gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
632002 Posts in 25311 Topics by 3602 Members - Latest Member: Beachboy61 May 24, 2018, 02:53:44 PM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
gfxgfx
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.       « previous next »
Poll
Question: Which band's output do you prefer in 1967?
The Beach Boys - 9 (36%)
The Beatles - 16 (64%)
Total Voters: 25

Pages: 1 [2] 3 Go Down Print
Author Topic: 1967: The Beach Boys vs. The Beatles  (Read 3025 times)
KDS
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4331


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: February 06, 2018, 05:31:47 AM »

I don't even bother to answer these polls, because for me it's Beach Boys every year. I know, if you measure achievements, sales, chart positions, cultural impact, The Beatles win every time. But when it comes to music, it's the Beach Boys that touch my heart more. Everry time. Even when they suck, their stuff is more direct and heartfelt. And that does it for me, no amount of studio breaktrhoughs and cleverness can change that.

Just (truly, honestly) some friendly advice: Perhaps if you stopped framing this as a case of the Beatles only being noteworthy due to sales/chart success/cultural impact, etc., to the point of music that you admit "sucks" strikes you as more "direct and heartfelt", maybe you'd actually like some other music.

People don't note the Beatles more than another bands because of "cleverness" or "chart positions", etc. They note them because their music is great. It speaks to people. It never would have survived had it not. They were successful because they spoke to people. Not the other way around.

Like what you like (obviously), but if anyone told me that everything the Beach Boys never did is more "heartfelt" than anything anybody else ever did, even when the BB material in question "sucks", I'd tell them to get out more and listen to other stuff and allow themselves to actually like something other than the BBs.

I'm not telling people how to feel, what to feel, what to like. If you think the Percadella Mix of "Rock and Roll to the Rescue" is more "heartfelt" than anything the Beatles ever did, I'm not saying you can't feel that way. But I think it's worth trying to reach out to people who are self-identifying as super narrow-minded musically and let them know that there is other stuff out there. For crying out loud, I'm not saying we all have to go listen to Freeform Jazz or something. To me, The Beatle and the Beach Boys are both *it*. I don't spend one moment of my life announcing that everything the BBs ever did is better than anything else. I enjoy the BBs, their music changes my life, and then I *also* have the same experiences with other music. If Mike Love's Hyatt Regency jingle started speaking to my soul more than "In My Life" or "For No One" or "Let It Be", I'd seriously start to self-assess what the problem is.


You're not telling people how to feel or how to vote, but you're kind enough to tell them how wrong they are. 

Logged

Any opinions posted by me regarding the music of The Beach Boys, and their members, is in no way a show of disrespect towards any member of The Beach Boys, past or present.

"There is no right nor wrong in art, only preference." - Steve Desper
rab2591
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4694


"My God. It's full of stars."


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: February 06, 2018, 06:20:21 AM »

I don't even bother to answer these polls, because for me it's Beach Boys every year. I know, if you measure achievements, sales, chart positions, cultural impact, The Beatles win every time. But when it comes to music, it's the Beach Boys that touch my heart more. Everry time. Even when they suck, their stuff is more direct and heartfelt. And that does it for me, no amount of studio breaktrhoughs and cleverness can change that.

Just (truly, honestly) some friendly advice: Perhaps if you stopped framing this as a case of the Beatles only being noteworthy due to sales/chart success/cultural impact, etc., to the point of music that you admit "sucks" strikes you as more "direct and heartfelt", maybe you'd actually like some other music.

People don't note the Beatles more than another bands because of "cleverness" or "chart positions", etc. They note them because their music is great. It speaks to people. It never would have survived had it not. They were successful because they spoke to people. Not the other way around.

Like what you like (obviously), but if anyone told me that everything the Beach Boys never did is more "heartfelt" than anything anybody else ever did, even when the BB material in question "sucks", I'd tell them to get out more and listen to other stuff and allow themselves to actually like something other than the BBs.

I'm not telling people how to feel, what to feel, what to like. If you think the Percadella Mix of "Rock and Roll to the Rescue" is more "heartfelt" than anything the Beatles ever did, I'm not saying you can't feel that way. But I think it's worth trying to reach out to people who are self-identifying as super narrow-minded musically and let them know that there is other stuff out there. For crying out loud, I'm not saying we all have to go listen to Freeform Jazz or something. To me, The Beatle and the Beach Boys are both *it*. I don't spend one moment of my life announcing that everything the BBs ever did is better than anything else. I enjoy the BBs, their music changes my life, and then I *also* have the same experiences with other music. If Mike Love's Hyatt Regency jingle started speaking to my soul more than "In My Life" or "For No One" or "Let It Be", I'd seriously start to self-assess what the problem is.


Good points, but missing the point. Me, I love the Beatles, they're great, and they've made some great music, some even best ever. I don't have nothing against them and they continue to inspire me on an everyday basis, and I still listen to them regularly. But, this is The Beach Boys vs The Beatles topic, and so it happens that I like the Beach Boys more. In my opinion, they are musically superior. Especially their 1967 output. Mike Love's jingles don't really belong to this discussion... All the Beatles songs you mentioned are great, of course, and I don't think there's much point in comparing B's and BB's. But, while were at it, that's where I stand.

I’ve said it before, but I do think the Beatles are the greatest band. When you listen to that Beatles 1 album (that comp of their number 1 hits) you can’t really deny how flippin great these guys were - with the exclusion of one or two songs on that album (personal preference) every song hits it out of the park (whether because of harmonies, chord changes, lyrics, advances in experimenting, etc)...and that comp doesn’t even begin to delve into what their albums were like. But all that being said, I acknowledge them being the greatest band but The Beach Boys make music that hits me on a whole other level.

I know some here get angsty when others of us talk about the spiritual impact The Beach Boys music has on us. But it’s an aspect that I can’t help but override the chart numbers, the catchy riffs and hooks, the cultural impact, the phenomenal songs in general - whether by The Beach Boys or the Beatles.

If someone asked me to give them an album 100% full of the catchiest/happiest/interesting tunes ever recorded I’d hand them the Beatles 1 album. If someone asked me to give them an album that would move them spiritually and possibly change their life, I would hand them Pet Sounds. And before I get a 5 paragraph essay on why that statement is wrong: I’m not trying to simplify the Beatles catalogue with that statement, I’m sure there are those who hear that type of life-changing spiritual beauty in the Beatles catalogue, and that’s perfectly fine. But this is a thread about personal preference and some here prefer The Beach Boys every year in this regard (whereas most here chose the Beatles for this particular year so I don’t get why jimmies are being rustled yet again).

I think this is in line with what Jukka is saying and it’s insulting that every time someone is overjoyed by Beach Boys music in these threads HeyJude has to swoop down with his Sgt. Pepper cape and save the day by telling people they are musically narrow minded. HeyJude, you’re implying that there are people here who value a Mike Love hotel jingle over the Beatles when literally NO ONE in these threads has done that at all. You’re implying that some here are spending every moment of their life claiming The Beach Boys are the best band in the world, when literally NO ONE here has done that. You’re implying that someone here likes a 1980s Beach Boy track “Rock and Roll To The Rescue” over the Beatles when literally NO ONE here has done that. Per the rules of the poll a few people have said they’d take The Beach Boys every year vs the Beatles. This does not mean these people are jamming out with Sennheiser HD 800s to Mike Love’s Hyatt Regency jingle for gods sake. The more you make these outlandish claims the more my ignored argument looks pretty spot on.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2018, 06:25:07 AM by rab2591 » Logged

Bill Tobelman's SMiLE site
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7300



View Profile WWW
« Reply #27 on: February 06, 2018, 07:04:18 AM »

I don't even bother to answer these polls, because for me it's Beach Boys every year. I know, if you measure achievements, sales, chart positions, cultural impact, The Beatles win every time. But when it comes to music, it's the Beach Boys that touch my heart more. Everry time. Even when they suck, their stuff is more direct and heartfelt. And that does it for me, no amount of studio breaktrhoughs and cleverness can change that.

Just (truly, honestly) some friendly advice: Perhaps if you stopped framing this as a case of the Beatles only being noteworthy due to sales/chart success/cultural impact, etc., to the point of music that you admit "sucks" strikes you as more "direct and heartfelt", maybe you'd actually like some other music.

People don't note the Beatles more than another bands because of "cleverness" or "chart positions", etc. They note them because their music is great. It speaks to people. It never would have survived had it not. They were successful because they spoke to people. Not the other way around.

Like what you like (obviously), but if anyone told me that everything the Beach Boys never did is more "heartfelt" than anything anybody else ever did, even when the BB material in question "sucks", I'd tell them to get out more and listen to other stuff and allow themselves to actually like something other than the BBs.

I'm not telling people how to feel, what to feel, what to like. If you think the Percadella Mix of "Rock and Roll to the Rescue" is more "heartfelt" than anything the Beatles ever did, I'm not saying you can't feel that way. But I think it's worth trying to reach out to people who are self-identifying as super narrow-minded musically and let them know that there is other stuff out there. For crying out loud, I'm not saying we all have to go listen to Freeform Jazz or something. To me, The Beatle and the Beach Boys are both *it*. I don't spend one moment of my life announcing that everything the BBs ever did is better than anything else. I enjoy the BBs, their music changes my life, and then I *also* have the same experiences with other music. If Mike Love's Hyatt Regency jingle started speaking to my soul more than "In My Life" or "For No One" or "Let It Be", I'd seriously start to self-assess what the problem is.


Good points, but missing the point. Me, I love the Beatles, they're great, and they've made some great music, some even best ever. I don't have nothing against them and they continue to inspire me on an everyday basis, and I still listen to them regularly. But, this is The Beach Boys vs The Beatles topic, and so it happens that I like the Beach Boys more. In my opinion, they are musically superior. Especially their 1967 output. Mike Love's jingles don't really belong to this discussion... All the Beatles songs you mentioned are great, of course, and I don't think there's much point in comparing B's and BB's. But, while were at it, that's where I stand.

Again, with all respect, I think *you're* missing *my* point. You can like the BBs more. You can like ZZ Top more. You can like whatever you want. My suggestion was that your words imply you think that BB material that *you* identify as material that "sucks" is STILL "more direct and heartfelt" than Beatles material. As in (assuming material you think "sucks" is the bottom rung of BB material) *everything* the Beach Boys did was "more direct and heartfelt."

If you're trying to walk back this extreme viewpoint, if your words didn't mean to imply that "Ten Little Indians" and "Summer of Love" are "more direct and heartfelt" than *any* Beatles track, then I think my only advice would be to not post with such sweeping generalizations and absolutes (which I feel are much more common in these "versus" threads).

If, on the other hand, you truly hold the extreme viewpoint that even BB material that "sucks" is more "direct and heartfelt", then that brings us back to the point of my previous post, which was simply that your words indicate a very narrow assessment of music, and I was suggesting opening yourself up to be moved by something other than your "hometown team" so to speak.
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
RangeRoverA1
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3437


I drink expired tea. wanna join?


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: February 06, 2018, 07:07:52 AM »

[facepalm]
Logged

Short notice: the cat you see to the left is the best. Not counting your indoor cat who might have habit sitting at your left side when you post at SmileySmile.

Cats - beautiful. Frogs - ugly, except cutely-shaped legs.

Everything big, in truth, is just little in disguise. (Truths. Tome 50)
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7300



View Profile WWW
« Reply #29 on: February 06, 2018, 07:08:46 AM »

HeyJude, you must stop forcing people like Beatles. They're not be-all, end-all, for Pete's sake. The way you advise Jukka to be open-minded when you don't know AT ALL his music likes & dislikes is completely dumb. For all you care/ know, he could have very diverse taste.
If Jukka chooses BBs every year - then what? If BBs is big deal to him that even bad songs sound good to him - cool.

I'm loathe to re-explain my point for the millionth time.

ANYBODY who says THIS about the Beach Boys vis-à-vis the Beatles (or any artist):

"Even when they suck, their stuff is more direct and heartfelt"

*Anybody* who says this, while 100% entitled to say so (obviously), I would *genuinely* tell that their WORDS *strongly suggest* they are narrow-minded in that they believe Beach Boys music that they admit SUCKS is "more direct and heartfelt" than anything the Beatles (or any other artist) recorded.

Remove "Beatles" and put in the name of any other great artist. This isn't about the Beatles. It's about my (clearly unsuccessful) attempt to try to snap some BB fans out of continuing this epic circle jerk of fandom.
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7300



View Profile WWW
« Reply #30 on: February 06, 2018, 07:13:32 AM »

I don't even bother to answer these polls, because for me it's Beach Boys every year. I know, if you measure achievements, sales, chart positions, cultural impact, The Beatles win every time. But when it comes to music, it's the Beach Boys that touch my heart more. Everry time. Even when they suck, their stuff is more direct and heartfelt. And that does it for me, no amount of studio breaktrhoughs and cleverness can change that.

Just (truly, honestly) some friendly advice: Perhaps if you stopped framing this as a case of the Beatles only being noteworthy due to sales/chart success/cultural impact, etc., to the point of music that you admit "sucks" strikes you as more "direct and heartfelt", maybe you'd actually like some other music.

People don't note the Beatles more than another bands because of "cleverness" or "chart positions", etc. They note them because their music is great. It speaks to people. It never would have survived had it not. They were successful because they spoke to people. Not the other way around.

Like what you like (obviously), but if anyone told me that everything the Beach Boys never did is more "heartfelt" than anything anybody else ever did, even when the BB material in question "sucks", I'd tell them to get out more and listen to other stuff and allow themselves to actually like something other than the BBs.

I'm not telling people how to feel, what to feel, what to like. If you think the Percadella Mix of "Rock and Roll to the Rescue" is more "heartfelt" than anything the Beatles ever did, I'm not saying you can't feel that way. But I think it's worth trying to reach out to people who are self-identifying as super narrow-minded musically and let them know that there is other stuff out there. For crying out loud, I'm not saying we all have to go listen to Freeform Jazz or something. To me, The Beatle and the Beach Boys are both *it*. I don't spend one moment of my life announcing that everything the BBs ever did is better than anything else. I enjoy the BBs, their music changes my life, and then I *also* have the same experiences with other music. If Mike Love's Hyatt Regency jingle started speaking to my soul more than "In My Life" or "For No One" or "Let It Be", I'd seriously start to self-assess what the problem is.


You're not telling people how to feel or how to vote, but you're kind enough to tell them how wrong they are. 



No, it's more like "Hey, try this other music and maybe something else will speak to you, because if you think Beach Boys material that you ADMIT SUCKS is more direct and heartfelt than any Beatles material, I have a feeling you're missing out and not letting something else speak to you."
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7300



View Profile WWW
« Reply #31 on: February 06, 2018, 07:18:25 AM »

You’re implying that someone here likes a 1980s Beach Boy track “Rock and Roll To The Rescue” over the Beatles when literally NO ONE here has done that.

I disagree. While the term in question was "more direct and heartfelt" as opposed to simply "liking" something more, Jukka's post took the extreme position that even when the Beach Boys "suck", they are more direct and heartfelt. That is, in my opinion, an absurd statement. I'd say the same regarding *any* musical artists being discussed.

When I read someone say stuff like that, I absolutely DO assume they feel "Rock and Roll to the Rescue" is more "direct and heartfelt" than "Let It Be."

The Mike Love jingle stuff was of course a bit of hyperbole, only in that his Hyatt Regency jingles (which I think are actually quite enjoyable in a surreal way) are technically I suppose not "Beach Boys" tracks but solo recordings (most likely with Adrian Baker).

And, regarding your "ignored argument" from the "1966" thread, I absolutely read it. I continue to try (unsuccessfully) to minimize my comments in these threads because continually calling the threads out as a big giant circle jerk was simply prolonging threads that were otherwise pretty quietly floating away. Look at my posts in the ten zillion C50 threads, or my "time I'll never get back" back-and-forths with filledeplage and Cam over the years. I have no problem laying out a 27-paragraph point-by-point rebuttal of *anybody.* My tact instead has been, of late in this thread anyway, more along the lines of one of my previous explanatory responses, which is to say "hey, it kinda sounds like you're pretty narrowly focused on the BBs to the determent of your possible enjoyment of other bands, so my honestly, truly friendly advice is to try to let go of that a bit and let other music speak to you."

As (I believe) I mentioned way back in one of the old threads, there were times in my youth and zeal in deep fandom of bands (mainly the Beach Boys and Beatles not surprisingly) that I CLEARLY became WAY TOO close-minded about other music. I never really did that "my team is better than yours" stuff, I didn't need to s**t on other bands to explain why I liked the Beatles or Beach Boys. But I certainly *did* refrain from letting myself let other music be on par with the stuff I loved the most.

But yeah, all else aside, if people continue to post absurd (in my opinion) statements along the lines of sucky BB material being more heartfelt than other artists' material, I'll probably continue to (politely and respectfully) call it out, at least from time to time.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2018, 10:03:30 AM by HeyJude » Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
RangeRoverA1
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3437


I drink expired tea. wanna join?


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: February 06, 2018, 07:18:35 AM »

Frankly, what you said before about people should be agreeing with/ listening to what Howie Edelson says doesn't make sense. 1stly, why, what for we must listen to him when he says this is "embarrassing" fandom? It's just fun, can't we have fun, you know? YOU know? I said this before & I'll say it again - it isn't obligation to listen to what people say because they're friends with BBs, honored guests, experienced long-timers etc. I don't owe to respect them, agree with them etc. If you agree with Mr. Edelson - fine but don't tell the other BBs fans to do the same, even to just listen to him.
Logged

Short notice: the cat you see to the left is the best. Not counting your indoor cat who might have habit sitting at your left side when you post at SmileySmile.

Cats - beautiful. Frogs - ugly, except cutely-shaped legs.

Everything big, in truth, is just little in disguise. (Truths. Tome 50)
RangeRoverA1
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3437


I drink expired tea. wanna join?


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: February 06, 2018, 07:20:58 AM »

ANYBODY who says THIS about the Beach Boys vis-à-vis the Beatles (or any artist):

"Even when they suck, their stuff is more direct and heartfelt"

*Anybody* who says this, while 100% entitled to say so (obviously), I would *genuinely* tell that their WORDS *strongly suggest* they are narrow-minded in that they believe Beach Boys music that they admit SUCKS is "more direct and heartfelt" than anything the Beatles (or any other artist) recorded.
Jukka confirmed plentifully in his single post Beatles is great band. No? NO?
Logged

Short notice: the cat you see to the left is the best. Not counting your indoor cat who might have habit sitting at your left side when you post at SmileySmile.

Cats - beautiful. Frogs - ugly, except cutely-shaped legs.

Everything big, in truth, is just little in disguise. (Truths. Tome 50)
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7300



View Profile WWW
« Reply #34 on: February 06, 2018, 07:39:48 AM »

ANYBODY who says THIS about the Beach Boys vis-à-vis the Beatles (or any artist):

"Even when they suck, their stuff is more direct and heartfelt"

*Anybody* who says this, while 100% entitled to say so (obviously), I would *genuinely* tell that their WORDS *strongly suggest* they are narrow-minded in that they believe Beach Boys music that they admit SUCKS is "more direct and heartfelt" than anything the Beatles (or any other artist) recorded.
Jukka confirmed plentifully in his single post Beatles is great band. No? NO?

Nope. The original post I responded to noted the Beatles "achievements, sales, chart positions, and cultural impact", but didn't seem to profess actually liking their music. Indeed, the point was then made that even BB material that "sucks" is "more direct and heartfelt." In a subsequent post, I suppose this position was walked back. I appreciate the clarification, but posting such extremes as the "even when they suck" comment is a big part of what I was criticizing about the nature of these threads in previous posts.

« Last Edit: February 06, 2018, 10:02:02 AM by HeyJude » Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7300



View Profile WWW
« Reply #35 on: February 06, 2018, 07:43:16 AM »

Frankly, what you said before about people should be agreeing with/ listening to what Howie Edelson says doesn't make sense. 1stly, why, what for we must listen to him when he says this is "embarrassing" fandom? It's just fun, can't we have fun, you know? YOU know? I said this before & I'll say it again - it isn't obligation to listen to what people say because they're friends with BBs, honored guests, experienced long-timers etc. I don't owe to respect them, agree with them etc. If you agree with Mr. Edelson - fine but don't tell the other BBs fans to do the same, even to just listen to him.

Feel however you want to feel. I don't tell people to take a moment to listen to Howie Edelson because he's an insider, or because he's friends with the BBs. I suggest that people take his opinion into account because he knows his sh*t, and knows how to respectfully, cogently, and engagingly talk about BOTH bands, and talk about fandom.

That he also happens to be the guy that writes the liner notes for Beach Boys releases and is a working journalist would only serve to help make the argument than maybe you SHOULD stop to listen to him.

But of course do what you want. If you don't want to listen to Howie Edelson, then than tells me all I need to know.
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
rab2591
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4694


"My God. It's full of stars."


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: February 06, 2018, 07:44:06 AM »

You’re implying that someone here likes a 1980s Beach Boy track “Rock and Roll To The Rescue” over the Beatles when literally NO ONE here has done that.

I disagree. While the term in question was "more direct and heartfelt" as opposed to simply "liking" something more, Jukka's post took the extreme position that even when the Beach Boys "suck", they are more direct and heartfelt. That is, in my opinion, an absurd statement. I'd say the same regarding *any* musical artists being discussed.

When I read someone say stuff like that, I absolutely DO assume they feel "Rock and Roll to the Rescue" is more "direct and heartfelt" than "Let It Be."

The Mike Love jingle stuff was of course a bit of hyperbole, only in that his Hyatt Regency jingles (which I think are actually quite enjoyable in a surreal way) are technically I suppose not "Beach Boys" tracks but solo recordings (most likely with Adrian Baker).

In response to what I said you’re totally right and I guess that part of Jukka’s post completely escaped my mind when replying to you. That being said, if he does find ‘Rock and Roll To The Rescue’ more heartfelt than ‘Let It Be’ then Jukka has every right to feel that way. Music hits us all in different ways for different reasons. In your opinion it is an absurd notion, and I almost feel the same way, but in a thread about personal preference its completely justified for one person to think that ‘chug-a-lug’ is superior to ‘Across The Universe’ - as ridiculous as it may seem to most of us.

I think I mentioned this before, but I think Abba’s ‘Dancing Queen’ is one of the greatest songs I’ve ever heard - even topping some of my favorite Beach Boys songs. It’s an absurd song in that its lyrically immature, but there is something about the way that song sounds that takes me to another place. When I think ‘Dancing Queen’ is a better song than ‘You Still Believe In Me’ or ‘The Warmth of The Sun’ I completely understand how absurd that is. But that’s the way I’m wired.

Maybe Jukka likes how Brian and Carl’s vocals sound on any Beach Boys tune, or he just likes the fun or ethereal vibe on any Beach Boys release and that makes him like those songs better than even the best Beatles songs. It’s rather crass to call someone musically narrow-minded just because they prefer one thing over the other.
Logged

Bill Tobelman's SMiLE site
KDS
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4331


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: February 06, 2018, 07:49:14 AM »

You’re implying that someone here likes a 1980s Beach Boy track “Rock and Roll To The Rescue” over the Beatles when literally NO ONE here has done that.

I disagree. While the term in question was "more direct and heartfelt" as opposed to simply "liking" something more, Jukka's post took the extreme position that even when the Beach Boys "suck", they are more direct and heartfelt. That is, in my opinion, an absurd statement. I'd say the same regarding *any* musical artists being discussed.

When I read someone say stuff like that, I absolutely DO assume they feel "Rock and Roll to the Rescue" is more "direct and heartfelt" than "Let It Be."

The Mike Love jingle stuff was of course a bit of hyperbole, only in that his Hyatt Regency jingles (which I think are actually quite enjoyable in a surreal way) are technically I suppose not "Beach Boys" tracks but solo recordings (most likely with Adrian Baker).

In response to what I said you’re totally right and I guess that part of Jukka’s post completely escaped my mind when replying to you. That being said, if he does find ‘Rock and Roll To The Rescue’ more heartfelt than ‘Let It Be’ then Jukka has every right to feel that way. Music hits us all in different ways for different reasons. In your opinion it is an absurd notion, and I almost feel the same way, but in a thread about personal preference its completely justified for one person to think that ‘chug-a-lug’ is superior to ‘Across The Universe’ - as ridiculous as it may seem to most of us.

I think I mentioned this before, but I think Abba’s ‘Dancing Queen’ is one of the greatest songs I’ve ever heard - even topping some of my favorite Beach Boys songs. It’s an absurd song in that its lyrically immature, but there is something about the way that song sounds that takes me to another place. When I think ‘Dancing Queen’ is a better song than ‘You Still Believe In Me’ or ‘The Warmth of The Sun’ I completely understand how absurd that is. But that’s the way I’m wired.

Maybe Jukka likes how Brian and Carl’s vocals sound on any Beach Boys tune, or he just likes the fun or ethereal vibe on any Beach Boys release and that makes him like those songs better than even the best Beatles songs. It’s rather crass to call someone musically narrow-minded just because they prefer one thing over the other.

Right. 

I'd much rather listen to classic Bon Jovi than pretty much anything Bob Dylan ever put out. 

That would cause a huge gasp among many music fans, but that's where my taste lies. 

Just as I'd personally rather listen to the BB85 or Still Cruisin over Love You. 

That's just my preference, and no matter how crazy is sounds to many, to my ears, it's anything but wrong. 
Logged

Any opinions posted by me regarding the music of The Beach Boys, and their members, is in no way a show of disrespect towards any member of The Beach Boys, past or present.

"There is no right nor wrong in art, only preference." - Steve Desper
rab2591
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4694


"My God. It's full of stars."


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: February 06, 2018, 08:03:48 AM »

Frankly, what you said before about people should be agreeing with/ listening to what Howie Edelson says doesn't make sense. 1stly, why, what for we must listen to him when he says this is "embarrassing" fandom? It's just fun, can't we have fun, you know? YOU know? I said this before & I'll say it again - it isn't obligation to listen to what people say because they're friends with BBs, honored guests, experienced long-timers etc. I don't owe to respect them, agree with them etc. If you agree with Mr. Edelson - fine but don't tell the other BBs fans to do the same, even to just listen to him.

Feel however you want to feel. I don't tell people to take a moment to listen to Howie Edelson because he's an insider, or because he's friends with the BBs. I suggest that people take his opinion into account because he knows his sh*t, and knows how to respectfully, cogently, and engagingly talk about BOTH bands, and talk about fandom.

That he also happens to be the guy that writes the liner notes for Beach Boys releases and is a working journalist would only serve to help make the argument than maybe you SHOULD stop to listen to him.

But of course do what you want. If you don't want to listen to Howie Edelson, then than tells me all I need to know.

I mean, I do have to disagree with Howie about these threads being the worst of the fandom. The idea behind people discussing what they prefer between two of the greatest bands ever isn’t that ridiculous, and far from anything bordering on being the “worst”.

Again I’ll say: Watamushi has helped bring some positivity to both forums with these poll threads (not counting the bickering that has plagued many of them because of your negativity regarding these threads). Instead of discussing Mike Love’s latest petulant outburst we’re talking about ‘Time To Get Alone’ and ‘Rain’. Because of these threads I have been playing more White Album and the deeper Beatles cuts lately because of these threads - I have played Beatles songs for people lately that they had never heard before, garnering very positive reactions. That’s not the worst of any fandom. You’re the one picking on people for having different musical tastes than your own, calling out their own personal preferences....I think that is the worst of any fandom.

If you don’t like these topics, start a thread on any subject you want to discuss - I’d be happy to participate as I enjoy most of what you post on this forum. But here and now most of us are all happy to discuss why we like certain things about either band, and most of us are happy that the Beatles music exists and most of us even enjoy it more than our favorite band here as these threads show. This is nothing to hate or be negative about.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2018, 08:05:31 AM by rab2591 » Logged

Bill Tobelman's SMiLE site
KDS
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4331


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: February 06, 2018, 08:14:00 AM »

Frankly, what you said before about people should be agreeing with/ listening to what Howie Edelson says doesn't make sense. 1stly, why, what for we must listen to him when he says this is "embarrassing" fandom? It's just fun, can't we have fun, you know? YOU know? I said this before & I'll say it again - it isn't obligation to listen to what people say because they're friends with BBs, honored guests, experienced long-timers etc. I don't owe to respect them, agree with them etc. If you agree with Mr. Edelson - fine but don't tell the other BBs fans to do the same, even to just listen to him.

Feel however you want to feel. I don't tell people to take a moment to listen to Howie Edelson because he's an insider, or because he's friends with the BBs. I suggest that people take his opinion into account because he knows his sh*t, and knows how to respectfully, cogently, and engagingly talk about BOTH bands, and talk about fandom.

That he also happens to be the guy that writes the liner notes for Beach Boys releases and is a working journalist would only serve to help make the argument than maybe you SHOULD stop to listen to him.

But of course do what you want. If you don't want to listen to Howie Edelson, then than tells me all I need to know.

So, because he's an insider, we should all think along the same lines as him. 

I respect his opinion, but I 100% disagree with this being the "worst of fandom." 
Logged

Any opinions posted by me regarding the music of The Beach Boys, and their members, is in no way a show of disrespect towards any member of The Beach Boys, past or present.

"There is no right nor wrong in art, only preference." - Steve Desper
rab2591
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4694


"My God. It's full of stars."


View Profile
« Reply #40 on: February 06, 2018, 08:19:21 AM »

You’re implying that someone here likes a 1980s Beach Boy track “Rock and Roll To The Rescue” over the Beatles when literally NO ONE here has done that.

I disagree. While the term in question was "more direct and heartfelt" as opposed to simply "liking" something more, Jukka's post took the extreme position that even when the Beach Boys "suck", they are more direct and heartfelt. That is, in my opinion, an absurd statement. I'd say the same regarding *any* musical artists being discussed.

When I read someone say stuff like that, I absolutely DO assume they feel "Rock and Roll to the Rescue" is more "direct and heartfelt" than "Let It Be."

The Mike Love jingle stuff was of course a bit of hyperbole, only in that his Hyatt Regency jingles (which I think are actually quite enjoyable in a surreal way) are technically I suppose not "Beach Boys" tracks but solo recordings (most likely with Adrian Baker).

In response to what I said you’re totally right and I guess that part of Jukka’s post completely escaped my mind when replying to you. That being said, if he does find ‘Rock and Roll To The Rescue’ more heartfelt than ‘Let It Be’ then Jukka has every right to feel that way. Music hits us all in different ways for different reasons. In your opinion it is an absurd notion, and I almost feel the same way, but in a thread about personal preference its completely justified for one person to think that ‘chug-a-lug’ is superior to ‘Across The Universe’ - as ridiculous as it may seem to most of us.

I think I mentioned this before, but I think Abba’s ‘Dancing Queen’ is one of the greatest songs I’ve ever heard - even topping some of my favorite Beach Boys songs. It’s an absurd song in that its lyrically immature, but there is something about the way that song sounds that takes me to another place. When I think ‘Dancing Queen’ is a better song than ‘You Still Believe In Me’ or ‘The Warmth of The Sun’ I completely understand how absurd that is. But that’s the way I’m wired.

Maybe Jukka likes how Brian and Carl’s vocals sound on any Beach Boys tune, or he just likes the fun or ethereal vibe on any Beach Boys release and that makes him like those songs better than even the best Beatles songs. It’s rather crass to call someone musically narrow-minded just because they prefer one thing over the other.

Right. 

I'd much rather listen to classic Bon Jovi than pretty much anything Bob Dylan ever put out. 

That would cause a huge gasp among many music fans, but that's where my taste lies. 

Just as I'd personally rather listen to the BB85 or Still Cruisin over Love You. 

That's just my preference, and no matter how crazy is sounds to many, to my ears, it's anything but wrong. 

Exactly. I think our personal preference is shaped by a ton of things; where we grew up, when we grew up, brain chemistry, events we’ve lived through. And those preferences can change depending on where we are in life. I know someone who dislikes the Beatles, I can’t at all see how they feel that way. But they are justified in feeling that way (and their multi-room vinyl collection with most of the Beatles albums tells me they are musically open minded). It all just depends on who you are and how you’re wired.
Logged

Bill Tobelman's SMiLE site
RangeRoverA1
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3437


I drink expired tea. wanna join?


View Profile
« Reply #41 on: February 06, 2018, 08:19:41 AM »

I don't tell people to take a moment to listen to Howie Edelson because he's an insider, or because he's friends with the BBs. I suggest that people take his opinion into account because he knows his sh*t, and knows how to respectfully, cogently, and engagingly talk about BOTH bands, and talk about fandom.
OK, got it. But it's not like we, I, don't know about Mr. Edelson's credentials. I didn't deny he knows his stuff. BUT it doesn't mean I must agree with him everytime for that reason. Ditto with the other people like Mr. Edelson. I didn't like the way you said "at least listen to him". I really can't agree & fail to recognize anything embarrassing with these "vs." threads. It's fun to compare, analyze these 2 bands, whose music you like each year etc.

Quote
If you don't want to listen to Howie Edelson, then than tells me all I need to know.
Yep, been there done that. People always say this to belittle smb. to prove what they say is right, their rhetoric is right.

It's not about not wanting to listen to Howie Edelson but germaine to this discussion & his point about this thread being example of worst fandom. If Howie Edelson/ Mr. Desper/ Alan Boyd/ yrplace (or is it Mr. Linett?) will bring some views with which I shall agree, then I'll listen & agree. What I'm getting at is I can't agree with people due to them knowing their stuff, being working journalists, everything else you said. It doesn't matter if, when I read what they say, I disagree with it, as I did here. I see everybody as posters who've got opinions with which I either agree or dis-.
Logged

Short notice: the cat you see to the left is the best. Not counting your indoor cat who might have habit sitting at your left side when you post at SmileySmile.

Cats - beautiful. Frogs - ugly, except cutely-shaped legs.

Everything big, in truth, is just little in disguise. (Truths. Tome 50)
KDS
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4331


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: February 06, 2018, 08:24:51 AM »

You’re implying that someone here likes a 1980s Beach Boy track “Rock and Roll To The Rescue” over the Beatles when literally NO ONE here has done that.

I disagree. While the term in question was "more direct and heartfelt" as opposed to simply "liking" something more, Jukka's post took the extreme position that even when the Beach Boys "suck", they are more direct and heartfelt. That is, in my opinion, an absurd statement. I'd say the same regarding *any* musical artists being discussed.

When I read someone say stuff like that, I absolutely DO assume they feel "Rock and Roll to the Rescue" is more "direct and heartfelt" than "Let It Be."

The Mike Love jingle stuff was of course a bit of hyperbole, only in that his Hyatt Regency jingles (which I think are actually quite enjoyable in a surreal way) are technically I suppose not "Beach Boys" tracks but solo recordings (most likely with Adrian Baker).

In response to what I said you’re totally right and I guess that part of Jukka’s post completely escaped my mind when replying to you. That being said, if he does find ‘Rock and Roll To The Rescue’ more heartfelt than ‘Let It Be’ then Jukka has every right to feel that way. Music hits us all in different ways for different reasons. In your opinion it is an absurd notion, and I almost feel the same way, but in a thread about personal preference its completely justified for one person to think that ‘chug-a-lug’ is superior to ‘Across The Universe’ - as ridiculous as it may seem to most of us.

I think I mentioned this before, but I think Abba’s ‘Dancing Queen’ is one of the greatest songs I’ve ever heard - even topping some of my favorite Beach Boys songs. It’s an absurd song in that its lyrically immature, but there is something about the way that song sounds that takes me to another place. When I think ‘Dancing Queen’ is a better song than ‘You Still Believe In Me’ or ‘The Warmth of The Sun’ I completely understand how absurd that is. But that’s the way I’m wired.

Maybe Jukka likes how Brian and Carl’s vocals sound on any Beach Boys tune, or he just likes the fun or ethereal vibe on any Beach Boys release and that makes him like those songs better than even the best Beatles songs. It’s rather crass to call someone musically narrow-minded just because they prefer one thing over the other.

Right. 

I'd much rather listen to classic Bon Jovi than pretty much anything Bob Dylan ever put out. 

That would cause a huge gasp among many music fans, but that's where my taste lies. 

Just as I'd personally rather listen to the BB85 or Still Cruisin over Love You. 

That's just my preference, and no matter how crazy is sounds to many, to my ears, it's anything but wrong. 

Exactly. I think our personal preference is shaped by a ton of things; where we grew up, when we grew up, brain chemistry, events we’ve lived through. And those preferences can change depending on where we are in life. I know someone who dislikes the Beatles, I can’t at all see how they feel that way. But they are justified in feeling that way (and their multi-room vinyl collection with most of the Beatles albums tells me they are musically open minded). It all just depends on who you are and how you’re wired.

Right, I grew up during the 1980s, so I tend to like what many critics or elitists refer to as "hair metal" or "80s cheese," so that explains by preference for Kokomo or Getcha Back over any song on Love You, or my preference for Bon Jovi or Motley Crue over Frank Zappa or Bob Dylan. 

Of course, I was exposed to The Beatles and Beach Boys as a child as well.   The Beach Boys took a lot longer to get under my skin than The Beatles for whatever reason.
Logged

Any opinions posted by me regarding the music of The Beach Boys, and their members, is in no way a show of disrespect towards any member of The Beach Boys, past or present.

"There is no right nor wrong in art, only preference." - Steve Desper
rab2591
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4694


"My God. It's full of stars."


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: February 06, 2018, 08:34:47 AM »

You’re implying that someone here likes a 1980s Beach Boy track “Rock and Roll To The Rescue” over the Beatles when literally NO ONE here has done that.

I disagree. While the term in question was "more direct and heartfelt" as opposed to simply "liking" something more, Jukka's post took the extreme position that even when the Beach Boys "suck", they are more direct and heartfelt. That is, in my opinion, an absurd statement. I'd say the same regarding *any* musical artists being discussed.

When I read someone say stuff like that, I absolutely DO assume they feel "Rock and Roll to the Rescue" is more "direct and heartfelt" than "Let It Be."

The Mike Love jingle stuff was of course a bit of hyperbole, only in that his Hyatt Regency jingles (which I think are actually quite enjoyable in a surreal way) are technically I suppose not "Beach Boys" tracks but solo recordings (most likely with Adrian Baker).

In response to what I said you’re totally right and I guess that part of Jukka’s post completely escaped my mind when replying to you. That being said, if he does find ‘Rock and Roll To The Rescue’ more heartfelt than ‘Let It Be’ then Jukka has every right to feel that way. Music hits us all in different ways for different reasons. In your opinion it is an absurd notion, and I almost feel the same way, but in a thread about personal preference its completely justified for one person to think that ‘chug-a-lug’ is superior to ‘Across The Universe’ - as ridiculous as it may seem to most of us.

I think I mentioned this before, but I think Abba’s ‘Dancing Queen’ is one of the greatest songs I’ve ever heard - even topping some of my favorite Beach Boys songs. It’s an absurd song in that its lyrically immature, but there is something about the way that song sounds that takes me to another place. When I think ‘Dancing Queen’ is a better song than ‘You Still Believe In Me’ or ‘The Warmth of The Sun’ I completely understand how absurd that is. But that’s the way I’m wired.

Maybe Jukka likes how Brian and Carl’s vocals sound on any Beach Boys tune, or he just likes the fun or ethereal vibe on any Beach Boys release and that makes him like those songs better than even the best Beatles songs. It’s rather crass to call someone musically narrow-minded just because they prefer one thing over the other.

Right. 

I'd much rather listen to classic Bon Jovi than pretty much anything Bob Dylan ever put out. 

That would cause a huge gasp among many music fans, but that's where my taste lies. 

Just as I'd personally rather listen to the BB85 or Still Cruisin over Love You. 

That's just my preference, and no matter how crazy is sounds to many, to my ears, it's anything but wrong. 

Exactly. I think our personal preference is shaped by a ton of things; where we grew up, when we grew up, brain chemistry, events we’ve lived through. And those preferences can change depending on where we are in life. I know someone who dislikes the Beatles, I can’t at all see how they feel that way. But they are justified in feeling that way (and their multi-room vinyl collection with most of the Beatles albums tells me they are musically open minded). It all just depends on who you are and how you’re wired.

Right, I grew up during the 1980s, so I tend to like what many critics or elitists refer to as "hair metal" or "80s cheese," so that explains by preference for Kokomo or Getcha Back over any song on Love You, or my preference for Bon Jovi or Motley Crue over Frank Zappa or Bob Dylan. 

Of course, I was exposed to The Beatles and Beach Boys as a child as well.   The Beach Boys took a lot longer to get under my skin than The Beatles for whatever reason.

I was born in the 80s so I heard my parents listen to a lot of Genesis and other bands like it. Which is why when I heard BB85 it kinda stuck with me and over the years I’ve come to absolutely love it - no doubt because of my upbringing with some very 80s sounding music. I’m glad to see BB85 getting a bit more love in the fandom recently!
Logged

Bill Tobelman's SMiLE site
KDS
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4331


View Profile
« Reply #44 on: February 06, 2018, 08:40:59 AM »

You’re implying that someone here likes a 1980s Beach Boy track “Rock and Roll To The Rescue” over the Beatles when literally NO ONE here has done that.

I disagree. While the term in question was "more direct and heartfelt" as opposed to simply "liking" something more, Jukka's post took the extreme position that even when the Beach Boys "suck", they are more direct and heartfelt. That is, in my opinion, an absurd statement. I'd say the same regarding *any* musical artists being discussed.

When I read someone say stuff like that, I absolutely DO assume they feel "Rock and Roll to the Rescue" is more "direct and heartfelt" than "Let It Be."

The Mike Love jingle stuff was of course a bit of hyperbole, only in that his Hyatt Regency jingles (which I think are actually quite enjoyable in a surreal way) are technically I suppose not "Beach Boys" tracks but solo recordings (most likely with Adrian Baker).

In response to what I said you’re totally right and I guess that part of Jukka’s post completely escaped my mind when replying to you. That being said, if he does find ‘Rock and Roll To The Rescue’ more heartfelt than ‘Let It Be’ then Jukka has every right to feel that way. Music hits us all in different ways for different reasons. In your opinion it is an absurd notion, and I almost feel the same way, but in a thread about personal preference its completely justified for one person to think that ‘chug-a-lug’ is superior to ‘Across The Universe’ - as ridiculous as it may seem to most of us.

I think I mentioned this before, but I think Abba’s ‘Dancing Queen’ is one of the greatest songs I’ve ever heard - even topping some of my favorite Beach Boys songs. It’s an absurd song in that its lyrically immature, but there is something about the way that song sounds that takes me to another place. When I think ‘Dancing Queen’ is a better song than ‘You Still Believe In Me’ or ‘The Warmth of The Sun’ I completely understand how absurd that is. But that’s the way I’m wired.

Maybe Jukka likes how Brian and Carl’s vocals sound on any Beach Boys tune, or he just likes the fun or ethereal vibe on any Beach Boys release and that makes him like those songs better than even the best Beatles songs. It’s rather crass to call someone musically narrow-minded just because they prefer one thing over the other.

Right. 

I'd much rather listen to classic Bon Jovi than pretty much anything Bob Dylan ever put out. 

That would cause a huge gasp among many music fans, but that's where my taste lies. 

Just as I'd personally rather listen to the BB85 or Still Cruisin over Love You. 

That's just my preference, and no matter how crazy is sounds to many, to my ears, it's anything but wrong. 

Exactly. I think our personal preference is shaped by a ton of things; where we grew up, when we grew up, brain chemistry, events we’ve lived through. And those preferences can change depending on where we are in life. I know someone who dislikes the Beatles, I can’t at all see how they feel that way. But they are justified in feeling that way (and their multi-room vinyl collection with most of the Beatles albums tells me they are musically open minded). It all just depends on who you are and how you’re wired.

Right, I grew up during the 1980s, so I tend to like what many critics or elitists refer to as "hair metal" or "80s cheese," so that explains by preference for Kokomo or Getcha Back over any song on Love You, or my preference for Bon Jovi or Motley Crue over Frank Zappa or Bob Dylan. 

Of course, I was exposed to The Beatles and Beach Boys as a child as well.   The Beach Boys took a lot longer to get under my skin than The Beatles for whatever reason.

I was born in the 80s so I heard my parents listen to a lot of Genesis and other bands like it. Which is why when I heard BB85 it kinda stuck with me and over the years I’ve come to absolutely love it - no doubt because of my upbringing with some very 80s sounding music. I’m glad to see BB85 getting a bit more love in the fandom recently!

Oddly enough, my folks were never into Genesis / Phil Collins.   I got into them as an adult. 

I've noticed that BB85 is viewed more favorably, even in the last 1-2 years or so. 
Logged

Any opinions posted by me regarding the music of The Beach Boys, and their members, is in no way a show of disrespect towards any member of The Beach Boys, past or present.

"There is no right nor wrong in art, only preference." - Steve Desper
rab2591
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4694


"My God. It's full of stars."


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: February 06, 2018, 08:46:45 AM »

I was listen to Elton John’s show on Beats1, and he had Noel Gallagher in for an interview, Noel played this Genesis song from 1969 called ‘The Conquerer’, and I’d never ever heard it before. But it absolutely blew my mind. Not sure if it’s even your taste/style, but putting it here in case no one else had heard it either.

I guess after only hearing their 80s stuff all my life I was surprised at how 60s Genesis could sound.
Logged

Bill Tobelman's SMiLE site
KDS
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4331


View Profile
« Reply #46 on: February 06, 2018, 09:08:54 AM »

I was listen to Elton John’s show on Beats1, and he had Noel Gallagher in for an interview, Noel played this Genesis song from 1969 called ‘The Conquerer’, and I’d never ever heard it before. But it absolutely blew my mind. Not sure if it’s even your taste/style, but putting it here in case no one else had heard it either.

I guess after only hearing their 80s stuff all my life I was surprised at how 60s Genesis could sound.

I'm not familiar with that one.   I've never heard anything from their debut, so the earliest work I have is Trespass (1971).   I've only recently gotten into their more prog material, which I quite like, and is definitely a far cry from the Genesis I used to hear on the radio in the late 1980s.

But, then again, anyone who only knew Getcha Back or Kokomo in the late 80s, might be blown away by Pet Sounds. 
Logged

Any opinions posted by me regarding the music of The Beach Boys, and their members, is in no way a show of disrespect towards any member of The Beach Boys, past or present.

"There is no right nor wrong in art, only preference." - Steve Desper
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8068


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #47 on: February 06, 2018, 09:48:14 AM »

I was listen to Elton John’s show on Beats1, and he had Noel Gallagher in for an interview, Noel played this Genesis song from 1969 called ‘The Conquerer’, and I’d never ever heard it before. But it absolutely blew my mind. Not sure if it’s even your taste/style, but putting it here in case no one else had heard it either.

I guess after only hearing their 80s stuff all my life I was surprised at how 60s Genesis could sound.

I'm not familiar with that one.   I've never heard anything from their debut, so the earliest work I have is Trespass (1971).   I've only recently gotten into their more prog material, which I quite like, and is definitely a far cry from the Genesis I used to hear on the radio in the late 1980s.

But, then again, anyone who only knew Getcha Back or Kokomo in the late 80s, might be blown away by Pet Sounds.  

Interesting. It's funny but in the 80's I had some friends who had older brothers, uncles, etc who introduced them to Genesis and it filtered down to me when we'd have listening sessions. In the 80's Phil Collins was very, very big. His videos on MTV were always produced up to where they were among the most popular, both Phil solo and with Genesis. "Land Of Confusion" with the puppets was always playing, then there was Phil doing a tribute to the old Benny Hill Show, with a cameo by Benny himself...all of that.

Phil was also on a very well remembered episode of Miami Vice, playing a shifty game show host that cheated one of the cops out of the prize in favor of a very well-endowed girl contestant. "Pig In A Poke" was the show Phil's character hosted - check it out, a classic MV episode. But even that show was at its peak when Phil was on, at least in the US so Phil was like a superstar at that time. His song "In The Air Tonight" which was actually over 5 years old when Miami Vice used it for a montage on their show kind of defined the style of MV cutting music to the TV action, like the famous memo said "MTV Cops". But that song took on another life after the show featured it.

The irony was that people who were "older" and music fans of a certain bent would be suggesting the only Genesis worth listening to was the earlier prog material and anything after Gabriel left was fluff. Kind of like suggesting Phil Collins and Genesis minus Gabriel had sold out to become pop artists, while the "real" Genesis was Lamb Lies Down..., and the other prog material.

Oh, and then at that same time Peter Gabriel himself became something of an MTV icon thanks to at least one truly great, classic single with Sledgehammer and two groundbreaking videos (Sledgehammer especially with the stop-motion animation), not to mention songs like In Your Eyes which took on a new audience after Say Anything and that boombox scene.

So both Collins and Gabriel (and Genesis) were essentially making hugely popular singles and had very popular heavy-rotation videos on MTV that were as far from prog-rock as you could get, yet I clearly remember it was Collins who got more of the flak for selling out, and fans saying the "current" Genesis with only Banks and Rutherford were selling out. Oh...and both Banks and Rutherford had successful side/solo projects charting at that time too. Odd scenario with the fans of the old-school variety seeming to be at odds with the new popularity the members of Genesis were seeing, except for Gabriel who escaped it despite big commercial success with the So album and videos.

Maybe some of it rubbed off on me, but I'm not a prog-rock fan of any significance, I appreciate it but don't actively listen...yet I found myself especially in the last decade rediscovering that hitmaking period of Genesis and Phil Collins. I think Phil got a really good reappraisal from newer and older fans recently and the music for the most part holds up, with some exceptions.

How does this tie into a Beatles thread? lol.

Well, most fans know Phil was a massive Beatles fan and there is one famous shot of the Hard Day's Night film concert scene where a young Phil can be spotted among the crowd in the theater where they filmed. And he did some work as a young musician on Harrison's All Things Must Pass sessions, and other little things like that.

But one of my favorite, all-time Genesis songs was "That's All". It's an amazing production IMO, just really stripped down but with a groove to die for and a pocket in the drum groove a mile wide, thanks to Phil. That drum beat and feel NAILS it, and for a long time I was trying to figure out what made it different.

Then I read an interview with Phil were he explained that the groove he played on That's All was an overt, direct reference to Ringo Starr, Phil's take on the "Ringo Groove" whose definition can change depending on which drummer you ask about it lol. But after reading that, it all made sense for me. The groove was the main feature, and Phil consciously channeled Ringo to lay down that drum track.

I guess my point is every band has some kind of fan drama, in the case of Genesis the "old" Genesis versus the pop hitmakers Genesis of the 80's. I actually prefer a selection of the 80's Genesis at their best and catchiest to the prog material with Gabriel. And ironically I just heard an ad on the radio that Genesis guitarist Steve Hackett is coming to the Jersey area for two shows next week, and they are *still* asking him and the others about a possible Genesis reunion.

But yeah, I'll listen to the Collins-Banks-Rutherford hit-making Genesis any day, I really enjoy some of those songs, and of course with some exceptions. Also, Collins' solo work too. "In The Air Tonight" is a stone-cold classic.

« Last Edit: February 06, 2018, 09:50:13 AM by guitarfool2002 » Logged

“Some people think you have to knock somebody down in order to build yourself up, I don’t look at it that way. To the mentality that likes to disparage other people, I say perhaps you should get a life. It’s just wrong thinking in my opinion and I don’t mind saying that.” - Mike Love

"Every single person who criticized Brian for having She & Him, Kacey Musgraves, Sebu and Nate Ruess guesting on his solo album can now officially go heartily f*** themselves." - Wirestone
KDS
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4331


View Profile
« Reply #48 on: February 06, 2018, 10:28:55 AM »

I like the 80s rock/pop version of Genesis a lot.

But, I think my favorite era was the transitional era in the mid to late 70s, where they were writing shorter songs, but still had elements of prog.  I think the unsung hero of the group is Steve Hackett, and there's a certain musicality that the band lost when he left that, despite a lot of great songs, never got back. 

I'll have to give That's All another listen, as I usually focus on the hypnotic Tony Banks piano riff. 
Logged

Any opinions posted by me regarding the music of The Beach Boys, and their members, is in no way a show of disrespect towards any member of The Beach Boys, past or present.

"There is no right nor wrong in art, only preference." - Steve Desper
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8068


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #49 on: February 06, 2018, 10:50:49 AM »

I like the 80s rock/pop version of Genesis a lot.

But, I think my favorite era was the transitional era in the mid to late 70s, where they were writing shorter songs, but still had elements of prog.  I think the unsung hero of the group is Steve Hackett, and there's a certain musicality that the band lost when he left that, despite a lot of great songs, never got back. 

I'll have to give That's All another listen, as I usually focus on the hypnotic Tony Banks piano riff. 

KDS - Listen to "That's All" a few times in a row, I'm doing it now actually before I have to head out.

On this track, I'll go to bat and say it's one of the best, most understated tributes to the "Ringo Groove" as has ever been recorded and became a hit...that didn't involve Ringo or a Beatle. I'm going out on a limb and saying that of all drummers, it was Jim Keltner and Phil who could best lock into that groove that made Ringo's drumming so unique and so special.

The track itself - It sounds like Phil was going for the same effect as Ringo did on Hello Goodbye. The first statement of the "hook", the song's title, has no snare drum. Phil stays on only the kick drum and hi-hat for like a minute before even touching the snare. Yet the groove is massive and the pocket is several miles wide with the most sparse drumming. Just like Hello Goodbye.

Then Phil brings in the snare, and later starts to add his take on the famous Ringo Starr "backwards" drum fills...again, as heard so perfectly on Hello Goodbye.

And it's also to a lesser degree the Ringo groove from Hey Bulldog, same way he played and the same feel.

It's not so much what Phil plays, but the way in which he plays it. The groove has that loose, delayed feel that opens up and leaves room for Banks' piano and also Rutherford later in the track. The groove has that lazy, almost delayed feel like Al Jackson Jr. did for Midnight Hour, but it never drags or feels like it's anything less than a massive pocket for the rest of the song. It's something so basic, yet Phil Collins *got it* on a level that a lot of drummers who try to do the Ringo groove just don't capture.

Really esoteric stuff, but that's how big a fan I am of that one groove...and of Phil's drumming in general. What happened I think was Phil became such a celebrity, it was pushed into the back just how good of a musician and drummer he was. Great singer too. I'm glad people are reconnecting with those aspects of Phil Collins' career, and I'm happy to provide examples anytime I can.  Smiley

BTW..."Easy Lover", Phil Collins and EWF's Philip Bailey...Kitschy as hell 80's video, but underneath all that is a true motherfucker of a great song and performance. Listen to it with new ears. I remember exactly when it hit me as that song came on one of those retro 80's nights on a radio station. I heard it with fresh ears and haven't looked back since, some 15 or so years later.

Tying it into the topic of 1967..."That's All" is Phil doing a spin on Ringo's classic "Hello Goodbye" drum part, with touches of Hey Bulldog thrown in too. So there's that.  Smiley
Logged

“Some people think you have to knock somebody down in order to build yourself up, I don’t look at it that way. To the mentality that likes to disparage other people, I say perhaps you should get a life. It’s just wrong thinking in my opinion and I don’t mind saying that.” - Mike Love

"Every single person who criticized Brian for having She & Him, Kacey Musgraves, Sebu and Nate Ruess guesting on his solo album can now officially go heartily f*** themselves." - Wirestone
gfx
Pages: 1 [2] 3 Go Up Print 
gfx
Jump to:  
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.972 seconds with 23 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!