Beatles or Stones (or Kinks? Monkees? Herman's Hermits?)

[Purple Stickpin]

Digney, you make valid points, but at the end of it all, we are discussion opinions, not facts. I would submit that the general public is, at best, disappointing in their ability to identify talent. But that's subjective too.

Regarding the Beatles, I would submit this: the one single that most dramatically changed the future of their music; their appraoch to music in general, and therefore music in general (too a degree commensurate with your acceptance of their influence, of course), was Paperback Writer/Rain. It's a watershed mark for sure, but it sold far fewer copies than most of their prior singles, and charted lower. So, influence needn't be (and perhaps can't be) measured only by commercial success.

The number of #1 singles from Elvis strikes me as a very impressive number, but his influence was probably introduced by his second or third major hit; to my ear, they didn't change all that much over the first 10 years or so (military service excluded, of course). The Beatles changed staggeringly from year to year, and even within a year (e.g., Rain, April '66; Strawberry Fields, December '66).

But, I'm really just blowing smoke, because this is all my opinion.

Rock on.

 

[Digney in Burnaby]

I know, I just get tired of opinions really quick. If I want to work out the battle of the bands I go to the I Love Music site, search "beatles v. stones" and come up with threads/opinions galore.

Or go to the Trouser Press message board.

Opinions, yeah, lots of 'em.

Ultimately chalk me up for The Stones. (God help me for actually playing along with the game.:rolleyes:)

 

[mjp]

Producer Andrew Loog Oldham encouraged Jagger/Richards to write because that was where the money was.

That's probably the same reason Ray Davies wrote You Really Got Me, and definitely the reason Paul Siminon wrote The Guns of Brixton on London Calling. Not really comparable as songwriters, but the motivation was the same. And that motivation is what forced a lot of musicians of that era to start writing their own songs.

The thing about the Kinks - and yes, I have heard much of their music - is Davies always sounded like he recorded his vocals after a nice warm bath. Like a cabaret singer reluctantly drafted into one of those crazy new rock and roll combos. That don't do it for me. Rock and roll shouldn't be a casual thing. In my idiot world, anyway. Even if it is a casual thing, at least make it sound like you're passionate or angry about something (see: any "rocking" Doors song for an example of how it's done).

It's all good, this olde-tymey music we're tussling over. Because a handful of motherfuckers sat in a room somewhere and made music together, in a stone-aged, organic, human way. That rarely happens anymore, so my hat is off to all the old bands. And I look forward to the day (and it is surely coming) that a generation of kids say, "Fuck you and your digital studio and your overdubs," and go steal some Les Pauls and make some rock and roll again.

 

[scribbler]

For 6 years my brother ran an ANALOG recording studio...24 track 2" Studor, the whole shabang. He kept his head above water with long alcohol and smoke fueled sessions with the few remaining rock an roll bands in the area that cared about getting the RIGHT sound. But in the end he was done-in by the ease and cheapness of his digital competitors. But man it was fun to hang around those sessions (we shared a warehouse building...welding shop below, rock n roll upstairs). There was some guitar tracking going on that would have killed all organic matter by the volume...had to be played on the other side of several shut doors 60 feet away...only microphones and gear could survive in that room.

 

[Ninjerk]

go steal some Les Pauls and make some rock and roll again.

Do they have to be stolen?

 

[Billville]

Ahh ... Analog. I miss it. I think that's the main reason music sucks today--it's all digital. Everything is compressed to death. No highs. No lows. Bland, bland, bland.(god-damned pro-tools!:mad:)

 

[Mark73]

I once had an analog Korg synthesizer, you could raise hell soundwise with this instrument. Organic sound is what I like best. I was given a groovebox as a present and sold it... trash.

 

[homeless mind]

Digney, you make valid points, but at the end of it all, we are discussion opinions, not facts. I would submit that the general public is, at best, disappointing in their ability to identify talent. But that's subjective too.

I take it you don't viddy American Idol? Not into idolatry? :eek:

Regarding the Beatles, I would submit this: the one single that most dramatically changed the future of their music; their appraoch to music in general, and therefore music in general (too a degree commensurate with your acceptance of their influence, of course), was Paperback Writer/Rain. It's a watershed mark for sure, but it sold far fewer copies than most of their prior singles, and charted lower. So, influence needn't be (and perhaps can't be) measured only by commercial success.

That's real interesting.

How the Beatles went from one genre of pop to metaphysical music in just a few short years in mind-boggling. Damn, they were/are good. Make that great. To me, Sgt. Peppers was the turning point.

And YES, it's not just the words/lyrics, but the sound.

It sure did change the sound of music forever. It reminds me of how things shift in art. Think about the births of: impressionism, cubism, expressionism, etc. They were violent (not literally), and met with some resistance. While the Beatles didn't meet the same resistance, your point of commercialism and public acceptance rings true. At least the Beatles had enough traction, and an audience whose mind was continually expanding too, to accommodate their changes...

I am waiting for the next Beatles or Stones or Doors to get up on stage...but I am not holding my breath...as I will certainly wind up in Picasso's blue period.

Pax

 

[mjp]

go steal some Les Pauls and make some rock and roll again.

Do they have to be stolen?

Well, preferably, yeah. There's a bit of larceny in all the best music.

Woody Guthrie was staying on Will Geer's couch in California for a time, and when they eventually had enough of him and kicked him out (the first of many times), he left with Herta Geer's guitar.

Bob Marley went to Europe to write songs for Johnny Nash, and things didn't quite work out as planned (though Nash had a few successful recordings of songs Marley wrote). When Marley left to return to Jamaica, Nash noticed that his guitar had left with Bob.

Sometimes people just need your stuff and they have to borrow it without your permission. It's not fun when you're the one being "borrowed" from, I know from bittersweet personal experience, but some things must happen for the greater good, comrade.

 

[CRBSMILE]

Does anyone want to talk about Pink Floyd???
In my oh-so teeny tiny opinion- Floyd will be looked at as one of the singular most ingenious musical contributers of the 20th century. Brilliant just isn't the word.CRB:)

 

[hank solo]

Pink Floyd or The Pink Floyd?

Syd roolz :p

 

[CRBSMILE]

OR...MR. Pink Floyd...:)

 

[Purple Stickpin]

To me, Sgt. Peppers was the turning point.

The Beatles had several turning points. Listen to the lack of Ringo on Rubber Soul; I mean, he's there, but that Ticket to Ride drumming sound is almost completely absent. Then, in April '66, when the Revolver sessions started, Rain came out and boasts some of his best drumming, which was always snare-heavy, but never moreso than on this great cut.

The androgeny of tonal center in both Rain and Paperback Writer really brought the innovation of their earlier works to fruition. Revolver brought this further to the fore with the flat 7 all over the flippin' place. It sounds familiar now because the Beatles made it like that.

Pepper may have been the fire-glo masterpiece, but the foundation was laid firmly in spring-summer '66 with the total departure from standard R&R form and substance.

 

[slimedog]

Well, preferably, yeah. There's a bit of larceny in all the best music.

Woody Guthrie was staying on Will Geer's couch in California for a time, and when they eventually had enough of him and kicked him out (the first of many times), he left with Herta Geer's guitar.

Bob Marley went to Europe to write songs for Johnny Nash, and things didn't quite work out as planned (though Nash had a few successful recordings of songs Marley wrote). When Marley left to return to Jamaica, Nash noticed that his guitar had left with Bob.

Sometimes people just need your stuff and they have to borrow it without your permission. It's not fun when you're the one being "borrowed" from, I know from bittersweet personal experience, but some things must happen for the greater good, comrade.

Steve Jones stole the good amount of the Sex Pistols gear from a David Bowie show.

 

[Billville]

Nobody can imitate Elvis. Not even Elvis. Come on, everyone knows that. ;)

Haven't seen it; didn't know what it was; did a quick google and it looks pretty funny...seems like it got a smudge of critical success and a cult following: so what's the deal?

Elvis is an Elvis impersonator impersonator (hiding from the spotlight)

 

[HiddenFormula]

The Beatles had several turning points. Listen to the lack of Ringo on Rubber Soul; I mean, he's there, but that Ticket to Ride drumming sound is almost completely absent. Then, in April '66, when the Revolver sessions started, Rain came out and boasts some of his best drumming, which was always snare-heavy, but never moreso than on this great cut.

The androgeny of tonal center in both Rain and Paperback Writer really brought the innovation of their earlier works to fruition. Revolver brought this further to the fore with the flat 7 all over the flippin' place. It sounds familiar now because the Beatles made it like that.

Pepper may have been the fire-glo masterpiece, but the foundation was laid firmly in spring-summer '66 with the total departure from standard R&R form and substance.

Actually I think 'See My Friends' written by Ray Davies in 1964 pre-dates 'Rain' & 'Paper Back Writer' in incorperating the droning, indian influenced music with the r n b sound that lead to psychedelia.

 

[chronic]

With all of this Beatle chatter, has anyone here heard

?

I thought Martin and Son did a pretty amazing job of putting this together.

 

[Purple Stickpin]

I'm pretty much a purist, so I was a bit surprised at how much I liked Love upon first hearing. But I shouldn't have been. Martin was a huge reason for their success, and he indeed did a masterful job on Love along with his son.

Oh, and I'll give HiddenFormula's link a listen tonight at home...

 

[homeless mind]

I'm pretty much a purist, so I was a bit surprised at how much I liked Love/I] upon first hearing. But I shouldn't have been. Martin was a huge reason for their success, and he indeed did a masterful job on Love along with his son.

"I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together" - JL

Purist, too. Let's not forget the JL influence. Which, I know, you haven't. But without the writing, Mr.M would have never had the same colors to paint with. And no, not with the Stones, as other(s) have opined. As they weren't in the same mental playground as JL. Monkeybars included.

I am the Walrus.

Pax

 

[Purple Stickpin]

Actually I think 'See My Friends' written by Ray Davies in 1964 pre-dates 'Rain' & 'Paper Back Writer' in incorperating the droning, indian influenced music with the r n b sound that lead to psychedelia.

Good tune. Certainly it does predate the Beatles' songs I mentioned, but I guess my point was that the Beatles altered their entire sound (or should I say that it evolved) so that their overall direction was toward the Revolver and then Pepper sound.

But, I'd be crazy to insist that the Beatles alone had a hand in all this. I mean the Byrds beat then to the psychedelic punch with Eight Miles High, which was originally recorded in December '65.

 

[homeless mind]

has anyone here heard The Beatles, Love?

Love, Love, Love...

Love is all you need...

Pax,

homeless mind

For those starved to read JL's truth:

Love, love, love, love, love, love, love, love, love.
There's nothing you can do that can't be done.
Nothing you can sing that can't be sung.
Nothing you can say but you can learn how to play the game
It's easy.
There's nothing you can make that can't be made.
No one you can save that can't be saved.
Nothing you can do but you can learn how to be you
in time - It's easy.

All you need is love, all you need is love,
All you need is love, love, love is all you need.
Love, love, love, love, love, love, love, love, love.
All you need is love, all you need is love,
All you need is love, love, love is all you need.
There's nothing you can know that isn't known.
Nothing you can see that isn't shown.
Nowhere you can be that isn't where you're meant to be.
It's easy.
All you need is love, all you need is love,
All you need is love, love, love is all you need.
All you need is love (all together now)
All you need is love (everybody)
All you need is love, love, love is all you need.

 

[mjp]

Further proof that lyrics are not poetry.





Sorry, I have to do that. It's like a form of Tourette's.

 

[homeless mind]

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaaahha.

that's why you da man.

and i really am laughing that hard.

hahahahhahahahahhahahahhahaha.

Cheers to your Kaleidoscope eyes....

 

[Purple Stickpin]

Oh dear. Seriously; lyrics are not poetry. I had this argument with my wife on Saturday night, and she still doesn't accept it.

But it's true. It doesn't mean that they are any less viable as thoughts or any less valuble. It's just that you can't read song lyrics and expect them to be a poem. And you can't sing a poem and expect a good song.

An obvious counter argument would be Morrison or Dylan. But try it:

Morrison wrote poetry, and he wrote lyrics. But ne'er the twain shall meet. Not to say that he didn't recite poetry over music "as lyrics." But that doesn't count; we're talking true sung lyrics vs. poetry.

Dylan writes mainly lyrics, and while they come close, they fall flat as poetry. Try it with Desolation Row, Visions of Johanna, It's Alright Ma or A Hard Rain's a-Gonna Fall. Great words. Horrible poems.

 

[homeless mind]

I've been educated by the brittle female organ already.
And I'm sometwat, I mean, somewhat in agreement.
Almost totally.

Mojo's poetry is lacking for me "” it just doesn't work (his poetry), compared to the greats.

But Dylan is where the lines still get blurred.

Dad gum, Mr Tambourine Man, while I can't read it without hearing it (as per The Bruce Springsteen of BUKnet's suggestion); it still befuddles me.

Methinks it's poetry.

But again, I can't read it without hearing it in my head.

So I am a victim of sound.

Sonorous curse, if I may.

Damn you, O brittle one...

 

[Purple Stickpin]

Sorry; I edited my post whilst you were quoting. Dylan is indeed close. As close as a red pubic hair. But not there.

But not to worry; Dylan's lyrics are better than a great deal of poetry.

 

[homeless mind]

The way I see Bob is that he isn't a rock star. He is merely a great writer who happens to get his message out through song. So music is his curse, his means to an end. His way to convey his message...music is just a sidebar.

I'm going to duck now. Gimme shelter...

 

[Purple Stickpin]

I see no flaw in that position at all. If you've read Dylan's liner notes to Another Side..., Bringing it... or Highway 61... you'll know that he can also write engaging prose. Albeit, somewhat random, stream-of-conciousness prose (a la Kerouac; from whom that probably emerged).

I really like those notes; zits and all. They are, as Dylan later expressed (was it from Ionescu?), all about "I is another." Dylan is a lie (and I don't mean that disparagingly, but as someone who has almost all of his records, boots included, and puts him right up there with Aristotle and Woody Allen), but the words are genuine nonetheless.

 

[mjp]

The way I see Bob is that he isn't a rock star. He is merely a great writer who happens to get his message out through song. So music is his curse, his means to an end. His way to convey his message...music is just a sidebar.

Bob Dylan wanted, very badly, to be a star. Whatever rejection of "stardom" he did after the fact doesn't change that.

And when he left Hibbing, he had no message. His only message was, "look at me."

I love Bob Dylan and his crazy ideas and crazy music. But he is who he is.

Most people who became famous for their art just wanted someone to look at them. Validate them. Or to prove to their fathers that they were worthy of their love. That is a very common theme among successful people in all walks of life, not just entertainment.

 

[slimedog]

I've got a collection of all Lou Reed's lyrics and it reads, for the most part, lie poetry to me. But hey, who cares what you call it-it's all words.