Reply
  • Found this paragraph while reading a biography of The Beatles that seems to accurately describe America's feelings towards UK hip-hop today.

    "America up to now had regarded the Beatles as it regarded every British pop performer鈥揳n inferior substitute for a product that, having been invented in America, could only be manufactured and marketed by Americans"

    So will a UK rapper ever be able to successfully change America's perception towards British hip-hop the same way the Beatles were able to do for pop music?

  • Nov 25

    21 Savage doesn't count

  • i mean, it's possible but i doubt it. Closest thing would be the influence their drill beats had

  • Nov 25

    That鈥檚 the thing. When they sing, the Beatles hardly sound British. Ed Sheeran and Adele don鈥檛 sound British while singing. They鈥檙e going to have to mask it while rapping.

    I think the closest we might get is Drake. It鈥檚 not like Canadian hip-hop was looked at much differently. But he was able to successfully hide that Toronto accent early in his career, even in interviews.

  • Nov 25
    2 replies

    J Hus Will.

  • Nov 25
    3 replies

    Dave could change American perception to British hip hop... he just needs a feature from a major artist like Drake or Kendrick.. then Americans will start listening

  • Nov 25
    1 reply

    Rock started in the US, went to UK, then the Beatles broke back through to the US

    Drill started in the US, went to the UK, then the UK variant of drill broke back through via NY drill

  • Magenta 馃巹
    Nov 25
    Danny

    J Hus Will.

  • I feel like if a British hip hop artist wants to make it in the U.S they gotta live and make music here..

    That's what Drake did.. and he signed under a American label too

  • Nov 25
    3 replies
    Olsen

    Dave could change American perception to British hip hop... he just needs a feature from a major artist like Drake or Kendrick.. then Americans will start listening

    No he wont

    He鈥檚 ok but not even remotely comparable to an S tier American rapper

    He鈥檚 maybe as good as a big sean

  • Ronin

    Rock started in the US, went to UK, then the Beatles broke back through to the US

    Drill started in the US, went to the UK, then the UK variant of drill broke back through via NY drill

    The name was the same but uk drill wasn鈥檛 really a variation of Chicago drill. Different

    But end of the day all falls under hip hop which comes from the USA so guess point still stands

  • Nov 25

    No, but Pop Smoke did it for them

  • Nov 25
    4 replies

    The fact that so many books still name the Beatles as "the greatest or most significant or most influential" rock band ever only tells you how far rock music still is from becoming a serious art. The Beatles sold a lot of records not because they were the greatest musicians but simply because their music was easy to sell to the masses: it had no difficult content, it had no technical innovations, it had no creative depth. They wrote a bunch of catchy 3-minute ditties and they were photogenic. If somebody had not invented "Beatlemania" in 1963, you would not have wasted five minutes of your time reading these pages about such a trivial band.

  • Olsen

    Dave could change American perception to British hip hop... he just needs a feature from a major artist like Drake or Kendrick.. then Americans will start listening

    dave had a song with Drake in 2017. its not that easy. he has to actually appeal to a U.S Rap audience or at least one that's adjacent. i honestly feel like if he collaborated with Pop acts it would be easier to slide into an American fanbase

  • The beatles

  • Nov 25
    1 reply
    MyBallsAndMyWord

    The fact that so many books still name the Beatles as "the greatest or most significant or most influential" rock band ever only tells you how far rock music still is from becoming a serious art. The Beatles sold a lot of records not because they were the greatest musicians but simply because their music was easy to sell to the masses: it had no difficult content, it had no technical innovations, it had no creative depth. They wrote a bunch of catchy 3-minute ditties and they were photogenic. If somebody had not invented "Beatlemania" in 1963, you would not have wasted five minutes of your time reading these pages about such a trivial band.

    One of the best things about this book so far is the contract it paints off the Beatles before they were signed to a label. They used to be legitimate rockers that wore all black and would jump around the stage and drink and smoke and curse while performing and get into fights after shows. They idolized Chuck Berry and Little Richard.

    Then Brian Epstein got his hands on them and cleaned them up and turned them into a family friendly pop group. They didn鈥檛 seem to really like the new direction, even having some contempt for their teenage girl fanbase, but they were like 21 and only cared about making money. Completely sold out

  • Dave, j hus and simz

  • Maartins

    No he wont

    He鈥檚 ok but not even remotely comparable to an S tier American rapper

    He鈥檚 maybe as good as a big sean

    "Maybe as good as big sean"

    Ur bugging lol

  • Nov 25
    2 replies
    Maartins

    No he wont

    He鈥檚 ok but not even remotely comparable to an S tier American rapper

    He鈥檚 maybe as good as a big sean

    You have to be sniffing glue if you think Dave is on the same tier rapping wise as corny ass Big Sean

  • Nov 25
    1 reply

    There is way too much competition and distractions nowadays for this kind of run.

  • Nov 25
    1 reply
    thekid187

    There is way too much competition and distractions nowadays for this kind of run.

    They don鈥檛 have to be as big as the Beatles. Just someone that causes the average American listener to start paying attention to UK rap. The same way the Beatles paved the way for the Stones, Zepplin, and Pink Floyd

  • Nov 25
    1 reply
    MyBallsAndMyWord

    The fact that so many books still name the Beatles as "the greatest or most significant or most influential" rock band ever only tells you how far rock music still is from becoming a serious art. The Beatles sold a lot of records not because they were the greatest musicians but simply because their music was easy to sell to the masses: it had no difficult content, it had no technical innovations, it had no creative depth. They wrote a bunch of catchy 3-minute ditties and they were photogenic. If somebody had not invented "Beatlemania" in 1963, you would not have wasted five minutes of your time reading these pages about such a trivial band.

    This post is silly lmaoooo

  • Bow And Arrow

    You have to be sniffing glue if you think Dave is on the same tier rapping wise as corny ass Big Sean

    Maybe a tier above so maybe j cole??

    And even that doesn鈥檛 even feel fair for cole

  • CGodJr

    This post is silly lmaoooo

    I think it鈥檚 way more 鈥渟illy鈥 that for most of their career, the Beatles were four mediocre musicians who sang melodic three-minute tunes at a time when rock music was trying to push itself beyond that format, one originally confined by the technical limitations of the 78 rpm record. They were the quintessence of "mainstream" (assimilating the innovations proposed by rock music) within the format of the melodic song.

    Every one of their songs and every one of their albums followed much more striking songs and albums by others, but instead of simply imitating them, the Beatles adapted them to a bourgeois, conformist and orthodox dimension. The same process was applied to the philosophy of the time, from the protests on college campuses to Dylan's pacifism, psychedelic d****, or Eastern religion. Their vehicle was melody, a universal code of sorts, that declared their music innocuous. Naturally others performed the same operation, and many (from the Kinks to the Hollies, from the Beach Boys to the Mamas and Papas) produced melodies even more memorable, yet the Beatles arrived at the right moment and theirs would remain the trademark of the melodic song of the second half of the twentieth century.

    Beatlemania created a comical temporal distortion. Many Beatles fans were convinced that rock and roll was born around the early 1960s, that psychedelic rock and the hippies were a 1967 phenomenon, that student protests began in 1969, that peace marches erupted at the end of the 60s, and so on. Beatles fans believed that the Beatles were first in everything, while in reality they were last in almost everything. The case of the Beatles is a textbook example of how myths can distort history.

  • Nov 25
    1 reply

    unless british rappers change up their style I dont' see it happening. the style of rapping in the UK is weird and off putting for a lot of people kinda similar to how danny brown is an amazing rapper but a lot of people don't like his voice (for the record I love danny)

    but anyways I could see a Drake or Post Malone type of UK "rapper" become huge. type of person that kinda sings more than raps and makes poppy stuff

Write a reply...|