Do the Beatles get too much credit..

+1

 

The opinions here are insane especially here at a prog site. Zappa only influenced a small fraction of musicians and songwriters the Beatles did. The Beatles basically influenced all the major early players of prog like Yes, King Crimson etc. Thats only one subgenre of music. You forget the Beatles were the reason the Byrds folk/rock formed and basically influenced every early Power-Pop bands.The Beatles were the main players in changing the perception that rock and roll was simple blues influenced music and that led to prog music and experimental music being accepted in the mainstream.

 

Also let me give you some history lessons years before Fripp or Brian Eno the Beatles were using or recorded live loops into a recording console like DEE JAYS do today for example on "Tomorrow Never Knows" and "I Am the Walrus" and that was Paul McCartney idea not George Martin. On top of that they used it in sound collage form with a highly closed miked bass and drum sound. I wonder if you hear these concepts in todays modern pop music.

 

Years before Brian Eno the Beatles were using loops to create ambient sounds for example on Revolver. You say the Beatles were not innovative which is insane but remember let me give you two bands who started were the Beatles left off Chicago for example "Got To Get You Into My Life" and ELO "Strawberry Fields  Forever".  The use of sitar and Indian instruments, feedback or mellotron the Beatles ideas again not George Martin. The Beatles had to tell George Martin that the Abbey Road studios had to improve on how they recorded the bass and drum sound.

 

As for the Beatles not getting enough credit well it's my opinion but on Revolver they managed to fuse Asian Music, Musique Concrete, the Avant Garde with huge success in the rock/pop music world that has not been matched well until their own Sgt. Pepper came along. Yeh other bands tried it out but most of the bands that tried to put these non-rock sources into their music never reached anywhere the success the Beatles achieved well at least sales wise.

 

You might think their music dismal which is sbubjectiive but the facts are their music is the most covered by other musicians not Zappa or Robert Fripp which is fact. Deal with it.

 

Awesome book for sure........and bread!

 

I will give these a try and get back to you.....

 

I did not realize they were so good!! Which album should I start with??

 

From what I have read, Abbey Road engineers are readily credited for their contributions to everything that was created in Abbey Road Studios (which wasn't called that then, it was called EMI Studios - it was renamed Abbey Road Studios after the release of... ... 'Abbey Road' - you can check that on the sleeve-notes of any album recorded there prior to that, like on 'Saucerful of Secrets' for example). Even the use of two 4-track tape decks to emulate an 8-track (as used on Sgt Pepper) is freely attributed to Ken Townsend, not The Beatles themselves:

ref: http://www.abbeyroad.com/visit/history-of-abbey-road/1960s/

 

Many of the studio engineers that worked with The Beatles became famous in their own right. Ken Townsend went on to become Chairman of EMI Studios Group, Alan Parsons and Norman Smith became successful recording artists in their own right, Chris Thomas went on to become a successful producer and session musician, Geoff Emerick also became a famous and successful producer that earned him a Grammy Lifetime Achievement award. Ken Scott went on to become famous as a producer (Bowie and Supertramp - so there is even a Beatles connection to Crime Of The Century ). Even Sir George Martin (oft called the 5th Beatle) while being moderately famous as a producer of classical music before, is more famous now for his work with the Beatles - it should be remembered that up until 1965 Martin was just an employee of EMI, (just like all the other now famous ex-studio engineers that worked with them). All these people are freely acknowledged and credited on the sleeve notes of Beatles albums, and that they have there own entries in Wikipedia is proof enough of their recognition within the recording industry and beyond.

 

..an off topic aside, but relevant since you brought up the subject:

ref: http://www.abbeyroad.com/visit/history-of-abbey-road/1970s/ 

 

(I'm a PF fanboy btw)

 

Barking Weasel wrote: That is definitely a primary reason for my argument, but as you elaborated further, my posts go further than that.  You may think that character and personality of said band mates does not matter in this debate, and that is your prerogative.  However, it does matter to me so that is why I mention that aspect, because I am trying to illustrate a broader point about why I dislike the Beatles on a personal level, and why I think the band is overrated.  Obviously, if the character comparisons were ALL that I were using to back up my argument, I would have a very weak argument indeed.  However, I do also explain my issues with the Beatles' music and cultural mystique, and with the overblown fawning that they receive.

That's all personal opinion, personal assumption and personal prejudice clouding a fact-based issue. I count that as equal to fanatics claiming The Beatles invented Rock'n'Roll - which is equally preposterous since it is evident that they did not. I see little point in arguing against fanatics who will say almost anything about their heroes. What I will discuss is experts and non-fanatics who make less exaggerated and more fact-based claims.

Barking Weasel wrote: I will elaborate further by giving a rebuttal to the documentary posted earlier on this thread, in that I think Goodall is misleading in his summation of the Beatles, and especially in his perception of avant-garde classical music of the 40's and 50's being a legitimate threat to the traditional framework of western classical music.  I think he draws ridiculous conclusions, and I would love to explain my reasoning at length right now, but unfortunately I have to go.  I look forward to continuing the debate later on, however.

I posted the Goodall documentary as a discussion point and for no other reason. I also disagree with some of what he says regarding Western Classical influence on the Beatles - it is evident for me that their influences came from more "working-class" roots, even down to the use of the Plagal Cadence in many of their songs that was unknown in Pop music at the time - it's very common in hymns. And as I have either mentioned here or elsewhere, the use of Indian raga scales is not necessarily of Indian origin as they are parallelled in Western (Church) Modes. Where I do agree with Mr Goodall is that The Beatles used these when no one else was and produced song structures and chord progressions that were not directly traceable to 50s Rock'n'Roll, Jazz or Blues (R&B) origins.