Give me a good reason why this untalented boyband was great in any way.
The fact that so many books still name the Beatles as "the greatest or most significant or most influential" rock band ever only tells you how far rock music still is from becoming a serious art. Jazz critics have long recognized that the greatest jazz musicians of all times are Duke Ellington and John Coltrane, who were not the most famous or richest or best sellers of their times, let alone of all times. Classical critics rank the highly controversial Beethoven over classical musicians who were highly popular in courts around Europe. Rock critics are still blinded by commercial success. The Beatles sold more than anyone else (not true, by the way), therefore they must have been the greatest. Jazz critics grow up listening to a lot of jazz music of the past, classical critics grow up listening to a lot of classical music of the past. Rock critics are often totally ignorant of the rock music of the past, they barely know the best sellers. No wonder they will think that the Beatles did anything worthy of being saved.
reply to this post or your mom will die in 24 hours.
>>63808616
Number of albums put out in a specific time frame.
The fact that so many books still name the Beatles as "the greatest or most significant or most influential" rock band ever only tells you how far rock music still is from becoming a serious art. Jazz critics have long recognized that the greatest jazz musicians of all times are Duke Ellington and John Coltrane, who were not the most famous or richest or best sellers of their times, let alone of all times. Classical critics rank the highly controversial Beethoven over classical musicians who were highly popular in courts around Europe. Rock critics are still blinded by commercial success. The Beatles sold more than anyone else (not true, by the way), therefore they must have been the greatest. Jazz critics grow up listening to a lot of jazz music of the past, classical critics grow up listening to a lot of classical music of the past. Rock critics are often totally ignorant of the rock music of the past, they barely know the best sellers. No wonder they will think that the Beatles did anything worthy of being saved.
Made the LP format a thing.
Innovated pop/rock music by experimenting with different styles/instruments, in a statement way that brought it to the general public.
>>63808616
>>>/2011/
>>63808616
>tfw he fell for the scaruffi meme
>>63808635
You stole than from Scaruffi you dingle
>>63808713
I didn't even know about that guy.
>>63808635
There's nothing wrong with being famous or rich.
I agree the Beatles are wack though.
The fact that so many books still name the Beatles as "the greatest or most significant or most influential" rock band ever only tells you how far rock music still is from becoming a serious art. Jazz critics have long recognized that the greatest jazz musicians of all times are Duke Ellington and John Coltrane, who were not the most famous or richest or best sellers of their times, let alone of all times. Classical critics rank the highly controversial Beethoven over classical musicians who were highly popular in courts around Europe. Rock critics are still blinded by commercial success. The Beatles sold more than anyone else (not true, by the way), therefore they must have been the greatest. Jazz critics grow up listening to a lot of jazz music of the past, classical critics grow up listening to a lot of classical music of the past. Rock critics are often totally ignorant of the rock music of the past, they barely know the best sellers. No wonder they will think that the Beatles did anything worthy of being saved.
In a sense, the Beatles are emblematic of the status of rock criticism as a whole: too much attention paid to commercial phenomena (be it grunge or U2) and too little to the merits of real musicians. If somebody composes the most divine music but no major label picks him up and sells him around the world, a lot of rock critics will ignore him. If a major label picks up a musician who is as stereotyped as can be but launches her or him worldwide, your average critic will waste rivers of ink on her or him. This is the sad status of rock criticism: rock critics are basically publicists working for major labels, distributors and record stores. They simply highlight what product the music business wants to make money from.
>>63808848
>The fact that so many books still name the Mozart as "the greatest or most significant or most influential" classical composer ever only tells you how far classical music still is from becoming a serious art. Indie critics have long recognized that the greatest Indie musicians of all times are Alex Turner and Julian Casablancas, who were not the most famous or richest or best sellers of their times, let alone of all times. Classical critics rank the highly controversial John Cage over classical musicians who were highly popular in courts around Europe. Most classical critics are still blinded by commercial success. Mozart sold more than anyone else (not true, by the way), therefore he must have been the greatest. Indie critics grow up listening to a lot of Indie music of the past, punk critics grow up listening to a lot of punk music of the past. Classical critics are often totally ignorant of the classical music of the past, they barely know the best sellers. No wonder they will think that the Mozart did anything worthy of being saved.
The fact that so many Americans still believe it should be illegal to marry a 12-year-old only tells you how far America still is from becoming a serious culture. The Europeans have long recognized that the greatest relationships of all times are between male adults and female adolescents, who are the most biologically fit to produce offspring, as well as the most physically attractive. Followers of the Muslim faith rank the highly controversial Aisha over all of their prophet Mohammed’s other wives, who were far past the prime age for reproduction. Americans are still blinded by puritan values. Adult females are more mentally developed than adolescents (not true, by the way), therefore they must be the greatest partners. Europeans engaged in relationships with adolescent European girls in the middle ages, radical Islamists engage in relationships with adolescent Muslim girls in the present. Americans are often totally ignorant of the virtues of relationships with adolescent girls, they barely know the biological benefits. No wonder they will think that sexual relations with 12-year-old girls should be criminalized.
The Beatless aren't, never have been, and never will be a "rock" band. They're a pop / boy band who went "off the rails." Their mind-numbing tracks would be very easy to play on a normal guitar, never mind on the dumbed-down Rock Band version.
Their "fans" make the bold assumption that The Beatless are the root of all "rock" music ever, and that if they had never existed, "rock" would still sound like Elvis. But when you say that The Beatless are the end-all-be-all of "rock" today, you're an idiot. Rock music existed before The Beatless, and it probably would've done just fine without them.
Look at Led Zeppelin. They evolved from The Yardbirds, who formed around 1963, roughly the same time as The Beatless. Let's assume The Beatless never existed (if only). The Yardbirds probably would've gotten just as big, with Clapton, Page, and Beck joining the band and Page turning the band into Led Zeppelin, maybe sounding slightly different than the Led Zeppelin we know today.
On top of that, bands and performers such as Chuck Berry, The Doors, and The Kinks would've had a larger influence on true rock 'n' roll. And of course, we can't forget Les Paul, who not only made great advances in recording technology, but also helped greatly in the popularization of the electric guitar, an essential element of virtually all rock, country, funk, metal, prog, punk, and much avant-garde.
In Brian Epstein's 1964 autobiography A Cellarful of Noise (how apt!!), their manager describes in detail how he had to address their early "scruffy" leather-clad rocker look. Epstein's assistant Alistair Taylor recalled in his own book that on 14 December 1961–the day after The Beatless signed their management contract–the foursome were marched to Birkenhead tailor Beno Dorn (a friend of Epstein's) for fittings for matching made-to-measure dark blue suits. They also had their hair neatened at Liverpool's top-notch barber Horne Brothers.
And if that's not record company marketing, then what is?
>>63808974
This guy is an idiot and obviously does not realize the impact the Beatles had on the world, music, fashion, politics, etc. And that he does not recognize how good the melodies and original the lyrics is amazing. Beatles went from rock and roll covers to profoundly influential songs with orchestral accompaniments and original electroniics created by George Martin...what other group did that?? Did all groups write, "And in the end the love you take is equal to the love you make. ?" Did this asshole think of that? NO. I have no respect for such a nut.
>>63808616
They're 10/10 on acid.
>>63808948
This guy is an idiot and obviously does not realize the impact America had on the world, music, fashion, politics, etc. And that he does not recognize how good the people and original culture is amazing. America went from a native-american piece of land to profoundly influential country of upper class men thanks to our founding fathers what other countrydid that?? Did all countries be like, "And in the end the war you take is equal to the war you make. ?" Did this asshole think of that? NO. I have no respect for such a nut.
They're an ok band they had a few good albums
People think it's hip to hate them because they are overrated
