FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[FRAFPDD]

The Beatles?! Pah! Manufactured pish with a bass player that looked like someone had shoved a turd under his nose!

Theyve sold an estimated billion records, and they disbanded in 1969. Nuff. said.

Listen to

Let it Be
Strawberry Fields Forever
Long and Winding Road
Something
Here comes the sun


then tell me the same thing!

Ok, the Beatles were crap. All their songs sounded the same. If the Beatles were a new band today, they were so bland I doubt anyone would notice. The Stones were the band of the 60's. In fact, the Beatles wished they were the Stones.

The Beatles were bigger then Jesus, comparing them to Stones doesnt particularly bother me considering both were in my top four. Also....

youll find the stones had a lot of stuff that sounded the same, im thinking 60's work mainly, but that is the nature of 60's music that music set the early benchmark of the very primitive 1950 start, and 1970 was the full explosion, peak and demise of rock music, with guns n roses playing the coda.

[andrew]

I still think they were vastly over rated.

[FRAFPDD]

[quote="andrew"]I still think they were vastly over rated.[/quote]



What the!? this is the favourite artist thread not the Vettel thread..... *pats self on back for cunningness*


Anyway i dont mind, i like the phrase "each to their own" it applies for so many things, my music taste, yours, DD's masochism fetish.......

What i dont like is when my EXTREMELY accomplished bands like Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, Stones and such are ridiculed by anyone be it emo music lover or rap music lover, its just like....do you want to talk facts, cause ill kick your ignorant face in.

[darwin dali]

I can appreciate the Beatles' late work when they began to branch out and experiment a bit more. The early stuff was just teenie pop crap.

[racechick]

The Beatles?! Pah! Manufactured pish with a bass player that looked like someone had shoved a turd under his nose!

Theyve sold an estimated billion records, and they disbanded in 1969. Nuff. said.

Listen to

Let it Be
Strawberry Fields Forever
Long and Winding Road
Something
Here comes the sun


then tell me the same thing!

Ok, the Beatles were crap. All their songs sounded the same. If the Beatles were a new band today, they were so bland I doubt anyone would notice. The Stones were the band of the 60's. In fact, the Beatles wished they were the Stones.

The beatles were crap? Thats worse than saying catlunya is better than Istanbul park! their songs dont all sound the same, depends who wrote them. Some of the McCartney ones do a bit , but certainly not all of them. If a new band today was heard back in the Beatles era I can guarantee you theyd receive a worse reception than the beatles songs would today. Of course they sound dated now. things have moved on-taste, technology;this is what happens. But remove the Beatles and you remove a link and you may not get the music you like now. I probably prefer the Stones, but the Beatles came first. they formed in 1957, then called the Quarry men. the Stones didnt form till1962. Sooooooo, bit of copycat going on there.

Fraff! Good choice of groups! Pink Floyd!!!! Moody Blues??

[FRAFPDD]

Yeah, i tend to like mainstream only bands but of non mainstream (nowadays) genres.

So i like all the main figureheads of say classick rock: Stones, Beatles, Led Zep, Floyd but not the one hit wonder shyte.


I literally have a very specific music taste in one sense they cant be one hit wonder bands and their lyrics and intrstruments must both be good.

Bands like Muse dont cut it cause the lyrics are total crud, its just catchy rock instruments, and even taht is basic beyond belief.


Bands on my ipod:


ABBA
Beach Boys
Beatles
Bloc Party (if you a fan of floyd listen to them, supreme current modern thought provoking lyrics with intricately layered floyd like instrumentals)
Classical Music/ Beethoven/ Verdi/ City of London-Prague Orchestras etc. Mainly Film Soundtracks like Schindlers List or Westerns.
The Clash
David Bowie
The Doors
ELO
Eric Clapton
Fleetwood Mac
Frank Sinatra
Guns N Roses
Jimi Hendrix
Johnny Cash
Kate Bush (who Lady Gaga has totally ripped off)
Led Zeppelin
Michael Jackson
Moby
Pink Floyd
Prince
Queen
REM
Rolling Stones
Santana
Simon and Garfunkel
The Smiths
Van Halen
The Who


thats it, therell never be any more added then songs of those bands.

[darwin dali]

No ELP?

[youtube]_Y1x04hAUT4[/youtube]

[andrew]

No ELP?

[youtube]_Y1x04hAUT4[/youtube]

[darwin dali]

No ELP?

[youtube]_Y1x04hAUT4[/youtube]

[FRAFPDD]

Ill have a look into them.....

[andrew]

The beatles were crap? Thats worse than saying catlunya is better than Istanbul park! their songs dont all sound the same, depends who wrote them. Some of the McCartney ones do a bit , but certainly not all of them. If a new band today was heard back in the Beatles era I can guarantee you theyd receive a worse reception than the beatles songs would today. Of course they sound dated now. things have moved on-taste, technology;this is what happens. But remove the Beatles and you remove a link and you may not get the music you like now. I probably prefer the Stones, but the Beatles came first. they formed in 1957, then called the Quarry men. the Stones didnt form till1962. Sooooooo, bit of copycat going on there.

Fraff! Good choice of groups! Pink Floyd!!!! Moody Blues??

You really don't like me having a different opinion do you?

The Stones and Beatles are different kinds of music so I doubt the Stones would copy a bunch of Scousers! The Stones stem from the only true music form - the blues. The Beatles were a forerunner to Simon Cowell mass produced filth that clutters the shelves in HMV - pop music. 4 blokes that look the same, look like they have their feet nailed to the ground and a drummer who didn't seem to know what a drum kit was.

Incidently, who would form the ideal band? For me it would have to be:

Bass - Peter Hook (who else?)
Drums - John Bonham if he was still alive, Charlie Watts or Stephen Morris (human drum machine!)
Guitars - James Dean Bradfield and Keith Richards
Lyrics - Freddie Mercury if he was still alive, James Dean Bradfield

Anyone else? Does this need a new thread or is there one that has been dead for a few years that I can resurrect?

[andrew]

Ill have a look into them.....

They were ok up to a point but like all prog rock they were far too self indulgant and the tunes were often far far far too long during gigs.

[darwin dali]

Ill have a look into them.....

One of their more famous hits:
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x9a8f_ ... -man_music

and of course:
[youtube]hwCWCJLm6M0[/youtube]

[FRAFPDD]

Ill have a look into them.....

They were ok up to a point but like all prog rock they were far too self indulgant and the tunes were far far far too long.

You must be trying to get me banned as soon as possible andrew lol

No such thing as too long, you know what Shine on you crazy diamond is, its a 26 minute long song from Pink Floyd, and every second is magical goodness, granted its split into two songs, SOYCD pt 1 and 2, Pink Floyds songs freuently made the 7 minute mark, Led Zeppelins songs are on average about 6 minutes long, rolling stones music style means songs a realatively short, 3/4 minutes, good music isnt chained to short songs.

Dont get the self indulgent thing, explain using Pink Floyd as an example, plus, when your taking tokes on a tasty rizla doobie, the longer the song the better, you dont want gaps ruining your "trip" which is why Dark side of the moon is such a classic albulm, 45 minutes of seamless transition between songs, its magic.

Granted you definitely dont need drugs to enjoy music, but if you can you should try it once. Just having a hard days work getting home, plonking on the sofa with whiskey and a smoke is good enough....

[darwin dali]

long is good

[youtube]gXiaiRWFBSk[/youtube]

The full version (I couldn't find on YouTube) is 21 minutes!