Now that I've heard them for myself,what was the big deal with The Beetles?Presley?.?

Originally posted by aiwass
On originality, i just have to say one thing, and i know Same goes for for example tapping. It doesn't take a brainiac to figure out that you can use both hands on the fretboard...

Well, once on TV, a guy said that: "a great idea is one that everyone says 'How come I didn't invent it, it's so simple' " It's the same with tapping and everything else, it's obvious, but some guys just come up with it, and we call them geniuses for that.

First off,I'm(only?)23,and didn't realise many of you dudes were that old.Notice how many threads contain this phrase :"I was.....back then..."?If you were anything in the same time the beetles were doing their thing,man,you're old.:)
And now to my post

Originally posted by Blaksmith
You're kidding, right?
I'm not kidding.I've heard them,and they didn't move me the way music moves me.Period.
Before I set a bad tone, I will ask you to listen to the simplistic magic from both.
Like I said,I didn't feel them.
There will NEVER, EVER be another song writing team like Lennon/McCartney.
Now,as long as mankind exists,on planet Earth or elsewhere,the kind of man will always shine.Allf***ingways.You think if Graham Bell suffered a heart attack the day before that now famous call to one Watson,we wouldn't have telephones today,not to mention celly's?I don't think so.
You imagine if the Wright brothers were Siamese twins,Collin Powell would be going to the Middle East by boat?I don't.
With all due respect to all the great people that have walked this planet,none of them had 2500C.C of brains,and the rest of us mere mortals have the standard issue 1500.Necessity is the mother of invention.Henry ford occupies the place he does in world history and the automobile industry because Daimler Benz's invention spawned a problem that needed Ford's kind of genius to solve.Even if he hadn't done it,it was bound to happen.Proof:What GM,under Alfred Sloan,later did to Ford,the company.
It is my everlasting belief that even though the Beatles had the kind of effect they did,had they suffered Lynyrd Skynyrd's fate early on,the music scene would still have changed.This race is the ultimate.Not individuals.So don't tell me about there "Never ever" being another team like Lennon and McCartney.You haven't heard my songs.Or Mary's.You asking who's Mary?She's a human being,that's what she is.
Ditto from elsewhere:
If you look at most of the Beatles songs, you'll see "written by Lennon-McCartney". The truth is that they co-wrote only about five percent of those songs. Lennon wrote about 15% by himself and McCartney wrote all the others by himself. They had agreed, from the start, to put both there names on all of their songs regardless of who wrote them in order to simplify matters and to put the good of the band ahead of everything else. It worked fine for them, they never had any disagreements over this.

[/B]

Our experiences are what mold us into what we become.So maybe if I'd been born in the sixties(with all other factors,like parents,wealth....constant),I wouldn't be who I am today.As in what I am now at 23 would be different from what I would be at 23 then.But still,I wonder if I'd been moved by these guys,inspite of what you guys are saying.Maybe I would.But then again,a lot of people are into the WWF wrestling,and I aint.And I'm into soccer(this world cup is screwing me up.I started my end-of-semester exams yesterday.Can you imagine how reading for the exams is?)and some people aren't.
So I dunno.

[Edited by kingdavid on 06-04-2002 at 05:54 AM]

You decide - now get back to studying leave the TV and Radioalone and get off the internet.. Pass those exams you fool :D

*mumbles incoherently into long white beard*

Lol
I will.

So don't tell me about there "Never ever" being another team like
Lennon and McCartney.You haven't heard my songs.Or Mary's.You asking who's Mary?She's a
human being,that's what she is.

*******************************************************************

Um, it wasn't a personal attack, David. You are correct, I have not heard your music.

Further, why bring Mary into the equation? F.Y.I., I am not wondering who Mary is at all.

References to Bell, Ford, the Wright Brothers et al all pioneered something. I never suggested Lennon/McCartney pioneered music.

Let me clarify: In my opinion, there will NEVER, EVER be another song writing team like Lennon/McCartney.

I appreciate your opinion. I was 23 once myself. I have spent much time in the music industry and seen a whole pile of talent. I asked you to listen to the simplicity of it. The subtleties of it. The influences. It was my hope you would see the bigger picture. Remember our talk about Payola? Further, I said: Before I set a bad tone, I will ask you to listen to the simplistic magic from both.

I didn't attack your likes/dislikes, nor did I compare current artists with inventors of the past.

Now, put the remote down and step away from the T.V. Get some sleep. It sounds like you need a nap young fella.

Hey Skippy,I'm only 32,so lets analyze the math,that means I was a kid in 70's,raised on KISS like every other kid was,then spent my teen years living and loving METALLICA,SLAYER,ANTHRAX,EXODUS,TESTAMENT,MEGADETH and so on.But in that time,i went back,like any good musician would,and loked at the history,and became a fan of the Beatles.And being a teenage thrasher of the 80's,it's still my opinio that the Beatles are un-touchable.I don't care who's alive,or what Mary does,When You and Mary hit the billboard charts wt over 50 top 10 singles,then I'll agree,"Look,there was another Lennon-McCarthney".But until then stop listening to 60's music with that scowl you probably have on your face,scratching your head wondering,"Why?" I know a lot of open minded people,younger then me,who have reached the same conclusion I did 15 years ago,the Beatles are Un-Equalled,No Parrellel,and they give them the credit as havig started this long strange trend into the new millenia.

Like I said,show me he next great writing team,I'll sign on.And I'll have an open mind when i hear it too.

[Edited by THE_HACK_PACK on 06-04-2002 at 07:08 AM]

Originally posted by PonyOne
I'm 18. Nirvana are my Beatles.

I've read your detailed analyses of their material, and why its important to you in particular, and Music in general, but I have to say that if you believe that statement, it underlines just how much [u]lower[/u] current expectations have become.

If you can, take some time to sample some music, starting with the late '50s. You will hear what I consider to be primative Rock'n'Roll. That is meant in an academic sort of way, not as a put-down. Quite simply, the technology in use at all phases of the recording, production and even playing music was at an early stage of development. Even a contemporary reincarnation of Mozart would have been frustrated. And there were no writers of that calibre in The Biz just then. Even The Biz was a disorganised bunch of independants fighting for survival.

In the early '60s, the countrified RockaBilly represented by Elvis et al, started to share the airwaves with Folk music, Folk-Rock, and Surf. Vocal harmonies, as presented by The Everley Brothers, The Beach Boys and The Mamas And The Papas, were becoming part of the North American public's musical consciousness.

Then came The British Invasion! The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, and The Who may be the most recognised names today, but there were dozens of other bands getting airplay on this side of the pond. Herman's Hermits were making hits with material that George Formby had written in the '30s! The Dave Clark Five, The Mersey Beats, and many, many 'One-Hit Wonders' gave us a huge supply of recordings to select from. These bands inspired a whole generation of American and Canadian bands in the same style. Paul Revere And The Raiders come to mind. There was a parallel boom in Soul Music and the Motown sound, and this too was influenced by the Beatles. Trivia question... Who recorded "Fool On The Hill"?

I can say, with a resonable degree of certainty, that there is a remarkable, readily noticeable difference in popular music pre-Beatles, and post-Beatles. Their influence has faded somewhat over the last [u]35 years[/u], but it can still be found.

PonyOne, I respectfully submit that, even 10 years from now, Nirvana will appear as an important, but much smaller, blip on the chart compared to the massive shift in musical styles brought on by the arrival of The Beatles.

Lordathestrings
Guitar Tricks Moderator
www.GuitarTricks.com - Home of Online Guitar Lessons

Permalink

Cobain stole riffs from The Beatles anyway,listen to "Serve The Servant" on In Utero,If that ain't a Beatles riff goin on,then BUMP-THE-LA-LA.

what song is it taken from?

i ahvent heard the song.

I'm leaning towards "Because",the ending section,not the vocal harmonies.It's not exact,bt Cobain used a bunch of Dominant 7ths and Minor 7ths for this particular song,which he really hadn't done before.

I had second thoughts when I was starting this thread.Coz people have a way of reacting to some things that I just don't understand.And I happen to be a guy that hates rubbing people the wrong way.Even if I stand a chance of learning something,if that learning involves bad vibe from people who don't really know me,people I'll probably never meet but just happen to interact with thanks to technology,I prefer keeping to myself.
But the thread got started.
Hack Pack:my name is David,not skippy.If the skippy you're talking about is the peanut butter brand,implying kid,I won't even go into what I think about that line of thought.But I will say that I didn't say anyone here is too old.I said old.Not too old.Too is a word which implies some sort of excess,and you need to illustrate the reason something is excess.And in any case,old is a relative term,so I don't even know what's pissing you off.
I don't listen to any music with a scowl on my face.I once heard a Joe Cocker song.On an "oldies "program on my fav local FM station.Once.I didn't even know who that was.But that song got me dancing(mildly)and playing my "air" guitar.I think it was called "The one you turn to" or something.That would be an example.I don't know how old he is,but I know he didn't grow up with the guys in Blink 182,for instance.And why has not being particularly moved(not my choice of words,here and elsewhere)by the beatles got to do with the openess of my mind?And what has having an open mind(you mentioned "a lot younger,more open minded poeple")got to do with being old?They don't necesarilly go in tandem,do they?
I can't like something coz people like it.You judge something when you experience it.And in view of all that I'd heard of the Beatles(notice I heard about them before hearing them),my experience of them wasn't on the same scale as what I'd heard of them.Simple.
Blacksmith,I usually get on the internet in the morning hours.The morning follows the night.I sleep during the night.It's a bit patronizing when you tell me you appreciate my opinion coz you too were once 23.Meaning?If I was 60 you wouldn't?What has age got to do with it,besides the learning curve?I don't want to get personal,so all I'll say is that I get the feeling you've got the opinion that "These days kids........".I've heard it before elsewhere.And I won't get into what I think aboutthe attitude
You say it's your opinion there will never ever be another team like Lennon& McCartney.My contention is this;that whatever it is that makes you feel about this duo as you do,those qualities could be endowed upon/horned by another person/duo/nthplet.Maybe even get better.You don't feel about the beatles the way you feel coz they were your sons.It is/was as a result of what they did.
Don't argue that no one else will will ever run the 100 M in 9.(is it 79?)just coz Maurice Green(?) did.The qualities the Beatles had are not infinite qualities.Someone else could get more magical for a lesser amount of subtle.
And btw,I haven't written any music.I was just using me as an example.
You guys are reacting like I said X is better than the Beatles.I didn't.
I'll try and remember what I say about icons next time.Coz people take offence.Not that it will change the way I see things,but coz since human beings are social animals,and I'm a human being,it might be better to keep to myself for the sake of the social thing.
All you dudes that talked about the time,and how society was then and how people were thinking,thank you.That was what the kind of thing I was hoping for.Not "skippy" and "go to sleep" crap.

HE certainly is a rascal ain't he.


I've been talking about these young "kids" from about the time Nirvana Changed Everything.By the time I was 23,I saw all these "kids" who became as fascinated for guitar solos about as much as we all love an Al Gore acceptance speech.So yeah,I tell these kids to listen to what they want,and I don't push any music on my students or what have.But if the art is lost it's gone.
Luckily we have this forum,where we know people want to be better musicians.We all knew,if you were a kid in the 60's,70's and 80's,that you had to really work to be a great musician,based on what we were hearing from all the talent out there.One thing everyone knew about The Beatles,even if they didn't like them was they were great musicians.But now any one who's been playing for a year has the chance to write a great song.And thats because society has allowed the music to sink to that level.
I listen to Blink 182,I like it,it's like pre-school punk with radio friendly lyrics.It's innocent,a lot like the early Beatles recordings.

Unfortunately,most of these bands like Blink and Sum 41,are NOT maturing like the Beatles did.I prefer latter days Beatles myself,from '66 on.The bands today seem to be repeating formulas that worked.So a bunch of 15 year olds see this,practice a year,figure thats all they need to know,and the music stalls 5 years down the road.These bands aren't maturing because they only reached a certain level,and stopped.

Who knows where this will lead,but at some point,one of the popular bands of today is going to release a song with a crazed insane guitar solo.I see a band like Korn in the future having a guest appearence from,Paul Gilbert say, and this shred solo will either make all the intermediate players quit out of frustration,or try to learn more.And in the process,they willl have to go back,and archive thru what happened 15-20 years prior,and they will realize it took quite an effort to play in those days,and they shall woodshed,and go forward like a army.


Preferably to firebomb MTV and every person who owns a Turn-Table!!!



[url]http://www.deadleaves.com[/url

[Edited by THE_HACK_PACK on 06-05-2002 at 07:13 AM]

Blink182 and Sum41 -seem in a post Nirvana context analagous to Hermans Hermits and whoverthef'did "Yummy,yummy,yummy i got love in my tummy"..ie bubblegum fluff music. (Ok,Ok i haven't heard all their stuff).
And i do like a nice little slice of bubblegum pop, but too much sugar will make you ill.

[Ok,who mentioned the Monkees??? you - outside now,Jimmy!!]


I like Nirvana and liked them before K died, (a student Disco without "Smells.."?? what,never??) and i know people to whom they are Demigods and i also know people who feel the same about The Beatles (and co-incidentally Cliff Richard,etc,etc.), so dig whoever moves your mojo and let those about to shake their moneymaker to a different tune groove on.

Crazy,Cats.

Jerry Levine of Ohio Express,I doubt they were from Ohio though.

Nirvana i thought were great, but to honest they weren't that massively original. They did however bring the punk philosiphy to the mainstream, which started with The pistols, Buzzcocks, the clash etc etc (where basically ANY one could get on stage do their thing, no matter how inept they were... and thanks to this we got "the worst", in my oppinion the very first noise band, which has certainly enriched our music).
That's why they weren't as sucsessful here than in the US, cos we'd areadly had the manchester scene and heard it crumble in the late 70's, only to give us a great post-punk sound (Joy division, blondie etc etc).
Personally i despise the notion that you NEED guitar solo's. I dont understand this. In the 80's we had an influx of bands centered around solo's, lacking in any artist concepts, and song writting was regarded as being superflous. Which i thought was very sad, cos musicains are human beings with feelings, not the products braging about faster speed, more echo, more collabs etc etc.
What also get's on my goat are poeple who have a go at turn tables. Turn tables are fantastic, and the early rap artists are a testiment to this. But like the guitar, it's jut a tool, it personally does nothing, and if it becomes a fad tahnks to the morons using it, then that's too bad, but remember Pappa Roach, Poison, Bon Jovi are guitar bands, but i dont think any us could be proud of such corprate sewage.
It's NOT about effort, but more about talent. To be honest, I hold much more respect for the pixies than i do for Slayer for example (I do like slayer dont get me wrong, but they have like 3 albums which sound the same, and not really taken their sound anywhere specail in the last 2 decades).
I'm glad David Bowie was mentioned, he is an innovator which poeple dont normally think of, and the same for iggy, punk wouldn't be half what it is whith out him.
Sadly with punk, the actaully style it self is vunrable to posers, fakes and generallly anyone out to make a quick buck.
But what makes me piss my self laughing when i hear some classically trained "vertiouso", who's never read any thing by Bowskie talk about Grunge bands saying they play like "hacks". I dont care what he says, he sounds like a cheesy midi, and cant hold a candle to the noise or the ideas of sonic youth (even though i'm not the biggest fan of post modernism). Let alone incorprate anything from teh dada movement, or just anything with depth.
I dont really know taht much abotu the beatles to be honest, but i am a big fan of the kinks, and i CAN apreacaite their influence.
rant over.

Where is the middle ground educated,you mention how the shredders trash the punks,Joe Stump is a great example,but why can't the 2 mix together like in the rest of the world.I'm sure everyone is aware that not only are the Japanese and Europeons fans of punk and industrial,they also love metal and progressive.Sepultura is still the biggest band in South American legend,but they also embraced Nirvana like the rest of the world.The media is at fault in America,they shut the doors on that chapter of music,and now everything in the last 8 years is a by product of Nirvana and Nine Inch Nails.
Am I the only person who owns Pantera,Pearl Jam,Andrew W.K. along with The Stones, The Who,The Beatles and Stevie Ray Vaughn and Vinnie Moore. Is That Weird?

As far as turn tables,if you want to use samples program your Midi equipment like RUSH did,if you want to scratch,then Copy Tom Morrello from Rage Against The Machine.I doubt we'll see any elementary schools in the future teaching young kids how to scratch a turn-table in the key of C very soon.

Originally posted by THE_HACK_PACK
I doubt we'll see any elementary schools in the future teaching young kids how to scratch a turn-table in the key of C very soon.

I've seen some posters today that offered that kind of classes for kids... You have to play with your time...

Then I stand corrected,If it's going on in France,then it must be going on in the states.Hell,I guess it's useful if for anything else,it will teach them good timing and rhythm,I guess an 8 year old would find a turn table more exciting then a metronome.Time will tell.

Well, I haved taught a 7th grade measures and everything by using Acid Pro, the techno program...

The schools in america are way behind,music eduction is the least of there worries.Parents are more concerned about their kids playing,football,and I don't mean soccer.

Kudos to Ronnie James Dio for donating money to a bunch of elementary schools,to develop the music education further,because it as barely there in my days,and I cn't imagine it has improved much in the last 20 years.