Posted on 02/07/2014 10:54:23 AM PST by US Navy Vet
It was 50 years ago today that The Beatles landed in America for the first time. Could any other group ever hope to top the talents of these beloved moptops? Well ...Yeah, yeah, yeah! Check out 11 bands that I think took the Fab Four’s pop revolution and made it even better, way beyond compare
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
"Which one's Pink?"
‘Rush’ is DEFINITELY in the top 11 along with Led Zeppelin. I will SCREAM ‘Gentle Giant’ until my lungs give out, though. LOL Okay, maybe the Suburban Lawns, too! A GREAT band I saw numerous times.
http://www.rutles.org/rstory.html
right.....your homework assignment is to turn on the radio tomorrow at 12PM and listen to any rock and roll station in the nation....by 12 midnight let me know if you heard more songs from the beatles or the mighty Led Zeppelin...
Wasn’t their run about 4 years? Not impressed. There are bands and players from that era that still sell out stadiums. Aerosmith, Rolling Stones, Rush, and many other bands and players in those bands still sell out stadiums. Beatles? Not so much.
Polka anyone???
The Beach Boys
The Beatles suck. Always have. I really wish they would just disappear and take their sucky music with them.
Oh and...ABBA...sigh.
Beeruls didn't hit their stride until Yoko signed up.
I can’t believe that it took 85 posts before anyone mentioned The Ruttles! The late George Harrison never did get enough credit for his sense of humor.
Seriesly though, the word “better” in regards to music is impossible to quantify. However, there are some very important incidents that would change music forever. One of which was the release of Sgt. Pepper. The Beatles were very much a 5 piece band, with George Martin both smoothing out the rough edges, as well as some really incredible things in the studio. He really did some amazing things with recording and sound techniques pioneered by Les Paul. It’s hard to believe that Sgt. Pepper was recorded using 4 track equipment, which at the time, was a technological breakthrough.
If “better” means “my favorite,” this list is forgivable. And while there are some bands that did some things that really stand out in the history of popular music, it’s also something that is completely subjective, based on the individual.
Mark
I figured they may have --- but were they in the same league?
When I was just a youngster myself, I once took a sweet looking young gal to a concert that she wished to attend, to see Kiss. She didn't like me, just knew I could afford the tickets.
Bob Seger and the Silver Bullet Band opened for Kiss, and flat blew them off the stage. No contest, just a lot of make-up and posing for Kiss, while they played air-guitar to canned recording. Seger and his boys on the other hand, were the real thing, live.
This was before Seger had much national exposure. After that tour, he and his band became more widely known. Speaking of those who got close to making it "big", perhaps.
The only reason anyone remembers Jack the Ripper was that he was the first media-enhanced serial killer. Pretty much the same as the Beatles.
Importantly, the Beatles moved into a huge gap in music when 1950s Rock and Roll had to a great extent burned out, and the interim was filled with forgettable pretty boy crooners singing cover songs. They made a big splash, because nobody else was making a ripple.
They also technologically hit at the right time, because Telstar had just gone active, so England and the US could now broadcast “live” to each other.
Within a year some 60% of the singles sold in the US were their music. Other than Bob Dylan and the Rolling Stones, who were just starting out, the Beatles almost had a monopoly of pop music.
re: “The Beatles are overrated, and there’s nothing intrinsically special about them. Their fame derives from them being on the scene at the right point in time.”
I must respectfully disagree. The Beatles made no secret about it that their inspiration was American rock n’roll. That’s what they played early on. But, what they did was create their own sound - yes, they borrowed from others, but they were way, way superior in their musicianship and technical ability by the time they came to America in 64.
Listen to any band’s recording, U.S. or UK, of that time period, then listen to the Beatles from the same era. Whether you liked their sound or not, they were definitely musically more sophisticated in their compositions and in their sound. Much of that I credit to their producer George Martin. He took their sound and refined it in the studio. He introduced them to other instrument and styles (baroque, classical) which they, to their credit, began to experiment with in their compositions.
I encourage everyone to, with head phones, listen to the Beatle’s recording of the song, “Dear Prudence” from the White Album, and notice all the layering of voices and instruments that takes place as the song progresses. It’s amazing what they do with just simple sounds. Also, Paul does a nice job on the drums (Ringo didn’t play on this cut).
I’m not arguing that the Beatles were necessarily “better” than all other bands, but they started with a simple sound and kept pushing the limits of a “rock” song. You can hear definite progress in their musical growth over the years. That’s why they didn’t fade away like other bands. Their music still sounds somewhat fresh and relevant even today. Again, they had a great and wise producer in George Martin, but they had talent, too. Many of their melodies will be around for a long time.
When they broke up they lost their “edge” because they didn’t have to compete with each other anymore. Lennon was still a good writer. I hate his “Imagine” song because it’s pure idiocy, but his ability to write music and a descent lyric was obviously better than McCartney. Lennon’s last album, “Double Fantasy” (minus the crap from Yoko) has some very nice tunes.
I will always be a Beatle fan because I grew up with them and they are part of my fond memories, but even so, they were a great band.
They were more popular than Rod.
It’s not a list I would have chosen, but to each his own when it comes to music.
Several game changers for music:
The Beatles/Capital/Ed Sullivan 1964 coordinated media attack.
The Beatles “concept album”.
Woodstock.
Keyboard and drum synthizers in the 1980s.
Music has never recovered.
Mass consumerism and pushing “product” (an identity as much as the music) rather than selling songs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.