DreamTheaterForums.org Dream Theater Fan Site
General => General Music Discussion => Topic started by: Chino on November 14, 2010, 09:26:16 AM
-
https://new.uk.music.yahoo.com/blogs/pop_gossip/12895/kanye-coldplay-are-better-than-the-beatles/
:facepalm:
-
Kayne West = douchebag
Coldplay = pretty good band whose last album was really good
The Beatles = too awesome for words
-
Kayne West = douchebag
Coldplay = pretty good band whose last album was really good
The Beatles = too awesome for words
This, except i've never cared much for Coldplay.
-
Bwah?! Oh Kanye...when will you learn? :facepalm:
I do agree, though, that the last album (and EP, and some related B-sides) were pretty good. I even went as far as to make a compilation disc of nearly everything they recorded during that year onto one CD (fit to about 75-77 minutes too), and it makes for a great listen.
I just don't think you could compare Coldplay to The Beatles, maybe not even in 30 years. You could probably compare them more to U2, especially since they have more of their sound than they do The Beatles'.
-Marc.
-
lolwtf
-
I was more amused by this:
"Skin flick company Vivid Entertainment is to make an adult spoof of the Kanye West and Taylor Swift spat. “We're always analysing news stories for their movie potential,” said boss Steve Hirsch. “The Kanye/Taylor feud has high visibility, is filled with passion and is something we believe that fans of adult films would enjoy.” [Contact Music]"
But yeah, Coldplay are a decent band whose last album was pretty good, but they are nowhere near on the same level as The Beatles. In 30 years they won't be considered close. U2? More likely.
-
They won't be on the same level as U2 either. You gotta remember that U2 is in the same stratosphere as The Rolling Stones, Pink Floyd, Bruce Springsteen, etc., and does anyone really see Coldplay getting on that level? Ever?
-
Imma letchyou finnish, but lemme just say... the Beatles were one of the best bands of all time.
Coldplay is just a very run-of-the-mill pop band with a few catchy melodies.
-
I can see Coldplay getting close if they keep releasing more ambitious well-received albums.
-
His opinion is just as worthless as every other music fan's.
-
His opinion is just as worthless as every other music fan's.
This.
Coldplay is a band I actually like a little. Parachutes and their last album and EP are pretty good, but they're nowhere as big as The Beatles.
-
Well, this thread gave me a good chuckle.
-
Have Coldplay ever been bigger than Jesus? I don't think so.
-
wants to get together with Martin to make one of the best albums of all time.
-
The Sun
-
They won't be on the same level as U2 either. You gotta remember that U2 is in the same stratosphere as The Rolling Stones, Pink Floyd, Bruce Springsteen, etc., and does anyone really see Coldplay getting on that level? Ever?
Not in my eyes they're not.
I wouldn't put U2 anywhere near a greatest band of all time list.
Ugh. Just thinking about that annoys me.
-
Meh. I don't care for either band. Dislike Coldplay more though.
-
Viva La Vida is a spectacular album in my eyes (and its accompanying EP is fantastic as well) but what a silly thing for Kanye to say.
-
No.
-
Kanye, what a troll....
-
William Hung > Kanye West
-
William Hung > Kanye West
:rollinKayne West = douchebag
Coldplay = pretty good band whose last album was really good
The Beatles = too awesome for words
1000%
-
William Hung > The Beatles OH!
-
The Beatles were good for their time. In a couple generations, I think the Beatles will be regarded as we view the jazz artists. They'll be respected, but will have a much smaller, refined following, and not as many people will care.
-
Heck, I already don't care about the Beatles.
-
I dunno.... universally speaking, I think there are more people that care about the Beatles NOW than when they were still making records. Same can be said for Led Zeppelin and Mozart. Are they still around to perform and write new material? No, but they're still as popular and relevant as ever, maybe even moreso
-
'Parachutes' and 'A Rush of Blood to the Head' feature well written, catchy pop tunes with some real feeling in it. After that I gave up. 'X&Y' was Coldplay at their most boring, and 'Viva La Vida' is just an overproduced piece of garbage. What a pompous snoozefest, I can't stand it at all. Especially the title track makes me cringe.
-
The Beatles were good for their time. In a couple generations, I think the Beatles will be regarded as we view the jazz artists. They'll be respected, but will have a much smaller, refined following, and not as many people will care.
I really disagree.
-
I can see where BrotherH is coming from though. However, the iconic images of the Beatles, classic rock radio, and the cult surrounding John Lennon's death will keep the Beatles in everyone's minds longer than he anticipates.
-
The Beatles were good for their time. In a couple generations, I think the Beatles will be regarded as we view the jazz artists. They'll be respected, but will have a much smaller, refined following, and not as many people will care.
I really disagree.
I don't mean that they'll be any less respected. If anything, they'll still be more respected than modern bands and future bands. When you think about it, older music is always respected at a higher level. Classical > Jazz > Classic Rock > Modern; as far as popular respect goes. I know I skipped a bunch of genres....but I just wanted to show that age and antiquity clinches a musical group into a place of reverence above everything else. See--The Beatles are just a drummer, two guitarists, and a bassist. I bet you could assemble together the greatest lineup imaginable, playing the same instruments, and it is literally impossible for them to be "better" than The Beatles in the public's eye.
But my main point is that while The Beatles will be held at a higher state of respect, popular culture and media will steer the public in a modern direction, as it always has. Since all those that were alive during The Beatles' career will have died, you will no longer have people listening to them for nostalgia's sake, and their fans will drop substantially.
-
"The Beatles" and "Led Zeppelin" have been dead for a while, in terms of an actual band. But that hasn't stopped parents from handing the music down to their children and so on and so on. Thats how the old bands stay alive, really. Pop culture have failed in steering people permanently away from the Beatles for forty years, and I have a feeling they will continue to fail.
-
'Parachutes' and 'A Rush of Blood to the Head' feature well written, catchy pop tunes with some real feeling in it. After that I gave up. 'X&Y' was Coldplay at their most boring, and 'Viva La Vida' is just an overproduced piece of garbage. What a pompous snoozefest, I can't stand it at all. Especially the title track makes me cringe.
Viva La Vida is their only good album.
-
I don't mean that they'll be any less respected. If anything, they'll still be more respected than modern bands and future bands. When you think about it, older music is always respected at a higher level. Classical > Jazz > Classic Rock > Modern; as far as popular respect goes. I know I skipped a bunch of genres....but I just wanted to show that age and antiquity clinches a musical group into a place of reverence above everything else. See--The Beatles are just a drummer, two guitarists, and a bassist. I bet you could assemble together the greatest lineup imaginable, playing the same instruments, and it is literally impossible for them to be "better" than The Beatles in the public's eye.
But my main point is that while The Beatles will be held at a higher state of respect, popular culture and media will steer the public in a modern direction, as it always has. Since all those that were alive during The Beatles' career will have died, you will no longer have people listening to them for nostalgia's sake, and their fans will drop substantially.
You have the most admirably stupid opinion in this entire thread, and that's including Kanye.
-
The Beatles were good for their time. In a couple generations, I think the Beatles will be regarded as we view the jazz artists. They'll be respected, but will have a much smaller, refined following, and not as many people will care.
I really disagree.
I don't mean that they'll be any less respected. If anything, they'll still be more respected than modern bands and future bands. When you think about it, older music is always respected at a higher level. Classical > Jazz > Classic Rock > Modern; as far as popular respect goes. I know I skipped a bunch of genres....but I just wanted to show that age and antiquity clinches a musical group into a place of reverence above everything else. See--The Beatles are just a drummer, two guitarists, and a bassist. I bet you could assemble together the greatest lineup imaginable, playing the same instruments, and it is literally impossible for them to be "better" than The Beatles in the public's eye.
But my main point is that while The Beatles will be held at a higher state of respect, popular culture and media will steer the public in a modern direction, as it always has. Since all those that were alive during The Beatles' career will have died, you will no longer have people listening to them for nostalgia's sake, and their fans will drop substantially.
Are you saying The Beatles were just a fad and that their music wasn't truly some of the ever, regardless of time period?
-
"The Beatles" and "Led Zeppelin" have been dead for a while, in terms of an actual band. But that hasn't stopped parents from handing the music down to their children and so on and so on. Thats how the old bands stay alive, really. Pop culture have failed in steering people permanently away from the Beatles for forty years, and I have a feeling they will continue to fail.
Yeah, fuck The Man trying to do that to our beloved classic bands, and fuck the pointless hatred.
-
The Beatles were good for their time. In a couple generations, I think the Beatles will be regarded as we view the jazz artists. They'll be respected, but will have a much smaller, refined following, and not as many people will care.
I really disagree.
I don't mean that they'll be any less respected. If anything, they'll still be more respected than modern bands and future bands. When you think about it, older music is always respected at a higher level. Classical > Jazz > Classic Rock > Modern; as far as popular respect goes. I know I skipped a bunch of genres....but I just wanted to show that age and antiquity clinches a musical group into a place of reverence above everything else. See--The Beatles are just a drummer, two guitarists, and a bassist. I bet you could assemble together the greatest lineup imaginable, playing the same instruments, and it is literally impossible for them to be "better" than The Beatles in the public's eye.
But my main point is that while The Beatles will be held at a higher state of respect, popular culture and media will steer the public in a modern direction, as it always has. Since all those that were alive during The Beatles' career will have died, you will no longer have people listening to them for nostalgia's sake, and their fans will drop substantially.
Are you saying The Beatles were just a fad and that their music wasn't truly some of the ever, regardless of time period?
No. I'm saying that in all music genres at all times, there was always something that was the most popular and most revered. I am not saying whether or not they in fact deserve it, I'm just saying that their greatness in the eyes of the general populace will diminish. In a hundred years for now, I think only very musically explorative people will bother to delve deeply into The Beatles.
-
I agree with BrotherH and I think he's point is too fuckin clear and logical.
-
I am sorry, but most of what you are saying, BrotherH, I cannot disagree more with. The Beatles have been finished for over 40 years now, yet are still as popular as ever. And that will continue to be the case. And saying something like...
See--The Beatles are just a drummer, two guitarists, and a bassist. I bet you could assemble together the greatest lineup imaginable, playing the same instruments, and it is literally impossible for them to be "better" than The Beatles in the public's eye.
...is just :facepalm:.
Tell you what: get this "greatest lineup imaginable" together and see if they can write as many great songs as the Beatles did, and then get back to me.
-
I feel like BrotherH has no concept of timeless songwriting. You could assemble the greatest group with those instruments and there is a large possibility of egos getting in the way. There's a reason a lot of supergroups don't turn out as well as they sound on paper.
-
I am sorry, but most of what you are saying, BrotherH, I cannot disagree more with. The Beatles have been finished for over 40 years now, yet are still as popular as ever. And that will continue to be the case. And saying something like...
See--The Beatles are just a drummer, two guitarists, and a bassist. I bet you could assemble together the greatest lineup imaginable, playing the same instruments, and it is literally impossible for them to be "better" than The Beatles in the public's eye.
...is just :facepalm:.
Tell you what: get this "greatest lineup imaginable" together and see if they can write as many great songs as the Beatles did, and then get back to me.
1000% Kev. How many greatest hits can a band come out with only to see it go #1. They always sell, 40 years later.
-
I feel like BrotherH has no concept of timeless songwriting. You could assemble the greatest group with those instruments and there is a large possibility of egos getting in the way. There's a reason a lot of supergroups don't turn out as well as they sound on paper.
This
-
Wow. Just wow.
Never once did I say that The Beatles were bad songwriters. Never once did I give my subjective opinion on whether The Beatles are good or bad. To say I have no concept of timeless songwriting....how arrogant and tasteless.
You really think, that as time progresses, The Beatles' fanbase will only grow? Really? They were huge then, and they're huge now. Give it two hundred f***ing years and I guarantee that their fanbase WILL have shrunk.
-
Who said anything about growing?
EDIT: I'll put it back.
-
KevSchmev did.
-
Bro, there's something to say when a band that has a greatest hits cd come out again fore the umpteenth time and it still goes #1 even though they haven't made new music in 40 years. How many bands can say that? None. That is why they are that special.
I understand that they were not the most talented musicians but they wrote tunes that stands the test of time 40 years later. That's special.
-
Yes it is. The Beatles have made a tremendous impact in music development, and will never be forgotten. However...it's like watching a movie like Gone With The Wind. Everyone knows about it, it's a classic, it's a landmark--but not everyone has seen it, or really has a desire to see. That's how I think The Beatles will be in a couple generations.
-
First off, yes, their fan base continues to grow. Everyone who was a fan back then is likely still a fan, except those who are dead, and think of all of the younger peeps who are fans who weren't even alive when they were around (like myself). Like was said, they had a greatest hits album debut at freaking number 1! That says it all. McCartney and Starr by themselves could grab two musicians, do a stadium tour as the Beatles, charge $300 a ticket for every seat in the house, and they would still sell out every single show in record time, even in these tough economic times.
Second, no one said you said they were bad songwriters; orcus said you had no concept of timeless songwriting. Big, big difference.
Lastly, there is no 'c' in KevShmev. :biggrin:
-
You also have to remember that there are several top notch cover bands making the magic and keeping the dream alive.
-
You also have to remember that there are several top notch cover bands making the magic and keeping the dream alive.
You beat me to it. There are tons of people across the world that are still hungry to hear Beatles music performed in a live setting.
-
You also have to remember that there are several top notch cover bands making the magic and keeping the dream alive.
You beat me to it. There are tons of people across the world that are still hungry to hear Beatles music performed in a live setting.
*raises hand*
But on the flip-side, I noticed that the crowd at the Jason Bonham's Led Zeppelin Experience show was all older men at least in their thirties and forties (many older), except for me, and literally five other "kids" at most. That says something about the general public's desire to actually see classic bands or the closest thing to the band short of a reunion.
-
Keep in mind that we are only one generation removed. It's hard to say.
-
:lol
For some reason I just pictured a black screen with the words:
"25 Years Later
Generation Two"
-
Keep in mind that we are only one generation removed. It's hard to say.
It's 2 generations. My niece who is 22,(back off you youngster :laugh:) Had me make a 4 disk greatest hits for her when she was 14 and that was my dad's music.
-
Keep in mind that we are only one generation removed. It's hard to say.
My niece who is 22
:eyebrows:
-
Keep in mind that we are only one generation removed. It's hard to say.
My niece who is 22
:eyebrows:
*two fingers at my eyes then pointing back at you*
-
The Beatles will start to become less popular eventually, in a couple generations, and then will slowly enter that realm of fossilhood BrotherH is talking about.
...But, by that time, no one will even remember who Coldplay were.
-
The Beatles will start to become less popular eventually, in a couple generations, and then will slowly enter that realm of fossilhood BrotherH is talking about.
...But, by that time, no one will even remember who Coldplay were.
Well, yeah. That's true. Now that you say that, I doubt the world will ever regard Coldplay above The Beatles.
-
First off, yes, their fan base continues to grow. Everyone who was a fan back then is likely still a fan, except those who are dead, and think of all of the younger peeps who are fans who weren't even alive when they were around (like myself). Like was said, they had a greatest hits album debut at freaking number 1! That says it all. McCartney and Starr by themselves could grab two musicians, do a stadium tour as the Beatles, charge $300 a ticket for every seat in the house, and they would still sell out every single show in record time, even in these tough economic times.
Second, no one said you said they were bad songwriters; orcus said you had no concept of timeless songwriting. Big, big difference.
Lastly, there is no 'c' in KevShmev. :biggrin:
:tup
You also have to remember that there are several top notch cover bands making the magic and keeping the dream alive.
That's a great way to keep the spirit and magic going, true. My teacher is in a Beatles cover band, imitation as well. They dress up like them and work really hard to deliver 101%. He was telling me they change outfits like 3 times per show because they do the whole psychedelic thing too just like The Beatles did. I haven't seen them play yet though.
-
I think it's a bit silly to think The Beatles are going to stay as popular as they are or have been. They could very well remain a household name like plenty of other past musicians (especially classical), but I can't see the number of "fans" growing as time goes on. Even today there are plenty of people my age can can recognize a number of Beatles songs if I play any for them, but they have no idea it's The Beatles until I tell them. I could very well see them going down like a lot of the famous classical composers; there are a good number of songs that everyone recognizes but lots of people don't know who it is so they can't really be called "fans."
-
You really think, that as time progresses, The Beatles' fanbase will only grow? Really? They were huge then, and they're huge now. Give it two hundred f***ing years and I guarantee that their fanbase WILL have shrunk.
Easy to guarantee something when neither you nor anyone who knows you will be around in 200 years.
Classical music is only called classical now; it was the popular music of its time. Since there was no radio or any prerecorded music, music was always played live, just as there was no TV or movies so people went to the theater. How popular do you think Mozart was in his time? Beethoven? Handel? Most of those guys were dirt poor in their lifetimes. There may have been a few hundred, tops, who knew their names. Since there are now millions of people who listen to their music, would you say that they are more, or less, popular than they were 200 years ago? And what would you say to someone who 200 years ago "guaranteed" you that they would not be as popular as they are today?
Maybe you're thinking that The Beatles aren't exactly Mozart or Beethoven. My point is that they are. Within their time, within their genre, they are consistently and often uninanimously regarded as the best. And just as the countless hacks who cranked out catchy yet trite concertos have all faded into obscurity* while the great names live on, people will eventually forget about Coldplay and others, while The Beatles will remain known. Shakespeare is still known by name centuries later. Renoit is still known by name. The Beatles are as big as they come as far as popular music, and I really expect that they will live on.
*except maybe Vivaldi.
-
The Beatles will start to become less popular eventually, in a couple generations, and then will slowly enter that realm of fossilhood BrotherH is talking about.
...But, by that time, no one will even remember who Coldplay were.
Crap PC, you beat me to it. This is exactly what I logged on to say. The only difference is that I think the Beatles will have a resurgence in popularity, as people get totally fed up with crappy music and long for the days when good music was recorded.
Edit: ^ ^ Orbert said it better.
-
I will never understand what the public sees in The Beatles. To me they're just a band. Nothing really remarkable or extraordinary about them. Never seen much spontaneity or adventurousness in their music. They're just another band to me. If anybody wants to show me something that they think will change my mind, then by all means. I am open to it. But the only song I've heard by them that I genuinely liked and would go back to listening to a few times is While My Guitar Gently Weeps.
-
Never seen much spontaneity or adventurousness in their music.
No offense, but you have no grasp of time and context if you really think that. At the time, their music was by far the most adventurous music ever seen in the rock music genre. And most of what we have heard out of rock bands since is following the blueprint that the Beatles laid out for everyone.
-
I will never understand what the public sees in The Beatles. To me they're just a band. Nothing really remarkable or extraordinary about them. Never seen much spontaneity or adventurousness in their music. They're just another band to me. If anybody wants to show me something that they think will change my mind, then by all means. I am open to it. But the only song I've heard by them that I genuinely liked and would go back to listening to a few times is While My Guitar Gently Weeps.
Go listen to Revolver, Sgt. Pepper, and The White Album. There was a LOT of experimentation on those albums that no one would have dreamed hearing from the same band that wrote "I Wanna Hold Your Hand." Prog rock as we know it wouldn't be here if not for Sgt. Pepper! And yet, even when they were making such weird music and staying in the studio and not going out on tour, they were still at the top of the world. They changed the face of rock and pop music as we know it and you don't see anything remarkable or extraordinary about them? Now whether you like them or not is personal taste, but its pretty ignorant to say you see nothing adventurous about their music or that they weren't extraordinary in some way.
EDIT: Dammit Kev.
-
...I heard that Paul McCartney can't even read sheet music. olol
-
I'm not so sure about that, Kev. I'm pretty sure a lot of bands that came later weren't so much as influenced by the Beatles as they were other blues and rock bands. Not that anyone's been MORE influential than the Beatles... but I do think that the amount of influence they've had is vastly overstated in the sense that Beatles fanatics tend to overestimate the number of bands that wouldn't exist if it weren't for the Beatles.
That said, I don't even really like the Beatles a whole lot, but it's pretty silly to argue against their legacy. While I'm not sure they'll be as timeless as those classical composers, they're certainly closer to being so than any other band since the birth of Rock and Roll. That is, if future generations actually place a value on music, which, in all honesty, is something I'm starting to doubt the probability of.
-
And just as the countless hacks who cranked out catchy yet trite concertos have all faded into obscurity* while the great names live on, people will eventually forget about Coldplay and others, while The Beatles will remain known. Shakespeare is still known by name centuries later. Renoit is still known by name. The Beatles are as big as they come as far as popular music, and I really expect that they will live on.
I don't think anyone's saying The Beatles won't "remain known," though.
-
Elvis > The Beatles :zook2:
-
Kayne West = douchebag
/thread
-
Semi related, it looks like iTunes is finally going to have The Beatles.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11763650
-
Semi related, it looks like iTunes is finally going to have The Beatles.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11763650
That very interesting erha. I'd be interested to see when it is available, what the sales will be.
-
I will never understand what the public sees in The Beatles. To me they're just a band. Nothing really remarkable or extraordinary about them. Never seen much spontaneity or adventurousness in their music. They're just another band to me. If anybody wants to show me something that they think will change my mind, then by all means. I am open to it. But the only song I've heard by them that I genuinely liked and would go back to listening to a few times is While My Guitar Gently Weeps.
And Brando was just another actor, and Jordan was just another basketball player.
McCartney & Lennon forgot more great melodies and songs than your 10 favorite bands will ever write COMBINED. This I am quite sure of.
-
...I heard that Paul McCartney can't even read sheet music. olol
How is this relevant? Holy fuck, there's a lot of ignorance in this thread.
-
...I heard that Paul McCartney can't even read sheet music. olol
Lol what, Petrucci can't read either if I recall correctly.
-
...I heard that Paul McCartney can't even read sheet music. olol
How is this relevant?
It's not; he is merely grasping at straws now, by trying to discredit the Beatles any way he can. It's both funny and sad.
-
kanye west is just a gay fish
-
You guys are so stiffnecked and stubborn about your favorite band. I made a jestly snipe at them (hence the "olol") and you take it personally, and start acting arrogant, highminded, and pompous, because a simpleton like me couldn't possibly comprehend the "genius" of this overblown boy band that writes boring, bland "music."
-
Butt hurt much?
-
You guys are so stiffnecked and stubborn about your favorite band. I made a jestly snipe at them (hence the "olol") and you take it personally, and start acting arrogant, highminded, and pompous, because a simpleton like me couldn't possibly comprehend the "genius" of this overblown boy band that writes boring, bland "music."
Ok this is just stupid, I don't even like the beatles but, boring? bland? Come on, you got to understand the impact they had back in the day, they were new and original.
Have you actually listened to anything by them? because after hearing their music you can't say they're bland.
-
Have you actually listened to anything by them? because after hearing their music you can't say they're bland.
I've worked my way through their past discography these past few months, so you can't pull the "ignorance" card. I did my homework BEFORE I decided that they belong in the attic.
-
You can get as pissy as you want, but the fact that you are calling them an overblown boy band just shows that you don't get it. Sorry if that sounds condescending, but it is what it is.
-
It's time to pull off the shade that the media and popular culture have draped over your eyes. Wake up. This is reality--The Beatles SUCK.
-
It's time to pull off the shade that the media and popular culture have draped over your eyes. Wake up. This is reality--The Beatles SUCK.
GTFO
Edit: also how old are you, because I know a lot of teenagers that think they are so EDGY because they hate the beatles.
-
Oh this is getting good!
-
Yeah, I am pretty sure you are either just fishing or trolling now. Good day, sir. :biggrin:
-
Normally I'm a nice guy, and I haven't really gotten into any spats here. But when I calmly suggest that The Beatles will probably not be as big as they are now, I get a bunch of people hollering at me saying I have no concept of timeless music and stuff like that. In my other Beatles thread, when I said that I was exploring The Beatles, and I wanted to know what made them so great, I had the same experience--people told me that since it wasn't clicking with me, I therefore had no taste in music. I was pissed when I entered the forum, and your insulting comments only made me more so.
-
You're a nice guy! You're a nice guy! But that doesn't fuckin' cut it when you're fucking around with The Beatles like this on the forums!
(https://hotcelebrity.name/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/images1420403_christian_bale.jpg)
-
I think your problem is that you tend to spin things the wrong way. I'm sure no one actually said that you have no taste in music. Knowing the way Kev at least might word something similar I'm almost guessing the response went something like "There is so much variety in the Beatles' music that if you can't find anything you like then I have no idea what to tell you".
-
Hey, you are the one that started that other thread by saying:
Their songs are so bland and tasteless. The lyrics all revolve around the same concepts. Aside from some of the bass lines, I probably could learn how to play any of their songs on each instrument in about a month or two, and I don't even play with those instruments.
-
Normally I'm a nice guy, and I haven't really gotten into any spats here. But when I calmly suggest that The Beatles will probably not be as big as they are now, I get a bunch of people hollering at me saying I have no concept of timeless music and stuff like that.
And saying they Suck won't help you either.
-
Fine. Send me to DTF hell because I don't like The Beatles.
-
But when I calmly suggest that The Beatles will probably not be as big as they are now
If it helps, while I think some of the other things you've said are near bat shit insane I do still stand by agreeing with you earlier about this. They're likely going to remain a household name, but, 50+ years down the line, they are absolutely not going to be listened to as much, by as many people, and as often as they have been 40 years ago or are now. Just because something's timeless doesn't mean it's always going remain popular.
-
It's time to pull off the shade that the media and popular culture have draped over your eyes. Wake up. This is reality--The Beatles SUCK.
(https://img241.imageshack.us/img241/2113/whoremouth.jpg)
And I'm pretty sure the media and pop culture today is the complete opposite of the Beatles.
-
I will never understand what the public sees in The Beatles. To me they're just a band. Nothing really remarkable or extraordinary about them. Never seen much spontaneity or adventurousness in their music. They're just another band to me. If anybody wants to show me something that they think will change my mind, then by all means. I am open to it. But the only song I've heard by them that I genuinely liked and would go back to listening to a few times is While My Guitar Gently Weeps.
And Brando was just another actor, and Jordan was just another basketball player.
McCartney & Lennon forgot more great melodies and songs than your 10 favorite bands will ever write COMBINED. This I am quite sure of.
Forgot more?
Well either way, my apologies. I forgot that music was objective and there is only one right opinion about everything. This is DTF after all.
-
wants to get together with Martin to make one of the best albums of all time.
I'm not one to do this, but I have to know that I wasn't the only person to notice this.
-
Butt hurt much?
Almost every poster in this thread is butt hurt. This thread was absolutely stupid in the first place. Its rather absurd how someones musical opinion makes a news website in the first place, let alone the fact that this thread was made.
-
I will never understand what the public sees in The Beatles. To me they're just a band. Nothing really remarkable or extraordinary about them. Never seen much spontaneity or adventurousness in their music. They're just another band to me. If anybody wants to show me something that they think will change my mind, then by all means. I am open to it. But the only song I've heard by them that I genuinely liked and would go back to listening to a few times is While My Guitar Gently Weeps.
And Brando was just another actor, and Jordan was just another basketball player.
McCartney & Lennon forgot more great melodies and songs than your 10 favorite bands will ever write COMBINED. This I am quite sure of.
Forgot more?
Well either way, my apologies. I forgot that music was objective and there is only one right opinion about everything. This is DTF after all.
lol your a silly goose :-* :tick2:
-
LieLow. Music is subjective but you can't deny their record and how, to this day they sell better than most in the industry today. I like other music so much more but I can't deny what this band has meant to fans and musicians alike. You just can't dismiss them because you don't like them.
I hate Nirvana, but I can't dismiss their impact on the music scene.
-
LieLow. Music is subjective but you can't deny their record and how, to this day they sell better than most in the industry today. I like other music so much more but I can't deny what this band has meant to fans and musicians alike. You just can't dismiss them because you don't like them.
I hate Nirvana, but I can't dismiss their impact on the music scene.
I didn't dismiss their impact on music. It's just that they really do nothing that speaks to me at all.
-
I get you. It's just that no other band that is defunct, still sells like they do. It will diminish in time but for 40 years they have staying power that no band can match.
-
Speaking of The Beatles, they're now on iTunes, finally. inb4lololiTunes
-
BrotherH, I don't really like the Beatles very much either. Sure, I have a few albums and like a few songs, but I wouldn't consider them anywhere near a "favorite." In fact, I'm pretty sure their influence is overstated, and most of my favorite bands would probably exist, Beatles or no Beatles. But the way your reacting in this thread is really, really silly.