Best Books of the Month Shop Costumes Learn more nav_sap_SWP_6M_fly_beacon Janet Jackson All-New Amazon Fire TV Subscribe & Save Amazon Gift Card Offer gdwf gdwf gdwf  Amazon Echo Starting at $49.99 Kindle Voyage Nintendo Digital Games Fall Arrivals in Amazon Outdoor Clothing Halloween
Customer Discussions > Classic Rock forum

Early or later Beatles music?

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-22 of 22 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Nov 26, 2012 9:25:07 AM PST
Early or later Beatles music?

Posted on Nov 26, 2012 9:47:20 AM PST
vivazappa says:

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 26, 2012 10:02:03 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 26, 2012 11:35:16 AM PST
AlexMontrose says:
Prefer mid to later much, much more... but like it all.

Posted on Nov 26, 2012 11:16:32 AM PST
Later....much their post 1970 material. :)

Posted on Nov 26, 2012 11:23:32 AM PST
Lauren says:
Rubber Soul and later. I recognize the quality and impact of what comes before, but as a listener I have little to no use for it.

Posted on Nov 26, 2012 1:27:44 PM PST
zlh67 says:
In general, I agree with Lauren: Rubber Soul was the first Beatles album I ever bought and from there I went forward and loved pretty much everything. Going back, there are tracks here and there on every album that I also like, but the only one that grabbed me as a whole was "Hard Day's Night". It may be bubble-gum pop, but it's bubble-gum pop done to perfection imo. It's the only pre-1965 album in my list of favorite Beatles albums. I'll take it over Abbey Rd, Sgt Pepper and Let It Be...

Posted on Nov 26, 2012 2:03:15 PM PST
i love it all, but i do play rubber soul, revolver, the white album, and the yellow submarine soundtrack (the original one) the most lately...

Posted on Nov 26, 2012 5:50:41 PM PST
I love both eras, but most of my very favorite Beatlesongs come from "Rubber Soul" and after. So, early era: amazing. Later era: transcendent. Take your pick.

Posted on Nov 28, 2012 7:48:45 AM PST
Fischman says:
Neither early nor later--definitely middle.

Early--definitely a new sound, but still vary basic and doesn't hold my interest. '64-'65 Kinks and Stones appeals to me much more.
Late--descended into so much psychedelic tripe. Moments of brilliance punctuated by sheer nonsense.

Rubber Soul and Revolver were just right.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 28, 2012 8:40:38 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 28, 2012 8:42:24 AM PST
Lauren says:
Interesting take on the later material, and I tend to agree with this in regard to parts of each later album. "Lucy in the Sky", "Mr. Kite", "Glass Onion", "Revolution 9", and "Octopus' Garden", seen from the perspective of this Gen Xer, are little more than hippie nonsense. Nonethless, I find that the moments of brilliance on each album greatly outweigh the nonsense and the nonsense is generally at least playful. Your mileage, of course, may vary.

FYI, Revolver remains my favorite Beatles album.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 28, 2012 9:00:58 AM PST
Fischman says:
Thanks, Lauren

I usually get lambasted for such a view.

BTW, I'm much older than a Gen Xer, but not old enough to have fully understand the Beatles during their heyday.

And I do appreciate the brilliance, both for the songs themselves and for how they expanded the pop/rock palette and influenced the music scene in general.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 28, 2012 9:45:33 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 28, 2012 9:45:52 AM PST
Lauren says:
@Fischman I expect to be lambasted and have been in other forums, but I'm not one to confuse what's influential at the time with what I enjoy now. The Beatles had broken up by the time I heard them in any meaningful way and they were not all that popular among my friends as I was growing up. So the opinions of the masses that came of age with the Beatles aren't really relevant to me - I judge from my own perspective.

Posted on Nov 28, 2012 6:40:23 PM PST
Love em' both. And middle. The early stuff has a great energy to it. As well as a lot of memories. The later stuff speaks for itself.

Posted on Nov 28, 2012 8:28:21 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 28, 2012 8:34:36 PM PST
@Fischman: The best of the early stuff is not fluff! Nor is it completely basic (remember it has all those "Aeolian cadences and such ;)). I mean, does it really get any better than "I Saw Her Standing There"? More sophisticated maybe, but not "better". Every song on the "A Hard Day's Night" album is a marvel of perfect pop songwriting--music, lyrics and arrangements on down. Just because the music is cheerier and more upbeat than the later stuff doesn't make it less interesting or good, IMO; "Things We Said Today" and "I'll Be Back" are as strong as anything in their later catalog! I can see how some people might think the overall sound is dated, but I only see timeless melodies, harmonies, lyrics, and playing. At the very least I think it has dated much better than The Beach Boys' early surf-n-cars material.

The early Kinks and Stones actually had a lot of filler on their first few albums. The singles and most notable album cuts were great and certainly equal to what The Beatles could do (and with a more modern, aggressive edge), but neither band had developed the kind of songwriting yet that could carry a whole album, like The Beatles had. Their third albums ("Out Of Our Heads" and "Kink Kontroversy") began to change this, leading to a total flowering on their fourth albums ("Aftermath" and "Face To Face").

Posted on Nov 29, 2012 6:03:05 AM PST
Fischman says:
Agreed that the "best" of the early stuff was not too basic--and I'll grant that there wasn't a lot of filler then either. But I still don't see much "best" on the first two albums and I still see the Kinks in '64 as being edgier and, purely personnaly, much more compelling to my ear, despite the filler. This is especially true of the earliest hits. To me, "Love Me Do" is a dreadfully plodding beat and melody filled with an inane lyric. "Please Please Me," while more interesting musically, is still only a marginal improvement.

I definitely see your point on the growth of the respective Kinks and Stones albums 1 - 4.

" . . .a marvel of perfect pop songwriting" is also an apt description, but then again, "pop" isn't my favorite genre--again speaking personally. Hard Day's Night was fun at first, but I can't take it seriously after repeated listenings. Having said that, my lack of appreciation for the early stuff isn't just a result of it being "lighter"; in fact some of the reason for my lack of appreciation for later Beatles is that they seemed to go through a sort of dark transition from these fun-loving, lighthearted lads to these dour, cranky sourpusses. I know all about the reasons for this in their personal lives, professonal lives and the turmoil in the world at large, so there's no need to rehash all that. They were good at what they did then too; it just doesn't grab me either.

For me, there was just a sort of Goldilocks sweet spot between the "basic" Beatles and the "far out" Beatles.

Posted on Nov 29, 2012 8:15:18 AM PST
RE: Early or Later Beatles?

66-69/ so, mid to late period.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 29, 2012 8:34:50 AM PST
Rubber Soul to Abby Be.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 29, 2012 7:54:35 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 29, 2012 7:54:55 PM PST
@Fischman: I understand your feelings here, which you explain very well, even if I do not share them. Although I admit "Love Me Do" didn't exactly set the world on fire, everything from "Please Please Me" on, well...let's agree to disagree. :)

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 30, 2012 5:00:16 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 30, 2012 5:00:45 AM PST
RE; "Lucy in the Sky", "Mr. Kite", "Glass Onion", "Revolution 9", and "Octopus' Garden", seen from the perspective of this Gen Xer, are little more than hippie nonsense.

Lucy may not have been a great song or among their best works, but it's a fascinating little sliver of psychedelia -- art imitating life -- and quite noteworthy in that respect.

If Revolver is your favorite and you find those other songs to be "hippie nonsense," I have to ask, what you think of "Tomorrow Never Knows" or "I'm Only Sleeping"?

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 30, 2012 12:13:02 PM PST
Lauren says:
@zapatos "I'm Only Sleeping" is not a particular favorite of mine - never was big on John's treated vocals - but it's a decent song. I love "Tomorrow Never Knows" as I do many of George's sitar adventures. I enjoy the Eastern flourishes and these don't strike me as typical psychedelia.

For the songs I mentioned above, I think there's just an effort at surrealism that doesn't work for me. I don't think I'd describe the Revolver songs in that way.

Posted on Dec 10, 2012 3:11:28 PM PST

Posted on Dec 10, 2012 3:48:23 PM PST
S. Stalcup says:
Mid-period with the folk influence: HELP!, Rubber Soul, and Revolver. Early was too slavishly following the desire to best Goffin and King, et. al. and the later period was either too druggy or caught up in technology or both.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in

Recent discussions in the Classic Rock forum


This discussion

Discussion in:  Classic Rock forum
Participants:  14
Total posts:  22
Initial post:  Nov 26, 2012
Latest post:  Dec 10, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.

Search Customer Discussions