New topic
PrintableSUPRMAN said: Moonbeam said: Indeed. My Beatles hate is as tried-and-true as the changing of the seasons.  I'm quite happy for others to love them, though.Can someone really just hate the Beatles? it's a great big scary world out there! | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
NoVideo said: Sandino said: yada yada yada, name some. Everyone that came after them. From a music or business standpoint, directly or indirectly - - everyone. The Beatles were like a nuclear bomb on what was pop music. They remade everything. They propelled a whole host of British bands into US and world consciousness. They broke the stranglehold of professional songwriters when they started using mostly their own material. What was always a singles-dominated industry morphed into an album-dominated industry. As they moved away from pop songs about love and love lost and into more experimental and introspective material while still maintaining mass appeal, legions of other bands and artists followed. All of their peers were directly inspired by them, and in turn inspired others. They changed the way the music industry worked, and upped the ante when it came to touring and playing in huge venues. They are the most covered band in history, and the most revered. It’s no accident that any list of “Best albums” created by songwriters, artists and others in the music industry are always dominated by The Beatles. In the nearly 40 years since they broke up, nobody else has come close to having the impact they did on the music industry as a whole - - nobody. Wanna talk specifics? The Beach Boys were trying to outdo the Beatles when they recorded their Pet Sounds LP. The Stones weakly emulated the Beatles psychedelic period in the wake of Sgt. Peppers. Hendrix was a huge Beatles fan and played some of their songs, as did Stevie Wonder, Otis Redding and others. Dylan plugged in and stepped away from his folk roots. See what Eric Clapton and other greats (all of whom went on to inspire their own legions of followers) have to say about the Beatles. They were 2nd to none. [Edited 6/29/09 15:43pm] wha I meant was how did they influence future musicians in western music when they play and write/compose their songs. I've already ackowledged what they've done for song structure in pop format, but did the beatles do anything that changed the way people play their instruments or how people composed songs? and I don't just mean re-packaging sounds that homogenized and segregated radio of the 60's didn't play, I mean consciously changing western music, how they influenced future chord progressions, vocal phrasings, jamming sessions EVERYTHING. because if they truly are the most influential band in western music history surely this means they're musical innovation can be felt even today. In short No video, please just explain to me how they changed how people either played their instruments or compose their songs(not sounds, not engineering tricks they didn't even make, not as pop icons, as MUSICIANS) [Edited 6/30/09 7:45am] Did Prince ever deny he had sex with his sister? I believe not. So there U have it..
http://prince.org/msg/8/327790?&pg=2 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Sandino said: Now that I got your attention
 I was speaking reading this one discussion on another message board from a dude who said the beatles were horribly overrated as musicians, and that they weren't as innovative as people believe because they didn't do anything to change the way people write or play music aside from using the A chord in at the end of their songs. What do you think?
[Edited 6/28/09 10:37am] Disagree. It is impossible to overrate the Beatles, IMHO. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Sandino said: Now that I got your attention
I was speaking reading this one discussion on another message board from a dude who said the beatles were horribly overrated as musicians, and that they weren't as innovative as people believe because they didn't do anything to change the way people write or play music aside from using the A chord in at the end of their songs. What do you think?
[Edited 6/28/09 10:37am] The beatles were so influential and innovative; it is hard to understand why anyone would ever consider them over-rated. A few examples: They popularized backmasking (e.g. the playing of guitars backwards). Which were consistently used by bands such as oasis and blur and even prince. Songs like helter skelter were written in the 60's (but you would never know that by listening to them). This song was hugely influential to many grunge rock and alternative bands such as radiohead. The guitar technique of flanging (a wirling sound) was invented by John lennon. I think prince uses this amongst other techniques in the undertaker performances They were the driving force of considering an album as both important an a art from. Pria to this, 45's were more important and albums contained mostly filler tracks with 2 singles. There are so many more, string overdubs and particular engineering techqiques were first used by the beatles. ALso, the single 'hey jude' completely changed pop music, since most songs before that were always 3 mins in lenght. regardless what one things about the beatles, muisc would not be the same without them. so they certainly arn't over-rated. [Edited 6/30/09 8:16am] "Sisters and brothers in the purple underground, find peace of mind in the pop sound!" | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Sandino said: NoVideo said: Everyone that came after them. From a music or business standpoint, directly or indirectly - - everyone. The Beatles were like a nuclear bomb on what was pop music. They remade everything. They propelled a whole host of British bands into US and world consciousness. They broke the stranglehold of professional songwriters when they started using mostly their own material. What was always a singles-dominated industry morphed into an album-dominated industry. As they moved away from pop songs about love and love lost and into more experimental and introspective material while still maintaining mass appeal, legions of other bands and artists followed. All of their peers were directly inspired by them, and in turn inspired others. They changed the way the music industry worked, and upped the ante when it came to touring and playing in huge venues. They are the most covered band in history, and the most revered. It’s no accident that any list of “Best albums” created by songwriters, artists and others in the music industry are always dominated by The Beatles. In the nearly 40 years since they broke up, nobody else has come close to having the impact they did on the music industry as a whole - - nobody. Wanna talk specifics? The Beach Boys were trying to outdo the Beatles when they recorded their Pet Sounds LP. The Stones weakly emulated the Beatles psychedelic period in the wake of Sgt. Peppers. Hendrix was a huge Beatles fan and played some of their songs, as did Stevie Wonder, Otis Redding and others. Dylan plugged in and stepped away from his folk roots. See what Eric Clapton and other greats (all of whom went on to inspire their own legions of followers) have to say about the Beatles. They were 2nd to none. [Edited 6/29/09 15:43pm] wha I meant was how did they influence future musicians in western music when they play and write/compose their songs. I've already ackowledged what they've done for song structure in pop format, but did the beatles do anything that changed the way people play their instruments or how people composed songs? and I don't just mean re-packaging sounds that homogenized and segregated radio of the 60's didn't play, I mean consciously changing western music, how they influenced future chord progressions, vocal phrasings, jamming sessions EVERYTHING. because if they truly are the most influential band in western music history surely this means they're musical innovation can be felt even today. In short No video, please just explain to me how they changed how people either played their instruments or compose their songs(not sounds, not engineering tricks they didn't even make, not as pop icons, as MUSICIANS) [Edited 6/30/09 7:45am] "The impact of the Beatles - not only on rock & roll but on Western culture - is simply incalculable. As musicians, they proved that rock & roll could embrace a limitless variety of harmonies, structures and sounds; virtually every rock experiment has some precedent on Beatle records." "Although many of their sales and attendance records have since been surpassed, no group has so radically transformed the sound and meaning of rock & roll." - Rolling Stone Encyclopedia of Rock and Roll * * * * Read back through what I wrote, including some of the quotes by famous and influential musicians that I posted. Yes, they changed everything about pop music, including the way people played, produced records, incorporated elements into their music, vocal harmonies, etc. The Beatles spawned a long host of imitators and guitar-rock bands that were directly emulating their style and who then in turn inspired their own devotees. They literally opened the floodgates; we’re not only talking about someone sitting at a guitar trying to specifically sound like The Beatles (although that obviously happened and continues to happen), but the Beatles changed pop music to the extent that others were able to experiment and bring in their own disparate elements and influences in a way that wasn’t happening prior to The Beatles. The Beatles influenced overall style, substance, sound and technique. A great primer on the Beatles’ influence: http://www.physicsdaily.c..._influence Here is an excellent summary of the extent of the Beatles’ influence, including on other musicians: http://www.musicophile.co...?itemid=98 Here is a good summary of the Beatles vast influence on recording in the studio: http://en.wikipedia.org/w..._recording Here is a good summary of the Beatles influence on popular culture, including other musicians: http://en.wikipedia.org/w...ar_culture In their career The Beatles have sold over ONE BILLION records and are widely regarded as the greatest rock/pop band in history. All this, and they recorded for a paltry 7 years. These days, you’re lucky to get 2 or 3 albums from a major artist in a 7 year span. Some other good quotes: Bob Dylan on the Beatles In an interview taken in 1971, Dylan recalls being impressed by their music. "We were driving through Colorado, we had the radio on, and eight of the Top 10 songs were Beatles songs...'I Wanna Hold Your Hand,' all those early ones. They were doing things nobody was doing. Their chords were outrageous, just outrageous, and their harmonies made it all valid...I knew they were pointing the direction of where music had to go." The Rolling Stones on the Beatles Keith liked the Beatles because he was quite interested in their chord sequences. He also liked their harmonies, which were always a slight problem to the Rolling Stones. Keith always tried to get the harmonies off the ground but they always seemed messy. What we never really got together were Keith and Brian singing backup vocals. It didn't work, because Keith was a better singer and had to keep going, oooh, ooh ooh (laughs). Brian liked all those oohs, which Keith had to put up with. Keith was always capable of much stronger vocals than ooh ooh ooh. - Mick Jagger Bob Weir of the Grateful Dead The Beatles were why we turned from a jug band into a rock 'n' roll band," said Bob Weir. "What we saw them doing was impossibly attractive. ... * * * This is all just the tip of the iceberg. If you are truly interested in the Beatles history, their place in rock and how they influenced and directly impacted rock and pop music going forward, just do some google searches. There is more written about the Beatles than any other pop/rock group - - by far. Another indication of their importance. Obviously musical taste is subjective. Saying "I don't like the Beatles music" is different than saying "THE BEATLES SUCK!!!!" If you have a basic understanding of the history of pop/rock music, then it should be evident how imporant and pivotal the Beatles were - - like them or loathe them. [Edited 6/30/09 8:27am] * * *
Prince's Classic Finally Expanded The Deluxe 'Purple Rain' Reissue http://www.popmatters.com...n-reissue/ | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Hyperbole at it's BEST.....and pure non-sense.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Graycap23 said: Hyperbole at it's BEST.....and pure non-sense.
OK cool! Glad that's settled * * *
Prince's Classic Finally Expanded The Deluxe 'Purple Rain' Reissue http://www.popmatters.com...n-reissue/ | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
How many of these people did the Beatles influence?
P-Funk Bootsy Ohio Players Prince James Brown Cameo The Barkays Meshell NDegeocello Mint Condition EWF The Isley Brothers The Brothers Johnson Marcus Miller Donna Hathaway Herbie Hancock Quincy Jones Ray Charles Hendrix | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Sandino said: Now that I got your attention
I was speaking reading this one discussion on another message board from a dude who said the beatles were horribly overrated as musicians, and that they weren't as innovative as people believe because they didn't do anything to change the way people write or play music aside from using the A chord in at the end of their songs. What do you think?
[Edited 6/28/09 10:37am] For their time they were sensational and I would not categorise them as an overrated band. Still, in saying that I could also appreciate when Lennon left and pursued a solo career, pure emancipation. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
jethrouk said: Sandino said: Now that I got your attention
I was speaking reading this one discussion on another message board from a dude who said the beatles were horribly overrated as musicians, and that they weren't as innovative as people believe because they didn't do anything to change the way people write or play music aside from using the A chord in at the end of their songs. What do you think?
[Edited 6/28/09 10:37am] The beatles were so influential and innovative; it is hard to understand why anyone would ever consider them over-rated. A few examples: They popularized backmasking (e.g. the playing of guitars backwards). Which were consistently used by bands such as oasis and blur and even prince. Songs like helter skelter were written in the 60's (but you would never know that by listening to them). This song was hugely influential to many grunge rock and alternative bands such as radiohead. The guitar technique of flanging (a wirling sound) was invented by John lennon. I think prince uses this amongst other techniques in the undertaker performances They were the driving force of considering an album as both important an a art from. Pria to this, 45's were more important and albums contained mostly filler tracks with 2 singles. There are so many more, string overdubs and particular engineering techqiques were first used by the beatles. ALso, the single 'hey jude' completely changed pop music, since most songs before that were always 3 mins in lenght. regardless what one things about the beatles, muisc would not be the same without them. so they certainly arn't over-rated. [Edited 6/30/09 8:16am] They didn't invent backmasking ken townshend did. They just knew it sounded good. Big whoop. John lennon accidentally invented it. even still hendrix perfected it an made way more contributions to the guitar then Lennon/mcCartney or harrison ever did. And if you hadn't noticed I'm talking about western music. Sure they were the first to put out a single over threem minutes. Singles only matter to radios. It's not like they were the first ever to make songs longer than three minutes in western music, so I can't give them credit for that as an innovation. and they didn't invent any of those technique either. The beatles weren't engineers, so that makes their contributions moot. Also it looks like the album is dying in pop music anyway, the industry is reverting right back to the ways that it was before the 60's, so that influence oover establishing the album as a legitimate artistic vehicle(which was btw already being done by jazz musicians) is also about be moot. Did Prince ever deny he had sex with his sister? I believe not. So there U have it..
http://prince.org/msg/8/327790?&pg=2 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
NoVideo said: Sandino said: wha I meant was how did they influence future musicians in western music when they play and write/compose their songs. I've already ackowledged what they've done for song structure in pop format, but did the beatles do anything that changed the way people play their instruments or how people composed songs? and I don't just mean re-packaging sounds that homogenized and segregated radio of the 60's didn't play, I mean consciously changing western music, how they influenced future chord progressions, vocal phrasings, jamming sessions EVERYTHING. because if they truly are the most influential band in western music history surely this means they're musical innovation can be felt even today. In short No video, please just explain to me how they changed how people either played their instruments or compose their songs(not sounds, not engineering tricks they didn't even make, not as pop icons, as MUSICIANS) [Edited 6/30/09 7:45am] "The impact of the Beatles - not only on rock & roll but on Western culture - is simply incalculable. As musicians, they proved that rock & roll could embrace a limitless variety of harmonies, structures and sounds; virtually every rock experiment has some precedent on Beatle records." "Although many of their sales and attendance records have since been surpassed, no group has so radically transformed the sound and meaning of rock & roll." - Rolling Stone Encyclopedia of Rock and Roll * * * * Read back through what I wrote, including some of the quotes by famous and influential musicians that I posted. Yes, they changed everything about pop music, including the way people played, produced records, incorporated elements into their music, vocal harmonies, etc. The Beatles spawned a long host of imitators and guitar-rock bands that were directly emulating their style and who then in turn inspired their own devotees. They literally opened the floodgates; we’re not only talking about someone sitting at a guitar trying to specifically sound like The Beatles (although that obviously happened and continues to happen), but the Beatles changed pop music to the extent that others were able to experiment and bring in their own disparate elements and influences in a way that wasn’t happening prior to The Beatles. The Beatles influenced overall style, substance, sound and technique. A great primer on the Beatles’ influence: http://www.physicsdaily.c..._influence Here is an excellent summary of the extent of the Beatles’ influence, including on other musicians: http://www.musicophile.co...?itemid=98 Here is a good summary of the Beatles vast influence on recording in the studio: http://en.wikipedia.org/w..._recording Here is a good summary of the Beatles influence on popular culture, including other musicians: http://en.wikipedia.org/w...ar_culture In their career The Beatles have sold over ONE BILLION records and are widely regarded as the greatest rock/pop band in history. All this, and they recorded for a paltry 7 years. These days, you’re lucky to get 2 or 3 albums from a major artist in a 7 year span. Some other good quotes: Bob Dylan on the Beatles In an interview taken in 1971, Dylan recalls being impressed by their music. "We were driving through Colorado, we had the radio on, and eight of the Top 10 songs were Beatles songs...'I Wanna Hold Your Hand,' all those early ones. They were doing things nobody was doing. Their chords were outrageous, just outrageous, and their harmonies made it all valid...I knew they were pointing the direction of where music had to go." The Rolling Stones on the Beatles Keith liked the Beatles because he was quite interested in their chord sequences. He also liked their harmonies, which were always a slight problem to the Rolling Stones. Keith always tried to get the harmonies off the ground but they always seemed messy. What we never really got together were Keith and Brian singing backup vocals. It didn't work, because Keith was a better singer and had to keep going, oooh, ooh ooh (laughs). Brian liked all those oohs, which Keith had to put up with. Keith was always capable of much stronger vocals than ooh ooh ooh. - Mick Jagger Bob Weir of the Grateful Dead The Beatles were why we turned from a jug band into a rock 'n' roll band," said Bob Weir. "What we saw them doing was impossibly attractive. ... * * * This is all just the tip of the iceberg. If you are truly interested in the Beatles history, their place in rock and how they influenced and directly impacted rock and pop music going forward, just do some google searches. There is more written about the Beatles than any other pop/rock group - - by far. Another indication of their importance. Obviously musical taste is subjective. Saying "I don't like the Beatles music" is different than saying "THE BEATLES SUCK!!!!" If you have a basic understanding of the history of pop/rock music, then it should be evident how imporant and pivotal the Beatles were - - like them or loathe them. [Edited 6/30/09 8:27am] I read the first article. The second is the same as the first. the Third is just telling me what the Engineers did in the Beatles sessions and the fourth is completely irrelevant to playing writing and composing music. none of them tells me anything that I didn't already know. They didn't invent shit, and played off the ideas of others like Bob Dylan, Buddy Holly, Beach Boys. George martin is the reason for the strings, ken townshend is the true innovator in engineering techniques. So, how again did they change how people PLAY music on their instruments, or how people COMPOSE SONGS? not just rock n roll musicians, but WESTERN MUSIC AS A WHOLE!?! I'm still waiting [Edited 6/30/09 10:08am] [Edited 6/30/09 10:11am] Did Prince ever deny he had sex with his sister? I believe not. So there U have it..
http://prince.org/msg/8/327790?&pg=2 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Sandino said: jethrouk said: The beatles were so influential and innovative; it is hard to understand why anyone would ever consider them over-rated. A few examples: They popularized backmasking (e.g. the playing of guitars backwards). Which were consistently used by bands such as oasis and blur and even prince. Songs like helter skelter were written in the 60's (but you would never know that by listening to them). This song was hugely influential to many grunge rock and alternative bands such as radiohead. The guitar technique of flanging (a wirling sound) was invented by John lennon. I think prince uses this amongst other techniques in the undertaker performances They were the driving force of considering an album as both important an a art from. Pria to this, 45's were more important and albums contained mostly filler tracks with 2 singles. There are so many more, string overdubs and particular engineering techqiques were first used by the beatles. ALso, the single 'hey jude' completely changed pop music, since most songs before that were always 3 mins in lenght. regardless what one things about the beatles, muisc would not be the same without them. so they certainly arn't over-rated. [Edited 6/30/09 8:16am] They didn't invent backmasking ken townshend did. They just knew it sounded good. Big whoop. John lennon accidentally invented it. even still hendrix perfected it an made way more contributions to the guitar then Lennon/mcCartney or harrison ever did. And if you hadn't noticed I'm talking about western music. Sure they were the first to put out a single over threem minutes. Singles only matter to radios. It's not like they were the first ever to make songs longer than three minutes in western music, so I can't give them credit for that as an innovation. and they didn't invent any of those technique either. The beatles weren't engineers, so that makes their contributions moot. Also it looks like the album is dying in pop music anyway, the industry is reverting right back to the ways that it was before the 60's, so that influence oover establishing the album as a legitimate artistic vehicle(which was btw already being done by jazz musicians) is also about be moot. Did you actually read what my post said. Where did I use the word invent, I said they popularized backmasking. One of the most solid innovations that michael jackson gave music was a ability to blend black music with more white music and white-dance music. The beatles for example, can be credited in a similar vein in that they brought influences over from other meduims such as jazz (as you mentioned). they were also the first (as far as i'm aware) to bring alot of eastern styles to popular music, such as the sitar. People do not consider what michael did to be un-innovative because such music styles already existed seperately in both the white and black community - and he merely fused them together. equally you cannot say the beatles were uninnovative because they brought , what already existed into the main-stream. the fact that they dared to do something that many people would have told them wouldn't work - had a major impact on music, [Edited 6/30/09 10:25am] "Sisters and brothers in the purple underground, find peace of mind in the pop sound!" | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
jethrouk said: Sandino said: They didn't invent backmasking ken townshend did. They just knew it sounded good. Big whoop. John lennon accidentally invented it. even still hendrix perfected it an made way more contributions to the guitar then Lennon/mcCartney or harrison ever did. And if you hadn't noticed I'm talking about western music. Sure they were the first to put out a single over threem minutes. Singles only matter to radios. It's not like they were the first ever to make songs longer than three minutes in western music, so I can't give them credit for that as an innovation. and they didn't invent any of those technique either. The beatles weren't engineers, so that makes their contributions moot. Also it looks like the album is dying in pop music anyway, the industry is reverting right back to the ways that it was before the 60's, so that influence oover establishing the album as a legitimate artistic vehicle(which was btw already being done by jazz musicians) is also about be moot. Did you actually read what my post said. Where did I use the word invent, I said they popularized backmasking [Edited 6/30/09 10:07am] \riiight. So by your logic i should give folks like T-pain, teddy riley and what not all the credit for popularizing autotune even if folks like Stevie Wonder or Roger troutman were altering their voices way before them? riiiight Did Prince ever deny he had sex with his sister? I believe not. So there U have it..
http://prince.org/msg/8/327790?&pg=2 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Sandino said: jethrouk said: Did you actually read what my post said. Where did I use the word invent, I said they popularized backmasking [Edited 6/30/09 10:07am] \riiight. So by your logic i should give folks like T-pain, teddy riley and what not all the credit for popularizing autotune even if folks like Stevie Wonder or Roger troutman were altering their voices way before them? riiiight Sandino said: jethrouk said: Did you actually read what my post said. Where did I use the word invent, I said they popularized backmasking [Edited 6/30/09 10:07am] \riiight. So by your logic i should give folks like T-pain, teddy riley and what not all the credit for popularizing autotune even if folks like Stevie Wonder or Roger troutman were altering their voices way before them? riiiight autotune and vcoder's and guitar talkers are similar but not the same. auto-tune is designed to level out the tone of someone who can't sing and is different from that used by zapp. autotune was popular in the 90's Cher for example. it has just recently come back into music. t-pain being credited with popuarizing it - > is actually an incorrect attribution. conversely, I don't remember backmasking ever being popular untill the beatles used it to actually create music, http://en.wikipedia.org/w...ackmasking [Edited 6/30/09 11:15am] "Sisters and brothers in the purple underground, find peace of mind in the pop sound!" | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I didn't even think about composing, producing/recording, mixing music until I realized in the 80's that all these incredible songs I had heard growing up from "A Day in The Life" to "Live and Let Die" to "Let it Be" to "Sgt Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band" to "Yesterday" to "Norwegian Wood" to "Got To Get You Into My Life" to "Here Comes The Sun" to "Come Together" to "Strawberry Fields Forever" to "Jealous Guy" to "My Sweet Lord"...and so many many more.... were in one way or another authored from the people that made up the group The Beatles. They were the ones that showed me that making a song or album was similar to making a movie (a philosophy that Prince takes to heart). That you could layer up concepts and special effects and elevate it into a coherent work that cuts through all other artist's works and soaks into the immediate cultural colletcive on a worldwide level. They were the ones that showed me that you could author many many hauntingly almost painfully beautiful melodies of great variety and texture, and that one certain genre identity did not have to anchor you down (again, a huge influence on Prince who grew up on solid helpings of classic rock aside from R&B). My art book: http://www.lulu.com/spotl...ecomicskid
VIDEO WORK: http://sharadkantpatel.com MUSIC: https://soundcloud.com/ufoclub1977 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Graycap23 said: How many of these people did the Beatles influence?
P-Funk Bootsy Participated in Eddie Hazel's cover of "I Want You (She's So Heavy)" Prince
Obvious. "Paisley Park" is the first thing that pops in my head. Participated in the cover of "While My Guitar Gently Weeps" James Brown
Covered "Something" The Barkays
Covered "Yesterday," "Hey Jude," "With a Little Help From My Friends," "A Hard Day's Night" Meshell NDegeocello
Covered "Imagine" by John Lennon EWF
Covered "Got to Get You Into My Life" The Brothers Johnson
Covered "Come Together," worked with Billy Preston Marcus Miller
Covered "Come Together" Donna Hathaway
Covered "Yesterday" Herbie Hancock
Covered "Norwegian Wood (This Bird Has Flown)" Quincy Jones
Produced many Beatles covers http://www.youtube.com/wa...byXnkdS8po Ray Charles
Covered plenty of Beatles tunes, including "Let It Be," "Eleanor Rigby," "Yesterday," and "The Long and Winding Road" Hendrix
Covered "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band" "Whitney was purely and simply one of a kind." ~ Clive Davis | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Graycap23 said: How many of these people did the Beatles influence?
P-Funk Bootsy Ohio Players Prince James Brown Cameo The Barkays Meshell NDegeocello Mint Condition EWF The Isley Brothers The Brothers Johnson Marcus Miller Donna Hathaway Herbie Hancock Quincy Jones Ray Charles Hendrix All of them – either directly or indirectly. I’m surprised you’d mention Prince. I assume you’ve heard ATWIAD? It’s a Beatles’ pastiche. The Dream Factory material is heavily Beatlesque, as is Parade. Wendy & Lisa’s influence is very much rooted in the Beatles. Rickey Vincent’s “Funk” book talks about the Beatles’ influence: “Layered levels consciousness in the lyrics floated in and out about the many sound effects… Years ahead of their time, The Beatles introduced a new psychedelic era in popular recordings, one which would have a profound effect on Jim Hendrix (check out “Electric Ladyland) and George Clinton’s Funkadelic (listen to the Free Your Mind and Your Ass Will Follow album), as well as many others”… Have you heard Ray Charles’ covers of “Eleanor Rigby” and “Yesterday”? How about the Isley Brothers’ “Come Together”? The Bar-kays did at least 3 Beatles covers, and Herbie Hancock did an amazing version of “Norwegian Wood.” James Brown recorded a wild version of “Something” – (it’s on YouTube, well worth checking out.) Donny Hathaway recorded a stunning version of “Yesterday” – one of my favorites. EWF's version of "Got To Get You Into My Life" is legendary. Quincy Jones was a friend of the Beatles and a close friend and admirer of George Martin. He accepted an Oscar on the Beatles’ behalf for “Let It Be” and did production work for Ringo. He even covered “A Hard Days Night”. The list goes on. If an artist wasn’t influenced by the Beatles directly, they were influenced by someone who WAS influenced by the Beatles directly - - or they were impacted by the Beatles’ innovations in recording, or the business aspects of the industry. But even if that’s completely wrong, and every single one of these artists wasn’t influenced by The Beatles in some way - - that doesn’t change the answer to this thread which is: are the Beatles overrated? No. [Edited 6/30/09 10:45am] * * *
Prince's Classic Finally Expanded The Deluxe 'Purple Rain' Reissue http://www.popmatters.com...n-reissue/ | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Sandino said: So, how again did they change how people PLAY music on their instruments, or how people COMPOSE SONGS? not just rock n roll musicians, but WESTERN MUSIC AS A WHOLE!?! I'm still waiting Well, all i can say is that you need to re-read this thread.* * *
Prince's Classic Finally Expanded The Deluxe 'Purple Rain' Reissue http://www.popmatters.com...n-reissue/ | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
AlexdeParis said: Meshell NDegeocello Covered "Imagine" by John Lennon " She does an amazing job on this song. * * *
Prince's Classic Finally Expanded The Deluxe 'Purple Rain' Reissue http://www.popmatters.com...n-reissue/ | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Sandino said: Now that I got your attention
I was speaking reading this one discussion on another message board from a dude who said the beatles were horribly overrated as musicians, and that they weren't as innovative as people believe because they didn't do anything to change the way people write or play music aside from using the A chord in at the end of their songs. What do you think?
[Edited 6/28/09 10:37am] OK yes individually they may not have been the best 'pound for pound' musicians in the world - arguably that accolade belongs to Led Zep - BUT anyone who seriously makes the statement that The Beatles were overrated as a band speaks from down south mate... I know we can argue that its all about opinion, but come on, just take any 5 of their number 1 singles and tell me seriously at that time who else could have made those records? We also know that they influenced hundreds of bands and writers - and of course the greatest gift they gave the world?? Electric Light Orchestra of course!  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Doing a cover song is NOT the SAME as influencing someone in their artistic endeavor. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
NoVideo said: Graycap23 said: How many of these people did the Beatles influence?
P-Funk Bootsy Ohio Players Prince James Brown Cameo The Barkays Meshell NDegeocello Mint Condition EWF The Isley Brothers The Brothers Johnson Marcus Miller Donna Hathaway Herbie Hancock Quincy Jones Ray Charles Hendrix All of them – either directly or indirectly. I’m surprised you’d mention Prince. I assume you’ve heard ATWIAD? It’s a Beatles’ pastiche. The Dream Factory material is heavily Beatlesque, as is Parade. Wendy & Lisa’s influence is very much rooted in the Beatles. Rickey Vincent’s “Funk” book talks about the Beatles’ influence: “Layered levels consciousness in the lyrics floated in and out about the many sound effects… Years ahead of their time, The Beatles introduced a new psychedelic era in popular recordings, one which would have a profound effect on Jim Hendrix (check out “Electric Ladyland) and George Clinton’s Funkadelic (listen to the Free Your Mind and Your Ass Will Follow album), as well as many others”… Have you heard Ray Charles’ covers of “Eleanor Rigby” and “Yesterday”? How about the Isley Brothers’ “Come Together”? The Bar-kays did at least 3 Beatles covers, and Herbie Hancock did an amazing version of “Norwegian Wood.” James Brown recorded a wild version of “Something” – (it’s on YouTube, well worth checking out.) Donny Hathaway recorded a stunning version of “Yesterday” – one of my favorites. EWF's version of "Got To Get You Into My Life" is legendary. Quincy Jones was a friend of the Beatles and a close friend and admirer of George Martin. He accepted an Oscar on the Beatles’ behalf for “Let It Be” and did production work for Ringo. He even covered “A Hard Days Night”. The list goes on. If an artist wasn’t influenced by the Beatles directly, they were influenced by someone who WAS influenced by the Beatles directly - - or they were impacted by the Beatles’ innovations in recording, or the business aspects of the industry. But even if that’s completely wrong, and every single one of these artists wasn’t influenced by The Beatles in some way - - that doesn’t change the answer to this thread which is: are the Beatles overrated? No. [Edited 6/30/09 10:45am] So basically.....the Beatles INVENTED music after the 1960s? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Graycap23 said: Doing a cover song is NOT the SAME as influencing someone in their artistic endeavor.
Doing a cover song implies a certain appreciation for one's work. Demonstrating influence on a message board any other way would probably involve direct quotes from the artists in question. "Whitney was purely and simply one of a kind." ~ Clive Davis | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Graycap23 said: So basically.....the Beatles INVENTED music after the 1960s? [/quote] You'll have to point out where I said that. I said The Beatles changed the music industry dramatically, and they influenced - either directly or indirectly – everyone in pop/rock (and many in other genres as well) that came after them. * * *
Prince's Classic Finally Expanded The Deluxe 'Purple Rain' Reissue http://www.popmatters.com...n-reissue/ | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
jethrouk said: Sandino said: Now that I got your attention
I was speaking reading this one discussion on another message board from a dude who said the beatles were horribly overrated as musicians, and that they weren't as innovative as people believe because they didn't do anything to change the way people write or play music aside from using the A chord in at the end of their songs. What do you think?
[Edited 6/28/09 10:37am] The beatles were so influential and innovative; it is hard to understand why anyone would ever consider them over-rated. A few examples: They popularized backmasking (e.g. the playing of guitars backwards). Which were consistently used by bands such as oasis and blur and even prince. Isn't it safe to call that more of a gimmick? Backwards guitars haven't really added much to popular music. Songs like helter skelter were written in the 60's (but you would never know that by listening to them). This song was hugely influential to many grunge rock and alternative bands such as radiohead. Do you have a source you can site? I don't think that "Helter Skelter" alone was a significant influence on grunge or alternative bands. They were the driving force of considering an album as both important an a art from. Pria to this, 45's were more important and albums contained mostly filler tracks with 2 singles. I said this before but both Frank Sinatra and Ella Fitzgerald pioneered the album as important and an art form back in the '50s, well before the Beatles. There are so many more, string overdubs and particular engineering techqiques were first used by the beatles. Source? ALso, the single 'hey jude' completely changed pop music, since most songs before that were always 3 mins in lenght. Bob Dylan's "Like A Rolling Stone" was released on June 15, 1965, a full three years before the Beatles released "Hey Jude" on August 26, 1968. Let's give proper credit where it is due. Also, although it was not a single, the Rolling Stones released the ten minute plus "Goin' Home" on the album Aftermath on April 15, 1966. regardless what one things about the beatles, muisc would not be the same without them. so they certainly arn't over-rated. [Edited 6/30/09 8:16am] I think another way to look at the Beatles is that they were the leaders of pop music in the sixties. However, they did not exist in a vacuum. Lyrically, Bob Dylan was a huge influence. Musically, the Beach Boys circa 1965-1966 were a huge influence. There was an awful lot of cross pollination going on. I do not believe that the Beatles could have existed without the influences of their contemporaries. Undeniably, the Beatles were the frontrunners, but they certainly took things that other artists were doing and incorporated them into their sound. I prefer to think of the musical acts of the '60s as a huge team. They were all going for something new. The Beatles were a huge part of that but in the end they were still part of something bigger. [Edited 6/30/09 11:51am] [Edited 6/30/09 11:52am] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
NoVideo said: Graycap23 said: So basically.....the Beatles INVENTED music after the 1960s? You'll have to point out where I said that. I said The Beatles changed the music industry dramatically, and they influenced - either directly or indirectly – everyone in pop/rock (and many in other genres as well) that came after them.[/quote] Let's agree 2 disagree. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
AlexdeParis said: Graycap23 said: Doing a cover song is NOT the SAME as influencing someone in their artistic endeavor.
Doing a cover song implies a certain appreciation for one's work. Demonstrating influence on a message board any other way would probably involve direct quotes from the artists in question. Sure, but do you think the Beatles really had much of an influence on someone like James Brown? James also covered Blood, Sweat and Tears but I wouldn't say that they were an influence on him. [Edited 6/30/09 11:54am] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
rialb said: AlexdeParis said: Doing a cover song implies a certain appreciation for one's work. Demonstrating influence on a message board any other way would probably involve direct quotes from the artists in question. Sure, but do you think the Beatles really had much of an influence on someone like James Brown? James also covered Blood, Sweat and Tears but I wouldn't say that they were an influence on him. [Edited 6/30/09 11:54am] They had ZERO influence on JB. Z E R O. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Graycap23 said: How many of these people did the Beatles influence?
P-Funk Others can argue the others, but George Clinton admitted that the Beatles influenced him. Where I hear it is in the way Parliament constructed albums. The Beatles mastered the art of creating whole albums that were more than just collections of songs, and that's something Parliament really embraced. My Legacy
http://prince.org/msg/8/192731 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
rialb said: AlexdeParis said: Doing a cover song implies a certain appreciation for one's work. Demonstrating influence on a message board any other way would probably involve direct quotes from the artists in question. Sure, but do you think the Beatles really had much of an influence on someone like James Brown? James also covered Blood, Sweat and Tears but I wouldn't say that they were an influence on him. Well, JB was certainly "influenced" by a song co-written by Lennon (I'm speaking of "Fame," of course). "Whitney was purely and simply one of a kind." ~ Clive Davis | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |