The Beatles Curse

[blue]

[quote name='ColinB' timestamp='1438515387' post='2835052']
Love this.....

[url="http://youtu.be/yWP6Qki8mWc?list=RDyWP6Qki8mWc"]http://youtu.be/yWP6...t=RDyWP6Qki8mWc[/url]
[/quote]

Nice one!

Blue

[blue]

[quote name='spectoremg' timestamp='1438457512' post='2834690']
This thread should read The Beatles Blessing. They were and are head and shoulders above anything at the time or since. [/quote]

The curse is how hard it is to make that very point to some.

Blue

[Woodinblack]

[quote name='blue' timestamp='1438531175' post='2835203']
The curse is how hard it is to make that very point to some.
[/quote]

Maybe it would be less of a curse and just accepted that what was earth shattering to you was different to others, and stop trying to make the point to people who disagree!

[TimR]

[quote name='Woodinblack' timestamp='1438533631' post='2835226']


Maybe it would be less of a curse and just accepted that what was earth shattering to you was different to others, and stop trying to make the point to people who disagree!
[/quote]



With respect. This IS an Internet forum.

And Blue is American.

[spinynorman]

[quote name='blue' timestamp='1438531175' post='2835203']
The curse is how hard it is to make that very point to some.

Blue
[/quote]

Like me. I was born in 1952. I'm fed up with people my age always going on about the Beatles, so I can understand why later generations would be thoroughly sick of it.

[Slipperydick]

[quote name='spinynorman' timestamp='1438533915' post='2835231']
Like me. I was born in 1952. I'm fed up with people my age always going on about the Beatles, so I can understand why later generations would be thoroughly sick of it.
[/quote]

I dunno. I was born in 52 as well and I was sick of the Beatles by 1965. Not knocking their talent, just sick of hearing people going on about them.

[Hobbayne]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFWAm4cP5-g&index=12&list=PL015D51E4D024B4C8

[spectoremg]

[quote name='Hobbayne' timestamp='1438536390' post='2835271']
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFWAm4cP5-g&index=12&list=PL015D51E4D024B4C8[/media]
[/quote]Is this the guy who does Freddie Mercury (also brilliantly)?

[RhysP]

[quote name='Slipperydick' timestamp='1438534380' post='2835238']
I dunno. I was born in 52 as well and I was sick of the Beatles by 1965.
[/quote]

I was born in 1965 & I was sick of the bloody Beatles by 1965.

[grandad]

I was born in 1948 & I don't think I'll ever become sick of the Beatles.

I revisit them every now & again. Some numbers might age better than others. Sometimes I find something new that I hadn't noticed before.

But the same applies to dozens of other artists in my music collection of LP's, Cassettes & CD's.

[Hobbayne]

[quote name='spectoremg' timestamp='1438542306' post='2835336']
Is this the guy who does Freddie Mercury (also brilliantly)?
[/quote]

Oh yes. Stevie Riks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQ-4bL-8mzQ

[obbm]

[quote name='ColinB' timestamp='1438515387' post='2835052']
Love this.....

[url="http://youtu.be/yWP6Qki8mWc?list=RDyWP6Qki8mWc"]http://youtu.be/yWP6...t=RDyWP6Qki8mWc[/url]
[/quote]

Great. When live meant live. No backing tracks. No autotune. Excellent.

[spectoremg]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqeBt5ZO4mU
Apologies OP, but the post has a Beatles badge on it...

[Nicko]

[quote name='blue' timestamp='1438531175' post='2835203']
The curse is how hard it is to make that very point to some.

Blue
[/quote]

Well to support the "young people don't get the Beatles" I don't. Admittedly I'm not that young, but no amount of people telling me I'm wrong is gonna solve that. Its a bit like a people telling me celery is nice when I f**** hate the stuff. Yes the Beatles were influential. Yes they wrote some fine tunes. They also released plenty of dross.

I get very frustrated reading factual inaccuracy to support the Beatles supremacy theory. Its a matter of fact George Harrison definitely did not invent lead guitar, or playing guitar standing up. I'll also avoid a counterargument that if the Beatles were so influential they were responsible for everything that was wrong with music until Punk.

[Skol303]

[font=Helvetica][size=3]
[size=4]I’m “too young” to have been bedazzled by The Beatles during their prime (I’m 41). But like many, I enjoy their music.[/size][/size][/font]
[font=Helvetica][size=3]
[size=4]I understand and appreciate the significant influence they’ve had, particular on popular music. Their impact is, I would imagine, pretty much indisputable and even someone like me can hear the reverberations of their songwriting in many corners of the rock/indie/alternatives scenes today.[/size][/size][/font]
[font=Helvetica][size=3]
[size=4]But… the important thing to remember in such debates is that The Beatles haven’t influenced [i]all[/i] forms of popular music - and yes, surprising as it may be to some here, there is more to popular music than [i]just[/i] rock’n’roll! [/size][/size][/font]
[font=Helvetica][size=3]
[size=4]I’d wager, for instance, that The Beatles did very little to ignite the early sparks of hip hop and acid house; nor did they do much for the evolution of the jazz scene, or metal for that matter.[/size][/size][/font]
[font=Helvetica][size=3]
[size=4]Just because they played guitars standing up, doesn’t mean they are responsible for influencing every form of music that adopts the same posture. They were great, but not omnipotent.[/size][/size][/font]
[font=Helvetica][size=3]
[size=4]Also, I think it’s fair to say that each of us identifies strongly with the music of our youth - and even more so if were we lucky enough to be there at the start of a new ‘movement’ or scene. For me, that was acid house - its nearest ancestors being disco and before that Northern Soul (in the UK). It was the start of something fresh and new - for my generation. And so I sometimes catch myself thinking that electronic dance music today “ain’t what it used to be”; that young people are disconnected from the musical heritage that I hold dear. The reality is that young people are out there, creating their own twists on the music of the past, claiming it for their own and riding roughshod over whatever ‘rules’ I used to adhere to. And long may that continue.[/size][/size][/font]
[font=Helvetica][size=3]
[size=4]So yeah. I guess what I’m trying to say is that of course musical heritage is important - but if we hold on to it too tightly, then we risk being the curators of our own little ‘museums’, constantly pining for the past.[/size][/size][/font]
[font=Helvetica][size=3]
[size=4]The fact that the influence of The Beatles can still be heard today at the stadium-filling end popular music is surely testament to their legacy. But it’s not fair to say that young people today are missing out on something by not appreciating the music of The Beatles. They’re quite happily discovering music for themselves, in their own ways. And frankly, I wish I could join them! [/size][/size][/font]

[wateroftyne]

Tomorrow Never Knows is pretty much ahead of its time in trance, etc.

[Skol303]

[size=4][quote name='wateroftyne' timestamp='1438607094' post='2835720']
Tomorrow Never Knows is pretty much ahead of its time in trance, etc.
[/quote][/size]

[size=4]…and Sergeant Pepper’s (Reprise) has one helluva funky breakbeat that wouldn’t be out of place on a modern dancefloor.[/size]

[size=4]But just because we can drawn a link between The Beatles and [i][insert style of music][/i], it doesn’t mean that the link actually exists in practice - i.e. in terms of influence.[/size]

[size=4]Otherwise, that would imply, for instance, that the early pioneers of trance music were listening to Lennon on “Tomorrow Never Knows”; when I’d wager they were far more likely to have been blasting “Angel of Death” by Slayer a few years before shaving their heads and swapping their guitar rigs for turntables and Ataris. I speak from my own experience here [/size]

[size=4]And besides… how far back could we go? It could be argued that Bach is the godfather of all bass players and everyone playing four-strings since the 18th Century, including Paul McCartney, owes their debt to him. Trouble is, [/size]nobody's left alive who "was there then" to argue his case

[skankdelvar]

The nub of this thread (as so many before it) is that the OP feels himself to have been significantly influenced by The Beatles at a formative moment in his life and - moreover - asserts that many others were similarly affected, be they musicians or consumers.

It is predictable to the point of tedium that other posters will emerge to state only in the baldest of terms their dislike of the Beatles or to aver that they 'do not get them'. Which is all well and good, though it suggests that some here 'do not get' the point of a musical discussion forum. A poster's personal tastes or the limits of their understanding are a matter of complete indifference to me and - I suspect - to many others, unless such opinions are underpinned by an engaging or informative substance.

Then there are those who state (usually without foundation) that The Beatles 'weren't all that'. Such observations sometimes remind me of the TV satire 'The Bad News Tour' where a band member adumbrates upon matters of musical competence:


Vim Fuego:[i] I could play "Stairway To Heaven" when I was 12. Jimmy Page didn't actually write it until he was 22. I think that says quite a lot.[/i]


I mean, it's perfectly alright not to 'get' the Beatles or to dislike their output as a matter of taste or to seek to place their importance in context. But it's risky to say so out loud unless one frames one's response with great care and precision, this lest one be perceived as a know-nothing f**kwit out to big oneself up by expressing a deliberately contrarian opinion which falls apart like wet cardboard at the slightest pressure.

Not that anyone here would do that, oh no.

Edited August 3, 2015 by skankdelvar

[wateroftyne]

Yup. It's also important to point out that youth culture before The Beatles broke was VERY different to after. It was a fundamental shift that only Elvis, punk and (IMO) Nirvana can hint at.

[skankdelvar]

[quote name='wateroftyne' timestamp='1438610415' post='2835740']
Yup. It's also important to point out that youth culture before The Beatles broke was VERY different to after. It was a fundamental shift that only Elvis, punk and (IMO) Nirvana can hint at.
[/quote]

Quite so.

One of the earlier 'serious' biographies of the Beatles was 'Shout' by Philip Norman. It is a magisterial tome and one of the best of its kind.

In the most recently updated edition (2005) the author added a section which suggests not only that the Beatles changed music but also that they showed stuffy 60's society how perfectly ordinary working class people could get to the top while remaining true to their roots and to a radical philosophy. In so doing they laid the ground for a cultural shift where the workaday individual might perceive themselves as being at the centre of society and no longer limited by petty convention.

So far so good. Mr Norman - though a staunch champion of the Beatles - nevertheless concludes with some reluctance that the loveable Mop-Tops laid the ground for the 'Me Generation' and that this may not have been an entirely good thing.

Oops.

[color=#ffffff].[/color]

Edited August 3, 2015 by skankdelvar

[ColinB]

Even my 83 year old dad, who hated The Beatles, admits that 'The Beatles changed everything'.

[TimR]

Unfortunately there are people who are so passionate about the Beatles that they're still convinced Paul Mcartney is still producing music that is better than anything else anyone else is producing.

That's why I find it difficult to take these people too seriously.

Try to keep it in context. Were the Beatles singlehandedly responsible for creating teenage culture in isolation. What was going on in Carnaby street, the Cambridge Set (Pink Floyd wtc), and elsewhere in the UK and the world? How much were they the cause and how much were they being carried along on this massive wave?

.

Edited August 3, 2015 by TimR

[PaulWarning]

big Beatles fan, just the right age (old) they were special, progressed from being a boy band, because unlike most of the others they wrote their own material, then continued influencing others for nearly 10 years.
Having said that they did have the piece of luck that all artists need if they're going to 'make it', they were in the right place at the right time.

[blue]

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1438623657' post='2835885']
Unfortunately there are people who are so passionate about the Beatles that they're still convinced Paul Mcartney is still producing music that is better than anything else anyone else is producing.

That's why I find it difficult to take these people too seriously.

Try to keep it in context. Were the Beatles singlehandedly responsible for creating teenage culture in isolation. What was going on in Carnaby street, the Cambridge Set (Pink Floyd wtc), and elsewhere in the UK and the world? How much were they the cause and how much were they being carried along on this massive wave?[/quote]

The Beatles catalog speaks for itself, he's 72 years old he's not 20 and probably struggles with coming up with new socially relevant material.

Me. I don't expect great new material from Paul. I am still working on learning from all of The Beatles catalog. I do expect world class live performance, which in my opinion he a long with The Stones deliver.

Blue

Edited August 6, 2015 by blue

[blue]

[quote name='Woodinblack' timestamp='1438213104' post='2832668']
I am not old enough, and not a fan, but I think if the question is specifically '64, then the message was probably bigger in the states, because 64 was a continuation here, but including '63, their message was probably a lot bigger here, because as bad as you may feel you had it in the states at the time, it was a hell of a lot worse in the UK![/quote]

I agree, however, we certainly had issues in The States,and 50 years later we still do. Any way The Beatles were able to take me a way from the social unrest even if it was only 2.5 minutes at a time.

Blue

Edited August 6, 2015 by blue