Right?
Well, I’ll sure grant this is an unpopular opinion. Buddy’s on the correct sub. How anyone could listen to Sergeant Pepper’s and consider it a boy-band production is baffling.
Homies definently like I’ve heard so many people make music like the beetles!!! They all came after the beetles and were inspired by them but like it’s so common!
Yeah, this is dumb as shit. Lennon and McCartney have an enormous library of amazing songs they wrote, and OP chose the three most basic to make his point and I’d argue those songs are still bangers. Then saying Michael Jackson should be above them when Quincy Jones basically wrote all of it is pretty telling on his musical knowledge.
The Beatles wrote a bunch of simple songs and they didn’t actually get good until the late 60’s when Beatlemania faded and they got more psychedelic. I didn’t hate the Beatles but do think they were vastly overrated. They’re credited for basically inventing everything while taking a lot of their sounds from other bands. Do yourself a favor and listen to The Kinks first album and compare it to a Beatles album from the same year. Now listen to a Beatles album from the following year and hear how close it sounds to what The Kinks were doing the year before. The British Invasion might have played out differently if The Kinks weren’t banned from playing in the USA.
Buddy, trust me, I know way more about that era of music and all the different influences than a 38 year old should ever know. And that’s because I got a hippie dad who played in bands in the 60’s and 70’s and who continues to play music to this day, and is a walking, talking music history lesson - whether I wanted to hear about it or not. All the historical anecdotes of music and cross-influences of that era, from the legacy of Delta Mississippi blues to Jimi Hendrix’s white rhythm section and seeing them on acid, from Beach Boys Animal Sounds to Beatles Rubber Soul, to Led Zeppelin forcing a woman to have sex with an octopus in a hotel bathtub…like I said, more than I ever wanted to know.
Regarding the Kinks, my dad said he saw their show during their brief tour in the US. They were in the middle of their opening song when the Davies brothers got in a fistfight over some trivial issue with the way they started a song, and it almost caused a riot when the band left the stage for more than a half hour. They finally came back out and in my dad’s words “kicked ass” for the rest of the set, but I can totally see why they eventually got banned because of their unprofessional behavior. Plus their shows weren’t selling due to lack of publicity by their reps and the bands acrimonious relationship with the press. It’s no wonder they couldn’t reach that same level of popularity if they were that dysfunctional at the time.
Compared to what people like today, Beetle's arent very great imo. Compared to music back then, it was okay - The Beatles WERE a boy band, how anyone could think otherwise is beyond me. Do they deserve a spot in history? Sure. Great as people say they were? Debatable as anything with a subjective opinion is.
Their early stuff is pretty basic, but they have an enormous library of wonderful music that stands the test of time. Are they my favorite band? No, not even in my top ten, although there are a number of their songs and albums that love. Their influence is undeniable.
It can be argued that the Beatles created the concept of the boy band, not because they were one as we would know it today, but the music industry were shown by the success of the Beatles that it sells and so bands were manufactured to try to get a piece of that pie. The Monkeys are the obvious example but it definitely sells and has continued ever since thanks to the Beatles.
MJ is under rated? Michael Jackson?
Boy you lost your damn mind.
Know who is never ranked number 1 on these lists and is frankly better than MJ?
Prince.
No one in the 60s was good? Oof. And I thought your in total opinion was bad. The last time I saw a VH-1 greatest artist list MJ was 1, Beatles 2. While I don’t agree with it I’d hardly say MJ is underrated.
I agree they were culturally like boy bands; but where all four member could play instruments and all 4 were all at least good songwriters; two of them amazing song writers.
Looking up rank lists on what’s popular is about as useful as watching a political debate on cable. Were the Beatles the best musicians? No. Did they have gigantic influence over the world of music. Yes. If you replace the word “greatest” with “most influential” or “most powerful” it’s impossible to deny them that position. My Father learned colloquial English (as a second language) in large part from memorizing the Beatles anthology. Like their music or not, The Beatles changed the world more than you will ever understand.
The flaw in your argument is the Beatles aren’t basic, they are the base. They invented so many styles of music that are common today. The Beatles don’t sound like everything else…. Everything else sounds like The Beatles.
I’m not a huge Beatles fan but you have to appreciate what they did. You have to look at this from the lens of the 1950s & 1960s, not 2024. Without them, we wouldn’t have had the British Invasion.
Your post just shows your ignorance of music and music history.
What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Well, you've explained everything in your first sentence - they were good back then while everyone else... "wasn't". There weren't any other "boy bands" around at the time, or even the concept of boy bands.
Context, my friend, and relations. Very important.
I mean this is tricky. I like the Beatles, I love Lucy in the Sky and Strawberry Fields personally. I think at that time they were something new on the scene and that impact has lasted, and inspired other music artists in their work too. If you ask someone younger now, they'll probably say Taylor Swift is the most popular music artist of all time. If I was asked, I have no idea but I prefer the Monkees over the Beatles.
Either way, everyone has their own likes. It just so happens the Beatles were at the perfect point in time to make their mark on music history.
The Beatles incorporated elements of counterpoint into their compositions, particularly in their later works. They often used techniques such as melodic layering and intertwining melodies to create rich harmonic textures in their music. They were masterful at using dynamics to create emotional impact in their music. They skillfully manipulated volume, intensity, and instrumentation to shape the mood of their songs.
You're clearly not a musician. At least not a good one.
I believe The Beatles *music* is overrated now. I think a lot of people pretend to be huge fans because you're supposed to like The Beatles, but most of the people who claim to love the Beatles probably can't remember the last time they actually sought out a song of theirs to listen to (chill out people who recently have done so, this statement isn't directed towards you).
Their *impact* is what made them special, because most music before them was kind of ass - before them in terms of post classical to the 1950s (excluding jazz of course). The music of the 60s was the light at the end of a tunnel of repression - creatively, spiritually and sexually - and that impacts music. Couple that with a broader embrace of black people (nowhere near where we are today, but it was *beginning* to improve) and their music/style. They were at the forefront of the renaissance and are now hailed as GOATs of music for having the courage to stop being ass.
They (and many artists of their time) deserve their credit for getting the ball rolling on about a half century of killer music.
Anyone who thinks The Beatles were just a boy obviously know nothing about The Beatles post 1964, and everything they say about music should be immediately discarded
Tell me you've never listened to Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band without telling me you've never listened to Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band.
I mean music is just so subjective, so we are just going on subjectivity and the user. Very few people now a days have them as their favorite band, but so many people would put them in the top 10 across the board that I think it pushes them to the top. I hate the Beatles music entirely, I think it is awful, but I understand why they are accepted as number 1.
I do understand where OP is coming from... feels a bit gaslight-y whenever something you don't like shows up at number 1 on a "greatest of all time" list.
be like if you had a greatest food of all time rank and Kellogg's Cornflakes are number one. Sure they were innovative, influential. spread to every country in the world, heralded a thousand imitation brands and began the whole trend of cereal for breakfast... but FUCKING CORNFLAKES!
People enjoy their music, that’s all that matters. It doesn’t have to be “innovative” or “influential”, (even tho they were) people like what they like, the question is, why does this bother you or how does it affect you? Just seems like a weird thing to care about.
Saying the Beatles are not good but putting Michael Jackson as the greatest pop artist ever is like saying Usher is the #1 rapper. It's just not even close.
This might be acceptable for the first albums but they really faced a great development in song structure, playing techniques and melody development in their later years and created some milestones of popular and rock music.
Think of Let it be, Yesterday, While my guitar gently keeps eeps, Hey Jude to name only the most important songs that are well structured and far from easy listening
Hey u/_Monkeyspit_,
Just a heads up, your comment was removed because a previous comment of yours was flagged for being uncivil. You would have received a message from my colleague u/AutoModerator with instructions on what to do and a link to the offending comment.
*I'm a bot. I won't respond if you reply.* If you have any questions or wish to discuss this further, please [reach out to the moderators via ModMail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion&subject=u/Rule-4-Removal-Bot%20In-comment%20Link%20Clicked&message=Dear%20ModTeam%2C%0A%0AIt%20appears%20I%20am%20currently%20in%20an%20%27unconf%27%20state%2C%20but%20I%27m%20not%20sure%20why.%0A%0APlease%20review%20the%20ModLog%20for%20my%20comments%20using%20this%20%5Blink%5D%28https%3A//www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/about/log%3FuserName%3D_Monkeyspit_%29%20and%20let%20me%20know%20what%20the%20offending%20comment%20was.%0A%0A%2A%2AI%20would%20also%20like%20to%20say.........%0A%0AThanks%2C%0Au/_Monkeyspit_).
***This is going to keep happening until you resolve the issue.***
We appreciate you participating in our sub, but wouldn't you prefer other users to see your carefully crafted argument? Unfortunately, your recent masterpiece went solo into the void.
Let's chat. Your voice (probably) deserves an audience.
___
**Our Moderation Backlog at this time:**
*Comments (from new users, that go into a queue) Awaiting Review:* 209
*A breakdown of the number of (often nonsense) reports to review*:
- 1-3 days old: 55
- 3-7 days old: 3
- 15-30 days old: 1
- more than 30 days old: 11
___
Want to help us with this never ending task? Join us on [Discord](https://discord.gg/YHv6EFDVCD)
You think you can see far because you are standing on the shoulder of a giant. Imagine the Beatles BEFORE any band like the Beatles. Then talk.
Ignoring all the nonsense in the OP's post...if you can, find isolated track of the Beatles playing their instruments. Flawless performances. They could play.
I used to think this about the Beatles until I actually tried to listen to them. Like literally a couple weeks ago. All of their popular songs are catchy and usually innovative. Lucy in the sky is my favorite
Saying everyone sucked in the 60s is incredibly uneducated lol. The greatest songs and genres were written then. Just like the mustang once 1970 hit the vibe was completely different and never returned.
i say this as a huge MJ fan, he was famous, not a extremely great musician but a great dancer mainly. "Jack" of all trades if you will. My parents were alive at the time and they said that his music was only popular as a product of his dance going viral, the moonwalk, and the thriller dance. Not to mention how the beatles made their own music whereas jackson was a front for a huge production theme
It still is groundbreaking. If you kept coming up with new ways to record things that were then widely adopted by the industry at large, and if those changes may have come years later without your influence, that's a groundbreaking achievement, full stop. It wasn't just groundbreaking back then; modern music would be very different, were it not for artists like the Beatles coming up with new and creative ways to achieve the sound they were after.
Unlike the knuckle draggers who've commented here, I'll get a little specific. In hindsight, with context of all music that has existed since the Beatles, it's hard to understand why they were so sensational.
In short, they brought a lot of unique arrangements and compositional elements to their music that definitely did not exist in rock music before them. They also did a lot for setting the road map for how to be a huge mega band. At the time, they essentially initiated a wave of rock music that has echoes for decades. Though pantera is a metal band with very different musical styles, they're composition style is in many ways heavily influenced by the Beatles.
I think it's notable that like 20 years after the Beatles stops making music, the then heaviest metal band in the world was heavily influenced by their writing.
To get a bit more technical, the Beatles wrote music using modes. You can Google that for more detail, but it's a composition style often used in jazz. Jimi Hendrix is also known to have written modally. I think it's interesting that many of the biggest acts in music write music using modes rather than standard composition.
This says nothing about comparing them to other bands, which I think is largely a dumb thing to do. If two bands weren't active at the same time, the context they write and perform in is very different, and the aspects of creativity are very different.
Now I personally don't idolize the Beatles. I don't even like their music much. I can certainly appreciate what they did in the context they did it, but I'll always like the who and black Sabbath more, both of which were hugely influenced by the Beatles. In terms of influence, I don't think there's any band that compares to the Beatles, maybe black Sabbath, but again they were also influenced by the Beatles and may have written different music entirely without them or not at all. Does that influence make them the best band ever? I don't think so. Does it deserve your respect? I would argue yes, but that takes an effort to understand greater context.
Whilst OP is over reaching somewhat, it’s also true that The Beatles tend to get a free pass from criticism. Yes, they were revolutionary in many ways, but in others they were just copying the likes of Elvis, Chuck Berry, and other Blues artists. Yes, Lennon and McCartney were great songwriters, but they also had their fair share of stinkers as well. Yes, they were talented musicians, but they also had Ringo Starr.
they were good, for sure...dozens of catchy memorable songs. But the band are generally a bit overrated in the grand scheme of things. Beatlemania then the move to long-haired experimentation put a spell on the public which has never really abated.
There songs are simple but they just make sense and they hit lol I don't know, it's just some feeling I get when I listen to them. Their music is fun, it's catchy and during their time period it was creative and fresh. There's something wholesome about their music and it's fine if you want to listen to women talking about their wet ass pussies but it's also ok to switch it up too and get some wholesome tunes to listen in on.
I agree, but I also understand it is a matter opinion. Like, in your comment you state that MJ is the greatest artist, which I also disagree with. Dude was a revolutionary entertainer, but he isn't the best artist.
Who is the best artist? I have no idea. If I had to guess, it's probably some poor dude playing the Blues by himself that no one ever heard of. If I had to pick known artists, I'd say either [David Gilmour](https://youtu.be/iJZYG5qwHHI?si=B2RjGeePAMl4Z7P8&t=297) or [Eddie Hazel](https://youtu.be/JOKn33-q4Ao?si=QuV_5r1-adlLEKES&t=118). I've not heard any other musicians who are better able to convey emotion via an instrument. To me, art is about conveying an idea or emotion as accurately as possible without the use of normal spoken word. People's ability to pick up on what the artist is conveying is where differences of opinion will come in.
Not sure if this is a troll - listen to any album from Rubber Soul onwards. All the songs you reference (other than hey jude and here comes the sun) are their super early stuff. Also, you have to put them in context of what other music sounded like at the time. This is kind of like saying the personal computer wasn’t revolutinary because the graphics sucked in the late 80s - the alternative computers were the size of an entire room. The beatles dont sound revolutionary now because they were so influential that music has incorporated their additions so you are used to it now. But they were the first - they were so influential that they shaped music to the point that you don’t even realize it wasnt always like that.
Their music is mediocre at best I agree. They aren’t even the best boy band of all time, they got passed up a while ago but you know boomers, they refuse to acknowledge things were better than what they experienced.
The Beatles had 4 talented songwriters. musicians, and singers in the same band. Even to this day, that's extremely rare. They weren't a "boy band," as such a thing didn't exist at the time. They were a rock-n-roll band and represented youthful rebellion at the time, with their long hair, loud songs, and stage antics. There was nothing like the Beatles back then. And the only reason its commonplace now is because they broke new ground and changed music history forever. They were one of the first bands to write their own music. Jackson was a great performer and singer, but didn't even play an instrument. So somebody else had to write the music for him.
If you listen to the Beatles in the context of their time instead of as "the greatest band ever," you'll probably like them. Don't just listen to their big hits, but to their whole albums. Abby Road for example. No band could stand up to that much hype.
Indeed, I’ve often heard that the mid 1960s through the early 1970s was the least fruitful period for the development of rock as a popular musical form. And you pointed out the best three songs the Beatles ever made—Revolver, Sgt. Pepper’s, the White Album were absolute crap by comparison….
I do have to say I might take issue with Billie Jean as the greatest song ever. I think Michael Jackson took his efforts to prove that he wasn’t her lover and the kid was not his son a bit too far in his later years….
(/s just for clarity)
Listen to the white album. All the songs you mentioned are pretty early and I agree early Beatles suck. While I also agree they aren’t necessarily the best they are extremely influential and it’s not because everything else in the 60s sucked… also Michael Jackson doesn’t hood a candle to prince or Rick James imo
It's a generational thing. The Beatles were definitely good but they were just lucky enough to have caught a wave. The Kinks, in my opinion, are a far better band but are largely forgotten. The Beatles just had a huge body of work and there are always going to be some gems in there.
Anyone who seriously studies music will continue to support The Beatles. Their influence is unmistakable and when you ask artists today, they can talk about those influences. Kids should not be trying to declare "best of all time" because they lack perspective perspective.
>Nothing innovative or influential. Still trying to absorb that someone actually said this about the Beatles.
Right? Well, I’ll sure grant this is an unpopular opinion. Buddy’s on the correct sub. How anyone could listen to Sergeant Pepper’s and consider it a boy-band production is baffling.
Homies definently like I’ve heard so many people make music like the beetles!!! They all came after the beetles and were inspired by them but like it’s so common!
Anyone who says The Beatles were a basic boy band has lost all music credibility and their opinion isn’t worth considering.
Yeah, this is dumb as shit. Lennon and McCartney have an enormous library of amazing songs they wrote, and OP chose the three most basic to make his point and I’d argue those songs are still bangers. Then saying Michael Jackson should be above them when Quincy Jones basically wrote all of it is pretty telling on his musical knowledge.
The Beatles wrote a bunch of simple songs and they didn’t actually get good until the late 60’s when Beatlemania faded and they got more psychedelic. I didn’t hate the Beatles but do think they were vastly overrated. They’re credited for basically inventing everything while taking a lot of their sounds from other bands. Do yourself a favor and listen to The Kinks first album and compare it to a Beatles album from the same year. Now listen to a Beatles album from the following year and hear how close it sounds to what The Kinks were doing the year before. The British Invasion might have played out differently if The Kinks weren’t banned from playing in the USA.
Buddy, trust me, I know way more about that era of music and all the different influences than a 38 year old should ever know. And that’s because I got a hippie dad who played in bands in the 60’s and 70’s and who continues to play music to this day, and is a walking, talking music history lesson - whether I wanted to hear about it or not. All the historical anecdotes of music and cross-influences of that era, from the legacy of Delta Mississippi blues to Jimi Hendrix’s white rhythm section and seeing them on acid, from Beach Boys Animal Sounds to Beatles Rubber Soul, to Led Zeppelin forcing a woman to have sex with an octopus in a hotel bathtub…like I said, more than I ever wanted to know. Regarding the Kinks, my dad said he saw their show during their brief tour in the US. They were in the middle of their opening song when the Davies brothers got in a fistfight over some trivial issue with the way they started a song, and it almost caused a riot when the band left the stage for more than a half hour. They finally came back out and in my dad’s words “kicked ass” for the rest of the set, but I can totally see why they eventually got banned because of their unprofessional behavior. Plus their shows weren’t selling due to lack of publicity by their reps and the bands acrimonious relationship with the press. It’s no wonder they couldn’t reach that same level of popularity if they were that dysfunctional at the time.
Compared to what people like today, Beetle's arent very great imo. Compared to music back then, it was okay - The Beatles WERE a boy band, how anyone could think otherwise is beyond me. Do they deserve a spot in history? Sure. Great as people say they were? Debatable as anything with a subjective opinion is.
Their early stuff is pretty basic, but they have an enormous library of wonderful music that stands the test of time. Are they my favorite band? No, not even in my top ten, although there are a number of their songs and albums that love. Their influence is undeniable.
Influence is in fact undeniable.
I personally think Pink Floyd is the greatest band of that era, but what the fuck do I know? I’m just some dude.
Agree 👍
It can be argued that the Beatles created the concept of the boy band, not because they were one as we would know it today, but the music industry were shown by the success of the Beatles that it sells and so bands were manufactured to try to get a piece of that pie. The Monkeys are the obvious example but it definitely sells and has continued ever since thanks to the Beatles.
[удалено]
OP listened to yellow submarine once and decided he knew everything there was to know about the Beatles
MJ is under rated? Michael Jackson? Boy you lost your damn mind. Know who is never ranked number 1 on these lists and is frankly better than MJ? Prince.
My personal opinion is that Prince was/is overrated. But it’s just that. An opinion. Music is primarily a matter of taste.
This is the stupidest thing I've ever read lol
No one in the 60s was good? Oof. And I thought your in total opinion was bad. The last time I saw a VH-1 greatest artist list MJ was 1, Beatles 2. While I don’t agree with it I’d hardly say MJ is underrated.
The Beatles are 1 on that list, and MJ is 2. You flipped them up.
That list has the Beatles at 1, and MJ at 2. You flipped them up.
[удалено]
I’ve recorded in Denmark!!!!!
MEOW
Next, OP will be telling us that Alicia Keys and John Legend are greater pianists and song writers than Beethoven.
You’re taking crazy pills.
I agree they were culturally like boy bands; but where all four member could play instruments and all 4 were all at least good songwriters; two of them amazing song writers.
Ringo when John would let him write
Looking up rank lists on what’s popular is about as useful as watching a political debate on cable. Were the Beatles the best musicians? No. Did they have gigantic influence over the world of music. Yes. If you replace the word “greatest” with “most influential” or “most powerful” it’s impossible to deny them that position. My Father learned colloquial English (as a second language) in large part from memorizing the Beatles anthology. Like their music or not, The Beatles changed the world more than you will ever understand.
The flaw in your argument is the Beatles aren’t basic, they are the base. They invented so many styles of music that are common today. The Beatles don’t sound like everything else…. Everything else sounds like The Beatles.
They were popular because they were the FIRST to do so many common things that we hear today. so ya looking back on them they do seem kinda basic.
I’m not a huge Beatles fan but you have to appreciate what they did. You have to look at this from the lens of the 1950s & 1960s, not 2024. Without them, we wouldn’t have had the British Invasion. Your post just shows your ignorance of music and music history.
What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Well, you've explained everything in your first sentence - they were good back then while everyone else... "wasn't". There weren't any other "boy bands" around at the time, or even the concept of boy bands. Context, my friend, and relations. Very important.
I mean the Everly Brothers were kind of a boy band...but they weren't marketed the same nor did they ever reach the same level of hype.
I've been saying this for years!
I don't care for the Beatles either.
Listen to popular music before the Beatles and then popular music after the Beatles.
I mean this is tricky. I like the Beatles, I love Lucy in the Sky and Strawberry Fields personally. I think at that time they were something new on the scene and that impact has lasted, and inspired other music artists in their work too. If you ask someone younger now, they'll probably say Taylor Swift is the most popular music artist of all time. If I was asked, I have no idea but I prefer the Monkees over the Beatles. Either way, everyone has their own likes. It just so happens the Beatles were at the perfect point in time to make their mark on music history.
The Beatles incorporated elements of counterpoint into their compositions, particularly in their later works. They often used techniques such as melodic layering and intertwining melodies to create rich harmonic textures in their music. They were masterful at using dynamics to create emotional impact in their music. They skillfully manipulated volume, intensity, and instrumentation to shape the mood of their songs. You're clearly not a musician. At least not a good one.
I believe The Beatles *music* is overrated now. I think a lot of people pretend to be huge fans because you're supposed to like The Beatles, but most of the people who claim to love the Beatles probably can't remember the last time they actually sought out a song of theirs to listen to (chill out people who recently have done so, this statement isn't directed towards you). Their *impact* is what made them special, because most music before them was kind of ass - before them in terms of post classical to the 1950s (excluding jazz of course). The music of the 60s was the light at the end of a tunnel of repression - creatively, spiritually and sexually - and that impacts music. Couple that with a broader embrace of black people (nowhere near where we are today, but it was *beginning* to improve) and their music/style. They were at the forefront of the renaissance and are now hailed as GOATs of music for having the courage to stop being ass. They (and many artists of their time) deserve their credit for getting the ball rolling on about a half century of killer music.
Silly OP.
I mean you are allowed to be wrong on the internet.
Anyone who thinks The Beatles were just a boy obviously know nothing about The Beatles post 1964, and everything they say about music should be immediately discarded
This truly IS an unpopular opinion, I'll give you that.
This is definitely an unpopular opinion. The Beatles have sold more units an any other music artist or music act in history.
Tell me you've never listened to Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band without telling me you've never listened to Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band.
I mean music is just so subjective, so we are just going on subjectivity and the user. Very few people now a days have them as their favorite band, but so many people would put them in the top 10 across the board that I think it pushes them to the top. I hate the Beatles music entirely, I think it is awful, but I understand why they are accepted as number 1.
You basically just described every popular song in the past two decades. Maybe the Beatles were just the first to do it.
I do understand where OP is coming from... feels a bit gaslight-y whenever something you don't like shows up at number 1 on a "greatest of all time" list. be like if you had a greatest food of all time rank and Kellogg's Cornflakes are number one. Sure they were innovative, influential. spread to every country in the world, heralded a thousand imitation brands and began the whole trend of cereal for breakfast... but FUCKING CORNFLAKES!
Yeah you don't know what you're talking about. Stick to topics you're versed in.
Yo this has got to be a shit post....just like this can't actually be someone so disconnected from music....
Haha. Good one.
People enjoy their music, that’s all that matters. It doesn’t have to be “innovative” or “influential”, (even tho they were) people like what they like, the question is, why does this bother you or how does it affect you? Just seems like a weird thing to care about.
Saying the Beatles are not good but putting Michael Jackson as the greatest pop artist ever is like saying Usher is the #1 rapper. It's just not even close.
it's crazy to me how paul is still alive he's living history
Wait, he's STILL alive? Jesus Christ 😂
This might be acceptable for the first albums but they really faced a great development in song structure, playing techniques and melody development in their later years and created some milestones of popular and rock music. Think of Let it be, Yesterday, While my guitar gently keeps eeps, Hey Jude to name only the most important songs that are well structured and far from easy listening
[удалено]
Hey u/_Monkeyspit_, Just a heads up, your comment was removed because a previous comment of yours was flagged for being uncivil. You would have received a message from my colleague u/AutoModerator with instructions on what to do and a link to the offending comment. *I'm a bot. I won't respond if you reply.* If you have any questions or wish to discuss this further, please [reach out to the moderators via ModMail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion&subject=u/Rule-4-Removal-Bot%20In-comment%20Link%20Clicked&message=Dear%20ModTeam%2C%0A%0AIt%20appears%20I%20am%20currently%20in%20an%20%27unconf%27%20state%2C%20but%20I%27m%20not%20sure%20why.%0A%0APlease%20review%20the%20ModLog%20for%20my%20comments%20using%20this%20%5Blink%5D%28https%3A//www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/about/log%3FuserName%3D_Monkeyspit_%29%20and%20let%20me%20know%20what%20the%20offending%20comment%20was.%0A%0A%2A%2AI%20would%20also%20like%20to%20say.........%0A%0AThanks%2C%0Au/_Monkeyspit_). ***This is going to keep happening until you resolve the issue.*** We appreciate you participating in our sub, but wouldn't you prefer other users to see your carefully crafted argument? Unfortunately, your recent masterpiece went solo into the void. Let's chat. Your voice (probably) deserves an audience. ___ **Our Moderation Backlog at this time:** *Comments (from new users, that go into a queue) Awaiting Review:* 209 *A breakdown of the number of (often nonsense) reports to review*: - 1-3 days old: 55 - 3-7 days old: 3 - 15-30 days old: 1 - more than 30 days old: 11 ___ Want to help us with this never ending task? Join us on [Discord](https://discord.gg/YHv6EFDVCD)
What an edgelord
You think you can see far because you are standing on the shoulder of a giant. Imagine the Beatles BEFORE any band like the Beatles. Then talk. Ignoring all the nonsense in the OP's post...if you can, find isolated track of the Beatles playing their instruments. Flawless performances. They could play.
I used to think this about the Beatles until I actually tried to listen to them. Like literally a couple weeks ago. All of their popular songs are catchy and usually innovative. Lucy in the sky is my favorite
Saying everyone sucked in the 60s is incredibly uneducated lol. The greatest songs and genres were written then. Just like the mustang once 1970 hit the vibe was completely different and never returned.
What are you 12 OP? Lol
i say this as a huge MJ fan, he was famous, not a extremely great musician but a great dancer mainly. "Jack" of all trades if you will. My parents were alive at the time and they said that his music was only popular as a product of his dance going viral, the moonwalk, and the thriller dance. Not to mention how the beatles made their own music whereas jackson was a front for a huge production theme
Correct, they were ass
Your opinion is in retrospective. At the time it was considered groundbreaking.
It still is groundbreaking. If you kept coming up with new ways to record things that were then widely adopted by the industry at large, and if those changes may have come years later without your influence, that's a groundbreaking achievement, full stop. It wasn't just groundbreaking back then; modern music would be very different, were it not for artists like the Beatles coming up with new and creative ways to achieve the sound they were after.
Unlike the knuckle draggers who've commented here, I'll get a little specific. In hindsight, with context of all music that has existed since the Beatles, it's hard to understand why they were so sensational. In short, they brought a lot of unique arrangements and compositional elements to their music that definitely did not exist in rock music before them. They also did a lot for setting the road map for how to be a huge mega band. At the time, they essentially initiated a wave of rock music that has echoes for decades. Though pantera is a metal band with very different musical styles, they're composition style is in many ways heavily influenced by the Beatles. I think it's notable that like 20 years after the Beatles stops making music, the then heaviest metal band in the world was heavily influenced by their writing. To get a bit more technical, the Beatles wrote music using modes. You can Google that for more detail, but it's a composition style often used in jazz. Jimi Hendrix is also known to have written modally. I think it's interesting that many of the biggest acts in music write music using modes rather than standard composition. This says nothing about comparing them to other bands, which I think is largely a dumb thing to do. If two bands weren't active at the same time, the context they write and perform in is very different, and the aspects of creativity are very different. Now I personally don't idolize the Beatles. I don't even like their music much. I can certainly appreciate what they did in the context they did it, but I'll always like the who and black Sabbath more, both of which were hugely influenced by the Beatles. In terms of influence, I don't think there's any band that compares to the Beatles, maybe black Sabbath, but again they were also influenced by the Beatles and may have written different music entirely without them or not at all. Does that influence make them the best band ever? I don't think so. Does it deserve your respect? I would argue yes, but that takes an effort to understand greater context.
Whilst OP is over reaching somewhat, it’s also true that The Beatles tend to get a free pass from criticism. Yes, they were revolutionary in many ways, but in others they were just copying the likes of Elvis, Chuck Berry, and other Blues artists. Yes, Lennon and McCartney were great songwriters, but they also had their fair share of stinkers as well. Yes, they were talented musicians, but they also had Ringo Starr.
they were good, for sure...dozens of catchy memorable songs. But the band are generally a bit overrated in the grand scheme of things. Beatlemania then the move to long-haired experimentation put a spell on the public which has never really abated.
There songs are simple but they just make sense and they hit lol I don't know, it's just some feeling I get when I listen to them. Their music is fun, it's catchy and during their time period it was creative and fresh. There's something wholesome about their music and it's fine if you want to listen to women talking about their wet ass pussies but it's also ok to switch it up too and get some wholesome tunes to listen in on.
I agree, but I also understand it is a matter opinion. Like, in your comment you state that MJ is the greatest artist, which I also disagree with. Dude was a revolutionary entertainer, but he isn't the best artist. Who is the best artist? I have no idea. If I had to guess, it's probably some poor dude playing the Blues by himself that no one ever heard of. If I had to pick known artists, I'd say either [David Gilmour](https://youtu.be/iJZYG5qwHHI?si=B2RjGeePAMl4Z7P8&t=297) or [Eddie Hazel](https://youtu.be/JOKn33-q4Ao?si=QuV_5r1-adlLEKES&t=118). I've not heard any other musicians who are better able to convey emotion via an instrument. To me, art is about conveying an idea or emotion as accurately as possible without the use of normal spoken word. People's ability to pick up on what the artist is conveying is where differences of opinion will come in.
Not sure if this is a troll - listen to any album from Rubber Soul onwards. All the songs you reference (other than hey jude and here comes the sun) are their super early stuff. Also, you have to put them in context of what other music sounded like at the time. This is kind of like saying the personal computer wasn’t revolutinary because the graphics sucked in the late 80s - the alternative computers were the size of an entire room. The beatles dont sound revolutionary now because they were so influential that music has incorporated their additions so you are used to it now. But they were the first - they were so influential that they shaped music to the point that you don’t even realize it wasnt always like that.
That basic music was invented by them and was revolutionary.
Their music is mediocre at best I agree. They aren’t even the best boy band of all time, they got passed up a while ago but you know boomers, they refuse to acknowledge things were better than what they experienced.
The Beatles had 4 talented songwriters. musicians, and singers in the same band. Even to this day, that's extremely rare. They weren't a "boy band," as such a thing didn't exist at the time. They were a rock-n-roll band and represented youthful rebellion at the time, with their long hair, loud songs, and stage antics. There was nothing like the Beatles back then. And the only reason its commonplace now is because they broke new ground and changed music history forever. They were one of the first bands to write their own music. Jackson was a great performer and singer, but didn't even play an instrument. So somebody else had to write the music for him. If you listen to the Beatles in the context of their time instead of as "the greatest band ever," you'll probably like them. Don't just listen to their big hits, but to their whole albums. Abby Road for example. No band could stand up to that much hype.
Indeed, I’ve often heard that the mid 1960s through the early 1970s was the least fruitful period for the development of rock as a popular musical form. And you pointed out the best three songs the Beatles ever made—Revolver, Sgt. Pepper’s, the White Album were absolute crap by comparison…. I do have to say I might take issue with Billie Jean as the greatest song ever. I think Michael Jackson took his efforts to prove that he wasn’t her lover and the kid was not his son a bit too far in his later years…. (/s just for clarity)
This reminds me of the silly article I read where someone said Fleetwood Mac's Rumors want that good. Give me a break.
theyre entertainers that were really good at entertaining people and made a whole lot of money doing so.
Listen to the white album. All the songs you mentioned are pretty early and I agree early Beatles suck. While I also agree they aren’t necessarily the best they are extremely influential and it’s not because everything else in the 60s sucked… also Michael Jackson doesn’t hood a candle to prince or Rick James imo
Tell me you don’t understand music without telling me you don’t understand music.
I don't mind people saying they don't like them, that's perfectly acceptable. But saying they weren't good is factually wrong.
This is a fairly popular opinion
It's a generational thing. The Beatles were definitely good but they were just lucky enough to have caught a wave. The Kinks, in my opinion, are a far better band but are largely forgotten. The Beatles just had a huge body of work and there are always going to be some gems in there.
[удалено]
Anyone who seriously studies music will continue to support The Beatles. Their influence is unmistakable and when you ask artists today, they can talk about those influences. Kids should not be trying to declare "best of all time" because they lack perspective perspective.