Album Rating: 3.5

this can't be real.

What the hell is wrong with rating this a 1?

Album Rating: 4.0

lol, great joke. must be a joke after all, but I liked it ;)



however, I also think it's not as great as many want it to be, Tomorrow Never Knows, She Said She Said, For No One and Here, There and Everywhere are genious songs but with the rest of it I wonder why it is so often claimed to be the Fab Four's best album. Love You To, Good Day Sunshine and Doctor Robert do nothing for me. Overall it's not as fresh and lively as their previous albums Help and Rubber Soul and not as clever and intelligent as Abbey Road or the White Album. Actually it's pretty much like Sgt. Pepper to me: a band that wants to outgrow their youth, but doesn't really know where to go. It's somewhere in between the young fresh Beatles and the old wise Beatles. And instead of combining both of these types of music, they neither really get any of them. (though they later on managed to combine their two sides on Magical Mystery Tour)



Don't get me wrong it's still a great album to listen to and definitely one of the most important ones ever recorded, but it has definitely grown old and it's definitely not the classic so many claim it to be.This Message Edited On 06.08.08

Album Rating: 1.0

By way of response I strongly believe this album is an abomination beyond it's core content for reasons explained very clearly in the article. If you take away what it represents, the music itself is still very pedestrian and far from worthy of the praise it has received in terms of innovating music.

Album Rating: 4.5 | Sound Off

yes, but is the music worth a 1? no way.

Album Rating: 4.5

resisting... the urge... to ridicule... every sentence in this review. Ok Ok just one then:



"Though most certainly not popular opinion it is a true proposition that The Beatles signalled the deterioration of western society through taking the medium of music and simplifying it for mass consumption"



Really? This is when Western society began deteriorating? I thought it was when women got the vote and blacks could join the army? You have an interesting perspective, but did you time travel here from the 17th century? If you can't find the beauty in four guys sitting down and writing gripping, gorgous melodies and harmonies that have touched millions of people for the last forty years, you should really just go back to reviewing classical pieces.



I love classical music too, but the urgency, emotion, and visceral beat of rock n' roll was a great discovery, and I'm thankful to the Beatles for having a part in popularizing it.

Album Rating: 4.5 | Sound Off

the reviewer seems more fed up with the cultural impact of the beatles than there music; which is probably why he/she gave it a one.

Album Rating: 5.0

By way of response I strongly believe this album is an abomination beyond it's core content for reasons explained very clearly in the article. If you take away what it represents, the music itself is still very pedestrian and far from worthy of the praise it has received in terms of innovating music.

Album Rating: 1.0

It is but a contributory element, I did not say otherwise.

Album Rating: 5.0

what the fuck are you talking about

unlike Hyberboleking, this is semi-well-written.

Album Rating: 1.0

I was referring to the post above. I would not dignify yours with comment.

Album Rating: 5.0

Yeah but just because it's well written dosen't mean it still wasn't made to just shock a bunch of peopleand get them pissed.

Fort23, if he wrote a good review, he justified his points, and , shock value or not, did a good job. It really shouldn't matter what you give an album, if you justify it well enough, you get my vote.

Album Rating: 1.0

To get across my viewpoint I had to be somewhat provocative in my writing style. I do not apologise.

Album Rating: 3.5

[quote="Fort23"]Yeah but just because it's well written dosen't mean it still wasn't made to just shock a bunch of peopleand get them pissed.[/quote]

... but it's not.

Album Rating: 5.0

He did a good job at writing the review. I'm not saying he didn't.

Album Rating: 3.5

No. He didn't. The entire second paragraph, which seems to be the center of if not the entirety of the premise upon which the review is built is a entirely incorrect.

Album Rating: 5.0

He did a good job at writing a review, but not expressing a solid explanatory opinion on music, i think. He just compared it to not being as well composed as Bach which is prertty irrelevant

Album Rating: 4.5

I could just as easily criticize Tchaikovsky for not sounding like Miles Davis. It would be no more ridiculous than this review.