Recent comments in /f/Music

Unable_Opinion_8646 t1_jaegcjh wrote

I used to own a bootleg years ago in the 70s where not only where there is a version of this song on it...it had FHITA. A song where Hendrix played guitar and Morrison scream the only words to the song...FUCK HIM IN THE ASS. Also on the double album it had the full Miami episode on it where Morrison exposes his penis. It was a horrible album, poor quality at that but certainly a collectors item. My brother owns it now as I gifted it to him.

2

TheVinylBird t1_jaegaas wrote

Well, everybody definitely lifted stuff from The Beatles. Like...everybody did copy The Beatles...from Hendrix, to the Rolling Stones, to Pink Floyd, to Bob Dylan.

The only other band that had a similar effect was The Band with their album Music from Big Pink. After that Clapton and George Harrison and loads of others were trying to make albums that sounded like that.

1

cymbalmonke t1_jaefnhn wrote

They released quite a lot of music. And did HELLA drugs.

I'd like to see you produce nothing but bangers with the resources they had available nonetheless too. Music is subjective, to some people "Good morning, good morning" is their jaaaam

Just because it's not yours doesn't really mean it's objectively bad or not good

3

Because_I_Cannot t1_jaeecl4 wrote

WTF are you even talking about at this point? Man, when your high wears off I hope you just delete this nonsense.

First of all, you HAVE to compare bands against their time period. And when you do, The Beatles absolutely come out on top, even 20 years after their last record. Take a look at this. It's a Wikipedia page, but it links to a book COMPILED BY CRITICS. In 1978, The Beatles held 4 of the top 10 spots on "Top 200 Albums" By 1987, they still had 3 of those spots.

3

TheVinylBird t1_jaee6aa wrote

they broke up in 69..they decided to stop being a touring boy band in 64. Started doing studio records in 65 with Rubber Soul and Revolver and hit their peak in 67 with Sgt Peppers.

Because their contract was structured like Elvis's with a movie/album deal..The record company didn't want to put any money into their productions, they just wanted something cheap and fast to churn out. So everything they did was through being creative. Acts like Hendrix had access to a lot better equipment. In fact Abbey Road, their last album, was the first album they recorded with an 8 track recorder instead of 4 track and was their first album released in stereo.

2

ls743 t1_jaedtj2 wrote

I don’t get the impression that’s what OP is trying to do, but okay. I also wasn’t trying to say the band belonged to OP, just that the front man joined after OP was already a member of said band. I assumed the “captain” you were referring to was the front man, implying it was his band that he started. Sorry if I misunderstood

1

Cleppert t1_jaeds3x wrote

I would agree to an extent just because not everything they wrote was good... I'd say a good 30% of their music isn't well received just from being to experimental or just straight up boring. But when you look at each of them idividually, even though lennon was a fucking shit human being and he soils a lot of the beatles for me just 'cause of that, they were all fucking incredible musicians, paul and ringo still are. They set a standard, especially for their time.

Lennon has such a powerful soulful voice and being able to be well rounded enough to play multiple instruments and convey the sound you're going for made writing more natural. when you combine Lennon, sir Paul and his even more amazing ability with music and multiple instruments, Good ol' george and HIS singing and guitar playing and Ringo's singing and very solid and pocket style drumming it's hard to deny the huge amount of talent they all had and the extremely popular music they made and the impact it STILL HAS.

3