Wild Frank Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 I've really tried I promise. They are back in the public glare again so I gave it another shot to no avail. My problem is.....I just can't get excited about The Beatles. Am I the only one? Is there something wrong with me? They do nothing for me. I'm in my mid-thirties and I love The Stones, Dylan, Neil Young and all the other legendary artists. Are there others like me out there? If so I'd love to hear from you. If I am the only one, don't think any less of me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
PopTodd Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 There is something very wrong with you. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bleedorange Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 To answer the title of this thread...yes. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 I had a boss once who thought Elton John was better than The Beatles. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Wild Frank Posted October 9, 2009 Author Share Posted October 9, 2009 I had a boss once who thought Elton John was better than The Beatles.I'm not a fan of the Beatles....but even I don't think that Elton is better!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jff Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 I had a girlfriend once that didn't like the Beatles. She did like Concrete Blonde, though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GtrPlyr Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 There's nothing wrong with not liking The Beatles, of course, there's nothing right with it either . All kidding aside, there's nothing wrong with not liking something as widely loved as the Beatles. They don't click with you, and that's okay. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LouieB Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 I had a girlfriend once that didn't like the Beatles. She did like Concrete Blonde, though. you may have hit the nail on the head. How can one NOT like the Beatles??!??!?!? They are the greatest rock group of all time, now and forever.... Perhaps as a mild defense of wild Frank, maybe you had to be there?? I donno. I guess I would ask?? Who else was ever better? LouieB Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bleedorange Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 I have to admit (and maybe this is some sort of character flaw), but I find it an impossibility to wrap my head around the very notion of not liking The Beatles. It's one of the very few things that I just can't understand. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Wild Frank Posted October 9, 2009 Author Share Posted October 9, 2009 Thanks for your re-assurances guys!!!!!. There has to be someone else out there who feels the same!!!Its not that I don't think they're any good. I really do. When people say they are the best/most influencing band ever etc I have no arguement with it at all. Its just when I actually listen to the music 95% doesn't get me going at all. Right, I'll get back in my padded cell and put on some Tom Waits!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Winston Legthigh Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Do you know the tune to Yesterday? Of course you do. Think about that. Hum it. See if you can find a person who can't hum the melody. I would wager that the melody to Yesterday is in the top 5 worldwide recognizable tunes - up there with happy birthday and twinkle twinkle little star. That takes it out of the "is it good?" question, and puts it into another universe entirely - it's something so natural and primal and universal that there have been tests to see if monkeys could recognize the tune. I recently read a quote by David Crosby talking about all the cover songs the Byrds used to do. Dylan songs were an easy choice for them because there was plenty of room ro pretty them up with harmonies and 12-string guitars. Beatles songs were pointless to cover because you just couldn't improve upon the original. But, there was no other band they wanted to sound like more. Next time you're on a road trip with a passenger - take the time to learn sing a two-part If I Fell. The two-part harmony is so perfectly simple and beautiful. If you have 3 in the car - see if you can nail the three-voice harmonies to I Feel Fine. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
PopTodd Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Thanks for your re-assurances guys. There has to be someone else out there who feels the same!!!Its not that I don't think they're any good. I really do. When people say they are the best/most influencing band ever etc I have no arguement with it at all. Its just when I actually listen to the music 95% doesn't get me going at all. Right, I'll get back in my padded cell and put on some Tom Waits!! I can understand your feelings. I feel like that about a couple of bands; but at least you recognize their importance and the quality of what they did. You should still go to a doctor, though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LouieB Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 I recently read a quote by David Crosby talking about all the cover songs the Byrds used to do. Without the Beatles there would be no Byrds as great as they are (or Wilco for that matter...) LouieB Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mjpuczko Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 i work with two dipshits who claim the beatles were not that influential & in fact suck. i refuse to talk to them unless it's about work. i can understand (sort of!) not liking the music but not recognizing their importance is flat out stupid. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Wild Frank Posted October 9, 2009 Author Share Posted October 9, 2009 Do you know the tune to Yesterday? Of course you do. Think about that. Hum it. See if you can find a person who can't hum the melody. I would wager that the melody to Yesterday is in the top 5 worldwide recognizable tunes - up there with happy birthday and twinkle twinkle little star. That takes it out of the "is it good?" question, and puts it into another universe entirely - it's something so natural and primal and universal that there have been tests to see if monkeys could recognize the tune. I agree with all of the above. The thing is, I can't say I ever really thought "I'd love to listen to 'Yesterday' now" no matter how instantly recognisable it is. If its on the radio I wouldn't turn it off. Its true, the Beatles are on another level as far as influence and worldwide appeal. But if I'm in my cellar listening to music the Beatles aren't a band I would ever think of putting on. I imagine how you are all responding is similar to how I would reply to someone saying they can't see what the fuss is about with Bob Dylan, who is probably the only other contemporary artist whose genius is so totally recognised and accepted. When people say they don't like Dylan I think they're crazy!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Shakespeare In The Alley Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Honestly, I think the Beatles are incredibly overrated. Terrific band, who made many important albums. But overrated. When I was a kid, I loved them. But then I moved on, and don't really find myself wanting to listen to them at all. I think there were better bands/songwriters in that era. Not to knock the Beatles at all. Those songs are classics for a reason. But the notion that they are the be all and end all of rock music is too much, in my opinion. So, to answer Wild Frank's question, no...it isn't wrong to not like the Beatles. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mjpuczko Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 i rarely want to listen to the beatles, honestly. but once i hear a song or two i can't stop for like 2 days. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
embiggen Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 yes Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 I think there were better bands/songwriters in that era.OK, I'll bite. Name one better band. The Rolling Stones get my nod at the very end of the decade, but from '63 to '67 or so, who was better? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Wild Frank Posted October 9, 2009 Author Share Posted October 9, 2009 I think my indifference specialy relates to albums. Now I realise I might be on dodgy ground here but albums like Sgt Pepper and Revolver, whilst obviously being very good, just don't seem as consistantly appealing as say 'Blonde on Blonde', 'Highway 61 Revisisted' or 'Astral Weeks'. Feel free to shoot me down on this point but when my old man puts on Sgt Pepper songs like 'For The Benefit of Mr. Kite' and 'When I'm 64' just don't do it (That said...'A Day In The Life' is very good!) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Shakespeare In The Alley Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 OK, I'll bite. Name one better band. The Rolling Stones get my nod at the very end of the decade, but from '63 to '67 or so, who was better?Well, I know you said band, but I think Dylan was consistently at a level above the Beatles. As for bands, I think the Kinks and the Who were better bands during that span. Obviously this is just my personal preference, but I think Davies and Townshend were writing better songs than Lennon and McCartney. To me, the Beatles were something of a gateway band. Once my interest in them faded, I discovered the wealth of other great 60's music. I guess this is why I put Dylan/Kinks/Who above the Beatles. But I've had a much more enduring interest in them than the Beatles. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Wild Frank Posted October 9, 2009 Author Share Posted October 9, 2009 OK, I'll bite. Name one better band. The Rolling Stones get my nod at the very end of the decade, but from '63 to '67 or so, who was better?I'm with you. There was no band better....Just not to my taste. I'd still put Dylan above them as a better artist between those years. (Times They Are A-Changin, Another Side Of Bob Dyaln, Bringing It All Back Home, Highway 61, Blonde On Blonde and John Wesley Harding). No one has ever done a run of albums that good in the rock Genre. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Winston Legthigh Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 I think my indifference specialy relates to albums. Now I realise I might be on dodgy ground here but albums like Sgt Pepper and Revolver, whilst obviously being very good, just don't seem as consistantly appealing as say 'Blonde on Blonde', 'Highway 61 Revisisted' or 'Astral Weeks'. Feel free to shoot me down on this point but when my old man puts on Sgt Pepper songs like 'For The Benefit of Mr. Kite' and 'When I'm 64' just don't do it (That said...'A Day In The Life' is very good!)Maybe you're a lyrics guy rather that a music guy. For music, Dylan doesn't do much for me - his songs (musically) are very boring to me, especially compared to the Beatles. Lyrically he's at the top. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sparky speaks Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 The Monkees were much better. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Wild Frank Posted October 9, 2009 Author Share Posted October 9, 2009 Well, I know you said band, but I think Dylan was consistently at a level above the Beatles. Honestly, if you asked Lennon (RIP), McCartney, Harrison (RIP) and Starr they would agree with that statement. I think Lennon especially was a bit intimatated by Dylan. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.