Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Beatles

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by mpfunk View Post
    In my defense, I have spent more years railing against that bastard Wynton Marsalis, the topic just comes up less often on this board. If I could erase one band/individual's contribution to the music world it would definitely be Wynton Marsalis over the Beatles.

    Mainly, I figured I needed to bring this up as MarkGrace, the message board poster not the terrible broadcast, indicated that I needed to mention something beyond the scope of what was originally asserted.
    I've been waiting for someone on CUF to lead the charge against that asshole Winston Marsalis. He and Jay Leno have long been plagues on the Jazz scene. The Jazz world had a choice of hitching their wagon to either Marcelis or Kenny G and they chose the wrong one.
    Part of it is based on academic grounds. Among major conferences, the Pac-10 is the best academically, largely because of Stanford, Cal and UCLA. “Colorado is on a par with Oregon,” he said. “Utah isn’t even in the picture.”

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
      Yeah, keep beating that drum amigo. I'll take a Led Zeppelin tune with dubious provenance over that whiny esoteric shit from Radiohead any day of the week.

      "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy; its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." - Winston Churchill


      "I only know what I hear on the news." - Dear Leader

      Comment


      • #48
        It's impossible to overrate The Beatles. Same goes for The Beach Boys. The quality of the two band's output set a very high bar for anyone coming after. I'm more of a Paul guy but John wrote amazing music. Too bad my perception is that John is a jerk.

        My opinion is that Brian Wilson was the most talented musician of that era. In fact, I would put him right up there with the most talented musicians of any era or genre. I think Brian and Wolfgang would have been tight yo.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Color Me Badd Fan View Post
          I've been waiting for someone on CUF to lead the charge against that asshole Winston Marsalis. He and Jay Leno have long been plagues on the Jazz scene. The Jazz world had a choice of hitching their wagon to either Marcelis or Kenny G and they chose the wrong one.
          LOL.

          Just wanted to appreciate some good work.
          At least the Big Ten went after a big-time addition in Nebraska; the Pac-10 wanted a game so badly, it added Utah
          -Berry Trammel, 12/3/10

          Comment


          • #50
            I think SU is just trying to be a friend and distract some of us from the pain of Brandon Davies.

            Those of you who claim the Beatles are overrated and justify the opinion by claiming you dont like to listen to them are confusing issues. They are rated just right. Even MPFunk acknowledges their place in the pantheon of pop music. If you dont like them, thats your problem. But there is no way you can look at popular music and its progress and not see the Beatles' remarkable contribution to music, popular and social culture.

            As to the Paul vs. John debate, I think it is hard to pick one over the other. If you look at their post Beatles oeuvre, it seems pretty clear to me that Paul had a much greater ability to write melodies. John had a much better ability to use ideas in his songs both thematically and lyrically. But neither alone was as good as both together. John's pragmatism and cynicism was the perfect antidote for Paul's' sugary sweetness and sentimentality. Paul's melodic leadership and bump leveling influence allowed John's efforts to soar.

            Grace references Brian Wilson. Another great one. But his greatest album was in response to the Beatles' efforts. (pet Sounds following sgt. peppers). They brought it out in him. Paul and John didn't have to wait for someone outside the band to have this effect; they brought it out in each other.

            IMNSHO, those of you who claim the Beatles are not listen-able simply haven't listened. Their work covers an incredible range of styles and approaches. If you cant find SOMETHING in their work that you appreciate, then you are either amusical or you are choosing to be contrary. I really see no other alternative. And even then to assert they are overrated is to ignore the history of pop music.
            PLesa excuse the tpyos.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by creekster View Post
              I think SU is just trying to be a friend and distract some of us from the pain of Brandon Davies.
              I thought that was James Taylor, not the Beatles.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by creekster View Post
                I think SU is just trying to be a friend and distract some of us from the pain of Brandon Davies.

                Those of you who claim the Beatles are overrated and justify the opinion by claiming you dont like to listen to them are confusing issues. They are rated just right. Even MPFunk acknowledges their place in the pantheon of pop music. If you dont like them, thats your problem. But there is no way you can look at popular music and its progress and not see the Beatles' remarkable contribution to music, popular and social culture.

                As to the Paul vs. John debate, I think it is hard to pick one over the other. If you look at their post Beatles oeuvre, it seems pretty clear to me that Paul had a much greater ability to write melodies. John had a much better ability to use ideas in his songs both thematically and lyrically. But neither alone was as good as both together. John's pragmatism and cynicism was the perfect antidote for Paul's' sugary sweetness and sentimentality. Paul's melodic leadership and bump leveling influence allowed John's efforts to soar.

                Grace references Brian Wilson. Another great one. But his greatest album was in response to the Beatles' efforts. (pet Sounds following sgt. peppers). They brought it out in him. Paul and John didn't have to wait for someone outside the band to have this effect; they brought it out in each other.

                IMNSHO, those of you who claim the Beatles are not listen-able simply haven't listened. Their work covers an incredible range of styles and approaches. If you cant find SOMETHING in their work that you appreciate, then you are either amusical or you are choosing to be contrary. I really see no other alternative. And even then to assert they are overrated is to ignore the history of pop music.
                Totally agree with your comments on John and Paul (although George is my favorite) as well as the impact and greatness of The Beatles. They were the first band I listened to as a kid and like PAC I memorized the lyrics to many of their songs.

                However with Pet Sounds - Sgt. Peppers, I think it was actually the reverse. Some of the inspiration for the Beatles Sgt. Peppers came from the Beach Boys Pet Sounds. That's what I remember and the chronology fits: Pet Sounds was released in May 1966 while Sgt. Peppers was released in June 1967.

                Last week I went to a concert featuring a Beatles tribute band (Classical Mystery Tour) backed by a local symphonic orchestra. I enjoyed the concert and the songs held up very well. Made me wonder what the Beatles could have accomplished had they toured with a symphonic orchestra.
                “Not the victory but the action. Not the goal but the game. In the deed the glory.”
                "All things are measured against Nebraska." falafel

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by creekster View Post
                  I think SU is just trying to be a friend and distract some of us from the pain of Brandon Davies.

                  Those of you who claim the Beatles are overrated and justify the opinion by claiming you dont like to listen to them are confusing issues. They are rated just right. Even MPFunk acknowledges their place in the pantheon of pop music. If you dont like them, thats your problem. But there is no way you can look at popular music and its progress and not see the Beatles' remarkable contribution to music, popular and social culture.

                  As to the Paul vs. John debate, I think it is hard to pick one over the other. If you look at their post Beatles oeuvre, it seems pretty clear to me that Paul had a much greater ability to write melodies. John had a much better ability to use ideas in his songs both thematically and lyrically. But neither alone was as good as both together. John's pragmatism and cynicism was the perfect antidote for Paul's' sugary sweetness and sentimentality. Paul's melodic leadership and bump leveling influence allowed John's efforts to soar.

                  Grace references Brian Wilson. Another great one. But his greatest album was in response to the Beatles' efforts. (pet Sounds following sgt. peppers). They brought it out in him. Paul and John didn't have to wait for someone outside the band to have this effect; they brought it out in each other.

                  IMNSHO, those of you who claim the Beatles are not listen-able simply haven't listened. Their work covers an incredible range of styles and approaches. If you cant find SOMETHING in their work that you appreciate, then you are either amusical or you are choosing to be contrary. I really see no other alternative. And even then to assert they are overrated is to ignore the history of pop music.
                  Good post.
                  When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.

                  --Jonathan Swift

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by SeattleUte View Post
                    Good post.
                    Except he was entirely wrong about the Brian Wilson Pet Sounds thing. Paul McCartney listened to Pet Sounds and decided they needed to step up their game. God Only Knows is one of the most beautiful songs ever written. Good Vibrations, one of the best songs ever, was only released as a single but they started work on it when they were recording Pet Sounds. IMO, Good Vibrations standing alone is better than any single Beatles song.
                    Part of it is based on academic grounds. Among major conferences, the Pac-10 is the best academically, largely because of Stanford, Cal and UCLA. “Colorado is on a par with Oregon,” he said. “Utah isn’t even in the picture.”

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Paperback Writer View Post
                      However with Pet Sounds - Sgt. Peppers, I think it was actually the reverse. Some of the inspiration for the Beatles Sgt. Peppers came from the Beach Boys Pet Sounds. That's what I remember and the chronology fits: Pet Sounds was released in May 1966 while Sgt. Peppers was released in June 1967.
                      Rubber Soul -> Pet Sounds -> Sgt. Peppers -> SMiLE

                      That's how it went down. Brian Wilson heard Rubber Soul while he was entering his heavy drug use phase and wanted to make an album like The Beatles where the "entire thing was a gas." As is well known, the BB spent most of their career in the singles era, so their "albums" were usually a couple of singles that charted well with a bunch of filler throw in so the label had something to sell. The Beatles were upping the ante on the idea of an album, so Wilson wanted to follow suit.

                      He stopped touring with the BB (crazy to think about) so he could stay home and write full time in pursuit of his masterpiece. The BB went on this long tour and by the time they got back Brian had basically written and recorded with sessions musicians the entirety of Pet Sounds. All the other guys had to do was sing their parts, but even a lot of those got scrapped as Brian was the best singer and could nail the parts they were struggling with. In many ways Pet Sounds is almost a Brian solo album.

                      The Beatles, specifically Paul, heard Pet Sounds and were totally enamored with it. To this day God Only Knows is still one of Paul's favorite songs ever and he says one of the biggest highlights of his career is when he got to sing it with Brian in concert. The Beatles set out to top Pet Sounds and emerged with Sgt. Peppers. Brian, upon hearing Sgt. Peppers, was crushed because he felt he was never going to be able to top it.

                      He set out to record the follow up to Pet Sounds, which was to be titled SMiLE, and basically lost his mind in pursuit of the perfection he felt it was going to take to best Sgt. Peppers. During recordings for Mrs. O'Leary's Cow, which includes these sounds that he wanted to be equivalent to fires, he literally thought the recording sessions were causing fire outbreaks around LA. Dude was just losing it and SMiLE seemed confied to the dustbin of music history, though songs from the album, including Good Vibrations, trickled out and were released as singles.

                      In 2004, after roughly 40 years, Brian finished the album and released it, recording again with studio musicians. It is, as it was always bound to be, an incredible piece of music and one of his best works.

                      As a melodist, arranger and composer, Brian was as good as they've ever come. Where he doesn't stack up to Paul/John, however, was as a lyricist. Brian always knew that portion of writing music was never his strength, and through each phase of his life and recording career he have almost these crush-like feelings towards another musician (most notably Van Dyke Parks) that would collaborate with him on lyrics. Though in that sense I guess what he did probably wasn't all that different than what John/Paul were doing as a team.

                      I read the BB biography last year.
                      So Russell...what do you love about music? To begin with, everything.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Those of who who claim the Beatles are overrated, who cares what you think. This is one instance where Grace et al. can say that most people agree with them.
                        When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.

                        --Jonathan Swift

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by creekster View Post
                          Grace references Brian Wilson. Another great one. But his greatest album was in response to the Beatles' efforts. (pet Sounds following sgt. peppers). They brought it out in him. Paul and John didn't have to wait for someone outside the band to have this effect; they brought it out in each other.
                          Paul said that Sgt. Pepper was The Beatles trying to keep up with The Beach Boys.

                          Edit: Crap. I'm late to this party.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by EuropeanFootballMale View Post
                            Paul said that Sgt. Pepper was The Beatles trying to keep up with The Beach Boys.

                            Edit: Crap. I'm late to this party.
                            Yea, I got it backweards. I guess I shold check wikipedia from now on instead fo rely on my graying brainn cells. I wish I could say that my inability to remeber it means I really was htere, but that's not exactly right either. Even so, the effect of the BB on the beatles and vice versa are not particualry relevant to the issues of the beatles' status itself.
                            PLesa excuse the tpyos.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by mpfunk View Post
                              In my defense, I have spent more years railing against that bastard Wynton Marsalis, the topic just comes up less often on this board. If I could erase one band/individual's contribution to the music world it would definitely be Wynton Marsalis over the Beatles.

                              Mainly, I figured I needed to bring this up as MarkGrace, the message board poster not the terrible broadcast, indicated that I needed to mention something beyond the scope of what was originally asserted.
                              Who wins?

                              [YOUTUBE]-7mFKj8z6nM[/YOUTUBE]

                              I give it to Shorty.
                              "Yeah, but never trust a Ph.D who has an MBA as well. The PhD symbolizes intelligence and discipline. The MBA symbolizes lust for power." -- Katy Lied

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Listened to revolver 3 or 4 times this weekend, and every time I got to tomorrow never knows, despite how many times I've heard it in my life, it left me absolutely jaw-dropped. The thing was recorded in '66 and would still sound boundary pushing in the contemporary era. There's ahead of the game...and then there's the beatles.
                                So Russell...what do you love about music? To begin with, everything.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X