Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all. Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Posted: December 08 2013 at 17:38
Dayvenkirq wrote:
Dean wrote:
Dayvenkirq wrote:
^ I don't disagree. I guess this is really a part of the generational gap.
No. It's nothing to do with the generation gap.
Well, regardless, this song is just not for me in any way whatsoever, though I do recognize its merit.
I couldn't give a flying fart whether the song is for you or not, that wasn't what you were talking about, you said:
Dayvenkirq wrote:
I've never understood the buzz about "Tomorrow Never Knows", nor ever will ... even after watching the PH video Dean posted.
So no, it is not "regardless", it is not "irrespective of, without regard to, without reference to, disregarding, unmindful of, heedless of, careless of/about, indifferent to, unconcerned about, without consideration of, negligent of, setting aside, discounting, ignoring, notwithstanding, no matter, despite, in spite of, for all; informalirregardless of...", it was not only germane to the comment you made, it addressed it directly.
Joined: May 25 2011
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 10970
Posted: December 08 2013 at 17:44
^ Wow, easy; it's not like I wanted to light up a tree in a forest.
I guess "Well, regardless, this song is just not for me in any way whatsoever, though I do recognize its merit" is something I should have said in the beginning so that this conversation wouldn't take this hot course.
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Posted: December 08 2013 at 18:28
Dayvenkirq wrote:
^ Wow, easy; it's not like I wanted to light up a tree in a forest.
Really? So you thought you could make a comment and there be no come-backs?
Dayvenkirq wrote:
I guess "Well, regardless, this song is just not for me in any way whatsoever, though I do recognize its merit" is something I should have said in the beginning so that this conversation wouldn't take this hot course.
This conversation is not taking a hot course. I am replying to your comments in a calm controlled manner. I found the phrase "Well, regardless" to be flippant and unnecessarily dismissive.
Either you now understand the "buzz" about TNK or you do not. Whether you like the song or not is immaterial.
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65298
Posted: December 08 2013 at 19:03
I was born the same year the song was recorded so I don't whether I was 'around for the song' or not (it certainly wasn't a song played on the airwaves much). I would say it was when I became a musician that I began to appreciate it.
Joined: May 25 2011
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 10970
Posted: December 08 2013 at 19:09
Dean wrote:
Dayvenkirq wrote:
^ Wow, easy; it's not like I wanted to light up a tree in a forest.
Really? So you thought you could make a comment and there be no come-backs?
Dayvenkirq wrote:
I guess "Well, regardless, this song is just not for me in any way whatsoever, though I do recognize its merit" is something I should have said in the beginning so that this conversation wouldn't take this hot course.
This conversation is not taking a hot course. I am replying to your comments in a calm controlled manner. I found the phrase "Well, regardless" to be flippant and unnecessarily dismissive.
Either you now understand the "buzz" about TNK or you do not. Whether you like the song or not is immaterial.
OK, help me out here: what kind of a comeback is "I don't give a flying fart" ? How is that a sign of calm or controlled behavior? And I've no idea what's so flippant or unnecessarily dismissive about "regardless", when I've only used it to wrap things up fast and drive a point home.
Maybe I should rephrase it: I don't dig the song (which is just my taste), but thanks to Tim I got a little idea of what it's all about. Better?
Joined: September 03 2005
Location: Olympus Mons
Status: Offline
Points: 15926
Posted: December 09 2013 at 07:30
Perhaps someone is mixing Revolver TNK with Phil Collins' TNK - the Beatles version is insane, PhilCo's just doesn't have the 'majik' (nice of him to select the song to cover, though).
I think this may have something to do with the styles on offer on both of these albums. While Vaudevillean pop is highly regarded in many Indie and underground groups alike, the one you encounter on Pepper sounds rather dated today imho. You certainly don't hear anything with that same vibe on the radio. Revolver on the other hand is one of the keystones that the whole current rock revival fad relies on. Seems simple really. Most people are into the rock part of The Beatles nowadays.
“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65298
Posted: December 10 2013 at 18:28
^ Good observation, though they were always a rock band and never veered from that. In fact they started more or less as a rockabilly band; they wanted to sound American. Of course eventually everyone wanted to sound like the Beatles, so you started getting this hodge-podge of American-based British inspired rock 'n roll, and that unholy blend is still happening today-- bands such as Vampire Weekend emulating the Kinks, and so on and so forth. It is an endless and fascinating musical relationship that keeps reinventing itself.
Joined: January 15 2008
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 160
Posted: December 12 2013 at 11:17
I think The Crimson King's post comes closest to hitting the nail on the head. I qualify this statement with "closest" because musical taste is ultimately subjective, and there is no definitive answer. For my money Sgt. Pepper stresses the psychedelic a little TOO much, and may not appeal to current listeners. Although it seems disingenuous to question Lennon and McCartney's songwriting, I believe Revolver is better written and demonstrates more variety than Sgt Pepper's.
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65298
Posted: December 13 2013 at 22:24
^^ 'Act Naturally' they did more as a spoof (which they did a lot of, the White Album, et al.). It was an older tune written by someone else, as I recall. When I talk of "rockabilly" I mean their early days as the Beatles/Silver Beatles. If you'd gone to see them play you might've wondered why these English kids think they're from Memphis.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.133 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Why has Revolver taken over Sgt. Peppers?
Topic Options
Dean wrote:
