THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

  • 14 Apr 2024, 17:10
  • Welcome, Guest
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Down

Author Topic: Elvis vs The Beatles  (Read 58727 times)

roulettescars

  • Guest
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #50 on: 13 Mar 2008, 19:39 »

I'm not so sure they were going for a nice guy image or anything, I think their earlier music sounds the way it does mostly just because thats what was new at the time, and as music evolved so did what they were able to accomplish. If you think about it in relation to the time they were in even "I wanna hold your hand" or "help" or anything like that was ground breaking.  It may strike you as generic bubble gum crap in this day and age, but at the time it was revolutionary.
Logged

David_Dovey

  • Nearly grown up
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,451
  • j'accuse!
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #51 on: 13 Mar 2008, 19:52 »

And they were hardly seen as nice boys in those early days either. If anything, despite the fact they became more political, more off-the-wall musically, more druggy, and much more hairy over the years, they still became more respectable than in those early days of fainting girls on the set of Ed Sullivan. For some people's money, the Beatles in 1964 signalled the end of civilisation as we knew it. Those "nice boys" in suits and neat haircuts were utterly scandalous.
Logged
It's a roasted cocoa bean, commonly found in vaginas.

Lines

  • Awakened
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,234
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #52 on: 13 Mar 2008, 20:07 »

Yes, but it wasn't as utterly scandalous as, say, the Rolling Stones, who went pretty much in the opposite direction. And a lot of their early music was considered much "nicer" than, sorry to say but it has to do with the time period, black artists were putting out. There were not many if at all, from what I remember, allusions to sex. No, they weren't as nice as the Beach Boys, Pat Boone, or even Chuck Berry, but they were pretty clean cut when they first started out which definitely helped them. Yes, their hair was a bit risqué, but not nearly as much as Elvis's dance moves or songs like Shake, Rattle, n' Roll.

Elvis, however, as he did come before them, made it easier for them to come to the US. Crossing the boundaries of what music is acceptable for what races and what is appropriate stage behavior did make it easier for the artists after him. What is probably the most important thing he ever did was covering "race" songs and doing hip moves on stage.
Logged
:grumpypuss: :grumpypuss: :grumpypuss:

Patrick

  • where did it cost?
  • Awakened
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,263
  • Used to be a cool kid
    • Troubador! bandcamp page
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #53 on: 14 Mar 2008, 04:47 »

Yeah guys, "I Wanna Hold Your Hand" is real rebellious. Sure times were different, but this isn't the fucking Renaissance we're talking about here. Love, love me do. OH GOD SOMEBODY FLIP A CAR AND LIGHT IT ON FIRE, YOU GUYS GO UNCAP THE FIRE HYDRANT
Logged
My long-dead band Troubador! licks your gentlemen's legumes on the cheap

roulettescars

  • Guest
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #54 on: 14 Mar 2008, 17:29 »

haha, well I'm not talking about a riot... I'm taking what was there at the time and stretching it a little bit further. All I was saying is that at the time it was something new. Nowdays it seems tired and old, but it wasn't at the time, thankfully as music caught up with them they kept trying to out run it.
Logged

Near Lurker

  • Duck attack survivor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,642
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #55 on: 14 Mar 2008, 21:10 »

Not really.  Honestly, their old songs sound essentially like all the dance hall music of the time.  It's only around the mid-sixties that they start to sound innovative.
Logged
After seventeen years, once again, sort of a lurker.  (he/him)

Thrillho

  • Global Moderator
  • Awakened
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13,130
  • Tall. Beets.
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #56 on: 15 Mar 2008, 13:22 »

Dalconnsuch is right, I really love Chuck Barry. Without him we wouldn't have Chuck Berry.

Yeah guys, "I Wanna Hold Your Hand" is real rebellious. Sure times were different, but this isn't the fucking Renaissance we're talking about here. Love, love me do. OH GOD SOMEBODY FLIP A CAR AND LIGHT IT ON FIRE, YOU GUYS GO UNCAP THE FIRE HYDRANT

Pat, you are talking out of your fucking arse here. These were times when ending 'She Loves You' on a sixth harmony made George Martin laugh out loud at the preposterousness on it, where Ringo wasn't on the b-side to 'Love Me Do' because his off-beat playing was perceived as being out of time.
Logged
In the end, the thing people will remember is kindness.

Patrick

  • where did it cost?
  • Awakened
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,263
  • Used to be a cool kid
    • Troubador! bandcamp page
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #57 on: 15 Mar 2008, 17:04 »

Perhaps because both of those statements are true, dude.

Doesn't mean they don't sound badass and it also doesn't mean I don't love both of those examples, but I still don't see anybody following their lead.
Logged
My long-dead band Troubador! licks your gentlemen's legumes on the cheap

KharBevNor

  • Awakened
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,456
  • broadly tolerated
    • http://mirkgard.blogspot.com/
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #58 on: 15 Mar 2008, 19:29 »

Why do you guys care most of these people are dead and the ones who are still alive are generally the less talented and charismatic.
Logged
[22:25] Dovey: i don't get sigquoted much
[22:26] Dovey: like, maybe, 4 or 5 times that i know of?
[22:26] Dovey: and at least one of those was a blatant ploy at getting sigquoted

http://panzerdivisio

Caspian

  • The Tickler
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 931
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #59 on: 16 Mar 2008, 05:12 »

Well, both of these bands annoy me intensely. However, it seem Elvis doesn't really get played on the radio much these days, and while people are still lining up to fellate the Beatles, Elvis has a fairly unassuming, not very annoying presence in popular culture. Therefore, Elvis is better, or at least, not as shit.
Logged

Thrillho

  • Global Moderator
  • Awakened
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13,130
  • Tall. Beets.
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #60 on: 16 Mar 2008, 05:40 »

Why do you guys care most of these people are dead and the ones who are still alive are generally the less talented and charismatic.

Flawless logic.
Logged
In the end, the thing people will remember is kindness.

KharBevNor

  • Awakened
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,456
  • broadly tolerated
    • http://mirkgard.blogspot.com/
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #61 on: 16 Mar 2008, 06:39 »

I'm glad you agree.
Logged
[22:25] Dovey: i don't get sigquoted much
[22:26] Dovey: like, maybe, 4 or 5 times that i know of?
[22:26] Dovey: and at least one of those was a blatant ploy at getting sigquoted

http://panzerdivisio

David_Dovey

  • Nearly grown up
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,451
  • j'accuse!
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #62 on: 16 Mar 2008, 07:46 »

Elvis has a fairly unassuming, not very annoying presence in popular culture.

Hahahahaha what
Logged
It's a roasted cocoa bean, commonly found in vaginas.

Thrillho

  • Global Moderator
  • Awakened
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13,130
  • Tall. Beets.
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #63 on: 16 Mar 2008, 07:55 »

Perhaps because both of those statements are true, dude.

Doesn't mean they don't sound badass and it also doesn't mean I don't love both of those examples, but I still don't see anybody following their lead.

I'd say 25% or more of popular music now ends on something other than a fade out or the root chord, and drumming is all over the place now rather than only ever locking into the bass guitar like it did back then. Everyone is following their lead.
Logged
In the end, the thing people will remember is kindness.

Misereatur

  • Duck attack survivor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,839
  • Quicksand my butt
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #64 on: 16 Mar 2008, 10:59 »

This thread is from 2005, Ben.

I don't think that guy is coming back any time soon.

Wow, I should really get some sleep.
Logged
FREE JAZZ ISN'T FREE!

I am a music republican.

Patrick

  • where did it cost?
  • Awakened
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,263
  • Used to be a cool kid
    • Troubador! bandcamp page
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #65 on: 16 Mar 2008, 15:53 »

I'd say 25% or more of popular music now ends on something other than a fade out or the root chord

HAHAHA WHAT. Man I would like to see one example of this, and then I might concede this point. Difficulty: It has to be somebody I've heard of.

drumming is all over the place now rather than only ever locking into the bass guitar like it did back then.

Fair enough.
Logged
My long-dead band Troubador! licks your gentlemen's legumes on the cheap

slowpoke

  • Guest
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #66 on: 16 Mar 2008, 17:01 »

I think yes the Beatles are better. But Elvis has done some fine things himself. For instance, influencing the Beatles:

"When we were kids growing up in Liverpool, all we ever wanted to be was Elvis Presley."
Paul McCartney

“Before Elvis, there was nothing.”
John Lennon
Logged

Beastmouth

  • Pneumatic ratchet pants
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 364
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #67 on: 19 Mar 2008, 00:21 »

Flying is a really great instrumental.  I don't really want it to be my favorite Beatles song cuz that'd be crazy, but I'm afraid it might be.  What should I do?  PS I didn't know which thread to post this in
Logged
Quote from: Lao_Tse
The song that can be sung is not the great Song.

David_Dovey

  • Nearly grown up
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,451
  • j'accuse!
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #68 on: 19 Mar 2008, 06:48 »

Post it in your blog!

If you don't have one, get a blog.

Or a Twitter. A Twitter would be perfect, really.
Logged
It's a roasted cocoa bean, commonly found in vaginas.

Thrillho

  • Global Moderator
  • Awakened
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13,130
  • Tall. Beets.
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #69 on: 19 Mar 2008, 10:15 »

I'd say 25% or more of popular music now ends on something other than a fade out or the root chord

HAHAHA WHAT. Man I would like to see one example of this, and then I might concede this point. Difficulty: It has to be somebody I've heard of.

Now, Pat, you know me - you know I'm now going to root through my whole collection and find as many songs as I possibly can. Do you want to take that chance? Off the top of my head, Fightstar come to mind, 'Palahnuik's Laughter' in particular. And keep in mind, I refer to popular music as in, not jazz or classical.
Logged
In the end, the thing people will remember is kindness.

Patrick

  • where did it cost?
  • Awakened
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,263
  • Used to be a cool kid
    • Troubador! bandcamp page
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #70 on: 19 Mar 2008, 16:47 »

Fightstar?! You know I'm going to have to fight them over my band name.

Also I have never heard of them at all ever.
Logged
My long-dead band Troubador! licks your gentlemen's legumes on the cheap

Guy Jackson

  • Guest
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #71 on: 20 Mar 2008, 01:48 »

First of all, I'm more of a Stones type of guy... and I actually like Elvis better than the Beatles as long it's pre-military service recordings. That stuff was great!
And to his defence, I'd have to say that he actually DID write a few songs of his own, like "All shook up" and a few others. The best thing about Elvis is that, while he mainly played other people's stuff, he made them his own. Give him a good song and he'll do things with it which weren't thought possible at the time (Blue Moon of Kentucky). But yes, it's sad that when you play Blue Suede Shoes by Carl Perkins, everyone thinks it's Elvis. He was THE guy to bring the new mix of black rhythm and blues and white country&western to the masses, and his early work is so much fun! The early Sun and RCA recordings are masterpieces.
If anyone is to blame for manufactured popmusic it's Colonel Parker who I hope is burning in Hell right now... I mean, he was the one with dollar signs in his eyes, the one who realised there was more money in C-movies than rock records. If he'd been alive still, I'd kill him myself should he ever return to his native country...

also, I genuinely loathe the fact that the Vegas-Camp-Elvis is the Elvis most people seem to know and like, while... well... his later work is crap. Don't get me started on suspicious minds... I really don't know why people like it so much and I'm even more irritated when people request I play it ('cause Rockabilly is my main style and I'm not opposed to covers).
But then, the Beatles wrote some horrifyingly terrible songs too... especially the McCartney stuff. I don't know why I'm not so keen on the beatles. It may be that they were just too nice, even in their revolutionary days. They did have a hilarious sense of humor though, and that's what I like about them.

bit of a long post for 2nd... but I'm very partial to Pre-beatles era rockers...
Logged

Thrillho

  • Global Moderator
  • Awakened
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13,130
  • Tall. Beets.
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #72 on: 20 Mar 2008, 10:44 »

I think the Beatles best stuff - or rather, my favourite stuff - is when they fucked about a bit and then decided it was shit. Like, 'It's All Too Much' is my favourite Harrison track, and I adore 'Hey Bulldog' because it makes no fucking sense at all and is off its nut.
Logged
In the end, the thing people will remember is kindness.

Patrick

  • where did it cost?
  • Awakened
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,263
  • Used to be a cool kid
    • Troubador! bandcamp page
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #73 on: 20 Mar 2008, 15:26 »

I think the Beatles best stuff - or rather, my favourite stuff - is when they fucked about a bit and then decided it was shit. Like, 'It's All Too Much' is my favourite Harrison track

Gaz you know I love you right
Logged
My long-dead band Troubador! licks your gentlemen's legumes on the cheap

most_wanted

  • Guest
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #74 on: 05 Jul 2008, 21:08 »

Elvis=Rebel

Beatles=Leaders of a Revolution



How did elvis become a rebel? He was probably far more humble than the Beatles, u dope. He was an anti-racist. Explain before u complain. U guys should never ever post negative comments to elvis without explaining urselves. U will be all losers.

Logged

squawk

  • Scrabble hacker
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,351
  • if it has a toothpick in it, it's free!
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #75 on: 05 Jul 2008, 22:04 »

first you register to bump a three-year old thread and do nothing else and then you leave for a few months but then come back to bump the same thread, which had been dead AGAIN, to poorly misconstrue a random comment and i guess you just really really like elvis and also warn about the risks of becoming a loser that come with not liking elvis, all without actually spelling out the word 'you'?

???
Logged
it's time to stop posting

De_El

  • Duck attack survivor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,723
  • uh oh
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #76 on: 05 Jul 2008, 22:11 »

He went to get coffee while he waited for replies when he commented the first time.

He just got back.

himynameisjulien

  • Guest
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #77 on: 05 Jul 2008, 22:39 »

The Beatles, unless you count Yellow Submarine. I mean, yeah, it sounds OK, but it's lyrically unimpressive, to say the least.
Aside from my one and only qualm in relation to The Beatles, I think they were all musical geniuses. Maybe not Ringo, but I guess that just stems from the Yellow Submarine thing. It's a pity John Lennon died, but at least I share my name with his son.
Also, Sgt. Pepper's > all, IMO, in pure songwriting.
« Last Edit: 05 Jul 2008, 22:45 by himynameisjulien »
Logged

Mars

  • Emoticontraindication
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 64
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #78 on: 06 Jul 2008, 02:03 »

I debated replying to the thread that wouldn't die but ultimately decided to, because I feel it necessary to say that one could strongly argue the case that Elvis was a victim of his success more than anything else.

I'm not really into the idea of getting into a 'who's better' pissing match because it's basically all taste, and I think it's a fairly tough call to say who was more influential. I will also agree that Elvis when he was young and not strung out and crazy was much better than bloated dead-on-the-toilet-with-a-needle-in-his-arm Elvis and it's a shame so many people remember the latter and not the former.

Mainly the first bit is what I wanted to say.
Logged

MadassAlex

  • Bling blang blong blung
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,050
  • "Tasteful"?
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #79 on: 06 Jul 2008, 02:27 »

Does anyone else find it extremely odd that the guy a few posts above me is posting with adequate spelling and grammar, except for anything to do with "you"?
Logged

MadassAlex

  • Bling blang blong blung
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,050
  • "Tasteful"?
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #80 on: 06 Jul 2008, 02:31 »

10 yea--

This is what I get for being optimistic.
Logged

Caspian

  • The Tickler
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 931
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #81 on: 06 Jul 2008, 02:59 »

I don't really like either of them- nothing against them personally but I don't find rock 'n' roll or most 60's music all that enjoyable- but Beatles fans are pretty annoying. Therefore, Elvis was a good deal better.
Logged

David_Dovey

  • Nearly grown up
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,451
  • j'accuse!
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #82 on: 06 Jul 2008, 07:07 »

Beatles fans are just more profligate. Have you ever actually met a total Elvis freak? The type who has at least one room in their house dedicated to him? (If not the entire house?)

I'm sure you're referring to the type of Beatles fan who absolutely insists the Beatles are a world-changing cultural force and the starting point for pretty much all popular music since the 1960's, and yeah I guess that's pretty annoying, but it also happens to be right.
Logged
It's a roasted cocoa bean, commonly found in vaginas.

Caspian

  • The Tickler
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 931
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #83 on: 06 Jul 2008, 07:43 »

I'm sure you're referring to the type of Beatles fan who absolutely insists the Beatles are a world-changing cultural force and the starting point for pretty much all popular music since the 1960's, and yeah I guess that's pretty annoying, but it also happens to be right.

Well, that's the other annoying thing. They just really aren't that good. I won't deny that their influence on nearly everything is huge, but their music, well. It's kinda shit.
Logged

David_Dovey

  • Nearly grown up
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,451
  • j'accuse!
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #84 on: 06 Jul 2008, 07:56 »

Most of the world disagrees!

(including most of your favourite bands, probably)
« Last Edit: 06 Jul 2008, 08:00 by David_Dovey »
Logged
It's a roasted cocoa bean, commonly found in vaginas.

Border Reiver

  • Born in a Nalgene bottle
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,189
  • Yes, I painted this.
    • The Pet Patch
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #85 on: 06 Jul 2008, 08:32 »

Of the two, I'm leaning towards the early music for both (I prefer blues).  Of the two I like early (pre-conscription) Elvis a bit better - His remake of Moon Calf Blues is awesome.

Of course I prefer Chuck Berry, Muddy Waters, Howling Wolf and John Lee Hooker to these lads, but there's nothing wrong with either.
Logged
"It's a futile gesture that my sense of right and wrong tells me I should make." Is It Cold Here, 19 Mar 2013, 02:12

Spluff

  • William Gibson's Babydaddy
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,410
  • it is time to party
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #86 on: 06 Jul 2008, 08:54 »

Most of the world disagrees!(including most of your favourite bands, probably)

Only if you like poppy bands, really.
Logged
[16:27] Ozy:  has joined the room
[16:27] Quietus: porn necklace!
[16:27] Quietus: Shove it up yer vag!
[16:27] Ozy: has left the room

Caspian

  • The Tickler
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 931
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #87 on: 06 Jul 2008, 09:00 »

Most of the world disagrees!

(including most of your favourite bands, probably)

The two bands that I like who have aired their views on this subject (that being slayer and metallica) have both aired their distaste on the beatles (and before they both turned shitty, too). I'm willing to bet that Nadja and The Angelic Process don't like 'em, either.

Also, I doubt "most of the world" disagrees with me. Most people over 75 and under 15 (hell, make that under 30) don't like the beatles, which is a large amount of the world's population. I imagine most africans, asians and arabs don't like a lot of western music in general, and this includes the beatles. Most of the world, I think, would be more inclined to agree with me.
Logged

David_Dovey

  • Nearly grown up
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,451
  • j'accuse!
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #88 on: 06 Jul 2008, 09:49 »

I remember you mentioning Motorhead and Black Sabbath as being among your favourite bands as well, no?

I've read interviews with Lemmy, Ozzy, and Iommi all saying that The Beatles was "where it all began" for them.

And I have no idea where you get the idea that people over 75 and under 30(!) don't like the Beatles. How old do you think I am? How old do you think most of the people on this forum are? My grandparents love the Beatles as well. Plus it's basically straight-out wrong to say that Asia, Africa and Arabs don't like Western Music. The main musical output of Japan is rock is and pop music, both Western inventions, and both highly influenced by The Beatles (with some more Japanocentric variations, certainly, but still highly recognisable as rock/pop). Even a lot of the popular music that Africa is producing is either influenced by blues, funk, rock or hip-hop. Sure, only one of those genres has really had any sort of major influence from The Beatles but nevertheless they are still Western forms. I can't honestly say I know much about what is popular in Middle Eastern countries.

Only if you like poppy bands, really.

Or metal, or hard rock, or progressive rock, or indie rock, or psychedelic, or folk, or electronic music, or [add your own!]

Not to mention the Beatles were the first band to place importance of albums over singles, they were the first band to film promo music clips and they pioneered many studio techniques now in common use today.

To summarise, the only thing more annoying than an obnoxious Beatles fan is someone who thinks they're being edgy by saying they think the Beatles are "average".
Logged
It's a roasted cocoa bean, commonly found in vaginas.

E. Spaceman

  • GET ON THE NIGHT TRAIN
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,630
  • The Sonics The Sonics The Sonics The Sonics
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #89 on: 06 Jul 2008, 10:40 »

Logged
Quote
[20:29] Quietus: Haha oh shit Morbid Anal Fog
[20:29] Quietus: I had forgotten about them

Caspian

  • The Tickler
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 931
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #90 on: 06 Jul 2008, 10:41 »

And I have no idea where you get the idea that people over 75 and under 30(!) don't like the Beatles.

Quote from: caspian
Most people over 75 and under 15 (hell, make that under 30) don't like the beatles



Quote
Plus it's basically straight-out wrong to say that Asia, Africa and Arabs don't like Western Music.

Well, there's plenty of them that don't; the younger generation might (well, most of them would, i guess) but what about the older? Fact is, less then half of the world likes the beatles, let alone thinks that they are the best band ever. Certainly, there's a lot of people our age who don't like them either.


Quote
To summarise, the only thing more annoying than an obnoxious Beatles fan is someone who thinks they're being edgy by saying they think the Beatles are "average".

I can understand where you're coming from with this- whole 'bash the sacred cow' thing is annoying, I admit that. Still, I don't know why it's so surprising that I don't like them; I was born 26 years after they split, and what sounded so edgy and revolutionary back then sounds bland and safe now. Saying "oh it was revolutionary at the time" means nothing to me- just because the first personal computer at the time was revolutionary, does that mean I should use that? No, I'd much rather use a new computer. Why should I listen to a 60's pop group* when I listen to stuff that's one hell of a lot more interesting, and, well, better?

*Bear in mind, too, that this doesn't just apply to the beatles. I think I like maybe 30 or so songs from the 60's; all of which are by Jimi Hendrix.



Logged

imapiratearg

  • Born in a Nalgene bottle
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,168
  • Oh thanks. They're not mine.
    • http://www.myspace.com/superpunkdout
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #91 on: 06 Jul 2008, 10:44 »

The Beatles are pretty sweet.
Logged

BlahBlah

  • Cthulhu f'tagn
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 511
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #92 on: 06 Jul 2008, 11:47 »

The Beatles are pretty sweet.

That.

Also, it's amazing how good they still sound now, the recording and production was just brilliant.
Logged

Lines

  • Awakened
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,234
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #93 on: 06 Jul 2008, 13:45 »

Man, why can't this thing just die.

I already gave my sentiments on Elvis and the Beatles, so I don't really feel like repeating myself. But honestly, you guys are arguing about 5 guys and three of them are dead. Zombie Elvis, John, and George probably just want to eat your brains and sometime in the future Paul and Ringo will too.
Logged
:grumpypuss: :grumpypuss: :grumpypuss:

nufan

  • Curry sauce
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 299
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #94 on: 06 Jul 2008, 15:16 »


I was born 26 years after they split, and what sounded so edgy and revolutionary back then sounds bland and safe now.

Tomorrow Never Knows. Like, seriously.
Logged

Windmills

  • Guest
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #95 on: 06 Jul 2008, 20:11 »

The answer is obviously The Beach Boys.
Logged

the Goat

  • Balloon animal serial killer
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 93
  • Murder is my hobby
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #96 on: 06 Jul 2008, 20:32 »

Is this a hypothetical situation where they both meet on a separate plane, each in the prime of their lives, or would it be Ringo, Paul, Zombie George and Zombie John vs. Elvis returned from the mothership?

In the former, the Beatles have the advantage of numbers. Even though Ringo and Paul would be pretty useless, I'm sure John could go pretty hog ass wild on E.

In the latter case, it would depend on what enhancements Elvis had received from our celestial brethren, whether it was the harnassing of his latent psychic abilities, or being outfitted with an ultra-powerful exoskeleton. Either way, even with two Zombies on their side, I think Elvis-El would make short work of them.
Logged
The Chicken won't stop.
The Chicken stops here.

Spluff

  • William Gibson's Babydaddy
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,410
  • it is time to party
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #97 on: 06 Jul 2008, 21:00 »

Or metal, or hard rock

No, not really. Sure, their inspiration's favorite artist's inspiration, might have been the Beatles somewhere way down the line. But very few hard rock or metal bands today would consider the work of the Beatles to be inspiring or interesting to them. The other four I'll give you, in that I don't know enough about the last 2, and indie rock is pretty much just a continuation of Beatles-esque pop rock, and psychedelic got alot of inspiration from that era.



Logged
[16:27] Ozy:  has joined the room
[16:27] Quietus: porn necklace!
[16:27] Quietus: Shove it up yer vag!
[16:27] Ozy: has left the room

MarkTBSc

  • Curry sauce
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 291
  • The pheasant has no agenda
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #98 on: 07 Jul 2008, 00:43 »

My fondness for The Beatles has to be filtered through the lens of them being my fellow countrymen and, thus, I'm strongly in favour of them being thought of as the greatest As to their music prowess and the various pros and cons of their styles... Don't ask me. i just know I like a lot more of their stuff than Mr. Presley's.

I suppose I should point out that some of their songs have become such a part of popular consciousness that they're on the same level as things like "Row row row your boat" (I'm talking about things like "when I'm 64", "A little help from my friends" and "Yellow Submarine" here).

All in all though, The Beatles were the greatest because they had Ringo.

RINGO ROCKS!
Logged
Unique Quarks - For when Antimatter just isn't destructive enough.

Thrillho

  • Global Moderator
  • Awakened
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13,130
  • Tall. Beets.
Re: Elvis vs The Beatles
« Reply #99 on: 07 Jul 2008, 05:58 »

*Bear in mind, too, that this doesn't just apply to the beatles. I think I like maybe 30 or so songs from the 60's; all of which are by Jimi Hendrix.

So where's the precise date at which you stop giving a shit about music? 1975? 1980? Are you going to stop listening to stuff from the 1990s in ten years' time?



Har.
Logged
In the end, the thing people will remember is kindness.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Up