| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
The Dark Elf 
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: February 01 2011
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 12701
|
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote  Reply
 Topic: Do the Beatles get too much credit..
Posted: March 31 2020 at 17:04 |
 chopper wrote:
Mortte wrote:
chopper wrote:
Sgt Pepper was supposed to be a concept album but after the first 2 tracks they got bored with the idea and it became "just" an album of songs. Lennon himself has said so. There is no theme linking the songs together apart from the afore-mentioned openers and the reprise later on. |
Your post sounds like you havenīt read my post. If you cant read it, I really recommend to watch that Goodall document. Itīs quite the same what Lennon had said if there is theme to be found from the songs if you just closely look them. Anyway I think I have said enough this.
|
I read your post and I've seen Goodall's film as well thanks, I'm still with Lennon on this one. |
Aside from the album's studio mastery, innovations, that it is both culturally and historically significant, as well as George Harrison's contribution being vastly underrated, I would have to say it is not a concept album as we would later consider albums like Days of Future Past, Tommy, Thick as a Brick, etc.
As John Lennon said quite succinctly: "Except for Sgt. Pepper introducing Billy Shears and the so-called reprise, every other song could have been on any other album." Ringo concurred that the first 2 songs ("Sgt. Pepper's and "With a Little Help From My Friends") and the Sgt. Pepper's reprise were the only conceptual parts of the album.
And referring back to Harrison's "Within You Without You", it is utterly and literally foreign to whatever the original concept was (Lennon/McCartney childhood, brass bands in the park, etc.), and if we were to point to progressivity in Beatles' music, then this composition, "Strawberry Fields" and "A Day In The Life" are the highlights of that session. Harrison doesn't just use Indian instruments as a hippy afterthought like so many other bands of that time, he actually studied music in India with Ravi Shankar, he used Indian musicians for the recording, and the scales employed in the piece are from Raga, the melodic mode of Indian classical music.
|
|
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...
|
 |
chopper
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: July 13 2005
Location: Essex, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 19944
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: March 31 2020 at 08:47 |
Mortte wrote:
chopper wrote:
Sgt Pepper was supposed to be a concept album but after the first 2 tracks they got bored with the idea and it became "just" an album of songs. Lennon himself has said so. There is no theme linking the songs together apart from the afore-mentioned openers and the reprise later on. |
Your post sounds like you havenīt read my post. If you cant read it, I really recommend to watch that Goodall document. Itīs quite the same what Lennon had said if there is theme to be found from the songs if you just closely look them. Anyway I think I have said enough this.
|
I read your post and I've seen Goodall's film as well thanks, I'm still with Lennon on this one.
|
|
Mortte
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 11 2016
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 5538
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: March 31 2020 at 08:46 |
chopper wrote:
Sgt Pepper was supposed to be a concept album but after the first 2 tracks they got bored with the idea and it became "just" an album of songs. Lennon himself has said so. There is no theme linking the songs together apart from the afore-mentioned openers and the reprise later on. |
Your post sounds like you havenīt read my post. If you cant read it, I really recommend to watch that Goodall document. Itīs quite the same what Lennon had said if there is theme to be found from the songs if you just closely look them. Anyway I think I have said enough this.
Edited by Mortte - March 31 2020 at 08:46
|
|
Mortte
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 11 2016
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 5538
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: March 31 2020 at 08:35 |
SteveG wrote:
Mortte wrote:
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:
SteveG wrote:
Revolver? Decent? Look at all the forgettable pop that was around in 1966! 
|
That's my opinion.
Honestly, even if there were no better albums, this doesn't make an album good, just a poor year for music.
But there were better albums for me, like Freak Out (Zappa), Roger The Engineer (Yardbirds), Pet Sounds (Beach Boys) and the underrated Psychedelic Lollipop (Blues Magoos).
But again, just my opinion.
|
I think 1966 was quite good year in music (not as great as 1967-1974, but close):the Beatles: Revolver Beach Boys: Pet Sounds the Ventures: Where the Action Is the Rolling Stones: Aftermath Small Faces: s/t the Ventures: Go With the Ventures Bob Dylan: Blonde On Blonde Yardbirds: s/t John Mayal With Eric Clapton: Bluesbrakers Donovan: Sunshine Supermen the Byrds: Fifth Dimension the Ventures: Wild Things! Simon & Garfunkel: Parsley, Sage, Rosemary & Thyme 13th Floor Elevators: the Psychedelic Sounds Of... the Kinks: Face To Face Tim Buckley: s/t Love: Da Capo the Blues Project: Projections Buffalo Springfield: s/t Skip James: Today! Cream: Fresh Cream the Who: Quick One Frank Zappa: Freak Out
I think there are also many others, but not yet listened them (or remember them). |
Nice list but more than half were not popular or known at all. In fact, you might have listed all of the best artists' albums of '66. Pet Sounds was a commercial disappointment, The Elevators were not known outside of Texas and the California Bay Area, and Mayal And The Bluesbrakers were not even known in the US until Cream became popular and people started to back track. Remember that US radio at the time was the AM format with Frank Sinatra thrown in with artists like the Monkees, Petula Clark, The Association and Tom Jones.
Please don't make me compile a counter list as my stomach couldn't take it.
|
Well, I think at least Stones & Simon & Garfunkel were as popular as the Beatles in the US that time, also Yardbirds was more popular that time in the US than UK and the Byrds album peaked 27 in the chart. Also, I thought we are just talking about great popular music, not how popular it was that time (most of those albums are widely recognized quite soon after their release and are still).
|
|
chopper
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: July 13 2005
Location: Essex, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 19944
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: March 31 2020 at 08:35 |
Sgt Pepper was supposed to be a concept album but after the first 2 tracks they got bored with the idea and it became "just" an album of songs. Lennon himself has said so. There is no theme linking the songs together apart from the afore-mentioned openers and the reprise later on.
|
|
Mortte
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 11 2016
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 5538
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: March 31 2020 at 08:16 |
jamesbaldwin wrote:
Mortte wrote:
jamesbaldwin wrote:
Moreover, I think until 1966 the Beatles have published only 2-3 minutes pop-songs. They have enriched the pop songs with unreleased arrangements and studio effects, perfecting the format of the pop song verse-chorus (Rubber Soul and Revolver). Sgt Pepper is not a prog album, nor is it a concept album, it's simply an album where the Beatles created an introduction that is then reprised. Then, they have expanded some songs. Sgt Pepper is not even a real rock album, in fact there is very little rock music, there is Indian music, swing music, symphonic pop, melodic pop, music hall, pop mixed with avant-garde and finally even some rock songs. The Beatles have expanded their arrangements so much that they have become popular music musicians of all kinds. The Beatles (the White Album) again mixed songs of all musical genres, then the Beatles returned to rock in 1969 with Let It Be and Abbey Road. But in the meantime, between 1967 and 1969 rock music changed completely (Hendrix, Doors, Cream, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Family, King Crimson). |
Said this before, but have to say again. Sgt IS concept album, itīs really not a typical concept albums where is story with begin and ending. But there are even two themes going through all of the song, first is childhood (really much Johnīs & Paulīs childhood), the second is ordinary day in British live. Even Within You Without You fits into these themes, with the British history in India that had brought Indian culture influences to Brit much earlier than hippies become interested in India. Sgt may not be prog album if comparing it for example KC court, but really it influenced a lot to prog, not the least with itīs cover art. |
I cant consider Sgt Pepper a concept album: The idea of the album was that the Beatles did a show like Sg, and in fact the first song, RR is sung under the name of Billy Shears, but then starting from LSD sgt pepper puts together the songs that the Beatles had to them disposition, without any idea that could connect them. The Beatles themselves recognized it. |
Paul got the idea, that instead Beatles, Edwardian-era military band will perform the new album songs. That was really great idea when releasing them about that "how Beatles-album should sound". Also that has given to the album a loose concept, you can imagine the album is one show played by Sgt. Band with all kinds of singers. But much more profound concept came from Johnīs "Strawberry Field Forever" that Paul immediately responded with his "Penny Lane". John went in this song into his childhood England and that will show less or more in the rest of the songs (these two songs could have also been in the album, but because EMI wanted a single, they decided to release them just as single, anyway they would have fit into theme). Although Harrison was that time much more in India (in his mind) than England, his song really also fit into concept because the UK historical & cultural connection to India. Also one thing you should say when thinking about the idea of Sgt, the Beatles members really havenīt got time to grow adults in decent way, just because their popularity that isolated them from the normal life. So the album was their "growing adults"-process and thatīs the reason why itīs so unique and mature and also make it so coherent. Have to also say that I find this not so obvious concept even more fascinating & profound than much more consciously build concept albums like Tommy, Lamb & the Wall.
It is quite common & superficial think Lucy in the Sky just drug song. Lennon had said he didnīt put letters LSD in that as purpose. Whatever it is, truth is that Lennon was highly influenced by Lewis Carroll (as many other English children of that time) and itīs his novel "Through the Looking Glass" he got the main inspiration of the song. Have to say also when they recorded this song, John wanted to sound as a child, so they recorded vocals in lower speed as music and he really sounded younger.
These are not my thoughts at all. If you want more profound view into Sgt Pepper, please watch a great document of it made by Howard Goodall. Also in 1987 Pepper-document Allen Ginsberg told about Pepperīs lyrics and in the end he said "there is a theme that goes through the album".
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: March 31 2020 at 06:55 |
moshkito wrote:
rogerthat wrote:
... A gross underestimation or downplaying of the impact Beatles had but again, that's par for the course coming from you. Bit more serious? Just play Day In The Life and Please Release Me side by side. No amount of revisionism will be able to describe the gap betwixt the two as merely a matter of being bit more serious. |
Hi,
You're the master of misquotes and changing the subject and understanding. The Beatles, specially on FM Radio here, were considered far more "serious" than most bands ... and that does not infer or mean, that they can not do a ditty about the queen! You would ... oh wait ... you're perfect ... you would not be strong enough to be an ARTIST and musician that did anything other than top ten at the nearest Red Lion and their circuit! 
|
I quoted your exact words. If you cannot remember your own rambling rants, not my problem.
|
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 16165
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: March 31 2020 at 06:43 |
rogerthat wrote:
... A gross underestimation or downplaying of the impact Beatles had but again, that's par for the course coming from you. Bit more serious? Just play Day In The Life and Please Release Me side by side. No amount of revisionism will be able to describe the gap betwixt the two as merely a matter of being bit more serious. |
Hi,
You're the master of misquotes and changing the subject and understanding. The Beatles, specially on FM Radio here, were considered far more "serious" than most bands ... and that does not infer or mean, that they can not do a ditty about the queen! You would ... oh wait ... you're perfect ... you would not be strong enough to be an ARTIST and musician that did anything other than top ten at the nearest Red Lion and their circuit!
|
|
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
|
|
The Anders
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 02 2019
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 3529
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: March 30 2020 at 17:47 |
Not if you ask me. Whether one likes their music or not, it had a big impact on the music that came after them - at least until punk and new wave set in.
Albums like Revolver, Sgt. Pepper and the White Album are still among my all time favourites.
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: March 30 2020 at 08:11 |
moshkito wrote:
IF they did push the boundaries, it was that compared to the top ten stuff, their material was a bit more serious and on "topic" instead of the usual bubble gum mentality of a lot of the top ten material, which has been like that for a long time, and the movie/recording studios loved it ... it made them money! (Remember that almost all recording studios were owned by film companies at that time in America ... an important consideration when it comes to making sure their material gets used and seen and sold.)
|
A gross underestimation or downplaying of the impact Beatles had but again, that's par for the course coming from you. Bit more serious? Just play Day In The Life and Please Release Me side by side. No amount of revisionism will be able to describe the gap betwixt the two as merely a matter of being bit more serious.
|
|
SteveG
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20503
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: March 30 2020 at 07:23 |
moshkito wrote:
SteveG wrote:
... Mosh, I'm talking about what music was known to the general public. I was listening to Davy Graham at the time as well as John Renbourn and Bert Jansch before they joined Pentangle! REMEMBER THAT!
|
Hi,
Steve ... this is not a competition about who knew/heard what ... I merely wrote what I had seen at that time and place ... and even with my limited English at the time, I remembered that much, but lesser known albums and materials would be a tough call for me ... but heck ... I heard Woody Guthrie ... and then laughed at Arlo's thing!
Madison, WI and then Southern California are not exactly the whole story as it seems like it is seen ... there is a lot more that I do not know enough of ... but I don't even know how some states in America would even handle some of that stuff the NY and Cal played! Even Ohio and Illinois, specially when they donned live guns on people!
|
I'm not in competition with you pedro. I simply don't like being shouted at. And that's what using Caps locks infers.
|
|
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
|
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 16165
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: March 30 2020 at 07:00 |
SteveG wrote:
... Mosh, I'm talking about what music was known to the general public. I was listening to Davy Graham at the time as well as John Renbourn and Bert Jansch before they joined Pentangle! REMEMBER THAT!
|
Hi,
Steve ... this is not a competition about who knew/heard what ... I merely wrote what I had seen at that time and place ... and even with my limited English at the time, I remembered that much, but lesser known albums and materials would be a tough call for me ... but heck ... I heard Woody Guthrie ... and then laughed at Arlo's thing!
Madison, WI and then Southern California are not exactly the whole story as it seems like it is seen ... there is a lot more that I do not know enough of ... but I don't even know how some states in America would even handle some of that stuff the NY and Cal played! Even Ohio and Illinois, specially when they donned live guns on people!
Edited by moshkito - March 30 2020 at 07:00
|
|
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
|
|
SteveG
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20503
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: March 30 2020 at 06:50 |
moshkito wrote:
SteveG wrote:
... (trimmed to keep it simpler and short)(not to take away from all the other posts)
I think 1966 was quite good year in music the Beatles: Revolver Beach Boys: Pet Sounds the Rolling Stones: Aftermath Small Faces: s/t Bob Dylan: Blonde On Blonde Yardbirds: s/t Donovan: Sunshine Supermen the Byrds: Fifth Dimension Simon & Garfunkel: Parsley, Sage, Rosemary & Thyme Buffalo Springfield: s/t Cream: Fresh Cream the Who: Quick One ... Pet Sounds was a commercial disappointment ... Mayall and The Bluesbrakers were not even known in the US ... AM Radio /// Monkees, Petula Clark, The Association and Tom Jones. ... |
Hi,
The AM station in Madison that was "hip" trashed Pet Sounds, and immediately played a previous hit!
Mayall was known by the folks that "knew" music ... for example, by 1969 in Madison, I knew Fairport Convention, John Renbourn, Pentangle, Chieftains, Incredible String Band and other things that were not as well known ... most folks that "knew" music would have a Mayall record or two. The first house we stayed in for a month (Danny and Mary's) had all these albums as well as things like Paul Butterfield and other things ... all of which were only a good fit on the FM radio, not the AM hit parade!
The whole thing gets blurred really bad when FM radio comes alive in America, which was in STEREO compared to AM Radio and it made a lot of the music sound better, thus a SGT P or MMT, these bigger albums were perfect fits, which the Monkees were a better fit for the AM Radio dial. So the stage/area between the late 60's and early 70's, a lot of the changes are the "new" exposure areas and centers and for most that meant the big cities, because they got it way before the small towns ever did ... like 5 to 10 years later!
REMEMBER THAT!
The only problem with the list is that it cross over to AM and then back to FM ... which makes it tougher to discuss altogether.
|
Mosh, I'm talking about what music was known to the general public. I was listening to Davy Graham at the time as well as John Renbourn and Bert Jansch before they joined Pentangle! REMEMBER THAT!
Edited by SteveG - March 30 2020 at 06:53
|
|
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
|
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 16165
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: March 30 2020 at 06:46 |
SteveG wrote:
... (trimmed to keep it simpler and short)(not to take away from all the other posts)
I think 1966 was quite good year in music the Beatles: Revolver Beach Boys: Pet Sounds the Rolling Stones: Aftermath Small Faces: s/t Bob Dylan: Blonde On Blonde Yardbirds: s/t Donovan: Sunshine Supermen the Byrds: Fifth Dimension Simon & Garfunkel: Parsley, Sage, Rosemary & Thyme Buffalo Springfield: s/t Cream: Fresh Cream the Who: Quick One ... Pet Sounds was a commercial disappointment ... Mayall and The Bluesbrakers were not even known in the US ... AM Radio /// Monkees, Petula Clark, The Association and Tom Jones. ... |
Hi,
The AM station in Madison that was "hip" trashed Pet Sounds, and immediately played a previous hit!
Mayall was known by the folks that "knew" music ... for example, by 1969 in Madison, I knew Fairport Convention, John Renbourn, Pentangle, Chieftains, Incredible String Band and other things that were not as well known ... most folks that "knew" music would have a Mayall record or two. The first house we stayed in for a month (Danny and Mary's) in Oct 1965 had all these albums as well as things like Paul Butterfield, Bob Dylan (BonB) and other things ... all of which were only a good fit on the FM radio, not the AM hit parade!
The whole thing gets blurred really bad when FM radio comes alive in America, which was in STEREO compared to AM Radio and it made a lot of the music sound better, thus a SGT P or MMT, these bigger albums were perfect fits, which the Monkees were a better fit for the AM Radio dial. So the stage/area between the late 60's and early 70's, a lot of the changes are the "new" exposure areas and centers and for most that meant the big cities, because they got it way before the small towns ever did ... like 5 to 10 years later!
REMEMBER THAT!
The only problem with the list is that it cross over to AM and then back to FM ... which makes it tougher to discuss altogether.
Edited by moshkito - March 30 2020 at 06:53
|
|
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
|
|
SteveG
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20503
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: March 30 2020 at 06:26 |
Mortte wrote:
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:
SteveG wrote:
Revolver? Decent? Look at all the forgettable pop that was around in 1966!
|
That's my opinion.
Honestly, even if there were no better albums, this doesn't make an album good, just a poor year for music.
But there were better albums for me, like Freak Out (Zappa), Roger The Engineer (Yardbirds), Pet Sounds (Beach Boys) and the underrated Psychedelic Lollipop (Blues Magoos).
But again, just my opinion.
|
I think 1966 was quite good year in music (not as great as 1967-1974, but close):the Beatles: Revolver Beach Boys: Pet Sounds the Ventures: Where the Action Is the Rolling Stones: Aftermath Small Faces: s/t the Ventures: Go With the Ventures Bob Dylan: Blonde On Blonde Yardbirds: s/t John Mayal With Eric Clapton: Bluesbrakers Donovan: Sunshine Supermen the Byrds: Fifth Dimension the Ventures: Wild Things! Simon & Garfunkel: Parsley, Sage, Rosemary & Thyme 13th Floor Elevators: the Psychedelic Sounds Of... the Kinks: Face To Face Tim Buckley: s/t Love: Da Capo the Blues Project: Projections Buffalo Springfield: s/t Skip James: Today! Cream: Fresh Cream the Who: Quick One Frank Zappa: Freak Out
I think there are also many others, but not yet listened them (or remember them). |
Nice list but more than half were not popular or known at all. In fact, you might have listed all of the best artists' albums of '66. Pet Sounds was a commercial disappointment, The Elevators were not known outside of Texas and the California Bay Area, and Mayal And The Bluesbrakers were not even known in the US until Cream became popular and people started to back track. Remember that US radio at the time was the AM format with Frank Sinatra thrown in with artists like the Monkees, Petula Clark, The Association and Tom Jones.
Please don't make me compile a counter list as my stomach couldn't take it.
Edited by SteveG - March 30 2020 at 06:30
|
|
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
|
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 16165
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: March 30 2020 at 06:18 |
rogerthat wrote:
... In that sense, I don't agree that their main achievement was pushing pop/rock to perfection because they instead broke stereotypes about pop/rock with every album from Rubber Soul up. They expanded the boundaries of pop/rock beyond belief and also far beyond any chart topping act since then, be it ABBA, Carpenters, Michael Jackson (and thereafter isn't even worth writing about as pop became completely formulaic and studio controlled). ... |
Hi,
IF they did push the boundaries, it was that compared to the top ten stuff, their material was a bit more serious and on "topic" instead of the usual bubble gum mentality of a lot of the top ten material, which has been like that for a long time, and the movie/recording studios loved it ... it made them money! (Remember that almost all recording studios were owned by film companies at that time in America ... an important consideration when it comes to making sure their material gets used and seen and sold.)
rogerthat wrote:
... If anything, after the break up of Beatles, popular music quickly settled into the dichotomy of long format but interesting rock on the one side and safe and formulaic pop music ready for the radio on the other. ... |
I think this is easier to discuss and formulate an opinion if we take the advent of FM radio in America ... the "heavier" and "longer" material by the Beatles was PERFECT for the new FM dial, which the AM pop craft music deliverer would never touch, until much later and then only as a "classic". No AM station is not going to play "Hey Jude" once a day ... which they helped sell better than FM radio!
This was the case in Wisconsin and California ... with one very important consideration, which might make a difference and helps define FM radio in many ways ... in Madison their music was considered serious, informative, innovative and intelligent ... in California, no one gave a sheep dip and it was all about the clothes, the hair, the haircut, and the colors ... and the "cool" content ... their meaning was ... who cares, it's fun ... very similar to a lot of the things going on in PA.
FM was way less formulaic until 1977 or 1978 when it started getting bought out by corporate folks, who immediately changed some of the formats to get rid of the stuff that was more offensive ... and they got deep fried (but had the corporate accounts behind them - Coke, Pepsi, Army, Navy) ... which meant they did not get a lot of credit for the punk stuff which had been huge in LA since at least 1970 ... see Iggy and the Stooges special by Jim Jarmusch and specially Iggy's discussion of their show at the Whiskey in 1972. Eat your heart out Sex Pimples?
rogerthat wrote:
... The only time in pop history that the twain were brought together was during the reign of the Beatles. It is easy to see why some on a prog rock board - not talking about you as you say you are a fan - would sneer or disdain this achievement but it was an enormously important chapter in popular music and its influence is almost impossible to gauge. |
I think for us to do this better, and properly, we would have to take into consideration the role and the radio stations ... for example ... I like to make a couple of jokes here ... NY and California alone sold half the Beatles albums in America! ... and of course, in Nashville, those folks made fun of the Beatles and trashed them on the air senselessly ... a losing battle for them which pretty much showed how far behind the times they were, and many of the "new wave" of country artists had a really hard time with those folks until way later.
As for cultural "influence" ... it depends how we look at it ... in those days (in Madison), a lot of us RESPECTED the Beatles for having done something serious, artistic and inspirational ... I'm not sure I would say the same for the Rolling Stones ... however, when we got to California (late 1971) it was just a FAD and no one gave a heck about nothing ... just get stoned to be cool! And there was no interest or desire to accept and understand the valuable elements of the Beatles ... and then that joke about Nashville, is a nice wake up call ... and I can not tell you about any other area ... I'm not comfortable even discussing NY, but an area that big, could easily sell half a million in one day if all the stores carried it, AND that would make it automatically number one in America.
In Europe this is different, because the scene was very much all over, and very clear in France, and in Germany (with a different name!!!), and even Italy, but the appreciation for it, is likely to have helped the music ... even Aphrodite's Child had at one time said that the Beatles were their inspiration, however, this was different ... in that the Beatles probably were the first rock band to really set a foot print in that area ... which woke up the kids to play electric instruments so to speak. Elvis, for example, was too American compared to the equivalent of a Zorba, or any other relative character in the other countries in Europe.
I suppose that there are way too many different cultures that looked at things differently ... for example I can tell you that both the Beatles and Rolling Stones, doubled or tripled the effectiveness of pop music in Brazil ... and created a huge industry of music from 1964 on ... but you did not see the whole dress and haircut thing as much ... since Brazil already had its own haircut and dress conventions that were way out there! Something like that ... but I do not know the status or development of radio in Brazil at a time when they were in a dictatorship and a lot of the new music became another voice against the political systems. Maybe not on the air, but the sales were impossible to ignore!
I hope I didn't make a mess of things ... !!! It's the best I could remember and put together!
Edited by moshkito - March 30 2020 at 06:48
|
|
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: March 29 2020 at 23:12 |
jamesbaldwin wrote:
Logan wrote:
I don't think many would dispute, any more than I would, that The Beatles were hugely influential and had a tremendous impact on music, but in terms of origination of musical ideas and true innovation, I think they're overrated. I don't doubt their importance at all, and I like this statement "It was the concept of creativity for the masses that makes them so important." What I do suspect is that they were being given exposure to a lot of underground music that was more innovative (asnd more musically astute associates such as George Martin helped to elevate the music). I listen to the Beatles albums, and I can think of many more, that I would think, were more musically creative/ inventive before them. They popularised such ideas, I would say, but I doubt that they were as originative as quite a few claim.
Some claim that Sgt. Peppers was the first Prog album, but I hear others from the same time and earlier that seem like much more progressive rock. It was an important album to Prog, I won't deny that. I've seen claims made that tthat The Beatles originated Psychadelic Rock and Raga Rock, which is not true. Musicians/ composers borrow ideas for music. Music is not born in a vacuum, other than the Hoover Symphony was born in a vacuum cleaner, and they adapt, that's progress, but I think that those who influenced The Beatles are not getting enough credit.
|
I totally agree.
Moreover, I think until 1966 the Beatles have published only 2-3 minutes pop-songs. They have enriched the pop songs with unreleased arrangements and studio effects, perfecting the format of the pop song verse-chorus (Rubber Soul and Revolver). Sgt Pepper is not a prog album, nor is it a concept album, it's simply an album where the Beatles created an introduction that is then reprised. Then, they have expanded some songs. Sgt Pepper is not even a real rock album, in fact there is very little rock music, there is Indian music, swing music, symphonic pop, melodic pop, music hall, pop mixed with avant-garde and finally even some rock songs. The Beatles have expanded their arrangements so much that they have become popular music musicians of all kinds. The Beatles (the White Album) again mixed songs of all musical genres, then the Beatles returned to rock in 1969 with Let It Be and Abbey Road. But in the meantime, between 1967 and 1969 rock music changed completely (Hendrix, Doors, Cream, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Family, King Crimson).
The 2-3 minute pop song, which remained until the end the distinctly prevalent format of the Beatles, with a few exceptions, had been surpassed by all the real rock bands like the ones I mentioned above. With Abbey Road the Beatles manage to produce real rock in step with the times, as they had done in part with the White Album and with some Sgt Pepper songs. In addition, they build a mini suite on the second side, one of the first in the history of rock. The Beatles' contribution to the prog, in my opinion, as far as the arrangements is concerned is seen in Revolver, Sgt Pepper and Magical Mystery Tour, but as for the dilation of the format of the song, which is much more important, you see in Abbey Road.
In short, the Beatles were experimenters of new instruments, new arrangements, new sound effects in the studio but on a compositional level they were not innovative, indeed they were retro, they were at the rearguard, in fact they were always attached to the format of the pop song of 2-3 minutes verse-chorus. When they went beyond this format, they wrote absolute masterpieces (A Day in The Life, Abbey Road suite etc) but in general, their greatest value was to make commercial, palatable to all, every new musical cue coming in their era, being able to integrate it into the format of the pop song of 2-3 minutes, which thus led to a level of compositional sophistication and exceptional arrangement.
There are two types of great artists: those that bring a genre to perfection, and those that create a new genre, transversal, out of all rules, personal. The latter are the really innovative artists. The Beatles belong to the first category, but sometimes they have churned out in the second category, with few examples but extraordinary. |
I don't completely agree with the notion that the 2-3 minute format songs weren't great (or overrated) or offered nothing innovative. No songs like Eleanor Rigby had been done by a popular band at that time. How long is Penny Lane? 3 min. Even LSD is just 3.5 min. Because is 3 min. Tomorrow Never Knows, Strawberry Fields, all eminently radio chartable length. Other than Day In The Life and I Want You, not many of their experimental songs were ever long. In that sense, I don't agree that their main achievement was pushing pop/rock to perfection because they instead broke stereotypes about pop/rock with every album from Rubber Soul up. They expanded the boundaries of pop/rock beyond belief and also far beyond any chart topping act since then, be it ABBA, Carpenters, Michael Jackson (and thereafter isn't even worth writing about as pop became completely formulaic and studio controlled). If anything, after the break up of Beatles, popular music quickly settled into the dichotomy of long format but interesting rock on the one side and safe and formulaic pop music ready for the radio on the other. The only time in pop history that the twain were brought together was during the reign of the Beatles. It is easy to see why some on a prog rock board - not talking about you as you say you are a fan - would sneer or disdain this achievement but it was an enormously important chapter in popular music and its influence is almost impossible to gauge.
Edited by rogerthat - March 29 2020 at 23:14
|
|
jamesbaldwin
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 25 2015
Location: Milano
Status: Offline
Points: 5744
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: March 29 2020 at 18:22 |
PS I am a fan of the Beatles!
In my personal ranking
Sgt Pepper White Album Abbey Road
are great masterpiece, five stars.
And even Magical Mystery Tour is (small) masterpiece
|
|
"Happiness is real only when shared"
|
|
jamesbaldwin
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 25 2015
Location: Milano
Status: Offline
Points: 5744
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: March 29 2020 at 13:48 |
Mortte wrote:
jamesbaldwin wrote:
Moreover, I think until 1966 the Beatles have published only 2-3 minutes pop-songs. They have enriched the pop songs with unreleased arrangements and studio effects, perfecting the format of the pop song verse-chorus (Rubber Soul and Revolver). Sgt Pepper is not a prog album, nor is it a concept album, it's simply an album where the Beatles created an introduction that is then reprised. Then, they have expanded some songs. Sgt Pepper is not even a real rock album, in fact there is very little rock music, there is Indian music, swing music, symphonic pop, melodic pop, music hall, pop mixed with avant-garde and finally even some rock songs. The Beatles have expanded their arrangements so much that they have become popular music musicians of all kinds. The Beatles (the White Album) again mixed songs of all musical genres, then the Beatles returned to rock in 1969 with Let It Be and Abbey Road. But in the meantime, between 1967 and 1969 rock music changed completely (Hendrix, Doors, Cream, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Family, King Crimson). |
Said this before, but have to say again. Sgt IS concept album, itīs really not a typical concept albums where is story with begin and ending. But there are even two themes going through all of the song, first is childhood (really much Johnīs & Paulīs childhood), the second is ordinary day in British live. Even Within You Without You fits into these themes, with the British history in India that had brought Indian culture influences to Brit much earlier than hippies become interested in India. Sgt may not be prog album if comparing it for example KC court, but really it influenced a lot to prog, not the least with itīs cover art. |
I cant consider Sgt Pepper a concept album: The idea of the album was that the Beatles did a show like Sg, and in fact the first song, RR is sung under the name of Billy Shears, but then starting from LSD sgt pepper puts together the songs that the Beatles had to them disposition, without any idea that could connect them. The Beatles themselves recognized it.
|
|
"Happiness is real only when shared"
|
|
Mortte
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 11 2016
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 5538
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: March 29 2020 at 11:06 |
jamesbaldwin wrote:
Moreover, I think until 1966 the Beatles have published only 2-3 minutes pop-songs. They have enriched the pop songs with unreleased arrangements and studio effects, perfecting the format of the pop song verse-chorus (Rubber Soul and Revolver). Sgt Pepper is not a prog album, nor is it a concept album, it's simply an album where the Beatles created an introduction that is then reprised. Then, they have expanded some songs. Sgt Pepper is not even a real rock album, in fact there is very little rock music, there is Indian music, swing music, symphonic pop, melodic pop, music hall, pop mixed with avant-garde and finally even some rock songs. The Beatles have expanded their arrangements so much that they have become popular music musicians of all kinds. The Beatles (the White Album) again mixed songs of all musical genres, then the Beatles returned to rock in 1969 with Let It Be and Abbey Road. But in the meantime, between 1967 and 1969 rock music changed completely (Hendrix, Doors, Cream, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Family, King Crimson). |
Said this before, but have to say again. Sgt IS concept album, itīs really not a typical concept albums where is story with begin and ending. But there are even two themes going through all of the song, first is childhood (really much Johnīs & Paulīs childhood), the second is ordinary day in British live. Even Within You Without You fits into these themes, with the British history in India that had brought Indian culture influences to Brit much earlier than hippies become interested in India. Sgt may not be prog album if comparing it for example KC court, but really it influenced a lot to prog, not the least with itīs cover art.
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
