Rock Band: The Beatles
- Thread starter Jane
- Start date
Father:_Polley
Fun's my Chinese neighbour's name
But yet they think Yellow submarine is good? Slap them for me. Big deal, Freddie was gay. Ask anyone to name 3 Queen songs and they could do it easily without breaking sweat.
We Will Rock You, Bohemian Rhapsody and It's a Kind of Magic could make for a great game, but the downside is Queen, Zeppelin and GNR tend to go longer. Beatles don't have many of their big songs over 3-4mins.
And you need to listen to more U2. Go 'Joshua Tree' and enjoy.
Now I am well aware of Jimi Hendrix's drug use and I never once said he didn't. However with the exception of the song Purple Haze, he doesn't make any references to drugs. Secondly, Elvis's career began in 1953, the Neatles didn't become a band until 1957. And if you could please provide me with proof that the Beatles were in fact invited to Woodstock. All I see is that The Doors, The Moody Blues, Jethro Tull, Bob Dylan, Led Zeppelin, Tommy James and the Shondells and Mind Garage were the most popular bands to decline the invite. No mention of the Beatles however. Odd eh?
You provide no insight as to why the Beatles are so great. All I ever see you wirte is that they revolutionized rock. Secondly Jimi Hendrix did drown in his own vomit, all of which was alcohol, most of which being red wine. For the second time I will once again ask, no tell you, give me documented proof of these record sales. I don't believe everything people tell me, especially not delusional people such as yourself.
Deexter Jorgan
Has a Dark Passenger on board...
do you like being wrong?, because last time i gave you evidence you completly ignored it a
nd attempted to target another poster over woodstock, honestly for someone who claims to understand music you seem dont tend to reference much or look up said material.
http://www.woodstockstory.com/passingperformersbands.html
Number one. And I've read it other places as well. Odd, eh?
I never said The Beatles were before Elvis. I just said that Elvis improved on rock n roll, but The Beatles took what he had done and completely re-invented it.
Ok, so Hendrix made a CLEAR drug reference. One is enough. Hendrix sang about drugs. His other songs are trippy as well. He was stoned as hell during Woodstock. Was he an LSD obsessed teen? He was more of a hippy then the Beatles ever were. Not that he wasn't amazing, but still.
Number one. And I've read it other places as well. Odd, eh?
I never said The Beatles were before Elvis. I just said that Elvis improved on rock n roll, but The Beatles took what he had done and completely re-invented it.
Ok, so Hendrix made a CLEAR drug reference. One is enough. Hendrix sang about drugs. His other songs are trippy as well. He was stoned as hell during Woodstock. Was he an LSD obsessed teen? He was more of a hippy then the Beatles ever were. Not that he wasn't amazing, but still.
So then why are you criticising the Beatles for using LSD and praising Hendrix in the next sentence? Hypocrisy.
Which is still more drug references then the Beatles ever made. Go back and read the lyrics to the Beatles songs when they were using LSD; none of them are about drugs. Not one. And before you even bring it up, Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds is not about LSD.
Which means what exactly? Elvis played an entirely different kind of rock and roll then the Beatles did. In fact quite honestly Elvis barely even played rock and roll, the majority of his music is rockabilly and country if you actually go back and listen to it.
How does Elvis being around first make him more important? No logic at all here.
It'll take you about five seconds to type in the words "Beatles Woodstock Invited" into Google and find several results. They were infact invited, but Lennon was the only one who really wanted to do the show, no one else did. The Beatles had famously stopped playing live shows all together after 1966, so the odds of them showing up were slim to none.
Good job at completely avoiding all of the points that you were proven wrong on though, maybe if you just keep ignoring them they'll go away right?
That's all I needed to see. And yes I think it's quite clear that Hendrix was a hippy, his songs seemed to have more passion and meaning then songs written by the Beatles.
So are you going to respond to the fact that every single thing you've brought up has been proven wrong, or are you just going to continue to ignore that?
Yeah though, that Beatles song "All You Need is Love" is so nihilistic right?
So... being a hippy means you have a lot of passion? In no way is that true. Not to mention "All You Need Is Love" is pretty much the hippy anthem so if we're speaking in that regards The Beatles take it.
"Got to Get You into My Life". The song is about marijuana.
"A little Help From My Friends". Once again marijuana.
"Day Tripper". LSD
"Doctor Robert" Amphetamines.
"She Said, She Said" LSD.
"Rain" marijuana
"Yellow Submarine" marijuana.
"Strawberry Feidls Forever" Drug state of mind
"Happiness is a Warm Gun" Heroin
You claim "Lucy In The Sky with Diamonds" isn't but you seem to be the only one.
"I Am The Walrus" Marijuana
"Tommorow Never Knows" LSD
"A Day In Life" LSD
"Cold Turkey" Heroin
None of them are about drugs eh?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIvs4j4IniA
Purple Haze- Jimi Hendrix
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lArULuBkogw&feature=related
Beatles live in Paris.
You tell me who had more emotion and passion.
And "Sunshine of Your Love" is the definitive hippy anthem.
Look apparently you think The Beatles are an old-fogey rock band anachronism but who could deny their influence on the world's music? They influenced musician for generations! And will influence even more for generations to come. Simply put the Beatles where some of the greatest musicians in modern history.
Early in their career, before anybody had heard of them, they got the opportunity to fly from their England homes to Hamburg, Germany, where a strip club owner had gotten the idea to have bands play non-stop live music while sexy Sadie did a little "helter skelter" on stage. And play non-stop the Beatles did, for seven days a week, eight hours a night. They made five trips to Hamburg between 1960 and 1962. By the time they had their initial taste of commercial success, they'd performed live approximately 1200 times, which is extraordinary! Most bands never play live 1200 times over their entire careers.
Philip Norman, who wrote the Beatles' biography Shout, explained in this way:
"They learned not only stamina. They had to learn an enormous amount of numbers cover versions of everything you can think of, not just rock and roll, a bit of jazz too. But when they came back, they sounded like no one else. It was the making of them."
I'm a musician, and I pray to God that I could have 1/10 the song writing talent Paul, John, George & Ringo had. And if by chance God was generous enough to answer said prayers I'd be one damn successful musician even today in 2009. I'm tired of people thinking guys like them are passe...
Early in their career, before anybody had heard of them, they got the opportunity to fly from their England homes to Hamburg, Germany, where a strip club owner had gotten the idea to have bands play non-stop live music while sexy Sadie did a little "helter skelter" on stage. And play non-stop the Beatles did, for seven days a week, eight hours a night. They made five trips to Hamburg between 1960 and 1962. By the time they had their initial taste of commercial success, they'd performed live approximately 1200 times, which is extraordinary! Most bands never play live 1200 times over their entire careers.
Philip Norman, who wrote the Beatles' biography Shout, explained in this way:
"They learned not only stamina. They had to learn an enormous amount of numbers cover versions of everything you can think of, not just rock and roll, a bit of jazz too. But when they came back, they sounded like no one else. It was the making of them."
I'm a musician, and I pray to God that I could have 1/10 the song writing talent Paul, John, George & Ringo had. And if by chance God was generous enough to answer said prayers I'd be one damn successful musician even today in 2009. I'm tired of people thinking guys like them are passe...
A) More then half of the songs you listed are about women, with passing references to drugs. REFERENCING drugs is different from a song being about drugs.
B) Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds is NOT about LSD. Lennon stated this time and time again.
C) In fact, pretty much the entire second half of your list are not about drugs.
D) What does the fact that they reference drugs in their songs have ANYTHING to do with the quality of their music? Absolutely nothing.
Sorry, but I have no idea where you're going with this drug argument. So they used drugs? What's your fucking point? So didn't EVERY SINGLE OTHER band in the 60s, or for that matter, 99.9% of ALL rock bands, ever.
Sorry, but you can't criticize the Beatles for being "druggies" and then praise Jimi Hendrix a minute later, that only makes you a hypocrite.
B) Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds is NOT about LSD. Lennon stated this time and time again.
C) In fact, pretty much the entire second half of your list are not about drugs.
D) What does the fact that they reference drugs in their songs have ANYTHING to do with the quality of their music? Absolutely nothing.
Sorry, but I have no idea where you're going with this drug argument. So they used drugs? What's your fucking point? So didn't EVERY SINGLE OTHER band in the 60s, or for that matter, 99.9% of ALL rock bands, ever.
Sorry, but you can't criticize the Beatles for being "druggies" and then praise Jimi Hendrix a minute later, that only makes you a hypocrite.
LamaNamaneumi
08-14-2012
^^^amen Brother.
OJ Simpson said he didn't kill those people. Bill Clinton said he didn't receive oral sex from Monica Lewinsky. Rafeal Palmeiro said he didn't take steroids. But guess what all of them lied. What I was trying to get across in that is, people lie all time time X. No one will ever know if the song really is about LSD except for John. I think even you can get off your high horse for once and agree on that.
LayneStaleyLives
Dark Match Jobber
Hmmm... I've never much been a fan of these rockband games.. I think people should just put more energy into playing real instruments hahaha. But anyhow, if we didn't have the Beatles then we wouldn't've had bands like Metallica, Led Zep, Sabbath, Nirvana... all those bands that people seem to like over the Beatles. Lennon and McCartney had the best possible outlook on music - If it's simple, it's likeable. If it's about love, you can relate.
Now, people not like it as much these days, but it worked in the 50's/60's even through to the 80's (for John Lennon.)
At the end of the day, having a British band become the world's most popular instead of an American band perhaps pushed some competition in the music industry much like WCW/WWF wars did for wrestling. The Beatles are a great band in my opinion, and I prefer them over most the shit on the airwaves today and they were long before my time. If you like em, that's great. If you don't then you don't have to listen to them.
Now, people not like it as much these days, but it worked in the 50's/60's even through to the 80's (for John Lennon.)
At the end of the day, having a British band become the world's most popular instead of an American band perhaps pushed some competition in the music industry much like WCW/WWF wars did for wrestling. The Beatles are a great band in my opinion, and I prefer them over most the shit on the airwaves today and they were long before my time. If you like em, that's great. If you don't then you don't have to listen to them.
I like my high horse thank you very much.
If I remember correctly John or Paul mentioned it was about an actual girl named Lucy that they used to know.
But really man, how do you not see the absurdity in criticizing a PSYCHEDELIC rock band for their drug use? Drugs were the central point of the entire genre, the reason it was created.
All of this is besides the point though. You were wrong on virtually every point you tried to make, and this has been proven. Then you proceeded to attack the Beatles for a bunch of reasons that have little to nothing to do with their actual music.
This debate is over, and you have lost. Time to move on for everyone.
If I remember correctly John or Paul mentioned it was about an actual girl named Lucy that they used to know.
But really man, how do you not see the absurdity in criticizing a PSYCHEDELIC rock band for their drug use? Drugs were the central point of the entire genre, the reason it was created.
All of this is besides the point though. You were wrong on virtually every point you tried to make, and this has been proven. Then you proceeded to attack the Beatles for a bunch of reasons that have little to nothing to do with their actual music.
This debate is over, and you have lost. Time to move on for everyone.
You just don't quit do you?
You've been proven wrong at virtually every single turn by at least six different people.
Please though, enlighten me as to what I am being ignorant about. Should be rich coming from the man who claims AC/DC are bigger then the Beatles.
No, I thought that would be quite obvious.
If you had the ability to count, you would see it was 3. I don't count people who attempt to make a convincing arguement but can't spell the name of the band there trying to defend.
You my friend are being ignorant on the fact that you belief that a band is only good if it has a low of fans. Not once in your reply's did you ever mention the Beatles lyrical content (which isn't all that impressive) was the reason for there superiority over other bands. You based it upon record sales and fan base. By those standards The Jonas Brothers, Miley Cyrus and Kanye West are the greatest things since sliced bread. I now await your next reply telling me I'm stupid, something about the Beatles record sales and then how I'm a hypocrite.
Lennon admitted to using drugs many times. If Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds was about drugs he would just say it. To his death he said it was about a picture his son drew. And even if it was about drugs... WHO THE FUCK CARES? They all used drugs! All of them! Jim Morrison, Jimi Hendrix, Eric Clapton, The Rolling Stones, Pink Floyd, Janis Joplin, Led Zeppelin, The Who, Bob Dylan, and THE BEATLES. Who gives a damn if they sang about drugs, they all did them! That's like the only argument you've made. Just give up.
SavageTaker
Everybody Has A Price!
The Beatles > AC/DC
