Beatles are Overrated

[Propagandhi]

"Whatever you do, The Beatles did it first and The Beatles did it better."
-Kurt Cobain

[jedbeetle]

Beatles hit on something deeper than musical style. They hit the zeitgeist and rode it through to other dimensions. They carried the world on an artistic and spiritual journey. They were cosmic mercenaries. After the dust settles, though, they are a pretty good pop band with a few brilliant compositions. John and Paul really shine compositionally - subtle and perfect chord progressions meshed with astounding lyricism.

[DesiredFX]

Whatever music you're listening to now wouldn't sound like it does if not for the Beatles. That's how broad their influence is.

Even if your favorite band says they hate the Beatles, they were probably influenced by someone who loved them.

And if you can listen to Abbey Road or Revolver and still say you hate them, then, wow, you've got a lot to learn about good music and what makes it good.

[darien87]

Sorry, but I never understood all the hype about the Beatles either. They've got a few good songs, but not really my kind of music.

[polishdog90]

Sorry, but I never understood all the hype about the Beatles either. They've got a few good songs, but not really my kind of music.

You can still dislike their music and still understand that their not overrated.

[battle_axe_of_doom]

what happened to gh2master??

[zepplinmike]

I normally accept that people just have different musical tastes, but in my mind, if you don't like the Beatles at all (they don't have to be your favorite or anything), you're music taste is useless to me. I'm sorry but if you can't appreciate anything out of the 80 or so absolute classic songs they produced, then you simply don't know good music. I don't even think it's a matter of opinion.

[Jolby32]

they didn't suck. they weren't overrated. I just don't listen to them to much. thats probably most peoples problem.

[ralyks45]

Youre a dumbass

[obliviator117]

u people r reatarted!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! the beatles r amasing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!just think about!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! do u know how many bands there wouldnt be right now if the beatles were never a band!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!i bet that many of ur guys favorite bands wouldnt be a band right now if it wasnt for the beatles!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Tagsrover]

Maybe music would be on a whole other level if it wasn't for the beatles. Maybe all they did was put us on the wrong path, maybe everything would be like so much better right now you couldn't even imagine it, like bill and ted's excellent adventure, where music rules the world.

[battle_axe_of_doom]

^ nah <JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ>

[polishdog90]

Maybe music would be on a whole other level if it wasn't for the beatles. Maybe all they did was put us on the wrong path, maybe everything would be like so much better right now you couldn't even imagine it, like bill and ted's excellent adventure, where music rules the world.

Maybe there would be no rock music all together. There would be blues, classical music, and pop.

[aesthetic12]

the beatles changed music entirely
if it wasnt for the beatles
most of the rock music today
wouldnt be like it is, not all of their
stuffis overrated, they have
a reason to be overrated
**** most of them are dead,
what happened to nirvana
after kurt cobain died, nirvana
got really popular.
what hapened in sublime
when bradley nowell died?
sublime got somewhat popular,
its a cycle, check your history
before you say their overrated.

[TorrentRage]

I have to admit that I did not read any posts on this thread after the first few pages, BUT I feel compelled to say that THE BEATLES DO NOT SUCK! Their music is VERY good. I enjoy listening to it, even though I'm not "old."

However, I do respect the fact that others may have different opinions (even if their opinions are wrong :D)

[preOwned]

Lucy in the sky with diamonds is possibly the worst song I have ever had to endure listening to.

[aesthetic12]

Um, no they didn't. :confused:

yes, they did. they invented it by standing close
to the amps.

[ShroominWITfurl]

They sucked. And these people who perpetuate the myth they're gd just shows how tryly ignorant and stupid, and are the type of people who are "I HATE YOUNG PEOPLE WITH THEIR HOP-HIP OR W.E. THE DARNEST ITS CALLED" (well i guess thats how you talk)

PLEASE come to san diego so i can beat the **** out of u to a bloody ****ing pulp. just because some one likes music that u dont like, they are some how ignorant and stupid????? im not to big of a fan of the beatles but i RESPECT what they have done for the music culture.

god i cant believe u actually said that. i really want to just f*** the s*** outa ur sister, then beater her down with my c0ck.

i was having a good day untill u ****in ruined it

[vash1422]

mkay, i hope im not the only one to disagree here considering i didnt read the whole thing. But the Beatles are incredible, not so much on the talent that they showed in instruments, but the lyrical genius behind their songs. Most every one of their songs (at least by Lennon) are completely metaphorical and symbolic for many other things, and I as a matter of fact, think that Metaphoric and Symbolical lyrics are something that lacks greatly in modern music, and i wasnt even around in the beatles time.

[Dr.G]

Their first offerings were largely bubblegum pop. They did not 'invent' electric guitar, but neither did any band YOU consider good. If you know anything about music around the time they came out then you know they were always one step ahead of everybody. Their lyrics were extremely well written and intelligent most of the time. They were amazing lyrical storytellers [Mccartney especially]. There is almost always an underlying message in the lyrics. If you can't grasp that.. well, you need to buck up on your english lit.

When rubber soul hit, that's when the amazing music hit. The lyrics vastly improved. George harrison played the sitar on 'Norwegian Wood', and it was the first time this instrument had been used in a pop song. After that there was a huge craze in the US over the sitar. He played with a complete traditional indian band on Within You, Without You.

Their recording studio was extremely advanced and their sound techs were far ahead of anybody else in the industry, very innovative. The leaps and bounds they made inside the studio were probably the most innovative throughout 20th century music history. They tried anything and EVERYTHING with the limited amount of tools they had. An example of this would be strawberry fields forever, playing clips of cymbals backwards to make a distinct swooshing effect that's quite ambient sounding.

Brian Epstein was the driving force behind them and always wanted what was the best for the music. George Martin was brilliant in the studio.

Instrumentally I will admit they were not fantastic, although mccartney was quite a good bass player and ringo almost NEVER went off tempo, in fact you'd have a hard time finding a cut of him going off tempo in any track. The main thing is they knew how to write elaborate melodies and fit the instruments in with this. In the seven years they were out they put out hit after hit after hit, and they failed to sound rehashed because every single album is completely different and incorporates any number of styles of music. They were not a one genre band by any right.

And what does sleeping like a log as a single lyric have to do with anything? It fits into the song. It's called a simile einstein. It describes an action. :rolleyes:

I really don't trust the opinion of somebody who says 'canabis-ensued' either, considering that makes absolutely no sense and you've just butchered the use of the word ensued. How can somebody who makes up a phrase like that possibly have any valid insight into lyrics and relevance of lyrics at the time? That's like letting a blind person review art


Well as much as I love Nirvana, if you had any brains you wouldn't be comparing them to the beatles. They were a one trick pony. Cobain was not at all talented on the guitar, he just had a style to it. Plus they put out THREE studio albums, and a compilation of b-sides in the same amount of time the beatles put out 9 albums. If you like radiohead then i don't understand how you can't give the beatles credit. They're one of the closest bands to a modern day beatles we have because they do not stay in the norm, they create. The beatles had the same ideology. You don't understand that because you can't relate to the music, it probably sounds old to you.

No, you are ignorant and stupid if you say the most influential band in history sucks. You may not LIKE them, but they do not suck, and you're a fool if you say so.

No, I don't really refer to people as 'young people' and the word darnest is not in my vocabulary. I know music, I know an amazing melody when I hear it, and the beatles wrote absolutely spectacular melodies track after track after track. Their music still sounds fresh today. You've grown up in a world where rock is distortion and technical skill, where there is little to no innovation in music anymore. It shows when you say the Beatles 'suck' outright. There has never and will never be a band as influential and talented in songwriting ability as a group than they were.

So please, give me reasons why they 'suck' other than 'they didn't invent the electric guitar'. Because I guarantee you i'll have a simple time proving you wrong. They DID NOT SUCK, not even CLOSE. You just don't like them, and that's the truth of it.
lithiumkc. All i want to say to you is Nirvana and the Beatles suck worse than "Hit me with your best shot"!
And now i'll bet you luv that boatload of cow crap as well. you defend the Beatles like a little schoolgirl! Personally I hope you get attacked by a tennis racket and have a videogame induced seizure!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Rev0lver]

...a tennis racket?

[Dr.G]

I have to admit that I did not read any posts on this thread after the first few pages, BUT I feel compelled to say that THE BEATLES DO NOT SUCK! Their music is VERY good. I enjoy listening to it, even though I'm not "old."

However, I do respect the fact that others may have different opinions (even if their opinions are wrong :D)



The Beatles really do SUCK!!!!!!!!!!!


:p

[Dr.G]

a ferocious man-eating tennis racket!

[TorrentRage]

The Beatles really do SUCK!!!!!!!!!!!


:p

well if you use a BIG FONT, you must be right! :D

[BobLoblaw]

yes, they did. they invented it by standing close
to the amps.The Sonics were playing with distortion well before the beatles, and I'm sure they weren't the first, either, but whatever you say, man. :)

[dodgyknees]

Like a couple of previous posts ago, I stopped reading after the first few pages so I apologise if I'm repeating a point already made.

Distortion - Whether The Beatles were the first to use distortion is an old debate. It's been proven countless times they weren't. It's just many heard the Beatles do it first, so attribute it to them. The Beatles contribution to modern music cannot be questioned though. Personally I'm not a fan of The Zep as much as others, but I recognise their importance in the scheme of things. To deny the beatles, or any other 'old' band their rightful position as musical pioneers strikes me as young children rebelling against what they consider the status quo. It's not new for kids to do this, so let's just have a quiet chuckle to ourselves knowing we once did the same and that they'll change their tune in a few years time.

Beyond that, the childish comments and name calling is out of hand. I also recognise the OP as someone that liked to cause trouble over at the old GH forum.

Isn't it time this thread was locked?

[Apples]

Beyond that, the childish comments and name calling is out of hand. I also recognise the OP as someone that liked to cause trouble over at the old GH forum.

Isn't it time this thread was locked?

Agreed. Thanks for playing everyone we have lovely parting gifts.