Industrial Deals Beauty Summer Reading STEM nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc PCB for Musical Instruments Starting at $39.99 Grocery Handmade Wedding Shop Book House Cleaning powers4premiere powers4premiere powers4premiere  Introducing Echo Show All-New Fire HD 8 Kids Edition, starting at $129.99 Kindle Oasis Trade it in. Fund the next. Shop Now STEMClub17_gno
Customer Discussions > Music forum

Rock music wasn't really good until The Beatles


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 26-50 of 205 posts in this discussion
Posted on Sep 28, 2012, 12:40:47 PM PDT
C. Harding says:
Stratocaster: I'm very respectful of others too. But certainly not when I'm accused of fabricating things just to stir the pot!

-----------------------------------------------

Oh wow, the irony in that line just made my afternoon. I'll be laughing at that all weekend. Thanks Stratocaster!

Posted on Sep 28, 2012, 2:00:41 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Sep 28, 2012, 2:02:41 PM PDT
Stratocaster says:
C. Harding says: "Oh wow, the irony in that line just made my afternoon"

This coming from the guy who's into death metal and reads books about satan? Yeah, you're the real shining beacon of humanity.

Why you keep busting my balls on every thread I post on? Just because I said I tried to help my sister along with her depression by reading up on causes and natural cures? The doctors and the drugs certainly weren't helping her at all. The other poster on that thread, who also suffers from depression, pretty much backed up almost everything I said. And you post some snide remark about me "knowing everything this there is to know about depression". I never came close to claiming that. What exactly is your beef? Do you work for a pharmaceutical company or something?

Posted on Sep 28, 2012, 4:14:30 PM PDT
Stratocaster says:
Hey Harding, Randy said "Perhaps, then, that would be the place to address those who make that claim".

He's telling me I should go post on another thread. Aren't you goin go give him a "bunch of c rap" and tell him I have just as much right to post here as anybody? No? Didn't think so. Hypocrite. I'll be laughing at that all weekend.

Posted on Sep 29, 2012, 1:41:08 AM PDT
For me rock music wasnt good until Jimi Hendrix, Led Zeppelin and Deep Purple came along and Black Sabbath, Blue Oyster Cult, UFO and Montrose followed soon after.

Posted on Sep 29, 2012, 6:08:55 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Sep 29, 2012, 6:32:42 AM PDT
C. Harding says:
Among the many things Stratocaster has made up here, I'm trying to figure out what books about Satan I've read. Actually, there are probably a couple, but I've also read books about Christianity, Buddhism, Wicca, Hinduism, Paganism, Islam, Judaism, etc. so I don't know what the point he's trying to make is. I'm also not sure how my taste in music is reflective of my character. I like a lot of Christian artists as well. What does that say about my character?

As for the conversation about depression, Stratocater, that was really cute how you reframed the whole conversation to make it seem like I attacked you for trying to help your sister find natural cures. Particularly when your original comment about your sister was quite insulting in the manner in which it trivialized depression and stated it wasn't a real illness. The other poster did NOT completely back you up - in fact, he contradicted you.

Finally, the comparison you've made between the original post of yours I responded to and what Randy's post here was about is comparing apples to oranges....totally different contexts and he didn't suggest you go elsewhere until you had....wait for it.....attacked him. Oh, what a surprise.

To answer your question, my problem with you is that a fair amount of your posts are rude and unprovoked attacks on other posters. You are quick to assume someone means something other than what they actually state, you put words into other posters' mouths (or keyboards in this case) and, as I've already mentioned, you reframe past conversations to try to make yourself come out smelling like roses. You like to state your opinions as if they are irrefutable fact and when someone questions or disagrees with you, you go on the attack. You use people's personal tastes in music to insult them and, now, question their character. Then you try to say you are respectful. No, I'm no "beacon of humanity" - never claimed to be - but I'm still calling out your bs.

Enjoy your laughter-filled weekend!

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 29, 2012, 6:48:38 AM PDT
Hinch says:
Rock & roll/rock was good before, during and after The Beatles.

Posted on Sep 29, 2012, 7:08:15 AM PDT
Hinch says:
Whether The Beatles are overrated, underrated, were great innovators or got credit for innovations they didnt innovate, were the most popular, least popular, everyone likes them or no one like them, I couldn't care less. I LIKE THEM!
LOL!

If you don't like them, don't buy their albums. Don't listen to them! Stay far away from Beatles threads. No one forces anyone to click on a link. I don't frequent threads about artists I don't like just so I can say how overrated they are.

If they were so overrated and unimportant people wouldn't still be talking about them and arguing about them over 40 years after they broke up.

Get over it. You're not going to change anyone's mind, and I'm not trying to. Some people like them and some don't.

:-)

Posted on Sep 29, 2012, 7:14:24 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Sep 29, 2012, 7:15:07 AM PDT
Hinch says:
Btw, I have to agree with Fischman. As big a Beatles fan I am, I can see why threads like this are the reason for so much anti-Beatles sentiment. If it wasnt for rock and roll in the 50s there wouldnt have been The Beatles.

Muddy Waters, Chuck Berry, Elvis, Little Richard, Buddy Holly, Carl Perkins, Hank Williams Sr, Johnny Cash, Everly Bros, Roy Orbison... I'm sure I'm forgetting some.....nuff said?

Posted on Sep 29, 2012, 7:40:11 AM PDT
I think rock and roll was good before the Beatles and the Beatles themselves always stated their influences. I do think rock and roll got better, more creative, more interesting due to the Beatles and others as well (like Dylan, The Byrds ETC) Rock and Roll started out as pure energy in a simpler time and it was just a natural progression as musicians started thinking more in terms of art rather than pure entertainment. Every era of music has it's greats and the first years (pre-Beatles) certainly did too. Buddy Holly, The Fats, Little Richard, The Everly Brothers, Chuck Berry and others. That music still excites me. And it's not an age thing as I was born in 1960. But the Beatles took it to the next level. And they were (along with Dylan) the guts of the 60's and musical changes and advancement. In a 1975 interview John Lennon was talking about how all music has it's history and you keep tracing it back to see how one thing influenced/planted seeds for another. I find the whole history of rock and roll and before to present fascinating and all the branches that grew from the tree. But I do think the Beatles were and still are the tallest tree in the forest.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 29, 2012, 8:37:12 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Sep 29, 2012, 8:39:51 AM PDT
E. Dill says:
Stratocaster:

At 66, I surely don't think of myself as a "stick in the mud" since I still have a natural affinity for experimental/avant garde music. Having said that (as pretentious as it may sound), the Beatles and their long list of "firsts" NEVER lessened my love for doo wop, rockabilly, early southern rock/r&b, etc. etc. When discussions like these arise, we often get confronted with the notion that complexity in music makes it better.....more interesting to listen to. If that is true, then werranth and her crowd are right. We should all break our records and worship classical music, or at least admit that we listen to rock and pop when we're lazy and go for the real music when we want to think.

I still list The Beatles and Dylan as my two favorite groups/single performers in my history of rock/pop music. With the Beatles, it has little to do, consciously at least, with their long list of "firsts". It has to do with their ability to mesh simplicity with experiment. Their music constantly grew but never, seemingly, in a way that suggested a "show offy" approach to experimentation, i.e., "look what we can do!". That's why I can listen to Johnny B. Goode next to A Day in the Life and not think they are different universes.

Good job boys.....good job.

ed.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 29, 2012, 8:48:46 AM PDT
Hinch says:
E Dill

Nice post! I can't disagree with anything you said.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 29, 2012, 9:00:12 AM PDT
E. Dill says:
Hinch:

Thanks.

Now about the upcoming election.

Kidding.....really kidding.

ed.

Posted on Sep 29, 2012, 9:01:16 AM PDT
E Dill, As Jack Soo in Barney Miller used to say...Very well put!

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 29, 2012, 11:31:08 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Sep 29, 2012, 11:33:16 AM PDT
Bob Bykowski says:
It's absolutely ridiculous to say that rock wasn't really good until the Beatles. The Beatles are the greatest band of all time, but that certainly doesn't mean that great rock didn't exist in the '50's. Chuck Berry wrote songs that stood for a hell of a long time as the textbook for every band learning to play. Early Elvis was fantastic. Little Richard was wild and unforgettable. Buddy Holly was brilliant. There was also the genius of people like the rockabilly king Carl Perkins, Jerry Lee Lewis, the amazing Fats Domino...many others. The great rock 'n roll of the '50's was the training ground for British bands such as the Beatles and American bands such as the Beach Boys when they were starting out. It inspired them to write their own great material.

Posted on Sep 29, 2012, 3:45:50 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Sep 29, 2012, 4:22:48 PM PDT
Stratocaster says:
C. Harding says: "I'm also not sure how my taste in music is reflective of my character".

You're absolutely right. It's not. I was simply "pushing your buttons" the same way you've been pushing mine for 3 days on 2 different threads.

I trivialized depression and stated it wasn't a real illness? Now who's the one "putting words into other posters' mouths". I NEVER said it wasn't an illness. Please find that for me. I said it wasn't a disease. There is a HUGE difference. I work in Healthcare, and even the doctors, nurses, and insurance companies can't figure out where the "disease" thing is coming from.

"You like to state your opinions as if they are irrefutable fact". Uh, yeah. And nooooooooooobody else on these threads does that. ?
Recognize this? - "It's really not important except to musicians and music educators. For most people, it's just music, but for musicians and, in particular, music educators, their livelihood depends on people thinking it's more than *just* music".

That's your quote. Sound like "opinion" to you? Sounds a lot like you're stating an opinion as fact. We all do it. Whether it be consciously or subconsciously, it's a fact we all do it. You even go on to say that your not a musician nor a music educator, but yet you're willing and able to speak for how all musicians and music educators think.

"when someone questions or disagrees with you, you go on the attack".

No. When someone attacks me, I go on the attack. I can pull up several posting on other threads right now where you yourself contradicted me on several occasions....politely. I posted a rebuttal.....Politely. One of my responses to your contradiction was "I stick to my timeline." That's what you call an attack? Did I personally insult you? Did I curse at you? Did I insult your mother?

If you referring to my reply to the OP of the "Tupac/BIG" thread - I seriously thought it was just some guy starting yet another trolling thread. If that's not the case, then I personally apologize to Mr Benitez. But as far as what I've seen others posting on other trolling threads, my response would have qualified as warm and fuzzy!
Ever been on the "Meade Skelton" thread? You want to see a bunch of people personally attacking some poor sap who's just trying to sell his CD, go take a look at that thread. About the only thing I've ever posted on there was "What the Frig is a Meade Skelton". I've never personally insulted him, or his music. You know why? Because Meade Skelton never attacked me with a post like "why are you on this thread talking about something that nobody else is talking about". What arrogance!

You hate me? That's fine. I won't be expecting a Christmas card this year. But as far as the stalking and constant snide remarks, which come into my email, and then you immediately delete them from the thread, don't you think that's being a jus little juvenile?

Posted on Sep 29, 2012, 4:44:12 PM PDT
Stratocaster says:
E. Dill says: "Stratocaster: At 66, I surely don't think of myself as a "stick in the mud"

E. - I'm not at all sure how you got the impression that that was directed towards you. To the contrary.
A "stick in the mud" is someone who is stuck in their ways. You'd be the polar opposite of a stick in the mud! You have more widely varied tastes in music then just about anyone I've ever seen.

Posted on Sep 29, 2012, 5:05:02 PM PDT
E. Dill says:
@Stratocaster:

<<I'm not at all sure how you got the impression that that was directed towards you.>>

I reread your post. I don't either. I apologize for becoming so defensive and such a lousy reader.

I think werranth has finally got to me on the other board and I'm not really blaming her either. I've said my piece to her about 50 times already and I guess I should just about close up shop when it comes to THAT "discussion". But recently, she rattled me again by suggesting I had a "narrow scope" or some such thing after I've told her what kinds of music I like listening to. About the only crime I can think of is not loving classical music. It's only ok, mostly. I tend to favor the baroque and romantic periods more than the classic stuff. What I REALLY have gotten into in the past year is so called "modern classical". It's like avant garde/experimental/classical/jazz rolled into one.

Anyway, again, sorry I got so muddled.

ed.

Posted on Sep 29, 2012, 5:06:27 PM PDT
[Deleted by the author on Sep 29, 2012, 5:06:37 PM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 29, 2012, 5:46:04 PM PDT
Hinch says:
E Dill

:-)

Posted on Sep 29, 2012, 7:55:31 PM PDT
[Deleted by the author on Mar 27, 2013, 7:11:57 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 30, 2012, 6:56:14 AM PDT
Bob Bykowski says:
Stephen Mcnary says: "For me rock music wasnt good until Jimi Hendrix, Led Zeppelin and Deep Purple came along and Black Sabbath, Blue Oyster Cult, UFO and Montrose followed soon after."

There's other types of rock music besides heavy metal, Stephen. You keep forgetting.

Posted on Sep 30, 2012, 7:06:28 AM PDT
Hinch says:
There's two kinds of music.....music I like and music I don't like. No one likes everything but all music is good to the people who like it.

Posted on Sep 30, 2012, 7:15:24 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Sep 30, 2012, 7:16:13 AM PDT
Bob Bykowski says:
What continues to remain amazing about The Beatles is that they wrote, recorded and released their entire output in seven-and-a-half years and progressed with each release. Most bands today take 2-3 years just to release ONE album, and it usually contains at least a couple of dud tracks on it. The Beatles' material was - for the most part - uniformly excellent.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 30, 2012, 7:16:31 AM PDT
To each his own, how true! I am going to use your 2 types of music saying. 2 kinds, what I like, what I don't like! Well said Hinch!

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 30, 2012, 3:16:06 PM PDT
Robert Bykowski-I'm not forgetting the other types, I just cant stand them.
[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 Music forum

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Music forum
Participants:  42
Total posts:  205
Initial post:  Sep 28, 2012
Latest post:  Dec 1, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 6 customers