kookadams

Carlsbad, CA

#1035 Jun 2, 2013
Nah I don't but that crap about the Beatles. Saying the beatles are the "greatest band of all time" etc. is like saying McDonalds makes the best burgers cuz theyre so renown... people with shallow views on music that don't look beyond the surface are people that buy the beatles and led zeppllin hype, and that bob dylan is the greatest composer. Its all crap. The beatles NEVER made an album as great as Pet Sounds and Smile, or Today and All Summer Long for that matter. The beatles were and are proof that the masses can be manipulated into swallowing what they're force-fed. And the beatles never made a single as phenomenal as Good Vibrations. I'd rather listen to Jan&Dean and the 4 Seasons too- better singers, better songs... but yes Mike Love is a jerkoff.
Chris

United States

#1036 Jun 2, 2013
kookadams wrote:
Nah I don't but that crap about the Beatles. Saying the beatles are the "greatest band of all time" etc. is like saying McDonalds makes the best burgers cuz theyre so renown... people with shallow views on music that don't look beyond the surface are people that buy the beatles and led zeppllin hype, and that bob dylan is the greatest composer. Its all crap. The beatles NEVER made an album as great as Pet Sounds and Smile, or Today and All Summer Long for that matter. The beatles were and are proof that the masses can be manipulated into swallowing what they're force-fed. And the beatles never made a single as phenomenal as Good Vibrations. I'd rather listen to Jan&Dean and the 4 Seasons too- better singers, better songs... but yes Mike Love is a jerkoff.
What do you mean The Beatles never made an album as good as the ones you mentioned. I cam think 7-8 off the top of my head. For example the quintessential album from the 60s is Sgt Pepper, & the most phenomenal single of the 60s came from that album A Day In The Life. And I will ask this question again, how do they continue to dupe the masses 43 years after they broke up.
Octopus

Latham, NY

#1037 Jun 2, 2013
kookadams wrote:
Nah I don't but that crap about the Beatles. Saying the beatles are the "greatest band of all time" etc. is like saying McDonalds makes the best burgers cuz theyre so renown... people with shallow views on music that don't look beyond the surface are people that buy the beatles and led zeppllin hype, and that bob dylan is the greatest composer. Its all crap. The beatles NEVER made an album as great as Pet Sounds and Smile, or Today and All Summer Long for that matter. The beatles were and are proof that the masses can be manipulated into swallowing what they're force-fed. And the beatles never made a single as phenomenal as Good Vibrations. I'd rather listen to Jan&Dean and the 4 Seasons too- better singers, better songs... but yes Mike Love is a jerkoff.
You are simply missing the point since The Beach Boys built their sound from early surf rock instrumentals like Dick Dale And The Deltones. They mixed it up with Chuck Berry (Surfin' U.S.A) "Pet Sounds" and "Smile" are indeed masterpieces that stand on their own and were never meant to be compared to The Beatles best work. Besides, by 1968...The Beatles made "The White Album" which was a return to straight ahead rock. Your opinion that The Beatles had never made an album or single as good as The Beach Boys is laughable. You need to give The Beatles another listen because Brian Wilson would even disagree with you. Frankie Valli never progressed outside of banal pop and even went disco. Be thankful The Beach Boys stayed pretty much true to their audience. The reason they did not get the respect of the sixties rock culture certainly has something to do with Mike Love. It was happy, cheerful and safe. Again, that wasn't The Beatles fault that they were more superior with a wider range of musical styles.
Octopus

Latham, NY

#1038 Jun 2, 2013
kookadams wrote:
Nah I don't but that crap about the Beatles. Saying the beatles are the "greatest band of all time" etc. is like saying McDonalds makes the best burgers cuz theyre so renown... people with shallow views on music that don't look beyond the surface are people that buy the beatles and led zeppllin hype, and that bob dylan is the greatest composer. Its all crap. The beatles NEVER made an album as great as Pet Sounds and Smile, or Today and All Summer Long for that matter. The beatles were and are proof that the masses can be manipulated into swallowing what they're force-fed. And the beatles never made a single as phenomenal as Good Vibrations. I'd rather listen to Jan&Dean and the 4 Seasons too- better singers, better songs... but yes Mike Love is a jerkoff.
Dude, Bob Dylan wrote some of the greatest musical statements in all of rock history simply because he went deeper and created a completely superior form of rock by mixing folk, blues, country into something different. From then on, musicians did not have to have a perfect singing voice to make a masterpiece. In fact, without Bob Dylan...some of the greatest rock music of the sixties wouldn't have ever been made. Dylan is simply too great of artist to dismiss since scores of artists have recorded his work over the years including The Byrds. Dylan plugged in at Newport and did "Maggie's Farm" and "Like A Rolling Stone" in 1965. He basically invented the modern concept of live rock performance.
Octopus

Latham, NY

#1039 Jun 2, 2013
Chris wrote:
<quoted text>What do you mean The Beatles never made an album as good as the ones you mentioned. I cam think 7-8 off the top of my head. For example the quintessential album from the 60s is Sgt Pepper, & the most phenomenal single of the 60s came from that album A Day In The Life. And I will ask this question again, how do they continue to dupe the masses 43 years after they broke up.
It is very easy to claim that something is overrated simply for the fact that The Beatles remain so popular after all these years. But in reality, the music did progress rapidly and The Beatles did improve as songwriters and artists as early as 1965. This is because of two factors, Bob Dylan and improved studio creativity, which The Beatles made full use of with the help of George Martin.
Octopus

Latham, NY

#1040 Jun 2, 2013
"Sgt Pepper" is a bit overplayed and overrated but at the time, it must've been mindblowing when it first came out. It still isn't my favorite Beatles albums and is too short. But it has some classic stuff on it, nevertheless. I tend to go for the lesser played tracks like "Getting Better" "Fixing A Hole" and "Being For The Benefit Of Mr Kite" There is a few weaker tracks that do not hold up that well today but if The Beatles had waited till they really had stronger material like some of the songs of "Magical Mystery Tour" and some of the better songs on "Yellow Submarine" the album would have been way stronger. It was just how it was first presented. I rearrange Beatle songs and make my own discs for my listening pleasure anyway. It is like taking an old photo and giving it a new frame. Then you have the Beatle bootlegs. They sometimes give the listener more insight into the creativity that went into the band. I like the 1965-1966 period the best including the often ignored b side "Rain" The Beatles, like Elvis were too complex to pinpoint but in Elvis's case, his best work was even more scattered on many drastically different releases. It is how the record company first put it out that people remember them. Die hard fans and collectors just happen to go deeper then most if they desire to hear more from the artist. You must want to seek them out to hear the real deal. Otherwise, criticizing someone as being overrated doesn't quite work if you haven't heard it all with the research needed before one can make judgements.
Chris

United States

#1041 Jun 2, 2013
Octopus wrote:
<quoted text>
It is very easy to claim that something is overrated simply for the fact that The Beatles remain so popular after all these years. But in reality, the music did progress rapidly and The Beatles did improve as songwriters and artists as early as 1965. This is because of two factors, Bob Dylan and improved studio creativity, which The Beatles made full use of with the help of George Martin.
I agree with everything you said, & yes The Beatles were very lucky to have a producer like George Martin. But, I don't understand why people keep saying that nowadays The Beatles are being shoved down our throats & were being brainwashed into liking them. When that couldn't be further from the truth. Because they don't get that much publicity these days, unless they're releasing something new, & even then it is minimal . Plus, most people don't listen to the radio anymore.
Octopus

Latham, NY

#1043 Jun 2, 2013
Chris wrote:
<quoted text>I agree with everything you said, & yes The Beatles were very lucky to have a producer like George Martin. But, I don't understand why people keep saying that nowadays The Beatles are being shoved down our throats & were being brainwashed into liking them. When that couldn't be further from the truth. Because they don't get that much publicity these days, unless they're releasing something new, & even then it is minimal . Plus, most people don't listen to the radio anymore.
The public can not be manipulated into liking any music, band or celebrity. The Beatles do get hype but so do others. Life magazine currently has a spread on Frank Sinatra. That doesn't exactly mean anything, does it? Rolling Stone has an entire issue devoted to Grateful Dead. Next month, it could be Pink Floyd. It comes in cycles. Some just feel The Beatles get too much publicity but so what? They have a hit show in Las Vegas called, "Love" Still playing to packed houses, six years running. It is just jealousy because The Beatles are legendary. If one doesn't like The Beatles or Elvis, simply ignore them. But they are still here in some form because they made more than just music. Not many can actually do that and stand the test of time. Only the best seem to live forever. Only a few cultual legends can really keep doing that. They had to be damn good or no one would still care.
Chris

United States

#1044 Jun 2, 2013
Octopus wrote:
<quoted text>
The public can not be manipulated into liking any music, band or celebrity. The Beatles do get hype but so do others. Life magazine currently has a spread on Frank Sinatra. That doesn't exactly mean anything, does it? Rolling Stone has an entire issue devoted to Grateful Dead. Next month, it could be Pink Floyd. It comes in cycles. Some just feel The Beatles get too much publicity but so what? They have a hit show in Las Vegas called, "Love" Still playing to packed houses, six years running. It is just jealousy because The Beatles are legendary. If one doesn't like The Beatles or Elvis, simply ignore them. But they are still here in some form because they made more than just music. Not many can actually do that and stand the test of time. Only the best seem to live forever. Only a few cultual legends can really keep doing that. They had to be damn good or no one would still care.
Thank you, you made a very good point. If they weren't very good then noone would care. Legends transcend generations & time, because their greatness lives on. Long live Elvis & The Beatles.
Chris

United States

#1045 Jun 2, 2013
Bubba wrote:
Dylan had many people do his songs like the Byrds-Jimi Hendrix-Hollies-George Harrison- Tom Petty-just to name a few. The Beachboys were the most popular surfer band but they were more in League with groups like Chigago and The 4 seasons were more in league with The Association. Not even close to the Beatles or the Stones. anyone who knows 60's rock will tell you that.No band has had a record like the Beatles white album or abbey Road. The white Album has Rock, Country ,Polkas ,balads, and Abbey Road is the master Piece they did before going their separate ways. Brian Wilson and Paul both have mutual respect for each other. But never at any time did the Beach boys out do the Beatles unless it was before 1963. As far as solo artist no one has topped Elvis Presley.
Hey Bubba how's it going . Everything you said I agree with.Like for example Abbey Road, how many bands can say their very last album was also one of their best. And was recorded while they were on the verge of breaking up. Most bands would never have gotten back together. But, The Beatles were in a class all by themselves. And they wanted to give their fans one last masterpiece .
Octopus

Latham, NY

#1046 Jun 2, 2013
Chris wrote:
<quoted text>Thank you, you made a very good point. If they weren't very good then noone would care. Legends transcend generations & time, because their greatness lives on. Long live Elvis & The Beatles.
In general, the sixties were an amazing time for music and creativity in the arts and entertainment. Many great artists and bands. Some faded away and some did not. Elvis and The Beatles are still the biggest rock legends in all of the rock era. Facts are facts. Perhaps, some would like to put their favorites on top. However, it doesn't really matter. Right now, I've been returning to the music of The Doors. Another incredible band. It would be a pretty boring world if all music was the same anyway. It is classic rock that has never been matched. I listen to whatever I'm in the mood for, really. That is the point of having a massive music collection.
Octopus

Latham, NY

#1047 Jun 2, 2013
Chris wrote:
<quoted text>Hey Bubba how's it going . Everything you said I agree with.Like for example Abbey Road, how many bands can say their very last album was also one of their best. And was recorded while they were on the verge of breaking up. Most bands would never have gotten back together. But, The Beatles were in a class all by themselves. And they wanted to give their fans one last masterpiece .
"Abbey Road" was indeed one of their finest albums and it was a shame it had to end there. But it was logical because they were ready to move on to branch out on their own with mixed results. Actually, hearing the studio outtakes and the various unreleased songs and jams gives fans more insight into what they were working on at the time and how the songs developed and formed shape. A lot of fun if you desire to hear more.
Chris

United States

#1048 Jun 2, 2013
Octopus wrote:
<quoted text>
"Abbey Road" was indeed one of their finest albums and it was a shame it had to end there. But it was logical because they were ready to move on to branch out on their own with mixed results. Actually, hearing the studio outtakes and the various unreleased songs and jams gives fans more insight into what they were working on at the time and how the songs developed oand formed shape. A lot of fun if you desire to hear more.
Actually I have quite a few Beatles bootlegs. It is pretty cool to hear songs in their infancy. I'm a huge Beatles fan & listen to anything I can get my hands by them.
Octopus

Latham, NY

#1049 Jun 3, 2013
Chris wrote:
<quoted text>Actually I have quite a few Beatles bootlegs. It is pretty cool to hear songs in their infancy. I'm a huge Beatles fan & listen to anything I can get my hands by them.
That is cool, Chris. I have some fantastic Beatle boots. They do the band justice. I know John Lennon was the only one that didn't mind them because he was a rock collector himself. I've heard that he used to go into record stores in New York searching for rare records.
Chris

United States

#1050 Jun 3, 2013
Octopus wrote:
<quoted text>
That is cool, Chris. I have some fantastic Beatle boots. They do the band justice. I know John Lennon was the only one that didn't mind them because he was a rock collector himself. I've heard that he used to go into record stores in New York searching for rare records.
If I remember correctly, John was actually responsible for the first Beatles bootleg. He gave away an acetate of the Get Back album. Soon after that it was being bootlegged.
kookadams

Carlsbad, CA

#1051 Jun 3, 2013
Octopus wrote:
<quoted text>
You are simply missing the point since The Beach Boys built their sound from early surf rock instrumentals like Dick Dale And The Deltones. They mixed it up with Chuck Berry (Surfin' U.S.A) "Pet Sounds" and "Smile" are indeed masterpieces that stand on their own and were never meant to be compared to The Beatles best work. Besides, by 1968...The Beatles made "The White Album" which was a return to straight ahead rock. Your opinion that The Beatles had never made an album or single as good as The Beach Boys is laughable. You need to give The Beatles another listen because Brian Wilson would even disagree with you. Frankie Valli never progressed outside of banal pop and even went disco. Be thankful The Beach Boys stayed pretty much true to their audience. The reason they did not get the respect of the sixties rock culture certainly has something to do with Mike Love. It was happy, cheerful and safe. Again, that wasn't The Beatles fault that they were more superior with a wider range of musical styles.
There wasnt anything "superior" about the Beatles. They had good timing (after Kennedy's death), good marketing (EMI), and a producer that saved them collapsing earlier than they did (George Martin), as for their music it was hit&miss, there were plenty other artists in the 60s that were just as good. They were good, but nothing amazing.
Chris

United States

#1053 Jun 3, 2013
kookadams wrote:
<quoted text>
There wasnt anything "superior" about the Beatles. They had good timing (after Kennedy's death), good marketing (EMI), and a producer that saved them collapsing earlier than they did (George Martin), as for their music it was hit&miss, there were plenty other artists in the 60s that were just as good. They were good, but nothing amazing.
You're right, their were plenty of other bands who where just as good as the Beatles. But, that is where the comparisons end. Because. the Beatles didn't settle for simply being good. They continued to improve as musicians & songwriters. Plus, they were always trying new things & pushing the boundries of what could be done in the studio. They set the standards for others to follow .Listen to their first album Please Please Me & their last Abbey Road. If you can't hear the vast improvment I don't know what to tell you.
Octopus

Latham, NY

#1054 Jun 3, 2013
kookadams wrote:
<quoted text>
There wasnt anything "superior" about the Beatles. They had good timing (after Kennedy's death), good marketing (EMI), and a producer that saved them collapsing earlier than they did (George Martin), as for their music it was hit&miss, there were plenty other artists in the 60s that were just as good. They were good, but nothing amazing.
Everything clicked for The Beatles at that time because they offered something different and other British invasion bands followed in their wake. Of course, Brian Epstein's marketing them had a lot to do with their instant success in America in 1964. The Beatles simply produced records at a rapid rate and the material improved greatly as they went along. I certainly can still hear growth in the lyrics and their playing by the time they made "Hard Days Night" and "Help" plus it had something to do with their personalities also. Sure, some songs were weaker than others but the product kept coming, where as with lesser bands simply could not keep up with them because they evolved so quickly. It didn't mean that there couldn't be other successful bands like The Who, The Rolling Stones, The Kinks, The Yardbirds and on and on. It was all about creativity and artists like The Doors, Jimi Hendrix, Jefferson Airplane and many other sixties giants making music. There were many bands for every taste. Even The Monkees had a foothold with a teen audience with their cloning of The Beatles. Basically, the recording industry has never had a decade like the amazing sixties as far as music is concerned. From Motown to Acid rock to Country. People were buying music and the culture changed to reflect what was going on with civil rights and the war. It certainly had something to do with Bob Dylan and folk protests. Rock had a message and it meant something. You are missing the point entirely. It wasn't just The Beatles, it was the culture of youth that sprung up around them.
Octopus

Latham, NY

#1055 Jun 3, 2013
Chris wrote:
<quoted text>If I remember correctly, John was actually responsible for the first Beatles bootleg. He gave away an acetate of the Get Back album. Soon after that it was being bootlegged.
Yes, I've read that. Ringo Starr and Paul McCartney do not like bootlegs but John Lennon didn't mind them. I avoid "The Get Back" sessions because the band was falling apart by then. There are Beatle imports from every period. My favorite is "The White Album" sessions.
Greg

Athens, Greece

#1056 Jun 3, 2013
Octopus wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, I've read that. Ringo Starr and Paul McCartney do not like bootlegs but John Lennon didn't mind them. I avoid "The Get Back" sessions because the band was falling apart by then. There are Beatle imports from every period. My favorite is "The White Album" sessions.
On the contrary, the "White Album" period was the one that every Beatle was searching his artistic self individually, yet it was the most productive. The "Abbey Road" period was the time that the Beatles tried to be a united band, again. As Sir George said, it was like recording a Beatle with an accompanying band. I'm talking about "The Beatles" album's sessions. After "Abbey Road" began if I remember well the tension and their conflict with Klein and Eastman...Or it became catalytic for the band's future. Paul had to persuade the others about Eastman taking over while the three of them wanted Klein. Anyway, those two albums were full of beautiful songs. Although I don't like some of the "White Album" and "Maxwell's silver hammer" from "Abbey Road" makes no difference. The Beatles had become master musicians and the epitome of what makes a real outstanding band with no match. Maybe the Cream or other bands had the finest Rock musicians in the field, but, the Beatles enclosed too many things together:great song writing, fine production, innovative studio tecniques, musicianship...I may sound boring repeating the same things, however this is not said only by me. It is the opinion of many Rock experts(I don't consider myself one just a fan of theirs, OK?). Thank you for your probable reading of my post. Your posts are really enjoyable to read and that is because no troll intervened. You guys are civilised and knowledgeable.

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
150 Best Selling Artists in the World! (Dec '08) 16 hr Octopus 12,759
Who invented the Beatles' logo? Sep 14 Greg 1
The Beatlesa Jewish Roots Sep 14 Dr Cosmo Arse-Bandit 6
Why do people hate Asparagus ? (Jan '10) Sep 10 DUH 22
10 Facts You Probably Didn't Know About Michael... Sep 10 goodvibrations 5
Pete Best says Ringo Starr enjoyed the fruits o... (Aug '06) Sep 10 gmc68beatle 385
British Invasion revisited at the Gaslamp Resta... Sep 9 no name 4
•••
•••

The Beatles People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••