Nah they're not the first ever. Buddy Holly and Elvis were writing pop tunes before the Beatles came around. I think the Beatles were simple because that was all the record labels had patience for at the time. They were forced to keep it simple if they were going to survive.

I love Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds. Such a mellow, trippy song. I think I actually like the intro and verses better than the chorus.

the beatles are all amazing songwriters and i dont understand how anyone can not like them or at least respect them

So as some of you might remember (Or not.) I gave my Sgt. Peppers to a freshman who was one of those "poser" kids who wore the band shirts but never heard the band. And now he is addicted he told me he is getting like 5 Beatles CD's for Christmas. It feels good turning a kid onto (excellent) music basically. :cool:

I don't think The Beatles are very simple, at least not in the later years. But I guess it's really subjective.

Jaca, good stuff. I try to do stuff like that as well.

[QUOTE=Dead_Trench]I've start listening to The Beatles lately. They have some really good songs, but I can't listen to too much of their music at once because it's too simple sounding.
My favourite Beatle's songs are Eleanor Rigby, I Am The Walrus, and Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds.[/QUOTE]

You can't possibly tell me those songs you listen to are 'simple sounding". Especially the first two.

Well its true, you can only like music that is technical... Since thats what music is all about. The Beatles lyrics, oh my, so boring and plain... Uh, ya.

[QUOTE=Romencer17]HighVoltage, the Santa hat looks like its falling off John's head. Just thought it looked goofy. Nothing to be mean.[/QUOTE]

You son of a bitch! Do you know how long I worked on that hat! DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA! And you come on here and just ****ing blow it off like some amateur job drawn in paint! You sir have offended me!

I've been listening to Revolver a lot again.

:\

I'm hooked. She Said, She Said, And Your Bird Can Sing, For No One are my favs.

[QUOTE=Jacaranda][B]It feels good turning a kid on[/B]to (excellent) music basically.[/QUOTE]

:nautiez: :nautiez: :naughty:

[QUOTE=JonG]I've been listening to Revolver a lot again.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, me too. It's such a great album, everything after Yellow Submarine is near perfect.

[QUOTE=HighVoltageRockNRoll]You son of a bitch! Do you know how long I worked on that hat! DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA! And you come on here and just ****ing blow it off like some amateur job drawn in paint! You sir have offended me![/QUOTE]

hey I really like your avatar, do you mind if I use it as an MSN display pic?

[QUOTE=JonG]I've been listening to Revolver a lot again.

:\

I'm hooked. She Said, She Said, And Your Bird Can Sing, For No One are my favs.[/QUOTE]

Revolver is awesome. I went through a phase the last 2 weeks where I just listened to Rubber Soul and Revolver constantly. Over and over again. It's hard to stop once you start listening to it. I've been listening to She Said, She Said a lot too. I suddenly realized how awesome it is.

Edit- An yeah, making avatars with Paint is tough. I took the cover of Rubber Soul and put Christmas hats on all the Beatles but it didn't look to good. And then I found this pic in a google search for Bob Dylan and it works well. So if anyone was wondering, no I did not creat this amazing avatar.

np- Get Back

I've just noticed that in my last.fm artist totals, The Beatles, John Lennon, and George Harrison all rank in my top 6 artists listened to, with The Beatles number 1 by about 120 listens. I've been listening to them even more obsessively than normal these last few weeks.

hah for me the beatles are no1 by about 500 or something

[url]http://www.last.fm/user/franchez[/url]

[QUOTE=clown_phobia]hah for me the beatles are no1 by about 500 or something

[url]http://www.last.fm/user/franchez[/url][/QUOTE]

Well I've only had last.fm for a month, so to be up by 120 songs after a month is a pretty big margin. I can listen to The Beatles all day.

I got mine Oct. 24th, and I have about 2,500 songs played so far. :\

Beatles are around 130 or so.

[QUOTE=Sgt._Joker]Heyyyyy erm, Do any of you have "The Beatles:Complete Scores"

If so,
Is it worth getting?
Is the text to small (i play guitar and read tab)?


thanks for your help.[/QUOTE]

Its awesome. I got it almost 6 years ago, and it has everything, from all the music from all the instruments, to tabs, to chord changes, etc. It is pretty small though, so they can fit like 10 staves on a page.

[QUOTE=robo2448]Well I've only had last.fm for a month, so to be up by 120 songs after a month is a pretty big margin. I can listen to The Beatles all day.[/QUOTE]

That's the way :thumb:

I find that I can always find a different album to fall in love with, theres so many great albums If I'm ever getting sick of one I can just put on a differnt one and love it.

lol did everyone understand that I was joking? There's all this serious talk about the avatars now.

I've been addicted to early Beatles lately, I like how they scream before the solos on A Hard Day's Night.

My avatar still isn't Christmasized.. oh well. One of my presents for Christmas is The White Album.. too bad I have to wait a few days till I can listen to it.

[quote]I've just noticed that in my last.fm artist totals, The Beatles, John Lennon, and George Harrison all rank in my top 6 artists listened to, with The Beatles number 1 by about 120 listens. I've been listening to them even more obsessively than normal these last few weeks.[/quote]The Beatles, Lennon and Harrison are all in my top 10. I don't listen to much Paul McCartney and Ringo Starr solo stuff..

[QUOTE=HighVoltageRockNRoll]lol did everyone understand that I was joking? There's all this serious talk about the avatars now.[/QUOTE]

Well come on man, do you really expect us to know you're joking when you don't throw any "lol's" or "jk's" in there??:p

/lol jk

B34tl3s r t3h suxx0rz.

But seriously, I pose a question to all you fans and fanatics: how many of you think the Beatles are the greatest rock band ever to have lived? Because I seriously don't. There are many guitarists alive now *cough[size=1]Omar[/size]cough* who give George and John a run for their money; many drummers who could rape Ringo with one stick; many bassists *cough[size=4]Paul Turner[/size]cough* who absolutely [i]kill[/i] Paul, etc. They played bog-standard 12-bar rock half the time, and their lyrics ("Have you seen the little piggies...") were not nearly as good as, say, Brandon Boyd's or Thom Yorke's. They have some merit as a joke band, though... :p Even one or two of their jazzy ballad-type songs such as Yesterday, whilst original, sound like any three songs from Elton John's repertoire.

I personally dislike the Beatles. They were highly inventive, I'll give them that, but far from the greatest rock band ever to have lived. Discuss.

^Well, no, maybe they aren't as technically good as a good amount of musicians today, but withou the Beatles, those musicains would never have even gotten interested in music in the first place.
The Beatles layed the foundations for hard rock, psychadellia, prog, and many other styles of music.
They progressed so dramatically, changing from album to album, even song to song at points.
And a "greatest band ever" title is left up to the opinion of the listeners.

Yeah, I know. They were inventive. I'm just trying to determine how many Beatlemaniacs think that the band can honestly be called the greatest ever. Because, as you said, it's left to the listeners' opinions. Any musician with an ounce of wits will not label any band "the greatest ever".

[QUOTE=mutant!]B34tl3s r t3h suxx0rz.

But seriously, I pose a question to all you fans and fanatics: how many of you think the Beatles are the greatest rock band ever to have lived? Because I seriously don't. There are many guitarists alive now *cough[size=1]Omar[/size]cough* who give George and John a run for their money; many drummers who could rape Ringo with one stick; many bassists *cough[size=4]Paul Turner[/size]cough* who absolutely [i]kill[/i] Paul, etc. They played bog-standard 12-bar rock half the time, and their lyrics ("Have you seen the little piggies...") were not nearly as good as, say, Brandon Boyd's or Thom Yorke's. They have some merit as a joke band, though... :p Even one or two of their jazzy ballad-type songs such as Yesterday, whilst original, sound like any three songs from Elton John's repertoire.

I personally dislike the Beatles. They were highly inventive, I'll give them that, but far from the greatest rock band ever to have lived. Discuss.[/QUOTE]


They are the most succsesful band ever, the most innovative band ever, and the most creative band ever. They wrote some of the best songs ever written, and their songs feature the best vocal melodies ever written.

But to call a band the greatest of all time is only a personal opinion you can't prove that they are the best band. But there is certainly no band better then them at the craft of songwriting, sure 90% of guitarists out there today could out solo Lennon...but Lennon was the rhythm guitarist and a great one at that. And sure many guitarist could play faster than George Harrison.

But is Clapton, Richards, or Vai capable of writing songs like "Here Comes The Sun," "Something," and "All Things Must Pass," the only who can come close to those songs is Clapton and even he is not as good a songwriter as Harrison a better guitarist maybe but songwriter and signer no.

And the same goes for Paul, sure flea could out play McCartney on the bass. But actually McCartney is better than at least 80% of the mainstream bands out there today. I don't think I've heard a song where Paul played the same thing on the bass as the guitar.

And who cares if Paul's not the best bass player in the world, how many other "bass players" can say that they know how to play the bass, the guitar, the drums, the piano? And how many of them can say they've written and sung some of the best song's ever made.

Now Ringo...the one everyone loves to take shots at. Has anyone actually listened to Ringo's drumming? Sure he can't compare with Mitch Mitchell, John Bonahm, and Neil Peart. But he's alot better than what people give him credit for. Try listening to Rain, or Come Together (there's some great fills in that song), and for his one and only drum solo try listening to The End. I've noticed that he's actually a great drummer, and anyone who says he does nothing but simple beats has probably listened to only the first 5 tracks on The Number One's.

And John, his guitar work is mainly rhythm, and sure the rhythm in the beatles songs are not complex, and they don't use all the crazy types of chords augmented, etc. But the chords fit the vocals perfectly (Hide Your Love Away, Eight Days A Week). And most of the beatles songs make use of lots of chords and are rarely just three chord songs an exception maybe Love Me Do but that's extremley early Beatles.

So though Led Zeppelin, Cream, and Black Sabbath may have been more complex (and if being complex makes you more talented), more talented indvidually. None of those bands as a whole are as talented as The Beatles. If were gonna face John off against Jimi Hendrix, Paul against Flea, Ringo against Neal Peart, and George against Eric Clapton...on their instrument skills, I can bet the members of the beatles will not get the highest votes (maybe George would win.)

But if were comparing The Beatles as a whole, no band has matched them.

Yeah, my "all-stars" band would have been Elvis, Jimi, Jaco and Hal Blaine, but anyway.

[QUOTE=HighVoltageRockNRoll]They are the most succsesful band ever, the most innovative band ever...[/QUOTE]
Objective troof.
[QUOTE=HighVoltageRockNRoll]...and the most creative band ever...their songs feature the best vocal melodies ever written.[/QUOTE]
Subjective troof. (ie Not necessarily.)

I know Ringo is good, I happen to like Come Together a lot (but that may have something to do with the fact that it doesn't sound like the rest of their stuff at all :p). I know Paul is good too. My best friend is a total Beatles fanatic and I've heard the phrase "George Harrison is an underrated guitarist" kerjillions of times before, and now you guys have confirmed that (or the notion, at least). I know John was a good singer and songwriter.

My band also consists of four people. I play guitar, piano and sax in the band, and do lead vocals. Bread (the Beatles fan) plays bass, piano, recorder and sax, and does the Frusciante backing falsetto thing. Johan does turntables and MCing. David plays drums and guitar and has a good singing voice too. So there, a little high school band has just as much instrumental diversity/talent as the Beatles.

[QUOTE=HighVoltageRockNRoll]I don't think I've heard a song where Paul played the same thing on the bass as the guitar.[/QUOTE]
If you could verify this for me, it would improve Paul's standing in my eyes.

Sure, Yesterday is a good song. I happen to think Mad World is better. Assuming I'm right, here's the question: who's the better band? The Beatles, because they wrote a lot of good songs? Or Tears For Fears, because they wrote one awesome song?

There's also the matter of taste. As far as my knowledge of the band goes, a vast selection of their music is totally senseless. One can only dig so deep for meaning before it becomes artificial and you are only trying to make up something to justify an LSD-induced hallucination-turned-song.

Ah, hell, there's a million points I could bring up but it's 12:33 AM and I'm tired, and I don't really want a flamefest. You guys can like who you want to and I'll respect that. My issue was just with people who call the Beatles "The greatest band ever" and think they're being objective, then have very little evidence to back their claim. Love you guys. :thumb:

[size=7]HOLY CRAP, THE OPINIONS ARE EVERYWHERE ON THIS PAGE![/size]

[QUOTE=mutant!]

My band also consists of four people. I play guitar, piano and sax in the band, and do lead vocals. Bread (the Beatles fan) plays bass, piano, recorder and sax, and does the Frusciante backing falsetto thing. Johan does turntables and MCing. David plays drums and guitar and has a good singing voice too. So there, a little high school band has just as much instrumental diversity/talent as the Beatles.
[/quote]

That doesn't make you diverse, talented yes (not as much as the beatles), but diversity would depend on how many styles of music you actually play.

[QUOTE=mutant!]If you could verify this for me, it would improve Paul's standing in my eyes.[/quote]

Well I don't know the bass to everysong, but I do have about 50 beatle songs on guitar pro. And Im I've yet to see the bass line the same as the rote note of the chord played on guitar.

[QUOTE=mutant!]Sure, Yesterday is a good song. I happen to think Mad World is better. Assuming I'm right, here's the question: who's the better band? The Beatles, because they wrote a lot of good songs? Or Tears For Fears, because they wrote one awesome song?[/quote]

Is that a serious question? I would go with a.) a band who wrote lots of good songs. All the one hit wonders in the world don't compare to bands that consistently write good material.

[QUOTE=mutant!]There's also the matter of taste. As far as my knowledge of the band goes, a vast selection of their music is totally senseless. One can only dig so deep for meaning before it becomes artificial and you are only trying to make up something to justify an LSD-induced hallucination-turned-song.[/quote]

Their early stuff is mainly love songs, which is not sensless, then there middle stuff is more serious stuff, then there experimental phase, some songs like Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds, and I Am The Walrus may strike you as sensless crap written while on LSD. But I don't think they ever wrote a song while on LSD. And actually John and Paul are widely considered two of the top best songwriters of all time.

[QUOTE=mutant!]
Ah, hell, there's a million points I could bring up but it's 12:33 AM and I'm tired, and I don't really want a flamefest. You guys can like who you want to and I'll respect that. My issue was just with people who call the Beatles "The greatest band ever" and think they're being objective, then have very little evidence to back their claim. Love you guys. :thumb:[/QUOTE]

I'm not making a flamefest, just having a debate. And I think that the following would work as evidence in claiming they are the greatest band ever;
- Over 1 Billion Records Sold Worldwide
- The Most Succesful Group Of All Time
- Sgt. Pepper is the fastest selling album in the UK
- A Record 20 Number One Singles
- In 1964 the top 5 songs on the charts were all by the Beatles
-The White Album is number 8 on the top selling albums of all time
- They broke in 1969 and 32 years later there Greatest hits "1's" released in 2001 became the fastest selling album of all time.
- And 36 year later Paul McCartney has set the record for fastest sold out concert (14 Minutes).

Thats just all I can think off right now :)

If I find out who keeps going around saying the Beatles are the greatest band ever, I'm going to have a little talk with him/her and explain how irritating it is to us when someone hears that and we, once again, have to get into this tired old debate with that person.:mad:

Non-subjective remark: Most commercially successful band ever.:)

The thing is The Beatles didn't even have to tour for a good 10 years or so. What band today could even do that in this age?

10 years?? They were only around for 10 years, and only really popular for 6 of them.