Sdldawn said:

But im my opinion "The beatles" were nothing in a era where there was much better music,and Yes i have heard "Abbey Road" the only beatles album i have heard fully, but i have heard many other beatles songs, and its just my opinion, but it looks like U cant take peoples opinion here, if U dont wanna hear people say that "they dont like a type of music" then just live with it, dont try and convince me weather or not im wrong, its my opinion, U cant change that, just live with the fact that people dont hear the same as U!

andykeen said:

of course, you have to recognize that the Beatles are a large part of the reason why there WAS better music in that era.

Tessa said:

Why the music i have listened to sounds nothing like them, I'm more into Motown and funk of that era, I dont like much more in that era..Damn im only 17

andykeen said:

well then you have a whole world to discover. so why not reserve your comments until you're more familiar with the topic? i'm not flaming or slamming you. but why not wait to form an opinion until you're better educated and more experienced with the subject at hand?

you say there was better music in the era, but you only like Motown and funk. until your horizons are broadened, you really aren't qualified to make statements about them.


you don't like them, fine. but on the other hand, you say the music you listen to sounds nothing like them. yet here you are on a site dedicated to Prince who is very much a product of the innovation, style, and influence that the Beatles had.

Tessa said:

Im sorry but i never said I never listened to nor heard any other music than motown or funk, I have heard a lot of music from the 60's/70 and it just didn't do It for me, U say i need to reserve my comments, when i have listened or still do listen to alot of that era, as its my fathers fav era and i have to work with him lol and all he does is play music from that era.
All Im sayying is I dont like the beatles, they music does nothing for me ITS MY OPINION, people have just got to take that....not every1 is the same, and to me they suck, my opinion, u guys cant change that..Just respect my feelings and I'll respect yours..
[Edited 9/21/05 12:47pm]

andykeen said:

When I was 17, I felt pretty much the same way about the Beatles. In a few years you'll change your mind. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if you did a total 180.

And BTW, my answer is the Beatles of course. The musical ground they covered from 'Revolver' to 'Abbey Road' is absolutely fascinating. I love that experimental trippy period.

The other bands unfortunately I only know through compilations; 'Hot Rocks', 'Early' & 'Latter Days', etc.

Probably the Beatles, tho I loves me some Funkadelic and Zeppelin. The Stones are cool, but I'd rather hear me some John Lee Hooker or Muddy Waters - the real thing. Tho I have a strange love for the Stones' 'Under My Thumb'.

Thing is to me, all these are inconsistant in quality.

Personally, much as I like/ love all four bands, Brian Wilson/ Beach Boys in their prime and Frank Zappa through his whole career kick all their asses! Both these imo are superior and more consistant composers and record makers than the others. Lennon/McCartney only occasionally approached Wilson/ Zappa levels. I have never really understood why Brian Wilson is so under-rated around here. I can only guess it's to do with a percieved 'over-sentimentality' and 'not being funky'. Both these are far more diverse composers than is often thought.

But in the end, all these 'Who is better than x, y & z' threads are pointless. It's all subjective.

GangstaFam said:

Me too. I'm currently having an affair with the Stones.

WildheartXXX said:

I find them to be quite a snooze myself. WAY OVERPLAYED. Hello???

heartbeatocean said:

And my reason? I just think they're cool. I like how they look. I like how they play. I like that they're old. I like their attitude. I like the members individually and as a group. I like the groove and grind.

Tessa said:

Yes. Agreed. They were absolutely fantastic.

Sdldawn said:

Outside the world of rock and pop the Beatles weren't influential. So if you're not a fan of either then the Beatles are unimportant to you. Funk, the blues, soul, jazz, hip-hop, reggae, mambo etc. owe nothing to them. Keep that in perspective when considering others' musical tastes.

Having said that I know they are one of, if not the greatest group in modern music. There have been singular artists that are better but not a group.
[Edited 9/25/05 15:08pm]

whodknee said:

This is absolutely ridiculous and incredibly stupid. The Beatles had an incredible impact on jazz-fusion (never heard Benson's THE OTHER SIDE OF ABBEY ROAD? ...betta ax sumbody) and many McLen songs have been done as covers by established acoustic jazz artists like Carmen McRae and Hank Jones and a host of others.

Stevie Wonder boasts such an obvious Lennon McCartney influence, you'd have to retarded to miss it and if you can't feel their impact onPrince you really shouldn't be posting around here. George Clinton will be the first to tell ya he copped a piece of their long-haired hippie acid-dropping funk and I've always thought the Beatles wrote some the best r&b tunes that were never categorized as soul: "Ticket To Ride", "Michelle", "Yesterday", "Hey Jude" (don't tell me you never heard Wilson Picket's cover!). That's why the covers done by r&b artists sound so damn good!. Plus many reggae artists have covered Beatles tunes. Go take a cruise to Jamaica.

yes, and if we were to get techinical. Lennon and McCartney had a huge impact on the experimental electronic/glitch music which is pretty vast in the indie/underground music scene..

Songs that pretty much paved that way were:

Tomorrow Never Knows - Sung by Lennon, loops were produced by McCartney.. as well as lennon.
Revolution 9 - a series of tape loops that consist around 9 or so minutes.. Possibly on of the first songs to ever be constructed in that style of tape loops. (If u dont know how they did.. its incredibly hard at that time to pull something like that off)

---
The reason they were so influential in their music.. is because of the multi angles of songwriting and their craft. Just about every album had many different types of styles of music.. Their songs touched on many different aspects of music. These were no ordinary musicians.. that is a bit stating the obvoius. if u took a trip through their catelog.
Lennon focused on a lot of avante garde style rock and very experimental songs. Paul did the same, but his carried a deep english tradition in his style.. which is very refreshing after the many rockish tracks. Paul also wrote the incredible Helter Skelter.. which was punk.. before there was punk.
Harrison also had much to do with their vast sound.. He brought a very unique indian sound to many of their albums... not to mention his amazing guitar talents.
Looking back at all those countless albums from the 60, 70, cheese 80's, 90, and even today.. Their music still outlives the majority, and they are still VERY relevant.. if that wasnt the most obvious part, they still affect the sound of many musicians today.


.
[Edited 9/25/05 15:55pm]

I also think what made their music very inspiring is they didnt follow formats.. especially this is applied to their final albums..

Sdldawn said:

LOL I don't even know what you're talking about here. "glitch music"? huh?
Anyways Living Colour does a lot electronica experimenting and they covered "Tommororrow Never Knows" and regularly feature it in their live show.
[Edited 9/25/05 16:25pm]

PFunkjazz said:

Figured that was coming..

Yes, "Glitch" is another term for the technical electronic music.. its very heavy sounding music that can be heard in and out of some of the artist that range from like Boards of Canada to even Radiohead.. pitchfork media is always reviewin glitch/electronic records.. Most of the time it isnt music that carries the normal sound everyone is used to.. its focus is on the sound and atmosphere it creates.. not the lyrics...

Virgin Records in New York, last time I was there.. seemed like I saw a whole section built aroudn this type music.. it can sometimes be found in "Dance/Electronica" but its far from that.. a little bit more depht.. and this stuff isnt dance like music

PFunkjazz said:

, spot on. I was just about to comment on that, but you've made it completely unnecessary .

Btw, Sdldawn, I have a little question for you. From what I've heard, Paul was really more responsible for the way Tomorrow Never Knows wound up sounding then John was; that he was the one who recorded and mixed the tape loops. you said "tape loops produced by mccartney...as well as lennon" exactly how much did John have to do the production/arranging of the song other than coming up with the basic tune and words?

jacktheimprovident said:

well, From what i've read and in the interviews of both paul and john.. It was paul who put together the loops.. I think John was there for some nit picking things for the song.. maybe a suggestion here and there.. but for the most part.. Paul arranged that brilliant sound in Tommorrow and Lennon did the lyrics..

you should check out the Anthology demo set.. I believe a demo of that song is on there.. its was in its mid stages.. neat to hear how the final piece turned out.


Having said that.. I think Paul was responsible for a lot of Darker things that were in The Beatles.. some of my favorites he contributed was these...

Tommorrow Never knows - paul did the loops
Helter Skelter - Wrote the song, and played instruments (As well as the rest of the beatles)
Cry Baby Cry - the last hidden part of the song "Can u take me back where I came from.. can u take me back"
Elenor Rigby - almost a standard when it comes to classical pop music.
The hidden track of him laughing and saying "never could be any other way" - also.. john talking amongst the jibberish.
You Mother Should Know (the backing vocals of that track is just haunting)


much more I'd have to dig through my disks..

Sdldawn said:

Ah ok, this confirms what I'd heard/thought about it. I remember reading an interview with John where he said that he was actually somewhat disappointed with how Tomorrow Never Knows sounded because he originally conceived the sound being like his voice coming from a mountain top surrounded by thousands of monks chanting. That would've been interesting, but I'm glad that it turned out the way it did.

PFunkjazz said:

People have such a hard time reading around here. I never said they didn't influence any of the artists outside of rock and pop. I said they were not influential in any of the so-called genres themselves. These forms of music, aside from the business and marketing aspect, don't owe the Beatles. That doesn't mean that some of the artists associated with said genre haven't incorporated a few of the Beatle sounds and ideas into some of the songs. To keep the music fresh you have to throw different things into it, but it remains the same at its core for the most part. At any rate the point is, the Beatles aren't integral to these forms of music.

The jazz-fusion example is poor, because it's what? Jazz-fusion-- meaning jazz combined with something else. All of your examples are where the music in it's purest form has been mixed with something else. Reggae would be essentially the same without the Beatles. R&B, funk, hip-hop, mambo, etc. would be no worse for the wear. You'd just have a few different things added to it to keep it fresh.

My idea of influential means that it is important in the genesis or evolution of the music as a whole, not just an interesting footnote. Prince is a pop artist by and large so I believe I acknowledged the influence there. Stevie mixes a lot of different genres, pop and rock included so again influence noted. If you want to impress me on their influence in funk, soul, jazz,reggae, and hip-hop show me how the Beatles figure into what Kool Herc, Eric B and Rakim, Louis Armstrong, Charlie Parker, James Brown, (young) Ray Charles, and Marley/Tosh did.

The Beatles.

I can't pick a favourite album, but my favourite songs are:

In My Life
I never get bored of this and it never fails to make me cry. I know it isn't groundbreaking or anything - it just moves me.

Revolution
The B-Side, not the album track. It still sounds incredibly fresh and exciting and noisy.

Only A Northern Song
It's odd that George Harrison whom was the most hippy-ish of them all, wrote the most direct songs about not being paid his dues, like this one and 'Taxman'. The remix on the Yellow Submarine Songtrack is fantastic. It's hypnotic, psychedelic and funky. Just crank up your subwoofer and concentrate on the bassline. It's fantastic.

Hey Jude
It sounds like a mountain in the distance. It's just so huge and domineering but accessible. Also has John saying "fuck" in the background which always makes me laugh when it's played on daytime radio.

Don't Let Me Down
The words are so simplistic but the delivery is so plainitive and honest. Stay clear of the remixed Let It Be Naked version.

Everybody's Got Something To Hide Except Me And My Monkey
Manic. Stuttering. Cowbell overload. Why Michael Jackson never covered this, I'll never know.

Hey Bulldog!
The template for every single one of Oasis's rockier moments. I have no idea what it's about but it's thrilling.

Across The Universe
This sounds like snow falling at night. I like Phil Spector's work on this song. It's very dream-like.

I think it'd be easier to list the Beatles songs I don't like.

wait.... at what point does lennon say fuck? and I like the remixed naked album... what is wrong with Don't let me down (which wasn't even available on an album, right, just the past masters and blue)?

BinaryJustin said:

"never could be any other way"? where's that?

Sdldawn said:

ufoclub said:

John Lennon says "Fuckin' 'ell!" quite audibly, just before the "Better, better, better, better, better, whoooh!" bit in Hey Jude.

There's nothing wrong with 'Don't Let Me Down' in it's originally released format but the remix is horrible. For a start, the remix has got co-lead vocals from Paul on the verses, so it sounds like they're singing to each other, whereas the originally released version had John just singing on his own.

p.s. The sweary bit on 'Hey Jude' is nowhere near as audible on their "1" album - even though the tracks supposedly weren't remixed from the 1987 CD remasters.

p.p.s. On the Yellow Submarine Songtrack, another of Lennon's off-the-cuff remarks is remixed out. If you listen to 'Baby You're A Rich Man' on the Magical Mystery Tour CD, you can clearly hear Lennon change the lyric from "Baby, you're a rich man too" to "Baby, you're a rich fat jew", towards the end of the song. Some people hear this as "rich fag jew" but in either case, it was directed towards their slightly-chubby, jewish, homosexual manager, Brian Epstein. Anyway, the slur is (thankfully) missing from the Yellow Submarine Songtrack remix.

BinaryJustin said:[quote]

ufoclub said:

Right around the three minute mark, if I remember correctly.

I love the Beatles dearly - but I've said that already.

ufoclub said:

Sgt Pepper.. after A Day In The Life.. u let it keep playing.. a high pitch freq. starts and this god awful laugh and then the psychotic "never could be any other way".. at least thats what It sounds like he is saying..
[Edited 9/28/05 17:33pm]

damosuzuki said:

I do too.. and the thing with their music.. that has only really happened with them.. is a more clarity appreciation the older I get.. Its a good feeling.. while the majority gets old after years past.. they only get better..


thats prolific baby