[71GP76TA]

Originally Posted by hobi

THE BEATLES CANT STAND YOU IS THE IMPORTANT PART

Oh well....

[Lightfoot]

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.

[sts]

Tonight we have a really big show for you.

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

[hurryinhoosier62]

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.

[hurryinhoosier62]

Originally Posted by MikeNoun

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.

Mike,

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

[Old Blue 66]

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.

[TempestFugit]

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!

[72projectbird]

Originally Posted by TempestFugit

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

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.

[Stuart]

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

[geeteeohguy]

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....

[Old Blue 66]

Originally Posted by geeteeohguy

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....

When Joe Turner and Elvis came around in the 50's the world of music was revolutionary around every corner. And it would continue to be for another twenty - thirty years. The world was just beginning to finding its self. There wasn't a better way to express that than music. IMO, all the good music was written up until the late 70's early 80's. Since then, nothing has set the world on its feet to the likes of early rock and roll.

I've loved Elvis and the Beatles all my life. Always will.

[MikeNoun]

I saw the special, and disliked it. The only decent moment was Jeff Lynne and Dhani Harrison singing "Something", which I thought they sounded great on.

The CBS special was simply to get younger artists to play Beatles tunes to help boost sales of The Beatles current LP releases (yes, they repackaged them again).

Ringo really can't play drums anymore. He doesn't practice at all, and he focuses on his solo career as a singer, and as Beatle Ringo. That's ok with me. When he plays nowadays, he plays with a backup drummer. Ringo just plays the straight beat, while the other drummer does the actual drumming (fills, rolls, etc).

At one point, McCartney (who is a decent drummer in his own right), Lennon, and Harrison all filled in for Ringo when Starr walked out of the recording session for "Back In The USSR". Later, when asked if Ringo was the best drummer in the world, Lennon said, "He's not even the best drummer in The Beatles". Typical biting Lennon sarcasm, but they truly loved Ringo, and needed him.

Ringo was a great drummer in his own way. Not flashy, not fast, but memorable fills and steady playing.

My earlier comment about The Beach Boys harmonies was that they were VERY talented in their singling, and Brian Wilson's arrangements. Their lack of talent was in their ability to play their instruments, which is why they used studio musicians during their recordings.

[sdbob]

Remember reading Life mag about beatles history. I liked back then car songs,surf,blues,folk,and country.Then the 'invasion' changed all that.

[Old Blue 66]

Originally Posted by MikeNoun

I saw the special, and disliked it. The only decent moment was Jeff Lynne and Dhani Harrison singing "Something", which I thought they sounded great on.

The CBS special was simply to get younger artists to play Beatles tunes to help boost sales of The Beatles current LP releases (yes, they repackaged them again).

Ringo really can't play drums anymore. He doesn't practice at all, and he focuses on his solo career as a singer, and as Beatle Ringo. That's ok with me. When he plays nowadays, he plays with a backup drummer. Ringo just plays the straight beat, while the other drummer does the actual drumming (fills, rolls, etc).

At one point, McCartney (who is a decent drummer in his own right), Lennon, and Harrison all filled in for Ringo when Starr walked out of the recording session for "Back In The USSR". Later, when asked if Ringo was the best drummer in the world, Lennon said, "He's not even the best drummer in The Beatles". Typical biting Lennon sarcasm, but they truly loved Ringo, and needed him.

Ringo was a great drummer in his own way. Not flashy, not fast, but memorable fills and steady playing.

My earlier comment about The Beach Boys harmonies was that they were VERY talented in their singling, and Brian Wilson's arrangements. Their lack of talent was in their ability to play their instruments, which is why they used studio musicians during their recordings.

I love this video of Paul. It show the true fire in his gut for music. IMO.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwSNa--Iilo

[TempestFugit]

Originally Posted by MikeNoun

The CBS special was simply to get younger artists to play Beatles tunes to help boost sales of The Beatles current LP releases (yes, they repackaged them again).

Exactly! My Wife got sick of me complaining & saying that same thing while watching, so I shut up and listened with my 21st Century ears, and some of it was not bad. Still it was not the 50th Anniversary special that I was hoping for. Yoko was dancing all the way to the bank... I don't think she enjoyed them that much back then.

Originally Posted by MikeNoun

"He's not even the best drummer in The Beatles". Typical biting Lennon sarcasm, but they truly loved Ringo, and needed him.

Ringo was a great drummer in his own way. Not flashy, not fast, but memorable fills and steady playing

That's hilarious. I think his strength was in doing exactly what he was told, no more, no less, (and in being Ringo). He certainly was no Keith Moon.

[MikeNoun]

McCartney also drums on John's 1968 classic "Dear Prudence", and Paul had some wonderful fills and rolls at the end of that song. Again, this was at the time when Ringo had walked out, leaving them in a lurch. There has always been debate as to whether McCartney is truly the drummer at the end of "Dear Prudence", and I for do not believe that's him. The drumming is to professional, and I believe when Ringo came back to the group, he added the ending to the song. I know Paul's drumming, he's drummed on dozens and dozens of his solo albums, and I can always pick him out. He's basically a capable drummer, but not as steady and consistent as a professional drummer.

Not many know that McCartney was actually the drummer for The Quarrymen, which was Lennon's band before The Beatles. Paul would alternate between the acoustic guitar, piano, or drums, depending on which song they were playing.

The Beatles always had trouble securing a drummer in the early days (good rock drummers that could play other styles were rare back then). The Beatles were John, Paul, George, and John's best friend Stu Sutcliffe, a beginner bass player that wasn't very interested in music, but he was John's best friend.

The Beatles were signed to play in Hamburg, Germany for a length of time, and they needed a drummer. Out of desperation, and at the last minute before leaving for Hamburg, they hired Pete Best, the son of a woman who owned a club where they played gigs, known as The Casbah. Pete Best never fit in with the band, wasn't a very good drummer, and they eventually fired him and hired Ringo just as The Beatles were scheduled to record their first record, "Love Me Do".