Guest isis Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 (edited) Blimey...thats addictive and I'm not a beatles fan, well spotted. Edited September 28, 2009 by isis
Guest Lobster Madras Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 Blimey...thats addictive and I'm not a beatles fan, well spotted. Personally think it's utter shite.. really have heard enough Beatles for one life.. ; the mere thought of Macca makes me feel ill.
John Reed Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 A miserable record - I've never like the Beatles and this has just cemented my view...
Citizen P Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 Stuff The Beatles tripe, but explore the James Jamerson links. Now That's What I call MUSIC!!!! Tony
Guest Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 (edited) Stuff The Beatles tripe, but explore the James Jamerson links. Now That's What I call MUSIC!!!! Tony Words fail me . Malc Burton Edited September 29, 2009 by Malc Burton
Pete S Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 The Beatles bit was great, shame about the backing track, pleasant though. She's Leaving Home is one of the greatest records ever made and greatest songs ever written and greatest melodies as well. The Beatles are the greatest band ever to walk the earth.
Guest TONY ROUNCE Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 The Beatles bit was great, shame about the backing track, pleasant though. She's Leaving Home is one of the greatest records ever made and greatest songs ever written and greatest melodies as well. The Beatles are the greatest band ever to walk the earth. She's Leaving Home is a long way from being my favourite Beatles record and What's Going On is a long way from being my favourite Marvin Gaye record, but I thought that this was a well thought out, well executed mash up. It entertained me considerably more than the records that it pairs individually do. Pete's closing sentence is 100% on the money, BTW. Only an idiot would think or say otherwise. I suspect we're now about to hear from quite a few idiots, as this thread continues...
jocko Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 (edited) Stuff The Beatles tripe, but explore the James Jamerson links. Now That's What I call MUSIC!!!! Tony Seems a very well reasoned and well thought analysis that I am happy to stick my name against mate. Sure we arent the only sensible people on here that are Beatle haters. Words fail me . Malc Burton Quite an unusual occurrence Malc, I am putting it down to when you think about it the above is quite a reasonable statement for a soul fan! The Beatles bit was great, shame about the backing track, pleasant though. She's Leaving Home is one of the greatest records ever made and greatest songs ever written and greatest melodies as well. The Beatles are the greatest band ever to walk the earth. The Beatles and George Lemmons are one and the same Pete, you just havent realised it yet, She's Leaving Home is a long way from being my favourite Beatles record and What's Going On is a long way from being my favourite Marvin Gaye record, but I thought that this was a well thought out, well executed mash up. It entertained me considerably more than the records that it pairs individually do. Pete's closing sentence is 100% on the money, BTW. Only an idiot would think or say otherwise. I suspect we're now about to hear from quite a few idiots, as this thread continues... A wise man once said that the biggest idiots in the world are those that have the most information but do not understand it or use it inappropriately so its all relative really isnt it. And its really a bit like beauty isnt it.......... The Beatles are sh*t for a number of musical reasons, give me the Stereophonics brand of pop anyday, at least he can sing. But that asides its a soul site, some of us are actually soul fans, although certainly not everyone, so as my question as to to Malc WTF should a soul fan like the Beatles music (appreciating them for exposing some soul artists is not the same as liking their music, so lets not trot out that old one.) Answers grounded in reality rather than your personal taste please. Off to the village now for some straw......... Oh and getting on topic the mash up is awful, get over to some House site and hear how a mash up should be done, if you like that sort of thing, which I generally do not. Edited September 29, 2009 by jocko
Jaco Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 Seems a very well reasoned and well thought analysis that I am happy to stick my name against mate. Sure we aren't the only sensible people on here that are Beatle haters. Quite an unusual occurrence Malc, I am putting it down to when you think about it the above is quite a reasonable statement for a soul fan! The Beatles and George Lemmons are one and the same Pete, you just haven't realised it yet, A wise man once said that the biggest idiots in the world are those that have the most information but do not understand it or use it inappropriately so its all relative really isn't it. And it's really a bit like beauty isn't it.......... The Beatles are sh*t for a number of musical reasons, give me the Stereophonics brand of pop anyday, at least he can sing. But that asides it's a soul site, some of us are actually soul fans, although certainly not everyone, so as my question as to to Malc WTF should a soul fan like the Beatles music (appreciating them for exposing some soul artists is not the same as liking their music, so lets not trot out that old one.) Answers grounded in reality rather than your personal taste please. Off to the village now for some straw......... Oh and getting on topic the mash up is awful, get over to some House site and hear how a mash up should be done, if you like that sort of thing, which I generally do not. Jocko, Given that you usually post meaningful and well constructed opinions on a variety of matters and stand your corner in a dogged manner, that comment is truely baffling. Why shouldn't soul fans like the Beatles music? They are the single most influential contributors to popular music ever and it is unlikely that we will ever see a collective group of musicians change the face of popular music in the way that they did. Is that brief answer sufficiently grounded in reality?
Ernie Andrews Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 (edited) Jocko, Given that you usually post meaningful and well constructed opinions on a variety of matters and stand your corner in a dogged manner, that comment is truely baffling. Why shouldn't soul fans like the Beatles music? They are the single most influential contributors to popular music ever and it is unlikely that we will ever see a collective group of musicians change the face of popular music in the way that they did. Is that brief answer sufficiently grounded in reality? The Beatles had their moment in influencing others but so did lots of people Not everything progressed out of the popularism of the Beatles Elvis Presley was before the Beatles so whose to say that he didnt influence popular music to the same Degree. I quite like some of the Beatles stuff especially when I was 4 playing my Tennis racket to "Twist & Shout. But I also liked Helen Shapiro at the same time or Little Richard which was way before the Beatles. Lets not forget "The Pretty things" as one of the leading lights of pop music in the early sixties The list could go on- The Beatles didnt influence Lez Zeppelin as they grew out of more of a blues influence not Pop and some might say they were the greatest band in the world. So what I am saying is its all relative to the popularism of when you were brought up based on your age. As we get older we do see things different! The Beatles to some are shite and to their Gods- Its all as said just like Beauty! Im going home now to Play "The Moves- Flowers in the rain and remember that I liked the record for the melody and not the political undertones that the record was aimed at as I didnt understand politics at that time- Do I now? Edited September 29, 2009 by Ernie Andrews
jocko Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 Jocko, Given that you usually post meaningful and well constructed opinions on a variety of matters and stand your corner in a dogged manner, that comment is truely baffling. I hate the B***tles irrationaly some would say, so given Tony's goading comment I thought I would join in. And even the word B******s makes me shiver. Why shouldn't soul fans like the Beatles music? They are the single most influential contributors to popular music ever and it is unlikely that we will ever see a collective group of musicians change the face of popular music in the way that they did. Is that brief answer sufficiently grounded in reality? Ahh now I definitely didn't say they shouldn't, I was expecting that. Both Malc and Tony's response suggested they should which is a very different emphasis, bit like saying all Northern fans should like soul!! I am genuinely not sure they changed my musical world at all, I dont know enough about "popular music" to comment about that to be honest, and really dont care about it, thats not to say I dont like any of it, that would be idiotic I appreciate, just it doesnt enter my world for a number of reasons, and yes the argument old Berry and lots of soul music was made to be popular etc etc is relevant, but he and his music are part of a genre called soul, whether people want to get all arsey and PC about that or not, a genre that gets little respect on here sometimes, bizarrely, and therefore I quite like standing my corner on that, irrationally or not. It would be nice to see a thread about some soul music great getting even remotely the attention that threads about "popular music" or what is your top 5 Y-Front type threads do! I would certainly rather discuss, and be educated on, how Louis Armstrong changed the musical world which some would suggest was far more relevant than the Ruttles! But the key word is probably irrational, regarding my dislike of all things Beatle and the asusmption that everyone should like them! I do genuinely think they are Sh*t, that I stand by!
Sebastian Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 (edited) Lets not forget "The Pretty things" as one of the leading lights of pop music in the early sixties Don't get me wrong, I like The Pretty Things a whole lot... but "leading lights of pop music"? Compared to The Beatles they were a just blip on the worldwide music radar and to compare the popularity/impact of The Beatles vs. The Pretty Things is a non-starter. Edited September 29, 2009 by Sebastian
Jaco Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 I hate the B***tles irrationaly some would say, so given Tony's goading comment I thought I would join in. And even the word B******s makes me shiver. Ahh now I definitely didn't say they shouldn't, I was expecting that. Both Malc and Tony's response suggested they should which is a very different emphasis, bit like saying all Northern fans should like soul!! I am genuinely not sure they changed my musical world at all, I dont know enough about "popular music" to comment about that to be honest, and really dont care about it, thats not to say I dont like any of it, that would be idiotic I appreciate, just it doesnt enter my world for a number of reasons, and yes the argument old Berry and lots of soul music was made to be popular etc etc is relevant, but he and his music are part of a genre called soul, whether people want to get all arsey and PC about that or not, a genre that gets little respect on here sometimes, bizarrely, and therefore I quite like standing my corner on that, irrationally or not. It would be nice to see a thread about some soul music great getting even remotely the attention that threads about "popular music" or what is your top 5 Y-Front type threads do! I would certainly rather discuss, and be educated on, how Louis Armstrong changed the musical world which some would suggest was far more relevant than the Ruttles! But the key word is probably irrational, regarding my dislike of all things Beatle and the asusmption that everyone should like them! I do genuinely think they are Sh*t, that I stand by! Well I can understand that they may not have changed your musical world and I was certainly more interested in Tamla Motown in the 60's than the Beatles output, but surely their influence is everywhere, including "soul" music. And yes they acknowledge that some of their early influences came from Black America but they transcend any limitations within any musical genres in one form or another. When you say that they are shit what exactly do you mean? They couldn't write, sing or play instruments? Their productions were dire, their lyrics poor? You don't have to know much about "popular music" to see that simply cannot apply here. This is not a thread about a "pop group" per se and there are plenty of threads about soul music greats but a simple statement as how magnificent the Beatles music is ought to be able to be made within this particular thread. As to the top 5 Y-Fronts thread, that's now been scratched from Webby's (seemingly endless) list. Shame.
Ady Croasdell Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 Great song ruined by a bland (in this context) backing. The Beatles were the best by a very long way. It's odd that the Americans appreciate that, including most black musicians, and a lot of people over here don't; a bit like us appreciating all those soul records that didn't chart.
jocko Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 Well I can understand that they may not have changed your musical world and I was certainly more interested in Tamla Motown in the 60's than the Beatles output, but surely their influence is everywhere, including "soul" music. And yes they acknowledge that some of their early influences came from Black America but they transcend any limitations within any musical genres in one form or another. I would be interested in hearing how they influenced soul music, not saying they didn't but its certainly not something I have considered before , and as I said before, not them introducing soul stars, with their music is how I am taking the above. If they didnt change my musical world, then surely they didn't influence everything, I am also struggling to see their influence on certain other things, Pavrotti and a few others may certainly disagree I would have thought, but now I am being pedantic and dogmatic. I think your obviously a big fan and your devotion to them is clouding your judgement as much as my irrational dislike of them does mine...... When you say that they are shit what exactly do you mean? They couldn't write, sing or play instruments? Their productions were dire, their lyrics poor? You don't have to know much about "popular music" to see that simply cannot apply here. They can't sing for toffee, especially the miserable MF McCartney whose nasal scouse tone makes him one of the worst sort of singers out there, IMO obviously, which is normally right in my world, but as someone who generally judges how much I like music based on the singers voice first, they are hardly going to be top of my pops. Which is really my point about them and soul fans, but taking it beyond that I certainly don't hear any potential Funk Brothers, John Coltranes or MG's in their playing, although will admit to have no musical talent so maybe its just my ignorance...... The mass hysteria that goes with them, normally by people bought into the image and hype, really doesn't help my thoughts. This is not a thread about a "pop group" per se and there are plenty of threads about soul music greats but a simple statement as how magnificent the Beatles music is ought to be able to be made within this particular thread. As to the top 5 Y-Fronts thread, that's now been scratched from Webby's (seemingly endless) list. Shame. Actually there aren't that many about soul greats and most of them just fall of the page. Until you move thios into Freebasing you have my constant comment, it shouldn't be on a soul site, move it to Freebasing and I can happily ignore it and my palpitations will cease. I won't be smart and say that the Beatles would be No 1 in my list of all time top Y-Fronts, or will I ...... Mr Rounce I really hope that blue touch paper is close to singing your fingers right now!
Guest Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 (edited) I would be interested in hearing how they influenced soul music, not saying they didn’t but its certainly not something I have considered before , and as I said before, not them introducing soul stars, with their music is how I am taking the above. If they didnt change my musical world, then surely they didn't influence everything, I am also struggling to see their influence on certain other things, Pavrotti and a few others may certainly disagree I would have thought, but now I am being pedantic and dogmatic. I think your obviously a big fan and your devotion to them is clouding your judgement as much as my irrational dislike of them does mine…… They can’t sing for toffee, especially the miserable MF McCartney whose nasal scouse tone makes him one of the worst sort of singers out there, IMO obviously, which is normally right in my world, but as someone who generally judges how much I like music based on the singers voice first, they are hardly going to be top of my pops. Which is really my point about them and soul fans, but taking it beyond that I certainly don’t hear any potential Funk Brothers, John Coltranes or MG’s in their playing, although will admit to have no musical talent so maybe its just my ignorance…… The mass hysteria that goes with them, normally by people bought into the image and hype, really doesn’t help my thoughts. Actually there aren’t that many about soul greats and most of them just fall of the page. Until you move thios into Freebasing you have my constant comment, it shouldn’t be on a soul site, move it to Freebasing and I can happily ignore it and my palpitations will cease. I won’t be smart and say that the Beatles would be No 1 in my list of all time top Y-Fronts, or will I …… Mr Rounce I really hope that blue touch paper is close to singing your fingers right now! This is more to do with your hatered of all things scouse then ? Jock !.....you Scouseist you,get real they where the best band ever,and they where Liverpudlians how are they s'posed to sound like every band today American. Edited September 29, 2009 by ken
jocko Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 This is more to do with your hatered of all things scouse then ? Jock !.....you Scouseist you,get real they where the best band ever,and they where Liverpudlians how are they s'posed to sound like every band today American. I have confessed to having an irrational dislike of most things scouse Ken, and feel guilty daily about it, but not everything, I like you, I just haven't met many (any) nice resident scousers, but you are all good Ken so its not everyone. But nothing to do with that, I really genuinely dont think he can sing for toffee.
Guest Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 but you are all good Ken so its not everyone. Only cause i speak Yorkshire
Phild Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 Surely the best ever non Soul band are The Strawbs??? Phil
jocko Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 Surely the best ever non Soul band are The Strawbs??? Phil Okay thats the non soul part confirmed, off to Freebasing with Mods, cmon you know you want to...
Jaco Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 I would be interested in hearing how they influenced soul music, not saying they didn't but its certainly not something I have considered before , and as I said before, not them introducing soul stars, with their music is how I am taking the above. If they didnt change my musical world, then surely they didn't influence everything, I am also struggling to see their influence on certain other things, Pavrotti and a few others may certainly disagree I would have thought, but now I am being pedantic and dogmatic. I think your obviously a big fan and your devotion to them is clouding your judgement as much as my irrational dislike of them does mine...... They can't sing for toffee, especially the miserable MF McCartney whose nasal scouse tone makes him one of the worst sort of singers out there, IMO obviously, which is normally right in my world, but as someone who generally judges how much I like music based on the singers voice first, they are hardly going to be top of my pops. Which is really my point about them and soul fans, but taking it beyond that I certainly don't hear any potential Funk Brothers, John Coltranes or MG's in their playing, although will admit to have no musical talent so maybe its just my ignorance...... The mass hysteria that goes with them, normally by people bought into the image and hype, really doesn't help my thoughts. Actually there aren't that many about soul greats and most of them just fall of the page. Until you move thios into Freebasing you have my constant comment, it shouldn't be on a soul site, move it to Freebasing and I can happily ignore it and my palpitations will cease. I won't be smart and say that the Beatles would be No 1 in my list of all time top Y-Fronts, or will I ...... Mr Rounce I really hope that blue touch paper is close to singing your fingers right now! Wrong, wrong, wrong. Not a big fan at all - I don't own any Beatles stuff and I'm devoted to nobody. I simply accept how significant their contribution has been to music as a whole. To be pedantic I said that their influence is everywhere which you would not take literally - Pavarotti might be a good example, which is somewhat different to say that they influenced everything and everybody. As for singing for toffee, it may be true about McCartney but for f**ks sake you mentioned the Stereophonics!! Maybe Freebasing is a more apt place for this discussion, after all.
Sjclement Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 Pointless exercise IMHO marrying these to together might have been better playing Cant buy me love over the backing track of Hitchike Always prefered the Stones and Beach boys Ludicrous !!!!!
Guest Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 (edited) In replay to the comment by Jaco - " Quite an unusual occurrence Malc, I am putting it down to when you think about it the above is quite a reasonable statement for a soul fan! " Firstly , let me inform all and sundry , I wish to make it known , that besides having the appreciation and love for black american rare soul music that I do - I am a BIG Beatles fan . The pairing of " SLH " and " WGO " simply does not work for me hence my comment , which I should have expanded on more . Malc Burton Edited September 29, 2009 by Malc Burton
Guest Perception Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 It's odd that the Americans appreciate that, including most black musicians, and a lot of people over here don't; a bit like us appreciating all those soul records that didn't chart. Not really, as the Beatles made a lot of money and the Americans like that. I have nothing against the Beatles, but if they were an obscure band, that did not get any marketing or promotion like a lot os Soul records, would they be so keen on them?!
Ady Croasdell Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 Not really, as the Beatles made a lot of money and the Americans like that. I have nothing against the Beatles, but if they were an obscure band, that did not get any marketing or promotion like a lot os Soul records, would they be so keen on them?! They were obscure when they started they played Hamburg for a couple of years and had a couple of poor releases on Polydor. It was their later brilliance that made them successful. They got rich because they were brilliant like Marvin, the Temps, Aretha etc you can't hold that against them.
Guest James Trouble Posted September 30, 2009 Posted September 30, 2009 (edited) Taxman is a great funk record. And the Beatles are a great group, probably the best ever, and if you don't like their music you need ya ears washing out. Oh yeah Edited September 30, 2009 by James Trouble
Corbett80 Posted September 30, 2009 Posted September 30, 2009 (edited) You can really hear what a poor vocalist McCartney is on the Motown/Beatles track. The Beatles made some interesting and forward thinking music for sure, (Tomorrow Never Knows for example off their best album imho) but they did plagiarize a lot of stuff and had their ear to the ground listening to lots of contemporary groups, a rudimentary trawl through Deram and other similar labels output of the time proves that. Are we simply going on record sales here? Interesting the way the phrasing used by the Beatles fans becomes ('And the Beatles are a great group, probably the best ever, and if you don't love them you're a loser who needs their ears washing out') at the thought of people disagreeing with the established world view that they are 'the best band ever to walk the earth'. Often hear Beatles fans banging on in this fashion Edited September 30, 2009 by mulf
Pete S Posted September 30, 2009 Posted September 30, 2009 The Beatles made some interesting and forward thinking music for sure, (Tomorrow Never Knows for example off their best album imho) but they did plagiarize a lot of stuff and had their ear to the ground listening to lots of contemporary groups, a rudimentary trawl through Deram and other similar labels output of the time proves that. Are we simply going on record sales here? You have to be kidding. Deram was set up more or less as a result of Sgt Pepper and Decca wanting a more progressive/innovative offshoot and the Beatles had been experimenting in the studio for a good 2 years before Deram was formed in 1967. They are the originators, everyone else was hanging on to their coat tails
Missing Link Posted September 30, 2009 Posted September 30, 2009 Considering that they are two quite different tunes they go together better than expected though both are better in their original formats. With regards the promotional aspect of the Beatles career, it was pretty much from a grass roots level - the fans rather than Brian Epstein who was very naive as a manager of a pop group. The Beatles were, as has been well documented, very influenced by Black America. Where they differed was that they took things a step further, experimenting with different sounds under the watchful eye of George Martin. Even the experimental sounds were influenced by others, Macca citing Ornette Coleman's free form jazz and Karl Heinz Stockhausen's electronic sounds as particular inspirations. What makes them unique is that they embraced all these influences and constantly progressed before finally returning to their RnR roots with 'Let It Be' before disbanding. They finished at the right time and didn't hang on churning out the same old stuff and becoming a caricature of themselves like the Rolling Stones. They were a very talented, zeitgeist, pop group.
Corbett80 Posted September 30, 2009 Posted September 30, 2009 ' the Beatles had been experimenting in the studio for a good 2 years before Deram was formed in 1967.' Experimenting or releasing Pete? Revolver being before Deram was setup definitely....was it '66?
Pete S Posted September 30, 2009 Posted September 30, 2009 ' the Beatles had been experimenting in the studio for a good 2 years before Deram was formed in 1967.' Experimenting or releasing Pete? Revolver being before Deram was setup definitely....was it '66? Sorry you're right about Deram, I should bloomin know, took me long enough to get the first Bowie Deram single. OK this is all getting a bit irrelevant but if you look at the label listing there's nothing vaguely psych-tinged until you get to The Syn DM 130 which must surely be 67 and even then it's another 6 months or so before it really gets going.
Corbett80 Posted September 30, 2009 Posted September 30, 2009 Sorry you're right about Deram, I should bloomin know, took me long enough to get the first Bowie Deram single. OK this is all getting a bit irrelevant but if you look at the label listing there's nothing vaguely psych-tinged until you get to The Syn DM 130 which must surely be 67 and even then it's another 6 months or so before it really gets going. I wouldn't say its irrelevant Pete, often the argument i hear for the Beatles is that they are the innovators of everything, particularly new & interesting arrangements in popular music so its interesting to me to discuss the wheres and whys of that viewpoint.
Guest Posted September 30, 2009 Posted September 30, 2009 Taxman is a great funk record. And the Beatles are a great group, probably the best ever, and if you don't like their music you need ya ears washing out. Oh yeah Never thought of it like that before , but you are right James Malc Burton
Recommended Posts
Get involved with Soul Source
Add your comments now
Join Soul Source
A free & easy soul music affair!
Join Soul Source now!Log in to Soul Source
Jump right back in!
Log in now!