BD Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 In a word? NO. BD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 bwahahahahahahaha. The Beatles???? Overrated????? bwahahahahahahahaha Nowhere close. I'd say they were underrated. I personally think the Beach Boys were better and more talented. Even McCartney has said they made records to compete with what Brian Wilson was doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard Washington Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 are they the group that said they were bigger than jesus? if so, then they are DEFINATELY overrated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECU-ALUM Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Not at all...their music was unique and Lennon and McCartney could out-write many of the song writers today...the fact that we are still talking about them (mainly in positive terms) today speaks volumes for their staying power :point2sky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark327 Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 beatles overrated !! no way . my first album i ever bought was from the beatles. they were simply the best and in someways still are . this post is going to send me on a seach in the attic to pull those old albums from storage. wipe the dust off'em and play'em and remember the good ole days .:cool: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Originally posted by redskin56 Modern music (all types from Country to Rock) owes itself to the Beatles. They invented stereo. They invented multi track recordings (with a little help from George Martin). One little known fact about John and Paul was they did not know how to read sheet music early on. They played, and re-made, music from earlier artists by ear. Simply incredible. Pardon me for nitpicking here, but stereo was invented years before by a guy named Fletcher. Multi-track recording was invented by Les Paul (yeah, the same guy who invented the Les Paul guitar). Multi-track recording had been in use for over a decade before the Beatles. Buddy Holly, for example, was the first artist to overdub his own vocals for harmonies. Hendrix's Electric Ladyland studios likely did more to advance modern recording studios and techniques than arguably even Sgt Pepper. Also, the overwhelming majority of rock and blues musicians play by ear. I can't read sheet music, but I've been playing in bands and writing material for almost 20 years. Rock musicians who can read are the exception, not the rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flashback Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 I love the Beatles. Their unique in music history. Paul was poppy and upbeat about everything, and John was the tortured poetic soul, but they meshed it together and produced masterpieces like 'Day in the Life'. George and Ringo were merely human, but its hard to imagine anything turning out better than the Beatles. BTW, Rubber Soul is in my CD player right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dannyboy70 Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Lennon and McCartney were the best songwriters popular music has ever seen or will ever see. They are underrated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 I agree with Riggo... Most musicians DO NOT read sheet music. I do, but I always have to resort to other means to convey music ideas to other musicians I've come across. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky21 Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Are the Beatles overrated? Let me put it this way....No. 5 songs in the top 5 spots on Billboard. Will never happen again. :cool: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Jones Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Simply, the Beatles are not overrated. As of this post 13 people have voted that they believe they are overrated. I just don't understand. The Beatles are the greatest band ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingJeremy Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Originally posted by Fred Jones As of this post 13 people have voted that they believe they are overrated. I just don't understand. ...and only one has owned up to it. Out yourseves and take your lashings!! Jer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard Washington Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 i said they were overrated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posse81 Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Originally posted by Higharolla ****amamie are they the group that said they were bigger than jesus? if so, then they are DEFINATELY overrated. I've seen a few people make reference to this in this thread. You have to put Lennon's statement into context. He did not feel that the Beatles SHOULD be bigger than Jesus. Quite the opposite actually. He was saying that they probably were and critisized society for it. People didn't really pay attention and thought he was making this egotisitical statement, when he wasn't at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 A link for everyone who thinks the Beatles are overrated http://petit.philou.free.fr/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Jones Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Kilmer, I couldn't get the link to work. For those who don't think the Beatles are the greatest, than who is? They came out with rankings a year or two ago and had Elvis as #1. The only reason they had him as #1 is becuase he was first and I believe it was Paul that said "without Elvis there would be no Beatles". Forget the music and just look at the numbers. The number or #1 hits, the number of top 40 hits. The number of their songs used in movies and advertising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Those who think the Beatles are overrated are either too young to understand or are looking at their music in context with music that came much later. They actually set the table for a lot of that later music and, unfortunately, the kids of today don't have the appreciation for The Beatles that they should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Okay, nobody is more overrated than Elvis. Sorry, I'll get fried for that one, but the fact is he was the 50s version of the Monkees - a product of good management and marketing without any significant talent, who sold records by being on the big screen. Hey, the Monkees sold more records than the Beatles and the Stones COMBINED during the years they were on TV. People purchase music more based on associations with what they see than what their ears here. Look at all the mindless crap that has sold over the last 20 years because of captivating videos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Jones Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Riggo, I agree somewhat with you that Elvis is overrated. Elvis was a major influence on music at the time and influenced future musicians like the Beatles. Elvis set the tone for rock and roll and was a pioneer in the music industry. I think he is overrated a little in that his songs have not lasted the test of time in the same degree that the Beatles recordings have. Now saying that, people can now start bashing me as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dannyboy70 Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Elvis? He was an American icon and an amazing entertainer. I'm a huge fan of his, but he really wasn't much of a musician or a songwriter. Most everything he sang was written by someone else- he was as cool as they come, had attitude, he could dance and he had a helluva voice. But you can't compare Elvis and the Beatles. The brilliance behind the Beatles were the songs they were churning out. Those guys were a hit factory.They took songwriting to new levels - they shattered conventions, they made complex ideas sound simple, and man, could they sing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iggle in Exile Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Well, as a Beatle nut I have to say how great these posts were. I would just add a few thoughts: Their stuff is universal. My three-year old just loves the Yellow Submarine DVD; older people can relate to Yesterday and In My Life; rock fans can enjoy Yer Blues or Helter Skelter. They went out on top. Kilmer mentions the greatness of the Beach Boys, which I agree with. Unfortunately though, their legacy (to me, anyway) has been tarnished by Mike Love’s commandeering of the group and perverting the brilliance of Brian Wilson. They used to be competitors with the Beatles; Mike Love has turned them into a group that shows up at car wash openings (ok, I’m exaggerating a little here.) The Stones carry on for the money, and the Who are limping to the finish line. As solo artists the Beatles did some pretty embarrassing things but the Beatle brand (can’t believe I just used that word) remains unaffected. And maybe it’s just me, but even Paul, who can be kind of goofy in interviews, seemed to take on a seriousness and coolness in the Anthology videos that he sometimes lacked in other interviews. Man were they prolific. They put out as many albums in 8 years as U2 did in 24. And a lot of the singles they released weren’t put on albums because they didn’t want to ‘rip off the customer’. Amazing. Look at it this way: It has been over 3 years since U2 put out their last album; take any three years in the Beatles’ history and you see incredible output and growth. Take 66-68 – you have the Rain/Paper back single; Revolver, Strawberry Fields/Penny lane single, Pepper, All You Need is Love single, Mystery Tour EP (it originally came out as an EP, not a cd) and (admittedly lousy) movie; the Lady Madonna/Inner Light single, the Yellow Sub movie, the Hey Jude/Revolution single, and the White Album. Incredible – and all in the period from U2’s last album to now, or U2’s album Pop to their next one – All That You Can’t Leave Behind. I'm not trying to discredit U2 because I like them, but am just noting how prolific the Beatles were. They overcame a lot of obstacles to cement their legacy. Look at the pressure spawned by Beatlemania; lots of other groups would have wilted under that kind of pressure. They only got better. Look at how they rebounded from the Get Back sessions; instead of that being their sad end, they somehow regrouped to call it a day with Abbey Road. And John missed a lot of the Abbey Road sessions because of personal stuff, so George steps in and contributes two of the best songs on the album. Each album is like its own era. Rubber Soul seems years removed from Revolver, which seems years removed from the White Album. And the barriers they broke down. I agree that there was a lot of fertile territory there at the time, but other groups at that time were also trying to break down barriers and yet the Beatles made so many of the breakthroughs. Big things like A Day in the Life, or the longest single of that time (Hey Jude) or doing Pepper or whatever. But they also did little things – the first fade-in (8 Days a Week) or the first instance of feedback (I Feel Fine), or the change in tempo in We Can Work it Out. I also think Help was the first time that the backing chorus came before the singer. In the end, determining them as overrated is subjective, but I think their achievements make them deserving of all the accolades that they have amassed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WallyG3 Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Iggle - great post! My dad has all the albums, so I grew up listening to the Beatles but never really sat down and listened to them until I was about 24. It wasn't until last year while trying to amass my own collection that I reallized what a short period it was within that they did their work. I think that is the most amazing part of their story. That they did THAT much in such a short time period. Simply incredible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iggle in Exile Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Hey Wally, thanks. It is kind of amazing, isn't it? For a couple of countercultural icons they were pretty hard workers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dannyboy70 Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Not to get too off-topic Iggle, but another amazing band in terms of prolificacy was CCR. In the span of three years ('68-'70) they put out six albums. They certainly weren't the Beatles, but awesome songwriters nonetheless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brave Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 I wouldn't say the Beatles were overrated ... but I will say that I believe Led Zeppelin to be a bigger influence on rock music over the last 30 years than the Beatles. They don't seem to draw the "awe and reverence" that the Beatles do, though. So, while I don't necessarily think the Beatles were overrated ... I would say that Zep, even given their considerably lofty status, is still underrated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.