Red Mosquito

stip wrote:I wonder how close I am in this thread to redeeming myself in KD's eyes.

You never needed any redeeming in my eyes, big guy. Some good came out of this thread in the end, like me listening to those Beatles Anthology albums.

Kevin Davis wrote:

stip wrote:I wonder how close I am in this thread to redeeming myself in KD's eyes.

You never needed any redeeming in my eyes, big guy. Some good came out of this thread in the end, like me listening to those Beatles Anthology albums.

And I illegally downloaded them!

stip wrote:

digster wrote:I'm still not even sure that applies. I understand what stip's saying about context influencing how people approach the Beatles, and could see context determining whether you give a band a shot...I don't see it turning The Beatles into someone's favorite band, or even a favored one.

Don't think of it as causal. Think of it as influencing. Extra weight on a scale.

If someone finds the Beatles package or mystique interesting(the look, how they talked, what they said, how they lived, how funny they were) that's a cool bonus. If that stuff is what puts the Beatles over the top for them it's seems perfectly reasonable. If someone feels Ringo isn't a particularly good singer but I finds him so lovable that they enjoy the songs he sings anyways that's valid to me. The knowledge of Ringo as a personality informs the experience. I suppose removing all context makes for a superior listening experience when it comes to judging music but also probably a much less enjoyable one. The mythology is a key component to not just the Beatles but all music. Would the British musicians from the 60s have been as interested in Robert Johnson if he didn't come along with the story that he sold his soul to the devil? The extra weight and influence is part of the fun.

Beatles melodies are second to none

Were there even melodies before the Beatles invented them?

What did people eat before the Beatles invented food?

I wonder how the spelling evolved from the original "Beatle" to the now-common (and much more widely used) "beetle".

For a very short while they were considering billing themselves as the Beatals (as in "beat all"). They liked The Crickets and beat music, so...

harmless wrote:but just as much of it is very "meh" and relies on the Beatles' already-established sound. To an extent it's arguable that, at some point, people began to buy The Beatles stuff because it sounded like The Beatles.

Until the lightning strike sets you free

did the beatles talk much about the music they didn't like, very much. Artists rarely do that. it's too bad, It would be revealing.

I bet they didn't like Pearl Jam

Paul McCartney took drugs once.

McParadigm wrote:

harmless wrote:but just as much of it is very "meh" and relies on the Beatles' already-established sound. To an extent it's arguable that, at some point, people began to buy The Beatles stuff because it sounded like The Beatles.

Until the lightning strike sets you free

Well, quite. The point applies to every band in the world. The fact that fans of The Beatles buy Beatles records is not really anything surprising.

That reminds me of the time I took a Beatles tour in Liverpool. The guide on the Magical Mystery bus went to school with Paul. Apparently Ringo only got the gig because the bloke who they originally wanted to play drums thought they were rubbish and told them to piss off or something suitably rude to Paul. They never mentioned that guys name in an interview ever but this guide remembers when it all happened.

Fuzzcharger wrote:That reminds me of the time I took a Beatles tour in Liverpool. The guide on the Magical Mystery bus went to school with Paul. Apparently Ringo only got the gig because the bloke who they originally wanted to play drums thought they were rubbish and told them to piss off or something suitably rude to Paul. They never mentioned that guys name in an interview ever but this guide remembers when it all happened.

Drummers don't know shit about music anyway, all they care about is beats.

Fuzzcharger wrote:That reminds me of the time I took a Beatles tour in Liverpool. The guide on the Magical Mystery bus went to school with Paul. Apparently Ringo only got the gig because the bloke who they originally wanted to play drums thought they were rubbish and told them to piss off or something suitably rude to Paul. They never mentioned that guys name in an interview ever but this guide remembers when it all happened.

They had a drummer, who was with them right up until they got signed. It was suggested to them that he was a weak link, so they burned him right before signing. All you need is love...

They stole Ringo because he was the drummer for one of their more popular rivals, and was popular on the Liverpool scene all by himself.

McParadigm wrote:

Fuzzcharger wrote:That reminds me of the time I took a Beatles tour in Liverpool. The guide on the Magical Mystery bus went to school with Paul. Apparently Ringo only got the gig because the bloke who they originally wanted to play drums thought they were rubbish and told them to piss off or something suitably rude to Paul. They never mentioned that guys name in an interview ever but this guide remembers when it all happened.

They had a drummer, who was with them right up until they got signed. It was suggested to them that he was a weak link, so they burned him right before signing. All you need is love...

They stole Ringo because he was the drummer for one of their more popular rivals, and was popular on the Liverpool scene all by himself.

Spot on, watched Anthology much? I watched the Directors cut twice, BC (before children)

I've watched it a few times. It's got some amazing footage, even if the Neil Aspinall protective sheen is all over the interview stuff.

Mostly, I've got a real thing for well-researched bios. Right now I'm reading this set:





1,300 pages on Elvis.

I am sure it will be interesting, i have read a few music autobiography, Clapton was real good and of course Scar Tissue

Have you read Peter Ames Carlin's Bruce?