Let's talk about bands that influenced the Beatles

[sydaud]

I'm liking this thread. I've been listening to the Kinks and enjoying it.

Something Else by The Kinks. Listen to it, love it...a damn near perfect album.

[Gribbz]

I love The Kinks. I'm not too familiar with the band members themselves though. Are they all still alive? Would love to see them tour.

[sydaud]

Ray and Dave Davies are still alive and they HATE each other. Just go check out a Ray show if he comes your way.

[gaypalmsprings]

Bay City Rollers

[JebusLives]

I guess since you quoted me at the onset, I should post something. I feel great resentment toward the Beatles because they embody the boomer generation's monopoly on culture. People 50 and younger are constantly being reminded that no generation can ever transcend the greatness that was 60s youth culture. This is bullshit.

Ultimately the Beatles wrote quite a number of very catchy songs. They have easy to remember lyrics are they're fun to sing along to. This is why the songs still appeal especially to young children, and I'll probably begrudgingly play them for my kids some day. Yes, I know they had a more experimental phase later on. Whoop de do; so has every other band. It was still, ultimately, radio-friendly pop music. Great artists evolve and grow their craft by studying the masters. These guys never even learned to read music.

Not to derail the thread though - I think this is great! I've always wanted to dig back to the early stuff, but didn't know where to start.

[Gribbz]

I guess since you quoted me at the onset, I should post something. I feel great resentment toward the Beatles because they embody the boomer generation's monopoly on culture. People 50 and younger are constantly being reminded that no generation can ever transcend the greatness that was 60s youth culture. This is bullshit.

Ultimately the Beatles wrote quite a number of very catchy songs. They have easy to remember lyrics are they're fun to sing along to. This is why the songs still appeal especially to young children, and I'll probably begrudgingly play them for my kids some day. Yes, I know they had a more experimental phase later on. Whoop de do; so has every other band. It was still, ultimately, radio-friendly pop music. Great artists evolve and grow their craft by studying the masters. These guys never even learned to read music.

Not saying I agree or disagree, but Thom York never learned to read music either. So I hear anyway.

[wmgaretjax]

These guys never even learned to read music.

I think this is fairly hysterical since the masters they were paying attention to (the aforementioned Stockhausen for one) had largely stopped writing their composed music with traditional notation because they found it insufficient in a day and age that would be largely driven by the mixing process or live electronics (not to mention large bodies of work that exist outside of the traditional tonal system that musical notation typically accommodates). They had either shifted to graphical notation (which the Beatles experimented with) or abandoned notation altogether (as was the case with a lot of Stockhausen's work, not to mention Varese, Ligeti or Xenakis).

Composers whose body of work is limited by traditional notation in this day and age are already irrelevant... If anyone tries to bring up Phillip Glass, Steve Reich (composers who are actually incredibly reactionary and entirely non-experimental in this arena) or any other typically regarded hack, they will be smacked.

[pancakespancakes]

Umm. Who does read music? Names? Please?

[pancakespancakes]

Jared beat me to it.

[thestripe]

I would say that how I work is similar to you, with regards to putting bands away for a long time. It is generally not a conscious move; it's just that I am not compelled to listen to Led Zeppelin - for example - much anymore.

Next I would note that I am not "completely done" with anybody. When I say I am done with the Beatles I mean that I am not going to be making a consicous effort to listen to them in order to focus that part of my listening time elsewhere. I certainly expect that I will revisit them at some point, 5, 10, whatever* years down the line.

Next I will confirm that OK Computer, Lonesome Crowded West and the three albums by the Beatles I have mentioned would all show up on any greatest/favorite albums list I make. None of these artists showed up on my list in the other thread because I chose to make that based on the last several years (or whatever) rather than my entire life.

Finally, I will note again that with the Beatles it is a different situation than with Led Zeppelin (which came and went over a decade but before me getting to these boards) or Modest Mouse; those happened very organically.

There is a lot of myth around the Beatles and I need to break myself of that. I just feel the need to set them aside and look around at what I have missed because of all the time I've spent listening to the Beatles. I made a conscious effort to get acquainted with their back catalog (pre-Revolver) and now I'm making a conscious effort to not listen to them at all for a while.


* It ocurred to me this morning that the 50th anniversary of their releases will be coming up; I could try and stick to not listening to anything by them until it is 50 years old. That means that I will be able to purposely listen to "I Wanna Be Your Man" again some day in November 2013 (I think) and Sgt Pepper's on whatever day in 2017, etc. I am not sure that I am going to do this, though.

Thanks for that, John. I think I'll play along too. I admit that I have had limited exposure to Buddy, Chuck and a few others mentioned above. It'll be a good listening study.

EDIT: While I do enjoy The Kinks tremendously, I don't think I can honestly say I think they were better than the Beatles. They share similar traits, but execute them entirely different. The Kinks took risks and their sound changed over the years. The Beatles definitely played things safe, but for as popular as the Beatles were, I do think they took slight risks. Risks that todays pop acts would never get away with while maintaining such popularity.

[Down Rodeo]

So wait...Steve Reich and Philip Glass are hacks?

[pancakespancakes]

So wait...Steve Reich and Philip Glass are hacks?

Word out on the street is that if you're not experimental, you're a hack.

[JebusLives]

I think this is fairly hysterical since the masters they were paying attention to (the aforementioned Stockhausen for one) had largely stopped writing their composed music with traditional notation because they found it insufficient in a day and age that would be largely driven by the mixing process or live electronics (not to mention large bodies of work that exist outside of the traditional tonal system that musical notation typically accommodates). They had either shifted to graphical notation (which the Beatles experimented with) or abandoned notation altogether (as was the case with a lot of Stockhausen's work, not to mention Varese, Ligeti or Xenakis).

Composers whose body of work is limited by traditional notation in this day and age are already irrelevant... If anyone tries to bring up Phillip Glass, Steve Reich (composers who are actually incredibly reactionary and entirely non-experimental in this arena) or any other typically regarded hack, they will be smacked.

Where did I say they should limit themselves to traditional notation? Lots of (most) great music was written in notation, and not having a single person in the band who was musically literate is fairly unforgivable for the "greatest band ever".

And jesus christ, you make it sound like Beatles tunes were just too far out to be constrained by notation. We're talking about a B flat major, verse-chorus-verse pop band, not fucking Aphex Twin.

[wmgaretjax]

So wait...Steve Reich and Philip Glass are hacks?

Philip Glass and Steve Reich are both composers that created some incredibly interesting works that were full of potential early on but have been treading water ever since. They take no chances in their music, and in fact have regressed into crusty curmudgeons with the opposite sensibility of the masters that directly proceeded them (the composers I have mentioned in this thread, and more). Their attitudes and educational inclinations have seriously dismantled a lot of the progress made in the middle of the 20th century. It's not so much I hate their music, which is simply uninteresting in my mind (beyond the potential of early works to push some boundaries), it's more that the impact of their attitudes and lack of evolution have been destructive in the slowly crumbling world of experimental "academic" music. I wish I could come up with a great pop-oriented parallel.

[wmgaretjax]

Lots of (most) great music was written in notation, and not having a single person in the band who was musically literate is fairly unforgivable for the "greatest band ever".

My point is exactly that. Musical notation is no longer a condition to being musically literate.

The origin of musical notation lies in limitations in the ability to reproduce music. The minute you could record music, musical notation began to die. It still has it's uses in elaborate orchestral music because of economics and efficiency, but the reality is that if not for dinosaurs in music education, better alternatives who have arisen a long time ago.

[mountmccabe]

Umm. Who does read music? Names? Please?

John McCabe, Dark Lord of the Coachella Board.

[Down Rodeo]

Hmm...interesting response, Jared.

[wmgaretjax]

Word out on the street is that if you're not experimental, you're a hack.

No. It's when you maintain a status of being progressive and "history-making" (Philip Glass actually referred to himself in that manner), while being entirely reactionary.

[wmgaretjax]

Hmm...interesting response, Jared.

Just to be explicit. I'm not talking about simple music at this point. I don't mind listening to their music at all. I'm specifically talking about my own (and my wife's) personal experiences with education in music and the influence these guys have had.

Seriously, the fact that we've essentially gone from John Cage and Xenakis -> Philip Glass as the major theoretical thinkers in musical education is insane.

[pancakespancakes]

John McCabe, Dark Lord of the Coachella Board.

I do too, as a matter of fact, thanks to previously mentioned "dinosaurs" of music education. High school was fun times.

[wmgaretjax]

I do too, as a matter of fact, thanks to previously mentioned "dinosaurs" of music education. High school was fun times.

High school band is hardly what I'm referring to. But I think you know that.

[mountmccabe]

Thanks for that, John. I think I'll play along too. I admit that I have had limited exposure to Buddy, Chuck and a few others mentioned above. It'll be a good listening study.

Woohoo!

EDIT: While I do enjoy The Kinks tremendously, I don't think I can honestly say I think they were better than the Beatles. They share similar traits, but execute them entirely different. The Kinks took risks and their sound changed over the years. The Beatles definitely played things safe, but for as popular as the Beatles were, I do think they took slight risks. Risks that todays pop acts would never get away with while maintaining such popularity.

I do not mean to suggest, by abandoning the Beatles for the Kinks and the Byrds, etc that the Kinks and/or the Byrds and/or etc are necessarily better than the Beatles.

What is going on is that up until now I have listened to the Beatles 14 times more than I have listened to the Kinks and 38 times more than I have listened to the Byrds and those numbers are way out of whack. The Beatles are certainly neither 14 times better than the Kinks nor 38 times better thank the Byrds. I am working to balance the scales by cutting off the Beatles for a while.

[I made up those numbers and did so for only two bands for illustrative purposes. I am not measuring anything here quantitatively.]

[pancakespancakes]

High school band is hardly what I'm referring to. But I think you know that.

I was not referring to anything you posted. (Except that hack line.)

[wmgaretjax]

Kinda Kinks is my favorite Kinks album... Is that bad? To be honest, I'm not as familiar with their work as I should be.

edit: oh and pancakes, i assumed the dinosaurs bit was a reference to what i said. heh...

[pancakespancakes]

I have never listened to The Byrds, and I really should, anyone suggest an album to download right now?

[Gribbz]

I have never listened to The Byrds, and I really should, anyone suggest an album to download right now?

I recommend "Sweetheart of the Rodeo."

[humanoid]

I have never listened to The Byrds, and I really should, anyone suggest an album to download right now?

you likely have and just don't know it yet, you'll probably recognize plenty

[mountmccabe]

Sweetheart of the Rodeo is more countrified, it is the only album with Gram Parsons in the band. It is their 6th album.

I might point one towards Younger than Yesterday or The Notorious Byrd Brothers (their 4th and 5th albums) which are more psychedelic folk.

[Down Rodeo]

Seriously, the fact that we've essentially gone from John Cage and Xenakis -> Philip Glass as the major theoretical thinkers in musical education is insane.

I could certainly agree with what you're saying here, and I'm barely familiar with either Cage or Xenakis (or Glass for that matter).

[SoulDischarge]

Something Else by The Kinks. Listen to it, love it...a damn near perfect album.

Yes. I really like bits of Face To Face and Arthur, Or The Decline And Fall Of The British Empire as well. VICTOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA