Reply
  • MmmHmm 💥
    Nov 25, 2021
    ·
    1 reply
    Freight

    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’t 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

    That barely even lasted. Cuz then they stopped touring. Cuz they actually wanted to make music. And not just have random girls screaming throughout songs even sad songs like Yesterday.

  • Nov 25, 2021
    ·
    1 reply
    MmmHmm

    That barely even lasted. Cuz then they stopped touring. Cuz they actually wanted to make music. And not just have random girls screaming throughout songs even sad songs like Yesterday.

    Yeah George especially seemed to hate it right from the beginning. Always annoyed that he couldn’t even hear himself play over all the girls screaming and literally pissing themselves

  • safe 🪩
    Nov 25, 2021
    ·
    1 reply
    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

    He literally already has a Drake feature lmao

  • Nov 25, 2021

    No. No one will.

  • Nov 25, 2021
    ·
    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.

    "No technical innovations, no creative depth" about the Beatles They were the first to use studio recording techniques that are still used today and Sergeant Pepper is often credited as the first concept album. I might be wrong about this, but they also may have been the first to record instruments in reverse on I'm Still Sleeping

  • MmmHmm 💥
    Nov 25, 2021
    ·
    1 reply
    Freight

    Yeah George especially seemed to hate it right from the beginning. Always annoyed that he couldn’t even hear himself play over all the girls screaming and literally pissing themselves

    Highkey hated the beatles cuz at my HS they would f***ing have Hey Jude on repeat during gym class.

    I never even tried to listen to the Beatles until i saw the movie Across the Movie.

    Then i was like

    Best comparison i can say is. they not really an album type of group. they are a hits group.

    just like Drake.

    the difference is. The Beatles actually tried to experiment,

    While Drake chooses to just cater to the masses.

  • Nov 25, 2021

    Savage Mode 2 out now!

  • Nov 25, 2021

    The closest to ever cross over is Skepta

  • Nov 25, 2021
    ·
    1 reply
    Chubby Gambino

    "No technical innovations, no creative depth" about the Beatles They were the first to use studio recording techniques that are still used today and Sergeant Pepper is often credited as the first concept album. I might be wrong about this, but they also may have been the first to record instruments in reverse on I'm Still Sleeping

    Lmao nah, The Beatles were the quintessence of instrumental mediocrity. George Harrison was a pathetic guitarist, compared with the London guitarists of those days (Townshend of the Who, Richards of the Rolling Stones, Davies of the Kinks, Clapton, Beck and Page of the Yardbirds, and many others who were less famous but more original). The Beatles had completely missed the revolution of rock music (founded on a prominent use of the guitar) and were still trapped in the stereotypes of the easy-listening orchestras. Paul McCartney was a singer from the 1950s, who could not have possibly sounded more conventional. As a bassist, he was not worth the last of the rhythm and blues bassists (even though within the world of Merseybeat his style was indeed revolutionary). Ringo Starr played drums the way any kid of that time played it in his garage (even though he may ultimately be the only one of the four who had a bit of technical competence). Overall, the technique of the "Fab Four" was the same as that of many other easy-listening groups: sub-standard.

  • Nov 25, 2021

    yes dbe are better than the beatles

  • Nov 25, 2021
    MmmHmm

    Highkey hated the beatles cuz at my HS they would f***ing have Hey Jude on repeat during gym class.

    I never even tried to listen to the Beatles until i saw the movie Across the Movie.

    Then i was like

    Best comparison i can say is. they not really an album type of group. they are a hits group.

    just like Drake.

    the difference is. The Beatles actually tried to experiment,

    While Drake chooses to just cater to the masses.

    Which is ironic because at the time they were the first artists to treat albums like a body of work and not just a cash grab taking advantage of a hot single—a way to get people to buy the same song twice and for more money. Their second album didn’t even include their hot singles at the time “She Loves You” and “I Want to Hold Your Hand”. Truthfully I think the album suffers from that but I respect what they were trying to do

  • Nov 25, 2021

    Beatles suck man so hope not

  • Nov 25, 2021
    ·
    1 reply

    probably eventually

    Dave is probably the 2nd biggest streaming artist in the UK now just behind Adele, ahead of Stormzy/Ed etc but his style of music will never make it in the US cause of the references

    it'll be a Drake type rapper if this does happen, someone that's insane at writing catchy pop songs as well as rapping

  • Nov 25, 2021
    safe

    He literally already has a Drake feature lmao

    That was a remix.. doesn't count imo

    I'm talking like what he did with Headie on Only You Freestyle

  • Nov 25, 2021
    mangotflu

    probably eventually

    Dave is probably the 2nd biggest streaming artist in the UK now just behind Adele, ahead of Stormzy/Ed etc but his style of music will never make it in the US cause of the references

    it'll be a Drake type rapper if this does happen, someone that's insane at writing catchy pop songs as well as rapping

    As an American that’s a big soccer fan I personally love hearing a random Wan-Bissaka reference

  • Nov 25, 2021
    ·
    1 reply
    MyBallsAndMyWord

    Lmao nah, The Beatles were the quintessence of instrumental mediocrity. George Harrison was a pathetic guitarist, compared with the London guitarists of those days (Townshend of the Who, Richards of the Rolling Stones, Davies of the Kinks, Clapton, Beck and Page of the Yardbirds, and many others who were less famous but more original). The Beatles had completely missed the revolution of rock music (founded on a prominent use of the guitar) and were still trapped in the stereotypes of the easy-listening orchestras. Paul McCartney was a singer from the 1950s, who could not have possibly sounded more conventional. As a bassist, he was not worth the last of the rhythm and blues bassists (even though within the world of Merseybeat his style was indeed revolutionary). Ringo Starr played drums the way any kid of that time played it in his garage (even though he may ultimately be the only one of the four who had a bit of technical competence). Overall, the technique of the "Fab Four" was the same as that of many other easy-listening groups: sub-standard.

    You may feel this way about their music but to say they weren't innovative or creative is just objectively CAP Yall really say just anything you want on this site

  • Nov 25, 2021
    ·
    3 replies
    Chubby Gambino

    You may feel this way about their music but to say they weren't innovative or creative is just objectively CAP Yall really say just anything you want on this site

    You are smoking crack lol. While the Velvet Underground, Frank Zappa, the Doors, Pink Floyd and many others were composing long and daring suites worthy of avantgarde music, thus elevating rock music to art, the Beatles continued to yield three-minute songs built around a chorus. Beatlemania and its myth notwithstanding, Beatles fans went crazy for twenty seconds of trumpet, while the Velvet Underground were composing suites of chaos twenty minutes long. Actually, between noise and a trumpet, between twenty seconds and twenty minutes, there was an artistic difference of several degrees of magnitude. They were, musically, sociologically, politically, artistically, and ideologically, on different planets.

  • Nov 25, 2021
    ·
    1 reply
    MyBallsAndMyWord

    You are smoking crack lol. While the Velvet Underground, Frank Zappa, the Doors, Pink Floyd and many others were composing long and daring suites worthy of avantgarde music, thus elevating rock music to art, the Beatles continued to yield three-minute songs built around a chorus. Beatlemania and its myth notwithstanding, Beatles fans went crazy for twenty seconds of trumpet, while the Velvet Underground were composing suites of chaos twenty minutes long. Actually, between noise and a trumpet, between twenty seconds and twenty minutes, there was an artistic difference of several degrees of magnitude. They were, musically, sociologically, politically, artistically, and ideologically, on different planets.

    What’s ur take on The Beach Boys

  • Nov 25, 2021

    Headie One brought drill to america

  • Nov 25, 2021

    Nope never

  • Nov 25, 2021
    Maartins

    No he wont

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

    He’s maybe as good as a big sean

    dave top 5 in the world

  • I hope not. Those accents are atrocious

  • Nov 25, 2021
    MyBallsAndMyWord

    You are smoking crack lol. While the Velvet Underground, Frank Zappa, the Doors, Pink Floyd and many others were composing long and daring suites worthy of avantgarde music, thus elevating rock music to art, the Beatles continued to yield three-minute songs built around a chorus. Beatlemania and its myth notwithstanding, Beatles fans went crazy for twenty seconds of trumpet, while the Velvet Underground were composing suites of chaos twenty minutes long. Actually, between noise and a trumpet, between twenty seconds and twenty minutes, there was an artistic difference of several degrees of magnitude. They were, musically, sociologically, politically, artistically, and ideologically, on different planets.

  • Nov 25, 2021
    ·
    1 reply
    MyBallsAndMyWord

    You are smoking crack lol. While the Velvet Underground, Frank Zappa, the Doors, Pink Floyd and many others were composing long and daring suites worthy of avantgarde music, thus elevating rock music to art, the Beatles continued to yield three-minute songs built around a chorus. Beatlemania and its myth notwithstanding, Beatles fans went crazy for twenty seconds of trumpet, while the Velvet Underground were composing suites of chaos twenty minutes long. Actually, between noise and a trumpet, between twenty seconds and twenty minutes, there was an artistic difference of several degrees of magnitude. They were, musically, sociologically, politically, artistically, and ideologically, on different planets.

    I provided 3 examples of how they were behind innovations that's still being used in music today and you just ignored it I'm not even talking about their actual music, just the ideas they had. It's objectively incorrect to say they had no technical innovations and no creative depth

    Who gaf about 20 minute songs when a song off DAMN, one of the biggest albums of the past few years and highest rated albums of all time, used a technique attributed to the Beatles

  • SHAQUILLE

    What’s ur take on The Beach Boys

    Im glad you asked, as the two bands can’t really be separated. In 1962 two phenomena exploded in America: the Beach Boys and the Four Seasons. Both truly sang, in vocal harmony derived from 1950s doo-wop, which they introduced to white audiences, with arrangements imitating the Crickets.

    That was the year the Beatles began the transition from covers to original, melodic, vocal harmonies. One of the first recordings of the Beach Boys had been a revision of one of Chuck Berry's songs, one of the first recordings of the Beatles had to be a revision of one of Chuck Berry's songs. Brian Wilson played the bass for the Beach Boys, Paul McCartney would play bass for the Beatles.

    Sgt. Pepper was the Beatles' answer to the sophistication of Pet Sounds, the masterpiece by their rivals, the Beach Boys, released a year and three months before. The Beatles had always been obsessed by the Beach Boys. They had copied their multi-part harmonies, their melodic style and their carefree attitude. Throughout their entire career, from 1963 to 1968, the Beatles actually followed the Beach Boys within a year or two, including the formation of Apple Records, which came almost exactly one year after the birth of Brother Records. Pet Sounds had caused an uproar because it delivered the simple melodies of surf music through the artistic sophistication of the studio. So, following the example of Pet Sounds, the Beatles recorded, from February to May 1967, Sgt. Pepper, disregarding two important factors: first that Pet Sounds had been arranged, mixed and produced by Brian Wilson and not by an external producer like George Martin, and second that, as always, they were late. They began assembling Sgt. Pepper a year after Pet Sounds had hit the charts, and after dozens of records had already been influenced by it.