The Beatles are irrelevant

I thought I would start this in Hell because it will save time later.

The Beatles - everyone in music seems to worship them. But they are trivial anr irrelevant. Not worth it.

People say "They changed musical history". Did they? No, music was changing, and they happened to be the right people in the right place at the right time. That is all - they were lucky. Luck plays a much bigger part in musical success than talent ever has.

"But what about all their songs?" Well Simon and Garfunkel produced better songs, IMO (I know, mostly Paul, but they were often written for them both. Unlike the Beatles who wrote songs for themselves to sing). And there have been far better song writers since - many of them. None of whom have even considered The Frog Chorus to be a good move.

"But everyone is influenced by them." No they are not. This only works because they were the first contemporary music band, so any other has some direct line back to them. But that was just good fortune. If it hadn't been them, it would have been another band.

Hendrix changed the way people play guitar. He forced music out of his instrument. I would argue that at least 50% of bands as Glasto this year can only play like they do because of his respect for his music over his instrument.

Eno invented a new genre of music - ambient. Which influences swathes of other music - and his use of electronics to produce musicthat is not geeky impacted (IMO) pretty much all dance music as well as other electronica.

The Beatles? Hardly worth a mention.

Prove me wrong......
Tagged:
«134

Comments

  • 'Pop' music = Is Outrage, anyway.

    Music died with young Herr Mozart...
    :cry:
  • Well, this isn't a hill I'd want to die on.
  • ECraigRECraigR Castaway
    I’ve never liked the Beatles, but contemporary music for me is Allan Pettersson. Which is a way of saying, I don’t listen to pop rock jingle jangle music.
  • The Beatles were not particularly innovative but I enjoy their music. I reckon its a matter of taste and whether their music was something you enjoyed as a youth.

    The closer rock music is to blues and roots, the more I like it. These days I can't go past Gillian Welsh and her in the tradition/developing the tradition interaction with folk and bluegrass.

    Oh, and Irish rebel music.
  • I wouldn’t say the Beatles are “irrelevant.” I’d say overrated—highly overrated. I’ve never really understood the mania about them.
    Music died with young Herr Mozart...
    :cry:
    Now that is Outrage. Give me Brahms, Vaughan Williams, Copland, Tavener and a whole host of other post-Mozartians over Mozart any day.

    But what do I know? I tend to find Mozart rather tedious. With the exception of Zauberflöte, I usually can only take him in small doses. Too many notes, perhaps.

  • ECraigRECraigR Castaway
    Nick Tamen wrote: »

    But what do I know? I tend to find Mozart rather tedious. With the exception of Zauberflöte, I usually can only take him in small doses. Too many notes, perhaps.

    Did you just describe Mozart as having too many notes? And Brahms does not suffer from that condition? Well, my word.
  • Too many notes, perhaps - but at least they're all in the correct order!

    Seriously, though, My Old Mum couldn't abide the 'pop' of the 60s and 70s. She called it 'yah-yah music', which is about right...
  • ECraigR wrote: »
    Nick Tamen wrote: »

    But what do I know? I tend to find Mozart rather tedious. With the exception of Zauberflöte, I usually can only take him in small doses. Too many notes, perhaps.

    Did you just describe Mozart as having too many notes? And Brahms does not suffer from that condition? Well, my word.
    A tongue-in-cheek reference to the movie “Amadeus”. :wink:
  • ECraigRECraigR Castaway
    Ah, now I get it!
  • I still like them, but as to their musical influence, I'm too ignorant about musical history. Does it matter?
  • sionisaissionisais Shipmate
    The Beatles were made, in every sense by George Martin. Without him The Who would probably be regarded as the leading British sixties band (and I’m a Stones fan).
  • The Beatles were of their time, their music was upbeat which reflected the mood of the 60's. For depth, look elsewhere. Some say Bob Dylan had more influence re: changing musical history, but how much influence did the Beatles have on him?
  • edited July 2019
    @op
    You probably like disco. Think Nirvana is great. Recite rap prayers. Never met Lucy or any of her friends. Never protested anything. Are constipated.

  • Raptor Eye wrote: »
    The Beatles were of their time, their music was upbeat which reflected the mood of the 60's. For depth, look elsewhere. Some say Bob Dylan had more influence re: changing musical history, but how much influence did the Beatles have on him?

    Why is depth important? I like surfaces.
  • lilbuddhalilbuddha Shipmate
    This is stupid. The Beatles are relevant because nearly every contemporary musician of the time, and many in the following decades list them as an influence. A minor perusal of musical history leads to the conclusion that the Beatles were majorly influential.
  • Raptor Eye wrote: »
    The Beatles were of their time, their music was upbeat which reflected the mood of the 60's. For depth, look elsewhere. Some say Bob Dylan had more influence re: changing musical history, but how much influence did the Beatles have on him?

    Why is depth important? I like surfaces.

    You can be a surfer or a diver.

    Both are dangerous in their own way.

    AFF

  • @op
    You probably like disco. Think Nirvana is great. Recite rap prayers. Never met Lucy or any of her friends. Never protested anything. Are constipated.

    I was a big Nirvana fan, plus Bush, and other grunge bands. It's a long time ago.
  • @op
    You probably like disco. Think Nirvana is great. Recite rap prayers. Never met Lucy or any of her friends. Never protested anything. Are constipated.

    Disco - not entirely. I have a wide range of musical taste. Mostly metal.
    Nirvana - quite listenable. Not an especial fan.
    Tend not to recite prayers much at all, and when I do, they would NOT be rap.
    Lucy and friends - yes, got me there. Never tried drugs. Except alcohol. SOmetimes, I wish I had.
    Never protsted anything - wrong again.
    Constipated - usually. But that isn't relevant.

    Now I know the Beatles were popular. But popular does not equal good, as so much of the charts make clear.
  • Shoo be doo, alright
    There's music and there's movement.
    Constipation is symbolic of not moving.
  • finelinefineline Kerygmania Host, 8th Day Host
    I don't seem to have any strong feelings on this. I don't think I see music in terms of relevance. Whether it's Mozart, the Beatles or the Spice Girls, it's all entertainment along the way as we go through our lives from the cradle to the grave.
  • BoogieBoogie Shipmate
    fineline wrote: »
    I don't seem to have any strong feelings on this. I don't think I see music in terms of relevance. Whether it's Mozart, the Beatles or the Spice Girls, it's all entertainment along the way as we go through our lives from the cradle to the grave.

    I was about to say the same.

    But then, I have a very poor musical ear. I could live happily with no music at all in my life.

    Mr Boogs (a musician) will wax lyrical about a particular musical instrument in a piece - and I struggle to even pick it out, never mind appreciate it.



  • fineline wrote: »
    I don't seem to have any strong feelings on this. I don't think I see music in terms of relevance. Whether it's Mozart, the Beatles or the Spice Girls, it's all entertainment along the way as we go through our lives from the cradle to the grave.

    Yes, I don't get relevance or depth or any of this stuff. What have I been missing? Is it snobbery?
  • I like music wot as a Choon.

    Herr Mozart was good at Choons. Some might say the Beatles were, too, which is fair enough.
  • edited July 2019
    You're missing it @fineline. Music, and other art, isn't mere entertainment if it's actually art. It's the original revolution. Can change the world. Like love. Could life have love without art? You never sang anyone a love song?
  • You're missing it @fineline. Music, and other art, isn't mere entertainment if it's actually art. It's the original revolution. Can change the world. Like love. Could life have love without art? You never sang anyone a love song?

    I have often sung love songs, with varying results. In fact, I still do. "We've been together now for 40 years, and it don't seem a day too much ..."
  • I like music wot as a Choon.

    Herr Mozart was good at Choons. Some might say the Beatles were, too, which is fair enough.

    But I want you to look hard into the dark recesses of your psyche, and tell me, in all candour, is Mozart better than the 4 lovable mop-heads?
  • finelinefineline Kerygmania Host, 8th Day Host
    But who defines what is art? Different people's lives can be changed by all sorts. My definition of entertainment I guess is broad and includes having one's life wowed and humbled and awed and all sorts as one goes from the cradle to the grave. Art/entertainment gives us new perspectives, elevates our thinking from the mere mundane, etc., but it's all by the by, and our lives on earth are still finite. Arguing over which music is relevant seems to me like a self-important squabbling over whose interpretations are the most valid, whose taste is the most refined.
  • DafydDafyd Shipmate
    Francis Spufford says he was converted to Christianity by the slow movement of Mozart's Clarinet Concerto.
    This makes perfect sense to me.
  • I like music wot as a Choon.

    Herr Mozart was good at Choons. Some might say the Beatles were, too, which is fair enough.

    But I want you to look hard into the dark recesses of your psyche, and tell me, in all candour, is Mozart better than the 4 lovable mop-heads?

    Yes, mophead though he may himself have been.

  • I like music wot as a Choon.

    Herr Mozart was good at Choons. Some might say the Beatles were, too, which is fair enough.

    But I want you to look hard into the dark recesses of your psyche, and tell me, in all candour, is Mozart better than the 4 lovable mop-heads?

    Yes, mophead though he may himself have been.

    Is the right answer. But no would also be the right answer.
  • OK, so music as Art. That makes the Beatles Thomas Kinkade.

    I prefer my art darker, more intense. With passion and feeling.

    [Just for clarification, while I do completely stand behind this, I thought there needed to be a focus for shouting and anger that was not politics or climate or politicians. ]
  • OhherOhher Shipmate
    Iron Butterfly.
    Pink Floyd.

    Mozart? Facile. Pressed to start too young; pressured to produce too much; died too young; also (like the Beatles) very popular. Given another 15 years, a different cultural background, and a couple more tragedies to live through, might have achieved the gravitas of Bach. Alas, poor Mozart: doomed to remain forever a twinkly-tweedly lightweight.
  • tclunetclune Shipmate
    There's an old music joke that goes like this:
    Q: What's the difference between jazz and blues?
    A: A jazz musician plays a thousand chords for three people and a blues musician plays three chords for a thousand people.
    I happen to like both jazz and blues. But there is some truth to the joke. Sonny Rollins is huge for a jazz musician, but he'll never draw the crowds that BB King did. There's more depth in Rollins, but King had the larger influence, at least numerically, on people who listen to music.
    When you think about influence, it's kind of tricky. Whoever first slung the sh*t that drives the American Idol train was, in some low-bred sense, influential. Telemann was also influential, but perhaps in a different sense.
    A group as successful as the Beatles is pretty much influential by definition. And, to my mind, the variety of sounds that they produced is noteworthy in itself. Whether that adds up to the kind of influence that you value is up to you, of course.
  • OhherOhher Shipmate
    I watched the Beatles' first appearance on the Ed Sullivan show here in the States and was totally underwhelmed. Worse, I was excruciatingly embarrassed by the carryings-on of the teenaged girls in the audience (I was a just bit past that age myself).

    It took me about 40 years to begin to see any value in their work. But that was largely because so much claptrap horrible imitators had followed in their wake.
  • LydaLyda Shipmate
    'Pop' music = Is Outrage, anyway.

    Music died with young Herr Mozart...
    :cry:

    This takes me back to wonderful quote from the sincerely missed ken:

    "And why do foolish people say Bach is emotionless or mathematical? He's a screaming world of stuff compared to Mozart's mild-mannered slightly snooty uber-cool not-quite-frivolity.
    Mozart's music so often says "aren't I clever? Isn't the Kaiser a nice bloke? Aren't we all rather clever together for liking Me? Would anyone like to commission a quartet? What are you doing after the party? Oh, no-one goes there anymore Darling! Yes, tedious, isn't it?"
    On the other hand Bach's music typically says: "Glory to God in the Highest! And Peace to his people on Earth! And Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive glory and honour and power! And isn't creation wonderful! And there is all this stuff going on in my head! Talking of which I've been up all night and could do with a coffee. No, make that a beer. In fact I want a double coffee AND a pint of lager. And shoot that bloody piano player. AND WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO PAY ME YOU TIGHT SAXON BASTARDS????"
    Trust me, its all in there somewhere."
  • Awesome!

    I sincerely miss the :notworthy: emoji.
  • MarsupialMarsupial Shipmate
    Sure Bach is great. But you don't need to diss Mozart (or Chopin, or Rachmaninov, or Mompou) to appreciate Bach.
  • Just for clarification, while I do completely stand behind this, I thought there needed to be a focus for shouting and anger that was not politics or climate or politicians. ]

    Ah, that makes more sense. You seemed like you were in "Darn lads from Liverpool, get off my lawn!" mode. IMHO, might have been better to state the purpose in the OP.
    ;)

  • What the hell does "the first contemporary music band" mean? Contemporary with whom? There were many rock bands before the Beatles. They named themselves after one of them. If this isn't mere twaddle and part of your "let's see how many people I can rile up hee hee hee hee I'm so clever" pseudo attack on the Beatles, what is it?
  • Marvin the MartianMarvin the Martian Admin Emeritus
    The Beatles - everyone in music seems to worship them. But they are trivial anr irrelevant. Not worth it.

    Something tells me you want a revolution, but after a hard day's night of fixing a hole in the glass onion of society I just need some help to get back to a place where I feel fine. Ask me why if you must, but in this helter skelter world that's going nowhere man I sometimes want to take a magical mystery tour along the long and winding road with a band that don't let me down.

    Do you want to know a secret? Baby you're a rich man, but all the money in the world can't buy me love. When you're back in the USSR you can buy a ticket to ride, be a day tripper, drive my car and carry that weight from me to you. I want to hold your hand, but I don't want to spoil the party. I call your name, crying "Martha my dear, please please me honey pie, I've got to get you into my life". And I love her, but she doesn't get all my loving because there's Michelle and Julia and Anna and Maggie Mae and dear, dear Prudence (who once asked me "why don't we do it in the road?"), and even with a little help from my friends it's clear that I'm a loser. And while my guitar gently weeps, she's leaving home.

    I'm so tired, and it won't be long before golden slumbers give way to good morning. Good morning, here comes the sun flying from me to you, here there and everywhere. Hello, Goodbye! Let's just let it be and come together, because all you need is love eight days a week. Each morning I pray "Lady Madonna, love me do", and she loves you too.

    The Beatles are awesome. The end.

    PS. I love you.

  • and Maggie Mae

    - are you quite sure about this one?

  • Marvin the MartianMarvin the Martian Admin Emeritus
    Last song on side 1 of Let it Be. Unrelated to the Rod Stewart version.
  • CaissaCaissa Shipmate
    edited July 2019
    We have always wondered the status of Schroedinger's Cat. Now we don't need to open the box. The cat must be dead if it is spewing smack about The Beatles.
  • TubbsTubbs Admin
    edited July 2019
    Well, it's probably true that the Beatles were lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time but they seized each opportunity and created an amazing body of work that has endured. There's good stuff on almost every Beatles album.

    They were sensible enough to break up at the end of the 60's. The less said about some of the solo work the better. None of them were as good apart as they were together.

    My favourite random Beatles factoid is their championship of black artists - they were among the first white artists to do so. And they spoke out about segregation - refusing to play US venues unless they were integrated. And they were big enough to make that happen.

    Not seeing your problem. Did you go and see Yesterday over the weekend and hate every minute?
  • Nick TamenNick Tamen Shipmate
    edited July 2019
    I think he identified his "problem" here:
    [Just for clarification, while I do completely stand behind this, I thought there needed to be a focus for shouting and anger that was not politics or climate or politicians. ]

  • HelenEvaHelenEva Shipmate
    edited July 2019
    Speaking as a musicologist (TM) (I has sertificuts an everyfink) - what is this "relevant" or indeed "irrelevant" of which you speak in the title? Seems we've got onto discussing the worth (artistic or financial) or influence of the Beatles but haven't really defined terms. As Adorno would doubtless remind us no art can be divorced from its cultural context so everything's bound to be "relevant" to something.

    Oh, and Mozart is the finest music in the universe without question, Mr Spufford is right about the slow mvt of the clarinet concerto and anyone who thinks otherwise deserves to be doomed to listen to Haydn until they repent. :wink: This is one of my few areas of absolute fundamentalism...
  • LydaLyda Shipmate
    Marsupial wrote: »
    Sure Bach is great. But you don't need to diss Mozart (or Chopin, or Rachmaninov, or Mompou) to appreciate Bach.

    Oh, yeah, I enjoy Mozart. I also enjoy ken's turn of phrase.
  • Never mind Mozart, what about Stormzy, "State your name cuz, Stormzy init, what we doing today, rapping init, yeah fucking rapping, yeah fire in park, let's go!"
  • Never mind Mozart, what about Stormzy, "State your name cuz, Stormzy init, what we doing today, rapping init, yeah fucking rapping, yeah fire in park, let's go!"

    His comments about Boris and May were very pertinent :mrgreen:
  • Nick Tamen wrote: »
    I think he identified his "problem" here:
    [Just for clarification, while I do completely stand behind this, I thought there needed to be a focus for shouting and anger that was not politics or climate or politicians. ]

    Isn't there a name for this? Starts with a tee and ends with an el?
This discussion has been closed.