|
|
Post by ymymeatemup on Sept 1, 2008 12:46:34 GMT -5
Drum rolls are one of the most basic techniques in drumming. Any qualified drummer should know it. Basic perhaps, but not particularly easy for a beginner. Rhythms and fills are easier. To be 'qualified' as a rock drummer, it isn't necessary to learn skills that don't apply to rock music. And if reading notation was not a required skill in "pop music" circa 1962, that doesn't say much for pop music does it? If the Beatles couldn't read musical notation, it kind of blows the whole "Beatles are musical geniuses" argument out of the water. It does absolutely nothing to that argument. Notation isn't music. You might as well argue that there couldn't have been any great orators prior to the invention of writing. |
|
|
|
Post by ymymeatemup on Sept 1, 2008 12:49:18 GMT -5
I don't see how communism affected the Beatles' music whatsoever. And aside from "Revolution 9," Yoko had a minimal effect on their music at best. Listen to Imagine once in awhile buddy. Imagine this song was a Beatles song. Then maybe you'd have a point. |
|
|
|
Post by imnotallenhoskins on Sept 1, 2008 15:33:32 GMT -5
Listen to Imagine once in awhile buddy. Imagine this song was a Beatles song. Then maybe you'd have a point. John Lennon was a Beatle. |
|
|
|
Post by ymymeatemup on Sept 1, 2008 15:34:27 GMT -5
Imagine this song was a Beatles song. Then maybe you'd have a point. John Lennon was a Beatle. His solo material was not Beatles music. |
|
|
|
Post by imnotallenhoskins on Sept 1, 2008 15:37:30 GMT -5
John Lennon was a Beatle. His solo material was not Beatles music. What about Piggies, Revolution #9, Back in the USSR, Angela (which glorified communist Angela Davis, “Bloody Sunday” (which called British police “Anglo pigs”), “Attica State” (“now’s the time for revolution”), Why Don't We Do it In the Road (which glorified sexual perversion) |
|
|
|
Post by ymymeatemup on Sept 1, 2008 15:56:16 GMT -5
I don't profess to know what any of the Beatles were thinking when they were writing their songs, other than the things they've said in interviews about them, but here's my impressions of the songs you listed:
"Piggies" contrasts the rich and the poor, particularly focusing on the greed of the rich. Harrison amassed great wealth and lived in a gigantic mansion. I'd guess that he wasn't promoting communism with this one, any more than Jesus did when he complained about rich people.
"Revolution 9" is a continuation of "Revolution 1," which was the slow version of "Revolution." "Revolution 9" doesn't actually say anything, and the song "Revolution" defuses the notion that Lennon was calling for revolution (at least that year anyway).
"Back In The USSR" is about as close to pro-communism as "Back In The USA" is to pro-capitalism. It's simply a description of a place, not an ideology.
"Angela," "Sunday Bloody Sunday" and "Attica State" are not Beatles songs.
"Why Don't We Do It In The Road" is clearly about having sex in the middle of a road. It's meant to be humorous. So are "Piggies" and "Back In The USSR." Humor is not glorification.
|
|
|
|
Post by ymymeatemup on Sept 1, 2008 16:43:23 GMT -5
Piggies obviously derides police, since pigs is a euphemism for police. There's nothing obvious about it whatsoever. Not as long as other conceivable explanations exist. and Revolution #9 is supposed to be "what could be regarded as the soundtrack to an actual revolution" according to AllMusic. Not just according to AllMusic, but according to John Lennon. Nevertheless, it was recorded as part of the original "Revolution," which says what it says about revolution. (And last I checked, there are other forms of revolution besides the communistic variety.) Back in the U.S.S.R. don't know how lucky you are. Hmmm.. seems pretty pro Soviet to me. Perhaps. But I think you're putting too much significance into what is basically an enigmatic line. McCartney's lyrical style favored the sound of the words over the meaning, so I doubt that it meant much to him. (Keep in mind, too, that the first instance of this line follows lyrics in which he describes being sick on the plane.) If he was trying to promote communism, then he didn't do it very effectively. |
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Sept 1, 2008 20:30:47 GMT -5
I don't see how communism affected the Beatles' music whatsoever. And aside from "Revolution 9," Yoko had a minimal effect on their music at best. Listen to Imagine once in awhile buddy. is John Lennon's solo recording, after The Beatles broke up. So it doesn't count. |
|
|
|
Post by zootmoney on Sept 1, 2008 21:08:28 GMT -5
John Lennon is the walrus! Eric Burdon was the Eggman. |
|
|
|
Post by zootmoney on Sept 3, 2008 0:19:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by antifrodis on Sept 6, 2008 19:03:56 GMT -5
Not that you asked me, but I prefer the mono mix. Other than the odd beginning to Sgt Peppers (Reprise), I think it sounds better overall. "When I'm 64" and "She's Leaving Home" both play at the proper speed, unlike the stereo version. You can actually hear Macca's yammering away during the end of "Reprise", and the vocals on "LSD" sound much cooler.
|
|
|
|
Post by ymymeatemup on Sept 6, 2008 19:09:51 GMT -5
Just as a general rule, I think Beatles recordings are better in mono - not only because they favored those mixes themselves (at least through '67 or '68), but because most stereo mixes from the sixties aren't so hot anyway. Stereo was still kind of a gimmick, so everything was given too much separation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Sept 6, 2008 19:33:46 GMT -5
Hmm. I've never heard any of the albums in mono before. I own the CDs, which of course are in stereo (no, I don't own any of the early stuff before Rubber Soul). I do own Abbey Road and The White Album on vinyl but they're both stereo.
I thought all their albums by 1966 onward were in stereo.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Sept 6, 2008 19:37:27 GMT -5
But anyway, I just want to say (again), that what is taking so darn long to release remastered/restored albums after Rubber Soul?  ? This is ridiculous!!! Virtually all other important albums from decades past have remastered CDs by now, but the Beatles? No. They may have released the ones from the first half of their career as a band, but the best ones have yet to be released with beautiful sound quality.  Ugh, play Come Together on "1" and then on the 1987 CD "Abbey Road" immediately after. Pathetic, huh? Just imagine every song on Revolver, AR, TWA, etc. sounding as good as the ones on "1." |
|
|
|
Post by zootmoney on Sept 6, 2008 19:59:12 GMT -5
The ones before Rubber Soul are pretty lame.
|
|
? This is ridiculous!!! Virtually all other important albums from decades past have remastered CDs by now, but the Beatles? No. They may have released the ones from the first half of their career as a band, but the best ones have yet to be released with beautiful sound quality.