• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

I don't understand the love for The Beatles at all

Status
Not open for further replies.
akira28 said:
Beatles are genius and I don't feel inclined to defend them to you, but I will say that they had a pop-crooner phase, a pop-rock phase, and a psychedelic phase where they basically caused the entire industry to respond in order to compete for relevance. Without the tension between the Rolling Stones and the Beatles there's no way to tell how rock would be today. So partially the Beatles popularity is a result of their skill and their place in history.

Truer words have not been spoken in this thread.
 
You probably haven't given them a fair shake and just want to hate on them because of how universally praised they are. You'll get over it. Or not.
 
Kaijima said:
Regardless of whether you can develop a taste for their music today, their legacy is more about the bombshell impact they had, much like Elvis Presley or even Michael Jackson. The Beatles were arguably more important than either of them, because their biggest contributions where in the technical and exploratory side. You hear the Beatles without hearing them, in the music of countless other artists who followed them.

This is the reason the Beatles are important. I don't much like Presley or Jackson either, but all three loom large over any other musical act of the last 70 years. Also, the Beatles later, experimental stuff is really good.
 
akira28 said:
Beatles are genius and I don't feel inclined to defend them to you, but I will say that they had a pop-crooner phase, a pop-rock phase, and a psychedelic phase where they basically caused the entire industry to respond in order to compete for relevance. Without the tension between the Rolling Stones and the Beatles there's no way to tell how rock would be today. So partially the Beatles popularity is a result of their skill and their place in history.
Well said.
 
One very important thing makes The Beatles better than Presley and Jackson: they wrote their own music. Sure they played lots of covers in their early years, but when they branched off into their own creativity, that's when the real magic happened.
 
ChackanKun said:
Oh god I thought I was alone in this!

Altough "Hey Jude" is a great song, most of TB songs are quite generic and not that catchy.


The Beatles are/were generic?

Some bad opinions in this thread.
 
MadraptorMan said:
One very important thing makes The Beatles better than Presley and Jackson: they wrote their own music. Sure they played lots of covers in their early years, but when they branched off into their own creativity, that's when the real magic happened.

Both did as well. Jackson even quite a bit.
 
There is countless bands from the 60's that were technically better than the beatles, shit you only need to give the nuggets boxsets a cursory listen to know that, but I dunno man, the beatles just had that popular appeal I guess.

I used to love them as a teenager, I don't really listen to them much now but I gotta admit, whenever I hear a song of theirs it pretty much always gets my foot tapping.

akira28 said:
Beatles are genius and I don't feel inclined to defend them to you, but I will say that they had a pop-crooner phase, a pop-rock phase, and a psychedelic phase where they basically caused the entire industry to respond in order to compete for relevance. Without the tension between the Rolling Stones and the Beatles there's no way to tell how rock would be today. So partially the Beatles popularity is a result of their skill and their place in history.


Not really, there was a thriving psych scene without the beatles and it is almost 100% better than anything the beatles produced, but sure, they were influential to the popular industry.
 
I could generate a long list of musical acts that I don't "get" but you don't see me starting threads saying "I don't understand the love for Tool/Deftones/Skrillex/etc. at all"
 
Praise the second coming of the post history my brothers and sisters! So that such stupidity will be exposed for the eons to come!

A-Fucking-Men.
 
I've always loved the Beatles, but I think playing the Beatles Rock Band game actually made me love them even more. There are so many little nuances of each part they did that I never really appreciated until Rock Band made me notice exactly what they were doing with each instrument during a song. Paul McCartney is an incredible bassist.
 
I'm not sure what I find more annoying. People who claim that the Beatles "weren't that great/what's the big deal?" or the hipsters who insist that they were the greatest thing ever and claim "all modern music is crap," or some variation thereof.

I like the Beatles for the music they made and what they represented. I think you can enjoy any music if you understand the context within which it was created.
 
MadraptorMan said:
Wasn't the bulk of their respected works written by other people?
From "Off The Wall" and on he wrote at least half, or so, of the songs on his albums with that number increasing as time went on.
 
Machine said:
I could generate a long list of musical acts that I don't "get" but you don't see me starting threads saying "I don't understand the love for Tool/Deftones/Skrillex/etc. at all"

Man, I really need to make that list. There are so many, it's ridiculous:

Kiss
Tool
Slayer
Iron Maiden
ABBA
The Ramones
Rolling Stones
Pink Floyd
Elvis
Manowar
Depeche Mode


I'm glad I got that off my chest.
 
SpartanForce said:
What a overrated band. Come on. Just look at this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhzF2K2b7Xo&feature=fvwrel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e50uIZCjQqI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBVpcclx3vA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW4p02Nm1Vs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqcqZlFMUYQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rg5U1-nQHsE

etc, all from the 60s. all hundred times better that any beatles song

da fuck this beatlemania had so special? (and has until today)
mediocre vocal, bad instrumental with 3 notes (so you can say that they have feeling anyway... well, no, just laziness).

well beatle fans, just give me a why. that's all I ask.
Time and place. I don't think they're that good either, but it's time and place. I can at least understand why they're an important band even if looking at them from the lens of a 20-something year old guy, I don't think their music is anything special.

The Who were superior in every way, really.
 
Gustav said:
Man, I really need to make that list. There are so many, it's ridiculous:

Kiss
Tool
Slayer
Iron Maiden
ABBA
The Ramones
Rolling Stones
Pink Floyd
Elvis
Manowar
Depeche Mode


I'm glad I got that off my chest.

i guess you don't like music?
 
Diprosalic said:
i guess you don't like music?
I could make an at least semi-compelling argument against all those bands. That isn't to say I don't like some of those bands, but it's not like it's a non-debatable point.
 
Dahellisdat said:
I've always loved the Beatles, but I think playing the Beatles Rock Band game actually made me love them even more. There are so many little nuances of each part they did that I never really appreciated until Rock Band made me notice exactly what they were doing with each instrument during a song. Paul McCartney is an incredible bassist.
I love Paul's bass lines on "And Your Bird Can Sing." As far as I'm concerned, Paul provided the lexicon for bass in pop/rock music. </hyperbole>
 
ChackanKun said:
Oh god I thought I was alone in this!

Altough "Hey Jude" is a great song, most of TB songs are quite generic and not that catchy.
If they are "generic" sounding to you it's probably just because all pop music made in the past 40 years has been massively influenced by them.
 
Angry Grimace said:
I could make an at least semi-compelling argument against all those bands. That isn't to say I don't like some of those bands, but it's not like it's a non-debatable point.

well anyone with an ear could make compelling arguments against slayer but i dare you to try it with Pink Floyd



you monster.
 
Hindsight never captures the moment and place of music accurately.
I bet OP would have had a Beatle haircut after watching the Ed Sullivan Show back in 1964.
 
scotcheggz said:
Not really, there was a thriving psych scene without the beatles and it is almost 100% better than anything the beatles produced, but sure, they were influential to the popular industry.

Didn't say they made the scene, they just turned the rest of the world at large on to it. Thriving and surviving is one thing, the Beatles helped make it mega. The Velvet Underground or Donnovan or someone like that didn't have nearly the same amount of visibility, while they were still successful musicians in their own respects.
 
I was able to write a 30 page paper on the technological innovations used by the Beatles solely in their album "Revolver", an album which is no where near as innovative as their later works.

I think a lot of people can't appreciate what the Beatles did because they are looking at it from a modern prospective and see how commonplace a lot of the techniques they used are. The thing is though, the Beatles are the reason why these techniques are so commonplace now. While other bands in the 60s may have been technologically or musically more advanced, no other band was able to bring these changes to the mainstream and change music so dramatically while still reaching unparalleled levels of fame.
 
wonderkins said:
I love Paul's bass lines on "And Your Bird Can Sing." As far as I'm concerned, Paul provided the lexicon for bass in pop/rock music. </hyperbole>

I would say James Jamerson was a massively more influential bass player from that time period to pop music.
 
Mama Robotnik said:
You want people to justify their subjective musical tastes over your subjective musical tastes?

He isn't asking why a single person likes the Beatles, but why they are an enduring mainstream phenomenon. It's like psychology vs sociology - when you are analyzing the behaviors and values of large groups, you ought to be able to come up with some generalizations beyond individual preference.
 
No, man, they're pretty good. Maybe overrated a bit, granted, but they made some damn good stuff.
 
Diprosalic said:
i guess some people in this thread only know hey jude and yesterday.
Most people who criticise their work only know of the earlier/more poppy songs.

It's a shame, and also very ignorant.
 
Diprosalic said:
well anyone with an ear could make compelling arguments against slayer but i dare you to try it with Pink Floyd



you monster.
Well, you could say it's boring, meandering drug music that takes forever to get to the point and goes off on boring tangents like 60% of the time. Too atmospheric. I can say I legitimately don't like Piper at the Gates, but I don't think the Syd Barrett era is all that well-regarded anyways.

For some reason, this thread is making me want to listen to The Who - Who's Next.
 
Vice said:
I would say James Jamerson was a massively more influential bass player from that time period to pop music.
Most definitely. I actually have a James Jamerson book that my bass teacher would work out of with me that came with a cd. Paul McCartney does a little bit on one of the tracks expplaining how much of an influence Jamerson's bass playing had on himself. Dat motown bass is definitely some of the sickest bass I've ever heard in my life.
 
I honestly do not know how to respond to the thread. I am just at a loss for words. Are the Beatles my favorite band ever? No. But are they the greatest band ever? Without a doubt. The fact that many people still scrutinize and listen to their music over 40 years later is a testament to their talent and impact. It is not just people that were alive then or children of the flower power movement. Great music transcends time and cultures, and The Beatles did that.

It is also amazing to think that they put out all those albums and changed their sound so drastically over only 7 or so years. Their songwriting is some of the best ever, and their instrumentation is incredible as well. Were there better musicians then? Oh, yeah. But the whole package of singing, songwriting, and musicianship in each member of the band was just unparalleled. And their work just seems to get better and better as I get older. I am appreciating it more with each passing year.
 
PhoncipleBone said:
I honestly do not know how to respond to the thread. I am just at a loss for words. Are the Beatles my favorite band ever? No. But are they the greatest band ever? Without a doubt. The fact that many people still scrutinize and listen to their music over 40 years later is a testament to their talent and impact. It is not just people that were alive then or children of the flower power movement. Great music transcends time and cultures, and The Beatles did that.

It is also amazing to think that they put out all those albums and changed their sound so drastically over only 7 or so years. Their songwriting is some of the best ever, and their instrumentation is incredible as well. Were there better musicians then? Oh, yeah. But the whole package of singing, songwriting, and musicianship in each member of the band was just unparalleled. And their work just seems to get better and better as I get older. I am appreciating it more with each passing year.

Each of them wrote songs too. People should really watch that recent George Harrison documentary on HBO, it was pretty enlightening and interesting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom