If you were 2 we could believe it or lived your entire life in a jungle on the Amazon, otherwise you just sound silly.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Anyone else not like The Beatles?
- Thread starter Snowglo
- Start date
- Status
If you were 2 we could believe it or lived your entire life in a jungle on the Amazon, otherwise you just sound silly.
Evidence? The Beatles singles compilation "1" has sold 31 million copies in this new century. Not too shabby. Do you see a downward trend elsewhere?
I don't care about the Beatles. However that doesn't mean I don't think they had some good songs, or that I don't appreciate their impact on popular music. You hear their influence everywhere in popular music. Paul McCartney still sounds great without the other three, and I enjoy watching his concerts on the intertubes.
The part I scoff at is the idea that they, or really any rock musician is a genius. Rock music is the most popular music is this country, and the Beatles are arguably the biggest influence on that music - so the majority of specific generations put them on a pedestal. They wrote some great pop songs, but it ain't exactly Duke Ellington ya' know. Sitting on a cornflake......not really brilliant unless maybe you are fried on drugs or something.
I appreciate the influence they've had though. There is something to be said about inspiring so many to go out to try and write their own music.
The part I scoff at is the idea that they, or really any rock musician is a genius. Rock music is the most popular music is this country, and the Beatles are arguably the biggest influence on that music - so the majority of specific generations put them on a pedestal. They wrote some great pop songs, but it ain't exactly Duke Ellington ya' know. Sitting on a cornflake......not really brilliant unless maybe you are fried on drugs or something.
I appreciate the influence they've had though. There is something to be said about inspiring so many to go out to try and write their own music.
Their genius and influence isn't just on the surface of their music.
They also directly, or indirectly depending on how you view it, created massive wealth for so many bands by changed the buying habits of the consumer.
When they popularized, and quite possibly invented, the concept album, consumers went from purchasing 45's to buying whole albums making it possible for many bands and solo artists to become wealthy through the sale of 10 songs at once.
That created a huge change in the whole music industry, more than anything else by any band.
It took 40 years and two powerful muscles, the internet and Steve Jobs, to change that paradigm.
They also directly, or indirectly depending on how you view it, created massive wealth for so many bands by changed the buying habits of the consumer.
When they popularized, and quite possibly invented, the concept album, consumers went from purchasing 45's to buying whole albums making it possible for many bands and solo artists to become wealthy through the sale of 10 songs at once.
That created a huge change in the whole music industry, more than anything else by any band.
It took 40 years and two powerful muscles, the internet and Steve Jobs, to change that paradigm.
Last edited:
I see a downward , and naturally so, trend from young people today, who don't know who Lennon or McCartney is. Eventually there will be no baby boomers to buy Beatle music, in 50 years or so, and by then we will be a few more generations in with people who have not heard of them.
So I think the long trend is to greater and greater obscurity, but I would be happy to live another 100 years to prove myself wrong.
Since you mention it, it's worth noting that the influence of John Lennon was pretty distinguishable from the influence of Paul McCartney (and to a lesser degree from George Harrison, since fewer of his songs made the cut), with Lennon songs generally being edgier and taking more risks, while McCartney songs tended to be sweeter and more highly-polished, but more conventional. Then of course there were the mini-masterpieces of complete Lennon-McCartney collaboration. Of course, there was generally collaboration all around whenever any of them brought in a song, though that song would usually retain the artistic "stamp" of its originator.
Examples:
Lennon songs: Revolution, Helter Skelter, I Am The Walrus, Why Don't We Do It In The Road
McCartney songs: Obladi Oblada, Your Mother Should Know, When I'm 64, Michelle
Lennon-McCartney songs: A Day In The Life, A Little Help From My Friends
MM
For the record, one of my daughters, who is 18, is a big Beatles fan. She also likes Led Zeppelin. And Arctic Monkeys, Fallout Boy, and My Chemical Romance. Of course they're not always going to be the rage that they were in the sixties, but I think they're in a category with Louis Armstrong and Cole Porter - there's always going to be people who love them, for the foreseeable future.
To tell the truth, I kind of find it weird when people say they "don't like the Beatles." People can like what they like and there's no obligation to have to like anything, of course. But the thing that impresses me about the Beatles' body of work is that they experimented with so MANY different styles. Meet the Beatles is a completely different album from Help or Rubber Soul which are completely different from Sgt. Pepper or the White album. I don't see how a person could dislike the entire body of work unless their taste is limited to one specific type of music (disco or hiphop or something) that the Beatles didn't try doing.
To tell the truth, I kind of find it weird when people say they "don't like the Beatles." People can like what they like and there's no obligation to have to like anything, of course. But the thing that impresses me about the Beatles' body of work is that they experimented with so MANY different styles. Meet the Beatles is a completely different album from Help or Rubber Soul which are completely different from Sgt. Pepper or the White album. I don't see how a person could dislike the entire body of work unless their taste is limited to one specific type of music (disco or hiphop or something) that the Beatles didn't try doing.
I agree with you. Humans tend to overvalue the time in which they live, and all that goes with it (including its art and culture); saying the Beatles will be remembered "as Schubert" (which itself has been a truism since about 1965) don't necessarily make it so in the future.
As for the waning of the fan base, this fact was illustrated to me starkly on recent occasion, when my father went into assisted living, and the after-lunch
concert for doddering, nodding and muttering patients came replete with Beatles medley. The singalong for "Yellow Submarine" was the one moment the patients sort of "came present."
That song, it just finds different ways to torture me.
Last edited by a moderator:
The Beatles did something remarkable.
They changed our society and our culture. Not just here in the US but around the world.
Before them, pop singles on a 45 were the primary medium of music. They focused their attention to albums and introduced the music video by way of movies. Those two changes alone rewrote how future artists released their music. I believe they also introduced a new concert experience... The Stadium.
They also made long hair acceptable and influenced fashion. It's kind of weird to think that not that long ago there was a lot of bigotry towards that generation of males who adorned long hair. I for one experienced it.
You and many others may dislike them and that's perfectly fine.
They changed our society and our culture. Not just here in the US but around the world.
Before them, pop singles on a 45 were the primary medium of music. They focused their attention to albums and introduced the music video by way of movies. Those two changes alone rewrote how future artists released their music. I believe they also introduced a new concert experience... The Stadium.
They also made long hair acceptable and influenced fashion. It's kind of weird to think that not that long ago there was a lot of bigotry towards that generation of males who adorned long hair. I for one experienced it.
You and many others may dislike them and that's perfectly fine.
No troll intention. Just my opinion.Curious if I'm the only one who cannot stand The Beatles? I will give them all the credit in the world for their success and how they arguably changed the industry, but I absolutely, cannot listen to their music. One of their tunes comes on the radio, I can't get to the kill switch fast enough.
I listen to all genres from jazz to punk to metal to country. I just don't get the hype?
I'm probably going to get banned for this one.
For me, "RedMoses" hit the nail on the head......
It's cool for you not to like them and no one should slam you for it, but for me, they were everything.
I guess it's because I was a little guy when they were in their prime and they were all over the radio all the time and that's all we heard growing up.
Their songs "are" simple, but if you really listen to the lyrics, melody, harmony and the way they put everything together including some of the instruments that nobody else would dream of using (at that time) then yes.......they were far ahead of their time and geniuses for it.
Absolutely Paul & John should go down in the history of music as two of the greatest legends to ever grace a stage, and not for their popularity, but for their musical abilities. George (for me) came into his own later, and he was also a musical genus in his own right.
Ringo, how could you not like Ringo.
Every time I hear "yesterday" which has probably been like 10 bazillion times, I get chocked up because I know the reasons why Paul wrote it and it resonates within me like no other song.
The Beatles were true trailblazers, and for me, there hasn't been anything even remotely close to them since...........
Smooth_bass88
vaxx!
- Oct 31, 2006
- 12,122
- 16,794
- Disclosures
- have been on nationally released albums, charting on the Billboard 200
I think your daughter has broad and interesting taste in music due to the old man's influence, because my wife's niece, 18, listens to (and cries over) Katy Perry records. She would know the Beatles from "the game," but that's about it.
Today, people call rappers genius because the can string together rhymes with no melody...and we're debating the validity of the Beatles???
Are you sure Lennon wrote Helter Skelter? I've read a few interviews with Paul taking credit for that one.
Wikipedia - Helter_Skelter
Helter Skelter is definitely a Paul song, no ambiguity there.
When I was a kid I used to think that they were the greatest. Now, like someone else said, when a Beatles song come on the radio I immediately change the channel. I don't hate them. I just don't want to hear it.
Paolo Hewitt wrote a humorous account of getting in a car with his British rocker pal Paul Weller, and Weller barking, "Turn this rubbish off" when the radio kicked on with the engine. Weller hadn't recognized that the radio was playing his record.
- Status
Latest posts
-
New five string bass. Question about dual action truss rod.- Latest: Gervais Cote
-
-
