Posted on 02/07/2014 10:54:23 AM PST by US Navy Vet
It was 50 years ago today that The Beatles landed in America for the first time. Could any other group ever hope to top the talents of these beloved moptops? Well ...Yeah, yeah, yeah! Check out 11 bands that I think took the Fab Four’s pop revolution and made it even better, way beyond compare
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
I heard he agreed with Pink Floyd.
This guy really needs to get a grip.
Good call! Boston is the ultimate loud car stereo rock band, followed closely by Van Halen. Neither is really good for low level listening per se, but loud, ooooh yeah!
Aw come on, you mean these surf jockeys that took London by storm in 1966 and in the NME contest that year pulled #1 band right from under John Lennon's beak? And all this while Brian stayed home alone and began his second sonic masterpiece, Smile - (the first being Pet Sounds which was the inspiration for Sgt Pepper)
Nah, no way these dudes could come anywhere close to being "better than the Beatles". They were just that other band on Capitol Records. /s
I saw Pete and his band play in a very small venue a year or two ago and chatted with him for a few minutes afterwards. He seemed like a good bloke (as they might say in Liverpool) and he didn’t seem to harbor any bitterness. Of course, the lack of bitterness may have had something to do with the several million dollar pound check he received as a result of the BBC session release and the Anthology release. :-)
Says it all right there.
Oops.
It’s been his first “taste” of Beatle money.
Not really.
Just where do
(A) The Allman Brothers
(B) Lynyrd Skynyrd
(C) Marshall Tucker Band
(D) Jon Mayall
and others fit in here or do they???????????
Like your list, but would add Outlaws, 1977 concert in Houston was fantastic.
My add on list:Those I haven’t seen listed yet.
Jimi Hendrix. Only 2 people could cover him. Clapton and Stevie Ray. (Every garage band can cover the Beatles)
Mike Oldfield
It’s A Beautiful Day (with Billy Gregory on guitar and Patti Santos vocals)
Ambrosia
Camel
Vangelis
Yoko???
Yes; I also come out when I drink my gin. Beefeaters, actually.
I agree with Rush and the Replacements on the list.
I think my criteria for 'better' would include 'able to read music'. That'll probably add another 50 posts to this thread....
That would add King Crimson, the Dregs and Deep Purple to my list.
None on the list displayed the range of music produced by the Beatles. They all had their characteristic sound, which varied slightly over the years. The Beatles really were much more robust, and more profoundly, able to make hits even when dabbling in completely different metrics and rhythms than that which they previously had been known.
IMHO, though, the Beatles rarely played their own repertoire. Stevie Wonder, Pink Floyd, Crosby Stills Nash and Young, and more recent jazz bands such as John McLaughlin, Larry Coryell, or even Larry Carlton are magnificent musicians with a wide range of taste intheir performances.
Note for all: if you are feeling a bit nostalgic, the website Beyond The Beat Generation live streams a lot of the “also-ran” music of the period. There were a lot of groups who never charted, but still contributed, for better or worse. In any event, it is fun to listen to.
http://www.beyondthebeatgeneration.com/
Music was revived when CCR, the Almond Bros, Lynyrd Skynyrd, the Outlaws, Blackfoot, Charlie Daniels, Marshall Tucker, etc. pulled us out of the gutter.
You may be right, but that doesn’t prove anything. Led Zeppelin is my favorite band, but the Beatles had well-over one hundred solid, timeless, instantly recognizable songs that THEY wrote. Plus whatever came after the breakup which will no doubt ultimately be included in their discography. (McCartney and Starr are still first Beatles, then whatever else. There really is no debate about this. Jimmy Page was a master in the studio, but all RECORDED music becomes derivative... Stale. The covers and reinterpretations will survive better into the future. I’m talking 200 years from now... Even then a handful of Beatle songs will be instantly recognized, regardless of the person’s awareness of the artist.
re: “Elvis. Elvis had an earlier and a greater impact.”
There is no denying that Elvis was a tremendous influence on rock n’ roll - I would say he possibly influenced rock n roll to a greater degree than anyone prior to the 1960’s. He definitely influenced John, Paul, and George musically, and also the way they dressed before they became the Beatles as a band. They loved Elvis and emulated him a great deal.
I didn’t say that the Beatles were the only ones who had a great influence on pop music, or, even that they were the “best” rock band - just one of the biggest (if not THE biggest) influences on rock music as an art form, in innovation of recording/effects techniques, and on the music/record business as an industry.
I think Elvis, then the Beatles, were the two biggest movers of the development of rock and teen/young adult culture from 1956 to 1970. Both have had lasting world-wide fame and musical endurance.
I think you are selling the Beatles short on their impact. I lived through that time period, got involved in music as a musician and as a teacher. Their impact on expanding what rock music could be is undeniable. Their impact, through their producer George Martin, on recording techniques, use of guitar effects, early electronic keyboard effects, phasing, and several other recording/effects innovations are also undeniable. They were not necessarily the first ones to utilize such techniques, but the quality of their compositions and the way in which the techniques were used broke new ground time after time.
Look, lots of individual artists and bands all made their contributions, but very few had the huge influence on music and culture that Elvis and the Beatles had. Elvis defined rock music for the 1950’s and early 60’s, the Beatles defined rock music for the 60’s and early 70’s. Others took up where they left off, others went different directions, but none have created the world-wide excitement, musical ingenuity, cultural impact, and money to the recording industry as Elvis and the Beatles, at least not to the same degree.
I’m not just making a statement “to the point that people believe it”. I was there. I heard and saw their influence. Remember, just before the Beatles made it big, there was one British record producer that Brian Epstein played Beatle’s recordings for, trying to get him to sign them, and this guy told Epstein that guitar/rock groups were “on the way out”. As of Dec. 2013, the Beatles have sold over 2.3 billion records world-wide (http://www.statisticbrain.com/the-beatles-total-album-sales/). I think just record sales alone speaks for their influence.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.