Not me.
I'm really not a basher, and I think everybody who is a basher deserves to be bashed.
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.
Does anyone else think the Grammy's are a joke?
- Thread starter Ironbar
- Start date
Not me.
I'm really not a basher, and I think everybody who is a basher deserves to be bashed.
I was going off the top of my head . . . I honestly couldn't remember him having any hits since "Broad Street" and his duets with Stevie Wonder and Michael Jackson.
As such, those stats are very surprising to me. Do you have a link?
Aaaaand, you just made my point.
If you would actually read my post, I'm not poking fun at the Beatles, I'm poking fun at their ultra-fanbois.
No, I didn't make your point.
No matter what I said, you would have said I made your point.
I made logical arguments that you didn't have an argument for, and by doing so, became guilty of "fanboiism."
Which is a made up thing.
I have liked VERY FEW songs by Paul McCartney since Wings.
I could hardly be called a "fanboi."
ALL of the criticism of the Beatles is based on ignorance. There is simply nothing to criticize. They made their last record in 1970, and yet people still argue about them today.
Their influence cannot be denied.
I got it off Wikipedia. I looked at his discography, singles, showing chart positions.
Wait - how did this turn into the political comedians thread?
It's become both polarizing and unfunny.
When was it funny?
Well, the thread was about the Grammys being a joke and it was fairly light jabbing at pop stars - which was fun in a social way (it brought us together) - but once the comment about Paul got dropped, it's now an us vs them debate about empirical evidence that Paul is the single greatest musician in history based on stats.
Or at least one "side" :wink: sees it that way. I think DFB is just yanking your chain.
Or at least one "side" :wink: sees it that way. I think DFB is just yanking your chain.
I think a lot of the criticism of the Beatles is also spurred on by the fact that so many of their fans are almost religious in their worship of everything the band and it's members ever did.
I have nothing against the Beatles, but when people reach a certain level of fanboi-ism I just can't help myself; I just have to poke a little fun at them.
Well, I am by no means a Beatles fan boy. Not even close. I guess you may believe in guilt by association, though, and make assumptions about me which aren't valid. But that may be more of a problem for you, since you seem to have taken it upon yourself to judge loyal Beatles fans (which I'm not even one of.)
Oh come on, lighten up. It's just music. And I never said you were a fanboi.
I don't take myself seriously, so neither should you.
(Beatles fans are still crazy though.
)
Oh come on, lighten up. It's just music. And I never said you were a fanboi.
I don't take myself seriously, so neither should you.
(Beatles fans are still crazy though.
When I think of the two Beatles fans that I know the best, I can only have great respect for them. Both are better musicians than most other people (including myself.) That's my perspective.
At least the Grammys were a joke. Many would agree on that. I'm back on topic now.
Maybe we're just jonesing for round ten-thousand of "The quality of music is determined by sales figures" versus "Great music is timeless art that compels emotion" in Miscellaneous. 
Strangely, the Beatles can fall into either camp.
Strangely, the Beatles can fall into either camp.
Which is what makes them great. See, we can go back to discussing them now.Maybe we're just jonesing for round ten-thousand of "The quality of music is determined by sales figures" versus "Great music is timeless art that compels emotion" in Miscellaneous.
Strangely, the Beatles can fall into either camp.
I just wish people would stop worshipping at the Macca altar. Ok well no.. I mean...not really like...i'm not ignorant enough to deny his contribution to rock music and the grounds that the beatles broke, Mccartney included, but for my money the guy has been lame as **** for over 30 years. But that's just MY money, not yours. And just because a guy has had some hits consistently throughout the decades doesnt mean these song were necessarily great. I mean here we have people saying how horrible whatever modern song that sold millions is, but the rules are no different for Paul Mccartney. Hit doesnt equal good. His songs are not necessarily great because people bought his records. He's Paul McCartney, his records couldnt really sell badly if he tried.
Anyway ill leave it at that because i realise getting into an arguemnt over Macca on talk bass is basically bad trolling and no good can come of it. Plus it derails the thread.
I haven't been very fond of Paul McCartney's solo work, either. But that doesn't take away from what he accomplished when he was a member of the Beatles. Taking an average Wings song or one of his average solo songs and saying let's judge Paul McCartney on that doesn't cut it for me. In my opinion, he operated way better when he was collaborating with someone else great: namely, John Lennon. Oh, maybe that will make me a John Lennon idol worshiper by saying that, though. Never mind. On a more serious note, maybe there were some fanatical people in the Beatles' day, but I don't think that much applies now.
You're missing my broader point. The guy has managed to continue to have success in a fickle industry for 50 years. And among his post-Beatles hits are some very nice compositions indeed, by the way.
Live and Let Die
Band on the Run
My Love
Maybe I'm Amazed
Let me Roll it
Venus and Mars/Rock Show
Not to mention his compositions with the Beatles!
And the man is far more than the songwriter. He is an influential and important bass player. (this is a BASS forum, by the way) He is one of the great voices of the classic rock era. His vocals on Maybe I'm Amazed, Oh! Darling, and quite a number of others stand as some of the greats of all time.
Is he above criticism? Of course not! He's written some real garbage. As the Beatles go, I was always more of a Lennon fan, and maybe even more of a George fan.
But he's never been "lame." He's done classical pieces, electronica, and aided in discovering other artists.
He's a living legend, and I don't worship him one bit, but he deserves his place in the annals of Rock History.
You can't argue that!
I'm not arguing that. I mean the "he deserves his place in annals of rock history" bit. Basically yhis whole thing started because he danced to modern ****** songs and i said that he told Katy Perry he thought her song was great. I guess my point was, just because McCartney was ONCE great doesn't mean he still is and that his musical tastes are impeccable and that surely he was just pretending to like those songs... he might not have been. I'm certainly willing to believe McCartney likes some bad music if i base it on his work in the past two or three decades. Also, my timeline given (in the past 30 years) didn't include the Wings stuff. Even if i don't care for Wings or The Beatles (yes i know...my gf thinks that fact makes me sociopathic), i think there is something to be said about some songs that they wrote.
It's just that him having been in the Beatles doesn't make him unattackable, specifically on things he wrote much later on. Ex beatle or not, he's pretty old (sorry i don't mean to offend, i know some people here are his age, it's just a fact..) and it's my belief that as with anyone who gets fairly old (as will happen to me someday if it hasn't started already..) he's kinda out of touch and likely likes those silly pop songs, pun intended (or he's pretending to like them to not appear out of touch which in turn actually makes him seem out of touch for liking what any self respecting musician, nevermind beatle fan, would likely call crap...).
And for the record my favorite Beatle (here mainly based on their solo or post beatle work), as a non beatle fan, is in fact George. Next i'd put Lennon. Then Ring.... ok ok..fine McCartney. Poor Ringo. He tried.
