The Beatles are still the dominant force behind every Indie Kid who loves music, whether it's pop, rock, prog, blues, electronic, avant-garde, gospel, psychedelia, jazz, "new wave", "punk", folk, country, skiffle, oh God!!

I thought this was a joke thread when I saw it. You can imagine my surprise when I saw it has been around for over two years! Yes, I like love the Beatles. Not much more to say on this.

For sure Juice box...They also used alot of classical music influences that were never used in rock music before. For instance, a string quartet in "Yesterday".

I like the Beatles but i don't love them. I hate it when people say stuff like "all music is influenced by them" or "No band comes close, period". This is completely OTT. Don't get me wrong, i acknowledge the fact that they had a big influence and that they had many great pop songs, however the key word here is "pop"; They wrote catchy songs, nothing more. Great music for me should take you to the extremes of emotion; it should make you feel like crying with joy or sadness or even want to smash things up and go wild. "Smells like Teen Spirit" does this but "I want to hold your hand" doesn't.
Radiohead, especially recently, is one example of a band who isn't influenced by them and who in many ways pushes back the boundries of music more then they did.

Since I'm one of the ones who said they influenced everybody else, I don't want to argue with you and I don't want your hate to grow, but if you think the Beatles only wrote catchy songs or didn't very much influence Radiohead, I will just say I disagree. I could list many specific examples, but it's better if somebody hears it themselves. I would also say that I'd bet the Beatles music has made more people cry for joy and sadness and want to smash things up than any other band. Music is personal and there's no right or wrong here. I went crazy for the Beatles in the '60s (and continue to do so), just as I go crazy for Radiohead now. I just toot my horn for the Beatles because I want people to either remember or at least learn about what they did instead of assuming things about them.

quote:

Originally posted by Member 27:
Though dont worry, I DO hate Yoko Ono as much as any avid Beatles fan.

I love the Beatles too, and though I don't care for her singing, I have nothing against Yoko.

I remember crying the last time I saw "A Hard Day's Night".

hal

I remember that about you too.

quote:

Originally posted by Funkymonk:
I like the Beatles but i don't love them. I hate it when people say stuff like "all music is influenced by them" or "No band comes close, period". This is completely OTT. Don't get me wrong, i acknowledge the fact that they had a big influence and that they had many great pop songs, however the key word here is "pop"; They wrote catchy songs, nothing more. Great music for me should take you to the extremes of emotion; it should make you feel like crying with joy or sadness or even want to smash things up and go wild. "Smells like Teen Spirit" does this but "I want to hold your hand" doesn't.
Radiohead, especially recently, is one example of a band who isn't influenced by them and who in many ways pushes back the boundries of music more then they did.

"I Wanna Hold Your Hand" probably won't want to make you smash anything, but "Helter Skelter" might. Without dissing you too bad, I'll just say that if you think the Beatles only wrote catchy pop tunes, you clearly have some more exploring to do.

You're also wrong about the Beatles' influence on music being overstated. I think you'll find that most of the music we talk about in these forums is influenced either directly or indirectly by the Beatles. Even Radiohead and Nirvana (I dare anyone to listen to "About a Girl" and tell me they don't hear the Beatles).

quote:

Originally posted by ericg75:

"I Wanna Hold Your Hand" probably won't want to make you smash anything, but "Helter Skelter" might.

Example 1: The Manson Family

nice one.

I'm also one of the believers that the Beatles had an ifluence on most music now a days. But anywase I recently bought they're new album (yes another greatest hits cd) but this one is different. I haven't opened it due to the fact that I'm giving it to my dad for Christmas, but the songs are sort of like remixed so the songs are different (in a very good way). Just f.y.i. I guess, lol.

quote:

Tomorrow Never Knows sounds like Manitoba.

I just want to say this is the greatest music geek quote ever.

As far as the Beatles, y'know, if they came out today as a mainstream band they would never ever get a major deal. Never.

As an indie band, they would probably be lost in the shuffle for the most part, but last a good 10 to 20 years (way longer than most indie bands do) and build up a really good-sized, dedicated fan base. Kind of like Wilco or They Might Be Giants. If they were met with any success, it would be ultimately marginal.

When I look at them purely content-wise, no context, they're a slightly above-average band who wrote hit-and-miss songs (like they all do) and were incredibly prolific. Their albums were noticeably different one by one (you could even argue every song on every record after Revolver was different from the other). This is to their credit I suppose. Exceptions are noted for Meet the Beatles/Help! and Revolver/Rubber Soul.

In my opinion, and most people dissent with mine and that's okay, their entire discog could be shortened into about five albums and I wouldn't feel like I'm missing much. Sgt. Peppers stays untouched, White album pared down to about 20 tracks on one disc, Revolver/Rubber Soul combined into one record, Help!/Meet/other early '60s tracks combined into one record and then Abbey Road untouched. Let it Be is an anticlimax, in my opinion, despite the re-release.

The rest, as any rock critic will tell you, is inessential.

I hate to be so brusque with the Beatles, but they were flawed like any other band. They just did a lot of stuff first before anyone else had the chance to.

I would normally let this slide as the babbling of some poor, uneducated dick, but I might as well chop you down a notch before others do. Are you really that unconcerned with feeling ridiculous while you're trying to "establish" your credentials? Apparently so because I can't believe a "serious" critic would say what you were dying to say for so long. What is your problem with the Beatles? That they're not American, not from the Deep South of America, or not Black Americans? I will accept that they are none of those, but for four Liverpudlians, they are remarkably in spirit with each of those "American" groups.

quote:

Originally posted by Yay!:
They just did a lot of stuff first before anyone else had the chance to.

Yay!, I'd just say a couple of things (three, actually):

Firstly, the Beatles did have contemporaries, most of whose names and output escape me now;

Secondly, being first is no good unless you've got the ideas to play with, and the Beatles had ideas aplenty. The rate of their musical evolution over 7 years and however many albums is simply unmatched in all of rock 'n' roll.

Thirdly, can I persuade you to locate and read Greil Marcus's essay on the Beatles (The Rolling Stone Illustrated History of Rock and Roll, circa 1979)? He states their case a lot better than I can. If you're still not convinced, that's your prerogative.

quote:

Originally posted by Yay!:
As an indie band, they would probably be lost in the shuffle for the most part, but last a good 10 to 20 years (way longer than most indie bands do) and build up a really good-sized, dedicated fan base. Kind of like Wilco or They Might Be Giants. If they were met with any success, it would be ultimately marginal.

I like these "if so and so came out today, they'd never make it" arguments. They're impossible to prove. Comparing the Beatles to any artist in modern music isn't an even comparison. An artist writing music today has the added benefit of an additional 40 years of music to be influenced by and to pilfer. When the Beatles hit, Rock N' Roll was relatively new. They didn't have much to steal, so they made up their own rules, which in turn set the rules for what many artists are doing today.

Even so, I'm pretty sure if Abbey Road was released in 2006, it would make my top 10 list.

quote:

Originally posted by mark f:
Since I'm one of the ones who said they influenced everybody else, I don't want to argue with you and I don't want your hate to grow, but if you think the Beatles only wrote catchy songs or didn't very much influence Radiohead, I will just say I disagree. I could list many specific examples, but it's better if somebody hears it themselves. I would also say that I'd bet the Beatles music has made more people cry for joy and sadness and want to smash things up than any other band. Music is personal and there's no right or wrong here. I went crazy for the Beatles in the '60s (and continue to do so), just as I go crazy for Radiohead now. I just toot my horn for the Beatles because I want people to either remember or at least learn about what they did instead of assuming things about them.

LOL i don't hate anyone mate. As for Radiohead, please tell me how "Kid A" is influenced by the Beatles (or anything else for that matter)? Their early stuff had some Beatles influence, for sure, but even this was minimal compared to their other inflences.
As others have so rightly said, music comes down to personal taste. The Beatles are the most popular band but i think they're over rated. I just don't see how anyone can justify saying that they influenced absolutely everyone and for the most part the Beatles songs were pop.
There are many great bands and i couldn't just pick one and say "this is the greatest band ever, period". This is another statement that is difficult to justify even if you have an encyclopaedic knowledge of the history of music and every band under the sun.

they brought modern music into the now. THey made it popular to a huge mix of folks who previously listened to one or maybe two kinds of music. Hugely influential, one has to wonder what might have happened had they stuck around another ten or twenty years.

I think the people who are criticizing my Beatles criticism have a personal connection to the Beatles. I, however, do not. I appreciate their influence. A lot.

Yet, I don't think the music is all that hot.

That's it.

Dude the Beatles are hot shit man.. if they were a rap track, they'd be "99 problems"