Go Back   UG Community @ Ultimate-Guitar.Com > Music > Bands & Artists > Classic Rock
User Name  
Password
Search:

Reply
Old 01-06-2013, 08:28 AM   #1
ioAK47oi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Why I Don't Like The Beatles. Let's Argue!

The Beatles are one of those bands idolised by people on global scale. They had more number one hits than visits to the barbers in 7 years. They were initially loved by teen girls and boys, then slowly changed to inspire drug-taking young men over their years. At present, multiple younger generations of people -mainly men- adore the Beatles and all the band's indulges. Sadly, I wasn't alive to experience the Beatles, and wasn't brought up listening to their music. This makes my opinion completely unbiased; I haven't been conditioned to like the Beatles or dislike them. Here are the reasons I don't like them:


1. Lack of musicianship and/or theory

Technically, the Beatles don't seem skilled on their instruments to me. especially the basic strumming at the beginning of A Day In The Life. However, you don't have to be a good guitarist to write a good song. I've even heard Beatles fans say the drummer can't drum. also, I personally think Lennon and McCartney sound high pitched and feminine when they sing at times.

Theoretically, when i listen to the guitar played in yesterday it sounds like a singer/guitarist without any knowledge of theory. He could just be coming up with guitar chords linked with fret patterns to the next chord. Then all you have to do is keep singing random notes 'til the melody fits. I think amateur guitarists were "innovating" this technique long before the Beatles. I like Yesterday, the lyrics are sound, and the melody is nice. I dislike the method behind creating that melody, and how people idolise them FOR that method. In their later songs, their theory and song writing doesn't seem to improve. Only lyrical content improves. - Apart from that Lennon song which repeats "mommy and daddy come home" until he's squealing like a pig.


2. Their impact on recording

I hear a lot about how they revolutionised the recording industry, but I'm not aware that they actually invented the technology used in their recordings. Surely the inventors should be equally credited? for one, Les Paul was much more influential in his time with multitrack recording. Most Beatles fans can tell you all about how the Beatles revolutionised recording but have no idea Les Paul influenced most of the technology they used. George Martin is worthy of praise, however.

People love to say the Beatles changed music forever, but the same can be said with any widely distributed music. If Beethoven had never existed or his music created, the Beatles would probably have a completely different sound. I'm sorry to say Take That will also influence music forever.


3. Yes, they were successful

I'm not denying them of the right to fame or that they shouldn't be liked. I'm denying the right of people born after the Beatles' reign who've been conditioned by society to think the Beatles are good and no-one should think otherwise. If this statement offends you, It's likely to be true. You can talk about the influence they had on society, how they changed the world, but they never directly influenced you and you never saw that change. All of my grandparents saw that change and were slightly influenced. They all say the Beatles were 'good'. It's strange to see them influence young men more from the dead than they did alive.



There are my reasons for disliking the Beatles and their 'after-breakup' fans. Obviously I'm no Beatles fan or historian, so all of this is my opinion. I actually WANT to be converted to liking the Beatles, so I'm not looked down on by other musicians. so discredit my points please!

- And let's keep our arguments mature
ioAK47oi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 08:18 AM   #2
Peaceful Rocker
Banned
 
Peaceful Rocker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
The Beatles don't like you either.


Your reasons for not liking the band are idiotic
Peaceful Rocker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 12:41 PM   #3
beer bear
UG's Hermit
 
beer bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Lahti, Finland
Guess I'll take a swing at it:



Quote:
Originally Posted by ioAK47oi

1. Lack of musicianship and/or theory

Technically, the Beatles don't seem skilled on their instruments to me. especially the basic strumming at the beginning of A Day In The Life. However, you don't have to be a good guitarist to write a good song. I've even heard Beatles fans say the drummer can't drum. also, I personally think Lennon and McCartney sound high pitched and feminine when they sing at times.


I bolded the right answer. You don't have to be a good guitarist to write a good song. You have to be a good songwriter to write a good song. Now I agree that they weren't virtuosos on their respected instruments. They could damn sure write a song though. I wouldn't describe either McCartney's or Lennon's voice as feminine. McCartney's can be a bit light a feathery at times, but the contrast of Lennon's and McCartney's vocals is quite nice.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ioAK47oi
Theoretically, when i listen to the guitar played in yesterday it sounds like a singer/guitarist without any knowledge of theory. He could just be coming up with guitar chords linked with fret patterns to the next chord. Then all you have to do is keep singing random notes 'til the melody fits. I think amateur guitarists were "innovating" this technique long before the Beatles. I like Yesterday, the lyrics are sound, and the melody is nice. I dislike the method behind creating that melody, and how people idolise them FOR that method.


Amateur guitarists weren't writing memorable songs now were they? And since when is the being unknowledgeable in music theory a reason to dislike music? The list of people who no either no theory or very little is massive. Hendrix, Page, Clapton? None of them no music theory that it would play a significant role in their songs. Do you think Hendrix knew that he was playing a E7♯9? The fact that you may not like the aforementioned is of no importance.
I believe that theory is descriptive and not conductive. Theory is a way of telling why this sounds the way it does. Be it good or bad. In the end knowing theory or not isn't important. What it comes down to is the song that you write.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ioAK47oi
2. Their impact on recording

I hear a lot about how they revolutionised the recording industry, but I'm not aware that they actually invented the technology used in their recordings. Surely the inventors should be equally credited? for one, Les Paul was much more influential in his time with multitrack recording. Most Beatles fans can tell you all about how the Beatles revolutionised recording but have no idea Les Paul influenced most of the technology they used. George Martin is worthy of praise, however.


Les Paul and others indeed did invent a lot of things the Beatles used in studio recordings. The Beatles however brought the techniques into the mainstream. I'm sure The Beatles were very grateful of Les Paul and his inventions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ioAK47oi
People love to say the Beatles changed music forever, but the same can be said with any widely distributed music. If Beethoven had never existed or his music created, the Beatles would probably have a completely different sound. I'm sorry to say Take That will also influence music forever.


They say that, because the Beatles did change music forever. Most musicians who came after the fab four will cite them as an influence.




Quote:
Originally Posted by ioAK47oi
3. Yes, they were successful

I'm not denying them of the right to fame or that they shouldn't be liked. I'm denying the right of people born after the Beatles' reign who've been conditioned by society to think the Beatles are good and no-one should think otherwise. If this statement offends you, It's likely to be true. You can talk about the influence they had on society, how they changed the world, but they never directly influenced you and you never saw that change. All of my grandparents saw that change and were slightly influenced. They all say the Beatles were 'good'. It's strange to see them influence young men more from the dead than they did alive.


I'm quite sure that they've influenced me. I took a liking to them at a young age and they are one of the reasons I myself picked up a guitar. They are also the reasons why I like a lot of Motown. Lennon had a lot of old Motown music amongst his record collection. I started looking up artists from that period as a response to that. I found Booker T. and the MGs.


If you don't like the Beatles thats fine. If you like them thats fine too. I personally find your reasons for disliking them slightly bizarre. But an opinion is an opinion and at the end of it all both of us are entitled to our own.
beer bear is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 12:13 PM   #4
Barricade_28
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
1. Who cares about theory and musicianship? The songs are good. There's a reason why people like The Beatles over Steve Vai and Joe Satriani.

2. Recording techniques are different than recording technology.

3. Nobody is forcing you to like the Beatles. I know a bunch of people who don't like them.
Barricade_28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 08:40 PM   #5
TheUltimateSin
Guitar Padawan
 
TheUltimateSin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Minnesota, US
Let's not
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Resiliance
I'm more of a hermafrodite guy.


Quote:
Originally Posted by apocalypse13
Lolz

/ultimatesin = genius]

[/really super obvious]


Original creator of the Resi Signal(s)
Only old shred forum regs get it

Some MP3's from me.

My Videos

Click for awesomeness
TheUltimateSin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 10:38 PM   #6
ChemicalFire
King of Bacon Pancakes
 
ChemicalFire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The United Kingdom
OP is full of subjectivity and just obvious lack of research.

Even if you don't like the music the impact they had on how bands functioned was huge.
__________________
All I want is for everyone to go to hell...
...It's the last place I was seen before I lost myself



Quote:
Originally Posted by DisarmGoliath
You can be the deputy llamma of the recordings forum!
ChemicalFire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 02:31 PM   #7
helltothee
Idiot
 
helltothee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: west mids, england
They had such a massive influence on pop music that you can sometimes still hear today. For that alone, they deserve something from OP I think

Something is a really well-written piece of music as well.
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by FryingNemo
I saw Satan one day
He looked kinda gay
The bible hates gays
So Satan I shall slay
Amen.
helltothee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 04:50 PM   #8
ioAK47oi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks for the comments.. I was hoping for one of those Beatles nuts to read this and help me out but sadly they didn't.

Quote:
Hendrix, Page, Clapton? None of them no music theory that it would play a significant role in their songs


at least they're playing was catchy, original and required a certain skill. Writing a good song is being a good 'song writer'. Writing good music is being a 'musician'. The Beatles write good songs, I said that. Their lyrics sound like they've had a lot of thought. But their later music is lacking in groove, rhythm and memorability. Are there any songs other than the well-known songs like Hey Jude, Yesterday and Eleanor Rigby that are good as both songs AND music?

Quote:
I'm quite sure that they've influenced me.

I'm quite sure too, but if you didn't live to witness or experience the Beatles during the hype, they couldn't have directly influenced you. If someone didn't experience them during the 60's, were they not influenced indirectly?

Last edited by ioAK47oi : 01-09-2013 at 05:01 PM.
ioAK47oi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 12:49 AM   #9
BrainDamage
Knirps for moisture
 
BrainDamage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by ioAK47oi
1. Lack of musicianship and/or theory
Seriously? Their lack of knowledge of theory is a contributing factor to why you don't like The Beatles? Musicianship I can understand, but I'd be more inclined to accept that as a reason if we were talking about a band that focuses on that aspect in their music. The Beatles were about the songs, not the musicians. Whether or not they knew their music theory or whether or not they were good musicians they wrote good songs in my opinion. Really, really good songs. In the case of The Beatles that's all that matters, at least in my mind.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ioAK47oi
2. Their impact on recording
I don't think you'll find anyone willing to discredit Les Paul's impact on recording, but that doesn't mean The Beatles didn't have a major impact either. Either way, why does their impact on recording affect whether or not you like their music?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ioAK47oi
3. Yes, they were successful

You can talk about the influence they had on society, how they changed the world, but they never directly influenced you and you never saw that change.
Now this is ridiculous. Why would someone have to have "experienced them during the 60s" for the band to have a direct influence on that person? On a more general scale, are you telling me that if I wasn't around to witness a band when they were big I'm not allowed to say that they directly influenced me?

If you don't like The Beatles that's fine, but your reasons are not very good ones in my opinion. What it all comes down to is, in the words of Frank Zappa, "if it sounds good to you, it's bitchin'. If it sounds bad to you, it's shitty."
__________________
How to achieve Frank Zappa's guitar tone:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thefallofman
Step 1: Buy a Gibson SG
Step 2: Insert Green Ringer, EQ, 3 dead squirrels and a microwave into said SG
Step 3: Plug in and freak the **** out.
BrainDamage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 09:11 AM   #10
beer bear
UG's Hermit
 
beer bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Lahti, Finland
Quote:
Originally Posted by ioAK47oi



at least they're playing was catchy, original and required a certain skill.


Now that is merely an opinion. But as you're implying that the Beatles' music is easy. Could I please have a demonstration of your sitar skills? George Harrison was quite good at it. Ravi Shankar himself said that Harrison was one of the best western sitar players he'd heard of.



Quote:
Originally Posted by ioAK47oi
Writing a good song is being a good 'song writer'. Writing good music is being a 'musician'.


I'm not quite sure what the difference is. Please enlighten me? I always thought that a song comprised of music. Unless you mean in terms of instrumental virtuosity, in which case the Beatles were hardly virtuosos on their instruments. But a wicked guitar solo was never what they were about. It was about likeable songs.



Quote:
Originally Posted by ioAK47oi
The Beatles write good songs, I said that. Their lyrics sound like they've had a lot of thought. But their later music is lacking in groove, rhythm and memorability. Are there any songs other than the well-known songs like Hey Jude, Yesterday and Eleanor Rigby that are good as both songs AND music?



Have you tried Rubber soul and Revolver albums? Both of them have quite a heavy Motown influence. 'The Word' especially grooves like nobody's business.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ioAK47oi
I'm quite sure too, but if you didn't live to witness or experience the Beatles during the hype, they couldn't have directly influenced you. If someone didn't experience them during the 60's, were they not influenced indirectly?


Does my age have to do with whether they influenced me directly or not? Again I'm not quite sure what you mean by this. Do you mean that I've actually have had to have met John Lennon in order to be influenced by him? If so, then yes, they did influence me indirectly. It was via their music and a speaker system.
beer bear is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 01:51 PM   #11
ioAK47oi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Cheers all :P To be more clear, when I referred to 'musician', I meant as in melody, chord progressions etc. I do like Yesterday for that reason. The chords move with the lyrics. The music can tell a story in its self. I understand liking them for their lyrics, i admitted I do too. Also, to clear the recording thing, I meant that I don't think it was completely their idea, but rather their producer's.
And about experiencing the 60's to be influenced.. I love jazz standards and Gerschwin, but I can't say I feel the same about that music compared to say, musicians of the 1920's. We live in a different society now. I suppose what I'm trying to say is, imagine if Dubstep was revered in year 2050 because of it's social and cultural background, and it's change to the recording industry. I personally believe that can only happen over time, when imagination and history become more real than the reality.
ioAK47oi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 01:21 PM   #12
NickBech
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
You guys are picking way too hard on him, like you're butt-hurt one person doesn't enjoy the Beatles. Stop being so angry and realise he's actually trying to like them!
__________________
"We are a metal band. Metal is brutal, metal vocals are brutal. I want some coffee."
NickBech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 01:36 PM   #13
timcrow420
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
I don't really like the Beatles
timcrow420 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 02:01 PM   #14
Morphogenesis26
UG Nerd
 
Morphogenesis26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Here's my reasons for the disliking The Beatles:

The general sound of the band has always sounded sloppy, which may be due to them being in the 60's, and the instruments don't sound tight at all.

The songwriting isn't interested to me. It feels like I've heard it all before, and I know that that could be because later musicians took a lot from The Beatles, but it seems like something that was around before them. I could be wrong, though.

A very strange reason I don't like the album Revolver is that I can't listen to it without developing a headache. It's the only album I've ever heard that has done that to me, I don't know why though.
__________________
When life gets tough and you don't know what to do, then just keep






Morphogenesis26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 02:24 PM   #15
BrainDamage
Knirps for moisture
 
BrainDamage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickBech
You guys are picking way too hard on him, like you're butt-hurt one person doesn't enjoy the Beatles. Stop being so angry and realise he's actually trying to like them!
He wanted an argument, so that's what he's getting. No one is being hard on anyone.
__________________
How to achieve Frank Zappa's guitar tone:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thefallofman
Step 1: Buy a Gibson SG
Step 2: Insert Green Ringer, EQ, 3 dead squirrels and a microwave into said SG
Step 3: Plug in and freak the **** out.
BrainDamage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 02:41 PM   #16
PacificOcean
Motivational poster.
 
PacificOcean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Guadalajara, MX
I don't like them either, mostly not in a fanatic way like a lot of people i know. I recognize their influence and historical value/legacy that gave us amazing music genders.
But still they're not in my mp3 player, i just don't like their music, even though they're better than today modern groups out there with rather poorly songwritting/theorical skills, it's just a matter of taste.
(In that case i'd rather listen to the beatles instead, they're not that bad neither that awesome)

Last edited by PacificOcean : 01-17-2013 at 02:50 PM.
PacificOcean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2013, 02:15 AM   #17
Moonlit101
Moonlit101
 
Moonlit101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toledo,Ohio
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickBech
You guys are picking way too hard on him, like you're butt-hurt one person doesn't enjoy the Beatles. Stop being so angry and realise he's actually trying to like them!









LOL .... that made me laugh ...but for the record I don't really like the Beatles either. They have some very good songs but I just dont get into them all like that
Moonlit101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2013, 07:08 PM   #18
youeyehat
Comfortable Liar
 
youeyehat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Winston-Salem, NC
So now Paul McCartney isn't a skilled bassist? This place....
__________________
Call me old fashioned but I prefer 'rock music' that has electric guitars.
youeyehat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2013, 09:36 PM   #19
TANG0DOWN21
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by beer bear
Guess I'll take a swing at it:





I bolded the right answer. You don't have to be a good guitarist to write a good song. You have to be a good songwriter to write a good song. Now I agree that they weren't virtuosos on their respected instruments. They could damn sure write a song though. I wouldn't describe either McCartney's or Lennon's voice as feminine. McCartney's can be a bit light a feathery at times, but the contrast of Lennon's and McCartney's vocals is quite nice.




Amateur guitarists weren't writing memorable songs now were they? And since when is the being unknowledgeable in music theory a reason to dislike music? The list of people who no either no theory or very little is massive. Hendrix, Page, Clapton? None of them no music theory that it would play a significant role in their songs. Do you think Hendrix knew that he was playing a E7♯9? The fact that you may not like the aforementioned is of no importance.
I believe that theory is descriptive and not conductive. Theory is a way of telling why this sounds the way it does. Be it good or bad. In the end knowing theory or not isn't important. What it comes down to is the song that you write.




Les Paul and others indeed did invent a lot of things the Beatles used in studio recordings. The Beatles however brought the techniques into the mainstream. I'm sure The Beatles were very grateful of Les Paul and his inventions.



They say that, because the Beatles did change music forever. Most musicians who came after the fab four will cite them as an influence.






I'm quite sure that they've influenced me. I took a liking to them at a young age and they are one of the reasons I myself picked up a guitar. They are also the reasons why I like a lot of Motown. Lennon had a lot of old Motown music amongst his record collection. I started looking up artists from that period as a response to that. I found Booker T. and the MGs.


If you don't like the Beatles thats fine. If you like them thats fine too. I personally find your reasons for disliking them slightly bizarre. But an opinion is an opinion and at the end of it all both of us are entitled to our own.


They directly influenced me so much that I'm about to blow $400 to see Paul in detroit.
TANG0DOWN21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2013, 11:38 PM   #20
Supersonic-95
UG Member
 
Supersonic-95's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by ioAK47oi

1. Lack of musicianship and/or theory

Technically, the Beatles don't seem skilled on their instruments to me. especially the basic strumming at the beginning of A Day In The Life. However, you don't have to be a good guitarist to write a good song. I've even heard Beatles fans say the drummer can't drum. also, I personally think Lennon and McCartney sound high pitched and feminine when they sing at times.

Theoretically, when i listen to the guitar played in yesterday it sounds like a singer/guitarist without any knowledge of theory. He could just be coming up with guitar chords linked with fret patterns to the next chord. Then all you have to do is keep singing random notes 'til the melody fits. I think amateur guitarists were "innovating" this technique long before the Beatles. I like Yesterday, the lyrics are sound, and the melody is nice. I dislike the method behind creating that melody, and how people idolise them FOR that method. In their later songs, their theory and song writing doesn't seem to improve. Only lyrical content improves. - Apart from that Lennon song which repeats "mommy and daddy come home" until he's squealing like a pig.



I think that you have got confused. When you say musicianship/theory, what do you mean? They may be technically not too advanced, but their harmonic content is fantastic. Their knowledge of harmonic function and general theory is very good. Making complex guitar parts doesn't mean you're theoretically any good. Look at bands such as slipknot, they are technically quite good, but harmonically they are very basic. But that is only one side, now lets discuss melodic content. The Beatles are by far one of the most melodic bands. Their melody and harmony relationships are just fantastic. Instrumental virtuosity can easily weaken melodic content - shred and metal music is a good example. You are viewing music in the wrong way. Music is not mechanical, and should not be technically approached mathematical. Even though music is theoretically just demanding as anything else such as physics, engineering etc it should still be viewed as an art. The real skill in music is firstly melodic content, secondly harmonic content, then lastly technical ability.
Supersonic-95 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:17 AM.

Forum Archives / About / Terms of Use / Advertise / Contact / Ultimate-Guitar.Com © 2014
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.