The Beatles

Norrin Radd

Vice Admiral
When I see clips of them or hear their songs, I think of them like they're family or old friends or something.

They're the only rock group I think of this way.

Strange?
 
Not strange, I'd say.

They've been so....omnipresent in popular culture for over 40 years, so it's understandable to me. We always had Beatles music in our house as I was growing up, and I got into their music in a big way (Well, mainly their stuff from '65 onwards, really) as did my sister.

To this day, we can slip into an in-depth Beatles conversation with ease - and that shared familiarity we have does make it seem like they're old friends.
 
I can't say I've ever been much of a fan. When it comes to '60s music, I far prefer bands like the Rolling Stones and Jimi Hendrix. The Beatles just always seemed a little to "cute" for my tastes.
 
I can't say I've ever been much of a fan. When it comes to '60s music, I far prefer bands like the Rolling Stones and Jimi Hendrix. The Beatles just always seemed a little to "cute" for my tastes.

The difference to me between the Beatles and practically any other band is that each individual...John, Paul, George, and Ringo...are all larger than life. Each is virtually an icon. With the Rolling Stones, you have Mick Jagger and Keith Richards...but it's not like the others are nearly as popular...I mean, Bill Wyman left the band and no one cared.

And the nature of the Beatle's music only adds to their universal appeal. It's completely non-threatening and accessible...to just about anyone...and any member of your family...as ITL says.
 
The Beatles are great. The most important band of them all.
I have met Sir Paul McCartney and he was so friendly. He spoke to both me and my girlfriend when we bumped into him on his own in Regent's Park in London. He was intersted where we where from and so humble. Top bloke!
Their music is wonderful.
Check this guy out he dose the best spoof of them I have ever seen:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqbCoNCNKm8
 
IMO, every piece of rock and roll made after 1964 must be measured against the Beatles. I would guess that you could pick any random person off the street and they'll probably know the lyrics to at least one Beatles song.

I remember two albums my mom had in the house when I was growing up. One was Bookends by Simon and Garfunkle. The other is still a perennial on my Desert island Disks list: Abbey Road by The Beatles. The second side of that LP is one the best album sides ever. From Here Comes the Sun (Goerge Harrison at his best) to Her Majesty it is near perfect music, IMO.
 
When I see clips of them or hear their songs, I think of them like they're family or old friends or something.

Agreed, their music is very comforting, and when I've had a bad day or just want to be comfortable I'll put on the Beatles.

So while the Beatles are like friends and family, The Who are the cool kids that I always wanted to hang around with.
 
I understand exactly what you mean Norrin Radd.

I am only 30 (only! LOL!) but their music, their story, those four guys mean the world to me.

While I have always known of them and been a fan to some degree, I really started to fully appreciate their music about 4 or 5 years ago.

There music simply makes me feel good. A spark of joy that started to break me out of years of debilitating depression. Which medication and therapy never could. In fact I would not be overstating things to say that otherwise I never wanted to see my 30th birthday. I might not be here now...

I know that may sound sappy or pathetic. The Beatles are not my religion. They simply sparked a passion for all life that had never come from anywhere else.
 
I can't say I've ever been much of a fan. When it comes to '60s music, I far prefer bands like the Rolling Stones and Jimi Hendrix. The Beatles just always seemed a little to "cute" for my tastes.

They were way too cute for their own good. I was really into them when I was a teenager, but then I grew up.

I can't imagine any self respecting rock band these days recording a song like "Ob Lah Di" or "Maxwell's Silver Hammer" or "Octopus' Garden" or "Bungalow Bill". They'd be laughed right out of the business.

They recorded a handful of really great, innovative songs like "I Am the Walrus" and "A Day in the Life", but I'm afraid most of their records are the kind of inoffensive, non-threatening music that can be enjoyed by toddlers and grannies alike. Personally, I prefer my music to have a little more bite to it.
 
I can't say I've ever been much of a fan. When it comes to '60s music, I far prefer bands like the Rolling Stones and Jimi Hendrix. The Beatles just always seemed a little to "cute" for my tastes.

I can't say I've ever been much of a fan. When it comes to '60s music, I far prefer bands like the Rolling Stones and Jimi Hendrix. The Beatles just always seemed a little to "cute" for my tastes.

They were way too cute for their own good. I was really into them when I was a teenager, but then I grew up.

I can't imagine any self respecting rock band these days recording a song like "Ob Lah Di" or "Maxwell's Silver Hammer" or "Octopus' Garden" or "Bungalow Bill". They'd be laughed right out of the business.

They recorded a handful of really great, innovative songs like "I Am the Walrus" and "A Day in the Life", but I'm afraid most of their records are the kind of inoffensive, non-threatening music that can be enjoyed by toddlers and grannies alike. Personally, I prefer my music to have a little more bite to it.

The Beatles created a paradigm shift in music. The Stones were re-vamping blues and had to play catch-up with Her Satanic Majesty's Request. Hendrix took a lot from the London guitar scene that he was a part of before making it big-and that scene came out of inspiration provided by the Beatles. As for the Beatles being too "cute"-nobody looked at rock 'n' roll as serious until the Beatles came along and began incorporating classic strings, Middle Eastern and Big Band brass into their songs. They have a song that would fit in every category that exists today as a sub-genre and if their music sounds "safe" for Granny, well, keep in mind that any long-haired, flower-wearing eighteen year-old in 1965 is now 63, one year away from answering a question the Beatles posed with amazing foresight a long time ago - will you still need me? I would say that we do need them, they are the backbone of rock and their legacy and sound(s) are echoed and imitated by every band that currently writes music. If they seem so familiar that they comfort or offer up an idea of safety, remember that they are that familiar for a reason: they didn't set the bar, they built the bar. Then they had a couple of drinks there and shared some laughs with us. The Beatles will be remembered in the same breath as Louis Armstrong, T. Monk, and Scott Joplin. When we are but food for worms they will be remembered and studied. And I'm willing to bet that some graduate student of Music Studies will base a thesis on the musical construction of Bungalow Bill.
 
Again, there's a major difference in perspective; whether you were part of the times AS The Beatles grew musically, or if you came later, having heard so much music post-Beatles first, and then hearing the Fab Four with a retro perspective and ear.

It's heartening to read so many "younger" (under 40) people posting favorable comments.

But there are those who can't separate the music since the Beatles from the contribution and evolution of mainstream rock that the Beatles were when they were first popular. Like saying silent films are crap because they're in black and white, the acting is over-exaggerated and there's no sound.

I've been in rock radio for 33 years and NO one group has made such an evolutionary contribution to mainstream rock as the Beatles. They evolved tremendously in their short career. Rubber Soul and Revolver are two of my all-time favorite albums.

--Ted
 
Last edited:
Two of my favourites as well. Simply amazing.

When it comes to The Beatles - love them or hate them - you can't dismiss them.
 
A friend of mine and fellow viola player introduced me to the Beatles back when I was 13. I was familiar with several of their songs, but didn't really fullty appreciate their wide range of musicality until years later, when I decided to listen solidly to one of their albums - as it happened, it was "Revolver" which while on holiday another passenger decided to play non-stop on the coach. "Revolver" is for me arguably their single greatest achievement, although nowadays my favourite album of theirs remains "Abbey Road" - a true miracle of a record given the state of the band around that time.

And even for all their now critically acclaimed experimentation and psychedelia of their "middle period" and the grooviness, maturity (musically, anyway) and branching out to other musical styles of their later years, my favourite Beatles song is still "I Want To Hold Your Hand" - its simplicity, innocence, optimism and sheer energy always wins me over. :bolian:

The Beatles have endured musically. It's no surprise that their sound has influenced the course of rock music, and even led to certain other bands trying to emulate their sound (for example...).
 
How did such geniuses manage to lose control of their song copyrights?


Because creative genius and business acumen are two different skill sets?

As for the band itself - no interest really, I understand their cultural importance but I'm not interested as a listener.
 
...."Abbey Road" - a true miracle of a record given the state of the band around that time.
Absolutely. After the messy and uncomfortable "Get Back" sessions that ground to a halt in early '69 the band was to all intents and purposes a lost cause - yet they got together one last time in the studio and created Abbey Road. A true achievement.

...."I Want To Hold Your Hand" - its simplicity, innocence, optimism and sheer energy always wins me over.
Not a song I've ever really liked that much (mainly because of the twee lyrics), but after hearing Al Green's soulful, funky cover version I realized just how great the chord sequences are.
 
Back
Top