home studios equipment staff/friends booking/rates for sale forum contact

Band: The Beatles..........

Vote and debate.

Moderators: kerble, Electrical-Staff

crap/not crap

not crap
181
86%
crap
30
14%
 
Total votes : 211

Postby patrick md on Sat Sep 18, 2004 1:59 pm

a Huge NOT CRAP for the following reasons:

Yellow Submarine movie and soundtrack (original LP, not the rerelease)

Sgt. Pepper

Revolver

Magical Mystery Tour

I like all of the Beatles music, but I can only listen to so many two minute pop songs about love before I get board. Some of the later material, I think lost a little of the magic because they weren't getting along and would all be in the studio at different times, not really working as a group.

But Yellow Submarine, Revolver, Sgt. Pepper, and Magical Mystery Tour, all amazing. I can listen to these albums on repeat for hours or days at a time, and I do.
User avatar
patrick md
cats
cats
 
Posts: 312
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2003 2:30 pm
Location: jamaica plain, ma

Re: She was a Cow Tipper, yeah...

Postby Angry_Dragon on Sat Sep 18, 2004 5:41 pm

[quote="geiginni"]I don't want anyone worshipping my brain, either.[/quote="geiginni"]

In the year 2025, some neocavemen (the apes) will find your brain in a cave (actually the Smithsonian) in New Monkeyland City (DC) and come to revere it as a god (bunch of bananas) of some sort. They will find out about your genius (10 reasons why Beatles are overrated) and then your status will become that of supreme overlord ( Lego block).

See, that's a lot better than a bunch of fishpeople pawing at a glass case muttering 'brains'.
Better yet, eat the placenta!!!
User avatar
Angry_Dragon
18th Amendment
 
Posts: 2761
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 11:56 pm
Location: Baltimore, Where Murderous Football Players Own Resturaunts

Postby cervixFORaHEart on Sat Nov 18, 2006 3:37 am

this music has been like a good friend throughout most of my 30 years....

....not crap and precious.
Uncle Ovipositor wrote:In Tokyo, the Japanese can pee in the streets...
User avatar
cervixFORaHEart
captain mash
captain mash
 
Posts: 1046
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 9:03 pm
Location: tower grove park

Postby dimpfelmoser on Sat Nov 18, 2006 10:02 am

The red Album was actually the first record I ever bought and I think it got me into music to some degree. I was nine at the time. So I still have s soft spot for them although I can't listen to them anymore. Played them to death in my early teen years.
User avatar
dimpfelmoser
linus pauling
linus pauling
 
Posts: 415
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 12:57 pm
Location: Berlin

Postby 242sumner on Sat Nov 18, 2006 10:12 am

Mayfair wrote:I think it was their trousers.


Ah...the Rutles! :lol:
242sumner
man forced to eat beard
man forced to eat beard
 
Posts: 1860
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 11:11 pm

Postby rocker654 on Sat Nov 18, 2006 12:45 pm

They are one of few bands that you can EASILY follow a dramatic evolution through their lifespan. That and almost everything they produced was NOT CRAP.

Side note: The Rutles were great as well.
User avatar
rocker654
Perfect Picture of Wisdom and Boldness
Perfect Picture of Wisdom and Boldness
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 5:18 pm
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: She was a Cow Tipper, yeah...

Postby Angus Jung on Sat Nov 18, 2006 2:37 pm

geiginni wrote:
I'm not going to give 10 reasons why they suck, but I'll try for 10 reasons why they're overrated and why perhaps their fame has been detremental to music in general....

I don't want anyone worshipping my brain, either.

1. They took "rock" music and elevated it to the level of "fine art" in the minds of their public and "rock journalists". This, in the long run, has trivialized other forms of musical art, and allowed those in "rock journalism" and the larger rock fan base to remain willfully and dare I say arrogantly ignorant of other music.

2. They, functioning as a "self contained singing, songwriting, performing unit" destroyed the existing musical concept of those that wrote/composed, those that perform, those that sing, and those that arrange. It set a paradigm where all musical "acts" are expected to be self-contained, self-sufficient "units"; whether or not they are good at any or all of these things. It has fostered an environment where mediocrity can flourish.

3. They, as an early "collaborative" unit, set the trend for bands that create by concensus. Though this worked extremely well for them (as evidenced by their post-Beatles individual outputs), it does not necessary function well for many other groups. I would argue that creation by concensus also fosters mediocrity. This expectation in the world of "rock" may in fact quell individual writers who may create better individually.

4. They set the pace, beyond Elvis, of the media mania clusterfuck. The spiralling media empire, with merchandising, tie-ins, etc... set the pace for the current music industry. This never went as far with Sinatra or the Dorseys, who were huge in their time.

5. Their early output was nothing more than insipid little ditties about boy-girl relationships.

6. They spawned countless imitators, setting a trend that thrives to this day.

7. Much of their "revolutionary" creative doings were actually attributable to their production staff. George Martin deserves as much credit for their ground breaking work, as the group themselves. He did all the arranging, conducting, keyboard work (the good stuff at least), set the tracking schedule, etc... and is hugely responsible for the final result.

8. By their very popularity, they steered the music industry to deem that "everything" they sold must bear the Midas Beatles Touch. Thereby Beatles easy-listening, Beatles acid-jazz, Beatles Andy Fucking Williams records, Beatles Classical records. Alot of decent artists and genres of music in the 60's were completely fucked over by the music industry's resulting clamoring to cash in on the Beatles sound and the Now sound.

9. Their musicianship and skills were quite mediocre. They were easily eclipsed by groups like Zeppelin and King Crimson.

10. Sir Paul McCartney.....enough said.

These reasons are all CRAP.

They all either rely on sweeping, soft-headed generalizations (#3), focus on entities other than the group itself (the media, "culture," George Martin, their imitators, etc.), or are just blatantly wrong (#2, #5, #8, #9).

Wait, #10 is pretty good.
Angus Jung
Present-day God
Present-day God
 
Posts: 9454
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 7:04 pm
Location: High Desert

Postby newberry on Sun Nov 19, 2006 12:29 am

Angry_Dragon wrote:CRAP because they are still the band upon which most people still base new music on. They were a good band but I feel like they've ruined it for all of us.


Does that make the Beatles crap, or the bands who copy them? A lot of the criticism I hear is about how their popularity changed the industry for the worse, too many people copied them for too long, etc. That's their impact that's (arguably) crap, not the band.
User avatar
newberry
Lode Star of the Twenty-First Century
Lode Star of the Twenty-First Century
 
Posts: 2471
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 1:30 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Postby Minotaur029 on Sun Dec 03, 2006 4:05 pm

Music that changed my whole life.
User avatar
Minotaur029
Power Incarnate with Endless Creativity
Power Incarnate with Endless Creativity
 
Posts: 7792
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 1:20 pm
Location: 7777

Postby rocker654 on Sun Dec 03, 2006 6:50 pm

newberry wrote:
Angry_Dragon wrote:CRAP because they are still the band upon which most people still base new music on. They were a good band but I feel like they've ruined it for all of us.


Does that make the Beatles crap, or the bands who copy them? A lot of the criticism I hear is about how their popularity changed the industry for the worse, too many people copied them for too long, etc. That's their impact that's (arguably) crap, not the band.


I didn't see the original post. If the Beatles ruined the basis of the music you create, then your music is crap. Get over yourself, you suck and should probably find something else to do.
blue_thunder wrote:You know, I can't help but think that Kim Gordon records all of her vocals while dropping a deuce.

http://www.myspace.com/therealrocker654
User avatar
rocker654
Perfect Picture of Wisdom and Boldness
Perfect Picture of Wisdom and Boldness
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 5:18 pm
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Postby cervixFORaHEart on Mon Dec 04, 2006 3:59 am

sit down and listen to "revolver" from start to finish and then type me up some jaded rationalization of "crap".

please.
User avatar
cervixFORaHEart
captain mash
captain mash
 
Posts: 1046
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 9:03 pm
Location: tower grove park

Postby Heliotropic on Sun Jun 03, 2007 10:01 pm

It is a guilty pleasure of mine to troll people whenever the Beatles are brought up in a conversation due to the very overrated position they have in the media today. Seeing a frat boy stutter, feign shock, and then proceed to demand (with an air of false authority) what could possibly be better than the Beatles always brightens my day.

Not crap; they wrote a lot of forgettable songs in the beginning of their career, but once they began to experiment they wrote some great songs.
User avatar
Heliotropic
man forced to eat beard
man forced to eat beard
 
Posts: 1866
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:40 pm
Location: bush

Postby Your Cap'n Speakin' on Sun Jun 03, 2007 11:40 pm

Your Cap'n Speakin'
julia roberts
julia roberts
 
Posts: 298
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 6:19 pm

Re: She was a Cow Tipper, yeah...

Postby M_a_x on Sun Jun 03, 2007 11:52 pm

geiginni wrote:
I'm not going to give 10 reasons why they suck, but I'll try for 10 reasons why they're overrated and why perhaps their fame has been detremental to music in general....

I don't want anyone worshipping my brain, either.

1. They took "rock" music and elevated it to the level of "fine art" in the minds of their public and "rock journalists". This, in the long run, has trivialized other forms of musical art, and allowed those in "rock journalism" and the larger rock fan base to remain willfully and dare I say arrogantly ignorant of other music.



I think a lot of this has to do with Rock itself hitting a certain age about the time the Beatles came in. I think, had Buddy Holly lived a little longer, you would have had music profs analyzing his use of "mixolydian 7ths" or some such bullshit. That doesn't mean the Beatles never purposely got arty and left themselves open to such a response, but they shouldn't get the all the blame (or credit) either way.

geiginni wrote:2. They, functioning as a "self contained singing, songwriting, performing unit" destroyed the existing musical concept of those that wrote/composed, those that perform, those that sing, and those that arrange. It set a paradigm where all musical "acts" are expected to be self-contained, self-sufficient "units"; whether or not they are good at any or all of these things. It has fostered an environment where mediocrity can flourish.


Well we have the old structure back in pop music, where you have songwriting wizards like "The Matrix", anonymous but oft-used producers, and at the very top muppetheads like Britney Spears....good thing medocrity got banished, eh?
The music business is powered by the dollar, and when great music makes the money, it's an accident anyway. This argument seems superfluous at best, disingenous at worst.

geiginni wrote:3. They, as an early "collaborative" unit, set the trend for bands that create by concensus. Though this worked extremely well for them (as evidenced by their post-Beatles individual outputs), it does not necessary function well for many other groups. I would argue that creation by concensus also fosters mediocrity. This expectation in the world of "rock" may in fact quell individual writers who may create better individually.


I don't think the Beatles created by consensus THAT much. I don't know what you mean by this. I think all four guys agreed what went on the final record, but...the other argument is that everything after Revolver, what a lot of people refer to as 'the only Beatles that matters' (though I think that's wrong) is definitely towards just mix albums of individual creations, with only mild cross-pollination here and there.

geiginni wrote:4. They set the pace, beyond Elvis, of the media mania clusterfuck. The spiralling media empire, with merchandising, tie-ins, etc... set the pace for the current music industry. This never went as far with Sinatra or the Dorseys, who were huge in their time.


I think it was mass media catching up with rock music in general. It was coincidental and not at all their fault except, as John Lennon said in a 70s interview, at the beginning they were more accepted by the media than Elvis was, because they were whiter than Elvis, being English. I dunno. Do you roll around in bed at night hating the Monkees??

geiginni wrote:5. Their early output was nothing more than insipid little ditties about boy-girl relationships.


What early rock and roll wasn't? How dare The Beatles start by singing love songs, same as everyone else at the time? It is never permissible for a band to start out by imitating their idols and then branching out with their own ideas, is that it?
As for 'insipid', I've told this story before on this board and I'll tell it again. We have so much historical perspective, and have listened to the 40 odd years since the first Beatles singles to really lose what was going on in the early 60s. A case in point is a song I'd never put on a best of Beatles mixtape, "I Want To Hold Your Hand". However, my Dad remembers that record coming out, and listening to it for the first time at a friend's house. To them it sounded sooooo different then anything else out there, so amped up and energetic, they listened to it about 8 times in a row and couldn't talk about anything else for weeks. I Want To Hold Your Hand! But when played back and back with the other 'hot' singles of the year, Louis Armstrong's 'Hello Dolly' or Jim Reeves' "My Heart Skips A Beat", yeah.

geiginni wrote:6. They spawned countless imitators, setting a trend that thrives to this day.


Any band that spawns imitators should be shot, is that it? Are automatically deserving of the term 'overhyped'? This is weird thinking to me. Elvis never spawned Gene Vincent and every other redneck out there with an attitude? What?

geiginni wrote:7. Much of their "revolutionary" creative doings were actually attributable to their production staff. George Martin deserves as much credit for their ground breaking work, as the group themselves. He did all the arranging, conducting, keyboard work (the good stuff at least), set the tracking schedule, etc... and is hugely responsible for the final result.


As Paul McCartney says in his autobiography, when speaking of George Martin receiving "Producer Of The Year" award for Sgt. Pepper's alone and not as co-producer with the rest of the Beatles - "He never made a Sgt. Pepper's with Gerry and the Pacemakers".
People throw the George Martin card around a lot...I wonder what they think these sessions were like? "Okay George we're tired, let's just do Mr. Kite with guitars, bass, drums like the old records" "No way, boys. My word is boss, and I say we play with it for 3 weeks until it sounds like nothing ever created. George, Paul, stop moping and take your positions. Geoff, fetch me my calliope. I've got some art to do"

geiginni wrote:8. By their very popularity, they steered the music industry to deem that "everything" they sold must bear the Midas Beatles Touch. Thereby Beatles easy-listening, Beatles acid-jazz, Beatles Andy Fucking Williams records, Beatles Classical records. Alot of decent artists and genres of music in the 60's were completely fucked over by the music industry's resulting clamoring to cash in on the Now sound, whether it be Beatles or hippies and Woodstock or whatever.


Fixed that for you. I mean Dylan to The Byrds to The Seekers - I ask you!

geiginni wrote:9. Their musicianship and skills were quite mediocre. They were easily eclipsed by groups like Zeppelin and King Crimson.


Musicianship was definitely part of the King Crimson aesthetic. It wasn't the Beatles, beyond being creative (Paul remembers being really excited they got a pop song with a diminished chord on the charts, and things like that) But I think in terms of sound and things people _didn't_ put on records in those days - like songs with one chord, or whatever - The Beatles could certainly stand their own ground. That's like saying fuck Debussy, Liszt was better. Eh? As for Zeppelin - and I'm a HUGE Zep-head - Zeppelin could do maybe 3 or 4 things really well. The Beatles did 4 or 5 things well PER ALBUM. And I'd rather have Paul McCartney in my band then any two members of Zeppelin.

geiginni wrote:10. Sir Paul McCartney.....enough said.


Yeah, that's probably enough on your end.
Last edited by M_a_x on Mon Jun 04, 2007 12:03 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
M_a_x
baron munchausen
baron munchausen
 
Posts: 630
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 5:50 pm

Postby John George Peppers on Mon Jun 04, 2007 12:30 am

Mr. Chimp wrote:It almost seems pointless to type anything here.

Not crap for a million reasons.


Agreed. Anyone claiming the Beatles are crap are just making themselves look foolish.


djanes1 wrote:I dont even like any of the beatles music, but everyone knows they are not crap....
User avatar
John George Peppers
Humankind's Greatest Musical Genius
Humankind's Greatest Musical Genius
 
Posts: 4277
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 3:53 pm
Location: Chicago

Postby trilonaut on Mon Jun 04, 2007 2:57 am

i wouldn't call them crap, but when i think about which songs/albums i like i realize that i only really like a small a percentage of beatles stuff.

most of it i don't mind, but some of it actually gets on my nerves:

norwegian wood
you've got to hide your love away
the end (and some other parts of that medley)
octopus's garden
don't pass me by

and a number of other songs.

still dig the yellow submarine movie (naturally since i was raised on it) and "i want you (she's so heavy)" is badass.
trilonaut
the white ho
the white ho
 
Posts: 1657
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 3:51 am

Re: She was a Cow Tipper, yeah...

Postby Nico Adie on Mon Jun 04, 2007 3:40 am

M_a_x wrote: "Geoff, fetch me my calliope. I've got some art to do"


I am going to use this line in a song.

Thank you.

Also, Beatles - Not Crap.
User avatar
Nico Adie
Leader with Extraordinary Personality
Leader with Extraordinary Personality
 
Posts: 2996
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 11:26 am
Location: Scotland

Postby Josef K on Mon Jun 04, 2007 4:57 am

The Beatles just don't do it for me. I never get excited by any of their songs. Maybe it's just over familiarity as their music has been pretty much present for all of my life, so far.
gjhardwick wrote:shut up you massive baptist
User avatar
Josef K
Eternal Bosom of Hot Love
Eternal Bosom of Hot Love
 
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 11:36 am

Postby bassman on Mon Jun 04, 2007 7:42 am

this thread shouldn't even exist,
NOT CRAP!
"Keep it Country"
User avatar
bassman
laney
laney
 
Posts: 159
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 7:43 am
Location: Dublin Ireland

Postby SecondEdition on Mon Jun 04, 2007 4:54 pm

Dylan wrote:Here's another one:

All the minutes of "Everybody's Got Something To Hide (Except For Me And My Monkey)".


Fuck. Yeah.

crap voters - you are all diseased.
Life...life...I know it's got its ups and downs.

In the someday, what's that sound.


CS. PC. MM.
User avatar
SecondEdition
King Shit of Fuck Mountain
 
Posts: 22448
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 8:32 am
Location: Midwest, USA

PreviousNext

Return to Crap / Not Crap

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Isabelle Gall, NewDarkAge and 23 guests