I just dont get it.

You don't have to think anything about them personally.

My brother hates Dylan, but he believes he's good because people he respects love him.

Oh, here we go.

I'm sure there will be plenty here that will tell you why they are not great, but I won't waste my time arguing with people that just don't get it.

All I can say is.....listen to the beautiful lyrics, the melodies and the sophistication of some of their music. Also, remember they were making this very music in the 60's. There music made people feel good.

You don't need to think. Really.

Because they went from being a typical "yeah yeah yeah" band to being something you couldn't compare to any other act on the scene at that time. They truly had no contemporaries. Each of them had their own style and (before they broke apart) those differences worked to their advantage - and the musical scene was and forever shall be better because of it.

The Beatles would create something fine and good, and then they would expand it. They experimented. With drugs. Just kidding. They experimented with loops, backwards dubbing, strings, sitars. Their lyrics are poetic. They made music that was revolutionary and at the same time catchy and accessible. Together, they were able to come up with enduringly lovely tracks like:

A Day In The Life
I'm Only Sleeping
Across The Universe
Blackbird
Something
Revolution
Eleanor Rigby

I could go on and on.

Bottom line, they were catchy from the get go, but they didn't rest on their laurels; they continued to grow as artists, invent new sounds, and try different things.

If you don't buy into any of that, then you should think they are really great simply because I say so.

The songwriting is terrific, and continue to inspire artists to this day. They're like the blueprint for western pop music.

CinisterCee said:

Nicely and succinctly put.

I actually have a brief form note that I’ve composed for the frequent occasions when someone tries to claim that the Beatles weren’t quite all that. It goes something like this:

Dear [insert name here (usually moonbeam )],


The greatness of the Beatles is not some myth concocted by a group of dope-addled hippies. Their accomplishments are real and worthy of respect. They are the template for the modern self-contained rock music band, and, more than any other act of their era, they embodied the notion that pop music could be mature, thoughtful and artistic. Above all, they wrote and recorded several dozen perfect pop songs that became standards in a remarkably short period of time, and those songs continue to reach people to this day.


The Beatles stand above every other popular music artist of the second half of the century. I don’t see the Rolling Stones or Bob Dylan as being their peers. The Beatles’ peers are Cole Porter, Louis Armstrong, Irving Berlin - genuine artists who've created a body of work that will transcend the trends of their time.
[Edited 4/4/06 13:24pm]

damosuzuki said:

Totally.

where's my bro?

damosuzuki said:

"The Beatles stand above every other popular music artist of the second half of the century".

Lunacy!

The Beatles have none of the attitude that IS rock and roll. None at all. Look, if Barry Manilow soft rock is your thing, have at it man, have at it, but don't go mixin' up your p's and q's. You are quite correct in saying they are not peers of the Rolling Stones...The Rolling Stones kick the Beatles asses. I am not saying the Beatles suck, I don't feel they do, but I do feel that they are they are the most overrated group of my lifetime...by far.

And personally I find this idea that the Beatles are most influential group of the last fifty years to be racist bullshit.

There is no question WHATSOEVER that James Brown is the most influential artist of the last 100 years.

James Brown through his vision spawned ENTIRE GENRES of GLOBAL MUSIC that WOULD NOT HAVE EXISTED WITHOUT HIM.

r&b
soul music
the funk
hip-hop
house
techno


All impossible without James. Impossible. And you best add Prince to the list, 'cause without James, DEFINITELY no Prince.

The Beatles can claim NO such similar multidirectional global influence.

James cannot get his props for this staggering mind-blowing contribution because he is a black man living in America, so we are fed this ridiculous crap about the all-pervading perennial untrumped influence of the Beatles.

Bullshit.

darkstranger521 said:

I feel close to this statement. But James Brown? I am not sure.

damosuzuki said:

Moonbeam uh?
I got to check out this guy.

bublebath said:

He's my brother and I love him, but he has some very unconventional opinions.

darkstranger521 said:

Give me a break. James Brown is (nearly) universally regarded as the inventor of several different forms of music & showmanship. Holds several titles--"the Godfather of this," "the hardest that..." A peerless genius.

The Beatles are (nearly) universally regarded as classic songwriters who influenced rock, pop, folk, even classical & R&B to this day. Peerless geniuses whose music was covered by every style of musician.

Can't both be true?

It's just as ridiculous to make such a blanket statement about James--"There is no question WHATSOEVER that James Brown is the most influential artist of the last 100 years"--as about the Beatles. What about Miles, Charlie Parker, Gershwin, Dylan, Robert Johnson, Jimi? Hell you said artist, what about Picasso?
[Edited 4/4/06 14:33pm]

darkstranger521 said:quote]

"The Beatles stand above every other popular music artist of the second half of the century".

Lunacy!

The Beatles have none of the attitude that IS rock and roll. None at all. Look, if Barry Manilow soft rock is your thing, have at it man, have at it, but don't go mixin' up your p's and q's. You are quite correct in saying they are not peers of the Rolling Stones...The Rolling Stones kick the Beatles asses. I am not saying the Beatles suck, I don't feel they do, but I do feel that they are they are the most overrated group of my lifetime...by far.

And personally I find this idea that the Beatles are most influential group of the last fifty years to be racist bullshit.

There is no question WHATSOEVER that James Brown is the most influential artist of the last 100 years.

James Brown through his vision spawned ENTIRE GENRES of GLOBAL MUSIC that WOULD NOT HAVE EXISTED WITHOUT HIM.

r&b
soul music
the funk
hip-hop
house
techno






































































































All impossible without James. Impossible. And you best add Prince to the list, 'cause without James, DEFINITELY no Prince.

The Beatles can claim NO such similar multidirectional global influence.

James cannot get his props for this staggering mind-blowing contribution because he is a black man living in America, so we are fed this ridiculous crap about the all-pervading perennial untrumped influence of the Beatles.

Bullshit.[/quote]




sorry but you are 100% CORRECT. No Question.

I knew my name would be brought up here.

While I detest their music, it would be really ignorant of me (or anyone) to deny their impact. The fact is that their influence is enormous.

However, I hold firm to the notion that they are the most overrated band in the history of rock and roll. I don't care how much anyone adores them, when it is universally unquestioned that they are the greatest, or it is suggested that this should be the case, there is no way for them to be anything but overrated. No matter the artist in consideration for such a lofty (and non-existent) title, there should always be room for discussion. It seems with most Beatle fans, discussion of this matter is viewed as nothing short of heresy. Subsequently, they are overrated by the very notion of what overrated means, and it has little to do with their music.

NDRU said:

James has had more influence than all the people you named and a whole lot more you did not name put together.

James invented hip-hop Please take a close look around the world you live in and you WILL see James EVERYWHERE.

Moonbeam said:

I agree but are u a lawyer?

darkstranger521 said:

Not sure where you live, but in America, his home, James Brown IS a joke, a punchline, a Saturday Night Live skit. That is how he is portrayed publicly. James is not taken seriously or given anywhere near proper credit for what he his contributed to life on Earth. Not even close to proper credit.

Graycap23 said:

Nope. I'm sorry if I sounded a bit up myself there.

darkstranger521 saidquote]

Not sure where you live, but in America, his home, James Brown IS a joke, a punchline, a Saturday Night Live skit. That is how he is portrayed publicly. James is not taken seriously or given anywhere near proper credit for what he his contributed to life on Earth. Not even close to proper credit.[/quote]

What Brother ever is? Especially if he is ALIVE?

Moonbeam said:

Hey, by that logic they are overrated! This explanation actually makes more sense than jumping right to the "discussion".

darkstranger521 said:

Lots of the greats are jokes. Elvis is a joke, too, but you can't deny that people love him. John & Yoko are mocked regularly. They all (James included) have done a lot to admire & a lot to make fun of. It may bother you that James is made fun of, but you're aware he's a legend, and so am I. Why don't you think everyone else is, too?

Look, I'm not saying you're wrong, I never denied James' influence, but look around & the Beatles are there, as well.

This picking of a winner of #1 in influence is kind of like saying "this star is farther away than that star." Maybe it's true, but that has no relevance to any of us here on Earth.

I think their sound from Rubber Soul up until the Abbey Road album sounds as current as anything thats ever came.... They hit it big with their sound, and it continues to age with grace.

Speaking of James Brown, how about that that clip of him with Sammy Davis Jr. on another thread here in Music: Non-Prince?

I say go out and get "1's". Target has it for about 9.99 now. You won't be able to put it down. Great is debateable. They're definitely good!

I've been listening to Abbey Road, and it sounds like it could have been released last week.

I actually like their perspective on their significance.

Paul McCartney "We were a good little group" and Lennon "We were just A BAND that made it very very big"

The eulogising over them is what has been placed on them. Great or not, I love to listen to them, you don't, why should I convince you otherwise?
[Edited 4/5/06 2:20am]

mynameisnotsusan said:

Well said. They're my favorite, but why should anyone else care? I know people who hate the Mona Lisa, people who hate Picasso, people who hate Miles Davis. Art isn't about quantifying greatness, it's about connecting to personal expression.

here's my take on the Beatles' greatness.

The Beatles were more or less the first act in rock music (or arguably popular music as a whole) to A."grow" artistically and make it acceptable, even expected for a band to expand and progress rather than keep rehashing the same songs over and over again. B they were among the first bands to exclusively write their own material and not be beholden to outside songwriters, again making it expected for artists in popular music to write their own stuff. C. Were among the first groups to embrace all kinds of styles and influences. Revolver may not have been the first place where orchestral strings were used in rock music, or the first place a rock artist made forays into eastern music, or the first place a musician used tape loops in a collage/soundscape, but it was the first record where all those things were done in the same place. D. Made the biggest contribution towards making rock music, and "popular" music as a whole, respectable and held on the same level as "Serious" art, not just disposable fluff that wouldn't have any relevance beyond it's time of release. I bet you the term "classic rock" would have never existed if not for them E. They just wrote dozens and dozens of excellent songs, both lyrically and musically, in almost every style and pioneered in some direct or indirect way just about every "hyphen rock" genre that would come into existence in the next decades.