@HexHammer,
Rhetorical questions are so hard to identify online! :-|
@Brandon9000,
incredibly complex bass line
@Brandon9000,
Thank you, Brandon9000! I enjoyed watching that marvelous video! That song is one of my favorites! Enjoy able?know, and have a great day!
@Rockhead,
Rockhead wrote:
If I could only have one, it would be Zeppelin or the Stones.
if i had to pick from a British band it would be The Kinks
Pop culture, maybe.
Rock culture was founded by a few young Americans.
Bill Haley, Little Richard, Elvis, Buddy Holly, Chuck Berry.....to name but a small few.
Meanwhile, The future Beatles were still at school in England, listening, learning and dreaming....
The Beatles are so derivative and so 1960s . . . i would never listen to the Beatles.
@Reyn,
you wouldnt even know the rolling stones and they would have had no recording career if not for the beatles.decca only signed them because the beatles recommended them.and even after decca was going to drop them because they wanted an original song no more cover songs.and the stones werent writing anything good enough yet to be released as a single.so they went to the beatles for help who gave them i wanna be your man.this gave the stones much needed time to write songs.so saying the stones are better than the beatles is redundant.
@Reyn,
you should thank the beatle because the rolling stones music would just be a blues cover band.the beatles set the bar and forced the rolling stones to write their own songs and compositions.the stones wouldnt have even had a recording career if not for the beatles.nobbody outside of manchester would have known them.decca president only signed the stones because the beatles recommended them.and even after decca was going to drop them because the stones were only doing cover songs and not writing anything good enough yet to release as a single..so the stones went to the beatles for help and they gave them i wanna be your man,which brought the stones much needed time to write a song good enough to release as a single.so saying the stones are better than the beatles is redundant
My answer is NO.
Here is my "brief" explanation.
The 60's were completely different than the 70's. The beginning of the 60's up to before Woodstock the music was "simplistic" and for this reason the Beatles became kings. Those were easy to sing songs like singing "old McDonald had a farm..."
They started to compose more complex music when close to the 70's, but their era as kings was reaching its end.
When sound effects started to be popular, and new groups acquired this kind of equipment, the music changed radically and each year new singers and groups overcame the remembrance of the "yeah yeah" lyrics.
Toto, Led Zeppelin, Grand Funk, Bachman Turner Overdrive, and hundreds more, it was a crazy amount of new groups that had their own ID which was greater than the best songs made by the Beatles. Soul music invaded the market and the songs were so good. Santana invaded the world with a mixing of beats that in conjunction with Mandrill and other groups, caused the birth of foreign bands to become worldwide famous like Osibisa, Fela Cuti and Africa 70.
Many of the foreign groups were unknown in the USA, but surely were listened all around the world in the 70s and 80s.
The Beatles music got into Russia much much later, and Russians indeed gave them the preference over Elvis. But, rock music was unstoppable, the Beatles era was over anyway. Russians turned into heavy rock and love it more.
After the group split, each member of the Beatles participated in concerts helping the poor like the concert for Bangladesh and similar. Their songs were good, no doubt about it, but they just became to be one more line on the tiger's skin.
So, the Beatles were the best band for people of the early to middle 60's.
Today, each generation deserves their own music, their own style.
Our new generation might listen Beatles music and say, "the music is good" but that's all, unless parents or grandparents are brainwashing the minds of the children to make them Beatles fans, like some nuts still doing it with Elvis songs and legend, something so bad that it should be considered a "capital sin". Lol.
@carloslebaron,
Totally agree.
The Beatles contributed very little to the music scene during the 60's and onwards. Ask most mega bands from the 70's and 80's and you will find that none have ever heard of them, let alone be influenced by them.
To my mind, music changed forever when The Lighthouse Family stormed onto the scene.
Here's what I remember. When the Beatles appeared, I had been a big fan of rock'n roll for about two years. I knew most of the top 40. However, the rock'n roll of that time was not like the rock music post-Beatles. The genre had just formed during about the past ten years, and the music was very simple, like "Under the Boardwalk" by the Drifters, "Johnny B Goode," by Chuck Berry, "It's My Party," by Leslie Gore, "The End of the World," by Skeeter Davis, "Fun, Fun, Fun" by the Beach Boys. It was all very simple, prototypical rock'n roll.
Then, in early 1964, the Beatles appeared on the Ed Sullivan show. They didn't sound like other groups, they were a highly cohesive unit with a funny name that wasn't just a description like "The Kingston Trio," and they wrote most of their own material, which was immensely unusual. Chuck Berry did and the Beach boys did, but for the most part, groups just sang covers or sang songs to which they had purchased the rights.
Within a very short time, most of the rock musicians in the world disappeared or became irrelevant, excepting a small number of them which could change to imitate the Beatles style. Then new groups began springing up which were essentially clones of the Beatles, and every rock group in the world today is some kind of descendant of those Beatles imitators.
I was alive at the time, and paying attention, and this is how I remember it.
The other day, I saw a teenager in a YouTube video say, "I'm sure that every rock musician of the day was influenced in some way by the Beatles whether they knew it or not," and I thought, "You have no idea."
@djjd62,
djjd62 wrote:
Rockhead wrote:
If I could only have one, it would be Zeppelin or the Stones.
if i had to pick from a British band it would be The Kinks
Hard for an Aussie to say, but when it comes to bands the best have been from Britain.
@Brandon9000,
So right Brandon.
As much as this 13 year-old loved the Beach Boys...I knew it was over for them.
The girls liked the Beatles...and I liked the girls.
So I switched.
@panzade,
What about the Lighthouse Family?
