The Beatles
 

Fifty years ago this very evening......http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqrauzHPpwE

That video makes me nauseous! I guess the person that uploaded it had to make it wavy in order to prevent copyright infringement. The original video is crystal clear and steady.

People remember this night like they remember the July 1969 moon landing, or the JFK assassination. Everyone remembers where they were and who they watched this show with.

It's the night that changed America, the night that changed music, the night that changed the world.

Speaking of nausea, George Harrison was sick as a dog during this performance. He had the flu when they arrived in New York, and was ordered to stay in bed at the hotel. Their biggest moment of their career almost didn't happen. Ed Sullivan said that if Harrison didn't go on stage, Sullivan himself would put on a Beatle wig and stand in for him. Harrison being very ill is the reason he isn't in the photos of the Beatles sightseeing around New York before the Sullivan appearance. To George's credit, no one could tell that during this performance he was close to passing out.

http://auroramediagrp.wpengine.netdn...-1-300x250.jpg

The stones. Lol

It sure shows how trite pop music was even back then. But people actually played instruments.

Regarding the moon landing, as a child growing up around the space program at Cocoa Beach the televised landing/walk wasn't nearly as memorable as an in person witness of a night launch of just about any rocket from The Cape. "Hey they're launching another rocket tonight in a few minutes. Let's go out in the back yard and watch."

The Beatles were not trite back then. When you see their 1964-1966 performances, people think they're corny, a bit lightweight. But in 1963-1964, no one saw anything like this before.

There were no bands on the charts back then, and by that I mean ROCK bands. The Beatles were the first rock band, and became the blueprint for every band that followed in the 60's and beyond.

The Beach Boys were popular in America in 1963, but they had very little musical talent, just a great songwriter in Brian Wilson, and of course great harmonies. All the other singing groups of the day were lead singers with a backup band (Elvis, Sam Cooke, Tony Bennett, The Four Seasons, Bobby Darin, etc).

The Beatles were a group. All four could sing, three of them (John, Paul, George) were lead singers. With two guitar players, bass, drums, harmonies, exceptional song writing, long hair, thick accents, sharp humor, the world was waiting for something like this.

The thing that amazes me is I can remember an event that happened a half century ago. :) I was only eight years old so I wasn't too impressed at the time, but my older sister was pretty excited about watching the Ed Sullivan show that night.

Time really flies Stuart! I can remember all the media hype back in 1984 when they had a "It was 20 years ago today" (Sgt Pepper lyric) to celebrate The Beatles 1964 arrival. Geez, now we're celebrating the 50th anniversary. Man, do I feel old. http://www.smilieshq.com/smilies/sad0026.gif

The Beatles are great,but as John Lennon said,"before Elvis there was nothing".Elvis kicked the door down for everybody else to follow.

I agree, Elvis was the first, he broke down the barriers for rock and roll.

McCartney, Harrison, and especially Lennon, all idolized Elvis. But it was the music of Buddy Holly that swayed them the most. In fact, the name "Beetles" was in tribute to the Crickets, and Lennon changed the "e" to an "a" as a play on words (promoters back then hated the name Beatles, they thought it was corny and immature, and thought they should change it). Buddy Holly was the prototype for a rock and roll musical group, as he played guitar (rhythm and lead), wrote his own songs (which really blew the minds of Lennon and McCartney when they found this out), and Buddy had what would become the prototype for a rock group; two guitars, bass, and drums.

The Beatles brought out the rock group format that Buddy Holly started, with two guitars, bass, and drums. The difference was that The Beatles had 3 lead singers, plus a drummer who could sing when required.

What many people don't realize is that The Beatles were hard rock, VERY hard rock, compared to other acts of the day. The Beatles were the bad boys of rock and roll, until their manager decided their stage act needed to be cleaned up in order to make it big.

I don't dispute that it was time...long past time for a new beginning. But I disagree. Those lyrics and music are trite and sugar pop.

It doesn't take anything away from the period. For instance look at Sabbath and what they did, forging new ground. But listen to the riffs and music and from THIS PERSPECTIVE ONLY, it was simplistic. Simple is good. They're each also outstanding musicians and (like the Fab also were) an incredible band together.

I look at two Beatles. I don't play the first few albums, but Revolver is a masterpiece, Rubber Soul is good also. So the latter Beatles were another thing, and trite doesn't come to mind for me, but everyone's MPG varies....

Yeah, yeah, yeah...
 

Yeah yeah yeah, YEAH!

Yup, remember it well. :D

Same opinion here. I'm talking about the first songs. But look at Shake It Up Baby later in the video. I don't consider it trite, but simple and raw. One of the best vocal bridges in history. I hope to not be misunderstood.

I understand what you're saying, and I agree, there are a few of their songs that are trite. But no worse than "Hound Dog", or "Be-Bop-A-Lu-La", "Splish Splash", "Peggy Sue", or countless other songs that made it to the top. The difference was that Lennon and McCartney wrote their own stuff, and that was absolutely ground breaking at the time. There was no other rock group that wrote their own material, with the exception being Brian Wilson of The Beach Boys, and Buddy Holly.

Their early songs did have Lennon and McCartney teething a bit, but then they found their groove quickly with "Please Please Me" and "I Saw Her Standing There". They were more interested in song publishing at that time, thinking they would be the next Goffin-King or Rogers-Hammerstein. But things changed rapidly after 1963.

It was the best of times it was the worst of times.

It was was a musical convergence in a societal event horizon.

You had to be there to really understand it, but I guess ("It's like trying to tell a stranger about Rock & Roll.")


Interesting to hear it dismissed as trite fifty years later.



From "I want to hold your hand" to Within you without you in a few years.


We were talking-about the space between us all
And the people-who hide themselves behind a wall of illusion
Never glimpse the truth-then it's far too late-when they pass away.
We were talking-about the love we all could share-when we find it
To try our best to hold it there-with our love
With our love-we could save the world-if they only knew.
Try to realize it's all within yourself
No-one else can make you change
And to see you're really only very small,
And life flows ON within you and without you.
We were talking-about the love that's gone so cold and the people,
Who gain the world and lose their soul-
They don't know-they can't see-are you one of them?
When you've seen beyond yourself-then you may find, peace of mind,
Is waiting there-
And the time will come when you see
we're all one, and life flows on within you and without you

Ringo's TALENT rivals Keith Moon's ability to make clapped-out songs stand again for an interesting listen. Really.

Too bad Lennon dissed Jesus.

I cant stand them :gag:

Too bad about a lot of things about Lennon. I wonder what changes maturity would have made to him. I like to think that he wasn't finished evolving but we'll never know.

I was surprised to see Bob Dylan doing an America themed commercial for a french owned company on the Super Bowl.

EDIT: I always appreciated Ringo the most as a person. I didn't care a lot for John. I don't care a much about Paul now.

No one dismissed it. You just made that part up.

First live concert for me was Alice Cooper when I was about 8, which was my favorite artist at the time. So, no I wasn't 'there' in 1964, but I was a Beatles fan even as a kid. That's how much things changed in that amount of time.

Yeah, bad choice of word... I didn't mean specifically what you said, but what others I have heard say about the Beatles and their impact is interesting to me.

I think 'Trite' made me say that... I think of their earliest stuff more as pure and simple yet with evolving musical overtones.... I find all their stuff interesting in context...

Doo Wop was also trite, if you will, or simple, but beautiful in it's simplicity and in context.

Poppy stuff was what was sold then. What a world it was back then. One car families. One income families. Our family luxury was color TV and buying our home. We didn't have AC in our cars.

Lennon and McCartney were the perfect mix of complex and edgy vs. 'Trite' (still not liking that word) for the time.

Who could say anything bad about Ringo?

What was sold then (musically and entertainmently speaking) was being controlled by a generation that had evolved at a slower pace. (Not that that's a bad thing)

Dylan, The Beatles, etc. were artists who were taking the reins of control away from people who didn't understand their 'art' ... much like Buddy Holley would have, I believe.

Hollywood was selling Beach Blanket movies and totally ludicrous 'hippie' representations while Viet Nam and Woodstock were happening....

Totally agree.

Lennon hardly dissed Jesus.

Citroen owns Chrysler? :confused:

The Beatles signaled the end of the 1950s in America. It was a time to toss off the institutional conformity that was a part of American society, and the reverberations were felt around the world. Things wouldn't ever be the same.

my bad...add it to the list... I meant Italian or is the Netherlands.. (who's on first?)


I agree about the lennon/Jesus comment... he made an offhand statement of comparison which sounded to many like blasphemy but I think was just a poorly thought out choice of words... (kinda like what can happen with twitter and posting words in a thread.) Lennon definitely had a chip on his shoulder about religion, something that he knew nothing about.

Lennon was actually mocking the people and fans that bestowed Godlike status upon them. They couldn't go anywhere, do anything without being mobbed and reporters asking idiot questions.

Lennons first two albums had some great stuff on them. "God" is one of my personal favorites. And no I don't think he meant it literally.... edgey sarcasm, why I like him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jknynk5vny8

Yeah, that is an interesting , and really good in my opinion, song from a genius who had no understanding of religion and the spiritual nature of human existence (Pity). When speaking of it he reminds me of the story about four blind people describing an elephant from touching part of it's leg.

But it is a great song.

Well, that's pretty cool, I was a big Alice Cooper fan myself, up until his original band left and Alice went solo, then I lost interest. Alice Cooper was a huge Beatles fan too, and many of his songs are direct nicks of classic Beatles tunes.

Black Sabbath....Ozzy was (and still is) a huge Beatles fan.

Lennon was not religious, and he had a lot of personal problems. The image his fans conjure up is one of a peace loving saint, but John was not a very nice guy. Often moody and irritable, he was the bad kid around the neighborhood, the hooligan. His dad abandoned him early in life, and his mom (Julia) gave him away to his Aunt Mimi, who was a strict disciplinarian. As a teenager, Lennon was shocked to learn that his mom was living within a mile of his home. He managed to strike up a relationship with her once again, but tragically his mom was run over by an off duty police officer, all within earshot of John. A couple years later, his best friend and soul mate, Stuart Sutcliffe (the fifth member of the early incarnation of The Beatles), died of a brain injury. It seemed like everyone in John's life either died, or abandoned him. Lennon had some serious issues.

The Beatles were rough kids. Many outside observers don't understand this, because they think The Beatles were squeaky clean, and The Rolling Stones were the bad boys. That was all marketing hype. The Beatles were hard rock before there was hard rock. No one played rock and roll like they did, and their attitude and stage presence was unique. They got into fights, they drank, they swore, they smoked, they were looked down upon by everyone as being degenerates. Liverpool was the armpit of British society, and no one expected anything relevant to ever come out of that miserable city.

And they changed the world.

I was born in 1968 so I totally missed the entire Beatles musical career. By the time I really knew music, the Beatles were history. I knew of them as the Beatles but didn't know much.

What I know is this as I've gotten older and seen the music industry simply turn wacky, I've gained a new appreciation for the Beatles music. I've never been one to evaluate what a song means or what it stands for, I've always evaluated a song by whether I enjoy the beat. I have a few of their songs on my Ipod and my 8 year old son even likes a few.

Memories flowing tonight... Listened to hours and hours of Beatles music in several GTO's back then. My first Pontiac had an 8-track and I remember I had found "Rubber Soul" under the seat, was there when I bought the car...

To put it simply. The Beatles were to music what the Mustang was to the automobile industry. Transformational. Think of all the musical acts and cars that have come and gone in the last 50 years. But the Beatles and the Mustang are still making headlines.

Never will forget that Ed Sullivan show. The family was all watching, I dissed them being a Beach Boys, Jan & Dean fan, they will never last. My sister flipped out. Today Beatle albums are in my library.

Played all 6 sides of All Things Must Past while rebuilding a TH400 today. Some real good jams.

Bruce/ West/ Laing album has some great Bass climbs.
Blind Faith album has them typically great Baker's Drum progressions.

oh yea the Beatles; didn't play them. maybe while changing a flat tire.

I can't stand the Beatles....

THE BEATLES
 

THE BEATLES CANT STAND YOU IS THE IMPORTANT PART

Pretty good show on CBS tonight, The Beatles 50 yrs.

I enjoyed that 50yr anniversary show... didn't think I was going to.
(Could have done without sean penn stevie wonder and yoko)




Just curious 71Gp & 72Proj What one band would you guys put up as something that you can stand?

I "wonder" what happened to "little" stevie ?

Oh well....

I sat in front of the TV as a five year old when the Beatles on Sullivan first aired.
My six and eight year old sisters had been talked into watching by our 14 year old cousin, Becky.

I was aware that the Beatles were cult famous through out the rest of the sixties. Then, feeling nostalgic in 1973, I curiously sampled through Becky's old Beatle albums. She had the first three Capitol albums plus Hard Days Night and HELP! soundtrack albums. I had a retro beatlemania experience and became a huge fan.

I had gotten away from listening to their music on a regular basis in the last twenty years but being able to watch so many of their live concert performances on YouTube has rekindled my fascination.

Tonight we have a really big show for you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-CyZDfl8AQ

I caught the end of the Beatle's special on CBS last night. I still know all the words. My first album (age 5) was a VJ Records MONO of the Beatles at the London Paladium.

Mike,

I'm a former a cappella singer. You CAN NOT sing harmonies like the Beach Boys used WITHOUT talent.

I thought the special was just ok. Im really not a fan of OTHER people singing Beatle music so I sorta new what to expect. I like the music played as it was recorded and other artists seem to think they can change it up and make it better. Case in point during this show was some band that Ive never heard of singing Revolution. That was terrible. Not electric guitar solo at the beginning ....really?

I cant remember what song it was but it was later in the show and Joe Walsh really let loose on his guitar. That was cool. The highlight in my opinion was when Paul & Ringo did their things and then got together later. Ringo has always been my least fav Beatle and last night I though he did a great job of getting people out of their seats and dancing. He looked like he was having a really good time.

I did learn two new things about The Beatles. The name of the band was something that John thought was cool since it had the word Beat in it. And for the life of me I had no idea in the world that Let It Be was somewhat of a tribute to Pauls Mom. 'Mother Mary comes to me" - I didn't know his mothers name was Mary and that Paul was so close with her. This song sorta takes on a new meaning for me now. I know she died when she was young but that was the end as far as I was concerned.

I kept thinking to myself what it would have been like it John and or George could have been there. And I really appreciated Paul giving them mention later in the show. Not much had been said about them for some reason until this point. And Yoko and Sean? Those two are never seen without each other which to me is creepy. Especially since Sean has his hair and beard much like John wore his for a time. And every time the camera went to Sean, he looked bored. At one point he was taking pics of the stage with his phone. I dont know anything about him, but he seems like a weird guy to me.

It doesnt matter who wrote what songs or who sang more, in the end, it was the four of them that produced many masterpieces together. And thats why I love there music so much.

I was a bit put off by Paul and Ringo showing off and talking about themselves.... I don't think they need to do that. There is nothing they can say (about how good they were) that hasn't been said a million times before by experts, artists and people of renown the world over. I'm always interested in what they have to say, but not about themselves. Their experiences, opinions yes, but tooting their own horns is 'unseemly' Paul did say that... but in the wrong context I thought. It was great to hear them perform, even at an event honoring them, but I think tooting their own horn is uncalled for.

I always ranked them John, George, Paul and Ringo in order. Not to take anything away from Paul as his talent was the perfect 'polish' on the rough edges, but I liked the rough edges.

I turned down a ticket to see them at Shea Stadium in favor of a heavy date. I figured at the time that I'd catch them next time they are in town.

I also always thought that 'Boys' was a song better left in the past. It kind of creeps me out. Now THATS trite!

I can tell you it wouldn't be The Who, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd,The Beatles, etc etc.....

I like a lot of bands from the late 80's to the early 2000's. With a few exceptions.

The Beatles were very popular but that doesn't mean everyone has to like them, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Like 'em or not, the Beatles provided the soundtrack for at least one generation. I remember as a kid watching the Beatles cartoon every Saturday morning, and remember when they hit in '64 and '65. My older brother had "Meet the Beatles" and my parents soon wised up and bought every new release. The shocking thing is, how EVERYTHING changed in 1967 with virtually ALL pop music: the innocent sounds of the early '60's replaced with Psychedelic hard core rock and roll. 1965 might as well of been 1955 compared to 1967. Was there ever a decade where so much change happened so fast? I remember the '60's and early/mid '70's as a very colorful time. Not much change in the past 35+ years, though. 1980, 90, 2000 and now 2014 seem blended together and unspectacular, culturally speaking. The '60's were flat-out WILD!! Most of the British groups did extensive covers of old American R&B stuff, though, along with their own songs. If you listen to some really old stuff, you can see where the beginnings of rock and roll are : 'Down the Road Apiece' by the Will Bradley Trio in 1940 and "Shake Rattle and Roll" by Big Joe Turner in 1954 are a couple of examples....