Guest 0ctoburn

How to make songs by the Beatles sound almost good!

85 posts in this topic

The Beatles created rock and roll?  :D  :D  :D

Not exactly what I meant. Poorly worded on my part. My bad. But the Beatles were certainly important in the evolution of Rock and pop culture in general.

 

What I meant was that certain posters disparage all of the old/original pioneers of Rock and Roll.

 

I get why people are tired of some of that music. Commercial radio was so repetitive for so many years that I have no desire to listen to much classic rock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Beatles created rock and roll?  :D  :D  :D

 

 

my guess would be Bo Diddley, or Chuck Berry, maybe Elvis?  Who knows, it's hard to pin down for me

 

plus it was before my time  :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see what Justin Bieber did by doing a song by the Beatles as no different that what the Beatles did to the songs by the people who really created rock and roll.

 

They always seemed like an early boy band who were changed by drug use to me. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see what Justin Bieber did by doing a song by the Beatles as no different that what the Beatles did to the songs by the people who really created rock and roll.

 

They always seemed like an early boy band who were changed by drug use to me. :(

And youd be wrong. The Beatles did a few covers early on but wrote over 90% of their songs and they were trend setters. Back then it was really rare for anyone to write their own music. And if you think they were a boy band think again. That's what the record companies wanted them to be but they basically gave a finger to that.

 

Bieber is a representation of what the Beatles were against. He is a music industry standin with very little originality. He looks cutesy for the girls and sells Cds, etc. Hes a fabrication of the record studio. He sells on image as opposed to actual talent. he is much like the Monkees who you seem to like so much.

Edited by veraciousmooncalf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And youd be wrong. The Beatles did a few covers early on but wrote over 90% of their songs and they were trend setters. Back then it was really rare for anyone to write their own music. And if you think they were a boy band think again. That's what the record companies wanted them to be but they basically gave a finger to that.

 

Bieber is a representation of what the Beatles were against. He is a music industry standin with very little originality. He looks cutesy for the girls and sells Cds, etc. Hes a fabrication of the record studio. He sells on image as opposed to actual talent. he is much like the Monkees who you seem to like so much.

Actually ~ he is self~made and was self~promoted before he was signed. And the Beatles were every bit a boy band who the record business made change their appearance to look "cutsey" from everything I have read.

 

And if you look at the writing credits on their first few records you will find that they did a lot of songs that were not original and much less than Justin Bieber did. :P

 

Do you think that Frank Sinatra and Elvis were not matinee teen idols in their day who wrote all of their own music? :confused::P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually ~ he is self~made and was self~promoted before he was signed. And the Beatles were every bit a boy band who the record business made change their appearance to look "cutsey" from everything I have read.

 

And if you look at the writing credits on their first few records you will find that they did a lot of songs that were not original and much less than Justin Bieber did. :P

 

Do you think that Frank Sinatra and Elvis were not matinee teen idols in their day who wrote all of their own music? :confused::P

Elvis and Sinatra did not write their own music. The Beatles did a few covers (mostly early in their careers) but fought and won against the record company to write and produce their own songs which was sacrilegious to the record companies  back then. And reading the history is not the same as living the history. The Beatles, like Elvis were so good in their day that today there are many impersonator bands that play their music to audiences. Their music is in movies and plays. Justin Bieber will long be forgotten before the Beatles ever will be. Whether you like their music or not they are a mainstay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Rolling Stones were sooooo much better than the Beatles.

 

That was rock n roll

 

Beatles fluff then drug induced music.

 

Ringo,worst drummer ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Rolling Stones were sooooo much better than the Beatles.

 

That was rock n roll

 

Beatles fluff then drug induced music.

 

Ringo,worst drummer ever.

The Stones were good and had huge influence from blues music. They certainly stayed together longer, but the Beatles overall were more popular across the entire spectrum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Rolling Stones were sooooo much better than the Beatles.

 

That was rock n roll

 

Beatles fluff then drug induced music.

 

Ringo,worst drummer ever.

Sharon Tate and those other people would still be alive if not for the Beatles. :mad:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I much prefer this version of Eleanor Rigby. Jazz Crusaders

 

That is good. :) Maybe the Beatles should have just stuck to instrumental music and let other people record it and not bothered with their lyrics. Much of what I have heard sounds rather childish to dimwitted or drug~influenced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is good. :) Maybe the Beatles should have just stuck to instrumental music and let other people record it and not bothered with their lyrics. Much of what I have heard sounds rather childish to dimwitted or drug~influenced.

Ignorance is bliss

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is good. :) Maybe the Beatles should have just stuck to instrumental music and let other people record it and not bothered with their lyrics. Much of what I have heard sounds rather childish to dimwitted or drug~influenced.

So you like Jazz versions because jazz has no history of drug use?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the Beatles should have just stuck to instrumental music and let other people record it and not bothered with their lyrics. Much of what I have heard sounds rather childish to dimwitted or drug~influenced.

Probably the only thing you and I will ever agree on. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No.  I like the jazz version presented above for what it sounds like.  The two songs by the Beatles I posted sound rather simple~minded whether they were on drugs or not when they wrote them and recorded them for release.

 

And if they were not on drugs at the time ~ maybe they should have been.  I do not see the "genius" aspect of them that a lot of people see.  Admittedly ~ they were well before my time ~ but those songs sound silly.  Even the songs they do that I do like sound like nothing special and actually very derivative in nature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably the only thing you and I will ever agree on. :D

I doubt that. We have agreed before ~ just this past week in fact ~ and will likely agree again.

 

I simply do not "get" the notion that the Beatles were all that great. And especially when there were many other people writing classic songs at the time that people like without the cult of personality that surrounds the Beatles.

 

I love old Motown and soul music and that too was long before my time. I think that many of those writers have withstood the test of time far better than Beatle stuff.

Edited by 0ctoburn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Derivative of what? I'm sure you two are right and all the musicians the credit them as inspiration were wrong

There is no right or wrong. Some people like them and some do not. Not one person here has explained why Justin Bieber's version of a Beatles song is so bad when even Carlos Santana obviously disagrees. I understand why people like to listen to old music they liked when they were younger. I love The Smiths and Oasis even though other people do not like them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you have to look at the culture of the time in which they started out, in which pop music was largely a product turned out by the music publishing business. They'd hire somebody to write a song, book a studio, hire some musicians to record it (some of whom were groups or became groups) and that was the product. The Beatles were really the main ones to change that to artists who wrote and performed their own songs. Were "Love Me Do" and "I Wanna Hold Your Hand" great literature? Of course not, but for the time it was what the pop biz was about. It took people like Bob Dylan to actual start making a living singing songs worth thinking about, and quite a bit of the Beatles later output was quite significant. You can like it or not as is your taste and your prerogative, but it cannot be denied that they were on the leading edge of a cultural change that perhaps today is taken for granted.  

Edited by Steveg85321

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically the era you were born in has the best music for those people.Its the soundtrack of their lives.

Edited by mcorioles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no right or wrong. Some people like them and some do not. Not one person here has explained why Justin Bieber's version of a Beatles song is so bad when even Carlos Santana obviously disagrees. I understand why people like to listen to old music they liked when they were younger. I love The Smiths and Oasis even though other people do not like them.

I love both of those groups even though The Oasis bros are Aholes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Derivative of what? I'm sure you two are right and all the musicians the credit them as inspiration were wrong

Musical taste is subjective. I simply posted my opinion or rather agreed with octo's. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now