Is there anyone here who genuinely dislikes or hates The Beatles as a musical entity?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (157 of them)

They do sometimes sound like people who were trying to sound like the Beatles, though.

― Tom (Groke), Friday, 11 August 2006 13:01 (seventeen years ago) link

i genuinely dislike the pussycat dolls as a musical entity.

― Bashment Jakes (Enrique), Friday, 11 August 2006 13:04 (seventeen years ago) link

I don't even really get that. The intro to Don't Look Back In Anger nicks from Imagine, and She's Electric has that Ringo-song vibe, but apart from that I can't think of a single instance where you could say "Yeah, that's a Beatles rip / homage".

― Sick Mouthy (Nick Southall), Friday, 11 August 2006 13:05 (seventeen years ago) link

What is All Around The World trying to sound like then?

― Tom (Groke), Friday, 11 August 2006 13:07 (seventeen years ago) link

i genuinely dislike the pussycat dolls as a musical entity.

tbh the only pussycat dolls song i like is 'buttonz', but i LUV LUV LUV it. (nb i have not heard the PCD album)

― The Lex (The Lex), Friday, 11 August 2006 13:07 (seventeen years ago) link

I realise my first post was ambiguous - I mean Oasis sound like they're borrowing from prior Beatle-esque bands, not that Oasis sound like they're trying and failing to borrow from the Bs.

― Tom (Groke), Friday, 11 August 2006 13:08 (seventeen years ago) link

Yeah, pretty much. Early seventies sound is what they were always after.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 11 August 2006 13:10 (seventeen years ago) link

Anyway, I do like the Beatles, but I don't think disliking them need be some outlandish thing or a big posture.

― Tom (Groke), Friday, 11 August 2006 13:11 (seventeen years ago) link

Eh. I used to hate the Beatles kinda reflexively, after having so many people try to shove them down my throat. I still hate Sgt. Pepper's and a handful of other stuff that I think is crap, but in general it's a "It's not the band I hate, it's their fans" moment. And after listening to Magical Mystery Tour, I admit that I enjoyed a lot of it.
But nearly all of the things that Lex lists above (clunky, trite, nasal, music hall) are things that I still hate about the Beatles. I've just come to realize that they have a lot more stuff beyond that, though the chances of me ever really exploring further are pretty slim.

― js (honestengine), Friday, 11 August 2006 13:47 (seventeen years ago) link

I like the Beatles but I don't like the vast majority of other 60's music. It really, really wasn't the golden era some crack it up to be. Sure, the odd Barrett-era Floyd here or the odd Robert Z/Brian Wilson there but apart from the stuff EVERYONE names immediately I can't think of much that's really flipped my lid.

― Louis Jagger (Haberdager), Friday, 11 August 2006 13:50 (seventeen years ago) link

Louis needs Love, Hendrix and Nuggets in his life.

― Sick Mouthy (Nick Southall), Friday, 11 August 2006 14:02 (seventeen years ago) link

What is All Around The World trying to sound like then?
-- Tom (freakytrigge...), August 11th, 2006 3:07 PM. (Groke)

Sclub7 - Pure and Simple

― wogan lenin (dog latin), Friday, 11 August 2006 14:03 (seventeen years ago) link

"i think oasis are the worst band to ever exist, this is in large part due to the fact that they copied The [easiest, most predictable and most conventional and acceptable to Phil Collins fans bits, which are maybe 25% of their contributions to music] Beatles so well"

fixed. kinda.

Lex this is like taking Joni Mitchell to be a tree-hugging hippy AND NOTHING MORE because of "Big Yellow Taxi" or Kate Bush as a novelty singer because of Wuthering Heights, The Beach Boys as a 100% SURF DUDES... or New Order as a FOOTBALL BAND.

xpost - and Dusty Springfield.

― fandango (fandango), Friday, 11 August 2006 14:03 (seventeen years ago) link

Your lid's stuck! (xpost to Louis)

― Danny Aioli (Rock Hardy), Friday, 11 August 2006 14:03 (seventeen years ago) link

I got poxy fuled but I wrote a long bit about the only thing Oasis really taking their queues from Beatles-wise was the wretched "Nananana's" of "Hey Jude". Oasis never wrote a "Being For The Benefit Of Mr Kite!" or a "Day In The Life" or anything close to Revolver, Magical Mystery Tour or anything the Beatles ever did. It's a fallacy created by the national press circa 1996.

― wogan lenin (dog latin), Friday, 11 August 2006 14:05 (seventeen years ago) link

Louis, buy the first four Spirit albums, seriously.

― Pashmina (Pashmina), Friday, 11 August 2006 14:06 (seventeen years ago) link

x-post

Isn't that partly what 'beetlebum' was about?

― Pete W (peterw), Friday, 11 August 2006 14:12 (seventeen years ago) link

Blur were closer to the Beatles stylistically than Oasis, bt no one ever says that. Parklife is very similar to, say Sgt Peppers than Definitely Maybe.

― wogan lenin (dog latin), Friday, 11 August 2006 14:13 (seventeen years ago) link

"Hey Jude" na-na-nas: C/D

classic

― Euler (Euler), Friday, 11 August 2006 14:13 (seventeen years ago) link

Nick, hey, I really, really like Forever Changes and Electric Ladyland, but it didn't immediately occur to me to stick 'em in. Obviously I like more than 3 60's artists, but I'm just saying that there's a lot of junk there too, and perhaps less gold than in other eras. Didn't you see Hendrix and Love on my 60's list?

― Louis Jagger (Haberdager), Friday, 11 August 2006 14:22 (seventeen years ago) link

Blur were a lot closer to that whole "Boyband +" steez that saw what most pop critics would term the Beatles "golden years", they were more... presentable?

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Friday, 11 August 2006 14:33 (seventeen years ago) link

Blur had a zest for experimentation, however, that associates their music much more closely with that of late-period Beatles, much more so in fact than Oasis, whose 'experimental' urges extended to the odd radio static interlude.

― Louis Jagger (Haberdager), Friday, 11 August 2006 14:37 (seventeen years ago) link

Was the 60's the last time pop and rock really had equal critical, commercial and artistic status?

― fandango (fandango), Friday, 11 August 2006 14:39 (seventeen years ago) link

2002

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Friday, 11 August 2006 14:40 (seventeen years ago) link

GTFO

― fandango (fandango), Friday, 11 August 2006 14:42 (seventeen years ago) link

Blur were a lot closer to that whole "Boyband +" steez that saw what most pop critics would term the Beatles "golden years", they were more... presentable?
-- Dom Passantino (juror...), August 11th, 2006 4:33 PM. (Dom Passantino)

Blur being called a boyband was as laughably unfair as Oasis being called Beatles heirs.

― wogan lenin (dog latin), Friday, 11 August 2006 14:44 (seventeen years ago) link

Blur were as much a boyband as The Beatles were. Oasis weren't.

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Friday, 11 August 2006 14:45 (seventeen years ago) link

Dom, yes and as Louis says their attitude towards dipping their toes into different genre pools was almost the same as the Beatles, even down to the musichall pastiches.

― wogan lenin (dog latin), Friday, 11 August 2006 14:47 (seventeen years ago) link

Plus "Chemical World" was way way way more Beatles-y than any Oasis track without even sounding like the Beatles.

― wogan lenin (dog latin), Friday, 11 August 2006 14:49 (seventeen years ago) link

I know which one of 'em Smash Hits gave a shit about when I was 14-15, and which one of them had four members with distinct and tangible personalities (OK the drummer was borderline but he FLEW A PLANE)

xposts

― DJ Mencap (DJ Mencap), Friday, 11 August 2006 14:50 (seventeen years ago) link

I like the early Invasion Beatles (up through "I Feel Fine" I guess) and the BBC album that came out with all their R&B/rockabilly covers, but "Rubber Soul" and everything after is unlistenable to me.

Blur were closer to the Beatles stylistically than Oasis, bt no one ever says that. Parklife is very similar to, say Sgt Peppers than Definitely Maybe.

Coincidentally, I dislike the Beatles and don't care about Oasis (love the big coke-album single that starts off with helicopters), but I hate Blur with a surprising passion. Except for "Song 2" which is still kind of fun.

― milo z (mlp), Friday, 11 August 2006 14:50 (seventeen years ago) link

Would a boyband have written 'Essex Dogs', however? Blur may have spent the early part of their career as a boyband, but, like the Beatles, they grew up to become a rock group. Horribly oversimplified I know but I hope you catch my drift.

xxpost

Song 2 is one of their worst songs, although I too have a guilty liking for D'ja Know What I Mean (one of the few Oasis songs I can listen to through).

― Louis Jagger (Haberdager), Friday, 11 August 2006 14:52 (seventeen years ago) link

Oasis -> McCartney & Ringo
Blur -> Lennon & George

― danzig (danzig), Friday, 11 August 2006 15:10 (seventeen years ago) link

found! the person who ~~hates~~ ~~mildly dislikes~~ thinks they were a bit overrated: http://www.scaruffi.com/vol1/beatles.html

― fandango (fandango), Friday, 11 August 2006 15:14 (seventeen years ago) link

Well, anybody who could conscionably give Revolver 5 out of 10 is a braver man than I.

― Louis Jagger (Haberdager), Friday, 11 August 2006 18:30 (seventeen years ago) link

Was the 60's the last time pop and rock really had equal critical, commercial and artistic status?

Dom said 2002; I'd also add 2003. Also: let's not forget the golden year of 1984.

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Friday, 11 August 2006 19:17 (seventeen years ago) link

I believe pop actually pulled ahead for a few weeks in spring '84. Fortunately, I wasn't around to see it.

― Louis Jagger (Haberdager), Friday, 11 August 2006 19:20 (seventeen years ago) link

"fortunately"? Fie on you.

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Friday, 11 August 2006 19:25 (seventeen years ago) link

She's Electric has that Ringo-song vibe

Actually its Funkadelic's 'No Compute'.

― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy (Kerr), Friday, 11 August 2006 19:32 (seventeen years ago) link

Christ, if you scan down that History of Rock Music thing far enough the guy's basic point becomes that the Beatles did not do enough lengthy free-form jams and therefore cannot be considered avant-garde.

I think I am less smart for reading that.

― Sean Braud1s (Sean Braudis), Friday, 11 August 2006 19:34 (seventeen years ago) link

John Lennon's freeform jam with a tape-machine near the end of The Beatles doesn't count, then...

― Louis Jagger (Haberdager), Friday, 11 August 2006 19:37 (seventeen years ago) link

No offense dude, but terrible thread idea.

― deej.. (deej..), Friday, 11 August 2006 20:08 (seventeen years ago) link

The Beatles were a really good rock and roll band. There's plenty of evidence of that on their early records and a decent amount on the later records. I would think that calling them klunky essentially amounts to the position that rock and roll is itself inherently clunky (and therefore that electric blues and country and western is also klunky).

― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Friday, 11 August 2006 20:24 (seventeen years ago) link

xpost
the premise of that Italian novel linked above seems to be

them beatles woz shit cos they wusnt CREEM or LED ZEP and they are bestbandzeva they ROXXXXOOOORRRRSS

― winter testing (winter testing), Friday, 11 August 2006 20:27 (seventeen years ago) link

I would think that calling them klunky essentially amounts to the position that rock and roll is itself inherently clunky (and therefore that electric blues and country and western is also klunky).

Yes, yes, but are the Beatles crunky?

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Friday, 11 August 2006 20:29 (seventeen years ago) link

no, more clinky rinky dinky

who said we never talk about what music actually sounds like ???

― winter testing (winter testing), Friday, 11 August 2006 20:31 (seventeen years ago) link

I must be desperate for ILM action to have opened this thread.

For those who don't know, you can't bring liquids on planes now.

― Sir Dr. Rev. PappaWheelie Jr. II of The Third Kind (PappaWheelie 2), Friday, 11 August 2006 20:33 (seventeen years ago) link

For me, the clunky bits come more from some of the "experiments" and music hall stuff than from the rock and roll.

― js (honestengine), Friday, 11 August 2006 20:34 (seventeen years ago) link

PappaWheelie, the roffle you provided made it almost worth it.

― Ruud Haarvest (Ken L), Friday, 11 August 2006 20:36 (seventeen years ago) link

I like both bands but I'm a little awestruck that someone could find the Beatles clunkier than the Velvet Underground.

― Sundar (sundar), Friday, 11 August 2006 20:56 (seventeen years ago) link

Skipping 57 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

What position? Left fullback? I thought this was a Beatles thread!

― Steve Go1dberg (Steve Schneeberg), Saturday, 12 August 2006 21:42 (seventeen years ago) link

http://www.quibbles-n-bits.com/archives/images/ChimChim.jpg

― Ruud Haarvest (Ken L), Saturday, 12 August 2006 22:58 (seventeen years ago) link

I listened to them all the time as a kid. but i cant stand to anymore. This guy i work with has a beatles shrine in his livingroom and wears an abbey road jacket every fucking day. what a load.

― slick dickens (slickdickens), Sunday, 13 August 2006 04:41 (seventeen years ago) link

Anyone hassles the Beatles to me in person'll lose their teeth

― A Viking of Some Note (Andrew Thames), Sunday, 13 August 2006 05:05 (seventeen years ago) link

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.