What is it with The Beatles?
|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
|
| Author |
Message |
- #1
- Posted: 09/23/2012 05:39
- Post subject: What is it with The Beatles?
|
|
Are they really that good? Surely they must sound dated now after 43-50 years?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mr. Shankly
Gender: Male
Age: 53
Location: Auburn, Washington 
- #2
- Posted: 09/23/2012 06:03
- Post subject: Re: What is it with The Beatles?
|
| thejoj96 wrote: | | Are they really that good? Surely they must sound dated now after 43-50 years? |
Well for one, they have more consistently great pop /rock songs in terms of melody, harmony, and sometimes lyrics than pretty much any band / artist in history. Now if songs and songwriting as a craft aren't things you value highly in music, you would probably ask that first question. As for whether they sound dated at all, maybe their '63 and '64 era stuff does, but I think the period of Rubber Soul to Let it Be still sounds very contemporary. As for why they are so revered, part of the appeal is their incredible songwriting, but part of it is also the way their music was recorded and how it sounded. This was due to the genius of George Martin as a producer and creatively adventurous engineers like Geoff Emerick. Listen to an oldies radio station, and tell me the Beatles recordings don't sound different and better than a lot of the other artists from that period. To me, their recordings are timeless. Also, they remain one of the most (if not the most) influential bands of all time. Of course, if you're one of those people that just wants super challenging art for art's sake music all the time, you're probably not going to be a huge Beatles fan. Your loss.
|
|
|
|
Norman Bates
Gender: Male
Age: 53
Location: Paris, France 
- #3
- Posted: 09/23/2012 06:10
- Post subject: Re: What is it with The Beatles?
|
| thejoj96 wrote: | | 1) Are they really that good? 2) Surely they must sound dated now after 43-50 years? |
1) Yes.
2) Probably, mostly their earlier stuff.
|
|
|
|
cartoken
The Seer
Gender: Male
Age: 41
Location: Paris
- #4
- Posted: 09/23/2012 06:42
- Post subject: Re: What is it with The Beatles?
|
| thejoj96 wrote: | | Are they really that good? Surely they must sound dated now after 43-50 years? |
1) No, they are just the Rihanna of the 60s
2) and yes, all their stuff sounds primitive.
|
|
|
|
- #5
- Posted: 09/23/2012 06:44
- Post subject:
|
|
What is it that makes one think that these kind of threads will lead to anything postiive?
|
|
|
|
|
|
VADERBREWING
Gender: Male
Age: 58
Location: Oregon Coast
- #6
- Posted: 09/23/2012 06:52
- Post subject:
|
I really liked the Beatles, and feel they cosistantly wrote good songs, and were way better than other bands from the era. No band will ever be that big again.
But I prefer the good modern albums over the Beatles albums and feel that they may not have the Best Ever Albums.
Still, their pretty good.
_________________
New fav's: The Weepies, Art Brut, 311. Old Fav's: Bowie, zepalin, stones, buckcherry, cheap trick, couting crowes. Seen: Black Crowes, Nirvana, Ugly Kid Joe, Pretenders, Phycadelic furs, Ozzy, Thompson Twins, B Adams...regret not seeing G&R.
|
|
|
|
Facetious
Gender: Male
Age: 26
Location: Somewhere you've never been 
- #7
- Posted: 09/23/2012 07:31
- Post subject:
|
As I would have guessed. If the "What is it with (insert Beatles album here)?" threads, complete with the "dated" question, only this time focusing on the Beatles in general, were to be brought back by anybody, that person would be thejoj96 🤣 Not necessarily a bad or good thing though.
As for my opinion of them, they made a few good albums, so they are a great band but overall really overrated. A lot of their stuff is flawed (sometimes it seems they don't have any interesting ideas, and sometimes they have interesting ideas but don't know what to do with them, resulting in only mildly interesting songs), and I don't get the thousands of people who say they were largely consistent and put them on a pedestal above all other bands, but I do like them very much because when they did get everything just right, they were unbeatable (it's just that this didn't happen nearly as much as many people say 🙁 ). Their most creative period was between Revolver and Abbey Road, the three albums released in that period were among the best of that time by any artist. The other albums for the most part contain too many average songs.
|
|
|
|
Facetious
Gender: Male
Age: 26
Location: Somewhere you've never been
- #8
- Posted: 09/23/2012 07:34
- Post subject:
|
|
Also, yeah, some of their work sounds dated, particularly pre-Revolver work.
|
|
|
|
Norman Bates
Gender: Male
Age: 53
Location: Paris, France
- #9
- Posted: 09/23/2012 07:48
- Post subject:
|
| Saoirse wrote: | | What is it that makes one think that these kind of threads will lead to anything postiive? |
I don't think it really matters if a thread doesn't lead to something positive. Not all threads can, and it's no big deal. We can also discuss things just for the sake of it, without hoping for any positive result. This is probably thejoj's most positive posts in ages, I'll gladly express my views in it, and if nothing comes out of this, well, I don't mind much.
|
|
|
|
alelsupreme
Awful.
Gender: Male
Age: 28
- #10
- Posted: 09/23/2012 09:46
- Post subject:
|
They are good becuse they came up with several good songs, and not just the succesful ones.
Their pre Revolver stuff can sound a tad bit dated as can some of their psychedelic work but dated dosen't nessecarily = bad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
