The Beatles

[pilferk]

Nobody's mentioned REVOLVER...my favorite Beatles album.? So many great songs on this one and it always seems to get overlooked.? Very underated in my honest opinion. And it has a kickass cover.

Also, try Abbey Road before Let it Be.? I think Abbey Road is far superior in that it doesn't have the cheesy wall of sound treatment from Phil Spector.? Let it Be: Naked is pretty cool though.? More stripped down to the intended sound.

Revolver is also one of my favs....and I agree about Let it Be.  It was overproduced to a large extent....and that "overproduction" is one of the "sounds of a band breaking up" that many people refer to in reference to let it be.  The band was basically kaput before Let it Be was released, but it was the straw that broke the camel's back, at least in Paul's eyes.

[pilferk]

Abbey Road and the White Album are good. The truth is, that most Beatles albums aren't good. They have a few gems, though. Of course, Clapton and Hendrix were the real musical geniuses of the 60's!

I'd actually be interested in seeing a list of the Beatles albums you think "aren't good".  Sgt Pepper?  Yellow Sub? Magical Mystery Tour?  All considered some of the best music of the 60's.  Abbey Road, The White Album, and Revolver?  Considered some of the best music, period.

I also agree with a previous poster: If I had to just pick ONE musical genius from the 60's, it'd be Lennon.  Not to take away from Clapton and Hendrix...they certainly were musical geniuses....but, for me (and most of the world, truth be told, not that that validates the opinion), John will always be numero uno.

[ppbebe]

I'd say The beatles. It's a band effort. John Lennon nor Paul McCartneyalone wouldn't have made it.

[Izzy]

I'd say The beatles. It's a band effort. John Lennon nor Paul McCartneyalone wouldn't have made it.

Well both Lennon and McCartney did make it alone.....and McCartney still does.

[Mikkamakka]

I'd say The beatles. It's a band effort. John Lennon nor Paul McCartneyalone wouldn't have made it.

Most of the songs were written by John or Paul alone, and not as a band effort, but they shared the writing credits.

[ppbebe]

  Nice, nice!
The following describes the most obvious effect the band effort had on other bands then and later.


Jimmy Page on the Influence of Blues:
"As far as the blues, it just captured them hearing Chicago blues. When the Stones first started they were doing really good interpretations of Muddy Waters songs and all that Chess catalog. They weren't the only ones of course. Down in the south (London), that's what was going on. Then you had the Beatles in Liverpool with "Please Mr. Postman", and it really wasn't the same deal as what was going on down South, but it got very popular and changed what was going on. It wasn't so much, for me, their music, but the fact that they wrote their own songs and all of a sudden they opened the door for any band that could write songs. I started doing studio work. That's the big change they made on the music scene."

They wouldn't have made it if they hadn't have been together.

I'm not sure if there were any "rock band" before they came out.
Music is more or less a medium of communication. writing their own songs enables a band to express themselves freely in music. That's the very being of rock.
It was only after the Beatles music became direct messages from bands to the audiences.


How did they do that? From what I've heard.....
With Beatles they inspired each other.
There're a lot of competition and collaboration, admiration and influence going in a band. That's the beauty of band beings.
But when they've been together long and can't find anything fresh in each other's ideas any more, it's at the end of the chemistry.

[RichardNixon]

Abbey Road and the White Album are good. The truth is, that most Beatles albums aren't good. They have a few gems, though. Of course, Clapton and Hendrix were the real musical geniuses of the 60's!

Clapton and Hendrix are way overrated. If I had to choose one genius for the 60s, it'd be Lennon.

Clapton is overrated, but if Hendrix is, than I am the prince of Madagascar.

[RichardNixon]

I'd say The beatles. It's a band effort. John Lennon nor Paul McCartneyalone wouldn't have made it.

Well both Lennon and McCartney did make it alone.....and McCartney still does.

And let's not forget George Harrison. He wrote many of their best songs--Taxman, Something, The Inner Light, Only a Northern Song.

[kj_jive]

Yeah, Harrison is certainly a largly overlooked contribution.  Released just months after the breakup of the Beatles, Harrison's double album "All Things Must Pass" was by far the best of the initial solo recordings.  John and Paul seemed to have been majorly limiting his contributions.

[RichardNixon]

Yeah, Harrison is certainly a largly overlooked contribution.? Released just months after the breakup of the Beatles, Harrison's double album "All Things Must Pass" was by far the best of the initial solo recordings.? John and Paul seemed to have been majorly limiting his contributions.

"All Things Must Pass" is a great album, but I wouldn't say it's better than McCartney and Lennon's early 70s albums. Lennon's "Plastic Ono Band" is my all-time favorite album. It's so raw and has so much balls, but at the same time is sensitive and emotional...I HIGHLY suggest picking up a copy. His other albums, Imagine, Mind Games, Walls and Bridges, Double Fantasy, and Milk and Honey are also excellent. The only Lennon album that I'm not crazy about is "Sometime In New York City."

As for McCartney, his solo stuff is more of a mixed bag. He has some great albums. I love his first album, "McCartney." It's real stripped down and homemade. "Ram" is great. "Band on the Run" is his solo masterpiece. But he also has some really shitty albums. "Press to play" sounds like a Flock of Seagulls." And "Off The Ground" blows. His other albums range from good to very good.

[pilferk]

Yeah, Harrison is certainly a largly overlooked contribution.? Released just months after the breakup of the Beatles, Harrison's double album "All Things Must Pass" was by far the best of the initial solo recordings.? John and Paul seemed to have been majorly limiting his contributions.

"All Things Must Pass" is a great album, but I wouldn't say it's better than McCartney and Lennon's early 70s albums. Lennon's "Plastic Ono Band" is my all-time favorite album. It's so raw and has so much balls, but at the same time is sensitive and emotional...I HIGHLY suggest picking up a copy. His other albums, Imagine, Mind Games, Walls and Bridges, Double Fantasy, and Milk and Honey are also excellent. The only Lennon album that I'm not crazy about is "Sometime In New York City."

As for McCartney, his solo stuff is more of a mixed bag. He has some great albums. I love his first album, "McCartney." It's real stripped down and homemade. "Ram" is great. "Band on the Run" is his solo masterpiece. But he also has some really shitty albums. "Press to play" sounds like a Flock of Seagulls." And "Off The Ground" blows. His other albums range from good to very good.

Damn Yoko Ono....she broke up the Plastic Ono Band!

D'oh!

[madagas]

Hendrix overrated??? Oh God no The single most influential guitar player in history....the man worshipped by Sir Paul himself...the man who wrote the guitar masterpiece Machine Gun......Genius does not begin to describe Hendrix. Hendrix is to the guitar what Dylan is to lyrics. Back on topic, a Gnr fan may actually want to start with the White Album then get Sgt Pep, Abbey, and Let it Be and Revolver. Of course those albums are missing Hey Jude, Paperback Writer, and a slew of other classics that were only released as singles.

[ppbebe]

Are there any songs in particular that i should look out for, while i don't like the Beatles i ain't determind to keep it that way, and i really do want to know what the fuss is about.

Nice! As to music if you feel it or not is everything.  You've got to decide it for yourself. 

My suggestions
the pinnacle: A Day in The Life
Rockers : Helter-Skelter, Come Together, Get Back
gems: Elenoa Rigby, Strawberry Fields Forever, The Fool On The Hill

[J?]

Or that song Freedom by Paul McCartney man that song is soooo crappy....

Seriously Paul pick up some acid again just briefly and go on a trip and write some kick ass tunes again man!

By the way Paul McCartney isnt even bald how cool is that?

[madagas]

PPBEBE, what about Revolution? I Am The Walrus? Man, you guys got me back on a Beatles  kick. Lennon is just wicked on Walrus-what an eclectic tune. Sgt. Pepper's is also actually the first album I remembered all the lyrics too, except the Harrison tune-always skipped that. Of course, I was only six years old and listening to my mom's rock albums and dad's country albums. Johnny Cash and the Beatles will set you off on the right foot!

[KeVoRkIaN]

I agree with Izzy's original statement and I heard all of their songs - the Beatles suck.  Faith No More Angel Dust destroys Sgt. Pepper any day

[disease51883]

I'm really in the mood to hear "Penny Lane", "Eleanor Rigby", and "The Ballad of John & Yoko" now, thanks to this thread. But I don't have any Beatles CDs anymore. Damn you all.

[Eazy E]

If I had to recommend a song, it'd be "Tomorrow Never Knows"... I believe its from Revolver!

[Mikkamakka]

If I had to recommend a song, it'd be "Tomorrow Never Knows"... I believe its from Revolver!

Yeah, it's from Revolver! Kinda like the first industrial song in the music history.

[ppbebe]

PPBEBE, what about Revolution? I Am The Walrus? Man, you guys got me back on a Beatles  kick. Lennon is just wicked on Walrus-what an eclectic tune. Sgt. Pepper's is also actually the first album I remembered all the lyrics too, except the Harrison tune-always skipped that. Of course, I was only six years old and listening to my mom's rock albums and dad's country albums. Johnny Cash and the Beatles will set you off on the right foot!

You mean "say you wanna revolution, well you know we all want to change the world?"  Or  "Number 9"- why the hell it scratches, one?
I Am The Walrus? Just escapes me. Which album is it on?
I listed the minimum titles necessary and sufficient for Izzy or anyone fresh to The Beatles to quickly get the general idea of the sound.

I used to hear Beatles songs in the cradle and I don't have any records of them either. To me it's almost in the same category to Chopin.....
Don't you just envy Izzy for his coming enjoyment of finding the Beatles?