Now we know how many trolls it takes to fill the Albert Hall.
|
To all those who don't like the Beatles, I blame your parents.
Your momma don't dance and your daddy don't rock n' roll.
|
So I guess you got the answer(s) as to what our fascination is and why we like them:) I agree - to each their own. |
Treyhoss, they were my wife's. I did not marry her for her musical tastes nor she for mine. As for musical growth that
is always someone's interpretation. I will gleefully give the Beatles' the title of kings of pop music and pop culture. They probably were responsible for getting pop
music out its doldrums from FValli, et al. In the context
of pop music they expanded the horizons beyond what people
expected of pop music and pop culture, but did they expand
my horizons of what I thought music should be? The answer
is that I looked elsewhere. GThomas and I agree that our worlds are different, so be it. Your worldview and mine
are just different that's all. I learned that from this
thread which to me was a thrill....really!!!! |
The impact of the Beatles is truly felt in today's music. A lot of groups have no musical growth or don't want to experiment for "fear" of changing their sound and alienating their fans. The Beatles were the kings of musical "growth" - you want proof, put on "Meet the Beatles" then put on Abbey Road. Listen to "She Loves You" then listen to "Helter Skelter". Remember, the Beatles were only on the scene for 7 years before they broke up! Shubertmaniac, when you were on vacation and listened to those 20 Beatles CD (why do you have those?) - did you at all consider that you had THAT MUCH music from a band only together for a few short years? THAT's the magic of the Beatles. That 7 years (or so) together even produced 28 #1 hits (and God knows how many #2 and #3 songs) says it all. |
Click click, send send. (right?) |
Happiness is a warm mouse |
He's a real nowhere Man,
Sitting in his Nowhere Land,
Making all his nowhere plans
for nobody.
Doesn't kave a point of view,
Knows not where he's going to,
Isn't he a bit like you and me?
Nowhere Man, please listen,
You don't know what you're missing,
Nowhere Man, the world is at your command.
He's as blind as he can be,
Just sees what he wants to see,
Nowhere Man can you see me at all?
Doesn't kave a point of view,
Knows not where he's going to,
Isn't he a bit like you and me?
Nowhere Man, don't worry,
Take your time, don't hurry,
Leave it all till somebody else
lend you a hand.
He's a real Nowhere Man,
Sitting in his Nowhere Land,
Making all his nowhere plans
for nobody. |
Thanks for the info Ben. Very interesting. Sorry for the double post, I hit refresh and for some reason it sent my post again. |
|
Prudence was Prudence Farrow sister of actress Mia Farrow-she was in India along with the Beatles at the same time.
Apparently she was incredibly shy and John Lennon quite taken with her wrote that great song about her.
I was also kind of struck recently while watching Rosemary's Baby on TV starring Mia Farrow Of the horrible sychronicity involved.
Polanski who directed the movie had his pregnant girlfrield murdered by Charles Manson who said his demented actions were partly inspired by the Beatles and the movie was filmed in the Dakota building where Lennon was murdered outside.A bit creepy really considering the movie is about the Devil (not Carl Eber but the real one).
Er sorry about that........... |
|
Trivia question-does anybody know who Prudence is?
I do. |
Dear Prudence, won't you come out to play
Dear Prudence, greet the brand new day
The sun is up, the sky is blue
It's beautiful and so are you
Dear Prudence won't you come out and play
Dear Prudence open up your eyes
Dear Prudence see the sunny skies
The wind is low the birds will sing
that you are part of everything
Dear Prudence won't you open up your eyes?
Look around round
Look around round round
Look around
Dear Prudence let me see you smile
Dear Prudence like a little child
The clouds will be a daisy chain
So let me see you smile again
Dear Prudence won't you let me see you smile? |
|
Yea! please stay away Shubertmaniac. My 15 year old daughter loves the beatles, and the Backstreet boys. Or any band that sings love songs "to her" That's there apeal, love songs. It's not original, they just carried it to the next generation, and better than any band prior or sence. It may be hard for you , in your universe to understand, but it's that simple. Wish I understood earlier that was all you needed. |
Schubertmaniac - Interestingly enough, anecdotal evidence doesn't do much for any of us. I live in the Metro Detroit area and our classic rock and oldies stations play quite a bit of Beatles music, "come Together" and "Let It Be" seeming to be two of their corporate headquarter's favorite. As we all know, 99% of FM stations are owned and programed by corporations who only want to make some money from them. And, this is interesting: our local "jazz" station plays NO Miles, Mingus, Monk, or Coltrane let alone anything from Chet Baker, Charlie Parker, or even Duke Ellington. We do get lots of Earl Klugh, Grover Washington, and Anita Baker, none of whom show any influence of any of the truly greats listed above. Oh yeah, and my 19 yr old nephew (who I see once a year) absolutely loves the Beatles and has told me he "intensely studied" them for his music. His band (alt rock) has won two battle of the bands in the last 18 months and is booked almost every weekend. And for his high school graduation a year ago, three people, including me, bought him Miles Davis' Bitches Brew box set! David recently told me he likes Santana's last album but that "His first six albums are his Canon." Anyway, I personally think kids today are, in many respects, a pretty shallow bunch of people. I know I was when i was 14. Aw, what the Hell...Miles, Coltrane, Hendrix, and The Beatles absolutely rule!! |
KThomas..we are both right...our musical universes are (and those that crucfied me) are just totally different. I guess I am now satisfied. Enough from me for awhile. |
Shubertmaniac - Actually, I agree that selling a jillion albums has nothing to do with their influence and, to a large extent, significance. I only brought it up since your line of reasoning seemed to be centered on measures of popularity. Who did they influence in the '80's and '90's? Squeeze, Marshall Crenshaw, Crowded House, Fountains of Wayne, Moxy Fruvous, Oasis, Charlatans UK. These are just bands that come immediately to mind that I listen to often. I'm not personally arguing that the Beatles transcend the ages, mainly because I'm not enough of a student of music history to say that with any authority. But their influence, success and skill are all but inarguable. Go read the entry on them on All-Music Guide (www.allmusic.com) - they quite eloquently explain how the Beatles transcended everybody else. I have a 14 year old daughter and I'm very aware that the Beatles hold no particular interest to her or her friends. Again, though, aren't we back to talking about popularity issues as opposed to significance or skill? I think it's quite possible that you don't understand based on being in a different musical universe than I and many others. Your example of Hank Williams Sr. is a good example - he's definitely not in my musical universe - there are clearly many to exist in and very few people can be in very many at once. |
KThomas, it was a joke both about poor ol' Led Zep and about the radio stations. Still NOBODY has explained how they transcended everybody else. If my joke on radio stations is invalid then your take on selling agillion albums is also invalid because the only people that bought the album are aging boomers. My kids and their friends,who are a very perceptive lot I might add, don't give a damn one way or another. It's only oldtimers' music. As far as influence is concerned, in the 80s and 90s ,(besides TV commercials) who did they possibly influence: Madonna? Prince? M.Jackson? InSync? B.Spears? But did they influence REM? or Nirvana? U2? Since everybody likes to pontificate, tell me what specifically makes them transcend everybody else and influence others. Maybe I don't understand because I live in a different musical universe than you. Hell in some other musical universes' Hank Williams Sr is god who transcends over everything. |
Well, how many times do you hear a Beatles influence in current pop music - constantly. A CD of their 27 (!!) #1 hits that's selling in the Britney / NSync range. They still have a huge sales appeal and are extremely influential in music being produced today - transcending all other musical artists of this era would be a strong statement, but hardly dismissable. You're irritated by everything musical your kids like and define rock and roll as "anything musical that irritates the parents" - hmmmm, sounds like a nice objective starting point for evaluating the merits of the genre. For somebody who has such a distaste for it, I'm wondering why you spend as much time as you apparently do listening to or researching the playlists of Classic Rock radio stations - who, pray tell, still listens to FM at all regularly, much less a classic rock station? To hold up their playlists as evidence of the significance of a band's contributions is just irrelevant. |
Tomryan: a few observations: how many times do you hear the Beatles on classic rock radio stations, virtually zero;how many times do you hear them on oldies stations, only the very early stuff;how many times would you expect to hear them on college or classical music stations absolutely zero. If they truly transcend all other musical artists of this era, then why are they not played more often. My children look back on the era and to them it is all throwaway music, boomer music they like to call it. "It's nice Mom but have you heard....." anything to irritate the crap out of me. Hey isn't that the very definition of rock and roll, anything musical that irritates the parents gotta be rockroll music. So in the end did the Beatles irritate your parents or did they embrace them, my parents thought they were cute, that ended it for me. Classic rock stations play Led Zeppelin...over..and...over...over(and my parents still hate them), does that mean Led Zeppelin transcends the Beatles at least rock and rollwise.ha ha ha |
Nice Post Tom. It is funny to me however that no one in this thread mentions the one American group at the time that rivaled the early Beatles and later influenced them. The first group I REALLY loved and have become an icon in their own right. The Stones were the bad boys but the Beach Boys were the Beatles' real American rivals. Remember, the Stones, Yardbirds, Dave Clark Five, Hermans Hermits and the rest of those invaders' and their work weren't the inspiration for Sgt. Pepper, Pet Sounds was. I don't know how many of you Audiogoner's out there were influenced by them but I sure was. All those songs about cars, surf, sun and especially girls sure change my life to the point that I traveled 70 miles each way to surf and live that lifestyle in a few of my summer teen years. Oh, Sweet Bird of Youth, how sweet it was! |
|
Nice post Tomryan, All that needs saying is said. I retire from the beatles thread. |
O.K., I've just figured out what's going on here. I'm 49 yrs old and was 12 when the Beatles first performed on Ed Sullivan. I sat with my family in our basement rec room and was entralled, as were the rest of my family, even parents. The rest, as they say, is history. However... I do understand where Shubertmaniac is coming from. During the 2-3 years after Feb, 1964, pop and rock music just exploded with innovation, ideas, and excitement, the Beatles indeed being at the forefront of it. There quickly came a time when one chose sides, so to speak, and became either a Beatles fan or a Rolling Stones fan, and the disagreements were voluminous. I was a Stones fan (when I was 12-15 yrs old) and also a huge fan of the garage style bands such as The 13th Floor Elevators, Syndicate of Sound (the summer of '66 I fell in love with Crystal Yarlott to "Hey, Little Girl". I was then able to rely on the song when she dumped me a few weeks later.), the Woolies, etc. Now, we all have to remember what it was like being a young teenager, especially a boy, and how underdeveloped our thinking abilites were. The Beatles/Stones argument pretty much was split down the middle by sexes, guys for the Stones (and other type bands/music) and girls for the Beatles (and even early Simon and Garfunkel). However, as we all grew older and, hopefully, more musically mature, things changed. It wasn't until Revolver and St. Pepper's that I realized the Beatles were something beyond what I had ever imagines or thought about. By the time Abbey Road came out, I understood that this was music for my lifetime, transcending sex, age, and everything else. The Beatles are the greatest pop/rock band of all time and no one will ever surpass them. They join the ranks of those who will never be equaled in their art: Mozart, Beethoven, Bruce Lee (for the sheer visual beauty and his power of expression of his martial art), and Hendrix. These are people who will always be immitated but never surpassed or even equalled. The Beatles easily join those ranks. The fact that we are even having this very long discussion about them proves it. Now, I have to say I still love the great bands of the 60s; I too have all the Nuggets collections and just got from Amazon.com The Darlings of Wapping Wharf Launderette by The Small Faces. (I have one of the greatest garage band CDs of all time, Michigan Memories with "Persecution Smith" by Bob Seger and the Last Heard (sp), "In the Midnight Hour" by The Wanted, "Respect" by the Rationals, "Love's Gone Bad" by The Underdogs, and a bunch more. Too bad this things been out of print for 4-5 years. Anyway, I think it's a bit sad to be as old as we are and still fighting the battles of our confused adolescent egos that should have been abandoned and outgrown 30 or more years ago. |
This was my point Shubertmaniac, your starting thread followed by this quote thread of yours and all the other opinions you've expressed here: "Jademo, The London school of British imports were a much different breed from the Liverpool boys. They were going to make it in spite of the trash from the beatles. In fact the Beatles set back rock 10 years. Listen any American garage band worth their salt emulated the Animals, Rolling Stones or Yardbirds, that's why bad boys always get the chicks!! Is it not the reason for rock and roll, hey, do you know what rock and roll is slang for????? The point is The ANIMALS, STONES and YARDBIRDS had far less to do with rock than the music they learned from. I think rock could have made it without the ANIMALS! |
Clapton? Hardly in my opinion the greatest rock influence of all time. Has he made a decent record in years? I have to say Dylan has produced a much wider range of music and stretched what popular music was about and what a song could achieve. The Beatles have had an impact on popular music bigger than anybody, ever, irrespective of how good you think their music was (oh and I think it was rather good)partly because of the reasons highlighted on the threads above. Clapton was good but I don't think he is in the league of these two or anywhere near it...nor has he experimented as much as say Zappa or Bowie again irrespective of how good you think some of that music was...... |
Jademo: So what's your point?? We were never discussing the virtues of the Chicago blues or its influence on rock music of the 60s. The thread was about the Beatles and their influence Were you around then or what? Do you think the Beatles were the driving force in your musical life? I stated in this thread: no they were not and I stated who and why. I was crucified for my heresy but that's ok. If you wanted to talk about great guitar bands or legends ,there was a previous thread on the subject. |
The beatles were good pop music for their time.I was listening and enjoying their music. IT IS OVER. GET OVER IT. There is lot more out there right now. Not just rock-pop and jazz. If you listen carefully hip-hop and electronic has lot more to it than given credit for. Hip-hop is being brushed aside mostly from the affluent community (read white)but listen aside from very well done sampling (sometimes better than the original), there is great quality of creation going on. Similar argument can be made about the electronic music.WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE! |
I'm sure grad that shubertmaniac was able to share his great knowledge of the histoy of rock! The bands and songs he's touting, The Animals "It's My Life"; "Get Off My Cloud"; Kinks' "All Day and All Night". He's here to tell us all that without the influence of these great bands rock would still be in the garage, huh. Seams to me these bands are just more pop top 40's in a different suit. I guess the influence that Robert johnson, Willie Dixson, Howlin' Wolf, Jimmy Rogers, Muddy Waters, Freddie King and John Lee Hooker all had on formulating the style of Keith Richards, Eric Clapton, Duane Almond, Jimmy Hendrix, Jerry Garcia, John Mayall, Allen Parsons, Bob Dylan etc. really ment nothing after all. Had the true inavators not listened to the Chicago Blues/ and the formation of the electric guitar we would have really followed the likes of the Animals, Mick Jagger, Chuck Berry and the Beach Boys along with the Beatles. Your right Shubertmaniac, if not for your great "British Bands" we couldn't have had real inivation in music! "get off your cloud son" I was thinking last night, the only guy I can think of that has transended all forms of rock is Clapton. He's been at the cutting edge of style developement, he tried his pop top 40's (too often)and blues. In my opinion, wich is worth what your paying, Clapton must be the greatest rock influence of all time. Any comments? |
PS: Those singles by Mitch Ryder & Detroit Wheels are some of greatest records ever...heard "Devil In A Blue Dress" comin' at me over the airwaves while driving down I75 on New Years, almost got a speeding ticket...so yeah, I still care. "Hey Little Girl" was always a favorite - yeah, loved those snotty garage bands. It was amazing time for music on the radio, only time I can remember when high art, low art, rock'n roll, pop, soul and r&b were all going strong - all this great music of different types and quality (but all FUN)and it all got played all the time on all radio stations. |
Welcome back Schubertmaniac. We will never agree on the Beatles ('n that's alright), but I'm with ya on other 60's/Brit/garage bands you mentioned. What I remember best about 1966 (I was a freshman in high school) was how cool it was to be glued to the radio, any radio. Almost every song dancing through the airwaves sounded great - hooks, riffs, harmonies and teenage love/angst/joy. I love the "Nuggets" compilations and still have the original LP compiled by Lenny Kaye. Have a happy new year. |
I probably did in my Dad's old 1950 Mercury but I wasn't listening to sound quality just along for the ride in those long days gone bye bye. I do however remember reading in an auto magazine several years back about some guy that had over 50K(!!) invested in a tubed car audio system that won some kind of award for sound quality. In car audio it seems to be more about db's; it you can exceed the db level of a jet engine at maybe 10' your on the right track. Hell I can sometimes hear (feel is a better word) that bass thump from god knows where when I'm listening to my own stereo with the windows closed and I have thermal pane windows and a very well insulated house. |
Tubegroover: Speaking of car radios; have you ever had the opportunity to listen to a tubed one from the 50s/early 60s with reverb? Try it sometime. You will never go back to solid state car stereo again. Elvis never sounded better. |
Hey Shubertmaniac that '63 Plymouth Fury wasn't named "Christine" was it? Nice post. |
I was on vacation for two weeks without my computer;so no audiogon. I thought I would check back to see if there was anything worth responding. Cornfedboy: that was a funny, funny post;loved it. To the point: I took about 20 of my Beatles' CDs along on vacation, listened very carefully. I wanted so much to "get it". There were fun songs, sad songs, even meaningful songs. But in the end they do absolutely nothing for me except bring back fading memories from my youth. By the way, the 1963 Plymouth was not mine but my brother's friend(and it did have all that I stated and more;my car was a 1968 Dodge Charger R/T with the right bells and whistles). OK so what; we all had AM radios with tiny 3" speakers listening to music to pass the time away on those hot summer nights. So what if the Rolling Stones or the Animals got us out of the boredom more than the Beatles. Hey what songs of the Summer of '66 do you relate to? Does anybody remember any of the great garage band songs like Psychotic Reaction by the Count Five or Dirty Water by the Standells. Remember Hey Little Girl by Syndicate of Sound? Does anybody remember(or care) Mitch Rider and the Detroit Wheels? The Garage Bands of America emulated either the Rolling Stones Animals or Yardbirds. Why:easy to play, aways fun, throwaway songs, always about bravado, getting the girl, lamenting her loss, etc. laughable stuff, always a good guitar(or organ)hook, and cynical or world weary vocals(even though they were probably still in their teens/early twenties). OK, let my go out on a long thin limb again and say that the greatest teenage angst song of the 60s was "Gloria" written by Van Morrison and played by every bar band, high school rock band, and covered by the Doors and Jimi Hendrix(guitar fireworks). Besides if you wanted serious rock/popular music then try listening to Bob Dylan. |
Some of the confusion about Harrison and Clapton's lead playing may come from the fact that Harrison played on Cream's "Badge" (through a Leslie speaker, so it has a distinct "swirling" sound) under the name of Mister Mysterioso and Clapton played lead on "While My Guitar Gently Weeps," released about the same time. |
PS: I did find some gems other than "All Things", Fleetwood Mac - Kiln House and the BBC Sessions, "The Best of Chaka Khan" volume one and Dudley Moore "Live from an Aircraft Hangar". |
Cornfed: No hurry, the last time I heard "I am Jeep" was in the summer of 1972 on a Sansui quad set up in Hawaii:-) |
Thanks Tubegroover for reminding me of the great cutting edge work by Pat Boone. The intire music industry owes it's great rewards to this "master". |
dekay: i have sources in the recording biz (my older son and his dj wife-whoa!). anyway, i'll check out actual release dates. i can usually get stuff a month or more ahead of announced release dates. |
Cornfed: I just tried to pick up a copy of "All Things" today and was told Late February for the remaster. I have always used vinyl, but after not even having a system for 15 years, I went with digital this time. I had never played or heard a CD, on a decent system, until nine months ago. I have had quite a lot of difficulty getting the sound that I was looking for with digital, but just stumbled across the magic combination of DAC, transport and cables etc, for me, and am very happy with the results right now (especially with well engineered disks). |
Thanks, Tubegroover. Stones, with Jimmy Miller producing avec Brian Jones, consisitently delivered authoritative, rock driven, penetrative licks. They lost me after Exile. |
Jadem6 Obviously you never heard Pat Boone sing "April Love" with "101 Strings" in the support mode. Just kidding but couldn't resist and I do agree with the way the Beatles used orchestra, Tin Pan Alley style and completely until then mixes that weren't even conceived (thanks George Martin for the help, you don't get enough recognization for the great producer you are). By the way Siddh great post and great insight very succintly stated except for the part about the Stones being the "Greatest Rock and Roll Band". I don't agree with you but that is for another thread. The Stones are the greatest longest living rock band. Although I'll always love Keith Richards for being the GREATEST GUITARIST WHO EVER LIVED TO TOUR!! He eptiomizes the Stones to a greater extent than Jagger ever will to me. |
Speaking of classical and the Beatles, I think we all should remember the influance the Beatles had on bringing classical instruments to a new generation. After the Beatles played with the sound of strings and woodwinds the other European invaders followed, The Who, Led Zepplin, Rolling Stones, etc. and of course the San Fran. groups followed that. If any band in the past 30 years has had a greater influence, who was it and how? |
I am not a beatles fan, but they progressed a lot during their careers. Early albums were collections of radio friendly pop songs, future muzak material. They took big step forward during Sgt Pepper/White/Abbey Rd album sessions, doing conceptional ablums full of interrelated songs and creative use of sound and studio effects. This is where they cemented their place in history, much more creative than earlier albums. At least the beatles can play instruments, look at the crap we have today, karioke rock stars, just sing and dance, no band, ie Brittany Spears, backstreet boys et al |
They say everyone has about 15 minutes of fame in them. I must say they were wrong - you Maniac have none. Form a band and see how you do - it sounds as if in your own mind it will be a legacy in itself since you know what's on. |
Beatles a rock n' roll band? Who says. Pop by all definitions. Like Goodman, Kenton, Ellington, Sinatra, and Gilligan. Prolific masters within their genre. But, for bloody sakes, give the boys credit for the expansion of mega-stardom into creativity. Drug induced? Likely. Time enhanced? Undoubtedly. Promulgated by the masses and their needs? Seems so. Propelled by their engineers musical acumen? For sure. All necessary ingredients in manifestatation of a time, a culture, an outpouring of radical transformation. The music was exploratory, innovative, especially to the ears thinking Pat Boone, Sinatra, and Elvis were the end-all. From the early days in Hamburg, and later the Cavern, most things written/filmed/critiqued the Beatles as taking their penchant as entertainers and musicians (again, of their ilk)to new levels. To attain such world notoriety and massive appeal, and yet diverge from the formula, with exploratory syncopations, utilization of non-conventional instrumentations is tribute to the greatness they acheieved. To compare most any composer to Beethoven, much less a contemporary pop band, is truly ludicrous. If you perceive The Stones as the ultimate rock band, as I do, it still does not diminish the creativity and the impact wrought upon virtually the entire Earth. Some have opined the Beatles influence as early stages of Russian downfall. Pervading arrested minds with potentiality. Song after song; melody, lyrically. Each selection carries a uniqueness few groups or individuals have replicated. Anyone who does not recognize their influence on the present world of "music" has not truly researched it's evolution. |
Right place, right time, right product, right manager, right attitude, right engineer, right customer base. And the memories will sell vast numbers of records for the next 20 years. Why is there still so much fascination over the JFK assassination? Because of the indelible memories that it involks. Some people like The Beatle's music, and some don't. ID guess I never heard anyone say that The Beatles were the best musicians in the world. Who told you that Shubertmaniac? If you were between 5 and 20 years old in 1965, then The Beatles have far more significance than just their music. They rode, and changed, the culture of youth at that time. And their vehicle for doing it was their music and the media. Nobody has ever had the top five songs on the charts at the same time like The Beatles did, and they probably never will again. |
