What is it with Revolver?

[smudge3]

Is it really that good? surely must sound a bit dated now after 30 years?

smudge

[headlessroland]

Part of why Revolver holds its place on so many "best album" lists is the fact that it doesn't sound dated; the music itself is universal and timeless. Part of that may be that the Beatles influenced so many artists and genres, it may be that this album forever changed how people looked at rock n' roll and pop music in general. Whatever the case, it most certainly stands up even almost forty years later, and is definitely worth a listen.

-Adam-

[AfterHours]

Nahh...

The Beatles are tremendously overrated. Good band, charismatic, very good at melodies, some great compositions (A Day in the Life, Tomorrow Never Knows, Strawberry Fields Forever, I am the Walrus), but dedicated most of their energies to creating tons of above average tunes that simply pale in comparison to the masterpieces of rock.

Their best love songs are perhaps In My Life and Yesterday, possibly Hey Jude and some others.

Yet, when put next to other masterpieces from the era such as Sad Eyed Lady of the Lowlands by Dylan, Light My Fire by The Doors, Beside You by Van Morrison (or practically anything else off Astral Weeks) to name a few, The Beatles simply lack depth. They're fun, sure, but they're way overrated. They're not even close to the greatest rock artists of all time, and Revolver doesn't hold a candle to any of the greatest albums ever made. I think your insinuation is completely spot on.

[The_111th_Beatle]

Revolver is an album of incredible variety and quality; Eleanor Rigby (almost classical yet appeals to people not interested in classical music), Yellow Submarine (a childrens song but appealing to people of all ages), Good Day Sunshine (great up-beat pop), Tommorow Never Knows (Indian acid type music), Love You To (Indian/rock cross breed) and the fantastic guitar work on Taxman and And Your Bird Can Sing. I could go on for a long while about just how good this album is.

If you're not a huge Beatles fan thats fine but I don't see how anyone can say they were overrated when all kinds of artists includng Dylan, Slash (GnR), Nirvana, Oasis, ELO, Elvis Costello and Jimi Hendrix to name but a few praised them. Music that was made 40 years ago doesnt stay popular and constantly appeal to a new audience unless its really good. I also dont understand how you say the Beatles lack depth when they displayed more variety than most artists of their time or any others.
_________________
"Its so easy to laugh, its so easy to hate. It takes guts to be gentle and kind"

[AfterHours]

Well, of course, it's all a matter of opinion and I'm quite certain you're not the only one who disagrees with me.

The best way to see how Revolver lacks depth is to compare it to some albums during the period that possess great depth.

Blonde On Blonde-Bob Dylan
Astral Weeks-Van Morrison
Velvet Underground & Nico-The Velvet Underground
Trout Mask Replica-Captain Beefheart & His Magic Band

These albums are infinitely more insightful and profound and demonstrate far greater compositional ingenuity and innovation than that of Revolver, as well as the entirety of The Beatles career. The fission involved in Trout Mask Replica, where the band combines a variety of different styles to form an emotional outburst of staggering proportions over a course of 25+ songs that are constantly changing and shapeshifting in endlessly different directions. Or, how Astral Weeks exhibits Morrison's immensely powerful vocals set to a masterful blend of acoustics classical nuance and intimate jazz, soulfully completing a profound and in-depth song cycle on childhood, growing up, the yearning for and loss of both love and innocence. Velvet Underground & Nico, with its streetwise rough edges and its splurges into decadance and the horrors of emotional turmoil lost in the parties, the tripped out afterthoughts and the ugliest corners and alleys of the city of New York. Blonde On Blonde, which is among the most influential albums of any genre, more or less inventing the album format, and vaulting rock into the realm of jazz, with its rich, textured compositions and its songs (especially Sad Eyed Lady of the Lowlands) that seem to endlessly create upon themselves (making songs within songs) resulting in a work of massive content and depth.

Revolver, while undeniably poppy and catchy, is merely a set of mediocre, slight songs. Tomorrow Never Knows is the closest they come to pulling off something really great. Overall, the album lacks unity, and most of all, lacks a significant sense of realism. When The Beatles sing a love song, they hardly ever sound as if they're really in love, or really devastated by the sadness they speak of. The conviction is there to make a great, catchy melody, but it's hardly there to project a strong feeling of emotion or conviction towards depth or profound insight. Their compositions too, exhibit this failing, usually consisting of a few instruments doing very little to project a great atmosphere or that of another world. They are more there to push the song along and make it as accessible as possible, as opposed to going all out towards communicating the power of the emotions being represented, regardless of where this takes them on the charts. Each one is but a skeleton of something that could've been far fuller (something they demonstrated a little better with Sgt. Pepper, an album possessing significantly more depth than Revolver. Here is where Martin finally started to really put to use his compositional strengths. It shows with Sgt. Pepper, The White Album and Abbey Road more than any other Beatles albums).

[The_111th_Beatle]

I disagree with what you say about the Beatles songs lacking conviction (Something, Yesterday and I Want To Hold Your Hand sound really heartfelt) especially those on Revolver. Good Day Sunshine isn't supposed to capture the passion of love but rather the bouncy, happy feeling love gives you which it does. For No One is sung from the third person, an outsider's mournful commentary on a loveless relationship rather than exhibiting the sadness from the point of view of someone in that relationship. Here, There and Everywhere creates an almost dreamlike atmosphere which suits the feeling McCartney says his lover gives him in the song. Taxman creates a rebellious and satrical attitude to the taxes they had to pay without coming off as whining or moaning over nothing. Eleanor Rigby has the perfect tone for its subject; sad but overly affected because no one cares about the lonely people as individuals. The songs create emotions and an atmosphere but perhaps not the one you were looking for or expected. There are some lightweights like Yellow Submarine and Doctor Robert but they hold their own as good songs if not overly meaningful, that to me is the key to Revolver it has the perfect mix of meaningful and fun songs and different styles of songs thus it is hard to talk of it as an album with particular depth or atmosphere but rather as a brilliant collection of good songs of all different sorts.
_________________
"Its so easy to laugh, its so easy to hate. It takes guts to be gentle and kind"

[AfterHours]

I agree with you that it's a collection of good songs of different sorts, but I don't think it's even close to a masterpiece.

What I require of a masterpiece is:

1. On average the songs must be amazing or of masterpiece quality.
2. The album must be significantly profound as a whole
3. The album must have considerable depth
4. The album must exhibit significant ingenuity
5. The album must posess great continuity

I feel Revolver is a good album, but fails by a large margin to make any of these requirements.

If a masterpiece rating is a 9.0/10 or higher, I'd rate Revolver around a 6.5/10.

My album ratings scale is as follows (with some examples):

0-4.9 POOR, NOT WORTH LISTENING TO AT ALL
Spice Girls, Britney Spears albums

5.0-5.4 AVERAGE
Back To Bedlam-James Blunt

5.5-5.9 ABOVE AVERAGE
Rubber Soul-Beatles

6.0-6.4 GOOD
A Hard Days Night-Beatles
Pablo Honey-Radiohead

6.5-6.9 QUITE GOOD
Revolver-Beatles
Ziggy Stardust-David Bowie
White Album-Beatles

7.0-7.4 VERY GOOD
Sgt. Pepper-Beatles
Abbey Road-Beatles
Pet Sounds-Beach Boys
Forever Changes-Love
Blood On The Tracks-Bob Dylan
London Calling-Clash

7.5-7.9 EXCELLENT
OK Computer-Radiohead
Funeral-Arcade Fire
Doolittle-Pixies
Blue-Joni Mitchell

8.0-8.4 OUTSTANDING
Marquee Moon-Television
Highway 61 Revisited-Bob Dylan
Remain In Light-Talking Heads
Agaetis Byrjun-Sigur Ros
Electric Ladyland-Jimi Hendrix

8.5-8.9 AMAZING
Songs of Leonard Cohen-Leonard Cohen
White Light/White Heat-Velvet Underground
Repeater-Fugazi
Tago Mago-Can

9.0-9.4 MASTERPIECE
Sprit of Eden-Talk Talk
Blonde On Blonde-Bob Dylan
Astral Weeks-Van Morrison
Velvet Underground & Nico-Velvet Underground
Trout Mask Replica-Captain Beefheart

9.5-9.9 SUPREME MASTERPIECE
The Black Saint & The Sinner Lady-Charles Mingus
Faust-Faust
Rock Bottom-Robert Wyatt
A Love Supreme-John Coltrane

10.0 ULTIMATE MASTERPIECE
None Known

So, it seems to me the main reason we disagree is that we have a different set of ideals for what makes an amazing album, or a masterpiece, etc. You're ideals are not wrong. If they work for you, they're right. Mine work for me, so I'm right too. Music evaluation is only an opinion. I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

However, if you're interested in some albums that I think you'd enjoy, post a list of your all time top albums, and I'll give you some recommendations to check out.

[The_111th_Beatle]

Yeah fair enough we'll have to agree to disagree. I'd also like to thank you as this is the most intelligent discussion/argument I've ever had on the internet. As for posting my favourite albums I would but as of now I'm still expanding my horizons, hopefully if Christmas goes well I'll have plenty of albums to post.
_________________
"Its so easy to laugh, its so easy to hate. It takes guts to be gentle and kind"

[AfterHours]

Thank you too! I had a blast!

[SamTheMan]

Most overated band of all time!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Zeppelin 'n Floyd any day