I Don't Even Like The Beatles...

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gibson

Friend of Leo's
Joined
Feb 13, 2007
Posts
2,406
Location
A Fool on a Hill
Through the first couple of episodes, Yoko has been a pretty benign presence. Michael Lindsay-Hogg, on the other hand, has been a conniving, insufferable turd in the punch bowl. I blame him for much of the dour mood of the filming and for the Rolling Stones Rock and Roll Circus turning into a ****show.

Couldn't agree more. The moment that guy came on camera it felt like there was something off about him. He even makes cigar smoking look objectionable. Quite the punchable face.

On the other hand, he has worked with the Stones quite regularly and still has all his own hair!
 
Last edited:

bcorig

Friend of Leo's
Gold Supporter
Joined
Mar 11, 2018
Posts
3,984
Location
Lost in the 909 trying to find my way home
Well he was there, he did same things, now he has the guts to say that was rubbish, like beatles songs, and Peper's record is rubbish too.



You are right, sorry for my english. Unfortunately is not my mother tonge and sometimes is hard to express.... I am strugling in my mimd because I am a native spaniard who works in english but at the same time in Estonian (similar to Finish) and some Russian too... please, change "girls pop" for "teens pop"
Sometimes, I must admit that learning and try speaking so many languajes at the sqme time is pushing my mind to the limit and many times trying to make things simplier you make mistakes like that one.

My apollogise to girls. I am a father of two daughters and consider myself a feminist.



Well, that affirmation is utterly FALSE. Repeating a mantra ten thousand times doesn't make it true. beatles only influenced silly teen pop. They didn't had any impact on other music genres and that is a fact. beatles did were influenced by old school rock'n'roll and are a bad mix between Buddy Holly, Beach Boys and Everly brothers, just a mixed up copy.

I can repeat things too... where is the influence of the beatles in blues, rockabilly, country, reggae, ska, hard rock, heavy metal trash metal, flamenco, bossanova, rancheras, punk, salsa, latin, punk rock, even rap? NONE AT ALL

Please, grow up, face the truth... the band you worship doesn't mean anything for most of the world and most of the musicians. Period. You can like beatles, yes, or don't like beatles like me and that doesn't mean anything but that. beatles mean nothing today.

And the problem is not the band itself. They, thankfully, stopped their disgusting music decades ago... Problem is with people stuck in their youth believing and worshipping a fake. I can buy that they were a big selling light teen POP band in the 60's and some 70's but nothing else like many others.
In the same style you have bands much much better than beatles, you have Kinks with are much more rich mussically talking, Zombies that are much more rich singing wise talking... but not, the beatles influenced everything mantra keeps coming...

Sorry, is false

Period.

Accept the truth, don't panic, resistance is useless

ac40e74857cd6c52e0b963cbf3f4f702.jpg
Merely an opinion. Ignores the facts.
 

P Thought

Doctor of Teleocity
Ad Free Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Posts
12,958
Location
Plundertown (Gasville) OR
A great deal of the pizza I have sampled is just OK IME.

There has been a memorable slice or two.
Neither came from a mega source however.

My memory of Disney was sunday nights.
Wild Kingdom too.
Occasional popcorn snacks.

Ah, that wonderful world of color! And Walt Disney himself! We didn't have a teevee until I was in 7th grade, and then it was B&W and we didn't receive NBC, so we saw Disney only at friends' or relatives'
 

Toto'sDad

Tele Axpert
Ad Free Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2011
Posts
54,510
Location
Bakersfield
Ah, that wonderful world of color! And Walt Disney himself! We didn't have a teevee until I was in 7th grade, and then it was B&W and we didn't receive NBC, so we saw Disney only at friends' or relatives'

They kept on advertising Bonanza was going to be on in LIVING COLOR. When it came on, I kept waiting for the LIVING COLOR. How was I supposed to know you had to have a COLOR TV to see it in color? What a bummer.
 

El Marin

Friend of Leo's
Joined
Mar 19, 2014
Posts
3,016
Location
Spaniard in Pärnu, Estonia, EU
so I don’t even really like the Beatles man but this is ridiculous- they’ve influenced pretty much everyone in music(...)
so you might not like them but to say they’re not influential is pretty obvious trolling man

Not it is not... liking the beatles doesn't make them an influence...

For example, Little Richard may like the beatles but is not an influence for him as me as I like The Who (who were really influenced by the beatles) but I don't consider the Who as my influence.

And YES, they were influential, but in teen pop, brithish whatever, mod music, YES... but not other genres AT ALL. Some players and composers like the beatles? yeah, maybe, I would like to talk deep with Bob Marley about it, but it doesn't make it an influence

Numbers 85 and 83 appear to contradict each other.

I didn't wrote that, I just find it funny but truth in a global thing

Hmm, I wonder why so many TDPRI folks are dismissive of the most popular, biggest selling, most influential band there has ever been- or ever will be?

Because that is utterly false. Elvis was, Chuck Berry was, Rolling Stones ARE... beatles no way
 

JamesAM

Tele-Holic
Joined
May 13, 2020
Posts
608
Age
36
Location
Virginia, USA
Not it is not... liking the beatles doesn't make them an influence...

For example, Little Richard may like the beatles but is not an influence for him as me as I like The Who (who were really influenced by the beatles) but I don't consider the Who as my influence.

And YES, they were influential, but in teen pop, brithish whatever, mod music, YES... but not other genres AT ALL. Some players and composers like the beatles? yeah, maybe, I would like to talk deep with Bob Marley about it, but it doesn't make it an influence



I didn't wrote that, I just find it funny but truth in a global thing



Because that is utterly false. Elvis was, Chuck Berry was, Rolling Stones ARE... beatles no way

“I don’t like the Beatles because they didn’t influence bossa nova or flamenco, and also I’m going to completely ignore the scores of direct quotes and videos from artists mouths of them saying how much they were influenced by the Beatles because i refuse to accept reality” is a heck of a take dude. Best of luck to you
 

telemnemonics

Telefied
Ad Free Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Posts
31,570
Age
62
Location
Maine
R.b813becfb48a52e486bc7afe92b7739c


Hmm, I wonder why so many TDPRI folks are dismissive of the most popular, biggest selling, most influential band there has ever been- or ever will be?

McDonalds is the most popular, biggest selling, most influential burger joint there has ever been or ever will be.

I used to eat there but got tired of it and found other stuff to eat.
New recipes rock!

I wonder why some keep wondering how somebody could move on from old stuff toward new stuff?
Isn't the answer obvious?
 

421JAM

Tele-Holic
Joined
Dec 16, 2020
Posts
971
Age
49
Location
Atlanta, GA
Not it is not... liking the beatles doesn't make them an influence...

For example, Little Richard may like the beatles but is not an influence for him

I think I’m starting to get it now. Your argument is that the Beatles were not an influence because they did not go back in time and influence the music and artists that came before them?

Very interesting take.

Ridiculous on its face, but interesting.
 

BerkshireDuncan

Tele-Holic
Joined
Sep 27, 2020
Posts
548
Age
59
Location
Oxford, UK
McDonalds is the most popular, biggest selling, most influential burger joint there has ever been or ever will be.

I used to eat there but got tired of it and found other stuff to eat.
New recipes rock!

I wonder why some keep wondering how somebody could move on from old stuff toward new stuff?
Isn't the answer obvious?[/QUOTE

McDonalds.. most popular, biggest selling (and delicious) yes of course. But influential? Maybe for their franchise model and business practices, but they've been knocking out EXACTLY the same old product for 80 years- a bit like the Rolling Stones, so I'm not sure 'inventing' the Triple Mac should be considered as artistically innovative or influential as the Beatles.
 

telemnemonics

Telefied
Ad Free Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Posts
31,570
Age
62
Location
Maine

WRT the global influence of McDonalds?
I started eating McDonalds food when the Beatles were still pop music.
Nobody had done what McDonalds was trying to do, and almost every fast food franchise since McDonalds has stolen their songs and licks.

As for pop music?
We've had tons and tons of great pop music from before the Beatles!
I was listening to pop radio before the Beatles hit the scene, the first band I saw live was The Platters (actual inventors of Rock 'n'Roll), and in my kids soundtrack of the '60s was great stuff like Otis Redding who I loved, then acts like Glen Campbell played on the same pop radio stations as the Soul / R&B bands who invented Rock & Roll. My favorite was The Band, that's who made me decide to become a musician.
Pointless to name artist after artist because there were just so damn many of them.

So really, McDonalds is a bigger influence on fast food franchise than The Beatles are on pop music.
The beatles were just a new flavor pop band, a great flavor for sure, but following a very old dusty time tested model.

Then we have Television.
What happened when the hottest new band of the year coincided with the TV in every household finally coming true?
I think the Beatles arrival also coincided with solid state transistors.
So the latest hot new pop band was supported by TV and the new transistor radio.

I remember well how big it was for kids to be able to carry a transistor radio to the beach etc.
And we know that many many kids picked up a guitar because they saw The Beatles on Ed Sullivan.
The mid '60s was just exploding with a tornado of culture shifts, including the hippy movement which was basically the first massive departure of children from their parents values.
Much of what happened when the Ed Sullivan event made boys everywhere pick up a guitar because they could SEE it on TV, the even bigger thing was that GIRLS WENT CRAZY AND STARTED SCREAMING FOR BOYS.

More girls screamed, than the number of boys who started bands.
Boys started bands as much because they saw girls scream for bumbling guitar players crooning, as because I wanna hold your hand was such epically great music.
The Beatles on Ed Sullivan was not impactful because they played great or had great songs.
Their playing was only adequate and the songs were trite and derivative.

But bumbling boys playing guitars on TV made repressed girls scream and faint.
Boys who didn't yet play guitar saw the chance and jumped at it!

TV, transistor radios, and repressed girls screaming: those three things are as critical to the first impact of the Beatles arriving, as any content of that first music they made.
Then the hippy movement carried them as the unwitting representatives of the hippies.
Which they took up and ran with.
Good for them!
Too bad they had so little staying power as a band.

I do love some of their better work.
But in the grand scheme of all the music I can choose from?
With the '60s now long gone and their importance only being one more old time band?
Seems funny to idolize them to such an extreme so many years after their brief run ended?

We who don't idolize them realize they were big, but the question is why we don't idolize them?
Isn't the answer obvious?
 

telemnemonics

Telefied
Ad Free Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Posts
31,570
Age
62
Location
Maine
I think I’m starting to get it now. Your argument is that the Beatles were not an influence because they did not go back in time and influence the music and artists that came before them?

Very interesting take.

Ridiculous on its face, but interesting.

I don't think @El Marin is saying the Beatles were not an influence on lots of players.

His point is I think, that they were not the most important influence in 20th C pop.
Many are so obsessed with the Beatles that they claim that was the most important pop music of the 20th C.
But if we look at the critical explosion of the Beatles on the pop music scene, it centered around the Ed Sullivan show, and the music they played when they first got huge, was just derivative pop Rock 'n' Roll, that copied stuff by the likes of Little Richard, whose career eclipsed the Beatles since he came before and continued after.

Or are you saying you feel that The Beatles influenced Little Richard more than Little Richard influenced the Beatles?
Like, without the Beatles, Little Richard would not have known what to play?
As opposed to: without Little Richard and his peers, the Beatles would not have known what to play on Ed Sullivan?

For a better understanding of the explosion of Pop guitar, we need to consider how older conservative society viewed black artists in terms of allowing their teen daughters to buy and listen to the records, or watch them on TV.
Remember that Elvis was considered too dirty and bad to show on TV, while huge array of black artists who invented the damn music were marginalized out by censorship and racism.

Parents would never allow their teen girls to adore young black men. Very bad things happened around that issue.
But young and bumbling white boys copping the music of young black men on Ed Sullivan was fully approved by the WWII era moms & pops, so they let their daughters adore and swoon over those nice white boys.
Culturally, this was hugely critical in that shift.
 

telemnemonics

Telefied
Ad Free Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Posts
31,570
Age
62
Location
Maine
I saw their first movie, A Hard Days Night, in the theater (theatre) when it first came out.
Pretty sure I remember that scene sitting there, and it might have been the first time I saw a movie on the big screen given that I was barely old enough to sit still and be quiet.
I'd watch this new film too, and I wonder how much footage is actually new?

I may be confusing some of you with my posts?
I loved the Beatles and still do in a way, but I find it strange how obsessive some fans are in suggesting they are the most important band of all time?
That just sounds crazy!
And repeating that sort of thing will always get an argument.
 

JamesAM

Tele-Holic
Joined
May 13, 2020
Posts
608
Age
36
Location
Virginia, USA
I don't think @El Marin is saying the Beatles were not an influence on lots of players.

His point is I think, that they were not the most important influence in 20th C pop.
Many are so obsessed with the Beatles that they claim that was the most important pop music of the 20th C.
But if we look at the critical explosion of the Beatles on the pop music scene, it centered around the Ed Sullivan show, and the music they played when they first got huge, was just derivative pop Rock 'n' Roll, that copied stuff by the likes of Little Richard, whose career eclipsed the Beatles since he came before and continued after.

Or are you saying you feel that The Beatles influenced Little Richard more than Little Richard influenced the Beatles?
Like, without the Beatles, Little Richard would not have known what to play?
As opposed to: without Little Richard and his peers, the Beatles would not have known what to play on Ed Sullivan?

For a better understanding of the explosion of Pop guitar, we need to consider how older conservative society viewed black artists in terms of allowing their teen daughters to buy and listen to the records, or watch them on TV.
Remember that Elvis was considered too dirty and bad to show on TV, while huge array of black artists who invented the damn music were marginalized out by censorship and racism.

Parents would never allow their teen girls to adore young black men. Very bad things happened around that issue.
But young and bumbling white boys copping the music of young black men on Ed Sullivan was fully approved by the WWII era moms & pops, so they let their daughters adore and swoon over those nice white boys.
Culturally, this was hugely critical in that shift.
This is all fine, but he literally said “the Beatles did not influence any music except for pop stuff for the girls.” This is clearly false as several people have demonstrated here with lots of black and white evidence.

not liking the Beatles (I am in this camp!) is not the same as refusing to acknowledge that many prominent musicians in the latter half of the 20th century and even today were influenced by them, especially their later work.

Their earlier stuff was definitely derivative. But at least it wasn’t on the level of jimmy page plagiarism (who ironically was also hugely influential!).

Anyway, best of luck fellow travelers, and happy holidays
 
Status
Not open for further replies.




Top