to think the way the Beatles revolutionised music has been largely forgotton?

[VicarsGoingForGoldInKungFu]

i was as guilty as the next man of slating Macca at the opening of the olympics....but then, DH made some "awwwwwww" noises and started to dig out his Beatles collection,( then his Wings collection, but i forgave him and we are still married).....and then that got me googling and i ended up with Dangermouses The Grey Album.....which got me to listening to The White Album......

and then i got googling a bit more and i think that people forget how they completely revolutionised the music scene, how they started, and how they ended up making some really really excellent music. The White Album is brill. id never really listened to DH beatles albums before tbh.....

and i feel a bit guilty now. Macca did deserve to be at the olympics.....just because he is now 70, and wobbles a bit, doesnt and shouldnt erase the musical history that he and his band mates gave us. He shouldnt be cast aside. (and honestly - if you re watch, the backing track started too early and he only wobbled at the start....he got going and was on tune!)

Now we have simon cowell who tells us what we will buy.....all those other bands that people cited as worthy of playing the opening ceromony......they are only here because the Beatles changed things. They did it first, i just think things have moved on so much and so fast that people forget. I am not a raging Beatles fan, but i acknowledge what they did.

so, it is with hands in pockets and staring at the floor that i say "soz macca". I have travelled the boards and i have said this on many of the nay sayer threads....but we should just stop a mo and go give the White album a listen.....

cliff was good in his day.

just didnt revolutionise anything. the beatles did though. have i told you all that yet?

sabbath were a completely different genre and originated in Birmingham.

the white album is really really really good......

so is revolver. i had a beatles fest today. i like macca. ive decided.

i reckon he was probably a nicer person than lennon.....i dont think lennon was very nice until he met Yoko. i think she did him some good.

Don't get us started on yoko!

The cavern club in Liverpool was NOTHING compared to the UFO club in London. The Beatles were good, but not revolutionary.

It seems, to me, as if you are saying The Beatles were in control of their writing/recording etc from the beginning . They weren't. Granted they wrote the pop dittys from the start, but they had to learn about recording techniques etc. That came later.
The Stones, Yardbirds etc didnt want to be The Beatles they wanted to be 80 year old black men.
Undenyibly(sp) they were a pop group that broke America, mostly because of their of looks, they were a teenybopper band.

Anyone who cites them as an influence says albums tracks from Sgt Pepper and The White Album, not Love love me do.

Abbey Road is my fave album. I even have a framed poster of the cover in my downstairs loo.

They did grow into a great band. Like I said earlier once they were more confident and secure in themselves. I do think it was a case of right place right time in the beginning and any band could have been held up as the revolutionaries at that point.

But I suppose we had to tolerate the shit to get the good stuff.

To summarise, I don't think people have forgot what the Beatles did, I just think it gets overstated at times at the detriment to others.

Look at American bands like Love? Contemporaneous with the Beatles, they influenced The Doors! Captain Beefheart and the whole American scene influenced the Beatles and enabled them to evolve into a memorable band. Without that they'd have stuck at 'love me do' they were no yardbirds or cream, they weren't innovative alone. The Beatles were good, great at times, but they weren't defining and they didn't move things on a lot.

Beatles are just legends and Paul is the best musician to have lived on this earth.

never heard that The Beatles were fans of Cliff

they did clean up their image, when in hamburg which was a very very seedy city (made soho look like a vicars tea party) their music was far more blues based and they were already experimenting with drugs, they were going out with strippers and handing around pimps and prostitutes this was the very early 60's of course if they had not changed their image they would not have been a success the stones did the same thing but were marketed as a more rebellious

and disagree their early music was crap, i prefer later stuff but I'll Follow The Sun and I Should Have Known Better are both great songs, from 64ish their writing progressed amazingly within a few years of writing pop songs they were writing and experimenting with production and wrote a concept album, the most influential album ever

Its always the same 3 people that get wheeled out, Macca, Elton and used to be Queen. They seem to be more middle of the road. Stones, Rod Stewart etc never appear at these things.

I bought most of the Beatles album when I was about 15, but they're the only band that I never listen to anymore.

In a balloon debate with pink floyd, the stones, led zep and the Beatles which one would you ditch for the good of humanity?

Oh Alistron that's tough.

For the good of humanity I don't know. If I had to choose one out of them to wipe out of my collection it would actually be The Beatles.

Rodney is always overlooked! Damn sexy too! I love an old rocker!

OP YANBU. and you've made me feel guilty for slagging Macca off. Just cos he's old. Not my favourite Beatle but part of the whole.

Alistron. Think I would ditch Floyd. If only so that I never have to listen to 'Another Brick in the Wall' again.

Another brick in the wall, and you'd lose piper at the gates of dawn and dark side of the moon?!!

Sorry, the Beatles HAVE to get the push. As a consolation at least there'd be no oasis.

I've started a non fighting quiche thread in chat. Join me, let's show the ravers that us rockers have a common bond!!

i would ditch Pink Floyd most overrated band ever (imo)

i have had the unfortunate experience of seeing them live twice, god it was painful

We weren't fighting, we were having a spirited discussion

well the fucking painted veil made me cry buckets.

through the snot and tears i see we have a balloon debate. tough one that. i have captain beefheart and i have Love in my collection btw.....

i think, if had to chuck one of em out, it would have to be between led zep and pink floyd.....
prog rock never really floated my boat. or my balloon. so i reckon floyd would be over the side for me

yes i know.....

The Beatles were and are amazing. Macca is a living legend. Those who think he didn't deserve to be in the olympic ceremony can fuck right off.

Given a choice between Dizzee Shit Rascal and Macca Singing Offkey I know who I'd chose, thanks very much.

You see, I don't think that he was up being for the benefit of being Macca. He was there being the last remaining Beatle that could have performed. Ringo couldn't have done it alone - although I do think it would have been great to have had them both. Personally I loathe Hey Jude and I would much prefer to have heard a Harrison song (Something or While my guitar gently weeps) but I understand why he was there.

Also read online that there is a bit of a backstory regarding Hey Jude being no1 at an olympics where two black athletes protested at the 1968 Mexico City Olympics hence the choice.

And I was in The Stones camp too (far more edgy than the Beatles).

When you have to say "we're much edgier than you" it kind of cancels out any form of edginess at all.