| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
JLocke 
Prog Reviewer
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
|
 Posted: November 20 2009 at 15:44 |
 splyu wrote:
p0mt3 wrote:
So, you knew your claim was wrong from the beginning, yet you intentionally pretended to not believe my own claim? Okay, now I know EXACTLY where you're coming from, and I don't care much for it.
|
No, I thought about that later. I don't get why you make so much ado about it.
|
I make so much out of it because I don't like it very much when people throw my statements back in my face as if I have no idea what I'm talking about. If I honestly didn't already know what Ian Anderson said regarding his influences, I wouldn't have said anything to begin with. So yes, I do bloody take offense to that kind of behavior.
|
 |
akamaisondufromage
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: May 16 2009
Location: Blighty
Status: Offline
Points: 6797
|
Posted: November 20 2009 at 15:44 |
|
|
|
Help me I'm falling!
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 64460
|
Posted: November 20 2009 at 16:07 |
|
why is this thing still open?
|
|
JLocke
Prog Reviewer
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
|
Posted: November 20 2009 at 16:21 |
|
Maybe because the thread can still get back on topic?
Are we locking every thread that gets sidetracked now?
|
|
JLocke
Prog Reviewer
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
|
Posted: November 20 2009 at 16:23 |
|
The again, the issue has been addressed, and the topic starter's question has been answered many times, so perhaps you're right.
Any nice Admins feel like locking this puppy away?
|
|
Snow Dog
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
|
Posted: November 20 2009 at 17:34 |
Good idea. The whole thread was self defeating anyway.
|
|
|
|
JLocke
Prog Reviewer
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
|
Posted: November 20 2009 at 17:38 |
|
^ True.
|
|
Slartibartfast
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam
Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29625
|
Posted: November 20 2009 at 18:02 |
OK then, but you realize we will have reached our quota on Beatles' threads and can never a new one again?   Leave it open, we need some more endless quote pyramids. Now 'scuse me while I turn off my mind and float down stream. It is a Friday after all. Should be moved to Just For Fun.
Edited by Slartibartfast - November 24 2009 at 14:52
|
|
ExittheLemming
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 19 2007
Location: Penal Colony
Status: Offline
Points: 11415
|
Posted: November 20 2009 at 20:26 |
MovingPictures07 wrote:
p0mt3 wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:
I'm sorry, but I find that people extremely often overestimate the Beatles' impact on the history of music.
They were simply in the exact right place, with the exact right image, at the exact right time. They were not really that talented; but I'll give it to them that they were able to capture an audience and achieve fame with it. I don't respect them one bit, but they had enough minimal talent, the perfect image, the perfect timing, and the perfect mix of the type of music most people simply wanted to hear.
It would NOT have taken "much, much longer" for rock, Prog, or the development of music as such thereafter to take off; I honestly believe the history of music wouldn't be all that different---another group would have taken the place of the Beatles.
Besides, when people act like the Beatles were the ONLY act to get that ball rolling, I extremely highly doubt it. They simply were popular enough to warrant recognition of it more than anyone else. It just bugs me when people defend the absolute irrational idolization of the Beatles with historical context, because there really is no way of knowing--and I think that their influence is overstated. They simply put their own spin on THE killer popular music format (which keep in mind has been around since the 1930s), and they succeeded with it. Nothing more.
|
I respect you a lot Alex, but I have to admit, this is a very naive opinion on The Beatles, I must say. I'm willing to bet you have not listened to a single Beatles record post-Sgt. Pepper from beginning to end more than once. Also, I believe people like you who seem to think The Beatles do not deserve their recognition choose to compare their music with every band that came AFTER them, when in fact you should be comparing their music to everybody who came BEFORE them. Then you'll have the proper perspective, and hopefully wake up to the reality that The Beatles changed music forever.
You don't have to like them, but to not respect them is nearly impossible once you truly learn about everything they introduced to the music world.
To be honest with you, I'm somewhere near the middle. I have defended and attacked both sides of this argument throughout this thread because I can see both perspectives. However, the reality is simple: The Beatles probably do get too much credit at times, but that does not mean we should simply disreagrd them completely in order to 'balance things out'. They introduced the concept album, directed the first music videos, were the first band to utilize feedback as a compositional element, first band to fuse world music along with classical and rock, the first band to step out of their boundaries and progress further (any progressive band that may have been around before The Beatles were already there, where as The Beatles did the brave thing and moved away from the norm halfway through their career), and on and on.
If you truly cannot respect them for all of these achievments simply because somebody else may have done something similar later on, then I don't really know what to think. It's true, Moody Blues released 'Days of Future Passed' mere months after 'Sgt. Pepper', but I still consider the latter to be the better concept album of the two. Floyd would only begin producing concept records once Waters became the primary songwriter, which happened nearly a decade later.
|
Oh, I've heard everything, trust me. My brother plays nothing but the Beatles non-stop; he listens to absolutely nothing else. I've heard every single studio album and live album top to bottom several times too many by now, I'd imagine.
To me, it doesn't matter what they've done. Like I said, I recognize their place in history mainly for what they did do and for the fact that they did the exact right things at the exact right time. Not anyone could have done that.
Still doesn't mean I respect them nor should I; as sonically, musically, and with regards to image, they represent everything that I personally find to be worthy of my dislike in the music world. As a composer and because music is my true only passion in life, I feel strongly about it and for that reason I cannot help but find the Beatles' music to rank extremely low on my tastes simply for what I hold dear in my musical preferences and ideals.
They made music that, to me, was the starting point of the "making music for the masses" movement that became "rock 'n roll" and many other forms of popular music. For that reason alone, I simply cannot find any value in the compositions.
From a purely emotional standpoint they also do nothing for me. It's simply the exact opposite of what I look for in music; and I don't think I could ever like or respect them--that's just me.
|
I've read this thread all the way through now and like many others, there's often just one statement that points to the source of negativity about the subject matter at hand. Yes, the poster does not respect the Beatles and has provided his reasons. He might want to address the real underlying issue with his brother though.
|
|
halabalushindigus
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 05 2009
Location: San Diego
Status: Offline
Points: 1438
|
Posted: November 20 2009 at 21:07 |
the guys is right. Tull has no sound that The Beatles did. What "Teacher" sounds like "Day Tripper"?
here's another one ..Mahavishnu Orchestra (don't quite hear the BEATLE'S influence) but on the other hand The Beatles influenced everyone's boot-styles
|
|
assume the power 1586/14.3
|
|
jammun
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 14 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3449
|
Posted: November 20 2009 at 21:12 |
"Say the word, and you'll be free..."
|
|
Can you tell me where we're headin'?
Lincoln County Road or Armageddon.
|
|
SgtPepper67
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 17 2007
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 530
|
Posted: November 21 2009 at 11:00 |
ExittheLemming wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:
p0mt3 wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:
I'm sorry, but I find that people extremely often overestimate the Beatles' impact on the history of music.
They were simply in the exact right place, with the exact right image, at the exact right time. They were not really that talented; but I'll give it to them that they were able to capture an audience and achieve fame with it. I don't respect them one bit, but they had enough minimal talent, the perfect image, the perfect timing, and the perfect mix of the type of music most people simply wanted to hear.
It would NOT have taken "much, much longer" for rock, Prog, or the development of music as such thereafter to take off; I honestly believe the history of music wouldn't be all that different---another group would have taken the place of the Beatles.
Besides, when people act like the Beatles were the ONLY act to get that ball rolling, I extremely highly doubt it. They simply were popular enough to warrant recognition of it more than anyone else. It just bugs me when people defend the absolute irrational idolization of the Beatles with historical context, because there really is no way of knowing--and I think that their influence is overstated. They simply put their own spin on THE killer popular music format (which keep in mind has been around since the 1930s), and they succeeded with it. Nothing more.
|
I respect you a lot Alex, but I have to admit, this is a very naive opinion on The Beatles, I must say. I'm willing to bet you have not listened to a single Beatles record post-Sgt. Pepper from beginning to end more than once. Also, I believe people like you who seem to think The Beatles do not deserve their recognition choose to compare their music with every band that came AFTER them, when in fact you should be comparing their music to everybody who came BEFORE them. Then you'll have the proper perspective, and hopefully wake up to the reality that The Beatles changed music forever.
You don't have to like them, but to not respect them is nearly impossible once you truly learn about everything they introduced to the music world.
To be honest with you, I'm somewhere near the middle. I have defended and attacked both sides of this argument throughout this thread because I can see both perspectives. However, the reality is simple: The Beatles probably do get too much credit at times, but that does not mean we should simply disreagrd them completely in order to 'balance things out'. They introduced the concept album, directed the first music videos, were the first band to utilize feedback as a compositional element, first band to fuse world music along with classical and rock, the first band to step out of their boundaries and progress further (any progressive band that may have been around before The Beatles were already there, where as The Beatles did the brave thing and moved away from the norm halfway through their career), and on and on.
If you truly cannot respect them for all of these achievments simply because somebody else may have done something similar later on, then I don't really know what to think. It's true, Moody Blues released 'Days of Future Passed' mere months after 'Sgt. Pepper', but I still consider the latter to be the better concept album of the two. Floyd would only begin producing concept records once Waters became the primary songwriter, which happened nearly a decade later.
|
Oh, I've heard everything, trust me. My brother plays nothing but the Beatles non-stop; he listens to absolutely nothing else. I've heard every single studio album and live album top to bottom several times too many by now, I'd imagine.
To me, it doesn't matter what they've done. Like I said, I recognize their place in history mainly for what they did do and for the fact that they did the exact right things at the exact right time. Not anyone could have done that.
Still doesn't mean I respect them nor should I; as sonically, musically, and with regards to image, they represent everything that I personally find to be worthy of my dislike in the music world. As a composer and because music is my true only passion in life, I feel strongly about it and for that reason I cannot help but find the Beatles' music to rank extremely low on my tastes simply for what I hold dear in my musical preferences and ideals.
They made music that, to me, was the starting point of the "making music for the masses" movement that became "rock 'n roll" and many other forms of popular music. For that reason alone, I simply cannot find any value in the compositions.
From a purely emotional standpoint they also do nothing for me. It's simply the exact opposite of what I look for in music; and I don't think I could ever like or respect them--that's just me.
|
I've read this thread all the way through now and like many others, there's often just one statement that points to the source of negativity about the subject matter at hand. Yes, the poster does not respect the Beatles and has provided his reasons. He might want to address the real underlying issue with his brother though.
|
The guy is obviously sick of Beatles music because it's the only thing his brother listens too, wich is understandable, but I don't think I can take his opinion objectively.
|
 In the end the love you take is equal to the love you made...
|
|
Floydman
Forum Groupie
Joined: November 24 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 67
|
Posted: November 24 2009 at 13:21 |
p0mt3 wrote:
splyu wrote:
Uhm, The Beatles invented prog? Not single-handedly obviously but they helped it along big time. Name even one important prog rock band from the 70s that was not influenced by them! |
Jethro Tull . . .
|
Well according to All Music Guide Jethro Tull lists the Beatles as an influence. Remember Ian is just one member of Tull. Take for example Rush Geddy Lee cites Paul McCartney bass playing as a major influence on him but the rest of the band were not really influenced by the Beatles.
Influenced By
Lastly on this Pink Floyd were influenced by the Beatles. Syd was only listening to Cream and the Beatles according in this interview.
Syd Barrett interview.
The below interview was done during at the BBC Lime Grove studio during a rehearsal for one of the See Emily Play Top Of The Pops appearences. FWIW he said he was happy with it but this was while it was rising in the charts.
Jacques Allemant - "Do you intend to make more instrumental pieces like Interstellar Overdrive?"
Syd - "Certainly, moreover Interstellar Overdrive came out on our first 33 1/3 RPM album in a version different from that on our successful French 45 RPM. It lasts nearly 10 minutes"
J.A. - "Are you picking up any new ideas on electronic music?"
Syd - Rather few. Out ideas generally come from ourselves. At present we are more concerned with our visual aspects of our stage show and we shall soon have new ultra perfect lighting equipment. Our next English tour could well be a new chapter, a little like that used in 'cinerama' itinerary"
J.A. - "Which are your preferred groups?"
Syd - "The Cream and The Beatles without doubt!"
Edited by Floydman - November 24 2009 at 13:25
|
|
Slartibartfast
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam
Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29625
|
Posted: November 24 2009 at 13:46 |
MovingPictures07 wrote:
To me, it doesn't matter what they've done. Like I said, I recognize their place in history mainly for what they did do and for the fact that they did the exact right things at the exact right time. Not anyone could have done that.
|
No band is ever that exacting are they? 
ExittheLemming wrote:
I've read this thread all the way through now
and like many others, there's often just one statement that points to
the source of negativity about the subject matter at hand. Yes, the
poster does not respect the Beatles and has provided his reasons. He
might want to address the real underlying issue with his brother though.
|
Speaking as someone with an annoying brother, I can understand that. Just wait, he will probably get over the Beatles before too long and find something else to annoy you with. Of course let's face it, being forced to listen to something over and over that just doesn't appeal to you will really drive you up the wall and it probably doesn't matter who they are and how good they are.
Edited by Slartibartfast - November 24 2009 at 14:52
|
|
Floydman
Forum Groupie
Joined: November 24 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 67
|
Posted: November 24 2009 at 13:52 |
MovingPictures07 wrote:
I'm sorry, but I find that people extremely often overestimate the Beatles' impact on the history of music.
They were simply in the exact right place, with the exact right image, at the exact right time. They were not really that talented; but I'll give it to them that they were able to capture an audience and achieve fame with it. I don't respect them one bit, but they had enough minimal talent, the perfect image, the perfect timing, and the perfect mix of the type of music most people simply wanted to hear.
It would NOT have taken "much, much longer" for rock, Prog, or the development of music as such thereafter to take off; I honestly believe the history of music wouldn't be all that different---another group would have taken the place of the Beatles.
Besides, when people act like the Beatles were the ONLY act to get that ball rolling, I extremely highly doubt it. They simply were popular enough to warrant recognition of it more than anyone else. It just bugs me when people defend the absolute irrational idolization of the Beatles with historical context, because there really is no way of knowing--and I think that their influence is overstated. They simply put their own spin on THE killer popular music format (which keep in mind has been around since the 1930s), and they succeeded with it. Nothing more.
|
There is one thing about not liking a band which is ok. Then there are people who try to diminish what the Beatles did.
"Well how do you know It would NOT have taken "much, much longer" for rock, Prog, or the development of music as such thereafter to take off".
Well we will never know will we so why diminish what they did. I don't even think there would have been King Crimson if Robert Fripp had not listen to Sgt Pepper
Ok let's not devalue that the Beatles they helped influence songwriting, using the studio as an instrument, albums as a collective unit. They basically made the self contained rock band bigger than the solo artist/producer in rock and roll. They single handedly paved the way for the Kinks, The Who, The Stones, the Yardbirds in America. Without the Beatles there would have been no Byrds and Folk Rock
Pete Townshend of the Who. "
The Beatles brought songwriting into rock and roll "the Beatles brought a complete arsenal of recourses into their songwriting and this broadened what a pop song can do
Brian Wilson of the Beach Boys
"Upon first hearing Rubber Soul in December of 1965, Brian Wilson said, “I really wasn’t quite ready for the unity. It felt like it all belonged together. Rubber Soul was a collection of songs…that somehow went together like no album ever made before
Bob Dylan
"They were doing things nobody was doing. Their chords were outrageous, just outrageous, and their harmonies made it all valid. They were pointing the direction music had to go.
BARRY McGUIRE
What were the key motivations behind your switch from the commercial folk you were doing with the New Christy Minstrels to folk-rock?
"But times changed, and I changed, and I didn't feel that way anymore. The Beatles were happening. I think that was probably the main thing. The Beatles just changed the whole world of music.
Basically every early prog rock artist was influenced by the Beatles and Robert Fripp went into rock music after hearing "A Day in the Life". Can basically formed after hearing "I Am the Walrus", ELO BASED THEIR SOUND after hearing 'Strawberry Fields Forever, Chicago cites "Got to Get You Int My Life" as combining rock with horned instruments. Numerous bands were influenced "Tomorrow Never Knows" which is easily one of most influential rock records ever to name a few Radiohead, Grateful Dead, Tangerine Dream, Brian Eno, Syd Barrett, Kraftwerk. The Beatles "Rain" influenced was a huge influence on REM and Oasis and the Brit-Pop sound. Nirvana Kurt Cobain vision of that group was fusing the Sex Pistols with the Beatles. Jimi Hendrix said the Beatles taught him how to make albums and push the studio as insturment. George Harrison use of classical Indian influence was a major influence on World Music. Early heavy metal act Black Sabbath was influenced by "I Want You She So Heavy". Then some of you might not know but the Beatles "She's A Woman" was huge influence on Tex Mex artists Sir Douglass Quintett.
Edited by Floydman - November 24 2009 at 13:58
|
|
Floydman
Forum Groupie
Joined: November 24 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 67
|
Posted: November 24 2009 at 14:03 |
Slartibartfast wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:
To me, it doesn't matter what they've done. Like I said, I recognize their place in history mainly for what they did do and for the fact that they did the exact right things at the exact right time. Not anyone could have done that.
|
No band is ever that exacting are they?
|
See the same could be said about anyone who is massively popular.
The Beatles represent a prefect storm of talent, critical regard AND mass popularity. One of those rare occasions where the very best in the biz was ALSO the one selling the most records. So what happens when you're the top banana? You've gotta whole lot of people trying to tear you down. I highly doubt that having over 10,000 cover versions of your songs is luck. Sometimes it's just better to give credit where it deserves. As an example song like "Tomorrow Never Knows" was insanely progressive for early of 1966.
|
|
Slartibartfast
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam
Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29625
|
Posted: November 24 2009 at 14:51 |
|
Of course MovingPictures makes it sound like more intentional than coincidental. In either case I have tremendous admiration for their contribution to mainstream and unmainstream music.
|
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
|
J-Man
Prog Reviewer
Joined: August 07 2008
Location: Philadelphia,PA
Status: Offline
Points: 7826
|
Posted: November 24 2009 at 15:01 |
|
Wow, 5 pages already....
|
|
|
|
Xanthous
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 16 2009
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Status: Offline
Points: 207
|
Posted: November 28 2009 at 11:35 |
J-Man wrote:
You complain that there are so many Beatles threads.
And then you start yet another Beatles thread, because you think there needs to be less Beatles threads.
Seriously?
|
Yes
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Can We Get Another Beatles thread?
