Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Anyone not like The Beatles?

13567…10

Comments

  • #62
    bnt
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,140 ✭✭✭✭bnt


    Royale with Cheese wrote: »
    They released 13 albums, and their best stuff was most definitely at the end. Abbey road (their last recorded album) was their best imo.

    You won't be able to name another band who has done that. Everyone else runs out of ideas after far less than 13 albums.
    Not only is there such a band, they're at the O2 in Dublin on Thursday night: 37 years since their first of 19 studio albums, and yet they're only now playing their first ever concert in Ireland. Who? Rush.

    But I still like the Beatles too - mostly their middle period, from Rubber Soul to Sgt. Pepper's.

    You are the type of what the age is searching for, and what it is afraid it has found. I am so glad that you have never done anything, never carved a statue, or painted a picture, or produced anything outside of yourself! Life has been your art. You have set yourself to music. Your days are your sonnets.

    ―Oscar Wilde predicting Social Media, in The Picture of Dorian Gray



  • #63
    orourkeda
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,918 ✭✭✭✭orourkeda


    Jackasaurus rex wrote: »
    I know a couple people that say they dont like them. but I think its just they are trying to rock the boat.

    There are people who dislike them for perfectly good reasons.


  • #64
    Stained Class
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,808 ✭✭✭Stained Class


    Badgermonkey wrote: »
    Well one quite comparable 'mainstream' unit preceding the Beatles were the Beach Boys, who only later moved to recording with session guys.

    Yer dead right there!

    The Beach Boys did it just before the Beatles in the US alright.

    Thing is, is that after Pet Sounds in '66, I think, the Beach Boys were a spent force.

    The great Brian Wilson was so overwhelmed by the responsibility of carrying so many talentless hangers-on, he just simply imploded under the pressure of it all.

    By '67/'68, the poor man was a mere shell of his former self & spent most of the '70s in bed with what most would call something akin to clinical deperession.:(


  • #65
    cruiser178
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,654 ✭✭✭cruiser178


    The King of Moo wrote: »
    When I was young I never got any of their albums just to be contrarian, cos it seemed such an obvious thing to do, and lots of people said they were the best band ever just because everyone else did. Though I still liked all the songs I knew by them.
    Then when I got a little older and a little less immature I started to buy their albums here and there, and came to the conclusion that they are indeed fantastic. I'm no expert on music, but I can instinctively tell that their best stuff is in another class. I think.

    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?


    sorry op couldn't get passed the first 4 words of your post http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQfjIw3mivc now i cant get it out of my head fs


  • #66
    Badgermonkey
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,018 ✭✭✭Badgermonkey


    orourkeda wrote: »
    There are people who dislike them for perfectly good reasons.

    Like this one?
    orourkeda wrote: »
    As musicians they are really very ordinary and it is difficult to understand why they are such a revered musical outfit (for me at least)

    Why are they held in such esteem by such a broad range of highly accomplished musicians across virtually all genres from jazz to rock to classical?

    For primarily self taught guys, they are considered to have been abundantly blessed with a musical sensibility and literacy light years ahead of their contemporaries (Brian Wilson excepted) in terms of compositional structure, chord progression and use of rhythm and harmony.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    Stained Class
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,808 ✭✭✭Stained Class


    orourkeda wrote: »
    There are people who dislike them for perfectly good reasons.

    Why?

    Because they don't like them or............they're a bit mad!


  • #68
    lalee17
    Closed Accounts Posts: 688 ✭✭✭lalee17


    Never really got into them... I think they were good but it's just not for me.


  • #69
    orourkeda
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,918 ✭✭✭✭orourkeda


    Badgermonkey wrote: »
    Like this one?



    Why are they held in such esteem by such a broad range of highly accomplished musicians across virtually all genres from jazz to rock to classical?

    For primarily self taught guys, they are considered to have been abundantly blessed with a musical sensibility and literacy light years ahead of their contemporaries (Brian Wilson excepted) in terms of compositional structure, chord progression and use of rhythm and harmony.

    They are by no means the only group who are influential across a great number of genres. Whilst this may be true of the beatles it is by no means a unique achievement.

    While they may have been ahead of the contemporaries,there have been several high profile self taught musicians who have had an impact and exerted influence over a host of subsequents artists. Again nothing unique.

    To my mind the beatles have had the distinction of being in the right place at the right time rather than being particularly adept musicians.


  • #70
    orourkeda
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,918 ✭✭✭✭orourkeda


    Stained Class wrote: »
    Why?

    Because they don't like them or............they're a bit mad!

    I can only speak for myself but I've never understood their appeal. There is little to my mind that sets them apart from a lot of other musicals outfits.

    Better songwriters, musicians and performers have come and gone.


  • #71
    Stained Class
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,808 ✭✭✭Stained Class


    lalee17 wrote: »
    Never really got into them... I think they were good but it's just not for me.

    Each to their own & all that.

    My fave band is The Who, cos their music suits my mindset.

    Having said that, I acknowledge The Beatles role in musical culture & their influence on the bands other posters here eulegise about...


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    Stained Class
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,808 ✭✭✭Stained Class


    orourkeda wrote: »

    Better songwriters, musicians and performers have come and gone.

    Not all in one unit though.

    They were very revolutionary for their time.


  • #73
    orourkeda
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,918 ✭✭✭✭orourkeda


    Stained Class wrote: »
    Each to their own & all that.

    My fave band is The Who, cos their music suits my mindset.

    Having said that, I acknowledge The Beatles role in musical culture & their influence on the bands other posters here eulegise about...

    Influence does not necessarily equate to musical excellence and vice versa


  • #74
    orourkeda
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,918 ✭✭✭✭orourkeda


    Stained Class wrote: »
    Not all in one unit though.

    They were very revolutionary for their time.

    There have been but that would be just my own opinion


  • #75
    Stained Class
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,808 ✭✭✭Stained Class


    orourkeda wrote: »
    Influence does not necessarily equate to musical excellence and vice versa

    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.


  • #76
    Glassheart
    Closed Accounts Posts: 501 ✭✭✭Glassheart


    They were an oak tree in a garden of weeds.Nobody can touch them.


  • #77
    Boxoffrogs
    Closed Accounts Posts: 458 ✭✭Boxoffrogs


    Can't really see the big fuss about them. I lived in Liverpool for a decade and you might think the Beatles worshiping that exists there would be infectious but it wasn't for me.

    The Chinese seem to adore them. I worked in the Albert Dock where you can enjoy the 'Beatles Experience' and busloads of them would turn up only in their John Lennon T-shirts. I'm sure they were suckered into buying lots of cheap tat marketed as Beatles 'memorabilia'.

    Saying that, the Beatles minus Paul McCartney may just have been tolerable...

    On the other hand, the Beatles Festival is class.


  • #78
    orourkeda
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,918 ✭✭✭✭orourkeda


    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.

    More memorable perhaps. The "perfect overall package" doesnt exist. They just sold more records.


  • #79
    Pauleta
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,778 ✭✭✭Pauleta


    I dont get them. I think they are pants. Nowhere near the level of a band like Queen.


  • #80
    Stained Class
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,808 ✭✭✭Stained Class


    orourkeda wrote: »
    More memorable perhaps. The "perfect overall package" doesnt exist. They just sold more records.

    The Beatles remain as close to the perfect package as has been seen in the music business so far.

    They just sold more records? Really! Why's that then?

    EVERYBODY LIKES GOOD MUSIC!


  • #81
    bodhrandude
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,860 ✭✭✭✭bodhrandude


    Have always liked the hard driving Tomorrow Never Knows probably one of their finest and rocking tracks, along with the Whos I Can See For Miles period and Pink Floyds Piper at the Gates of Dawn, amphetamine psychedelic rock.

    If you want to get into it, you got to get out of it. (Hawkwind 1982)



  • Advertisement
  • #82
    Pauleta
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,778 ✭✭✭Pauleta


    Paparazzo wrote: »
    Show me to the guillotine then.


    And not forgetting they released everything over a 7 year period. Dont think any band can come close to the impact the beatles had over such a short period.

    Guns n Roses


  • #83
    DaveDaRave
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 387 ✭✭DaveDaRave


    The Beatles pander to the mainstream masses. The only good bands are underground less heard-of bands that only intelligent and informed people such as myself listen to.


  • #84
    Badgermonkey
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,018 ✭✭✭Badgermonkey


    orourkeda wrote: »
    They are by no means the only group who are influential across a great number of genres. Whilst this may be true of the beatles it is by no means a unique achievement.

    Of course not, no, though the breadth and constancy of that influence on the collective cultural consciousness is simply unmatched in modern popular music.

    That's not to say it lends the Beatles any more legitimacy than some obscure 1920's delta-blues guitar picker or some such, it's merely a matter of scale.
    orourkeda wrote: »
    While they may have been ahead of the contemporaries,there have been several high profile self taught musicians who have had an impact and exerted influence over a host of subsequents artists. Again nothing unique.

    Yep.
    orourkeda wrote: »
    To my mind the beatles have had the distinction of being in the right place at the right time rather than being particularly adept musicians.

    OK, you qualified that, there were no virtuosos, Ringo wasn't John Bonham, George wasn't Clapton, musically they were more than the sum of their parts. A 'right place, right time' argument is far too foggy and ethereal to get into tbh.


  • #85
    Stained Class
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,808 ✭✭✭Stained Class


    Pauleta wrote: »
    I dont get them. I think they are pants. Nowhere near the level of a band like Queen.

    Queen are a great band too!

    Saw them at Slane in '86.

    Have most of their albums too,but like the Stones Kinks, et all , they would'nt have existed without the influence of The Beatles.:cool:


  • #86
    orourkeda
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,918 ✭✭✭✭orourkeda


    Stained Class wrote: »
    The Beatles remain as close to the perfect package as has been seen in the music business so far.

    They just sold more records? Really! Why's that then?

    EVERYBODY LIKES GOOD MUSIC!

    No idea


  • #87
    orourkeda
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,918 ✭✭✭✭orourkeda


    Badgermonkey wrote: »
    Of course not, no, though the breadth and constancy of that influence on the collective cultural consciousness is simply unmatched in modern popular music.

    That's not to say it lends the Beatles any more legitimacy than some obscure 1920's delta-blues guitar picker or some such, it's merely a matter of scale.



    Yep.



    OK, you qualified that, there were no virtuosos, Ringo wasn't John Bonham, George wasn't Clapton, musically they were more than the sum of their parts. A 'right place, right time' argument is far too foggy and ethereal to get into tbh.

    Why?


  • #88
    GLaDOS
    Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 23,242 Mod ✭✭✭✭GLaDOS


    Have some fantastic songs and some really ****e ones, but the good definitely outweigh the bad

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yn3YqoRDTQo

    Cake, and grief counseling, will be available at the conclusion of the test



  • #89
    Stained Class
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,808 ✭✭✭Stained Class


    orourkeda wrote: »
    Why?

    Orourkeda, you're just arguing for the sake of arguing?

    I'm not a mod, but I wish I was was one now, just to ban your ass from this thread.:pac:


  • #90
    orourkeda
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,918 ✭✭✭✭orourkeda


    Stained Class wrote: »
    Orourkeda, you're just arguing for the sake of arguing?

    I'm not a mod, but I wish I was was one now, just to ban your ass from this thread.:pac:

    Is this the attitude you take to everyone who doesnt like the beatles


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    Stained Class
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,808 ✭✭✭Stained Class


    orourkeda wrote: »
    Is this the attitude you take to everyone who doesnt like the beatles

    You haven't , so far given a legitimate reason for their Non-Role in modern culture other than 'your dislike'*
















    Like it matters'.


Advertisement