"The Beatles!"

[BetaFunk]

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1360443589' post='1970653']
How can anyone sensibly claim that anyone or anything as globally popular as The Beatles are over-rated? Over-rated against what? Their own personal dislike? To claim that something is over-rated because of a personal dislike is clearly nonsense.

Dislike The Beatles, Microsoft, Tesco [enter own hobby-horse here] by all means, but don't make yourself look stupid by saying they are over rated.
[/quote]
I think one poster in this thread said they thought the Beatles were overrated. Most posts have been about what (if any) influence or how much influence they had over music.

[peteb]

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1360443589' post='1970653']
How can anyone sensibly claim that anyone or anything as globally popular as The Beatles are over-rated? Over-rated against what? Their own personal dislike? To claim that something is over-rated because of a personal dislike is clearly nonsense.

Dislike The Beatles, Microsoft, Tesco [enter own hobby-horse here] by all means, but don't make yourself look stupid by saying they are over rated.
[/quote]
That’s complete nonsense! By your logic (i.e. anything that is popular cannot possibly be over-rated) means that any concept of ‘over-rated’ is by definition redundant!

You cannot sensibly argue that the Beatles were not of huge global significance, but you can argue that their artistic merits were exaggerated to be much greater than they were popularly perceived!

[Lowender]

[quote name='peteb' timestamp='1360439434' post='1970574']
They were not just a cultural phenomenon, they were [b]the[/b] biggest cultural phenomenon ever in popular entertainment and their influence is still being felt today. I would argue that a similar thing is there with Led Zep, who are still influencing many bands today.

I can't deny the influence that the Beatles had, just that much of their actual music wasn't actually that great if you strip away their cultural significance....
[/quote]

Meanwhile, whoever you like as a bassplayer was influenced by Paul. How ironic.

[BetaFunk]

[quote name='Lowender' timestamp='1360444375' post='1970671']
Meanwhile, whoever you like as a bassplayer was influenced by Paul. How ironic.
[/quote]
...or maybe not.

[risingson]

[quote name='BetaFunk' timestamp='1360441967' post='1970607']

Yes and yes.

I heard all of Revolver the week it was released so yes i am familiar with the song. I think the Beatles were a massive influence on a lot of people and groups but fail to see that Tomorrow Never Knows had much influence on electronic music. Surely it's the other way around.
[/quote]

What?? Sampling has no effect on electronic music? Oh dear mate. Google what DJ Spooky said about TNK. Go and listen to the Chemical Brothers. Read an interview with the Boards of Canada and read about their influences after Music Has the Right To Children, widely believed to be one of the best electronic albums of all time. Rarely do I say this on this forum but you're just wrong.

Edited February 9, 2013 by risingson

[BetaFunk]

[quote name='risingson' timestamp='1360445702' post='1970707']
What?? Sampling has no effect on electronic music? Oh dear mate. Google what DJ Spooky said about TNK. Go and listen to the Chemical Brothers. Read an interview with the Boards of Canada and read about their influences after Music Has the Right To Children, widely believed to be one of the best electronic albums of all time. Rarely do I say this on this forum but you're just wrong.
[/quote]
I'm not sure who you think said that sampling has no effect on electronic music so not sure what you are on about there. Yes i'm familiar with Boards Of Canada. Twoism was much sought after until it was commercially released and still is a classic in my opinion. I was buying Thomas Leer and Robert Rental (go and google them) recordings in the 70s when they were issuing them privately so have an interest in electronic music but wouldn't tell anyone that i'm an expert. Although i do admit i know a lot more than some.
It isn't a competition on who's right and who's wrong. Just enjoy the music.

[risingson]

[quote name='BetaFunk' timestamp='1360447209' post='1970745']

I'm not sure who you think said that sampling has no effect on electronic music so not sure what you are on about there. Yes i'm familiar with Boards Of Canada. Twoism was much sought after until it was commercially released and still is a classic in my opinion. I was buying Thomas Leer and Robert Rental (go and google them) recordings in the 70s when they were issuing them privately so have an interest in electronic music but wouldn't tell anyone that i'm an expert. Although i do admit i know a lot more than some.
It isn't a competition on who's right and who's wrong. Just enjoy the music.
[/quote]

No, quite right it's not a competition. But your comments on the Beatles having no influence on electronic music are false, TNK is sampling, and as I'm sure you are aware sampling has everything do do with electronic music. It's been cited continuously as a seminal track in this respect, a precursor.

Never mind... there have been some stupid theads round here recently.

[leschirons]

[quote name='skankdelvar' timestamp='1360435722' post='1970491']
All very subjective, so let's have some cold hard facts:

* 80% of people who think that the Beatles are over-rated have listened to 10% or less of their output
* 10% of people who think the Beatles are under-rated are 20% more likely to own the entire Beatles' catalogue
* 90% of people who own all the Beatles recorded output admit to (rarely / never) listening to 'Octopus's Garden' except for the first time that they heard it.
* 4% of people who listen frequently to 'Octopus's Garden' have at some time been sectioned under the 1987 Mental Health Act

[size=3][i](Source: BMI / ASCAP 2007) [/i][/size]

[color=#FFFFFF][size=3][i].[/i][/size][/color]
[/quote]

Is the answer 11?

[BetaFunk]

[quote name='risingson' timestamp='1360449371' post='1970767']
No, quite right it's not a competition. But your comments on the Beatles having no influence on electronic music are false, TNK is sampling, and as I'm sure you are aware sampling has everything do do with electronic music. It's been cited continuously as a seminal track in this respect, a precursor.

Never mind... there have been some stupid theads round here recently.
[/quote]
What i was getting at is that yes TNK is sampling but there are many (better) examples of sampling long before TNK. Listen to Spike Jones in the 50s. Here was a middle of the road entertainer that used samples. Not so cutting edge as we thought in the 60s then. TNK is just one small piece of the jigsaw. Maybe it's more important to you for some reason but it's a small part. Have a listen to any Raymond Scott recordings or Fontana Mix by John Cage, anything by Luciano Berio and you'll maybe have a better understanding of the music you obviously have a passion for.
I've always kept my ears open to new music whether that's by actually listening or by listening to those with a greater understanding than me. As i said before, just enjoy the music.

[flyfisher]

[quote name='peteb' timestamp='1360444244' post='1970668']
That’s complete nonsense! By your logic (i.e. anything that is popular cannot possibly be over-rated) means that any concept of ‘over-rated’ is by definition redundant!

You cannot sensibly argue that the Beatles were not of huge global significance, but you can argue that their artistic merits were exaggerated to be much greater than they were popularly perceived!
[/quote]

Not really, because there's no actual scale against which to measure these qualitative statements.

[risingson]

[quote name='BetaFunk' timestamp='1360451231' post='1970790']

What i was getting at is that yes TNK is sampling but there are many (better) examples of sampling long before TNK. Listen to Spike Jones in the 50s. Here was a middle of the road entertainer that used samples. Not so cutting edge as we thought in the 60s then. TNK is just one small piece of the jigsaw. Maybe it's more important to you for some reason but it's a small part. Have a listen to any Raymond Scott recordings or Fontana Mix by John Cage, anything by Luciano Berio and you'll maybe have a better understanding of the music you obviously have a passion for.
I've always kept my ears open to new music whether that's by actually listening or by listening to those with a greater understanding than me. As i said before, just enjoy the music.
[/quote]

None of the examples you listed are nearly as well remembered in the popular music consciousness, at all. I also don't claim George Martin and his studio is the be all and end all here, there are other artists and producers to be counted, but you are drastically underestimating the importance, god knows why as you know your stuff.

EDIT - here's the DJ Spooky quote for everyone else:

""Tomorrow Never Knows" is one of those songs that’s in the DNA of so much going on these days that it’s hard to know where to start, Its tape collage alone makes it one of the first tracks to use sampling really successfully. I also think that Brian Eno’s idea of the studio-as-instrument comes from this kind of recording."

Edited February 9, 2013 by risingson

[4 Strings]

[quote name='Bilbo' timestamp='1360422170' post='1970120'] The most over-rated band in history Very influential etc but I have never actually listened to 90% of their stuff. Not hostile, just never went there. [/quote]

If you only ever listened to 10% of their stuff how can you know if they're overrated or not?

[bigjohn]

The f***ing Beatles.

Fanf***ingtastic

[Jazzneck]

As the Kaiserkeller bouncer said in 1960:

"Ven ze fight shtarts, you leef!! Verstehen??"

Edited February 10, 2013 by Jazzneck

[Bilbo]

[quote name='4 Strings' timestamp='1360454708' post='1970851']
If you only ever listened to 10% of their stuff how can you know if they're overrated or not?
[/quote]

For that reason. It s perfectly possible to 'know' about The Fab Four and their ubiquitousness without knowing every tune. I know about Dickens and Shakespeare but have only read 2 works by each of them. There is an argument that ALL superstars are overrated.

[louisthebass]

Not such a fan of the poppy early Beatles stuff but everything from Rubber Soul & Revolver onwards is really good. They're a band that you either love or hate - not mediocre by any stretch of the imagination...

[Sean]

[quote name='thunderider' timestamp='1360427603' post='1970228']
i neither like fenders or the beatles....i cant say there rubbish as they both very popular...i just think the davieses or the wilsons were far better song/lyric writers...the who were technicaly better band,the beatles just rode gravey trains...like a statement they pioneered psychadelia or prog.....pahleeesseee....moodys were there!! but each to there own i like others think they are overrated....
[/quote]

This post is to grammar, spelling and punctuation what TAB is to notation. It's painful to read. Have some respect for us poor sods who aren't fluent in rambling disjointed nonsense, please.

Edited February 10, 2013 by Sean

[Jazzneck]

[quote name='Sean' timestamp='1360487370' post='1970987']
This post is to grammar, spelling and punctuation what TAB is to notation. It's painful to read. Have some respect for us poor sods who aren't fluent in rambling disjointed nonsense, please.
[/quote]

Couldn't agree with you more, but I would love to try some of the stuff he's smokin'.

[peteb]

[quote name='Lowender' timestamp='1360444375' post='1970671']
Meanwhile, whoever you like as a bassplayer was influenced by Paul. How ironic.
[/quote]

I am sure that most of the bassplayers that I listen to have been influenced (mostly indirectly) by Willie Dixon, Bill Black, whoever played bass on Chuck Berry records and James Jamerson – Macca would be a fair way down the list (but still on it)!

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1360451772' post='1970798']
Not really, because there's no actual scale against which to measure these qualitative statements.
[/quote]

I am not aware of any peer reviewed scientific process that can deduce that are Beatles are over-rated by a factor of 64.3%!

However, I think it is valid to question whether ‘Yesterday’ is the greatest rock & roll ballad ever written (as I have heard people state in the past), or merely a run of the mill tin pan alley tune elevated to greatness by some people, merely because it was written by the Beatles!

That is not to say that everything that Fab 4 did was rubbish, or that ‘Eleanor Rigby’ and ‘A Day In The Life’ are not great creative examples of 60s pop music, just that their artistic importance has been exaggerated due to their wider cultural significance….

[SteveK]

[quote name='Bilbo' timestamp='1360486998' post='1970982']
For that reason. It s perfectly possible to 'know' about The Fab Four and their ubiquitousness without knowing every tune. I know about Dickens and Shakespeare but have only read 2 works by each of them. [b]There is an argument that ALL superstars are overrated.[/b]
[/quote]
I guess that would be the kind of argument that academics might have to argue [i]black is white[/i] or that[i] water is not wet[/i].
First of all, of course we would have to define 'superstars' and 'overrated' - that would occupy at least 12 pages on BC.

Just a little factoid for the younger BCers regarding the Fabs: In 1964 The Beatles held the top 5 positions in the Billbord 100 chart, [b]and[/b] they had 7 other records in that same chart.

[flyfisher]

[quote name='peteb' timestamp='1360498363' post='1971182']
However, I think it is valid to question whether ‘Yesterday’ is the greatest rock & roll ballad ever written (as I have heard people state in the past), or merely a run of the mill tin pan alley tune elevated to greatness by some people, merely because it was written by the Beatles!
[/quote]

Question away . . . but it won't change The Beatles' position in musical history.

Some may think 'Hey Jude' is a cheesy song, but how many other songs could have been used in a global event such as the 2012 Olympics opening ceremony with with pretty much ALL of the nearly one billion viewers knowing the tune?

A great song isn't just about musical composition and how many augmented 7th dimished chords you can fit in - it's about the emotional connection it makes with its audience and The Beatles' catalogue has clearly done that, certainly to a greater extent than anything before them and possibly since them.

None of which will make a blind bit of difference to all those who thing The Beatles were sh*te, of course, because that's their privilege.

It's a bit like not believing in God and trying to deny the impact that religion has had on the history - no one would sensibly argue against anyone's right to be an atheist, but they'd look pretty foolish trying to deny the influence of religion around the world.

(Er, I'm trying to equate The Beatles to God of course - Lennon tried that once and got into all sorts of trouble )

[Leonard Smalls]

Who's to say that One Direction, once they've finished with their cr*ppy little songs for 9 year old girls, won't become the next innovators in music?



After all, they've had huge success and are known all over the world...

[flyfisher]

Yes, that's a fair point, in principle. If One Direction can come up with a huge catalogue of songs that can be hummed by a few billion people around the world in 50 years from now then I think it would be fair to accept their musical influence.

[Lowender]

[quote name='Bilbo' timestamp='1360486998' post='1970982']
For that reason. It s perfectly possible to 'know' about The Fab Four and their ubiquitousness without knowing every tune. I know about Dickens and Shakespeare but have only read 2 works by each of them. There is an argument that ALL superstars are overrated.
[/quote]

Not true at all. That would be like saying a saw a couple of early pencil sketches by Van Gogh so I don't t have to see anything else to get what he does. Or, I saw Michael Cain in Jaw2 and can't understand why people say he's such a good actor. It's opinion based on purposeful ignorance. If all i heard from Coltrane was "Transition" I'd think he was total B.S. Hell, even Beethoven wrote a few duds.

The difference between Yellow Submarine and "She's Leaving Home" is the difference between Gone With The Wind and Meet The Fockers.

[SteveK]

[quote name='Leonard Smalls' timestamp='1360506052' post='1971328']
Who's to say that One Direction, once they've finished with their cr*ppy little songs for 9 year old girls, won't become the next innovators in music?



After all, they've had huge success and are known all over the world...
[/quote]I know nothing of One Direction other than they sold their souls to Simon Cowell and are very successful. Are they song writers?
.