Customer Discussions > Music forum

Why are there so many anti-Beatle threads here?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 751-775 of 1432 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Jul 1, 2012 2:44:35 PM PDT
ELVIS FAN says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 1, 2012 2:46:59 PM PDT
ELVIS FAN says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on Jul 1, 2012 3:24:20 PM PDT
C. Scanlon says:
cuz they suk?

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 1, 2012 8:32:03 PM PDT
Hinch says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 1, 2012 8:33:45 PM PDT
Hinch says:
You have no understanding of music in any way.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 2, 2012 3:44:26 AM PDT
parker lewis says:
So... anyone who doesn't share the standard enthusiasm for the Beatles is a troll, Barry? I would say you're being the troll here. Disagreeing with somebody else's opinion isn't fundamentally disrespectful. Dismissing somebody else's opinion is.

Anyway, it would seem that any amount of negative opinion on The Beatles is a drop in the bucket compared to favorable. It's just responsive. Everywhere you look The Beatles receive highest praise. If that's not your view it will compell you to respond.

Posted on Jul 2, 2012 6:36:33 AM PDT
Steelers fan says:
To put the total-sales thing to rest for good, here is a link to the top-selling artists of all time. The top two are unquestionably the Beatles and Elvis Presley. In terms of total certified units sold worldwide, the Beatles are the best-selling of all time (250 million units worldwide vs. 203.3 million worldwide for Presley). The Beatles outsold Presley, according to certified sales, in both in the U.S. and in the U.K.

Most large countries have a record-sales certification organization; in the U.S., it's the RIAA. Now, RIAA numbers are questionable, and much ink has been spilled over the problems with Presley's numbers as far as the RIAA is concerned. He is without doubt the biggest-selling individual recording artist in history.

This should put this to rest, for what it's worth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_music_artists

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 2, 2012 1:45:40 PM PDT
Hinch says:
parker lewis

You are correct. I dont think Barry was being a troll. Simply expressing an opposing opinion is not what defines a troll.

A troll is someone who posts inflamatory or off topic comments with the intention of getting an emotional response or disrupting the discussion. It's mainly for the purpose of gaining attention. Most of us recognize a troll when we see one.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 2, 2012 1:49:17 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 2, 2012 1:52:54 PM PDT
Hinch says:
Steelers fan

The facts will not put anything to rest where EF is concerned. I and others have posted those statistics many times, and he denys them.

The Beatles have sold more than anyone.
Elvis is the top selling solo artist.

For a while, Garth Brooks was the top selling solo artist, but Elvis moved ahead of him again.

EF used to say Elvis had sold over a billion. He was looking at claimed sales. After I brought it to his attention, both Elvis and The Beatles have "claimed" sales of over a billion(which he initially denied) I guess he found I was correct. Now he says Elvis has sold over 2 billion. Facts are irrelevant to EF.

Posted on Jul 2, 2012 3:42:08 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 2, 2012 3:51:43 PM PDT
Steelers fan says:
Unfortunately, I think you're correct.

The Wikipedia article lists both the Beatles and Elvis with "claimed" sales of 600 million to 1 billion units. The problem with this is that these figures can never be verified with any degree of precision. Internet downloads? Who knows?

Presley is the leader, of course, in gold (and higher status) singles and albums, simply because he released many more singles and albums over a longer period of time. And the music is still selling.

Posted on Jul 2, 2012 4:23:21 PM PDT
paris says:
i never got into the beatles. they are overrated. if paul's a "genious" then why did he buy 10 copies of the doors first album?

jim morrison was a true genious and the doors blow the beatles out of the water!

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 2, 2012 4:26:32 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 2, 2012 4:38:01 PM PDT
Hinch says:
That's another point I have made. Elvis started several years before The Beatles and continued several years after. During his lifetime he release very many more singles and albums than The Beatles. Many didnt even reach top 40.

Every The Beatles original studio album, except one, reached #1 in the U.S. and either #1 or the top 10 worldwide. The U.S. Capitol release SOMETHING ELSE reached #3. Several of their albums were #1 worldwide. From 1963 through 1970, every Beatles single had at least one side to reach either #1 or the top ten in several countries, and sometimes #1 worldwide.

That cant be said about Elvis. Yes, he had many top 10s and #1s but he had many that didnt break top 40. % wise, The Beatles are way ahead.

There was one week when The Beatles had all top 5 songs and a couple others in the top 10. Once, The Supremes had 3 of the top 5. The BeeGees had 3 songs in the top 5 and a couple other in the top ten at once, but no one has broken the record set by The Beatles of owning the top 5.

Since his death there have been countless compilations with his hits and popular songs being reissued over, and over, and over in differnt combinations. There have been many Elvis box sets released. He SHOULD have sold more than The Beatles with that many releases, but he hasnt.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 2, 2012 4:34:01 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 2, 2012 4:42:06 PM PDT
Hinch says:
First of all it's spelled "genius".

Secondly, I think genius is an over-used word. It doesnt take a genius to write good songs. It takes a clever songwriter with talent and it comes naturally for some.

Thirdly, what an artist enjoys listening to has nothing to do with his songwriting or musical ability.

I love The Doors, and Jim Morrison, but many people say The Doors were lousy musicians and Jim Morrison wrote drivel. I disagree, but we all have our own taste and opinion.

Maybe McCartney is like most of us. Most of us have the ability to like various music. McCartney's favorite album is The Beach Boys' PET SOUNDS, which Brian Wilson says was inspired by The Beatles' RUBBER SOUL.

Posted on Jul 3, 2012 6:39:05 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 3, 2012 6:51:24 AM PDT
Steelers fan says:
There is the distinct likelihood that Elvis may pass the Fab Four in sales in the not-too-distant future. He recorded much more material over a longer period of time; the Beatles' body of work is smaller. Parker made sure that Elvis' live performances were recorded, so, in particular, there must be hundreds of hours of unreleased concert performances by Presley in the vaults, including, most likely, some tremendous stuff. I would say that Elvis passing the Fab Four in another couple of decades is a distinct possibility.

Posted on Jul 3, 2012 6:48:30 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 3, 2012 6:52:30 AM PDT
Steelers fan says:
In contrast, few officially-recorded Beatles performances (a la the two Hollywood Bowl concerts) are now left unreleased as "new" material. The studio outtakes, unreleased material, etc., will eventually run out, if they haven't already. That leaves the official "canon" (13 albums in the U.K., I think, plus non-album singles and a few rarities), which, of course, will continue to sell well indefinitely.

Posted on Jul 3, 2012 9:21:14 AM PDT
J. Hand says:
@ EF -You are a perfect demonstration of the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

Posted on Jul 3, 2012 11:09:13 AM PDT
Jules says:
J. Hand,
Really good point. I agree.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 3, 2012 6:31:21 PM PDT
Hinch says:
Steeler's fan

That is a possibility. There is a record label, I believe owned by Elvis' estate, that has been releasing previouisly unreleased concerts and alternate takes of his songs. Some collectors and fans buy every release, just as Beatles fans do.

I don't deny his popularity, especially with his hardcore fans, but if he's as popular as some claim, he should have already outsold The Beatles, considering the hundreds of releases already out there.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 3, 2012 6:32:55 PM PDT
Hinch says:
J. Hand

I had to look that one up. I believe you are correct.

Posted on Jul 4, 2012 2:01:00 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 4, 2012 2:04:12 AM PDT
J. Hand says:
@ Hinch & Jules- Thanks! Glad you agree! I first learned the term back in business school when we were studying poor management styles. This one was especially dangerous for a work superior to have because you can't tell the people who have it anything because they already know everything. What they don't know they fake thatr they know. They also seldom, if ever, pay for the mistakes they force others to make and always find a fall guy (or gal). Powerless, these folks are just annoying. I was doing some research for something recently and stunbled on it again and as soon as I did guess who popped to mind?

RE: Continued Elvis releases. Not to name drop them again, but over the years (and there have been a lot of them I have been a customer) Collectors Choice Music (ccmusic.com) has had 'new' and/or previously unreleased Elvis releases in their catalog every month. Every month. I used to work with a self proclaimed Elvis lover and I used to show her the catalogs on occasion. She had never known of many of the releases although she was familiar with the performances. So, as others have suggested, if there is indeed a ton of recorded live performances, there may well be enough stuff to put out regularly for years to come. I know little about Elvis in any detail so I don't know if there is any studio stuff left that hasn't been put out. Compared to the Beatles, Elvis toured a lot so there is likely a lot of live material. The Beatles stopped touring early on long before capturing live rock concerts was figured out.

I use the Zappa Family Trust as an example. The legendary Vault is stuffed full of performances, projects, experiments, and all other things Frank Zappa left and he recorded EVERYTHING! ZFT feed out a slow, but steady trickle of material and will probably have stuff left after the last Zappa fan goes back to the Big Note, myself included.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 4, 2012 3:04:31 PM PDT
ELVIS FAN says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 4, 2012 3:05:32 PM PDT
ELVIS FAN says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 4, 2012 3:15:00 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 4, 2012 3:15:29 PM PDT
ELVIS FAN says:
No it has already been proven by my post here, that Elvis Presley is by far the most best selling artist single or by a group, the world has ever know.
Wiki is full of outdated and unreliable resource. Get a clue.
http://www.elvis.com.au/presley/one_billion_record_sales.shtml
This is resourced and confirmed by : Nick Keene - Originally published 17 July 2007. Updated April 2008.

Written and researched by Nick Keene with help from Ernst Jorgensen and source's at Sony BMG.

Conclusion :

Finally I feel that it is now safe to say that the sales of Presley records have passed that coveted one billion milestone and possibly may even have done so about 5 years ago. That places him several hundred million ahead of anyone else. And I would add that despite Michael Jackson's periodic claims I very much doubt that the gloved one is anywhere near the Beatles (600 million) far less Elvis.
Let it rest. Now you know why they called him the KING!
********************************************************

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 4, 2012 3:18:16 PM PDT
ELVIS FAN says:
You think? Maybe a tad overrated. by oh. 75%

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 4, 2012 3:27:51 PM PDT
ELVIS FAN says:
But you seem to forget your facts are based on your love for the beatles and are just opinions. Mine are the real facts. Elvis Is number 1 in sales. Why is that so hard to get?
[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
 


ARRAY(0x9d99f918)
 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Music forum
Participants:  146
Total posts:  1432
Initial post:  Jan 23, 2012
Latest post:  Jul 29, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 11 customers

Search Customer Discussions