Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Bad Dog Cafe' started by Ribsspare, Jan 21, 2019.
No I'm not
I was born in '63 and they just never grabbed me. When I used to listen to commercial radio, I wouldn't necessarily freak out and change the channel, but I also didn't turn it up either. Just sort of musical wallpaper for me. I just naturally liked the harder rock and bluesier rock, the Beatles seemed a little soft and flowery/poppy to me. I get that a lot of the bands that I grew up listening to were inspired by the Beatles, but they were teenagers when the Beatles came out. I was 13 in 1976 and the Beatles were "old" to me by then.
I have never owned a Beatles album and I never listen to Beatles music by choice, but I do like when other artists cover some of their songs. Aerosmith has done some great covers of Beatles tunes and Steven Tyler's performance at the Kennedy Center Honors for Paul McCartney was amazing. I wont post a link because there will be a political backlash, but if you haven't seen it, look it up on You Tube. Other artists covering their songs with a little more edge to them has always just been more enjoyable to me than the originals, so I guess the song writing was pretty good.
I find myself in the awkward position of agreeing with you for the second time.
They bridged us out of 50s rock n roll into new genres into modern rock. They were cute boys from England and the girls went mad over them. They were a pretty darn good live band before PA systems could amplify them live which is why they quit touring. They brought classical music into rock, a first. Yeah they brought long hair into a world of crew cuts. They were eclectic and gave rural America a view of the rest of the world through their films and music. They had George Martin to develop their tastes beyond rock n roll. 4 songwriters, 3 singers in the same band. Don't see that much anymore.
Overall they were this musical entourage singing about new things while the rest of the world was singing ballads from the 40s, or simple 1,4,5 songs from the 50s. They were experimental outside the norm. They were I guess now looking back no more a "thing" of their time than Bing Crosby, Frank Sinatra or Aretha Franklin were the rage in their day.
In a modern sense they were kind of like the Jonas Brothers but much bigger and more musically productive.
While I agree (minus the snarkiness), I also think that if it wasn't them, it would have been some other band.
One thing I do like about them is that, unlike a lot of others, they didn't keep doing the same thing over and over. I think they're a bit of an example of what some young people can do if they have enough resources to do what they want. And not in a bad way at all.
That's okay Bones, it happens as people grow in wisdom
I don't want to sound contentious my friend, I respect your opinion. It just seems hard for me to imagine anyone "more connected to the universe" than Aristotle. Many after him were important too, but Aristotle was a tough one to top. He was a really, really sharp mind and deep spirit.
Some later guys were more specialized. For example, guys on biology, physics, etc. Aristotle tried to find a synthesis for all fields to convey a unified view of our existence here - what Man really is, what he is supposed to do and how are the best ways to live both individually and collectively. He may have been wrong on specific things, but we have to look at the width and depth of his work, especially the purely philosophic, metaphysical, political and sociological work.
Aristotle and Beatles are two completely different things.
It bugs me a bit that there is this trend of treating Aristotle as old, archaic, jurassic, rudimentary, obsolete. Reading his work it strikes me how universal and timeless he is. He wrote things 2 thousand years ago that the avarage people still struggle with today.
You are joking, right?
Is it true the Beatles were the first “indie”/alternative rock band?
The Beatles were not the best musicians of the time, but they knew how to craft a song. You could hear with each album how they improved though.
Rubber Soul , The White Album, Abbey Road and Let It Be, were my fav albums. I find the actual sound production most fascinating, as there is little hiss and artifacts compared to a lot of 70s and early 80s music. I think the Beatles were very lucky in that Epstein, George Martin, Emerick all were all part of the history. If any of those were written out of the equations things would of been a lot different.
Sadly, of the classic Badfinger lineup, only guitar player Joey Molland is still alive.
And he doesn't reside in Liverpool anymore.
He made his home in the US many years ago.
I do love the music of Bandfinger.
Baby Blue is one of my favorite warm-up songs on the guitar.
Maybe if Kant is the Beatles, then Aristotle would be Robert Johnson? Kant was kind of the Beatles of Modern Philosophy IMO.
not ONE bit
Nobody has come close to the consistent quality they created.
You either like 'em, or you don't. What's to explain?
It's a famous oldies group , like Elvis or Jimi Hendrix. Geezer music.
Joey live's here in the Minneapolis/St. Paul area. I've talked to him several times over the years. Very nice guys. Always takes the time to talk.
and Hegel, where does he fit in?
yeah like "why don't we do it in the road"