[quote]imhungry wrote:
Vicomte wrote:
wfifer wrote:
Technically they weren’t the most amazing musicians but the song writing was often genius. And I’m a fan of McCartney’s delivery. I get the need to be an iconoclast, I’ve been there…but if you haven’t really explored the entire Beatles library you’re missing out. Abbey Road is what drew me. Other albums are very hit or miss, but we’re judging individual songs here.
That’s the attitude I’m talking about. It’s not just that we have different opinions, it’s like I’m just wrong and possibly mentally deranged.
This happens to me all the time. People always dismiss shit they don’t like to hear with, ‘Oh, you’re just being an iconoclast. Stirring the pot. I get it.’ It’s condescending.
Often, the perpetrators of this phenomenon are Beatles Fans.
The Beatles were the greatest band, EVER.
The Sex Pistols are the most overrated “band”, next to Nirvana.
;P[/quote]
Honestly, I think the Pistols would agree with you, on that last bit.
And don’t pull your quotey bullshit with me, Hungry! The Pistols are as bandy as bands get!
I’m not trying to condescend, I just associate animosity with iconoclasm. I don’t think you’ll find a lot well-versed music fans who won’t at least admit that McCartney and Lennon were amazing songwriters.
[quote]wfifer wrote:
I’m not trying to condescend, I just associate animosity with iconoclasm. I don’t think you’ll find a lot well-versed music fans who won’t at least admit that McCartney and Lennon were amazing songwriters. [/quote]
You’re still doing it.
They weren’t bad songwriters; they also weren’t any better than anyone else. And they made shit-sounding music.
[quote]Vicomte wrote:
wfifer wrote:
I’m not trying to condescend, I just associate animosity with iconoclasm. I don’t think you’ll find a lot well-versed music fans who won’t at least admit that McCartney and Lennon were amazing songwriters.
You’re still doing it.
They weren’t bad songwriters; they also weren’t any better than anyone else. And they made shit-sounding music.
And had stupid hair.
So there.[/quote]
I am not, that was a purely factual post. I admitted I was making a generalization. I’m not trying to pass off popular opinion, even among elitists, as fact.
If you’re gonna argue, name some better songwriters.
[quote]wfifer wrote:
Vicomte wrote:
wfifer wrote:
I’m not trying to condescend, I just associate animosity with iconoclasm. I don’t think you’ll find a lot well-versed music fans who won’t at least admit that McCartney and Lennon were amazing songwriters.
You’re still doing it.
They weren’t bad songwriters; they also weren’t any better than anyone else. And they made shit-sounding music.
And had stupid hair.
So there.
I am not, that was a purely factual post. I admitted I was making a generalization. I’m not trying to pass off popular opinion, even among elitists, as fact.
If you’re gonna argue, name some better songwriters.
[/quote]
John Lydon and Steve Jones. Their music was just as well crafted(objectively speaking, as in arrangement, melody, etc.) and they wrote better lyrics.
In my opinion, there really is no “arguing” over the merits of liking a particular band, or even their “song writing” abilities because music is very individual. Some bands have a very broad appeal, but just like any bell curve there will be people who are CRAZY about the band and their will be people who get nothing out of their music.
With the way music strikes us, you can like a band for any number of reasons, or not like a band for any number of reasons. It can even be a time based thing, liking a band/song one day and then thinking its “played out” the next and not listening ito it. There really is no right or wrong.
There are many bands that I ilke that other people dont care for, and vice versa.
I really like the Beatles, but I can understand why some people don’t, a lot of their stuff is too simple and repetitive for my taste. [/quote]
This is true… And it is particularly obvious on the first half of their “1” CD… Its amazing how many great, possibly “better” songs of theirs are not on that CD.
This is due to a number of reasons. Their early writing style was to play a song, not write it down, and if they couldnt remember it the next day they would trash it. This lead to a collection of songs that were very catchy and easy to remember. At least that is how I understand it, I may be wrong.
I think Bob Dylan got a hold of them half way through their run (only 6 years together as a band) and introduced them to weed and told them their songs were too superficial. They began writing fewer and fewer love songs after that I believe.
