The Beatles Are Overrated

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#980 Apr 10, 2013
Bubba wrote:
<quoted text>The Beatles music touched us all in the 60's. I still enjoy watching Yellow Submarine now and then. Their Legacy has spoken in volumes no doubt.The only ones who claim they were overrated are the ones who weren't around or just didn't appreciate the magic they created with their music.
In the most recent post modern era, we had a little taste of some reimagined Beatles with "Free As A Bird" and "Real Love" then the whole CD soundtrack "Love" which is still playing to packed houses out in Las Vegas. Of course, there is always going to be people who criticize certain artists as being over rated but in reality, fifty years have gone by since The Beatles first exploded onto the worldwide scene. Very few musical acts really become legendary and unstoppable in their fame so jealousy is what comes up. In all of rock history, there seems to be only two acts that continue to stay on top with the second wave beneath them. You know who they are, Bubba. Nothing has changed. A true musical or entertainment legend is one that stands the test of time no matter what new trends happen to be popular before the next one takes over. And still, the best are the ones that last forever.
Nemesis

Ardsley, NY

#982 Apr 13, 2013
Vern Hunter wrote:
<quoted text>Death Metal sucks the big Wienny! Get over ignoramus jerk!
I'm not the ignorant one here. If you don't like metal, fine. To say its garbage is ignorant. I hate opera but I know enough about music to know it takes talent. The Beatles had very little IMO.
The technicality behind metal is amazing and takes quite a bit of talent but an overrated scrub band like The Beatles wouldn't know anything about that.\,,/\,,/
Nemesis

Ardsley, NY

#985 Apr 13, 2013
octo wrote:
<quoted text>
What did you expect Brian Epstein to market them to, Bing Crosby fans? The Beatles had to play to an audience that would appreciate British Invasion music. Besides, AC/DC and other established rock bands sell their logos and/or likeness for different products, just like Justin Bieber. Of course, the difference is that no one will know who Justin Bieber or One Direction were fifty years from now. Death Metal is completely dead today. That was the eighties. Who actually plays Slayer, King Diamond or any of that crap now? That shit is still underground and only appeals to a few long haired misfits with faded tattoos. More talented than The Beatles?
Death metal is very much alive. Don't speak of things you don't have a damn clue about

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#986 Apr 13, 2013
Nemesis wrote:
<quoted text>
Death metal is very much alive. Don't speak of things you don't have a damn clue about
Death Metal is very underground and only appeals to a few. Quite frankly, I never hear it being played anywhere. Even a fairly decent old school Metal band, Dragonforce failed to get listeners or radio play. Without that, the music simply can not survive or gain an audience. I was surprised by Dragonforce but in the end, nobody is listening nor do they care. The Beatles are still being played on most pop, oldies, classic rock stations. They are far from being over rated. There is a reason why they continue to be legendary, you know. They appeal to a large selection of people. That means that they must've done something right, huh? After all, they broke up in 1970 and we are still talking about them.
Nemesis

Ardsley, NY

#987 Apr 14, 2013
octo wrote:
<quoted text>
Death Metal is very underground and only appeals to a few. Quite frankly, I never hear it being played anywhere. Even a fairly decent old school Metal band, Dragonforce failed to get listeners or radio play. Without that, the music simply can not survive or gain an audience. I was surprised by Dragonforce but in the end, nobody is listening nor do they care. The Beatles are still being played on most pop, oldies, classic rock stations. They are far from being over rated. There is a reason why they continue to be legendary, you know. They appeal to a large selection of people. That means that they must've done something right, huh? After all, they broke up in 1970 and we are still talking about them.
That is exactly why I like metal. It's underground. You never hear it on the radio. I hate commercialized music. It's force fed down your throat until the next one hit wonder comes out.
Metal isn't. Its discovered by word of mouth and its kind of like,"Here's our product, dislike as you please but if you like it, thanks for your support" I've corresponded with many musicians in metal and they're the some of the nicest people in music. They take the time to respond. Some will even send you signed items (I have many)
They appreciate your support.
You really think Paul McCartney would give me the time of day? He's rich beyond most people's wildest dreams. He couldn't care less about you or me. Same goes for all the other mainstream clowns.
chris

United States

#990 Apr 14, 2013
Nemesis wrote:
<quoted text>
That is exactly why I like metal. It's underground. You never hear it on the radio. I hate commercialized music. It's force fed down your throat until the next one hit wonder comes out.
Metal isn't. Its discovered by word of mouth and its kind of like,"Here's our product, dislike as you please but if you like it, thanks for your support" I've corresponded with many musicians in metal and they're the some of the nicest people in music. They take the time to respond. Some will even send you signed items (I have many)
They appreciate your support.
You really think Paul McCartney would give me the time of day? He's rich beyond most people's wildest dreams. He couldn't care less about you or me. Same goes for all the other mainstream clowns.
If Paul McCartney didn't appreciate his fans, then why would he continue to make music & play concerts. As you have pointed out, he's mega rich, so he doesn't do it for the money. The only other reason is for his fans & the love of the music.
Nemesis

Ardsley, NY

#991 Apr 15, 2013
chris wrote:
<quoted text>If Paul McCartney didn't appreciate his fans, then why would he continue to make music & play concerts. As you have pointed out, he's mega rich, so he doesn't do it for the money. The only other reason is for his fans & the love of the music.
He absolutely does do it for money. Why do they charge ridiculous amounts of money then? I'll tell you why. Greed! Plain and simple
I saw a rolling stone magazine top 100 metal guitarist of all time for $20! A concert I'll never forget. And merchandise was affordable too. Worth every penny. I wouldn't give you a rusty nickel to go see the Beatles.
Nemesis

Ardsley, NY

#992 Apr 15, 2013
Dimewitesis wrote:
<quoted text>That's just where Death Metal belongs buried in the underground so anybody with good musical taste doesn't have to be annoyed by it like rap. Rap and Death Metal is best heard by people wearing headphones so the rest of the normal people don't have to hear the noise pollution. Those bands correspond to people like you because they don't fill Arenas and Auditoriums like classic rocks still do. All musicians appreciate their fans support goofball. McCartney is rich because he has been entertaining for 5 decades and his royalties just keep coming to him. Dime bag Derral only dreams of that kind of royalties huh?
I'd much rather watch a show in a venue that holds 1,000 people than pay hundreds for seats in the nosebleed section of some stadium.
Smaller venues make for a much more personal
and pleasant experience.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#993 Apr 15, 2013
Nemesis wrote:
<quoted text>
That is exactly why I like metal. It's underground. You never hear it on the radio. I hate commercialized music. It's force fed down your throat until the next one hit wonder comes out.
Metal isn't. Its discovered by word of mouth and its kind of like,"Here's our product, dislike as you please but if you like it, thanks for your support" I've corresponded with many musicians in metal and they're the some of the nicest people in music. They take the time to respond. Some will even send you signed items (I have many)
They appreciate your support.
You really think Paul McCartney would give me the time of day? He's rich beyond most people's wildest dreams. He couldn't care less about you or me. Same goes for all the other mainstream clowns.
I tend to go for Metal with vocalists that can really sing.

That's been a problem for many death Metal bands around today.

They bark and I was never crazy for kind of shit.

It all sounds the same and most of the new bands suck.

Heavy Metal as I knew it, died a very sudden death in the nineties.

Of course, you can figure out what I grew up with in the eighties.

Black Sabbath
Rainbow
Judas Priest
Iron Maiden
AC/DC
Van Halen
Cinderella
Ratt
Y & T
Guns N Roses

I was never a big fan of thrash but like classical Metal.

Dragonforce reminds me of that, which actually takes talent.

Unfortunately, not many people are buying it.

Check out the neglected King Kobra "Ready To Strike"

Still under rated but a perfect eighties album that still rocks.

As for Paul McCartney, he commands high ticket prices.

Some people are willing to pay to see him play a show live.

He still gives money away to certain charities.

Concert promoters charge big for legendary acts like McCartney.

Free market, supply and demend.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#994 Apr 15, 2013
chris wrote:
<quoted text>If Paul McCartney didn't appreciate his fans, then why would he continue to make music & play concerts. As you have pointed out, he's mega rich, so he doesn't do it for the money. The only other reason is for his fans & the love of the music.
Of course, Paul McCartney is doing it for the money.

Most wealthy people get as much as possible if they can.

McCartney even played at a CEO's bithday party not too long ago.

He got paid a million dollars to play a short set.

Paul would never play for 20 bucks when he can play for 300 plus.

Why? He is very aware of who he is.

That doesn't exactly make him greedy though.

Because he does raise money for good causes that he believes in.

He really doesn't have to do that but he does.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#995 Apr 15, 2013
*demand

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#996 Apr 15, 2013
Paul got taken a couple times in the past...

First, by that dancing clown then by Heather Mills.

Why wouldn't Paul want to fill up his bank account?

Think about it.

He is a business man that made a few errors.

So, he can still command top dollar for his show?

There is nothing wrong with making money.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#997 Apr 15, 2013
Nemesis wrote:
<quoted text>
I'd much rather watch a show in a venue that holds 1,000 people than pay hundreds for seats in the nosebleed section of some stadium.
Smaller venues make for a much more personal
and pleasant experience.
I agree.

I had the fortune to see Alice Cooper play a small venue.

The tickets were only 20 bucks a piece.

A fine night of entertainment and I bought his tour shirt.

We could see and hear everything. One hundred percent live.

Alice Cooper put on a great show and never stopped moving.

Not bad for an old man. His voice and his band were flawless.

He did has whole stage act but no live animals.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#1001 Apr 15, 2013
Poppa J wrote:
<quoted text>That's right jivey boy managed to shuck and jive and wind up with much of the Beatles song catalogue fortunately not the George Harrison songs. Mills the I-Hop Bandit Queen got a huge amount and pissed most of it away. Yes Paul trusted Jivey Boy and he did love Mills until she became unbearable comepletely. Paul is Wealthy and Healthy and he loves what he does and hell yeah he makes millions but he came from playing for next to nothing in Hamberg so get over it all who don't understand it.
The Beatles were upper middle class lads. McCartney's parents were especially well to do, Bubba. I think The Beatles made money playing in the early days or they wouldn't have done it. They certainly enjoyed the attention of being musicians in a British rock n roll band. They weren't mega rich but had enough to support what they were doing. Even Brian Epstein came from a wealthy family.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#1003 Apr 16, 2013
Bubba wrote:
<quoted text>Well Lennon's Dad was a merchant Sea Man his mother was poor so gave John to Aunt MiMi and her husband to raise John. They weren't wealthy or Upper class. George's Dad was a like a metro bus driver with 3 or 4 kids not wealthy upper class at all. Ringo I'm sure wasn't from a weathy family either. Paul's parents were pretty educated but not rich. They couldn't barely afford guitars and cheap amps during 1961 and before. I don't think Paul's Dad was wealthy but maybe he was a good provider. Brian may of came from an Upper class family I don't know much about his early childhood or upbringing.In the early days Octo they traveled in a crappy old van had to drink and stack onto of each other because they couldn't afford to get the windshield or heater fixed in the van that carried them and their crappy gear. they had to share tiny rooms and they made very little but they knew they had magic once the girls caught on to them and they became more in demand.They all paid their dues and like Elvis they didn't start out rich by no means.
All four Beatles had more than Elvis did but Elvis had a faster rise. An overnight sensation from being dirt poor to on his way to becoming a millionare in less than two years. The Beatles took longer to break it big but that doesn't mean that they weren't making money and not having fun. I'm sure they packed in the young and hip crowds as early as 1962. It was a movement, a happening. The Teddy Boy scene to the mod scene with other artists around creating their own culture. It had to start on those early gigs, which gave them a following. I have a CD of The Beatles Star Club performances. They were pretty loud for that era. I'd imagine that they were packing them in and knew that they were on their way to becoming big. You could feel the energy and excitement of that period through the music. Stu was Lennon's art school friend and his girlfriend gave them all Beatle haircuts. Wealthy kids go to art school, Bubba.
Nemesis

Ardsley, NY

#1004 Apr 16, 2013
For those who think metal is just a bunch of noise and senseless lyrics, think again
For example, the track Cruelty Without Beauty by the Swedish metal band Arch Enemy, is about animal cruelty and all the experiments performed on defenseless animals. As brutal and yet melodic as it sounds, its very sad if you know the lyrics.
Mostly though, their whole theme is about corrupt governments throughout the world and the defenseless people who deal with it everyday.
The lyrics try to encourage those to rise and stand up for themselves.
We should count our lucky stars.
Their music sends a message, and a strong one at that.

Also, The French metal band Gojira often often writes about how we're destroying this planet with our pollution, etc
I can go on and on.
So before you assume ALL metal is "the devils music", think again. Have a nice day!:)

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#1007 Apr 16, 2013
Bubba wrote:
<quoted text>Maybe Lennon went on a grant and Ringo was an apprentice electrician at a trade school I think in England they have schools and programs to help you learn a trade for very little money if any.Lennon knew Cynthia was from a upper class family but he wasn't.He even said she was Posh and was surprised that she went for a teddy boy like him.
The Beatles were out to build a following by playing gigs in England and Germany, Bubba. It was an art school culture of very wealthy young kids going out and seeing bands play. I didn't say that The Beatles were millionares, just well to do because they obviously had support from their families. George Harrison was the youngest and yet he was allowed to go to Germany to play these dates. It was a series of live gigs, which attracted a bigger audience for them and they packed them in. I think I've read that they were the most popular band at that time and were blowing the other bands off the stage in 1962. Even through they weren't known in the states, they were certainly making money before Brian Epstein saw them. It was like a chain reaction of events that all led up to their signing to a major record label. Of course, once Pete Best was out and Ringo joined the band, it was steady climb. Epstein did a great job promoting them even before their trip to the US to appear on television. That is why everybody tuned in to watch, right? The Beatles impact was programed to be a very successful venture for the music industry looking for the next big thing and The Beatles improved by leaps and bounds whereas other British invasion bands could no longer compete against them except for a few of the most talented ones like The Stones, The Who, The Kinks and The Yardbirds.
Bubba

Bothell, WA

#1008 Apr 16, 2013
octo wrote:
<quoted text>
The Beatles were out to build a following by playing gigs in England and Germany, Bubba. It was an art school culture of very wealthy young kids going out and seeing bands play. I didn't say that The Beatles were millionares, just well to do because they obviously had support from their families. George Harrison was the youngest and yet he was allowed to go to Germany to play these dates. It was a series of live gigs, which attracted a bigger audience for them and they packed them in. I think I've read that they were the most popular band at that time and were blowing the other bands off the stage in 1962. Even through they weren't known in the states, they were certainly making money before Brian Epstein saw them. It was like a chain reaction of events that all led up to their signing to a major record label. Of course, once Pete Best was out and Ringo joined the band, it was steady climb. Epstein did a great job promoting them even before their trip to the US to appear on television. That is why everybody tuned in to watch, right? The Beatles impact was programed to be a very successful venture for the music industry looking for the next big thing and The Beatles improved by leaps and bounds whereas other British invasion bands could no longer compete against them except for a few of the most talented ones like The Stones, The Who, The Kinks and The Yardbirds.
I read where they made 10 grand for 3 performances on Ed Sullivan back then I guess that was a lot of money because you could buy a new car for 3 grand.I hear the Young Rascals are getting back together do you remember them ?
Nemesis

Ardsley, NY

#1009 Apr 17, 2013
Jicky wrote:
<quoted text> Hey Mon maybe the metal bands should combine a little reggae into their music you know GET UP STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS and No Woman no cry mixed with thrashing heavy metal. LOL I can go on and on Mon.
Hey, why not?!?
They've already created a sub genre called folk metal where they mix celtic folk music with death metal. Pretty awesome actually
The Guest

Sylmar, CA

#1010 Apr 17, 2013
Good afternoon. Time to listen to PSY's new video - Gentleman.
http://youtu.be/ASO_zypdnsQ

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

The Beatles Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
new george martin interview he apologizes to p... (Feb '08) Sep 9 macca 20
Samples Aug 27 djhope 1
News Radio Faces Big Test In Pennsylvania That Will ... Aug 27 Hair Nation 2
Earliest/Rarest!! This is a DIFFICULT questio... Aug 24 merseymale 1
News 150 Best Selling Artists in the World! (Dec '08) Aug 24 RICK 12,902
News Satellite radio's SiriusXM is debuting Beatles ... Aug 23 PrinterBench Tech 3
News The Rise and Fall of Phil Spector (Apr '09) Jun '17 SLICK PUTZ PENCE 2
More from around the web