They're universally acclaimed as the greatest rock band of all time, and as musical geniuses. Yet sometimes when I'm slightly buzzed I'll spin a few CDs from other groups, particularly the Stones, alongside Beatles tracks. Whenever I do, the Beatles sound like a bunch of kids alongside such ballsier music.
As far as I can determine from long critical listening, Ringo's drums and McCartney's bass distinguished their sound. Albert Goldman once described it as having almost a marching band quality--disciplined and restrained even on something like the fadeout of "Strawberry Fields Forever".
As time goes on, you have to wonder if they were really that special, or if they were just another talented band.
2007-04-15 12:04:47 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Entertainment & Music ➔ Music
To me is that everyone of there albums was masterpieces. I mean everytime you listen to one of the albums all the way through you just love every single song on it and you dont want that expierience to ever end!
2007-04-15 12:12:14 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The special thing about the Beatles is that they managed to combine immense popularity with a capacity for innovation and a willingness to reach out into areas previously unknown in popular music. Also, the quality of songwriting and recording of their records is universally superb. You are quite right, however; they should not be placed on a pedestal over all other bands. There are many bands that were "special" and wrote tons of wonderful songs, bands like The Stones, in your example, or, my personal favorite, The Kinks. The Beatles were one of the greatest bands ever, but we should not believe the mythology that they were THE indisputable greatest band ever.
2007-04-15 19:14:20 · answer #2 · answered by Ape Ape Man 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, they were the first band to overlay their tracks. (Like when Ringo, for instance, would be drumming, but there woudl be cowbell in the song as well.)
And at the time, their hairstyles and clothes were considered shocking, along with their attitudes.
They were good looking, and wrote catchy songs which took the teenage girl population by storm. Over time, they've become sentimental to that generation, and a window into the past for this generation.
They're an amazing escape from the artists of today who only do/wear things/write about things to improve their images and make them more money.
John, Paul, George, and Ringo wrote 100% of their songs, which is still rare for a group to do.
In my oppinion, that "special thing" you're asking about, is John Lennon.
2007-04-15 19:13:12 · answer #3 · answered by bamismyidol22 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The stones sound like any other band unlike the Beatles.
Did the Stones ever write a song for the Beatles no
Did the Beatles ever write a song for the stones yes
2007-04-16 21:42:42 · answer #4 · answered by cspmo99 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I wonder that myself. I loved the Beatles first 4 or 5 albums, then they started getting horrible with all that sitar and drug induced music, I thought they stunk. The Stones were and are a much ballsier band and their old 60's stuff was so much bluesier and hardcore. I love it. Lennon & McCartney were more impressive as solo acts in my opinion.
2007-04-16 11:18:48 · answer #5 · answered by BoosGrammy 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It was the "sound" they produced. No other rock group before or after had the same sound. I think
the Monkeys tried but they didn't come close. It
was that 'sound' that was instantly recognized and
the fact that they were young and from a different
country that made them so popular. Frank Sinatra
had his scooby-be-do-be-do and Mel Torme had his velvet voice. Elvis had his sound that will live on forever.
2007-04-15 19:19:32 · answer #6 · answered by Precious Gem 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
they were special, they were different, they were so cute, all the girls loved them and some guys too, they represented the time.they were great
2007-04-15 19:13:50 · answer #7 · answered by greenfrogs 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋