audition stage, that's hilarious, not only do the auditions he sits in on have no real musical instruments (just people singing to backing tapes), but the man has cloth ears, lest we forget he is responsible for the 'musical' careers of David Hasslehoff and also Robson and Jerome
btw I like some of the beatles output but I'm not a slavish fan, I also like lots of other stuff. Consider that Jaco Pastorius was a beatles fan, and he's considered one of the most influential modern jazz musicians (not only an amazing player but a supremely talented composer also)
and I'm surprised I'm the first to point it out but the thread title should be un-musical
[i]Apart rom paperback writer and here comes the sun, I always thought they were pretty dull[/i]
[b]That[/b] is your opinion
[i]Were they not simply the first Boy band?[/i]
[b]That[/b] shows your opinion isn't worth airing
😕
Well, a-musical kind of means without a musical sense, unmusical implies a property going against a musical sense.
like unhappy as opposed to not happy
and I'm surprised I'm the first to point it out but the thread title should be un-musical
Well, a-musical kind of means without a musical sense, unmusical implies a property going against a musical sense.
Yes, my wife has no musical sense. To her it's all just 'noise'. I once had some music on while she was upstairs. I went up to get something and asked what she thought about the music. She said 'I like it'. I asked what she liked about it. She replied
'That it's down there and I'm up here' 🙄
Woody - Member
Just got in from work and PMSL @ Northwind and philconsequenceRather an amusing non-argument and assumptions that I am/was angry and a Beetles fan. Wrong on both counts.
However, Philc - I did assume (wrongly?) that you have less talent than any of The Beetles, so if you really are an undiscovered musical genius or even a mega star trolling on STW, please accept my apologies.
apology accepted woody 😀
although i may have to correct you slighty...
so if you really are an undiscovered musical genius or even a mega [s]star[/s] troll[s]ing on STW,[/s] please accept my apologies.
this thread has kept me highly entertained 😆
i have never listened to enough beatles to comment on if i like them enough. i'd probably like them, but for the sake of this thread... they were awful and couldn't write a musical diddy to save their lives.
Listen to the Beatles harmonies on their early recordings. They must've been able to really sing. Seem to remember hearing live recordings of them doing it just the same, to prove it. But I could be wrong.
If you listen carefully to the early records and other records of the time you can see that they are talented - at least John and Paul were. Most simple pop tunes you can just grab a guitar and belt them out after having a few listens. I tried the same with Yesterday and it's actually quite complex. To produce stuff like this shows quality songwriting craft to begin with, but to do it at a time when everyone else is just belting out happy crappy tunes or derivative immitation R&B shoes real integrity and creativity.
Co-incidence that this has just been announced? Or is down to the interest on STW??
[img] 
[/img]