Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > The MB Reader > Album Reviews
Register Blogging Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-20-2011, 08:42 AM   #21 (permalink)
Veritas vos liberabit
 
Jedey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Musicapolis
Posts: 477
Default

Help! is a great album absolutely no filler there, in fact the only song in The Beatle catalog that is filler is Revolution 9 everything else is pure gold!
__________________
My Tunes
Jedey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2011, 08:54 AM   #22 (permalink)
Live by the Sword
 
Howard the Duck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Posts: 9,039
Default

^^that's debatable - i like Revolution 9
Howard the Duck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2011, 02:35 PM   #23 (permalink)
Let it drip
 
Sneer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 5,421
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rainard Jalen View Post
How so? The album is virtually 80% filler for goodness sake. Anybody who can rate Help as high as 9/10 must, in no uncertain terms, have fiendishly low standards.

Revolver? That's a perfect pop album.
Shocking, you again find a post of mine and attempt to debunk it.

I happen to think the likes of Help!, You've got to Hide Your Love Away, I've Just Seen a Face, Ticket to Ride, Tell Me What You See, I Need You, Yesterday, The Night Before, You're Going To Lose That Girl, You Like Me Too Much and Its Only Love are great.

Lets do the maths, thats 11 songs I love. There's 14 on the album. That's what, a 78.5% hit rate? If that means I have low standards, do one.

Last edited by Sneer; 02-22-2011 at 02:43 PM.
Sneer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2011, 02:41 PM   #24 (permalink)
s_k
Music Addict
 
s_k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 2,169
Default

I've just seen a face is probably one of the best beatles songs.
Apart from that I prefer the more modern beatles, but that is such a beautiful song
__________________
Click here to see my collection
s_k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2011, 02:47 PM   #25 (permalink)
Let it drip
 
Sneer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 5,421
Default

I said it was a near perfect pop album, and I stand by that, but it's still only my 6th favourite Beatles release.
Sneer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2011, 01:26 AM   #26 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stu View Post
Shocking, you again find a post of mine and attempt to debunk it.

I happen to think the likes of Help!, You've got to Hide Your Love Away, I've Just Seen a Face, Ticket to Ride, Tell Me What You See, I Need You, Yesterday, The Night Before, You're Going To Lose That Girl, You Like Me Too Much and Its Only Love are great.

Lets do the maths, thats 11 songs I love. There's 14 on the album. That's what, a 78.5% hit rate? If that means I have low standards, do one.
I apologize if it seemed I was trying to debunk your posts. I didn't mean to come across like that.

There are some real gems on this album. To clarify my view point, the whole album is certainly very catchy and listenable. It's a hell of a lot better than virtually all pop releases that existed when it was released. But there's still a feeling that at least more than half of the songs are formulaic ditties that had little value to their respective composers. The point that those very same songs are so strong is merely a testament to the brilliance of Lennon/McCartney: even when they wrote filler, they did it like nobody else. They could disguise it as credible composition.

I think the filler only begins to entirely disappear once we hit Rubber Soul. On that album more than 85% are compositions that writers were proud of. But even then, there are songs on RS that they disliked, e.g. Wait, and the much despised (by Lennon) Run For Your Life. As it happens, I love both songs.
Rainard Jalen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2011, 11:31 AM   #27 (permalink)
Groupie
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 33
Default

Strange but I like both Tell Me What You See & I Need You. What is so horrible about these ? Are you talking about the performances, lyrics, melodies, all the above or???
__________________
Steel Drum Music by my band Steel Tropics
bahama is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2011, 12:05 PM   #28 (permalink)
Let it drip
 
Sneer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 5,421
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rainard Jalen View Post
I apologize if it seemed I was trying to debunk your posts. I didn't mean to come across like that.

There are some real gems on this album. To clarify my view point, the whole album is certainly very catchy and listenable. It's a hell of a lot better than virtually all pop releases that existed when it was released. But there's still a feeling that at least more than half of the songs are formulaic ditties that had little value to their respective composers. The point that those very same songs are so strong is merely a testament to the brilliance of Lennon/McCartney: even when they wrote filler, they did it like nobody else. They could disguise it as credible composition.

I think the filler only begins to entirely disappear once we hit Rubber Soul. On that album more than 85% are compositions that writers were proud of. But even then, there are songs on RS that they disliked, e.g. Wait, and the much despised (by Lennon) Run For Your Life. As it happens, I love both songs.
No worries dude.

I think, looking at the album purely in terms of 'pop song' formulaic convention, its quite brilliant. I know there are better Beatles albums (as I said, Help! is probably my 5th/6th favourite), and certainly they released work of a significantly greater creative quality as they progressed, but purely as standard, enjoyable pop songs, this album holds up for me. Plus it's highlights are arguably highlights of The Beatles entire back catalogue.
Sneer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2011, 12:32 AM   #29 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stu View Post
No worries dude.

I think, looking at the album purely in terms of 'pop song' formulaic convention, its quite brilliant. I know there are better Beatles albums (as I said, Help! is probably my 5th/6th favourite), and certainly they released work of a significantly greater creative quality as they progressed, but purely as standard, enjoyable pop songs, this album holds up for me. Plus it's highlights are arguably highlights of The Beatles entire back catalogue.
Yesterday, Ticket To Ride, Help, You've Got To Hide Your Love Away. I guess it would be hard to argue that those songs were not highlights of the Beatles' back catalogue. The first three definitely are, for sure.

The rest of the album however, while it stands up in terms of pop gratification, is nevertheless firmly outside the realms of Beatles essentials.
Rainard Jalen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2011, 10:56 AM   #30 (permalink)
Model Worker
 
Gavin B.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,238
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Ice Plant View Post
I understand that. But when you think of Ringo's image within The Beatles, "his" (or Buck Owens') lyrics in Act Naturally fit that image perfectly.
Act Naturally was not only a good song for Ringo's vocal talents but the Beatle's cover of the Buck Owens song is a showcase for their skills at playing country & western music. Act Naturally originally appeared as the B-Side 45 rpm single of Yesterday, another unusual Beatles' song in which Paul McCartney sings a somber ballad accompanied only by his acoustic guitar and a string quartet. None of the other Beatles were involved in the writing or the recording of Yesterday & producer George Martin gave some thought to releasing Yesterday as a Paul McCartney solo single.

From my perspective the Beatles' cover trumps the Buck Owens original for a number of reasons. Ringo's plaintive vocal is more inspired that Buck Owens and Ringo's smooth phrasing of the lyrics is a lot less awkward than Buck's sing-song phrasing that lags behind the tempo at times. George Harrison improves the original by adding some twangy Carl Perkins inspired double-tracked guitar licks. Paul & Ringo's pumped up backbeat and Ringo's innovative stick tapping punches up the mid-tempo original by the Buckaroos. The Beatles version of Act Naturally sounds like a rootsy rockabilly version recorded at Sun Records and the Beatles version sounds more authentically country than the Buckaroo's trademark Bakersfield sound.



Compare to the 1965 Beatles version to 1963 Buck Owens & the Buckaroos original recording of Act Naturally.



As it turned out Buck Owens loved the Beatles cover and he re-recorded Act Naturally as a duet with Ringo in 1988. It's interesting how each of the Beatles had hit & miss musical careers following the breakup in 1970 but they all were brilliant musicians during the years they played collectively as the Beatles. I'm convinced that Gram Parker & Roger McGuinn had nothing on the Beatles & if they would have chosen to do so, the Beatles could have made a better country rock album than Sweetheart of the Rodeo,which came out 3 years after the Beatles release of Act Naturally.

McGuinn has said that hearing the Beatles 1965 version of Act Naturally inspired him to move the Byrds in a more countrified direction. You can hear the country music influence creeping into the Byrds' psychedelic sound on the song Time Between, which was recorded in late 1966, two years prior to Gram Parsons' entry into the Byrds.

__________________
There are two types of music: the first type is the blues and the second type is all the other stuff.
Townes Van Zandt
Gavin B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads



2003-2019 Advameg, Inc.

SEO by vBSEO 3.5.2 ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.