|
Unsung Forum » Sgt Pepper must die! |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
Earl Mallard 555 posts |
Jun 15, 2007, 19:34
|
||
|
I'm sure you will continue to love music. I just don't understand how people can hate The Beatles. I can understand people hating stuff they did after the break up, and being sick of the endless Mojo covers and their godlike status..but the music, even if you've heard it too much, is still toppermost. I just can't hear what you don't like. I wish I could hear it through your ears so I could understand.
|
|||
Dog 3000 4611 posts |
Jun 15, 2007, 19:38
|
||
|
I've always suspected Beatle-haters were reacting more to "the myth" than "the music." The Beatles influence is so profound that disputing it is like saying the earth is flat (the very idea of what a "rock group" should be comes directly from them!) To paraphrase an old album title, 1 billion Beatles fans can't be wrong . . . . Anyone want to argue against?
|
|||
|
Popel Vooje 5373 posts |
Edited Jun 17, 2007, 21:21
Jun 15, 2007, 19:57
|
||
|
Not bad - I'd go along with a few of those. In some cases, like "Nevermind", I don't actually think they're bad records - it's just that they've spawned too many mediocre imitators and their influence has been assimilated to the point where their impact has dulled. In others, such as "Meat Is Murder" or "Dark Side Of The Moon" I find it hard to understand what all the fuss was about in the first place. Don't agree with Peter Hook's assessment of "TMR" and the tinny production on the first VU album is one of the things I love about it, but that's just personal taste. As for what's missing, I'd nominate anything by the Clash. Can't understand why their po-faced, turgid stadium rock posturing is regarded as classic in anyway whatsoever.
|
|||
|
Dog 3000 4611 posts |
Jun 15, 2007, 20:41
|
||
|
I found it interesting the Velvets-disser's arguments were: 1) Andy Warhol didn't really produce it, 2) the sound quality is not audiophile-grade, 3) there is dissonance and atonality in the music, 4) inspired legions of black trenchcoat wearers. Seems like half of these arguments are about "style" or "culture" or something that has nothing to do with "the record" itself (ie music.) As for sound quality & dissonance -- those are the reasons why most people seem to like it! But then avant-garde sounds are always polarizing (same with Beefheart -- most hate it, a few dig it) -- but that's a whole 'nuther discussion I spose.
|
|||
Daminxa 1415 posts |
Jun 15, 2007, 20:55
|
||
|
That article has made me see some albums I really like in a different light as it goes. It's true, I DON'T dig out my copy of 'Nevermind' and think 'I HAVE to listen to this now, it's fucking BRILLIANT!' I like 'Smells Like Teen Spirit' because it reminds me of some kick ass times in the 1990's when I was a pissed up student trying to dance without falling on my arse, but the rest of the album; well it ain't all that really is it? And it's true Kurt Cobain was a victim of his own hype and was guilty of an awful lot of 'naval gazing'. When he died, the bloke I was with at the time bought himself a T-shirt with a massive picture of Kurt Cobain on it holding a gun in his mouth bearing the legend 'Dead? Nevermind. Nice Shooting Son!' Now I still think that's in remarkably poor taste and I'm surprised he never got any death threats over it but there was something slightly Lady Dianaesque about Kurt Cobain's death and his subsequent canonisation; left me feeling uneasy... The Stone Roses album; well I've got to admit I thought that with the excption of 'Made of Stone' it was the biggest heap of shite I'd ever heard, but in later years I mellowed towards the album and developed a crush on Mani so I now have a soft spot for that record and can't slate it too badly, although I did think what the chap said in that article was extremely funny! 'LA Woman' by the Doors; can't slate it too much meself as it contains one of my all time favourite tracks in the whole wide world ever, but yeah, thinking about it, the rest really ain't all that good, especially not when compared with some of the earlier albums. Much as I do love The Doors part of me thinks that yes, Jim Morrison WAS a bit of a drunken baffoon and I'm not sure he was quite the insightful poet he was made out to be. Credit where it's due though, The Doors did still make some fucking fine music when they were on form and regardless of the antics of their lead singer they're still one of my favourite bands. I quite like Sgt Pepper but no, it's not the best Beatles album (my favourite is 'Revolver') and some of the stuff, though nicely melodic, isn't especially uplifting which, to be honest, I want my 'classic albums' to be! Pet Sounds too is, at best, overrated. Don't hate it, don't love it, but like it well enough. Don't think it deserves slating, don't think it deserves adulation. It's just a relatively good album that just IS. The fact something has been well overhyped isn't enough to condemn it in my book. Don't HATE Dark Side of the Moon either. Wouldn't mind it much at all if it weren't for knowing this was supposedly the same band responsible for 'Piper at the Gates of Dawn' and even 'Wish you were Here'. Good article though that; food for thought...
|
|||
|
riotmaster 1563 posts |
Jun 15, 2007, 21:04
|
||
|
i don't 'hate' the beatles. i can't get that excited by them to warrant hate. i simply have absolutely no interest in them at all. nothing they've done moves me even remotely. you tell me why because i don't know. is it their voices ? could be. whatever it is its been the same for the last 20 odd years so its not going to change now
|
|||
|
riotmaster 1563 posts |
Jun 15, 2007, 21:06
|
||
|
Popel Vooje wrote: As for what;'s missing, I'd nominate anything by the Clash. Can''t understand why their po-faced, turgid anthemic stadium rock posturing is regarded as classic in anyway whatsoever. Amen to that !
|
|||
|
keith a 9576 posts |
Jun 15, 2007, 21:15
|
||
|
And he said.."This is a sacred cow but that doesn't mean it can't be turned into hamburger." Well, sorry to be pedantic, but that's not strictly, too. Even as a veggie, I know the difference between cows and pigs ; ) But printing articles about so-called sacred cows has got a bit here-we-go-again though, hasn't it? Still, whilst we're on the subject, I've always thought Sgt Peppers was over-rated. I like it, but I never thought it was the greatest album of all time or anything. But Pet Sounds, VU & Nico and Marquee Moon are three of my fave albums, so I'm obviously not gonna garee there (no matter how apologetic the Franz Ferdinand guy came across!) But the Stone Roses. I loved Fools Gold 45, and don't mind the odd track, but I really, really could never understand the fuss about that album. Anyone who thought that was the first album that marred indie and dance, clearly hadn't been listening. Hilite for me in that article though was Green Gartsides comments re the Arcade Fire album. I like AF, but I'm really not convnced that their new album is as great as some folk are making out. Not yet anyway...
|
|||
Jim Tones 5142 posts |
Jun 16, 2007, 00:05
|
||
|
Re: The Velvets rant... "...It's muddy, the volume comes and goes, the guitars are all out of tune, as is the viola." That's what is so brilliant about the album, the way the sound matches the themes of each track A major landmark to punch 'musical snobbery' in the face!
|
|||
earthlingdave 285 posts |
Jun 16, 2007, 09:59
|
||
perfectly put jim, the fact that monkeys could do this is what makes the velvets 20 times the band the beatles ever were.
|
| Pages: 5 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| Unsung Forum Index | |
