The Beatles are the most important band ever

musicismylife78

A little while ago I got reamed for suggesting Nirvana was the most important band since the beatles/

This time I am taking a different path.

Are the beatles the most important band ever? I am inclined to think so.

I mean who ISNT influenced by the beatles?

dunkman

Cheguevara6 wrote:

Are the beatles the most important band ever?

yes. even if people dont like them msuically it would be churlish to ignore their importance on the musical world... they define an era and their importance is still relevant today.

when you read musicians interviews and they say how much they are influenced then the list becomes frightening... and these are musicians we are talking about.. they realise how musically important the Beatles are

Klumpie

The Rolling Stones are more important. Also Chuck Berry and the Beach Boys are more important.

Chuck Berry was the first who played with - vocals, bass, guitar and drum

Beach Boys were the first who played pop-rock songs and the first who made a conceptalbum, The Beatles were influenced by this and did this all a year later.

The Rolling Stones were the first who played blues-rock. Mick Jagger was the first rocksinger who didn't sing like a boyband-boy, but uses his own beastly vocals. Keith Richards was the first who played hard riffs on the guitar (also Dave Davies from the Kinks did this at the same time). Watts and Wyman were the first who introduced jazz rhythms in the rock music. Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, Black Sabbath were all more influenced by The Rolling Stones then The Beatles. The Rolling Stones were also the first who introduced sex, drugs and violence into the rock music.

The Beatles were doing nothing new, they were only doing things what other bands did before them. And they did it good, that's why they get much more credits then other bands.

http://www.scaruffi.com/vol1/beatles.html

Gremmie95

While I prefer the Stones music to the Beatles, the Fab 4 had more impact musically.

pjoasisrule

Klumpie wrote:

The Rolling Stones are more important. Also Chuck Berry and the Beach Boys are more important.

Wrong, you could at least explain yourself if you disagree.

The Beatles are the most important, it would be stupid to argue even if you dont like them.

Alex_Coe

Personally I disdain the Beatles. They got big because they had a new sound, not because they were extremely talented. They wrote extremely simplistic, often forgettable rock songs. But they were the first people EVER to write simplistic, often forgettable rock songs. People latched onto this new sound, of course, but what would have happened if the Beatles never existed? Their laid back 60's rock never would have evolved into the intense, emotional, good music of the 70's.

So maybe the Beatles weren't that great in a vacuum. But that's because they were the first rockers. Inexperienced, mostly. But they paved the way for other rock bands to spring up, and every rock band (good or bad) of the 60's and 70's owes their existance to the Beatles, who laid the first brick of the kingdom.. of... rock. Yes, that was very cheesy. There is no kingdom of rock. Whatever. They laid the first brick.

Out.

Ledbetterman10

Klumpie wrote:

The Rolling Stones are more important. Also Chuck Berry and the Beach Boys are more important.

Chuck Berry:
big influence on the Beatles. however, if not for the Beatles, who knows how important he'd even be. remember, the Beatles were rejected at their first audition because they were told that "guitar bands are on the way out." maybe they were....until the Beatles exploded and everyone tried to imitate them. maybe guys even as great as Chuck Berry and Buddy Holly would just fade away if not for them.

The Beach Boys:
great band but not on the Beatles level as far as creativity. not to discredit the Beach Boys though, but Pet Sounds is the only album that can be called a masterpiece. every other post-Pet Sounds album seems just thrown together with no direction. and the albums without Brian Wilson aren't too good if you ask me. but really, the early Beach Boys songs (California Girls, Surfin' USA, etc) aren't as good as the early Beatles songs. the Beach Boys peak creative period (Pet Sounds, Smiley Smile, Wild Honey) don't even touch Sgt. Pepper's, Magical Mystery Tour or the White album in terms of not only creativity, but musicianship and lyrics (remember that none of the Beach Boys wrote any Pet Sounds lyrics and the instruments were all played by session musicians except for "That's Not Me"). I love the Beach Boys, but they aren't more important than the Beatles. and I think Brian Wilson is a genius, but he's not even close to Lennon or McCartney.

The Rolling Stones:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. you can't be serious. they're a better than average rock band, that's all.

sasoj

pearl jam is the best band ever

cory

What about Carl Perkins who influenced the Beatles?

Carl was my great uncle. I was at his funeral and George Harrison was there. Paul McCartney visited Carl's wife the night before and recorded a video speech for the funeral attendees.

Each of the Beatles have said that he was their inspiration to play music.

That being said, I'm not a big fan of Carl's music overall, but to each his own. Whatever moves YOU.

He could play some fucking guitar though. I'll give him that. And all without the use of his pinky finger on his fret hand.

DocChicago

Alex_Coe wrote:

Personally I disdain the Beatles. They got big because they had a new sound, not because they were extremely talented. They wrote extremely simplistic, often forgettable rock songs. But they were the first people EVER to write simplistic, often forgettable rock songs. People latched onto this new sound, of course, but what would have happened if the Beatles never existed? Their laid back 60's rock never would have evolved into the intense, emotional, good music of the 70's.

So maybe the Beatles weren't that great in a vacuum. But that's because they were the first rockers. Inexperienced, mostly. But they paved the way for other rock bands to spring up, and every rock band (good or bad) of the 60's and 70's owes their existance to the Beatles, who laid the first brick of the kingdom.. of... rock. Yes, that was very cheesy. There is no kingdom of rock. Whatever. They laid the first brick.

Out.

If the Beatles had stopped before the Rubber Soul album, your post might start to make sense. But they progressed musically from that point forward, moving from those simplistic songs to much more complex stuff like the tunes on Sgt Pepper's or Abbey Road. The Beatles carried their own sound forward. Other band didn't need to do it for them. As for them being the first rockers, I'm not sure that's true either, if you read the other posts in the thread.

pdh1978

Klumpie wrote:

The Rolling Stones are more important. Also Chuck Berry and the Beach Boys are more important.

Chuck Berry was the first who played with - vocals, bass, guitar and drum

Beach Boys were the first who played pop-rock songs and the first who made a conceptalbum, The Beatles were influenced by this and did this all a year later.

Um, Brian Wilson has said in many interviews that the reason he worked so hard on the Beach Boys greatest album, Pet Sounds, was because he had listened to Sergeant Peppers', and he felt he had to compete with that. So the Beatles definitely influenced him...

Steve Dunne

Beatles and Stones influenced everyone after them.

Chuck Berry did the same.

Elvis influenced music, culture, and race.

FinsburyParkCarrots

Alex_Coe wrote:

They wrote extremely simplistic, often forgettable rock songs. But they were the first people EVER to write simplistic, often forgettable rock songs.

I bet you can remember those forgettable rock songs, though.

FinsburyParkCarrots

pdh1978 wrote:

Um, Brian Wilson has said in many interviews that the reason he worked so hard on the Beach Boys greatest album, Pet Sounds, was because he had listened to Sergeant Peppers', and he felt he had to compete with that. So the Beatles definitely influenced him...

Ah, well, Brian Wilson is loopy. Recording for Pet Sounds was mainly concurrent with the sessions for Rubber Soul and Revolver. The sessions for Pet Sounds began in July 1965, and the album was released in May 1966. Rubber Soul was released in December 1965; Revolver in August 1966. Sgt Pepper wasn't released until June 1967, by which time the Beach Boys' Smile sessions had ended.

Macca has said that he was very influenced by the "clean sounds" on Pet Sounds, and his bass playing on Sgt Pepper - which Paul really worked on and often recorded last on each number, after all the other tracks were done - was largely trying to get that Beach Boys feel.

facepollution

FinsburyParkCarrots wrote:

I bet you can remember those forgettable rock songs, though.

Yeah I can remember every excruciating 'na na na na' from Hey Jude - an absolute steaming turd of a song.

darthvedder88

sasoj wrote:

pearl jam is the best band ever

Enough said. Thank you sasoj!!!

FinsburyParkCarrots

facepollution wrote:

Yeah I can remember every excruciating 'na na na na' from Hey Jude - an absolute steaming turd of a song.

Just as I can remember every excruciating "Baaaaabeeee baaaaabeeee baaaaaabeeeee" from a dreadful Zep song. Now say something constructive.

augustwest

cory wrote:

What about Carl Perkins who influenced the Beatles?

Carl was my great uncle. I was at his funeral and George Harrison was there. Paul McCartney visited Carl's wife the night before and recorded a video speech for the funeral attendees.

Each of the Beatles have said that he was their inspiration to play music.

That being said, I'm not a big fan of Carl's music overall, but to each his own. Whatever moves YOU.

He could play some fucking guitar though. I'll give him that. And all without the use of his pinky finger on his fret hand.

CARL PERKINS' CADILLAC
Life ain't nothing but a blending up of all the ups and downs
Dammit Elvis, don't you know
You made your Mama so proud
Before you ever made that record, before there ever was a Sun
Before you ever lost that Cadillac that Carl Perkins won

Mr. Phillips found old Johnny Cash and he was high
High before he ever took those pills and he's still too proud to die
Mr. Phillips never said anything behind nobody's back
Like "Dammit Elvis, don't he know, he ain't no Johnny Cash"

If Mr. Phillips was the only man that Jerry Lee still would call sir
Then I guess Mr. Phillips did all of Y'all about as good as you deserve
He did just what he said he was gonna do and the money came in sacks
New contracts and Carl Perkins' Cadillac

I got friends in Nashville, or at least they're folks I know
Nashville is where you go to see if what they said is so
Carl drove his brand new Cadillac to Nashville and he went downtown
This time they promised him a Grammy
He turned his Cadillac around

Mr. Phillips never blew enough hot air to need a little gold plated paperweight
He promised him a Cadillac and put the wind in Carl's face
He did just what he said he was gonna do and the money came in sacks
New contracts and Carl Perkins' Cadillac

Dammit Elvis, I swear son I think it's time you came around
Making money you can't spend ain't what being dead's about
You gave me all but one good reason not to do all the things you did
Now Cadillacs are fiberglass, if you were me you'd call it quits

facepollution

FinsburyParkCarrots wrote:

Just as I can remember every excruciating "Baaaaabeeee baaaaabeeee baaaaaabeeeee" from a dreadful Zep song. Now say something constructive.

Ok, people are incapable of judging The Beatle's output from a purely objective standpoint, because it has forever been drummed into everyone's heads from birth, that The Beatles were the 'start' of rock, and nobody else can come close.

I don't doubt their influence, but on a technical basis, they are no more important than the artists who influenced them in the first place.

Alex_Coe

DocChicago wrote:

If the Beatles had stopped before the Rubber Soul album, your post might start to make sense. But they progressed musically from that point forward, moving from those simplistic songs to much more complex stuff like the tunes on Sgt Pepper's or Abbey Road. The Beatles carried their own sound forward. Other band didn't need to do it for them. As for them being the first rockers, I'm not sure that's true either, if you read the other posts in the thread.

Sorry, I just say what the TV box tells me. And the picture box says the beatles were the first big rock band. So that's what I parrot

squawk



squawk

aNiMaL

Alex_Coe wrote:

Personally I disdain the Beatles. They got big because they had a new sound, not because they were extremely talented. They wrote extremely simplistic, often forgettable rock songs. But they were the first people EVER to write simplistic, often forgettable rock songs. People latched onto this new sound, of course, but what would have happened if the Beatles never existed? Their laid back 60's rock never would have evolved into the intense, emotional, good music of the 70's.

So maybe the Beatles weren't that great in a vacuum. But that's because they were the first rockers. Inexperienced, mostly. But they paved the way for other rock bands to spring up, and every rock band (good or bad) of the 60's and 70's owes their existance to the Beatles, who laid the first brick of the kingdom.. of... rock. Yes, that was very cheesy. There is no kingdom of rock. Whatever. They laid the first brick.

Out.

On the whole, The Beatles wrote anything but simple music. Most of their catalog is very complex musically and very hard for professional musicians to replicate. Not impossible, just not easy at all.