HuMpThAnG said:

I'm still asking, "What is the big deal?"

I mean they had their moments on a few.

"Rubber Soul" was probably closest to a R&B album.

Got through the self title [damn near went to sleep ]

A lot of their stuff sounded more of a novelty act, like showtunes....which isn't a bad, if you're into that.

But like I stated , I probably liked some of their tunes on each album, not all.

So what am I missing?

Not much.

I think the word is HYPE.

HuMpThAnG said:

MotownSubdivision said:

Throwing shade is just a specialty of your's, huh?

Thought you were defending my name....

Anyway, I choose to ignore the "bad taste in music" and the other unnecessary shaded remarks...

It's not that serious.

guess i didn't ignore it huh?

And to surprise some of you snubs, I actually like this performance

[Edited 6/17/15 20:19pm]

[Edited 6/17/15 20:20pm]

[Edited 6/17/15 20:21pm]

You are learning grasshopper. Keep up the good work! I do think it is a generational thing of sorts. I was brought up listening to them and Stevie Wonder. So they are two of my biggest influences in music. But I never experienced them like my parents did. It's sort of like trying to explain to my kids that Lovesexy is the best album ever. And they look at me like....WTF!! But maybe your thread title turned a few people off. If it had said "Having trouble getting into the Beatles.....need help" it might have drawn less shade from Beatles fans.

3rdeyedude said:

HuMpThAnG said:

Thought you were defending my name....

Anyway, I choose to ignore the "bad taste in music" and the other unnecessary shaded remarks...

It's not that serious.

guess i didn't ignore it huh?

And to surprise some of you snubs, I actually like this performance

[Edited 6/17/15 20:19pm]

[Edited 6/17/15 20:20pm]

[Edited 6/17/15 20:21pm]

You are learning grasshopper. Keep up the good work! I do think it is a generational thing of sorts. I was brought up listening to them and Stevie Wonder. So they are two of my biggest influences in music. But I never experienced them like my parents did. It's sort of like trying to explain to my kids that Lovesexy is the best album ever. And they look at me like....WTF!! But maybe your thread title turned a few people off. If it had said "Having trouble getting into the Beatles.....need help" it might have drawn less shade from Beatles fans.

I don't think it would matter

Again, I never claimed that i didnt' like them because i do.

There are some tunes that I do like, I just never understood the big deal.

[Edited 6/19/15 9:13am]

Graycap23 said:

HuMpThAnG said:

I'm still asking, "What is the big deal?"

I mean they had their moments on a few.

"Rubber Soul" was probably closest to a R&B album.

Got through the self title [damn near went to sleep ]

A lot of their stuff sounded more of a novelty act, like showtunes....which isn't a bad, if you're into that.

But like I stated , I probably liked some of their tunes on each album, not all.

So what am I missing?

Not much.

I think the word is HYPE.

hmmmm

peedub said:

i'm glad these 'i don't get the beatles...' threads pop up every now and again, if for no other reason to inspire a repeat examination. abbey road side 2 sounded so good on the hi-fi last night. it doesn't get much better than when 'here comes the sun' fills the room...

it doesn't get much better than when 'here comes the sun' fills the room...

--------------------------

for real ...

ok, i'll give it another try

this time i'm downloading my cd sets on my MP3 player

and i'll get back!!! withcha

[img:$uid]http://ecx.imag.../img:$uid] [img:$uid]http://ecx.imag.../img:$uid]

HuMpThAnG said:

ok, i'll give it another try

this time i'm downloading my cd sets on my MP3 player

and i'll get back!!! withcha

[img:$uid]http://ecx.imag.../img:$uid] [img:$uid]http://ecx.imag.../img:$uid]

Take a pillow.........u will get sleepy.

Boggles the mind how anyone could come to the conclusion that the Beatles were overrated...then again, this is Prince.org after all...the place were acts such as Beyonce or Madonna are hailed as musical geniuses

Grab a pair of decent headphones, kick back, smoke a joint or two and let Sgt. Pepper take you to another place...I pity your soul if you still think the Beatles are overrated after that!

Maybe the problem is trying to do it ALL in a short time? I mean, maybe taking some time with individual albums?

.

I personally started with the Blue Album (the 1967-1970 compilation you showed), not one of the "real" albums--and I did that for years before I ever got anything else. And some obviously is a completely different kind of thing--I honestly don't think things get really good until Rubber Soul or Revolver. The earlier stuff is good, but it doesn't excite me. It's kind of, for me, comparable to the first two Prince albums. They aren't "The Beatles" yet--at least not "The Beatles" I love.

.

But I would never suggest someone do all 12 albums if they don't like the band--anymore than I'd dump all of the P-Funk discography on anyone if they didn't already have a sense of what they might be most drawn to. I've tried starting at the beginning with a few major artists that I'm not familiar with, but it's never been particularly successful. But I don't know what to suggest, because I don't really know you. Actually, I would say don't spend intensive listening time on Sgt. Pepper--I'm not sure it shows anyone at their best, and while it obviously meant something historically, it didn't seem to age all that well. Rubber Soul, Revolver, The White Album, or Abbey Road all seem miles ahead of it to me.

Graycap23 said:

HuMpThAnG said:

ok, i'll give it another try

this time i'm downloading my cd sets on my MP3 player

and i'll get back!!! withcha

[img:$uid]http://ecx.imag.../img:$uid] [img:$uid]http://ecx.imag.../img:$uid]

Take a pillow.........u will get sleepy.

That's funny because the blue and red albums pictured above were the first ones I owned. Won them from a radio station. I think the vinyl was even blue and red. At the time I think I was eleven years old. Can't remember listening to them very much though. But if my mom was not around, I would find a way to put on her Songs in the Key of Life album instead. For some reason that just blew my mind back then.

http://www.amazon.com/How...019975697X

I don't necessarily agree with it but it's worth a read. Makes a lot of good points and I think the original poster might like it.

The older I get the more i've come to enjoy the Beatles lesser tracks, these days my favourite Beatles song is probably She Said She Said.

In the end,not everyone is going to 'get' the Beatles.There are some popular,critically acclaimed artists that people love,yet I don't understand the appeal.For me,those artists are Bob Dylan and Joni Mitchell.

I love the Beatles, and they deserve all the accolades they get, but I just think there are other musicians worth focusing on. The Beatles are but one of may incredible bands/musicians. Yet, there's all these people who freak out if you even suggest the Beatles aren't the best band ever.

That said, Abbey Road is defintely my favorite album. I remember for a while when I was really into music magazines in the 1990s and early 2000s (when they were still going strong on the newstand), the "best" Beatles album amongst critics rotated between Rubber Soul, Revolver, and Sgt. Peppers (probably still does). White Album got a lot of "genius" nods, but probably cuz it's all over the place and long, it never got the "best" distinction, though plenty of people recognized it as such in comments online and letters to the editor (remember those).

coltrane3 said:

I love the Beatles, and they deserve all the accolades they get, but I just think there are other musicians worth focusing on. The Beatles are but one of may incredible bands/musicians. Yet, there's all these people who freak out if you even suggest the Beatles aren't the best band ever.

agree totally. There's a difference between how important they were culturally (and if it wasn't them it would have been someone else, maybe for better maybe for worse, we'll never know) and actually liking their music - which is really down to personal taste.

HuMpThAnG said:

I'm still asking, "What is the big deal?"

I mean they had their moments on a few.

"Rubber Soul" was probably closest to a R&B album.

Got through the self title [damn near went to sleep ]

A lot of their stuff sounded more of a novelty act, like showtunes....which isn't a bad, if you're into that.

But like I stated , I probably liked some of their tunes on each album, not all.

So what am I missing?

I will try to answer your question. I'm not sure I'm up to the task. Please, please do read till the end.

On the face of it, the tunes are catchy, tight as hell, the harmonies are excellent, the instrumentation brilliantly complements the compositions and the lyrics are fun and often thought-provoking, often dark too — everyone from your father to grandfather to your domestic help to you will like most of the songs at first listen.

That's greatness right there: shakespeare is considered high art today, but in his day his audience would be plebians and commoners.

That's No. 1. Now dig a bit deep, and it helps if you're a musician with at least a rudimentary knowledge of notes and chords, and you will discover the beatles were extremely technically proficient composers and players, even without formal music learning. Eric Clapton once commented that "some of the chords harrison played are still unplayable." That's just scratching the surface.

Have you gone a bit deeper into the music? Have you heard Ringo's drumming on Day In the Life? Have you heard McCartney's bass on Rain or Lucy? There are immense, infinite musical delights in the Beatles' relatively small catalogue. Then comes the songwriting. Everyone in the band works for the song — for example, isolate ringo's drumming out of an early beatles track and you can still pinpoint the song. Then there are the compositions.

Primarily, the Beatles were in their own right each gifted musicians, which explains why each of them are in the Rock and Roll Hame of Fame twice. That's something the Stones are not, and why they didn't click as solo artists.

But while in the band, the beatles all contributed seamlessly to make magic. Once they lost that and each song became more of a solo effort, they broke up.

Remember, good art needs effort to understand --- that's why people get trained in music, painting, acting etc. Art is not easily appreciated at first glance and first listen. A friend of mine once looked at Van Gogh's 'Sunflowers' and said just what you're saying now, "What's the big deal?"

That time, I couldn't explain but I knew there was more to the painting then met the untrained eye. It's not for nothing that generation upon generation of musicians have appreciated the beatles. reading up would be a good place to start. Like good artists, the Beatles had phases too. Just like Prince.

Lastly, rock and roll is meant to be enjoyed. Let the songs wash over you one more time. Remember, the Beatles' social impact in the early and mid-60s is something we'll never get. But the music seems to grow stronger with each passing generation. It wasn't just a fad.

Many, many people have written better musically informed and more compelling articles on the Beatles' music, impact and image than I have. This is just my 2 cents. Go listen to 'Something' again.

Thanks and phew! that was long. Cheers

[Edited 6/26/15 10:22am]

Funkyalien said:

HuMpThAnG said:

I'm still asking, "What is the big deal?"

I mean they had their moments on a few.

"Rubber Soul" was probably closest to a R&B album.

Got through the self title [damn near went to sleep ]

A lot of their stuff sounded more of a novelty act, like showtunes....which isn't a bad, if you're into that.

But like I stated , I probably liked some of their tunes on each album, not all.

So what am I missing?

I will try to answer your question. I'm not sure I'm up to the task. Please, please do read till the end.

On the face of it, the tunes are catchy, tight as hell, the harmonies are excellent, the instrumentation brilliantly complements the compositions and the lyrics are fun and often thought-provoking, often dark too — everyone from your father to grandfather to your domestic help to you will like most of the songs at first listen.

That's greatness right there: shakespeare is considered high art today, but in his day his audience would be plebians and commoners.

That's No. 1. Now dig a bit deep, and it helps if you're a musician with at least a rudimentary knowledge of notes and chords, and you will discover the beatles were extremely technically proficient composers and players, even without formal music learning. Eric Clapton once commented that "some of the chords harrison played are still unplayable." That's just scratching the surface.

Have you gone a bit deeper into the music? Have you heard Ringo's drumming on Day In the Life? Have you heard McCartney's bass on Rain or Lucy? There are immense, infinite musical delights in the Beatles' relatively small catalogue. Then comes the songwriting. Everyone in the band works for the song — for example, isolate ringo's drumming out of an early beatles track and you can still pinpoint the song. Then there are the compositions.

Primarily, the Beatles were in their own right each gifted musicians, which explains why each of them are in the Rock and Roll Hame of Fame twice. That's something the Stones are not, and why they didn't click as solo artists.

But while in the band, the beatles all contributed seamlessly to make magic. Once they lost that and each song became more of a solo effort, they broke up.

Remember, good art needs effort to understand --- that's why people get trained in music, painting, acting etc. Art is not easily appreciated at first glance and first listen. A friend of mine once looked at Van Gogh's 'Sunflowers' and said just what you're saying now, "What's the big deal?"

That time, I couldn't explain but I knew there was more to the painting then met the untrained eye. It's not for nothing that generation upon generation of musicians have appreciated the beatles. reading up would be a good place to start. Like good artists, the Beatles had phases too. Just like Prince.

Lastly, rock and roll is meant to be enjoyed. Let the songs wash over you one more time. Remember, the Beatles' social impact in the early and mid-60s is something we'll never get. But the music seems to grow stronger with each passing generation. It wasn't just a fad.

Many, many people have written better musically informed and more compelling articles on the Beatles' music, impact and image than I have. This is just my 2 cents. Go listen to 'Something' again.

Thanks and phew! that was long. Cheers

[Edited 6/26/15 10:22am]

You were up to task and on point as well.

Instead of being bashed for not having good taste in music , it was very enlighten

And I prided myself on having a good ear for music.

I guess in terms of "Big Deal", I meant the media frenzy, but I understand that as well.

Always liked them.

Hearing cover versions of their songs [Brothers Johnson's "Come Together"

], maded me seek out the original to make comparsions, but I did that with any artist.

And this at 10 or 11 years old

Great musicians and songwriters, can't take that away from them.

And far as the phases go, like any artist, they had their moments and it came to an halted.

Still listening to the 2 cd set and gonna get the original albums/cd's.

KISS might be my next "What's the big deal?" project..

thanks again....

[Edited 6/26/15 12:39pm]

HuMpThAnG said:

Funkyalien said:

I will try to answer your question. I'm not sure I'm up to the task. Please, please do read till the end.

On the face of it, the tunes are catchy, tight as hell, the harmonies are excellent, the instrumentation brilliantly complements the compositions and the lyrics are fun and often thought-provoking, often dark too — everyone from your father to grandfather to your domestic help to you will like most of the songs at first listen.

That's greatness right there: shakespeare is considered high art today, but in his day his audience would be plebians and commoners.

That's No. 1. Now dig a bit deep, and it helps if you're a musician with at least a rudimentary knowledge of notes and chords, and you will discover the beatles were extremely technically proficient composers and players, even without formal music learning. Eric Clapton once commented that "some of the chords harrison played are still unplayable." That's just scratching the surface.

Have you gone a bit deeper into the music? Have you heard Ringo's drumming on Day In the Life? Have you heard McCartney's bass on Rain or Lucy? There are immense, infinite musical delights in the Beatles' relatively small catalogue. Then comes the songwriting. Everyone in the band works for the song — for example, isolate ringo's drumming out of an early beatles track and you can still pinpoint the song. Then there are the compositions.

Primarily, the Beatles were in their own right each gifted musicians, which explains why each of them are in the Rock and Roll Hame of Fame twice. That's something the Stones are not, and why they didn't click as solo artists.

But while in the band, the beatles all contributed seamlessly to make magic. Once they lost that and each song became more of a solo effort, they broke up.

Remember, good art needs effort to understand --- that's why people get trained in music, painting, acting etc. Art is not easily appreciated at first glance and first listen. A friend of mine once looked at Van Gogh's 'Sunflowers' and said just what you're saying now, "What's the big deal?"

That time, I couldn't explain but I knew there was more to the painting then met the untrained eye. It's not for nothing that generation upon generation of musicians have appreciated the beatles. reading up would be a good place to start. Like good artists, the Beatles had phases too. Just like Prince.

Lastly, rock and roll is meant to be enjoyed. Let the songs wash over you one more time. Remember, the Beatles' social impact in the early and mid-60s is something we'll never get. But the music seems to grow stronger with each passing generation. It wasn't just a fad.

Many, many people have written better musically informed and more compelling articles on the Beatles' music, impact and image than I have. This is just my 2 cents. Go listen to 'Something' again.

Thanks and phew! that was long. Cheers

[Edited 6/26/15 10:22am]

You were up to task and on point as well.

Instead of be bashed for not having good taste in music , it was very enlighten

And I prided myself on having a good ear for music.

I guess in terms of "Big Deal", I meant the media frenzy, but I understand that as well.

Always liked them.

Hearing cover versions of their songs [Brothers Johnson's "Come Together"

], maded me seek out the original to make comparsions, but I did that with any artist.

And this at 10 or 11 years old

Great musicians and songwriters, can't take that away from them.

And far as the phases go, like any artist, they had their moments and it came to an halted.

Still listening to the 2 cd set and gonna get the original albums/cd's.

KISS might be my next "What's the big deal?" project..

thanks again....

So u now believe the hype is REAL?

Graycap23 said:

HuMpThAnG said:

You were up to task and on point as well.

Instead of be bashed for not having good taste in music , it was very enlighten

And I prided myself on having a good ear for music.

I guess in terms of "Big Deal", I meant the media frenzy, but I understand that as well.

Always liked them.

Hearing cover versions of their songs [Brothers Johnson's "Come Together"

], maded me seek out the original to make comparsions, but I did that with any artist.

And this at 10 or 11 years old

Great musicians and songwriters, can't take that away from them.

And far as the phases go, like any artist, they had their moments and it came to an halted.

Still listening to the 2 cd set and gonna get the original albums/cd's.

KISS might be my next "What's the big deal?" project..

thanks again....

So u now believe the hype is REAL?

i have a understanding of it, but that'll be going elsewhere.

for now, i'm referring to the music

HuMpThAnG said:

Graycap23 said:

So u now believe the hype is REAL?

i have a understanding of it, but that'll be going elsewhere.

for now, i'm referring to the music

HuMpThAnG said:

Funkyalien said:

I will try to answer your question. I'm not sure I'm up to the task. Please, please do read till the end.

On the face of it, the tunes are catchy, tight as hell, the harmonies are excellent, the instrumentation brilliantly complements the compositions and the lyrics are fun and often thought-provoking, often dark too — everyone from your father to grandfather to your domestic help to you will like most of the songs at first listen.

That's greatness right there: shakespeare is considered high art today, but in his day his audience would be plebians and commoners.

That's No. 1. Now dig a bit deep, and it helps if you're a musician with at least a rudimentary knowledge of notes and chords, and you will discover the beatles were extremely technically proficient composers and players, even without formal music learning. Eric Clapton once commented that "some of the chords harrison played are still unplayable." That's just scratching the surface.

Have you gone a bit deeper into the music? Have you heard Ringo's drumming on Day In the Life? Have you heard McCartney's bass on Rain or Lucy? There are immense, infinite musical delights in the Beatles' relatively small catalogue. Then comes the songwriting. Everyone in the band works for the song — for example, isolate ringo's drumming out of an early beatles track and you can still pinpoint the song. Then there are the compositions.

Primarily, the Beatles were in their own right each gifted musicians, which explains why each of them are in the Rock and Roll Hame of Fame twice. That's something the Stones are not, and why they didn't click as solo artists.

But while in the band, the beatles all contributed seamlessly to make magic. Once they lost that and each song became more of a solo effort, they broke up.

Remember, good art needs effort to understand --- that's why people get trained in music, painting, acting etc. Art is not easily appreciated at first glance and first listen. A friend of mine once looked at Van Gogh's 'Sunflowers' and said just what you're saying now, "What's the big deal?"

That time, I couldn't explain but I knew there was more to the painting then met the untrained eye. It's not for nothing that generation upon generation of musicians have appreciated the beatles. reading up would be a good place to start. Like good artists, the Beatles had phases too. Just like Prince.

Lastly, rock and roll is meant to be enjoyed. Let the songs wash over you one more time. Remember, the Beatles' social impact in the early and mid-60s is something we'll never get. But the music seems to grow stronger with each passing generation. It wasn't just a fad.

Many, many people have written better musically informed and more compelling articles on the Beatles' music, impact and image than I have. This is just my 2 cents. Go listen to 'Something' again.

Thanks and phew! that was long. Cheers

[Edited 6/26/15 10:22am]

You were up to task and on point as well.

Instead of being bashed for not having good taste in music , it was very enlighten

And I prided myself on having a good ear for music.

I guess in terms of "Big Deal", I meant the media frenzy, but I understand that as well.

Always liked them.

Hearing cover versions of their songs [Brothers Johnson's "Come Together"

], maded me seek out the original to make comparsions, but I did that with any artist.

And this at 10 or 11 years old

Great musicians and songwriters, can't take that away from them.

And far as the phases go, like any artist, they had their moments and it came to an halted.

Still listening to the 2 cd set and gonna get the original albums/cd's.

KISS might be my next "What's the big deal?" project..

thanks again....

[Edited 6/26/15 12:39pm]

Great. Wishing you many. many hours of Beatles pleasure. You can listen to everything under the sun, and you'll still come back to them, believe me. Once you are done, you have the solo albums!! Some of them are very, very good.

Funkyalien said:

HuMpThAnG said:

You were up to task and on point as well.

Instead of being bashed for not having good taste in music , it was very enlighten

And I prided myself on having a good ear for music.

I guess in terms of "Big Deal", I meant the media frenzy, but I understand that as well.

Always liked them.

Hearing cover versions of their songs [Brothers Johnson's "Come Together"

], maded me seek out the original to make comparsions, but I did that with any artist.

And this at 10 or 11 years old

Great musicians and songwriters, can't take that away from them.

And far as the phases go, like any artist, they had their moments and it came to an halted.

Still listening to the 2 cd set and gonna get the original albums/cd's.

KISS might be my next "What's the big deal?" project..

thanks again....

[Edited 6/26/15 12:39pm]

Great. Wishing you many. many hours of Beatles pleasure. You can listen to everything under the sun, and you'll still come back to them, believe me. Once you are done, you have the solo albums!! Some of them are very, very good.