The Beatles

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (1097 of them)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUx78Ecyxvk

bizarro gazzara, Thursday, 2 October 2014 16:00 (eleven years ago)

Pepper's importance seems to have waned, I will give you that. I don't know anyone, these days, who has a bad thing to say about Revolver.

DavidLeeRoth, Thursday, 2 October 2014 16:17 (eleven years ago)

There's not a lot of hipster capital to be had with The Beatles (as opposed to loudly proclaiming your Jethro Tull vinyl collection).

Darin, Thursday, 2 October 2014 16:31 (eleven years ago)

One and one is two, yakky dakky doo, darlin' I'm in love with you.

Liquid Plejades, Thursday, 2 October 2014 16:36 (eleven years ago)

boomers and the beatles, you say??!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLSDAZLvtwA&feature=youtu.be

tylerw, Thursday, 2 October 2014 16:37 (eleven years ago)

64-66 Beatles seems to endure best imo....from what I can tell

Master of Treacle, Thursday, 2 October 2014 17:31 (eleven years ago)

Didn't Cobain say something along the lines the Beatles should have broken up in 1964?

DavidLeeRoth, Thursday, 2 October 2014 17:44 (eleven years ago)

we're in the age where Hendrix is the quaint name that grandad gave to his cat. I think fading boomer (and hippie) influence is the thing .

thomasintrouble, Thursday, 2 October 2014 17:54 (eleven years ago)

I'm brave enough to admit that I enjoy bands like the Beatles and the Beach Boys. I think most people are afraid to like them, but not me.

Portly Backgammon (Old Lunch), Thursday, 2 October 2014 18:00 (eleven years ago)

since they were both an active band and cartoon characters when I was 5, well...

son of a lewd monk (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 2 October 2014 18:03 (eleven years ago)

Would love a Beach Boys cartoon.

Josh in Chicago, Thursday, 2 October 2014 18:05 (eleven years ago)

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-BRhcgJu9LgY/UMONEz7vn2I/AAAAAAAACnE/yzUrV_DGdHU/s1600/BB-HB.png
!

Josh in Chicago, Thursday, 2 October 2014 18:06 (eleven years ago)

Still think the earlier Beatles' records sound freshest today. Anything from 63' to 66'. Most everything after I'm tired of.

ColinO, Thursday, 2 October 2014 18:07 (eleven years ago)

White Album for life

©Oz Quiz© (Adam Bruneau), Thursday, 2 October 2014 18:10 (eleven years ago)

Psychedelic whimsy just isn't a popular aesthetic right now. I admit I'd rather hear Rubber Soul than any later Beatles album right now.

Shepard Toney Album (dog latin), Thursday, 2 October 2014 18:16 (eleven years ago)

'63 to '66 beatles haven't aged a day imo. i can go back to that stuff over and over. the paperback writer/rain single still sounds like their pinnacle to me. love lots of the later stuff but the worst of it is pretty bad, and even a lot of the best of it is overplayed.

i've said this before but the most depressing transition on any cd i own is volume 2 of past masters, where you go from rain to lady madonna. you hear them going from being the coolest band in the world to paul mccartney plus three bored stoned guys messing around in the studio.

(The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Thursday, 2 October 2014 19:00 (eleven years ago)

People tend to put down the early Beatles mostly in regard to lyrics (yakky dakky), but musically they were very sophisticated from the start. The harmonies on "If I Fell" are among the greatest things they've ever done.

DavidLeeRoth, Thursday, 2 October 2014 19:08 (eleven years ago)

also almost no one but oldsters knows what Merseybeat was aside from the Beatles

son of a lewd monk (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 2 October 2014 19:09 (eleven years ago)

really like the beatles good band

zero content albums (darraghmac), Thursday, 2 October 2014 19:25 (eleven years ago)

XP I hate this shit
www.youtube.com/watch?v=dw4gd6O3pbE

DISMISSED AS CHANCE (NotEnough), Thursday, 2 October 2014 19:29 (eleven years ago)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dw4gd6O3pbE

Mark G, Thursday, 2 October 2014 20:11 (eleven years ago)

Ah right.

Lennon and co didn't like it much either

Mark G, Thursday, 2 October 2014 20:12 (eleven years ago)

tho I think their ratio of great-to-clunkers stayed fairly consistent over their whole career. For every Hard Days Night there's a Come Together, for every For Me To You there's a Ballad of John and Yoko.

DISMISSED AS CHANCE (NotEnough), Thursday, 2 October 2014 20:49 (eleven years ago)

lol wut

zero content albums (darraghmac), Thursday, 2 October 2014 20:57 (eleven years ago)

Xp Cannot parse that sentence, can you Venn diagram it for me?

bippity bup at the hotel california (Phil D.), Thursday, 2 October 2014 21:22 (eleven years ago)

For every Hard Days Night there's a Come Together

^i can't tell which one is supposed to be the bad one?

u2 removal machine (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Thursday, 2 October 2014 22:09 (eleven years ago)

http://www.learnnc.org/lp/media/authors/walbert/venn/Edwards-Venn-six.png

The "5" Astronomer Royales (James Redd and the Blecchs), Thursday, 2 October 2014 22:12 (eleven years ago)

Come Together has a bad rap these days

Iago Galdston, Thursday, 2 October 2014 22:27 (eleven years ago)

http://www.clickhole.com/video/incredible-man-can-name-all-beatles-1055

Josh in Chicago, Thursday, 2 October 2014 22:28 (eleven years ago)

tbh considering how much the beatles recorded in so short a time period it's kind of remarkable how generally high-quality their material generally is. like, they had barely finished sgt pepper when they were back in the studio making magical mystery tour. even if you dislike (say) three songs from every album, that's still an incredibly good record.

(The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Thursday, 2 October 2014 22:35 (eleven years ago)

Otm

The "5" Astronomer Royales (James Redd and the Blecchs), Thursday, 2 October 2014 22:46 (eleven years ago)

As a friend observed, early on John and Paul were often writing these songs under chaotic circumstances - parties, hotel rooms, studio hustle and bustle -and then band would get something like three days to make an album in between commitments. Even when the band took longer (I think Rubber Soul took a month, Revolver three months) there was so much other stuff going on.

Josh in Chicago, Thursday, 2 October 2014 22:59 (eleven years ago)

Even when the band took longer

Veiled Rutles reference here

The "5" Astronomer Royales (James Redd and the Blecchs), Thursday, 2 October 2014 23:01 (eleven years ago)

Its esp impressive to think they pulled shit like writing & recording Rubber Soul, Revolver, Day Tripper/We Can Work it Out and the Paperback Writer/Rain singles in the span of 9 months (in between crazy tours, death threats and Jesus statements).

Darin, Thursday, 2 October 2014 23:09 (eleven years ago)

I haven't even cleaned my closets in the last nine months.

Darin, Thursday, 2 October 2014 23:15 (eleven years ago)

It's really no surprise that they looked absolutely fucking shattered on the sleeve to Beatles For Sale, thinking about it.

Welcome To (Turrican), Thursday, 2 October 2014 23:32 (eleven years ago)

Come Together is an amazing song, hilarious self-portrait

Οὖτις, Thursday, 2 October 2014 23:40 (eleven years ago)

Yup. Truly awesome bass and drum interplay intro too.

The "5" Astronomer Royales (James Redd and the Blecchs), Thursday, 2 October 2014 23:45 (eleven years ago)

one thing about the beatles i think that keeps them out there is the records just *sound* so good...like the drum sounds, bass, guitar sounds, just really good sounding records

u2 removal machine (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Thursday, 2 October 2014 23:53 (eleven years ago)

Yeah, apart from their able to generate songs, their records sound good, they knew how to play together and they knew how to arrange a pop record properly.

The "5" Astronomer Royales (James Redd and the Blecchs), Friday, 3 October 2014 00:00 (eleven years ago)

The only problem with The Beatles is that I have to clear off a layer of cold ejaculate off my leg every time I listen to them - they are that fucking good.

xelab, Friday, 3 October 2014 00:07 (eleven years ago)

Ƹ༑Ʒ (imago), Friday, 3 October 2014 00:09 (eleven years ago)

tbh considering how much the beatles recorded in so short a time period it's kind of remarkable how generally high-quality their material generally is. like, they had barely finished sgt pepper when they were back in the studio making magical mystery tour. even if you dislike (say) three songs from every album, that's still an incredibly good record.

― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Thursday, October 2, 2014 6:35 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Especially amazing given that two of the strongest songs on MMT (the LP version) are the first two things they recorded for Pepper's! They were just unbelievably productive for a very sustained period of time, it's natural that there are clunkers in there but the overall quality is, as most folks have noted, super super high.

Doctor Casino, Friday, 3 October 2014 00:39 (eleven years ago)

one thing about the beatles i think that keeps them out there is the records just *sound* so good...like the drum sound....

slowly gathering a few mono vinyl re-ish's and the drums on "tomorrow never knows" are so so **cking glorious sounding it's incredible (even sans pristine mono alanog mastering, but)

Tom Waits for no one (outdoor_miner), Friday, 3 October 2014 01:02 (eleven years ago)

That latest Lewisohn book, btw, is some sort of masterpiece. So many things had to go right in the Beatles story, and after all the jostling and coincidences and hard work, in the end they still had to write great songs.

Josh in Chicago, Friday, 3 October 2014 01:20 (eleven years ago)

It is amazing how much better their records sound than even most of their peers'. And that isn't just down to them having more money/power/time to use in the studio - though that definitely helped by the mid-sixties, however hurried for time they were - since even the early stuff sounds pretty damn good, most of it anyway. I think George Martin, Geoff Emerick & co were just really good at what they did and maybe also kind of perfectionists, in Martin's case maybe not wanting to do pop records unless he could at least make them sound good. But I'm kinda speculating there.

Doctor Casino, Friday, 3 October 2014 02:55 (eleven years ago)

No, I think its well established fact, that.

Mark G, Friday, 3 October 2014 06:38 (eleven years ago)

yakky, cross the dakky

I dunno. (amateurist), Friday, 3 October 2014 06:44 (eleven years ago)

'63 to '66 beatles haven't aged a day imo.

But '62 was shit, right? When was the first album, cuz I'm pretty sure that's what I was listening to (enduring) yesterday - and, Jesus, that stuff has aged decades. I've got to give them their due though, the vocals were stunningly good, much better than Adam Faith or even Frank Ifield.

The Count has shot himself (Tom D.), Friday, 3 October 2014 09:54 (eleven years ago)

'63 was the first album.

Mark G, Friday, 3 October 2014 09:56 (eleven years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.