I think some people just don't do popular. Even going out their way to be different but ultimately end up just in another tribe, like goths or emos.
nickc - afrobeat? hugely influential. Reggae?
Oh I do popular. gor a sneaky love of disco and love a bit of soul
A song can be both good and not to your personal taste.
Precisely. The Beatles may not be everyone's cup of tea, but they were hugely innovative and influential.
What you ‘young uns’ who think the Beatles are overrated don’t understand is: that in the 1960’s they were completely and utterly groundbreaking. The music beforehand was often dull and predictable (apart from Elvis).
There may actually have been some other pre-Beatles artists who weren't dull and predictable. I agree that the Beatles were groundbreaking, but there were other groundbreaking artists in the 50s and 60s too.
afrobeat? hugely influential. Reggae?
Oh I don't disagree at all, massively influential; But largely on musicians who then co-opted those sounds into music for the masses of western audiences, who then exported it back around the world. Look at Graceland; for how many was that their first taste of South African influenced sounds? It still took Paul Simon to bring it to a wider audience.
As an individual in the 60's-70's you had to go out of your way to get to hear music from countries other than the UK and USA regardless of how influential it was in it's home state, I mean; even countries as influential as France had to make rules about how many songs in English* radio stations were allowed to play in a row
* and that meant mostly UK and American bands
. I agree that the Beatles were groundbreaking, but there were other groundbreaking artists in the 50s and 60s too.
Very much this. The Beatles had good PR though.
Bob Marley? Brought a whole new genre to a worldwide audience, created some classics, highly political Slightly longer career. His music does not sound dated now
It's all a bit samey though in my opinion.
Very political as well
In what way, shape, or form is this an argument to the quality of music?
As someone pointed out above, the band were together for 7 years and the scope of output and boundaries pushed is quite remarkable.
I like the Beatles but the new release is pants. Bland, sentimental, emotionless. Not sure why they did it. I still buy a fair bit of music, I’ll give this a miss.
It brought me to tears and I like it, maybe it’ll be a grower for others.
What you ‘young uns’ who think the Beatles are overrated don’t understand is: that in the 1960’s they were completely and utterly groundbreaking. The music beforehand was often dull and predictable (apart from Elvis). This group came out of the blue and changed everything. Their lyrics, their attitudes, their playing, their vocals, all unbelievably different from anything before. It was a ‘wham bam thank you mam’ into a different genre of music.
Completely and utterly ground breaking and out of the blue? Not really.
Like many other uk 60s musicians they were influenced by and derivative of earlier mainly american musicians. Chuck Berry, Little Richard, The Isley Brothers, early Motown artists like Barrett Strong, The Miracles, The Marvelettes. And the Everly Brothers and Buddy Holly and probably more.
Elvis similarly was influenced by earlier black american artists.
'Influenced by' and 'sounding the same as' are quite different concepts. Obviously they had influences but unlike many other contempoary bands it was what they did with those influences that mattered - and that includes the PR.
Like many other uk 60s musicians they were influenced by and derivative of earlier mainly american musicians.
But only one band managed to take those early influences and create Tomorrow Never Knows, I Am The Walrus and A Day In The Life.
It's not a competition, and it's certainly subjective, but to an awful lot of people the Beatles are the greatest.
Like many other uk 60s musicians they were influenced by and derivative of earlier mainly american musicians
That's true of the Stones, but I fail to see how the same could be said of the Beatles. One of the interesting things about Sergeant Pepper was its revival of music hall.
Funny how some people click on a thread about the Beatles just to let everyone know they don't like the Beatles 😂
And you could make a compelling case that the 1960s actually started on the evening of Feb. 9, 1964. That’s when the Beatles made their historic U.S. television debut on The Ed Sullivan Show, drawing the largest viewing audience in the history of the medium at the time (73 million people—nearly half the nation—tuned in to the telecast)
Not bad for such an overrated band. But obviously these would have all been hysterical young girls screaming at their cute new idols, wouldn't they? They weren't interested in music...
Feb. 10, 1964, the day after the Beatles’ historic U.S. television debut, consequently dawned as a new era for Gretsch. Guitar orders skyrocketed. Over the ensuing weeks and months, countless youths from Portland, Maine, to Portland, Ore., started forming bands, and all those budding guitarists wanted the same kind of guitars the Beatles played.......The effect on Gretsch was truly phenomenal. Even without a formal partnership with the Beatles, the company experienced an exponential growth in sales with the surging British Invasion that actually necessitated major logistical changes at Gretsch headquarters in New York. With guitar orders snowballing at such a phenomenal rate in 1964, the entire Gretsch drums department was moved to another facility several blocks from the Brooklyn factory, and Gretsch wholesale efforts were either halted or transferred to Chicago. As noted in 50 Years of Gretsch Electrics, at the suddenly overwhelmed Brooklyn factory, “all of this was to allow the whole of the seventh floor to be turned over to guitar making.”.
Most groundbreaking bands aren’t popular. They tend to be the weird, mad outliers. Somebody takes what they do and makes it fit to a tune that most find pleasant to the ears. I’m looking at you Frank Zappa, Cpt Beefheart etc.
But only one band managed to take those early influences and create... ...I Am The Walrus
Thank christ for that.
Don't get me wrong they did make some really good tracks but for every killer there was easily a dozen filler tracks.
As for what there was before I suppose if you only listen to pop music or whatever the radio plays then yeah, I suppose. But if you want to talk about influence then how about Dick Dale and Greek guitar. All the blues that was influencing whatever came after the Beatles (Led Zepplin etc.). Jean Jacques-Perrey on electronic music.
It's easy to take one in isolation and pretend the others don't exist but they did and were, for the most part, all contemporary.
Have to wonder how old some of you are though, my mum was 12 when they broke up!
"As for what there was before I suppose if you only listen to pop music or whatever the radio plays then yeah, I suppose."
Hmmm best take off my Big Bill Broonzy CD and go listen to some Mariah Carey
I think we can all agree they had some shockers and that not everything they wrote was completely original but I honestly can't think of a band that in a brief 8 year period 50 years ago wrote the cannon of work they did, that still gets played every single day in probably every single country in the world.
Is it just me that sees the title & hears “Now then, now then” in a Jimmy Saville voice!
Funny how some people click on a thread about the Beatles just to let everyone know they don’t like the Beatles
It didn’t make sense to mention it on the Gazza thread.
Gazza
All Things Must Pass/Twist & Shout (ACL's hurt)
That’s true of the Stones, but I fail to see how the same could be said of the Beatles
Hugely influenced by American artists:
https://www.beatlesstory.com/blog/2022/10/19/bhm-2022-the-beatles-and-black-music/
Which as this piece notes, goes full circle with many US artists subsequently covering Lennon and McCartney compositions
Just off to KFC with my fishing rod.
Hugely influenced by American artists:
Sure, but you said derivative.
Sure, but you said derivative
Not sure what your point is by highlighting this but I said both:
influenced by and derivative of
It didn’t make sense to mention it on the Gazza thread
Fair enough. It's been about 20 years since he played so you're not going to get the same footfall on a thread about him.
Not sure what your point is by highlighting this but I said both:
And you were half right.
A great example of why Jeff Lynne should not be trusted.
I think we can all agree they had some shockers and that not everything they wrote was completely original but I honestly can’t think of a band that in a brief 8 year period 50 years ago wrote the cannon of work they did, that still gets played every single day in probably every single country in the world.
That could apply to a few bands though. Creedence did similar in a much shorter timescale and their music crops up everywhere still. I’d argue that it’s aged better than the Beatles too. All subjective though at the end of the day.
Thats nonsense and you know it. Go out into any street in any country in the world and ask the first passer by over 18 to name a Beatles song - then do the same for Creedence Clearwater Revival. I bet most could name several by the Beatles and that outside the US almost none would even guess who sang Fortunate Son.
This is not about whos the better musician but about influence and legacy.
It’s not nonsense at all. I don’t know anyone who doesn’t at least recognise several Creedence songs. That’s across people I know who are both significantly older and younger than me. Not as well known as the Beatles granted and it’s the song rather than the artist who are known. Doesn’t stop it being influential. Still insanely prolific in a very short timescale and their songs are widely known. Nonsense is a bit strong.
Same likely applies to ABBA and the Rolling Stones. Possibly some Motown and Atlantic/Stax artists too.
@bunnyhop sums it up for me. I was 9 when my big sister brought home Please Please Me. Having been brought up on a diet of Burl Ives and Children's Favourites this was something utterly different and exciting. Those early songs still sound fresh and they went on to become one of the most adventurous and innovative bands ever.
They are not my favourite band ever but they are very special indeed and I'm reminded of this whenever I put on something like Rubber Soul or the White Album.
But... I don't think this new offering adds anything to the legacy.
Quite lackluster I thought.
A great example of why Jeff Lynne should not be trusted.
Because you prefer Free As A Bird? Jeff Lynne had nowt to do with the new one, his "additional production" credit is because they used Harrison's guitar from the Anthology sessions.
It's a grower on me but don't think it will go on my playlist
Because you prefer Free As A Bird? Jeff Lynne had nowt to do with the new one, his “additional production” credit is because they used Harrison’s guitar from the Anthology sessions
No, that was a reply to the post above with the video for 'When We Was Fab'.
Free as a Bird was severely hampered by Lynne, to my ears. The wrong production for both of those singles in '95. I'm not a fan of his.
And you were half right
Nope. Wholly right. Here's an example, there are more:
If you don't get it straight away the lyrics make it obvious from 0.40
Ive been pondering this a bit. Is it that culturally the beatles really were a huge revolutionary influence but musically less so? Ie folk who played or who were music nerds knew where all the influences came from but the general public didn't?
there is no doubt that culturally they were hugely influential.
I don’t know anyone who doesn’t at least recognise several Creedence songs.
Hmmmm - I remember pretty much any song I have heard more than once or twice -- the funny way my brain works to the point I remember hymns from 55 years ago that I have never heard since
Creedence clearwater revival. I've got "bad moon rising" obviously. Thats the only one that comes to mind straight away. checking on spotify I also know "Proud Mary" and "Have you ever seen the rain" None of the rest seem familiar. out of their top ten most popular. I think thats more about your circle of friends than their popularity
I don't like the beatles much but I could name a dozen songs or more without even thinking
