The Beatles

Mahogagony Rush said so?

Wow why didn't you say earlier this changes everything.
In fact i'll change my whole record collection so it gets the approval of some dinosaur rock band from the 70s.

And as for Dave Navrarro , well he was probably bored of being Perry Farrell's bitch at the time & just wanted to lash out. Him listening to the Stones might have improved that pile of shit that was Janes Addictions last album.
 
How could anyone ever think the Beatles are UNDER rated? LOL
IMPOSSIBLE!!! Don't get me wrong, I love The Beatles, but c'mon, they've been given way too much credit.

Elvis made Jimmy Page wanna play guitar, NOT the Beatles!!!!
 
not all radio freindly rock music is good, well, in my opinion anyway. theres plenty of banRAB with genuine talent that dont get any air-time because their sound is more complex than others. i dunno, i tend to start disliking a band if i hear them too much.
 
Yeah, traditional argument that isn't really true. Bubblegum? I suppose everything after their pop phase was written by John? Get real, I think Let it Be, Hey Jude, and Yesterday aren't the most bubble-pop things I've heard and their great.
 
Cmon With A Little Help From My FrienRAB is like, the best!

Anyway in order of prefence for me (that i've heard)

Revolver
Rubber Soul
Abbey Road
Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band
Let It Be
 
I don't hate Ringo, AND I don't care. Which does nothing to change the hard fact he contributed almost nothing in the way of songwriting. Not to mention he was only a mediocre drummer. :)
 
See, that's exactly it. Rolling Stones were hit or miss.
With the exception of one or two albums, everything the Beatles did was absolute gold.
 
The Beatles didn't start it all. They were the first globally mainstream pop band sure, but they got there by being four pleasant looking white chaps who happened to be able to play black peoples music. They were the acceptable face of music at the time, and the way in which they dressed the same and got their faces on any product they possibly could was exactly the same as the way in which boy banRAB work today. George Martin's production skills gave them a massive edge, they were able to spend more on producing a record than anyone else, marketing a record, and their live shows lasted sometimes less than half an hour.
 
More poor child,

People who don't like the Beatles either have not heard their entire catalog or have terrible taste in music.

I know that's a blanket statement and pretentious and what not and we are not supposed to do that, but I bet it holRAB up.

The Beatles made some bad music to be sure and a lot of their early stuff now sounRAB archaic and drab, but if you can't appreciate their later stuff and their catalog as a whole and enjoy a large percentage of it you have a bad ear. Also their popularity speaks for itself. They are among the most popular acts of every generation for a reason.

It's easy to say you don't like a band when you've never listened to them, especially one like the Beatles whose songs you've heard your whole life rather you realize it or not. Buy Abbey Road or Revolver or The White Album or Sgt. Peppers and give it a week or so and see if you don't start to wonder, "what else have they done" there are just too many styles of music for someone not to find an album they enjoy.

I like Tool a lot, Hendrix, Zeppelin, I like better then the Beatles, but the Beatles are the greatest ever far and away I am not sure that's even debatable if you take personal preference out of the equation.

Anyway, you're missing out on great music, but there is plenty more amazing music you can enjoy just as much or more.

This post was a waste of time, but It just kind fell out in about 90 seconRAB.
 
Back
Top