What are you currently listening to?

[coollino]

It's all individual taste I guess! There are many bands that are also considered 'Best Band Ever' types that I've never really bonded with (Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, Bob Dylan)

Sonic youth and talking heads for me, I think

I'd like to put Low in there too but realistically they haven't had a big enough impact

 

[COYBL25]

There's definitely been a bit of backlash over the years against The Beatles -"Nowhere near as good as Band X", "Massively overrated" etc

They're rated exactly how they should be - which is the greatest band that ever was and will ever be

All of those albums (13) and songs - In a catalogue that spans only 7 years is absolutely mindblowing, and puts almost every 'modern' band to shame

I`m not a fan in anyway of the Beatles, despite being brought up on them by my mum.

But considering their age and lack of any formal musical background, some of their lyrics and music is just mind blowing.

I`ll use " Elanor Rigby" as an example, a song written by two young men in their early 20`s, about old age and loneliness. Something they knew nothing about or experienced. It`s just staggeringly good.

 

[coollino]

 

[Gabagool]

 

[Gabagool]

 

[navidson]

You know what type of music I post in here.

Give me a Beatles album that will sway me.

I generally find myself reaching for 'Abbey Road' - but every album has gold on it

 

[coollino]

 

[coollino]

 

[Rugby Toffee]

 

[Blue Sky]

5. Magical Mystery Tour

Their least favourite amongst critics? I'd argue that a) its a better into than Sgt Peppers intro, and b) the tracks on this album alone would be any other bands greatest hits, its that good.

It's a bit of a conundrum is Magical Mystery Tour , it wasn't really a studio album , it was released as a double EP here and made no. 2 in the UK singles chart being held there at no. 1 by Hello Goodbye . An album was released in the USA , all the EP tracks plus 5 singles which included Penny Lane and Strawberry Fields which were written during the recording of Sgt Pepper and released as a double A side before Sgt Pepper . The album version stayed at no.1 in the states for 8 weeks but only made no. 31 here as it was an import .
I agree it is the finest collection of Beatles songs .

 

[Gwladys St. Glory]

 

[Gwladys St. Glory]

 

[McBain]

That's from years of people pummelling that 'fact' into people, that's not surprising

I genuinely can't see why they are the best band though? I have listened to most of their albums, i think, at least once and they never really did much for me other than the odd song

I'm not an expert of 60's rock, but Beach Boys, Velvet Underground, Rolling Stones put out a lot of albums in a short space of time in the 1960's so maybe that was the done thing back then?

It's loads of reasons i reckon. Heres my half baked reasoning!

First and most basically the name. It's clever, it's not a real word. Well advanced for its day and they're instantly the best named band to take on what's to come in the 60's. Look at the other bands names - they're good for stereotypes but culturally Beatles name literally means music. Its also the first time they attribute creativity to dreams which in and of itself adds to the mystique.

A Band. They had big bands and singers - performers like Jerry lee Lewis who had bands - and they say 'The Crickets' were the first real band - you can see the influence. They were formed in '57 - only a couple of years before The Beatles but Holly died in '59. So in a lot of peoples eyes they were the first 'band' people had ever seen.

Cultural Influence. From the very first moment they broke out they had an identity - and fused hit songs into fashion and art and not only did it first with the mop tops and suits, they did it again a few years later with Sgt Peppers, psychedelia, and leading culture, and then again with counter culture.

Mainly though it's just the actual songs, the development of albums, building up and breaking down genres and the metamorphasis of their sound. Thats not even touching on the incredible innovations in recording and mixing techniques. You’d get an entire lifetime career out of a song like ‘Revolution’ when for them its just another tune.

And finally, the career. They smashed out apprentiships, graduated to superstardom before anyone, worked their absolute socks off, borrowed heavily, paid it back in spades, got way too big for their boots, refused to tour, pioneered ownership of their material (eventually) and broke up spectaularily.

 

[Parker]

 

[coollino]

It's loads of reasons i reckon. Heres my half baked reasoning!

First and most basically the name. It's clever, it's not a real word. Well advanced for its day and they're instantly the best named band to take on what's to come in the 60's. Look at the other bands names - they're good for stereotypes but culturally Beatles name literally means music. Its also the first time they attribute creativity to dreams which in and of itself adds to the mystique.

A Band. They had big bands and singers - performers like Jerry lee Lewis who had bands - and they say 'The Crickets' were the first real band - you can see the influence. They were formed in '57 - only a couple of years before The Beatles but Holly died in '59. So in a lot of peoples eyes they were the first 'band' people had ever seen.

Cultural Influence. From the very first moment they broke out they had an identity - and fused hit songs into fashion and art and not only did it first with the mop tops and suits, they did it again a few years later with Sgt Peppers, psychedelia, and leading culture, and then again with counter culture.

Mainly though it's just the actual songs, the development of albums, building up and breaking down genres and the metamorphasis of their sound. Thats not even touching on the incredible innovations in recording and mixing techniques. You’d get an entire lifetime career out of a song like ‘Revolution’ when for them its just another tune.

And finally, the career. They smashed out apprentiships, graduated to superstardom before anyone, worked their absolute socks off, borrowed heavily, paid it back in spades, got way too big for their boots, refused to tour, pioneered ownership of their material (eventually) and broke up spectaularily.

there are all of the top of my head:

1. it means music to some maybe, but it doesn't to me. this just aligns with the view that everyone should just accept that they are the best and that they are 'music'. they aren't, they're a band. there are different types of music, even around that time, which does not involved bands.

2. yeah, that would make sense - they prob are the first band like that (that i am aware of)

3. wasn't a lot of that big in the US at the time anyhow?

4. a lot of were techniques already being used, by Terry Riley (who worked with them ) and Le Monte Young

I'm obviously not saying they are bad or anything, but it just seems to be a default answer for a lot of people and if anyone disagrees you just get a sneer by a musical expert who has all the LP's and has played in a pub band a few times.