Number nine... number nine... number nine... number nine... number nine...
Bang bang maxwell silver hammer came down upon his head
i am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together...
When I find myself in times of job
Mother Mary comes to me
Speaking words of wisdom, let me neet.
And in my hour of my room
She is standing right in front of me
Speaking words of wisdom, let me neet.
let me neet, let me neet, let me neet, let me neet.
If you work then you're loser, let me neet.
If I fell in love with you, would you promise to be true, would you love meeeeee all you can?
>>2 I enjoy this.
Beatles sucked big dicks.
Seriously the first 4 albums are the same fuckin song all over again. Especially the first two. Just put them on an listen, jesus crist why are you doing this to me?
1 Million Liberal Arts Professors can't be wrong!
Well, according to Tom Wolfe, the Beatles went from bubblegum pop sellouts to ripping off the Grateful Dead and acid rock.
the beatles really aren't that unique in terms of how they sound. everything they did was done by someone else before them. All the the beatles ever did was spread other peoples' ideas to the mainstream and get rich for doing it!
>>11: And they did it very, very well.
I am lonely because there is no high school student who listens to Beatles in
Japan.
I'd have to say that "Here Comes the Sun" is my favorite song. I'm not sure why. When I found out out Louis the XIV was called the Sun King, I was in awe.
http://www.scaruffi.com/vol1/beatles.html
Piero Scaruffi thinks the Beatles are one of the most overrated bands of all time, and he knows ten billion times more about everything than anybody (or at least it seems from browsing his website).
I think the Beatles had some good songs but didn't listen to them growing up like most people were able to (except maybe Getting Better on the radio).
Oh, and bump.
Woah, George Harrison's Electronic Sound got a higher score than 10/14 of the Beatles catalogue. Not that I've ever heard Electronic Sound.
meh. Scaruffi's horrible. Abbey Road, The White Album, Revolver... how can you not like these? Sure, they weren't horribly original, and the early stuff is shite, but their melodies are just perfect!
The Beatles were a mind control experiment! That's what I read on the Internet, anyway.
I cannot just sit back and let you hooligans diss my John, Paul, George, and Ringo!
Justice must be served!
The Beatles were incredibly original and basically invented rock music.
No, not rock 'n' roll, rock.
Pop music with a strong backbeat.
They revolutionized music everywhere with psychedelia, introduced Indian music to the west, and created transitioning songs for the first time in mainstream/pop/not-classical music. They also released the first album to show lyrics of songs.
And whether you like it or not, men having long hair was not socially acceptable in the Western world during the 20th century before the Beatles. Then came hippies...
Anyway, how can you not like them? They just simply made good music.
>Anyway, how can you not like them? They just simply made good music.
They were and are still popular. It's good enough of a reason for a bunch of stuck-up hypocrites to passionately hate them.
I have a title for which the Beatles should be legendary, regardless of anything else concerning their other songs, songwriting, and live performances:
I am the Walrus
People able to pull this off deserve to be at the pantheon of humanity.
lol Paul is dead.
Anyways, anyone who says they hate the Beatles are liars. They may hate what they stand for, but chances are they like the songs.
>>15 Have you seen the shite he thinks is better than the Beatles? Captain flipping Beefheart and The Red Crayola.
Freedom of partiality aside, if you agree with this deduction then you are a tit.
This guy is totally full of shit. I want to reach through the Internet and slap his spaghetti-stuffed mouth silly.
It's been a long time since I've read such bad music "criticism".
>>25
I just stumbled onto here and honestly, does anyone even post here anymore? The thread was started in 2006 with less than 30 responses to date, it seems pointless to even come here or try to respond when you probably won't get an answer from people long gone.
Jesus
>>26
Well, you never know! Maybe I might just get a response to years later when that particular user decides to revisit this board out of boredom.
Gooby plz
The beach boys are better.
>>26
Woah, you're right. I didn't even notice how old this thread was. Now it feels weird, like I'm standing in a graveyard.
The fact that so many books still name the Beatles as "the greatest or most significant or most influential" rock band ever only tells you how far rock music still is from becoming a serious art. Jazz critics have long recognized that the greatest jazz musicians of all times are Duke Ellington and John Coltrane, who were not the most famous or richest or best sellers of their times, let alone of all times. Classical critics rank the highly controversial Beethoven over classical musicians who were highly popular in courts around Europe. Rock critics are still blinded by commercial success. The Beatles sold more than anyone else (not true, by the way), therefore they must have been the greatest. Jazz critics grow up listening to a lot of jazz music of the past, classical critics grow up listening to a lot of classical music of the past. Rock critics are often totally ignorant of the rock music of the past, they barely know the best sellers. No wonder they will think that the Beatles did anything worthy of being saved.
>>35
I believe that the Beatles were the best all-around band. The members had well-balanced talents that worked together in a good way. They, however, were not prodigies. They could play, but individually they weren't the most talented or creative.
I got into the Beatles because of the Paul Is Dead conspiracy, I bought Sgt. Peppers so I could get a better look at the front cover and then I thought hmmm the music's pretty good too