The Beatles

Forum

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
They assimilated influences to an extent that no band had before, or has done since. You can hear these influences in terms of genres. If you know their work well, you'll hear that their music has bits of rock, folk, soul, R&B, blues, jazz, ska, C&W, classical, avant-garde, metal, & more.
They had no narrow-mindedness in their musical outlook. They didn't 'play it safe'. They were so unique, & no one since has been more unique.

>>By nonyeb   (Tuesday, 30 Jan 2007 03:09)



I would argue that last point, except that I don't know The Beatles' music anywhere near as well as you.

>>By Flagg   (Tuesday, 30 Jan 2007 12:46)



Well, other acts like Bowie have shown commendable diversity in their music, but to the same extent as The Beatles? They were only around for 8yrs or so, & I think they did it in considerably less time than the others.

>>By nonyeb   (Tuesday, 30 Jan 2007 16:27)



To diversify is one thing, it is the whole other level of significance, when you predetermine what the music shall be at least for half a century.

>>By Vallerius   (Tuesday, 30 Jan 2007 21:12)



Yes, it is as if other bands & composers looked to them for musical guidance.

>>By nonyeb   (Wednesday, 31 Jan 2007 00:37)



I'm sure they do. Based on what I've heard on them, which does cover their whole span, their music is nowhere near as diverse as Bowie's.

>>By Flagg   (Wednesday, 31 Jan 2007 17:52)



*heard of them

>>By Flagg   (Wednesday, 31 Jan 2007 17:53)



I think The Beatles were most diverse, & managed to stay most popular throughout that diversity.

>>By nonyeb   (Thursday, 1 Feb 2007 01:14)



That's an accomplishment but it doesn't make them better artists.

>>By Flagg   (Friday, 2 Feb 2007 14:11)



Who's the Beatles?

>>By endless_nameless   (Friday, 2 Feb 2007 16:19)



You're joking, right?

>>By Flagg   (Friday, 2 Feb 2007 17:18)



Of course he's joking. It's likely meant to be a way of saying that they were overrated or don't deserve their fame, which is completely untrue.

>>By Urbane   (Saturday, 3 Feb 2007 21:51)



Yes I was joking. I don't think they're overrated, they made amazing music so they got everything they deserved. Well, apart from a bullet in John Lennon's back...that was quite mean..

>>By endless_nameless   (Sunday, 4 Feb 2007 21:11)



This is where have to put it honest: Do you really know what it takes to form a band? a good band? a fabulous one? Then you'll probably agree that this is all made in heaven, I mean the human factor above all.
you need folk to accomplish anything in this life.
Even if you wish to build up a relationship in your private life, you still need the right person. Otherwise it's all in vain.
No great folks, no great band...

>>By Vallerius   (Monday, 5 Feb 2007 10:58)



Anyone who has ever tripped while listening to the revolver album i'm sure will agree that the beatles made unbeatably astounding music. Any band that can make you hear a color or see the wind move is amazing.

>>By Artemis7.0   (Friday, 9 Feb 2007 18:29)



I just hear Decca turned Beatles down, because they did not like the sound [?) and anyway guitars were on the way out.

With guitar sounds like George´s you can live forever...

>>By Bob Arne   (Saturday, 10 Feb 2007 00:36)



words cannot explain the brilliance of the beatles.

>>By raspberry_juice   (Sunday, 18 Feb 2007 03:26)



The Fab Four are just the complete, total band where I'm concerned.

>>By nonyeb   (Saturday, 10 Mar 2007 12:29)



I wonder if these guys will ever let their music be sold online (i.e. iTunes). Not that I would need it, since I already own all their albums. Just wondering. They seem to be the only holdouts. Hell, even Metallica (Napster, anyone?) finally released their stuff online.

>>By The Walrus   (Thursday, 5 Apr 2007 05:01)



Maybe that´s because the Beatles no longer exist, half of them are dead and the other half either doesn´t bother or has enough money for more than one life and doesn´t need any more.

They were the best band that ever existed... and they´re still.

>>By Nightmare   (Friday, 6 Apr 2007 20:09)



They produced even greater music when they disdbanded, i.e. G. Harrison, McCartney, Lennon et all.

>>By lv2read   (Monday, 9 Apr 2007 05:14)



Oh, yes! The aftermath is a fabulous period musically. Band On The Run is a master-piece, as is London Town. Unbelievable albums, absolutely awesome.

>>By Vallerius   (Monday, 9 Apr 2007 15:43)



I just bought George's Brainwashed album & am glad that he was making music until 'the last moment'.

>>By nonyeb   (Tuesday, 10 Apr 2007 12:24)



And besides there is no past time in music actually.

>>By Vallerius   (Thursday, 24 May 2007 20:04)



Their songs are GREAT!!! A great band, that has managed to capture the attention of every age up to now!

>>By Hey There Tracy   (Monday, 25 Jun 2007 22:42)



Everytime I open up this section & read that first entry saying that they're overrated, I fel like throwing-up! A curse upon that person!

>>By nonyeb   (Tuesday, 26 Jun 2007 00:14)



Sorry, "I feel like....", I should've said.

>>By nonyeb   (Tuesday, 26 Jun 2007 00:15)



Eh. There's always someone who likes to be contrary when a band, movie, etc. is popular. They usually only have a very shallow knowledge of the work in question. I doubt they've actually listened to any of the Beatles music besides the singles played on the radio.

>>By The Walrus   (Tuesday, 26 Jun 2007 04:31)



The song 'Hello Goodbye' just perfectly sums up the frivolity of the '60s, doesn't it?

>>By nonyeb   (Sunday, 1 Jul 2007 00:47)



I'm looking forward to the film, "Across the Universe," with Evan Rachel Wood. I have NO idea what it's about and I know even less after watching the trailer but the music is faaaaantastic.

>>By The Walrus   (Sunday, 1 Jul 2007 05:17)



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
The discussion board is currently closed.