Nevermind, let's talk about the same handful of bands that suck ad nauseum (lyrics, pop, rock, Blink 182, Nickelback)

~~telepicker~~ · 07-20-2010, 02:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Janszoon

Well, I think they kind of suck. Like I mentioned before I wouldn't really think much about it except for the fact that people insist on making silly claims like "they were the first band to break the mould", as if no one ever did anything innovative in the entire history of music before they came along. As a result they fit well in both the "suck" and the "overrated" threads.

You can think that...but the truth is, before the Beatles, popular music was in an absolute SUCK phase; Elvis in the Army...Buddy, Richie, and JP in that plane...Jerry Lee hiding with his 13-y.o. Cousin/wife in shame...Little Richard headed back to the pulpit...

By 1962, people were back to listening to records of "How Much Is that Doggie In the Window" that sounded like they were recorded over the phone.

Not only did the Beatles change the way music was WRITTEN (taking it out if the hands of the record companies and instilling the ORIGINAL D.I.Y. Ethic) but the way it was recorded in the studio and listened to it at home.

I can guarantee that if you listen to music that is not European classical or opera, American jazz or blues, or Eastern/Drone/Raga...that is, if a band you like puts out an album (CD or download for ignorant youth), and it has the lyrics printed inside, and/or a Producer credit, then it has roots that lead directly to the Beatles.

Then again, I just saw that you are from Philadelphia (I can't think of a single decent band from the Philly area)...the same city that boos Santa Claus...I remember Michael Irvin getting booed after he was wheeled off the turf of the Vet...those moronic Philly fans even booed Donovan McNabb when he got drafted, and are now talking smack on him now that he's gone.

People from Philly must have a genetic retardation inherent to the region...

Maybe it's the water?