50 years ago ...

Music and video: analog or digital
User avatar
TOS
Posts: 39391
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 5:48 pm

50 years ago ...

Post by TOS »

this concert happened

yeah, half a century

i still wish i could have been there

meanwhile, peter jackson is working on a doc about the beatles

Jackson said in a statement of making the new film: “The 55 hours of never-before-seen footage and 140 hours of audio made available to us ensure this movie will be the ultimate ‘fly on the wall’ experience that Beatles fans have long dreamt about.


now was that the session where they wanted to make it this big multi-media project? recorded in a cavernous film studio and spent most of their time arguing with each other? sounds like fun!
"TOS ain’t havin no horserace round here. “Policies” is the coin of the realm." -- iDaemon
User avatar
Donkey Butter
Posts: 1655
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 8:15 am
Title: jerk face
Location: over yonder

Post by Donkey Butter »

I realize I'm solidly in the minority but I just find the Beatles incredibly "meh"

I don't get what all the fuss is about, their music is not great.
User avatar
justine
Posts: 16703
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 3:35 pm
Title: Elitist Beer Lover
Location: Magrathea
Contact:

Post by justine »

Donkey Butter wrote: I realize I'm solidly in the minority but I just find the Beatles incredibly "meh"

I don't get what all the fuss is about, their music is not great.

I am in this same minority. I like the music, but it's not great.
"The older i get, the less i care about what people think of me. therefore the older i get, the more i enjoy life."

"Life is so constructed, that the event does not, cannot, will not, match the expectation."
User avatar
arkayn
Posts: 6721
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 1:47 pm
Title: Aaarrrggghhhh
Location: Gulf Coast
Contact:

Post by arkayn »

justine wrote:
Donkey Butter wrote: I realize I'm solidly in the minority but I just find the Beatles incredibly "meh"

I don't get what all the fuss is about, their music is not great.

I am in this same minority. I like the music, but it's not great.


Same as me, I really do not get the Beatles. I can listen to them with no problem, but I do not crank the stereo when it comes on.
User avatar
Metacell
Posts: 11131
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2010 1:58 am
Title: Chocolate Brahma
Location: Lidsville
Contact:

Post by Metacell »

I think you Beatles meh lot are just missing the historical context: most of the great music you do like was inspired or influenced by The Beatles.
Remember, people, to forgive is divine. In other words, it ain't human.
User avatar
Betonhaus
Posts: 2911
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 10:25 pm

Post by Betonhaus »

Metacell wrote: I think you Beatles meh lot are just missing the historical context: most of the great music you do like was inspired or influenced by The Beatles.

So if you don't have the nostalgia factor it just sounds like a watered down homogenized version of modern music.
User avatar
Ribtor
Posts: 9364
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2010 3:45 pm

Post by Ribtor »

Pyke notte thy nostrellys
User avatar
Pithecanthropus
Posts: 6076
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:46 pm
Title: Roast Master
Location: St. Cloud, MN
Contact:

Post by Pithecanthropus »

Donkey Butter wrote: I realize I'm solidly in the minority but I just find the Beatles incredibly "meh"

I don't get what all the fuss is about, their music is not great.

Go write a song as good as "Yesterday" then come back and comment.
set DeusEx.JCDentonMale bCheatsEnabled true
User avatar
juice
Posts: 12076
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 12:26 am
Title: Inadvertently correct

Post by juice »

Pithecanthropus wrote:
Donkey Butter wrote: I realize I'm solidly in the minority but I just find the Beatles incredibly "meh"

I don't get what all the fuss is about, their music is not great.

Go write a song as good as "Yesterday" then come back and comment.

And follow it up with another as good as anything on the Revolver album. Or St Peppers. Or the White album. etc etc etc
User avatar
Séamas
Posts: 6905
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 9:32 pm
Title: Honorary Consul General
Location: Where am I?

Post by Séamas »

I think their music is great.

Break out a chart of most Beatle tunes and you will see chord and harmony structures that none of their peers (outside of Motown and maybe Brian Jones could come close to. Even their early material was a studied and expanded mix of of the basis of American popular song and produced an amalgam of rockabilly, R&B, rock n Roll, tin pan alley and girl-group harmonies.

That is in addition to having awesome arrangements and a desire to up the ante on production techniques and sonic exploration. Their musicianship is highly underrated.

The "Get Back" (Let it Be) project is an interesting part of their history. They recognized the fractured aspect of the White Album and sought to make something cohesive, less "concept" and more back to their roots. Apparently they recorded hours and hours jamming on their back catalog, playing covers, etc, but they had grown up and were unable to go back to where they came from.

That said, all that jamming is part and parcel as to why their playing was so sharp on their final recordings (Abby Road).
And Proteus brought the upright beast into the garden and chained him to a tree and the children did make sport of him.
User avatar
Metacell
Posts: 11131
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2010 1:58 am
Title: Chocolate Brahma
Location: Lidsville
Contact:

Post by Metacell »

Betonhaus wrote:
Metacell wrote: I think you Beatles meh lot are just missing the historical context: most of the great music you do like was inspired or influenced by The Beatles.

So if you don't have the nostalgia factor it just sounds like a watered down homogenized version of modern music.

If you don't like the blues, you ain't got no soul.
Remember, people, to forgive is divine. In other words, it ain't human.
User avatar
dv
Posts: 30684
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 3:42 pm

Post by dv »

Betonhaus wrote:
Metacell wrote: I think you Beatles meh lot are just missing the historical context: most of the great music you do like was inspired or influenced by The Beatles.

So if you don't have the nostalgia factor it just sounds like a watered down homogenized version of modern music.

You have that backwards.
Image
User avatar
maurvir
Posts: 25359
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2010 10:13 pm
Title: Steamed meat popsicle

Post by maurvir »

The Beatles really are only "good" when taken in the context of the period during which they arose. From what I understand, they were among the first "hyper popular" 'pop' bands, and that is why they have such an out-sized place in history. Other bands were producing even more forward looking music at the time, but it was outside the mainstream. That is, they didn't have as many teen girls flinging panties at them.

That isn't to say they weren't an important band, or that they didn't push the envelope of what was popular in the day, but objectively speaking, a lot of their music was dreck even then. There are probably only a dozen or so Beatle's tracks that I would consider somewhat timeless.

I get that they are an important band for a lot of reasons, but I'm not a fan of them myself either.
User avatar
Metacell
Posts: 11131
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2010 1:58 am
Title: Chocolate Brahma
Location: Lidsville
Contact:

Post by Metacell »

Metacell wrote:If you don't like the blues, you ain't got no soul.
Remember, people, to forgive is divine. In other words, it ain't human.
User avatar
user
Posts: 29386
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 4:40 pm
Title: Stupid cockwomble

Post by user »

keep your hands off my jelly roll
Aw, he's no fun, he fell right over.

Science is Truth for Life. In FORTRAN tongue the Answer.

...so I'm supposed to find the Shadow King from inside a daiquiri?
User avatar
Séamas
Posts: 6905
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 9:32 pm
Title: Honorary Consul General
Location: Where am I?

Post by Séamas »

maurvir wrote: The Beatles really are only "good" when taken in the context of the period during which they arose.


I disagree completely.


Unless you are saying the same thing for any and all types of music and performers.

Other bands were producing even more forward looking music at the time, but it was outside the mainstream


Not all that many, and most of them hopped on to the wagon some time after the Beatles hit big.

a lot of their music was dreck even then


Again, disagree.
They were one of the bands I think had the lowest ratio of filler to gem. Very rarely repeated themselves at all.
And Proteus brought the upright beast into the garden and chained him to a tree and the children did make sport of him.
User avatar
justine
Posts: 16703
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 3:35 pm
Title: Elitist Beer Lover
Location: Magrathea
Contact:

Post by justine »

maurvir wrote: The Beatles really are only "good" when taken in the context of the period during which they arose. From what I understand, they were among the first "hyper popular" 'pop' bands, and that is why they have such an out-sized place in history. Other bands were producing even more forward looking music at the time, but it was outside the mainstream. That is, they didn't have as many teen girls flinging panties at them.

Didn't it come out that all those screaming girls turned out to be a PR stunt? Manufactured?
"The older i get, the less i care about what people think of me. therefore the older i get, the more i enjoy life."

"Life is so constructed, that the event does not, cannot, will not, match the expectation."
User avatar
Kirk
Posts: 25939
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 5:09 pm
Location: SLO

Post by Kirk »

I think some of you may be jaded by time. Remember the Beatles broke new ground on so many aspects of song writing, recording and musical technique.
User avatar
Ribtor
Posts: 9364
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2010 3:45 pm

Post by Ribtor »

Pop tunes; fine for what they were, and are.

I liked the Beatles music more when they stopped touring and started bickering in the studio. I'm sure their producer deserves a lot of credit.
Pyke notte thy nostrellys
User avatar
Donkey Butter
Posts: 1655
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 8:15 am
Title: jerk face
Location: over yonder

Post by Donkey Butter »

Oh I get that they are a popular and important band. I just don't go all gah-gah over them.

I even bought one of their albums once. That's when I realized that I didn't like 'em so that CD wen't back to graywhale where I traded it in for some good music.

And sure they were more musically talented than I am, though, that is not saying much since I sing like an amputee (can't hold a note, can't carry a tune)
User avatar
DukeofNuke
Posts: 33305
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 1:33 pm
Title: FREE RADICAL
Location: Scintillating!

Post by DukeofNuke »

Not to argue, but,
That is, they didn't have as many teen girls flinging panties at them.

Elvis
That isn't to say they weren't an important band, or that they didn't push the envelope of what was popular in the day, but objectively speaking, a lot of their music was dreck even then. There are probably only a dozen or so Beatle's tracks that I would consider somewhat timeless.

Mozart
Go write a song as good as "Yesterday" then come back and comment.

or "Something" or "Eleanor Rigby". I mean, how many chart topping songs of the 60's were written for a string quartet? The Beatles changed the landscape and were ahead of their time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuS5NuXRb5Y
intellectual/hipster/nihilist

"Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts."
-Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan
User avatar
maurvir
Posts: 25359
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2010 10:13 pm
Title: Steamed meat popsicle

Post by maurvir »

To be fair, Eleanor Rigby is a freaking amazing song, and one of the songs I was referring to as timeless.
User avatar
Pithecanthropus
Posts: 6076
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:46 pm
Title: Roast Master
Location: St. Cloud, MN
Contact:

Post by Pithecanthropus »

Look, you want to say that their catalog of songs isn't 100% great, that's fine. Find me a band or artist whose catalog is 100% great.

You want to say, "they don't appeal to my musical taste," that's fine, too. Taste is subjective.

You want to say, "the Beatles suck because I don't like them," you're going to get into a flame war that you won't win.
set DeusEx.JCDentonMale bCheatsEnabled true
User avatar
maurvir
Posts: 25359
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2010 10:13 pm
Title: Steamed meat popsicle

Post by maurvir »

Pithecanthropus wrote: Look, you want to say that their catalog of songs isn't 100% great, that's fine. Find me a band or artist whose catalog is 100% great.

You want to say, "they don't appeal to my musical taste," that's fine, too. Taste is subjective.

You want to say, "the Beatles suck because I don't like them," you're going to get into a flame war that you won't win.


I don't think anyone is saying the Beatles sucked, because they didn't. There are quite a few Beatle's songs that I really like, and they even have songs that are still getting airplay. However, I do feel that they were overrated.
User avatar
Ribtor
Posts: 9364
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2010 3:45 pm

Post by Ribtor »

It's pop tunes. Over-rating is built in. Proportion often gets lost in fandom. Maher and his Marvell rant touched on a similar thing.
Pyke notte thy nostrellys
User avatar
DukeofNuke
Posts: 33305
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 1:33 pm
Title: FREE RADICAL
Location: Scintillating!

Post by DukeofNuke »

Mozart, Bach, Strauss, et al , all wrote "Pop" tunes for their time.
intellectual/hipster/nihilist

"Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts."
-Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan
User avatar
ukimalefu
Posts: 44210
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 3:52 pm
Title: want, but shouldn't, may anyway
Location: Failed State

Post by ukimalefu »

DukeofNuke wrote: Mozart, Bach, Strauss, et al , all wrote "Pop" tunes for their time.


I believe one of the reasons orchestras were invented was to make music louder.
User avatar
Ribtor
Posts: 9364
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2010 3:45 pm

Post by Ribtor »

They took it to 11.
Pyke notte thy nostrellys
User avatar
Ribtor
Posts: 9364
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2010 3:45 pm

Post by Ribtor »

DukeofNuke wrote: Mozart, Bach, Strauss, et al , all wrote "Pop" tunes for their time.

I thought the word popular in this context means widely available and consumed by the masses rather than commissioned by, and primarily performed for the court or the church or wealthy patrons. The word popular in this context may need some scholarly definition.
Pyke notte thy nostrellys
User avatar
DukeofNuke
Posts: 33305
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 1:33 pm
Title: FREE RADICAL
Location: Scintillating!

Post by DukeofNuke »

Ribtor wrote:
DukeofNuke wrote: Mozart, Bach, Strauss, et al , all wrote "Pop" tunes for their time.

I thought the word popular in this context means widely available and consumed by the masses rather than commissioned by, and primarily performed for the court or the church or wealthy patrons. The word popular in this context may need some scholarly definition.

The sheet music was published. It was also played in Opera Houses, theaters, parlors and player piano rolls.
intellectual/hipster/nihilist

"Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts."
-Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan
User avatar
C. Ives
Posts: 3563
Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 6:49 pm
Title: Lacks Critical stick fiddling Thinking

Post by C. Ives »

Ribtor wrote:
DukeofNuke wrote: Mozart, Bach, Strauss, et al , all wrote "Pop" tunes for their time.

I thought the word popular in this context means widely available and consumed by the masses rather than commissioned by, and primarily performed for the court or the church or wealthy patrons. The word popular in this context may need some scholarly definition.

Mozart's operas were widely available and consumed by the masses.

Bach wrote mainly for the church where he was employed (and also wrote for the "masses" . . . get it? Masses? :lol: )

Strauss . . . Well. Which Strauss? I'm going to assume Johan Jr.? Yes, while you could say he was writing for the upper class, his waltzes were certainly geared toward the masses as well.

So yes, I'd agree with Mozart and Strauss. Maybe not so much with Bach.
All skill is in vain when an angel wastes down the barrel of your rifle.
User avatar
Metacell
Posts: 11131
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2010 1:58 am
Title: Chocolate Brahma
Location: Lidsville
Contact:

Post by Metacell »

maurvir wrote:
Pithecanthropus wrote: Look, you want to say that their catalog of songs isn't 100% great, that's fine. Find me a band or artist whose catalog is 100% great.

You want to say, "they don't appeal to my musical taste," that's fine, too. Taste is subjective.

You want to say, "the Beatles suck because I don't like them," you're going to get into a flame war that you won't win.


I don't think anyone is saying the Beatles sucked, because they didn't. There are quite a few Beatle's songs that I really like, and they even have songs that are still getting airplay. However, I do feel that they were overrated.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, Led Zeppelin was overrated (and overplayed) too. But that's because they were awesome.
Remember, people, to forgive is divine. In other words, it ain't human.
User avatar
DukeofNuke
Posts: 33305
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 1:33 pm
Title: FREE RADICAL
Location: Scintillating!

Post by DukeofNuke »

I see what you did there
intellectual/hipster/nihilist

"Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts."
-Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan
User avatar
avkills
Posts: 3127
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 9:46 am
Location: Everywhere

Post by avkills »

I think the big thing about The Beatles is that they were an extremely tight live band. The vast majority of artists today sound like ass live.
"Killing them dead till they believe"
† The Church of Mark †
User avatar
ukimalefu
Posts: 44210
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 3:52 pm
Title: want, but shouldn't, may anyway
Location: Failed State

Post by ukimalefu »

avkills wrote: I think the big thing about The Beatles is that they were an extremely tight live band. The vast majority of artists today sound like ass live.


the best beatles music came after they stopped touring

Thanks to Sir George Martin
User avatar
TOS
Posts: 39391
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 5:48 pm

Post by TOS »

a staggering list of hit songs and records, basically made stadium concerts a thing, emphasized whimsy and fun

it's okay if you don't like them ... but it's ridiculous to deny their talent and cultural impact
"TOS ain’t havin no horserace round here. “Policies” is the coin of the realm." -- iDaemon
User avatar
ukimalefu
Posts: 44210
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 3:52 pm
Title: want, but shouldn't, may anyway
Location: Failed State

Post by ukimalefu »

'We don't like their sound. Groups of guitars are on the way out.' – Decca Recording Company when turning down the Beatles in 1962.
User avatar
juice
Posts: 12076
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 12:26 am
Title: Inadvertently correct

Post by juice »

ukimalefu wrote: 'We don't like their sound. Groups of guitars are on the way out.' – Decca Recording Company when turning down the Beatles in 1962.

The were right; just early to that conclusion. :goth:
User avatar
TOS
Posts: 39391
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 5:48 pm

Post by TOS »

i think the beatles broke up before its members turned 30

let that sink in a minute
"TOS ain’t havin no horserace round here. “Policies” is the coin of the realm." -- iDaemon
User avatar
ukimalefu
Posts: 44210
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 3:52 pm
Title: want, but shouldn't, may anyway
Location: Failed State

Post by ukimalefu »

Post Reply