ForumsPopular MediaHow the Beatles destroyed Rock and roll

40 7149
redfan45
offline
redfan45
197 posts
Nomad

http://www.austinchronicle.com/music/2009-07-17/810720/
very interesting book that I agree with, anyone who knows anything about 1950's rock and roll more than just the usual "elvis" crap would agree with this.
They turned it from music that black people, white people, men and women were putting so much work into,
and turned it into pretty much white kids and later on hippies.
Im not going to say they were bad artists, but the Beatles ruined what rock and roll was supposed to become.

  • 40 Replies
delossantosj
offline
delossantosj
6,672 posts
Nomad

artsy fartsy people touch music they ruin it.


i disagree entirely. especially with rock. rock music has evolved so much. like MGMT and Empire of the Sun are brilliant
xfirealchemistx
offline
xfirealchemistx
370 posts
Nomad

I laughed when I read the title. First of all the Beatles cover of Please Mr. Postman I believe was the first black song on the pop charts. The songs is actually credited to The original artists etc, so I'm pretty sure they made money off of the song anyways. I think you should take a class on the subject and you'd truly understand the scope of Rock and Roll and how The Beatles are one of the greatest if not THE greatest band in the world.

ide4749
offline
ide4749
310 posts
Nomad

They talented i gues

redfan45
offline
redfan45
197 posts
Nomad

THE greatest band in the world.

Thats a large matter of opinion, this might not go for you but many people who have told me that same thing haven't even heard any bands before the beatles. There is no greatest band to live, its all about personal taste in the music that brings it alive in you.
I've heard songs made in the 50's that were by artists only big in like a city, that were so great "the greatest band ever the beatles" couldn't make a song that compared. And thats a large matter of opinion on me. Who gives a rats *** if a band was successful in popularity, doesn't make them the best musicians to walk the earth and I can promise you John Lennon would tell you he is not the best musician ever and that his band rules everything else "especially that old **** they called rcok from the 50's"
I made this post about the BOOK and wanted opinions and you are all acting like I am saying the beatles suck and that i wrote the **** book myself. christ people
Freakenstein
offline
Freakenstein
9,504 posts
Jester

We were never criticizing you, Redfan. At least not me. I was criticizing how the book deems one band responsible for the "sudden" change in music evolution to "what Rock and Roll was supposed to be". I think I implied your name into the mix, so I should apologize for that bit. I just want to point out that it wasn't you that was being called out, but the book and the author who has no clue how music works. Opinions are nice, Redfan, but even opinions can go too far to where they are constricted.

delossantosj
offline
delossantosj
6,672 posts
Nomad

redfan you did say that you agreed with the book, and im pretty sure you are the only one who has read it. so its safe to say that you are speaking for the book right now. not a problem, but prepared to be proved wrong


the beatles weren't the greatest musicians of all time. fact. deffinatly one of the greatest song writers of all time yes. no heres were oppinion and fact get sepparated.

im not saying they were the greatest rock band of all time because of there musical talent, i dont think anyone is. i personally am not a big beatles fan. but the influence that they brought to the music industry was HUGE. you dont seem to realize what they did. they brought rock to an international level almost SINGLE HANDEDLY. if it wasnt for artists like them, jimi hendrix, and the rolling stones, rock would most likely be an american genre only. if defining the greatest band of all time was based on skill alone, i garentee you the mahavishnu orchestra would be at the top of the list on probably every single list from people who know what they're talking about. but no. you also have to put in, influence, impact not only musically but also culterally. this is where the beatles outshine every other band by a long shot

redfan45
offline
redfan45
197 posts
Nomad

Yeah they certainly brought it to a international level more than anyone had before, they're just not my favorite band. I like their earlier stuff because it still sounded like rock and roll, but rock and roll is being considered a sub genre of rock now, as the kind of rock that was the style of the 50's and early 60's
Rock after than I think was missing the roll

DustyLee
offline
DustyLee
216 posts
Nomad

if they beatles hadnt come out we wudnt have so many good bands that were influenced by them. like manchester orchestra and ect.

loloynage2
offline
loloynage2
4,206 posts
Peasant

wth was rock 'n' roll suppose to be anyways? There are just transformations in music, not a straight path that music has to follow.

redfan45
offline
redfan45
197 posts
Nomad

wth was rock 'n' roll suppose to be anyways?

listen to some 50's rock and if that would have kept up longer and didn't get pushed back by the british invasion rock would be more influenced by that than what the beatles and such did.
ofcourse rock is still influenced by the 50s rock. obviously otherwise there would be no rock what so ever.
Showing 31-40 of 40