Anyone not like The Beatles?

--Kaiser--

Duggy747 wrote: »

While I respect and acknowledge what The Beatles did for music I could never get into them, bar a slight amount of songs I don't like most of their stuff.

I have a wide area of music I listen to going back decades but The Beatles just don't do anything for me, never have. Still, if I heard them in a pub / cafe I wouldn't throw a wobble about I how dislike them or anything.

When you say you dislike most of their stuff, I assume you've heard nearly every song they've recorded? Whenever I quiz people on not liking The Beatles, invariably the person in question has only heard their cheesy stuff like 'Love Me Do' rather than something off the Revolver album.

I always say that if you say you don't like The Beatles, you probably haven't heard enough of their music. Here's some of the lesser heard stuff.

Eleanor Rigby with no vocals

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jx8RHoVMusg

Because Acapella

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eh5vgULGH-A

Duggy747

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

When you say you dislike most of their stuff, I assume you've heard nearly every song they've recorded? Whenever I quiz people on not liking The Beatles, invariably the person in question has only heard their cheesy stuff like 'Love Me Do' rather than something off the Revolver album.

I haven't heard everything but I did have the majority of their albums years ago which I listened to. If I don't like the majority of their stuff, chances are some of the more obscure stuff isn't going to turn me around and love them.

They just don't appeal to me. I don't see why that's so hard for people in this thread to understand that not everybody likes The Beatles. I don't hate them, they just don't anything for me.

4zn76tysfajdxp

For Kaiser and Wibbs :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1Y3PlmwnRM

Bear in mind that video is basically just rehearsal footage of a concert from which the song was cut out of, they hadn't made much effort to play anything at all live as a band in about three years, two of the performers have swapped instruments (Harrison and McCartney), Lennon is seething in animosity towards McCartney and everyone else is seething in animosity towards Lennon and his wife. I think it just highlights just how brilliant they were as a band that they'd perform and write a song that good, just like that, despite their personal differences.

Osgoodisgood

Duggy747 wrote: »

I haven't heard everything but I did have the majority of their albums years ago which I listened to. If I don't like the majority of their stuff, chances are some of the more obscure stuff isn't going to turn me around and love them.

They just don't appeal to me. I don't see why that's so hard for people in this thread to understand that not everybody likes The Beatles. I don't hate them, they just don't anything for me.

This

They're ok. Pretty good even. Just not something that floats my boat as much as loads of other things.

Temaz

Best staring out the window song ever written.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCKANiM9tUM

--Kaiser--

Best song for fixing a hole in a roof

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flGdFvkjMPU

parker kent

Duggy747 wrote: »

I haven't heard everything but I did have the majority of their albums years ago which I listened to. If I don't like the majority of their stuff, chances are some of the more obscure stuff isn't going to turn me around and love them.

They just don't appeal to me. I don't see why that's so hard for people in this thread to understand that not everybody likes The Beatles. I don't hate them, they just don't anything for me.

I have to agree with this. I've never understood why certain Beatles fans find it so difficult to understand that not everybody has the same taste in music they do. Plenty of people have tried to convert me, but I simply can take or leave them. I'd never go out of my way to listen to them.

Badgermonkey

Wibbs wrote: »

Listen to with a little help from my friends off Pepper and lets play spot Macca ripping off that very song feel in the bass. He admitted it too. Without the beachboys I really doubt there would have been pepper or even revolver. Any interviews I've seen the Beatles rate them above all others, with a side order of respect for Dylan that quick enough turned sour(though they were blamed for Bobbie going electric). They don't rate the Stones except in a fatherly patronising way. They rate the motown and other black american stuff a lot more*.

As do I. What always grinds my gears about "best albums of all time" lists is the oft omission of What's goin on, by Marvin Gaye.

As with most all your posts on the subject, I think my views would chime on this. As bassists, Wilson and Macca brought the instrument to the fore in '60's white popular music by utilising it not merely as a functional driving core of the rhythm section but as a melodic counterpoint within the song.

This thread has prompted me to go give the Stones a listen again. I've always appreciated their ability to deliver blues in a rough and elemental fashion and the bad boy swagger still appeals, though I found them interesting only up to a point. It took the Stones a long time to find themselves and their back catalogue is full of dead ends, a significant amount of filler and what seems to me to be experimentation with decidedly mixed results.

Only know the 2 obvious tracks from What's goin on, will give it a listen on Grooveshark.

Chiggers

Stained Class wrote: »

Plenty of bands exhibited more musical virtuosity in future years than the Beatles.

Think Boston, ELP, Yes, ELO, Genesis..........most of the Prog Rock acts of the '70s .

Look, The Beatles wrote songs that were/are more memorable to the 'musical virtusos' above.

They were the perfect overall package & that's why they're rememberd so fondly by so many people.

Could be argued the Beatles invented 'prog rock'.
Could then be argued that was a bad thing.
Some of their stuff is over-rated. But the 'White Album' is a masterpiece.

7sr2z3fely84g5

Band wrote many powerful songs,heres soppy love song from abbey road-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLnVOyhqSi8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUd9Sx5Pumg

I prefer spectors version of let it be

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3a2gLH0hHog

The King of Moo

Aryanna Salmon Motor wrote: »

I prefer spectors version of let it be

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3a2gLH0hHog

I prefer the original release of Let it Be (the album) over Let it Be Naked, though both are far from their best works.
I think it's mainly because I'm more used to Spector's versions, but I also think his production just suits some of the songs on the album. The naked version of All Across The Universe just doesn't have the Spector version's cosmic grandeur, and his strings suit the romantic nature of The Long and Winding Road.

Martyn1989

Duggy747 wrote: »

While I respect and acknowledge what The Beatles did for music

What did they do for music? They sold alot of music, but if it wasnt their band, it would have been someone elses band

I had a stage of liking the white album, and I have a copy of Sgt Peppers and 1, neither of which Ive listened to many times, and NEVER listened to without skipping tracks
The Beatles as people, and their image are annoying, and yeh you can say "can you not just listen to the music", but no, they are irritating, and there songs become irritating

--Kaiser--

Martyn1989 wrote: »

What did they do for music? They sold alot of music, but if it wasnt their band, it would have been someone elses band

Absolute rubbish, they have had a massive and lasting influence on modern music, there is no more important 20th century band.

Havermeyer

Martyn1989 wrote: »

What did they do for music? They sold alot of music, but if it wasnt their band, it would have been someone elses band

I had a stage of liking the white album, and I have a copy of Sgt Peppers and 1, neither of which Ive listened to many times, and NEVER listened to without skipping tracks
The Beatles as people, and their image are annoying, and yeh you can say "can you not just listen to the music", but no, they are irritating, and there songs become irritating

This thread is becoming more farcical with each post that goes by.

Whether you like them or not, to say they have done nothing for music, or to pose your question the way have, is complete and utter rubbish. Your disliking of them has blinded you from appreciating that they have been, and continue to be, a huge influence on bands - past and present.

Martyn1989

I didnt say they didnt influence other musicians, they didnt revolutionize modern music to the point where it wouldnt exist with out them.

The thread asks do you like the beatles and if not, why not, I find both Sgt Peppers and the majority of 1 irritating, answering the question.
Jeez

Havermeyer

Martyn1989 wrote: »

I didnt say they didnt influence other musicians...

Not in so many words.

Martyn1989 wrote: »

What did they do for music? They sold alot of music, but if it wasnt their band, it would have been someone elses band

Martyn1989

nummnutts wrote: »

Not in so many words.

Ah here that hardly counts, and if the beatles wernt around, another band would have sold albums, and influenced musicians, music wouldnt have stopped.

I dont see the appeal of them, I dont see what they changed and I definatly dont see what they did that was different and worthy of their songbook being called 'The Bible' and all that stuff.

KnifeWRENCH

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

Wouldn't totally agree with this reason for disliking Elvis. I wouldn't be a huge fan of Elvis, but I wouldn't knock him on the song-writing thing. Some of the best singers of all time didn't write their own music - Sinatra, Billie Holiday, Ella Fitzgerald. It doesn't really have much bearing on how great they were at singing. Singing is more than just writing your own songs and singing them, it's also about interpretation. The above singers were brilliant interpreters of lyrics without ever having to write their own songs. Billie Holiday, for example, so completely owned every song that she ever sang by simply turning it into a piece of autobiography and making it profoundly emotional. She chose to sing songs (written by other people) because they applied to her life. If she'd never written a song lyric in her life, she'd still be one of the greatest singers that ever lived, simply through her power to interpret and make the songs her own.

For example, this is her last ever recording after battling alcoholism, heroin addiction and several men who abused her physically and mentally, and robbed her. In my opinion, it's one of the greatest recordings in music.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs9P-pfqF6Y

Ok, that's a fair point.

The difference between Billie Holiday and Elvis for me is that Billie Holiday, despite a somewhat limited vocal range, did interpret songs well. Anytime she sang, you got the feeling she lived what she was singing and wasn't just handed a piece of paper with lyrics on it.

Elvis always just sounded kind of soulless to me. He had a good voice I guess (though the way he mumbles irritates me a lot) but I never got the same vibe off him.

Meh. I just think there have been many better singers throughout history so it's frustrating to see him called "the King". But that's just my opinion.

Fighting Irish

Meh to the beatles!

Anyone else notice how the best musicians(in most peoples minds) always seem to be men?

Latchy

Fighting Irish wrote: »

Meh to the beatles!

Anyone else notice how the best musicians(in most peoples minds) always seem to be men?

That's because boy bands aside , most male musicians are in bands alongside 3 or 4 other males , who equally might be great singers/guitar players were as most female singers just sing . But I would say the balance on great male/female singers is 50/50 ,Mama Cass Elliot /Dusty Springfield / Scott Walker /Roy Orbison would be in my top 10 .

Da Shins Kelly

Fighting Irish wrote: »

Meh to the beatles!

Anyone else notice how the best musicians(in most peoples minds) always seem to be men?

Not me. My favourite artist is Billie Holiday.

But, you're right. Men do outnumber women as 'great' musicians, if you're to accept who most people consider great musicians.

donalg1

never liked them, i am 28 and everyone says they are brilliant even people my own age.

I think most people claim to like them because they are supposed to because everyone says they are brilliant, a bit like U2 really, over rated over hyped crap music

A_Border_Bandit

The Beatles : A Cultural Revolution

I love the Beatles. I get chills watching this video, it's like they changed the lives of all the girls who attended this concert. I think they are responsible for opening peoples eyes and ears, using their imagination and common sense, and for liberating the youth of the world. As a eejit with with no knowledge in the subject, I feel that they inspired the Hippy movement. They said it's okay to do what you want and not just do what is expected of you by your family and society at large. Elanor Rigby is a powerful song in this sense.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsg0AC_Ch00

Latchy

Everything and everybody is overrated in this instant gratification society we live in , be it music ,film ,tv and everybody and everything is disposable and dispensable . The Beatles and many other groups are still the reference point for 'great ' music in it's original production , otherwise we wouldn't have the hundreds of tribute bands out there to the Beatles ,Led Zeppelin , Pink Floyd , Bon Jovi ,Byrds and all the bands that come from the 60s genre .

Elliemental

I'm not a huge fan of the Beatles, no.
It's almost high treason for me to admit this, as I was born and raised in Liverpool.

Latchy

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

Absolute rubbish, they have had a massive and lasting influence on modern music, there is no more important 20th century band.

They were the yardstick for which many were judged on and many aspired to be like and they are still the reference point for millions

Elliemental wrote: »

I'm not a huge fan of the Beatles, no.
It's almost high treason for me to admit this, as I was born and raised in Liverpool.

Not unique in itself ,I know many Liverpudlians not fussy on the Beatles but they also know that many other city's around Britain and the world would be only to glad to have had them come from their city .

Mistress 69

But I know a lot of people still say they're the best band ever just because most people do. It's very rare to hear someone say they don't like them.

So, does anyone hear not like them, and if not, do you have a reason?[/QUOTE]


Probably one of the best bands... ever ! As a teenager I had all their albums, some on record, including the white album in its very simple sleeve, and then on cassette as I started driving and buying cars. Since then I have bought them all again on cd. As for the 2009 digital remasters, the sound quality was so wow, that.... well I went and bought them all again. The Best... they really are !

Latchy

Mistress 69 wrote: »

As for the 2009 digital remasters, the sound quality was so wow, that.... well I went and bought them all again. The Best... they really are !

I love the digi format to which on hearing is like being in the actual studio listening to them record each album track, with vocals ,guitars and drums as crisp as a ice .

It's as up close and personnel you get to hear the Beatles on audio ,as you ever will and that's coming from somebody who at one time had all the albums and cassettes in mono and stereo before the digitally remastered stuff was released in 09 .

7sr2z3fely84g5

Anyone that doesnt have the remasters sample them on YT,be aware of fake boxsets doing the rounds-

http://forums.ebay.com/db2/topic/Trust-Safety-Safe/Counterfeit-Beatles-Remastered/520175666

cosmicfart

Beatles = Worst ever over hyped up media frenzy 4 piece boy band that ever lived. :pac: Pacman agrees!